Seriously... WTF the point? The only way Israel would ever claim that the UN is un-biased is if they were given a blank cheque to do whatever they wanted. Despite the strides taken to bring Israel into the UN community, and to fight the anti-Israeli attitude of some nations, Israel and the US constantly claim an anti-Israeli bias.

Personally I don't ever see the anti-UN bias dimishing from Israel or the American right... the get far to much play and mutual support of their respective positions from each other when it comes to the UN. The part that pisses me off is that the same people that bemoan the faults of the UN are the same ones actively fighting against reforms and working to weaken the instution further...

I have never understood the virulent hatred of the UN fostered by the American right... it is something almost unique in the world; an opinion of political view that I haven't seen anywhere else in the poltical mainstream (except of course Israel). Further I also take it personally when people slam peacekeepers or the UN as a whole; firstly because I look back with pride and honour at the good accomplished while I wore the blue, secondly because I know that the overwhelmingly vasy majority of UN are some of the most noble people I have ever had the pleasure of knowing... and yet I continuely see both gleefully vilified on this site by some, by the American political right... and now even the new conservative movement in Canada :(

As for Paeta, he requested this posting - he saw enormous hope for the future of Israel and Lebanon... he wanted to be there to help ensure that cooler heads prevailed, and that no side provoked the other - and even then that no one took the bait. Even after the surprisingly violent Israeli response, he wanted to stay to help in a ceasefire... instead it looks like he fell victim, murdered if you will, to the same hate and lack of respect for the UN that neither he nor I could ever understand.

As for myself right now I find it hard to put into words the rage and disgust I feel right now for the IDF... writing has never been my best medium to communicate effectively through (even though I am a writer now). I know I am so angry right now that I can't talk to friends or others I know that were (or are know) in the IDF, for fear of what I might say... or fear of what they might (given what I know of their views of the UN). It is so bloody frustrating knowing what I know, and looking at the attack... everything points to it being a planned and deliberate attack based on the information officially available and unofficially available... a conclusion that enrages me for more than one reason - 1) it means a man I deeply respected, and considered a friend was murdered; 2) other people that I consider friends belong or belonged to the org. that did it; 3) that his death, his murder, is being lampooned by the right-wingers nutters... some in my own party...; and 4) that his death/murder is being used to score cheap political points by politicans, including Paeta's (and mine) former commander - a man I used to respect as well....

I still think it is quite early to call the IDF murderers.

Regarding the UN...This is how the American right views it: It is supported by the United States, significantly funded by the United States, and housed in the United States. However, it often goes against U.S. policy, and continually condemns our ally Israel, while rarely if ever condemning the terror states and groups which target Israel. That is in addition to the fact that the UN is an incredibly corrupt organization led by a man with very questionable character. This isn't to say the UN doesn't have a role, it does fairly well with some hunger and health issues. However, it seemingly takes the position of "peace at any cost." The UN seems to forget the enemy in today's world is terrorism, and they do little to stop it. They spend their efforts, rather, on attempting to dissuade America and Israel and others from protecting themselves. How about taking a stand on terrorism? How about referring to Hezbollah as the terrorist group they are, rather than the bullsh*t PC term of "alleged aggressors." Is it that difficult to understand why certain people despise the UN? Sure, its easy for France or Russia or Canada to question America or England or Israel, considering they aren't constant targets of terrorism. It makes no difference to some countries if the UN appeases terrorists, since they haven't been threatened yet. The reason some Americans hate the UN is the same reason they get angry at foreign nations who after billions in aid and assistance from the U.S., curse our name and rail against our practices. I think people like yourself, RA, give groups like Hezbollah too much credit. Do you think they will stop the shelling if Israel stops? Absolutely not. They'll proclaim a victory for Islam, and plan more strikes. All the while, Israel can expect little action from the UN, who is traditionally much more inclined to defend terror organizations than to go to bat for Israel.

Often, I wonder what would happen if much of the world got their wish, and the U.S. stayed out of international affairs. For one, the UN would lose most of its legitimacy. Economic aid for countries in need would plummet, including many who hate us. If this keeps up, I imagine one day it will happen. When it does, I fear for those knocking at America's door, desperately in need. One day that knocking will go unanswered, and then perhaps those countries will understand the feeling of being rebuked.

Okay lets examine the evidence:
1) The post is clearly defined on IDF maps (highlighted and GPS co-ordinates clearly marked) for the past 20+ years. So, it can be easily ruled out that the post was “misploted” or unknown to the IDF forces in the area or the IDF command.
2) The post had been subject to close-in ground and air bombardment during the previous 10 days. This rules out a scenario where the post could have been mistakenly targeted by rapidly advancing troops in the heat of battle.
3) In the 14 hours prior to the fatal attack, the post had extremely tight air and ground bombardment patterns, including some 450kg bombs coming within 100 metres. The extremely well placed bombardment striking all around the post indicates the use of forward observer or drones to plot the bombardment. Incidentally this close bombardment also effectively prohibited the UN observers from evacuating the post.
4) The IDF was in communication with the post for the 12 hours previous, with the post repeatedly (at least 10 times) expressing serious concern about how close the bombardment was. This rules out the possibility that the IDF forces or command were unaware that the post was still occupied by UN personnel.
5) 3 air dropped guided munitions were used in destroying the post: 1 destroying the communication centre; 1 destroying the vehicle garage/storage area; and 1 destroying the living area/bomb shelter. The fact that they were guided is supported by the fact the centres of each structural component was struck, as well as the repeated claims by the Israelis are only using guided munitions in their precisions strikes.
6) The fact that a hardened bomb-shelter was destroyed by a bomb that penetrated 3 hardened/reinforced floors indicates the use of a specialized munition, or a “bunker buster”. This at some level indicates at least some pre-planning in if not the mission/weapons selection for the F-16, while also indicating a conscious decision on the pilot’s or FO’s part on the mention needed to take-out the bunker component of the target.
7) Initial Israel claims that the post was being used by Hezbollah forces is proven to be extremely unlikely for the following reasons: no mention of Hezbollah in the base by UN personnel, and no bodies recovered other than the UN personnel.

All of the above leads me to the conclusion that it was a deliberate attack on the site… because it would require far to many basic mistakes on the part of the IDF: the local and higher command would have had to fail to emphasize the location of the UN post; the local and higher command would have had to have failed to pass on the UN personnel’s communications/concerns; the FO or attack director would have had to have suddenly forgotten that it was a UN post they had been avoiding striking in the previous bombardments; and finally the pilot would have had to have possessed, and selected a specific weapons deployment for striking the post that would have been clearly marked on his hard and electronic maps.



Alright on to what I think Hezbollah’s reaction to Israel ceasing it’s assault… I don’t think they would cease their missile bombardment unless Hezbollah and Lebanon received some truly extraordinary concessions. Personally Israel’s assault has basically batted the hornet’s nest – you can stop swinging the bat, but that doesn’t mean the hornets won’t stop stinging. From a political standpoint Hezbollah couldn’t back down without sacrificing their standing (politically or militarily) in the post assault period… if say there was a ceasefire that returned to the status-quo, then Hezbollah would look weak and they would have failed in their primary role as defenders against Israeli aggression (as defined by themselves). Now say if Israeli troops remain in Lebanon, then whatever negative impact the assault created within Hezbollah will be mitigated by a renewal of their core mission statement… however if a multinational force occupied at “buffer-zone” then Hezbollah would be hardpressed to portray itself as “defenders against Israeli aggression” (especially if this force is authorized to enforce the peace). Of course the multinational force proposed by the EU to enforce a ceasefire is also problematic for other reasons though… for example it may have to use force against the Hezbollah or the IDF, which is a concern – a concern that becomes even more problematic say if German troops are involved. Regardless, a ceasefire and multinational force would be unwelcome by both of the combatants…

Now of course the situation is becoming even more complex and volatile as Lebanese military units are being drawn into the fighting, and an increasing number and size of Israeli “incursions” brings up the spectre of invasion and occupation - a perception not helped by the images of Israeli troops proudly displaying captured Lebanese flags. The focus of the assault has been slipping away from a directed attack against Hezbollah, into a war against Lebanon… and if that happens who knows who else will be drawn into the conflict.

Finally as for the UN, or even America's economic aid programs, lets just say that I reject the policy of throwing money at a problem to fix it - thats an easy fix that never works, and a fix that almost always leads to international and domestic corruption. Until such time that this becomes apparent to all concerned, then the rest have to slog on... hoping against hope that leaders will realize that men and material go a lot further than $$$

Well, I'd be happy to solve the problem by cutting off U.S. aid. If people don't think we should "throw money" at problems, I think we should oblige. Also, we'll stop allowing our troops to be used for anything but American missions, and we'll provide no supplies to anyone. I don't think Americans are looking to be put on a pedestal, but rather a simple "thanks" every now and then, or even the discontinuation of international spite.

As for the attack on the UN post, I imagine there will be much more to come of this.

Regarding Hezbollah, I still place my support behind Israel, in defending itself. I do feel bad that Lebanon got in the way, but after the continued failing of UN policy and weak Lebanese government, this is to be expected. If you cannot use your governmental and military authority to keep terrorists from controlling your country, you have little right to call upon that authority when asking Israel to pack up and go home. The situation for Israel is this: They can oblige the Lebanese, and stop the bombing and incursion, thus failing to defend themselves and allowing Israeli citizens to be killed. The second option would be to continue with the mission, eventually destroying their attackers, but with civilian Lebanese casualties as a by product. Naturally, I understand Israel's choice. As defender of their land, they must value their own citizens' lives more than those of a foreign country being controlled by a terrorist organization. This is another issue I have a problem with, involving the UN. They often portray international life as equal to everyone. Although that is a nice politically correct notion, it simply cannot be true in a world of nation-states. In a conflict such as the one Israel is involved in, I would easily say I value American life more than the opposition. That is a prime component of war, which unfortunately the world no longer has the stomach for. Of course, I am pleased at the world's distaste for death and destruction, however, when that distaste interferes with what must be done, that becomes a problem.

Rob, as much as I'd like to say this is a result of the pain you are suffering from your loss I think you also harbor anti-Israel and anti-American beliefs.

Again, you don't see people constantly discussing their hate for Canada. Don't you think you can just give it a rest for a day...maybe two?

-Rudey

This just pisses me off more and more. The UN is ridiculous. They completely ignore the fact that Hezbollah leaders met Iran officials in Syria this week, TO ORGANIZE HOW TO ARM THE MILITANTS! Where is the UN condemnation of Iran and Syria?

On a side note, I know its wrong to hate an entire religion, but given the attack in Seattle, I'm getting more and more prejudiced.

Well then you will be doing alot of hating --like a billion people's worth (and growing). Good luck.

Its alright, I hate China as well, thats another billion.

North Korea? and for old times sake, how about Russia?

Not Russia. I don't know enough about N. Korea to hate them. But you can add France to the list. I want the wine though.

The Main thing, is The UN is uless.

Readorict may be good, but it does not get stuff done!:mad:

If there is not Polotics there then what is it?:confused:

.... Ireland has filed a official protest through the UN and the Hague over the IDF murder of the 4 UN soldiers at Khiam, and the wounding of 2 UN soldiers at Adaisseh... (and yes the Irish used the language of "deliberate and careful targeting of UN forces with murderous intent"...)

... and in other news 5 dozen civilians (women and children) killed when the IDF "mistakenly" strikes the wrong building in Qana...

The IDF sure seems to have problems with their high precision guided mutions don't they? :rolleyes:

The Premier of Lebon was interviewed to day on an American News Channel and did nothing but blame Isreal and said They Would not send Troops of that Country to try to control The H Terrorists!:mad:

Blameing everything on Isreal!

On another note, the anti Missile system in Iseral from the US does not work!:rolleyes:

The whole thing is sad and they wonder why Civilians get killed? Wrap them around the hidden places that they hide.:mad:

Isreal has had to fight for thier lives since begining and will continue to do so. But, this seems to be over kill and losing support from the World!:(

RA, that is pretty typical of you. Naturally, you blame Israel, rather than the terrorists using the Lebanese as personal shields. Of course, Annan comes out today to condemn Israel, but remains silent on Iran, Syria and HEZBOLLAH. Attention, to the people who may not have noticed, this is a war. Innocent people die during war. It is unfortunate. If terrorists would leave Israel alone, it wouldnt happen. Annan mentioned Israel not heeding his calls for a ceasefire, as if Kofi Annan has distinguished himself as somebody with any sort of wisdom or sense. This coming from the organization who has had people in Lebanon for over 2 decades, and yet has done absolutely nothing to stop Hezbollah's reign in recent months. Sickening.

And Shiner that is rather typical of you, swallowing the line that Israel uses for every "mistake" - ie. that Hezbollah was using the people as shields... thing is in everyone of these "accidents" the Israelis haven't been able to show any bomb camera or drone footage of this (sure they've showed footage, but nothing for the actual events).

Of course Annan condmens Israel in this attack, because after all it was the Israelis that dropped the bomb... just like the rest of the UN (except of course for US & Isreal). I can also understand his anger and frustration with Israel, because everytime it happens (like shelling the UN in the same village 10 years ago) Israel conviently turns it around to blame the victims.

Also in case you ever decided to turn away from FauxNews you'd see the anger and frustration directed against the UN by the Lebanese and Palestinians - apparently they are angry that the UN can't protect them, and they are angry that the UN is beholden to the US and Israel...

Now a final thought - both sides seem to be targeting civilians.... but only one side uses precision weapons. I join with the rest of the f-ck'in world in condemning these continual "accidents" by Israel.

1) I watch MSNBC, which is generally more in the bleeding heart category which you belong to.

2) The UN isn't controlled by the US, although they should be. You continue to ignore the UN's inaction on terrorism.

3) Your consistant condoning of terrorism makes your condemnation of Israel less legitimate.

4) Again, this is entirely the fault of Hamas and Hezbollah. They started this, and I pray to God Israel finishes it, by whatever means necc.

Well I watch CBC, BBC, DW, CNN, and when I can stomach it FOXNews. Didn't know that made me a "bleeding heart"

No it isn't controlled by the US (thank God); but it is beholden to the US (just as it is to any security council member with veto), and the US is effectively blocking any calls for a cease-fire or condemnation for any Israeli action.

I don't condone any terrorism - whether it be by an organization or by a state - I say again that I don't condone any terrorism. In fact I condemn the terrorism by both Hezbollah and the IDF.

No it is not entirely the fault of Hamas or Hezbollah - yes they sparked the beginnings of the current round of violence; yes they have launched attacks on Israel; but they weren't the ones that dropped the precision bombs... so the IDF shares the blame.

1) What news you watch has nothing to do with you being a bleeding heart-type. I simply indicated that I don't prefer conservative-biased news. I would, but Fox News tends to repeat things and cover stories I think are stupid.

2) The U.S. is blocking calls for a cease fire, because it would endanger Israel. Hezbollah would not agree to a cease fire. They are not a legitimate negotiating body, they are a ultra radical terrorist organization who wants the end of Israel. Countries must have some sort of "credit" if you will, for a cease fire to work. Hezbollah has none. The U.S. consistantly blocks anti-Semetic action by the UN, usually because Israel is the only one targeted, while Kofi and the GA consistantly ignore Israel's attackers.

3) Very rarely, if at all, have I heard you condemn the terrorist organizations. It is similar to the rhetoric of many muslim groups. Simply not supporting terrorist action isn't enough. There must be condemnation, which the UN does not do.

4) It is the fault of Hezbollah. They created this problem. Would Israel have attacked them otherwise? No. Thus, it is the fault of Hezbollah, a terrorist organization who went after Israel initially.

Rob it's simple. You don't consider Hezbollah to be a terrorist group. That's very telling.

And the UN is busy murdering and raping Africans so who knew they had time to cry over this?

And Hezbollah cares about civilians. That's why it continues to use them as human shields. That's why it continues to fire rockets at them. That's why they bomb buildings in Argentina.

People die in a war. It's not easy. Was there ever a single war where civilians did not die? It's a shame. It's sad. But it's reality. It can all stop when Hezbollah stops firing rockets at Israel and releases the soldiers it kidnapped while Europe and the UN admit that they allowed the country to become a large terrorist state.

-Rudey

And I'd like to note this point has not been answered.

Also, I'm wondering where this "anti-UN media" is, because everything I've seen in the U.S. (NBC, CBS, ABC, Boston Globe, etc.) has been free of anti-UN literature. Same for this notion that conservatives in the US are anti-UN.

WTF? Where the hell did I ever say that Hezbollah isn't a terrorist group?

As for your f-ck'ed up little jihad against the UN, and seemingly blaming it for Israel's actions :rolleyes: Look back at history jackass and you might see that it was Israel and the US that tied UNIFIL's hands and prohibited them both the manadate and the firepower to disarm Hezbollah and enforce a ceasefire along the blue-line - because they didn't want a force that would potentially have to use force against Israel in enforcing a cease-fire.

Umm you defended Hezbollah as being more than just a terror group and even tried to justify what they were doing as if it was a bunch of freedom fighters (when clearly they are a Lebanese terror group and not Hamas btw). You talked about all the nice things Hezbollah did. And my reply to you was that if someone stabbed your mother and fed you bread afterwards, they would still be a murderer.

And Rob, your anger problem is pretty bad and you should consider seeking help. Under the UN's watch, the area was stockpiled with rockets and missile launchers while the UN soldiers took a break from murdering and raping Africans to serve as human shields.

-Rudey

Exactly. I've never seen any anti-UN literature in most media. Rob just comes on to blast America and Canada and will keep talking about how Republicans and Fox news and Israel are controlling everything.

-Rudey

Just a couple of thoughts.

The UN as a peacekeeper is not particularly efficient. How can it be with all of the polictical pressure brought to bear on it and the lack of any kind of forces of its own.

Israel is going to take a lot of heat from the US and much of the rest of the world for killing not only numerous civilians (including women and children), but the UN troops as well. If they claim accidents, they are going to look like fools, if not they'll look bloodthirsty or uncaring. I'd guess that's why the US is suddenly pushing for a quick cease fire -- which we were not doing last week as I recall.

Hezbollah is not made up of nice people.

The war of words in this thread is sometimes more acrimonious than the one in the actual war. Neither are particularly entertaining.

I think there should be no cease fire. This war started before I was even born, and I hope everyone fighting in it dies, so that normal people there can regain control. Hezbollah isn't very nice, no but then again, would not exist in the first place if Israel hadn't invaded Lebannanon 20 years ago or whenever it was. There are criminals on both sides.

Do you think that Israel entered Lebanon in 1982 for shits and giggles? Before there was Hezbolah operating from Southern Lebanon, there was the PLO, and they were no angels either.

Hezbolah does not exist because of what happened 24 years ago. It was created in 1983 by Iran, and not by an indigenous response to local conditions. It exists in its current state because of Iran (mostly) and Syria.

This current war started when Iran coaxed Hezbolah to act as the G8 was meeting. Iran wanted to show the world that they could shake things up. Well, they shook things up and now there is a war.

We can debate whether or not Israel's response was appropriate, but no one is debating about who killed the first person. It was Hezbolah doing the dirty work for Iran.

I won't attempt to repeat or even paraphrase, but there was a fascinating discussion of the current crisis on NPR's "Talk of the Nation" today.

The one comment that really hit me is that, save one which wasn't identified, every modern day war has cost more civilian lives than military.

I don't even remember who said it -- someone from Rand or the Naval War College or someone, but that's pretty dramatic.

Delt, I think they'd also agree that the recent conflicts are absolutely nothing compared to the loss of civilian life from WWI WWII and Vietnam.

In WWII the British accidentally bombed a children's hospital instead of a Gestapo office. Nobody likes it but it's not supposed to be pleasant.

-Rudey

Not to mention America pounding German cities and Japan.

PLO aren't terrorists though.

PLO is better than Hezbollah and Hammas by a long shot. I'm not saying Iran doesn't control Hezbollah, but without Israel creating a bunch of conditions, then neither Hammas nor Hezbollah would exist, at least not as they do now. Bulldoze people's family's homes and run over teenagers with tanks anywhere else in the world, and you get human rights protestors from every country in the world that cares about such things. Say anything bad about Israel and you are terrorist if you're brown and anti-semetic if you're another color.

Former head of the PLO: Known terrorist.

It was von Clauswitz who foresaw that civilian populations would be part of this. We now see this being reversed by the U.S., with the use of technology that enables highly surgical strikes. There will still be collateral damage, but at least the effort is being made to minimize civilian casualties where possible. This is in sharp contrast to a group like Hezbollah that rarely even bothers to target Israel's military. They just go straight for the civilians.

Which is why they're called terrorists.

"Delt, I think they'd also agree that the recent conflicts are absolutely nothing compared to the loss of civilian life from WWI WWII and Vietnam."

Shiner. You're right. It's not something that people generally think about, though, I think.

Boy, was that a strange sentence.

And what the Phalangist officers did under the command of the Israel government was not for "shits and giggles". They were "no angels either".

It happened while they were in the country but not under their command. Why it occured is something you can ask the Phalangists I suppose. Besides what Assad did to his own people is much more angelic. So is what Saddam did.

Either way this is all irrelevant. Per the UN's own declarations, Israel was not in Lebanon. The only one violating a UN resolution was Lebanon for not disarming Hezbollah. And now this is what happened. I really do have faith though that Hezbollah will be weakened and pushed back and that any new peacekeepers will finally do their jobs. Lebanon will be rebuilt with someone's oil money I am sure too.

-Rudey

Are you sure it wasn't Ariel (head of IDF at the time) who allowed the Phalangists into the camps, while Israel occupied Lebanon?

History must have been rewritten :confused:

So Hamas and Hezbollah need military units and war-making/terrorist capability for legitimate, peaceful reasons?

What is wrong with requiring these people to disarm? Please tell me how exactly this is unreasonable?

Ariel Sharon was investigated for it after 300,000 people in Israel protested. Somewhat on a tangent, but when was the last time you heard of 300,000 Arabs protest because Hamas blew up a bus full of civilians? After the investigation, Sharon was held indirectly responsible because it happened under his watch ("buck stops here") but it was in no way carried out by the Israelis and at no point did Israel command them to go in and kill women and children. Supposedly Sharon found out about all this when getting woken up at night.

Consequently, Sharon went on to become a big pussy that gave up a lot of land for nothing and didn't act early enough.

-Rudey

On a side note, did anyone see Brian Becker of the A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition just say that Hezbollah wasn't a terror organization but Israel was? It was on FoxNews, he claimed that Hezbollah was only responding to Israel's aggression. He looked like a white American, I don't even think he had middle eastern heritage. I love it when the dumbass middle aged hippies come out for things like this.