• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Re: Israel Hits U.N. Post

Status
Not open for further replies.
Out of curiosity, does anyone actually believe that Hezbollah was NOT firing from positions adjacent to the UN observer post with the specific hope that this would happen?

The following report from Canadian Maj Hess Von Kruedener emailed to CTV.ca:
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20060718/mideast_lebanon_UN_060716/20060718/

Important Excerpt:
"What I can tell you is this: we have on a daily basis had numerous occasions where our position has come under direct or indirect fire from both artillery and aerial bombing. The closest artillery has landed within 2 meters of our position and the closest 1000 lb aerial bomb has landed 100 meters from our patrol base. This has not been deliberate targeting, but has rather been due to tactical necessity."

Interpretation:
Hezbollah is firing rockets in near proximity of our observation post and since we're not doing anything to stop them....the Israelis are justifiably firing upon them.



Matthew.  ???
 
a_majoor said:
Face it, the Hezbollah are fighting a 4GW aiming not at the Israeli military or State (which they have no realistic chance of defeating in an open confrontation), but at us, using civilians as weapons in theinr info ops. I don't know what the counter to this is, "Golani Brigade" snipers fanning out and zapping any male carrying a weapon? (The enemy will shift to women and children carrying and manning the weapons.....). The only possible counter is to carry out strategic operations against the Hezbollah's state sponsors (Syria and Iran), as well as excluding Hezbollah and Syrian attempts to infiltrate or influence the Lebanese government. Once Hezbollah is cut off from outside support, they will be easier to deal with.

That is where a "Strong, Aggressive Force" is required.  Israel is not going to take on NATO and its might.  If Hezbollah isn't removed by a "Strong, Aggressive Force" than it will be no better than the UN.  They have to be taken out.  If they want to play the game that they are, and get down to arming women and children......Guess what?......If they are carrying arms and in an aggressive stance threatening the NATO Force, then they are targeted.....No Race/Sex/Age/Religious/Cultural/etc distinction has to be made as long as they pose a threat.  Time to get "Hard" with these people, as that seems to be the only thing they understand.
 
George Wallace said:
That is where a "Strong, Aggressive Force" is required.  Israel is not going to take on NATO and its might.  If Hezbollah isn't removed by a "Strong, Aggressive Force" than it will be no better than the UN.  They have to be taken out.  If they want to play the game that they are, and get down to arming women and children......Guess what?......If they are carrying arms and in an aggressive stance threatening the NATO Force, then they are targeted.....No Race/Sex/Age/Religious/Cultural/etc distinction has to be made as long as they pose a threat.  Time to get "Hard" with these people, as that seems to be the only thing they understand.

A NATO force would be reluctant to interfer with Israel retaliating with return fire, and I think Hezbollah would encourage that, in much the same way they have been doing. They know the western press will focus on Israel violating the agreement and "targeting" women and children, meanwhile it is Hezbollah that emplaced their weapons in civilian areas.

You are going to find the average NATO forces member having a difficult time, even when it is known, targetting women and children. They don't have the careless disregard for civilian casualties others may have.
 
The hue and cry over the deaths of UN troops is understandable and yet there is no similar outrage over the killing of Israeli civilians from Hizbollah rockets.

One of whom, according to multiple (unconfirmed) media reports was a Canadian.  Given that I know two officers currently serving as UNMOs in that very region, I suggest that you're bound to see some "hue and cry" on this Canadian army forum.  T6, I've had issues with some of your comments before, but this one pushes my buttons - for obvious reasons.

Sub_guy and GW:  +1

As many know, I have no love for the UN and feel that their "peacekeeping" missions - of which UNIFIL is a prime example - border on a joke.  In this theatre, the force has an apparent reputation for vacillation and ineffectiveness, part of which is due to the mandate provided to it by UNNY.  However, as George points out, the force has been in place in static locations for many, many years.  Surely the much-vaunted IDF (who aren't nearly as good as made out, BTW) had each OP and camp entered into their GPS years ago...

To quote Sub_Guy:

I suspect in 15 years we will be reading (once again) that in fact it was a planned attack.

Indeed...
 
Working in that position was similar to moving into a high crime neighbourhood and hoping you would not get robbed. Here is some of what they were doing before the bombing:

http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/archives/004344.html

July 26, 2006
When Luck Runs Out
At the Belmont Club, a lengthy list of the close calls INIFIL had already suffered due to their proximity with Hezbollah installations;

All the incidents of IDF fire reported in the press releases are clearly related to some kind of nearby combat with the Hezbollah. In one case the IDF fired on a village into which the UNIFIL had gone, but rockets had originated from the vicinity of the village prior. In another case, an Israeli aerial bombardment detonated mines all around a UNIFIL position. Those mines were presumably not planted by UNIFIL, but they were so close to it that the UN position caught fire. The UN observation post in Maroun al-Ras was hit by artillery, but we know from press reports that Maroun al-Ras was the epicenter of heavy fighting and the location of a Hezbollah bunker complex. The UN even ran a convoy from the Hezbollah "capital" of Bint Jubayl to another area. Bint Jubayl is well known to be the target of an IDF attack. Yet the UN felt that it was possible to move convoys through such areas, albeit at considerable danger.

One reason that they could was that UNIFIL was evidently in contact with the IDF. In a sentence which speaks volumes we learn that "One unarmed UN military observer, a member of the Observer Group Lebanon (OGL), was seriously wounded by small arms fire in the patrol base in the Marun Al Ras area yesterday afternoon. According to preliminary reports, the fire originated from the Hezbollah side during an exchange with the IDF. He was evacuated by the UN to the Israeli side, from where he was taken by an IDF ambulance helicopter to a hospital in Haifa." This strongly implies that UNFIL was able to coordinate their movements with the IDF and that the IDF was willing to risk men and aircraft to help UNFIL.

Now a lot will be made of UN positions being "clearly marked". However nearly all of the fire reported on UN positions with the exception of the July 23 indicident in Kiyam, where the 4 UN observers were killed today, were from artillery, which is an area weapon. Artillery, depending on the angle and range from which it is fired, has a certain dispersion even allowing for crew perfection. (In contrast UNIFIL took small arms fire from the Hezbollah between Kunin and Bint Jubayl and small arms can only be used when visual contact is made). Imperfections in shell manufacture, operator error, barrel wear etc can cause an artillery round to fall off target. It is not called an area weapon for nothing.

[...]

Their positions are manifestly so close to the Hezbollah; their convoys so at risk at being confused with mobile Hezbollah forces that only by the grace of God and the accuracy of the IDF have fatalities been avoided until now. They were willing to take the risk. Annan was willing to make the hay.You be the judge of Kofi Annan's competence both in the care of his men and with respect to the accusation he has made against the IDF.

Full article here:
http://fallbackbelmont.blogspot.com/2006/07/knife-thrower-at-carnival.html

 
I've noticed a lot of rumour and speculation on this subject and on who the KIA might be.  I have started a new thread:  http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/47969.0.html

on the evils of rumour and speculation.  PLEASE READ AND KNOW IT WELL!  It should not be tolerated here at all.  Remember that we are professionals and that we are a family.  Please protect our own.
 
I agree with Sub_Guy in that these posts are clearly marked as "UN".  I fully believe there is no way that someone in IDF command did not know full wekk of it's location and purpose.

Further, with the state of the art weapons a first rate western supplied/led force has at it's disposal nowadays command and control of the fall of shot of these weapons is considerable.  We all have seen the "guided weapon entering the third window from the top left video" or what have you we are familiar with since GW1.

The UN are claiming their people made at least 10 calls to the IDF with regard near misses on their position before contact was lost.

Full story here:  http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20060725/israel_fighting_060726/20060726?hub=TopStories
 
This morning on CNN, an Irish officer (forgot his name) stationed in the area was being interviewed.

If I understood him correctly he was stating that the posts on the high ground were "unmanned" at time of the "attack" and all the UN personnel were taking shelter from the fighting.

When asked by the CNN correspondent if it was in ANY way possible that Hezbollah fighters had occupied the positions and were using them to fire on the IDF, the officer stated he had "no comment" on that??

I am not sure what that means?
 
CanadaPhil said:
This morning on CNN, an Irish officer (forgot his name) stationed in the area was being interviewed.

If I understood him correctly he was stating that the posts on the high ground were "unmanned" at time of the "attack" and all the UN personnel were taking shelter from the fighting.

When asked by the CNN correspondent if it was in ANY way possible that Hezbollah fighters had occupied the positions and were using them to fire on the IDF, the officer stated he had "no comment" on that??

I am not sure what that means?

It means exactly what it means. He most likely didn't know and didn't want to put the UN in an embarassing position if whatever he said turned out to be wrong.
 
I agree with Sub_Guy in that these posts are clearly marked as "UN".

Fair enough.  And if some IDF soldier deliberately targeted a UN post, he or she should be incarcerated until the sun goes nova.

But look at this picture of a UNIFIL post, and tell me mistakes aren't possible: http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/archives/upload/2006/07/flags.jpg

Hezbollah should not have been allowed to use UNIFIL posts for cover.  They should not have been allowed to impersonate UN troops to kidnap Israelis (http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2006_07_16-2006_07_22.shtml#1153523571).  They should not have been allowed to direct small-arms fire against a UN soldier, severely wounding him, or open fire on a clearly-marked UN convoy (http://fallbackbelmont.blogspot.com/2006/07/knife-thrower-at-carnival.html).

In fact, the UN administration itself should be roundly castigated for leaving in an active shooting war a force with no strong mandate, no real resources, for no real purpose.
 
This from Canadian Press:

Harper says he doesn't believe UN post deliberately targeted by Israelis KEVIN BISSETT
13 minutes ago



HOPEWELL CAPE, N.B. (CP) - Prime Minister Stephen Harper says Israel's deadly attack on a UN observation post in Lebanon, which claimed the life of a Canadian soldier, was a "terrible tragedy" and he doubts whether the bombing was deliberate.

Harper, speaking to reporters after a funding announcement in eastern New Brunswick, said the Canadian military would consult with the UN and the Israeli government to find out what happened.

The prime minister also said he wants to know why the post was still manned even though it was in the middle of an obvious war zone. Three other peacekeepers - from Austria, China and Finland - were killed when a bomb hit their post in the town Khiyam, near the eastern end of Lebanon's border with Israel.

UN Secretary General Kofi Annan has suggested Israel deliberately targeted the UN outpost. But Harper said the facts suggest otherwise.

"I certainly doubt that to be the case, given that the government of Israel has been co-operating with us in our evacuation efforts, in our efforts to move Canadian citizens out of Lebanon and also trying to keep our own troops that are on the ground, involved in the evacuation, out of harm's way," he said.

"We want to find out why this United Nations post was attacked and also why it remained manned during what is now, more or less, a war during obvious danger to these individuals."

Harper said he expected to hear from the Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert.

"I expect that he will be expressing his deep regret. But also I'll be asking for his full co-operation in getting to the bottom of this."

Harper said it was too early to say whether a UN peacekeeping force should be dispatched to Lebanon and he confirmed Canada's current evacuation policy for non-resident Canadians will be reviewed when the rescue effort ends.

"Our priority in this case has been the evacuation of citizens who are also residents but we have also been willing to evacuate residents who are not permanent residents of Canada," he said following a news conference in Hopewell Cape, a picturesque community at the eastern edge of the Bay of Fundy.

"That has been somewhat controversial. There are large numbers involved, and in other parts of the world there are even larger numbers."

On Tuesday, Harper said Canada would prefer to keep its troops out of Lebanon because any ceasefire between Israel and the Lebanese militant group Hezbollah would be better enforced by Middle East countries.

The United States is proposing a NATO-led intervention force in southern Lebanon. It wants the UN to sanction a force as it did for coalition forces in Afghanistan.

Neither Canada nor the United States has called for a ceasefire in the region, insisting that Hezbollah must first be dismantled.

Canada's evacuation efforts are expected to wind down in the coming days. Officials expect 10,000 Canadians will be evacuated by the time the rescue effort ends.




Copyright © 2006 Canadian Press


 
Babbling Brooks said:
But look at this picture of a UNIFIL post, and tell me mistakes aren't possible: http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/archives/upload/2006/07/flags.jpg

Correct me if I am mistaken, but geeze, the great big freaking UN flag on a registered UN bunker should give a highly trained observer such as a pilot or FOO a clue as to the identity of who's there.
 
I still remain confused every time a Prime Minister makes a public statement that's actually logical, fair and not intended to pander to specific voting block.


Matthew.  ???
 
The Hezbollah banner is flying HIGHER than the UN one.

A definite NO-NO in flag flying protocol.
 
jollyjacktar said:
Correct me if I am mistaken, but geeze, the great big freaking UN flag on a registered UN bunker should give a highly trained observer such as a pilot or FOO a clue as to the identity of who's there.

Not if there was no wind...;)

 
Cdn Blackshirt said:
I still remain confused every time a Prime Minister makes a public statement that's actually logical, fair and not intended to pander to specific voting block.


Matthew.   ???

I can't wait for the next election.  Good for him. I hope he doesn't blow things through some idiotic scandal - as seems to be inevitable no matter which party is in power.
 
Michael Dorosh said:
Not if there was no wind...;)

The wind isn't going to blow the big black UN lettering off of the big white bunker!
 
From the BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5216230.stm)

How UN Lebanon post was bombed  

There was fierce fighting in the Khiam area for six hours
Details of the circumstances in which the Israeli air force bombed a United Nations observation post in south Lebanon, killing four UN peacekeepers have begun to emerge.
According to diplomats familiar with the UN's initial report into the incident, the post in the town of Khiam was hit by precision-guided munition, says the BBC's Paul Adams in Jerusalem.

The report says there was fierce fighting in the area for about six hours before the post was hit, during which time UN personnel contacted the Israel military 10 times, urging them to stop firing.

Our correspondent says the UN claims that after each call, it was assured the firing would stop.

The Irish foreign ministry said one of its officers in the UN's Unifil peacekeeping force in south Lebanon, placed six warning calls to the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) prior to the attack.

"On six separate occasions he was in contact with the Israelis to warn them that their bombardment was endangering the lives of UN staff in South Lebanon," Reuters news agency quoted an unnamed foreign office spokesman as saying.

"He warned: 'You have to address this problem or lives may be lost'," the spokesman said.

The Associated Press news agency named the officer as Lt Col John Molloy.

The bomb which killed the unarmed peacekeepers - Canadian, Austrian, Finnish and Chinese soldiers - hit the building and shelter of the observation post, near the eastern end of the Lebanese-Israeli border, UN spokesman Milos Struger said.

Israel has launched an investigation.

The UN post was on high ground, in an area once occupied by Israel.

My emphasis added...



 
It must be alright.  Uncle Steven said he believes it was an accident.....

http://www.cbc.ca/story/world/national/2006/07/25/un-lebanon.html
 
jollyjacktar said:
Further, with the state of the art weapons a first rate western supplied/led force has at it's disposal nowadays command and control of the fall of shot of these weapons is considerable.  We all have seen the "guided weapon entering the third window from the top left video" or what have you we are familiar with since GW1.

These 'state of the art weapons' are only as smart as the guy who is painting the target. Thats not speculation, but fact.

I think we should do a 'wait out' on this one.

As for Uncle Steven, Jolly, he has shown more leadership in one day than other PMs have in decades, and if I lived back in dear ole Canada, he would have got my vote.

Regards,

Wes
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top