U.N.: Israeli airstrike hits U.N. observer post

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by blankall

Thats a ridiculous theory. By killing a few UN observers they only bring more attention to their tactics.

Also do you really think Israel is gonna have trouble drawing in a third party here? The UN is already heavily involved, and talks about bringing in UN forces as swift as possible had already started.

This only makes them look bad. no way it was done on purpose

What's ridiuclous is that so many people are just willing to give Israel the benefit of the doubt all the time.

When it comes to the combination of technology and training, Israel is tops. To think that they accidentally hit a well known UN outpost at least 10 times in 6 hours is ridiculous.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

What's ridiuclous is that so many people are just willing to give Israel the benefit of the doubt all the time.

When it comes to the combination of technology and training, Israel is tops. To think that they accidentally hit a well known UN outpost at least 10 times in 6 hours is ridiculous.

OK ... I'll bite.

Why kill UN soldiers. Anan was out quickly with the suggestion that they were a target, but why?

What do they gain by bombing a global organization to which they belong?

I think even smart bombs can be off by fractions of percentage points and then they hit the wrong targets.

[Displaced Flames fan]

I have seen it suggested that Hezbollah is fond of running its flag up with UN flags at these outposts.

I'm sure we don't know the whole story.

Like Bingo said, though, it just doesn't make any logical sense for Israel to purposely target a UN outpost repeatedly.

[oldschoolcalgary]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

I have seen it suggested that Hezbollah is fond of running its flag up with UN flags at these outposts.

I'm sure we don't know the whole story.

Like Bingo said, though, it just doesn't make any logical sense for Israel to purposely target a UN outpost repeatedly.

??? yeah, and Landis having a beer is what made him test positive for testosterone....

One of the most ridiculous things I've ever heard...what's next?

"We saw a framed picture of Sheik Hassan Nasrallah!"
"There was definitely a call to prayer emanating from the compound."
"They shouldn't have been there in the first place."

The last one really bugs me as a rationalization...Sweet...nothing like blaming the victims...sounds an awful like "She was asking for it, dressed like that."

I am sure there'll be some crazy explaination for it from the IDF...just don't choke if you decide to swallow it hook, line and sinker...

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by oldschoolcalgary

I am sure there'll be some crazy explaination for it from the IDF...just don't choke if you decide to swallow it hook, line and sinker...

So answer his question then.

Why would Israel purposely target a global body to which they belong when they already have strong support from key countries in the conflict?

If you can't answer that then I would suggest it's probable that it was a mistake. Usually the simplest answer is the correct one.

[oldschoolcalgary]

Absolutely it was a mistake...

I think I said previously in the thread that the IDF was guilty of gross negligence...purposely targeting the observation post? Doesn't make any sense in my books.

but its still gross negligence and someone has to take the fall for it.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Why would Israel purposely target a global body to which they belong when they already have strong support from key countries in the conflict?

The UN was in the way? The UN was standing between Israel and their target and Israel decided that if they were in the way, oh well, too bad. It wouldn't be the first, nor the last, that Israel has ignored the UN. You wanted the simplest answer, there it is.

To swallow the line that it was a mistake would require you to believe that the post in question did NOT make 10 calls to alert Israel of the shelling proximity to their location AND the fact that the post had been there for 40 years. So what was that about the simplest answer being the correct one?

[Hakan]

Maybe Israel forgot to shower pamplets on the site explaining that it would be bombed in 24 hours.

I mean to alot around here that's all you have to do to wash your hands of innocents being killed in bombing campaigns.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Bingo

OK ... I'll bite.

Why kill UN soldiers. Anan was out quickly with the suggestion that they were a target, but why?

What do they gain by bombing a global organization to which they belong?

I think even smart bombs can be off by fractions of percentage points and then they hit the wrong targets.

Like I said before;

Without observers, the UN cannot observe. It's the same reason why Israel refused to allow UN observers into the West Bank during the last full occupation.

Does it really matter if they are a member as well? Iraq was a member of the UN, but it doesn't mean they got along. The UN has enetered resolutions against Israel several times in the past, so it is not like Israel has a great relationship with them.

[Calgaryborn]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Like I said before;

Without observers, the UN cannot observe. It's the same reason why Israel refused to allow UN observers into the West Bank during the last full occupation.

Does it really matter if they are a member as well? Iraq was a member of the UN, but it doesn't mean they got along. The UN has enetered resolutions against Israel several times in the past, so it is not like Israel has a great relationship with them.

What were they there to observe? Hezbollah building tunnels and hiding missiles in them as well as peoples basements. The adding of rockets,missiles and landmines by a terrorist organization that is suppose to be disarming and leaving the border region. Were they watching Hezbollah make a raid into Israel and kill/kidnap soldiers?

Here is a link to some of the military objectives Israel has achieved in the last little while. Please note that Hezbollah is still launching unobserved missiles at Israel:

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satelli...cle%2FShowFull

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Like I said before;

Without observers, the UN cannot observe. It's the same reason why Israel refused to allow UN observers into the West Bank during the last full occupation.

Does it really matter if they are a member as well? Iraq was a member of the UN, but it doesn't mean they got along. The UN has enetered resolutions against Israel several times in the past, so it is not like Israel has a great relationship with them.

Still haven't answered the question.

What.

What would Israel gain from bombing UN observors. If you're suggesting secrecy than they'd better start attacking the Fox, CNN and the BBC quickly too as they're broadcasting live from the region 24/7.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Still haven't answered the question.

What.

What would Israel gain from bombing UN observors. If you're suggesting secrecy than they'd better start attacking the Fox, CNN and the BBC quickly too as they're broadcasting live from the region 24/7.

Nothing is secret, but no media outlet has the same clout as the UN. They certainly have no juristiction anywhere.

You must be able to see the difference between having the U.N. doucmenting events than having FOX or NBC doing it.

[Bingo]

First off ... of course there's a difference.

However, if you are saying (appears you are) that the Israelis intentionally killed UN soldiers in order to keep people from seeing what they are doing in Lebanon, then how air tight can things be with that much media attention involved?

Not much of a OPERATION KEEP IT QUIET plan is it?

I just don't buy it. Mistakes happen, I can't see them purposely attacking the UN

[blankall]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Like I said before;

Without observers, the UN cannot observe. It's the same reason why Israel refused to allow UN observers into the West Bank during the last full occupation.

Does it really matter if they are a member as well? Iraq was a member of the UN, but it doesn't mean they got along. The UN has enetered resolutions against Israel several times in the past, so it is not like Israel has a great relationship with them.

That theory does not make sense because there are thousands of UN personel in the area right now. Killing a few would not have a significant impact on their ability to observe, but would increase the amount of attention drawn to the situation.

As for the UN entering resolutions against Israel, the UN has several different bodies. The general assembly has entered resolutions against Israel, but that doesnt mean that Israel wants to purposely kill all UN personel. The UN is a massive and diverse organization.

The reason why Israel didnt want observers in the West Bank was because it felt they would do nothing to stop Palestinian attacks which occur underground, but would seriously hamper their attacks and regulations which occur in the open. Also UN forces in the past in Israel have proved themselves to be totally ineffective. There have been massive UN forces in Israel in the past which were supposed to stop arab armies from invading. As soon as the armies came the UN left and Israel was forced to fend off an attack.

[Calgaryborn]

a good read: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/m.../29/do2902.xml

[oldschoolcalgary]

^ that was pretty good - certainly, having the political "debate" degenerate into name calling from both sides of the aisle is part of the problem...nothing can come out of it.

Rather than simply dismissing legitimate arguments because they're "liberals" or "neocons" is the reason why there is such a divide...

I don't agree with his final assement however, that

We preach that unilateral action is always wrong. That position can be maintained only by people who do not have to make life-and-death decisions. It is cheap and immoral.

Ironic, as he rails against extreme comments/analogies as being counter productive to the political debate. And yet he ends it with an absolute statement - unilateral action is not always wrong, however, if that action is opposed by like minded countries, one must be open to the possibility that said unilateral action does not have its foundation based upon a position of moral authority.

[home_sweet_dome]

And now today, another terrorist attack by a terrorist nation.

At least 60 Lebs killed in Qana including many children in another "accidental" attack by Israel.

To call this anything other than an act of terrorism is absolute BS. It's about time the world called things evenly. When a Muslim kills someone (usually by way of a suicide bombing or old school rocket) its called terrorism, but when Israel or the US kill people with advanced technology and bombs (which usually kill way more people than the Muslim terrorists ever do) nobody mentions the word terrorism. This is complete crap. It's not a "War on Terror", its a "War OF Terror" and its about time Israel and the US got called on it by the rest of the world.

I know I'll get a bunch of idiotic, borderline racist replies from all the Jew apologists on here, but you ######s can go F yourselves. One day you people will get what you deserve. A day like today just created tons of new Islamic "terrorists".

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by home_sweet_dome

And now today, another terrorist attack by a terrorist nation.

At least 60 Lebs killed in Qana including many children in another "accidental" attack by Israel.

To call this anything other than an act of terrorism is absolute BS. It's about time the world called things evenly. When a Muslim kills someone (usually by way of a suicide bombing or old school rocket) its called terrorism, but when Israel or the US kill people with advanced technology and bombs (which usually kill way more people than the Muslim terrorists ever do) nobody mentions the word terrorism. This is complete crap. It's not a "War on Terror", its a "War OF Terror" and its about time Israel and the US got called on it by the rest of the world.

I know I'll get a bunch of idiotic, borderline racist replies from all the Jew apologists on here, but you ######s can go F yourselves. One day you people will get what you deserve. A day like today just created tons of new Islamic "terrorists".

Holy cow, Bin Laden is that you?

[oldschoolcalgary]

the perspective from the West is that of an accident, while those in the Middle East will see it as a war crime.

Robert MacNamara said more or less the same thing; that the firebombing of Japan would have been considered a war crime if they happened to lose the battle for the Pacific. And this was even before the Hiroshima/Nagasaki bombs.

History is written by the victors, always has been and alway will be.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by oldschoolcalgary

the perspective from the West is that of an accident, while those in the Middle East will see it as a war crime.

Robert MacNamara said more or less the same thing; that the firebombing of Japan would have been considered a war crime if they happened to lose the battle for the Pacific. And this was even before the Hiroshima/Nagasaki bombs.

History is written by the victors, always has been and alway will be.

Also, if Hezbollah hits civilian targets, they don't say oopps...they cheer and dance for victory. IDF doesn't intentionally target civilians, I think they do not really care who is in the building at the time but they are targeting military targets. The problem is they wouldn't be able to do any kind of military offensive if they were really worried about civilian casualties because Hezbollah is held up in all the civilian areas.