Who thinks the USS Liberty incident bears a striking resemblace to the UN post deaths

[MOBIUS]

204 US servicemen were killed and wounded by repeated IDF strikes while all their radio signals were jammed back in 1967 - Washington whitewashed the whole thing despite a blatant attack on its own servicemen!

http://www.ussliberty.org/report/report.htm

Now the UN outpost.

The similarities are repeated attacks over a prolonged period of many hours by combined arms on surveillance/monitoring assets - followed by a claim from one of the world's most sophisticated fighting forces that 'it was a mistake'

No one in the IDF was ever punished for the USS Liberty atrocity - will any be for the UN atrocity?

[Vince278]

Not even close.

[MOBIUS]

Why not?

Because one was a ship and the other one was on dry land...?

[Vince278]

*Starts off by answering own question*

[Dinner]

2/10

[dannubis]

not even close

this time it is not bad because no USians were killed, didn't you know ?

[SlowwHand]

More Same as always.

[MOBIUS]

Originally posted by Vince278
*Starts off by answering own question*

*Whoosh!*

If all of you say "not even close", you should say why.

I gave my reasons, no one has yet refuted them. More like avoided them.

It does not matter if one was a boat (Though Vince apparently thinks it does!), or one was an American target - what I am drawing similarities to is the nature of the attack...

Both easily recognisable as being non hostile, both attacked repeatedly over many hours, both attacked in a coordinated effort using different methods (sea/air & land/air).

Are we to believe the IDF that they are that incompetent? If so they shouldn't be engaging in combat in the first place...

"Not even close" is 'not even close' to a satisfactory argument - in a discussion both sides give a structured account of the reasons for their opinion.

I have mine.

[MOBIUS]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
More Same as always.

See, another one...

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Oerdin
2/10

You give too much credit.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
You give too much credit.

QFT

[Vince278]

Originally posted by MOBIUS
If all of you say "not even close", you should say why.

Apples and oranges. Say whatever you want, it won't make your logic any less faulty. A better topic would be whatever your hidden agenda is.

[Dinner]

Cruelity posted this on a different site and I thought it was worth reporting. It originally came from the Canadian paper the Ottawa Citizen.

"Hezbollah was using UN post as 'shield'
Canadian wrote of militia's presence, 'necessity' of bombing
Joel Kom, with files from Steven Edwards, CanWest News Service, The Ottawa Citizen
Published: Thursday, July 27, 2006
The words of a Canadian United Nations observer written just days before he was killed in an Israeli bombing of a UN post in Lebanon are evidence Hezbollah was using the post as a "shield" to fire rockets into Israel, says a former UN commander in Bosnia.

Those words, written in an e-mail dated just nine days ago, offer a possible explanation as to why the post -- which according to UN officials was clearly marked and known to Israeli forces -- was hit by Israel on Tuesday night, said retired Maj.-Gen. Lewis MacKenzie yesterday.

The strike hit the UN observation post in the southern Lebanese village of El Khiam, killing Canadian Maj. Paeta Hess-von Kruedener and three others serving as unarmed UN military observers in the area.

Just last week, Maj. Hess-von Kruedener wrote an e-mail about his experiences after nine months in the area, words Maj.-Gen. MacKenzie said are an obvious allusion to Hezbollah tactics.

"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.

That would mean Hezbollah was purposely setting up near the UN post, he added. It's a tactic Maj.-Gen. MacKenzie, who was the first UN commander in Sarajevo during the Bosnia civil war, said he's seen in past international missions: Aside from UN posts, fighters would set up near hospitals, mosques and orphanages.

A Canadian Forces infantry officer with the Edmonton-based Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry and the only Canadian serving as a UN military observer in Lebanon, Maj. Hess-von Kruedener was no stranger to fighting nearby.

The UN post, he wrote in the e-mail, afforded a view of the "Hezbollah static positions in and around our patrol Base."

"It appears that the lion's share of fighting between the IDF and Hezbollah has taken place in our area," he wrote, noting later it was too dangerous to venture out on patrols.

The e-mail appears to contradict the UN's claim there had been no Hezbollah activity in the vicinity of the strike.

The question of Hezbollah's infiltration of the area is significant because UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, speaking Tuesday just hours after the bombing, accused the Israelis of the "apparently deliberate targeting" of the base near Khiam in southern Lebanon.

A senior UN official, asked about the information contained in Maj. Hess-von Kruedener's e-mail concerning Hezbollah presence in the vicinity of the Khiam base, denied the world body had been caught in a contradiction.
1 2 next page "

Basically the Canadian paper is saying that UN personal in the field repeatedly complained to higher that Hezbollah was using them as human shields by launching attacks and starting fire fights right next to or on top of UN posts. Even the Canadian soldier who was killed yesterday himself said that Hezbollah was deliberately right next to UN positions and was attacking Israelis hoping that either the Israelis wouldn't return fire out of fear of hitting the UN or that if the Israelis did return fire that they'd also kill the UN people. Either way it works for the terrorists.

[chequita guevara]

The Anan was correct. Israel deliberately hit them.

[snoopy369]

I actually agree here... not sure exactly why, but the evidence is pretty solid as far as I can see that they should've known where they were shooting, and shot anyway - all day long. One hit, sure, i'll buy accident ... not all day