Middle East Continued Again...

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by MOBIUS
He supports the Israelis - ergo he doesn't give a flying **** about the lives of innocent people...

Your cause would be better served if you weren't so inflammatory. I don't think you'll ever prompt Sloww to think about his stance by constantly insulting him.

Most Israeli-supporters here are eager to whitewash anything Israel does (or to raise only a lip-service outrage when Israel goes incredibly over the line).

But that's not because they're criminals. That's because their belief of Israel as the "good guys" blind them into giving Israel the benefit of the doubt in all but the most extreme circumstances.

If they were suddenly prompted into thinking of the whole issue without first assuming that Israel is the good guys, without automatically being lenient on Israel's actions, then their opinions would be very different.

Remember what happened during the Abu Ghraib scandal. Many of our war-supporters changed their minds, as they saw that the US might possibly not be the "good guys" in Iraq. It had an especially strong effect on Ted, who became very critical towards the US' policies, whereas he was nearly jingoist before.

This kind of opinion-shifting cannot occur when people get constantly insulted by the other side. Especially when these insults are so remote from reality that they make the insulter look like a frothing-at-the-mouth troll

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by BlackCat
Yep. That happend after six hours bombardment where they didn't hit it. Was that the first precision missile used in this ? I doubt it.

...

From Mobius' article

the base came under close Israeli fire 21 times - including 12 hits within 100 metres and four direct hits - from 1.20pm until contact was lost with the four peacekeepers inside at 7.17pm.

[Pekka]

Spiffor, talk to the trees since you're full of doodoo baby! Everyone is biased. It's a fact, the question is what the direction is and how much. BUt everyone is biased. You can only realize it or be blind and not realize it.

I support Israel, but not all the way. For example this thing is getting out of the hands too quickly now. There needs to be some sustaining pretty ASAP and there needs to be some explaining to be done and there needs to be real efforts to avoid full scale 'we're going to kill you all'-war. In other words, it's not looking good right now from where I'm standing.

[BlackCat]

Originally posted by Spiffor

...

From Mobius' article

the base came under close Israeli fire 21 times - including 12 hits within 100 metres and four direct hits - from 1.20pm until contact was lost with the four peacekeepers inside at 7.17pm.

I'm not quite sure what you are trying to say. Arty are pretty precise but not without variation. If only 12 hits was inside 100 m, then they for sure wasn't aiming for the UN site.

I know a bit about it since I served at a haubitzer battery some years ago, and even with our WWII guns, we were way under 100 meters in targetting. Technology has advanced a bit since, and if the arty was targetting the UN post I can guarantee that there would have been way more hits inside 100 m and several more direct hits.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Pekka
Spiffor, talk to the trees since you're full of doodoo baby! Everyone is biased. It's a fact, the question is what the direction is and how much. BUt everyone is biased. You can only realize it or be blind and not realize it.

I know that everybody is biased. And when it comes to the Israeli matter, the bias is often very strong.

However, the bias might be softened as well. Heck, I used to be anti-Israel in the past. Then, Sharon's plan made me leer much more toward Israel. It just struck my pragmatic chord. I've become relatively neutral about the area then, slighty favourable to the Israelis. Not because they're the "good guys", but because Israel seemed the most willing to do some effort to reach peace.

So, when the conflict began (back when the IDF bombed a Palestinian beach, killing a family), I was mostly neutral, and even slightly sympathetic to Israel. My sympathies have shifted again as Israel has consistently showed a "might makes right" attitude both in Gaza and in Lebanon, and has entered a full-bully mode. I don't like bullies, and Israel did nothing to deserve a "benefit of the doubt" from me.

My position is just an example. I think the current war will lead more people on these boards to grant much less trust to Israel. Because this ****up is the first one where we just can't assume that the target was Hezbollah, no matter how hard we try. And this ****up grants a new light on those who say that Israel's behaviour is wrong.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by BlackCat
I'm not quite sure what you are trying to say. Arty are pretty precise but not without variation. If only 12 hits was inside 100 m, then they for sure wasn't aiming for the UN site.

There have been 21 attacks total. These include 12 close hits, and 4 direct hits.

[Pekka]

I also agree that the very current updated actions are sliding into wrong at the moment in my opinion. Some military experts say that there's absolutely no reason why IDF would ever target UN. This is wrong. There's all the reasons to do it. We all know when crap starts to fly, UN packs up their stuff and leaves running. And when you're doing war, you don't want UN to be there, because you want your own view against your enemy's view and no third parties, if you are stronger. Strategically, I think it makes lots of sense.

If it was targeted on purpose, that remains to be seen, I'm not saying it was on purpose or wasn't, I don't know.

My view is complicated. OTOH I compeltely understand the original claim of Palestine and that it was all handled pretty much .. well fubared by Europe. But now that things are how they are, I see Israel being much more capable of actually running things and keeping order of its own actions so I consider it to be more trustworthy, like a real country with real leadership and structure. I also recognize their right to exist like the rest of us, so .. I'm all for self defense in their case. I also have some feelings for the nation that are non-religious though.

However, that doesn't persuade me thinking this current action of the past few days is going into a good direction. I don't know who this general or is he a minister, the new dude anyway.. I'm not sure if he is very competent. I think he is a complete f-up and I hope he gets fired very soon and let someone else take over.

[BlackCat]

Originally posted by Spiffor

There have been 21 attacks total. These include 12 close hits, and 4 direct hits.

Yep, there has been 21 attacks, but they weren't aimed at the UN site. If they were I can assure that most of them would have been in at max 25 meters.

[Barnabas]

This is another "we accidentally bombed the chinese embassy" like in serbia, lol,

edi: I had posting amnesia and not noticed I had posted pretty much the same easrlier, sorry.

And the lol doesnt mean I find it funny.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Pekka
If it was targeted on purpose, that remains to be seen, I'm not saying it was on purpose or wasn't, I don't know.

Well, there are two possibilities. Either the UN post was deliberately target, or it wasn't.

In both scenarios, I can't see how it is possible to paint Israeli actions as a good thing:

- If the post was indeed targetted, it shows that Israel (or at least some IDF officers powerful enough to call some shots) wanted to destroy a UN post.

I actually hope that the post was targetted, because the other scenario is much, much worse:

- If the post was NOT targetted, then it means that 21 attacks (in that scenario, random attacks) occured in that tiny place alone, 16 random attacks on a 100m radius.
Such scenario would mean that Israel unleashes a barrage of blind artillery fire on southern Lebanon such that a tiny piece of land gets 16 hits in one day.
It would also mean that precision missiles aren't precision, and hit whatever pleases their AI.
We condemn Hezbollah for firing rockets blindly against Israel. But if Israel hadn't been targetting the UN then it would mean it's been firing blind rockets too. And many, many more than Hezbollah could do.

I don't believe in the second scenario. If Israel had been putting southern Lebanon under blind fire, the Lebanese death toll would be much, much higher. When you compare the number of attacks and the number of deaths, it's a proof that Israeli targetting systems work. It's also pretty clear that Israel targetted the UN. And frankly, in comparison with the alternative, it's a relief.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by BlackCat
Yep, there has been 21 attacks, but they weren't aimed at the UN site. If they were I can assure that most of them would have been in at max 25 meters.

If artillery fire is so precise, how come the UN has been hit 4 times?

[Kuciwalker]

Is it a possibility that there really was just a big intel ****up? Like the Chinese embassy bombing?

[Pekka]

"In both scenarios, I can't see how it is possible to paint Israeli actions as a good thing"

I don't think it was a good thing no matter what the spin is going to be. And I think accident or no accident, this issue needs to be addressed and there are folks accountable for this and they need to step up. It's not just a matter of 'it was an accident'. UN is not just some organization, it is the organization and if it was an accident, the accountable people should step up and they should be heard for it. If it wasn't an accident, then it's criminal actions and the leadership should be accountable for it.

I think if it wasn't an accident, that is the worst possible option because I figure it means UN will lose more power in the aftermath.

[Pekka]

Kuci, if that is the level of incompetence (I mean they did call them and protest the action several times), maybe some people need to go and someone needs to take over?

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
Is it a possibility that there really was just a big intel ****up? Like the Chinese embassy bombing?

It would really need to be big.

http://www.un.org/Depts/Cartographic/map/dpko/unifil.pdf

Look right to the "N" of "Lebanon".

It took me 3 minutes to find it on the Unifil website.