Hezbollah used UN post as human shields

Rue D'Awakening

polaris wrote:

everyone knows of the leaflets - can you explain how they are relevant in this scenario?? ...

you can channel your hate for kofi annan but it still doesn't change what happened ... there is still absolutely no justification for the bombing ... when you come up with one - then share it ... until then - feel free to continue to call me whatever you want - it matters not to me ...

as i said before, and just maybe this time you'll understand, it was an accident. not intentional. an accident does not need to be justified. unintentional actions, by definition, cannot be justified. let go of your sanctimonious bullshit for five seconds to internalize this simple logic.

the leaflets are relevant to the extent that they disprove your earlier accusation that israel isn't warning the innocents in a location before it is bombed.

shiraz

polaris wrote:

ok ... so, these precision guided missles that they've been touting the past 2 weeks aren't so accurate??

so, the wife and UN secretary general are all conspiracy theorists? ...

i guess all those calls to tell them to stop weren't enuf to prevent this ... the fact hezbollah were around or using the area as a shield has absolutely no bearing on why a missle was sent into that outpost ...

If Hizbullah is using the UN people as their human shields (which they are, according to that UN solider), and Israel is fireing towards Hizbullah ==> there is a big possibility the UN guys will get hurt.

I have nothing to say about the wife (her husband died, lets give her a break), but about the UN secretary general - like someone wrote here, he is dishonest, hypocrite, corrupt and a VERY stupid man with lots of personal interests. These words of one of his soliders prove once and for all Israel didn't "deliberately attacked those UN soliders", like Anann insisted to calim for some reason before even checking the facts first.

And no, I'm not justifaying their death, just accusing the UN secretary general for being an irresponsible lier.

Eliot Rosewater

shiraz wrote:

And no, I'm not justifaying their death, just accusing the UN secretary general for being an irresponsible lier.

I'm glad we can agree on something here. He is in fact a liar and a political dirtbag. He's unfortunately got his own interests in mind and I have no idea what those might even entail.

However, no one has responded to my question about why Israel cannot live up to their word when promised at least 10 times on the day of the strike in question to stop firing in that location. Here's the link if anyone doesn't know what I'm referring to. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/5217176.stm

shiraz

don't gimme no wrote:

I'm glad we can agree on something here. He is in fact a liar and a political dirtbag. He's unfortunately got his own interests in mind and I have no idea what those might even entail.

However, no one has responded to my question about why Israel cannot live up to their word when promised at least 10 times on the day of the strike in question to stop firing in that location. Here's the link if anyone doesn't know what I'm referring to. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/5217176.stm

And I have to ask this - if Hizbullah is knowen for a long time for holding the UN guys as a human shields in that area, then why the hell the UN officials did not move them out of there? I mean really, they couldn't help / supervising anyone even if they wanted to, and the risk of staying in that same location was clearly too high, so why did the UN officials decided to keep them there?

RockinInCanada

shiraz wrote:

And I have to ask this - if Hizbullah is knowen for a long time for holding the UN guys as a human shields in that area, then why the hell the UN officials did not move them out of there? I mean really, they couldn't help / supervising anyone even if they wanted to, and the risk of staying in that same location was clearly too high, so why did the UN officials decided to keep them there?

Damn you sound like our Prime Minister....

Eliot Rosewater

shiraz wrote:

And I have to ask this - if Hizbullah is knowen for a long time for holding the UN guys as a human shields in that area, then why the hell the UN officials did not move them out of there? I mean really, they couldn't help / supervising anyone even if they wanted to, and the risk of staying in that same location was clearly too high, so why did the UN officials decided to keep them there?

I dunno....it kinda seems to me that the U.N. might want this war. Fuck. Now I can't trust anyone.

shiraz

don't gimme no wrote:

I dunno....it kinda seems to me that the U.N. might want this war. Fuck. Now I can't trust anyone.

Do you know what? Now is my turn to *assume* things. I think that was the reason why Anan lied and said right from the stat Israel did it on purpose - He wanted to cover his ass, and what's better way to do so than "shifting the flames" towards the most convenient target of all: Israel, the world's "favorite". It worked.

giveblood

don't gimme no wrote:

I dunno....it kinda seems to me that the U.N. might want this war. Fuck. Now I can't trust anyone.

Consider the nations who probably DO want a war ... The member nations of the UN, who use this body's considerable resources to harass Israel with resolution after resolution. You know, at risk of sounding like a conspiracy theorist, it wouldn't be all that surprising.

Eliot Rosewater

giveblood wrote:

Consider the nations who probably DO want a war ... The member nations of the UN, who use this body's considerable resources to harass Israel with resolution after resolution. You know, at risk of sounding like a conspiracy theorist, it wouldn't be all that surprising.

Well, it wouldn't surprise me one bit. It's so discouraging though....to think that we'll never know the truth behind a lot of this and it's never as simple as good vs. bad or right vs. wrong. Goddamn human race is so out of control.