Updated continuously by citizens like you, Newsvine is an instant reflection of what the world is talking about at any given moment.
Article Source: Michelle Malkin"The U.N.'s years-long record on the Israel-Lebanon border makes mockery of the term "peacekeeping." On page 155 of my book, "Inside the Asylum," is a picture of a U.N. outpost on that border. The U.N. flag and the Hezbollah flag fly side by side. Observers told me the U.N. and Hezbollah personnel share water and telephones, and that the U.N. presence serves as a shield against Israeli strikes against the terrorists."
Kind of suspicious, don't you think?
Just to be clear, are you actually trying to quantify/justify Israel's attack on the U.N. Peacekeepers?
#1 - Wed Jul 26, 2006 9:55 PM EDTI am not trying to justify an attack on a UN post. I am just trying to say that the proximity between UN and Hizballah was more than the actualy number of meters separating them. Who knows what was going on there yesterday? It is not out of the question that Hizballah was using their outpost as cover for launching attacks, or something along that lines. With everyone so quick to condemn Israel over this and proclaim that it was a deliberate attack on Israel's part, I think that these facts warrant a closer review of what went on, what were thoe UN people still doing there (making sure that the 1949 armstice lines weren't violated?) and how was the UN interacting with Hizballah - before condemning Israel.
The UN knew Israel was bombing very close to their position. They even said they had to because Hezbollah fighters were so close.
So now Israel isn't allowed to use bombs or artillery either? Soon you are going to be suggestion hand to hand combat to eliminate the terrorists.
Given that they have been there for some time, it is only natural that some friendship will occur
Friendship with a terrorist organization?!
There job is to keep the border quiet not drink coffee with Hezbollah or Israel.
And the UN is in a territory controlled by Hezbollah. Should they run their own phone lines and water pipes? Kind of silly, Yaakov, come on... ;-)
Yes it appears Hezbollah was using the presence of the UN post as protection. Various reports say 5m to 500m distance. The UN could have been evacuated. Different weapons could have been used.
#2 - Wed Jul 26, 2006 10:22 PM EDTShould they run their own phone lines and water pipes?
Maybe. Use datellite phones. It is not as if there is a big phone company working out there. It is all jungle and is controlled by Hizballah. The easiest supply for water and electricity is over the border from Israel. And even so, why is the Hizballah flag flying side by side with the UN flag within the UN compound? Something is not right abotu this!
So are you now saying that the U.N. is working with Hezbollah? This doesn't really make sense, but I guess it's easier to discredit than accept responsibility. It is not the U.N.'s mandate to engage either side during the conflict unless directly attacked and then only to defend itself and these were unarmed observers.
Also, the U.N. had pleaded with Israel for several hours to stop the attacks to no avail, I guess that Israel follows a "guity by proximity" rule of thumb. Those civilians were within 100 metres of a terrorist so they deserve to die because they were fleeing and didn't stop the terrorists. And hey, those U.N. observer folks should have seen the rockets as they were within 50-500 metres of where the IDF is pretty sure the rocket fire was coming from, so obviously they should dies as well.
U.N. working in conjunction with Hezbollah, sorry, just not feeling this one without definitive proof...
#3 - Thu Jul 27, 2006 12:49 AM EDTApart from being unbelievable, it's also a red herring. Israel has a responsibility to not target UN positions, even as "collateral damage" - let alone dropping a bomb big enough to reach the shelter under the building after repeated calls to notify of the situation. But I'm giving up beating my head against this wall... if anyone believes this is acceptable there's nothing I can say to change their minds. War is Peace. Ignorance is Strength. Freedom is Slavery. What else can be said? Civilians fleeing the fighting are legitimate targets. The UN are the Hezbollah. Ambulances are military vehicles. Their crimes excuse our crimes.
I am not saying (because I do not know) whether this was completely accidental, or whether Israel was responding to attacks coming from very close or within the UN compound. However, based on the points above, I do not find it so hard to believe that (with or without UN permission) Hizballah was at one point in the day yesterday using this facility as a staging point for attacking the IDF or launching katyushas (either of which would render this facility a legitimate target, whether or not UN personnel were still there). What I am saying is because the above is a possibility, it is a mistake to rush and condemn Israel for this before finding out exactly what happened. And if it so happened that Hizballah was firing from very close by or within the compound, and Israel was responding to the fire and accidentally hit the building - sorry to the UN, but your guys shouldn't have been there, they were in the middle of a war and staying in a building which was a legitimate military target.
If you have the unilateral ability to define a legitimate military target, then Hizbollah can do the same, regarding the cities they attack.
They already do. They purposefully send hundreds of rockets into civilian cities knowing there i s little military value in the attacks.
Yaakov This would have been an important seed if you had taken the time to find a credible source. Unfortunately you chose Michelle Malkin making this bias non sense.
From my own experience there are defiantly issues with UNIFIL and the Positions of troops and movements and Signals security is a problem. In effect UNIFIL does operate as an unarmed Hizbollah unit. That goes with the territory and most of them are From Central Asia. A lot of Indians etc. There have been other issues. I suspect that this is what always happens and that is that Israel was firing to near the UN base and after repeated warnings UNIFIL gave the Israeli positions to Hizbollah. Israel realised this and fired on the UN base.
Good Luck proving that. But I will garuntee thats what happened.
#4 - Thu Jul 27, 2006 6:12 AM EDTThis would have been an important seed if you had taken the time to find a credible source. Unfortunately you chose Michelle Malkin making this bias non sense.
So you think that the photo with the UN flag next to the Hizballah flag in the UN compound was a photoshop job?
I suspect that this is what always happens and that is that Israel was firing to near the UN base and after repeated warnings UNIFIL gave the Israeli positions to Hizbollah. Israel realised this and fired on the UN base.
If this is true, then it explains why Annan is so quick to accuse Israel - he wants to deflect any type of investigation or suspicion of wrongdoings on the part of his personnel.
So you think that the photo with the UN flag next to the Hizballah flag in the UN compound was a photoshop job?
Ahh I didn't but now you raise it ?
I Doubt that it is Shopped. As I said In effect UNIFIL does operate as an unarmed Hizbollah unit. This is not by choice but they are there and Hiuzbollah are in control. They cant say much. At the end of the day you will never prove what I have said or see it in the Media. You can believe what you want. This will hurt Israel internationaly though. It will be yet another incident the UN can point too.
Even if it came out that this happened, Unlikely because the witnesses are dead, I srael will still look bad. I dont think they will try to cite it as a war crime though, and when the investigation ends, without charge we will know that what I have said is true.
Even if it came out that this happened, Unlikely because the witnesses are dead, Israel will still look bad
Was there a different possible outcome? Israel looking bad at the end of "international incidents" has been the norm for the past sixty years. And Israel will continue to look bad unless all of the Jews stop being Jewish or we all pick up and move. It is not ideal, but we can handle it.
Israel looks bad for the treatment of the Palestinians, constantly extending their borders by bulldozing homes to build settlements of armed civilians. They also look bad for occupying Lebanon for 18 years. There are numerous other incidents in the past 60 years that makes them look bad, none of which are because they're Jewish. However, since they are the Jewish state the actions of Israel are being related to Jews in general which is very unfortunate. There's nothing in the general Jewish faith that makes them "bad" just as there's nothing in the general Christian and Muslim faiths. There are of course extremists in all religions that twist the religion to justify their violent actions, etc. But what it comes down to is that Israel always plays the anti-semitic card when criticized rather than admitting they may have mishandled something. Even if you don't want to admit error, for some reason you have a problem with accepting that it's Israel's foreign policy and military actions that are looked down upon and not the religion. The problem is that because of this the people who are racist and they do of course exist) are gaining momentum by taking advantage of the deserved criticism. So the racism fuels other racism in the Israeli people and suddenly everything thinks it's just about religion. Valid critism gets overwhelmed by racial slurs and critics get lumped with racists.
Admittedly I am generalizing here. From what I've seen of Yaakov's comments, though he is undoubtedly biased, he does usually try to argue instead of playing the anti-semite card, which I respect.
Yaakov This would have been an important seed if you had taken the time to find a credible source.
Keld posts hundreds of articles from completely biased sources and you think that every one is an important seed. Why don't you question him?
I just wrote an article on the UN, what they have done so far in Lebanon and why they are not the choice for future observer and peacekeeping missions in this part of the world: Can the UN be Trusted to do Anything in Lebanon?
#5 - Thu Jul 27, 2006 7:31 AM EDTYou're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |
Log In | Register
