Hezbollah was using UN post as 'shield'

One of the UN observers killed in the Israeli air strike gave his view of the matter just days before he died........

http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=37278180-a261-421d-84a9-7f94d5fc6d50


"What I can tell you is this," he wrote in an e-mail to CTV dated July 18. "We have on a daily basis had numerous occasions where our position has come under direct or indirect fire from both (Israeli) artillery and aerial bombing.

"The closest artillery has landed within 2 meters (sic) of our position and the closest 1000 lb aerial bomb has landed 100 meters (sic) from our patrol base. This has not been deliberate targeting, but rather due to tactical necessity."

Those words, particularly the last sentence, are not-so-veiled language indicating Israeli strikes were aimed at Hezbollah targets near the post, said Maj.-Gen. MacKenzie.

"What that means is, in plain English, 'We've got Hezbollah fighters running around in our positions, taking our positions here and then using us for shields and then engaging the (Israeli Defence Forces)," he said.


No comment on his view from the UN? Does this affect your view of the strike and/or Hezbollah's actions?

 

How are you supposed to spell "meter"?

EDIT: Or does [sic] signify that his spelling was corrected?

 

What is [sic] anyway?

 

Sic is a Latin word meaning "thus", "so", or "just as that". In writing, it is italicized and placed within square brackets — [sic] — to indicate that an incorrect or unusual spelling, phrase, or other preceding quoted material is a verbatim reproduction of the quoted original and is not a transcription error.

 

I thought meters was the "Americanized" version.

Anyway, about the article, it does not surprise me in the least. They do the same thing with civilians, why not the UN?

 

Thanks, CG.


Anyway, I think we have been over this for so long its pretty useless to discuss it anymore, nobody will suddenly change his mind about this.

 

meter ie light meter, is a measuring device and metre is a distance AFAIK.

Kofi really put his foot in it saying that it was deliberate, he did withdraw it though.

I don't think anyone thinks that the Israelis target any civillians or UN posts deliberately do they? We do however question why they don't use more descriminate methods such as in other wars, I've advocated specialist units moving in, but apparently this isn't viable. Since the war is about to end soonish I hope, I'd suggest the Israelis proceed with more caution as it's obvious any civillian casualties are going to be over emphasised atm.

 

I never believed that the IDF would intentionally target the UN or uninvolved civilians. I don't doubt though that Hezbollah was quite happy that the UN got hit, and may have had that in mind when using them as a shield.

 

Clever Hez i say.

 

I think the main motive was to remain close the safe harbour of UN facilities. Apparently they calculated wrongly. My only wish is that the Israel did got some of those fellows too within those strikes so the lifes of blue helmets weren't wasted for nothing.

Members of Hezbollah are humans too so they're scared as much for their own lifes as others are.
In fact when they use human shields it's rather apparent they're probably crapping their pants all the time otherwise.
If human shields are used, it's partly win-win situation. Either the enemy doesn't strike you or if they do they get blamed for attacking civilians. Only thing matters is how close these shields are for you.
I think though that there are issues involved about these civilian deaths and human shields that we don't here know or understand.

 

How very very odd.

Hezbollah apparently lurk within 2 metres of UN command posts, but are never photographed, spoken to or otherwise verified as being there. They can apparently move huge distances on foot very quickly, but only end up being engaged when within 2 metres of a UN command post.

Oh of course! EVERYWHERE Israel shells is infiltrated by terrorists, and EVERYONE shot by Israel is a terrorist.

Tautology Ammo, the new standard equipment for feeding weapons.

Now kindly post some real facts and stop insulting our intelligence.

 

Have someone that can read go through the article with you. Perhaps if they speak slow and use small words you'll get the gist of it.

 

Suggest you read The Fateful Triangle]/I] by Noam Chomsky.

It might give you some impression of how to interpret propaganda.

Where are the published reports of UN observation posts? They are there to observe, so what have they been observing?

And it's particularly dispicable to use one sentence from a dead man to infer that every attack was fully in line with international law.

 

How to interpret propaganda by a leftist propagandist like Chomsky? Priceless!!

 

Chomsky is the most centred writer there is.

Name one who gives more consideration to both sides in a debate. Name just ONE who is less biased.

 

You are so F'ing delusional that you can't be taken seriously. Chomsky centered? Only if you consider the radical left the center. Bleh. Take your meds and continue your therapy.....the voices will stop sooner or later.

 

Wasn't he a commie? (serious question)

 

Professor Noam Chomsky invented the human study of linguistics.

And I don't see the name of someone purportedly less biased.

If you want to take the words of others, rather than just reading the man and making your own mind up, it's your loss.