Thursday, July 27, 2006
Hezbollah using UN troops as human shields
According to a UN Press release dated 26 July, Hezbollah forces were firing from the vicinity of of four UN positions at Alma Ash Shab, Tibnin, Brashat, and At Tiri. In another press release dated 20 July, the UN itself reports Hezbollah firing from "the immediate vicinity" of its compounds at Naqoura and Maroun al Ras. And that's just the ones that were firing. How many more Hezbollah assets are simply sitting nearby, waiting to attract Israeli fire?
Actions like this could explain why UN troops get killed by Israeli air strikes. Doubtless Hezbollah is hoping to cause the Israelis to spill UN blood, because Kofi Annan, et. al., are such reliable dupes.
Yes, the UN and Hezbollah routinely co-locate. But don't take my word for it. Check out this photo from August of 2002:
Kind of explains why UN troops might get hurt once in a while, doesn't it?
The photograph comes from Canadian Jewish News, which also contains this illuminating detail:
The Shiite terrorist group has erected a billboard facing Israel on which it placed enlarged photos showing mutilated Israeli soldiers killed in Lebanon.
The New York Sun is also reporting that one of those UN troops killed in the Israeli air strike had emailed the following report:
A Canadian U.N. observer, one of four killed at a UNIFIL position near the southern Lebanese town of Khiyam on Tuesday, sent an e-mail to his former commander, a Canadian retired major-general, Lewis MacKenzie, in which he wrote that Hezbollah fighters were "all over" the U.N. position, Mr. MacKenzie said. Hezbollah troops, not the United Nations, were Israel's target, the deceased observer wrote.
If true, then the UN public statement that there was no known Hezbollah activity for five kilometers from the UN position, is exposed as a lie.
Indeed, given the tremendously compressed battlefield that exists on the northern Israeli frontier, I think the notion that there was no known Hezbollah activity for five klicks that day is already absurd on its face. For the attacks to be legit, there does not need to be Hezbollah activity. Only a Hezbollah presence.
More:
"We've received e-mails from him a few days ago and he was describing the fact that he was taking fire within, in one case, three meters of his position ‘for tactical necessity — not being targeted,'" Mr. MacKenzie said he wrote.
What, exactly, is the UN trying to accomplish by leaving these troops in place, unarmed?
And how did we ever even consider placing US troops under UN command?
Hat tips to Michelle Malkin, Glen Reynolds for the links, and a sharp-eyed reader for the press releases.
Splash, out
Jason
Actions like this could explain why UN troops get killed by Israeli air strikes. Doubtless Hezbollah is hoping to cause the Israelis to spill UN blood, because Kofi Annan, et. al., are such reliable dupes.
Yes, the UN and Hezbollah routinely co-locate. But don't take my word for it. Check out this photo from August of 2002:
Kind of explains why UN troops might get hurt once in a while, doesn't it?
The photograph comes from Canadian Jewish News, which also contains this illuminating detail:
The Shiite terrorist group has erected a billboard facing Israel on which it placed enlarged photos showing mutilated Israeli soldiers killed in Lebanon.
The New York Sun is also reporting that one of those UN troops killed in the Israeli air strike had emailed the following report:
A Canadian U.N. observer, one of four killed at a UNIFIL position near the southern Lebanese town of Khiyam on Tuesday, sent an e-mail to his former commander, a Canadian retired major-general, Lewis MacKenzie, in which he wrote that Hezbollah fighters were "all over" the U.N. position, Mr. MacKenzie said. Hezbollah troops, not the United Nations, were Israel's target, the deceased observer wrote.
If true, then the UN public statement that there was no known Hezbollah activity for five kilometers from the UN position, is exposed as a lie.
Indeed, given the tremendously compressed battlefield that exists on the northern Israeli frontier, I think the notion that there was no known Hezbollah activity for five klicks that day is already absurd on its face. For the attacks to be legit, there does not need to be Hezbollah activity. Only a Hezbollah presence.
More:
"We've received e-mails from him a few days ago and he was describing the fact that he was taking fire within, in one case, three meters of his position ‘for tactical necessity — not being targeted,'" Mr. MacKenzie said he wrote.
In one such e-mail, obtained by The New York Sun, Hess-von Kruedener wrote about heavy IDF artillery and aerial bombardment "within 2 meters of our position." The Israeli shooting, he added, "has not been deliberate targeting, but has rather been due to tactical necessity."
The correspondence between the trooper and former commander amounted to "veiled speech in the military," Mr. MacKenzie, who once commanded the U.N. troops in Bosnia, told the CBC. "What he was telling us was Hezbollah fighters were all over his position and the IDF were targeting them, and that's a favorite trick by people who don't have representation in the U.N. They use the U.N. as shields knowing that they cannot be punished for it."
What, exactly, is the UN trying to accomplish by leaving these troops in place, unarmed?
And how did we ever even consider placing US troops under UN command?
Hat tips to Michelle Malkin, Glen Reynolds for the links, and a sharp-eyed reader for the press releases.
Splash, out
Jason
Comments:
Now come on your being too harsh on the UN, I have it from a good source that the UN had been out there all day scolding hisballah , they said the UN had been waving fingers, and had almost raised their voices, so harsh was their disapproval of Hizbollahs actions. Give these poor guys a break their doing everything they can.
Post a Comment
