This raises my blood pressure (Israel/Lebanon war related)

Post Reply New Topic

You remember the Israeli attack on the Lebanese ambulances that helped turn public opinion against Israel and lead to Israel's failure to achieve a complete victory against Hezbollah?

Well, turns out that it was all horses**t.

EDIT: Apparently there are photos of a mildly graphic nature on the website I linked to, so if you really want to see what I was talking about, PM me... otherwise just forget it.

Last edited by McJeff on 25 Aug 2006, 2:40 am, edited 3 times in total.

Well, Israel has been illegally occupying parts of Lebanon for decades, i dont think a few (more) civilian casualties would be likely to cause a sudden shift in the local opinion. Unless you mean public opinion internationally of course.

I have listened to the news, and I have heard about the incident with the ambulences only briefly. It hasn't been the focus of the news. There has been news of a sizable civilian casualty count in Lebanon, and the ambulence incidence was something I heard on only one day. I looked at the arguments and photographs of the bloggers, and I am not convinced that it was all faked. If all you have are photographs and news stories, then it takes a lot to make a good case that there was a small conspiracy of clever fraudsters. The arguments simply are not good enough.

I meant public opinion internationally, specifially within the UN members. Kofi Annan wasted no time in raking Israel over the coals for the incident.

You won't accept point blank photo and video evidence, but you'll accept Hezbollah's word that it happened? What's wrong with this picture?

It is not as simple as photo and video evidence yielding one conclusive answer. The people who claim that there was no moon landing also use photographic evidence and pretend it is conclusive. It is not conclusive. Your normal everyday knowledge to determine exactly what you would expect is not always best. It would take experience in a war zone. Was the ambulence rusted when it was struck? Is it rust or scorch marks? Was the news media mistaken when it claimed that missile hit the top of the vehicle rather than the front? Was the ambulence disturbed by investigators before it was photographed by the media? Was the media mistaken about the details of the story? These are the sort of details that you would need to be there to answer. I don't believe it is likely that the IDF intentionally fired at an ambulence, but they do make targetting mistakes. In this war, they seemed to have made many of them. If the Israeli army doubts it, then they can be the ones to investigate. In this case, they didn't deny it.

SFGate.com (link), 7/25/2006, "Medics, injured civilians under attack Red Cross trucks in south Lebanon targeted by pilots."

"In previous conflicts in Gaza and the West Bank, Israel has struck ambulances when it believed the vehicles were being used to smuggle weapons and personnel to militants. In a statement Monday, an Israeli army spokesman said the ambulances in Qana were attacked "in an area known to be one of the main sources of the launching of hundreds of missiles," according to Cox News Service. The Red Cross has asked Israel for a more detailed explanation."

I think it was a hoax, thanks McJeff for the link.

Good points, however, it's always Israel's policy to apologize first and investigate later. Take for example when some Palestinian civilians were blown up while on a beach. Israel initialy apologized for the event, then, after investigating, decided to revoke their apology and charge Hamas with it instead.

It's also well known that Hezbollah kept a stranglehold on what journalists were allowed to show. One journalist claims that when he took pictures of some Hezbo guerillas firing rockets at the Israelis, they took his camera and footage and threatened to kill him.

Like the site explained, they only allow journalists who are willing to take footage that casts Hezbollah in a sympathetic light. But the news stations, which need to make profit, HAVE to get footage, or they fall behind...

Anyway, here's my take. Any one of those photo sets, taken seperately - the guy in the hospital with allegedly fake bandages, the ambulance with the siren cut out - would have looked funny, but wouldn't be conclusive. In this case, the evidence overwhelmingly points to fraud.

Had been, seeing as Israel withdrew out of Lebanon in 2000. Just like they withdrew from the Gaza strip, and began to withdraw settlements as well.

Wasn't enough for Hezbollah and Hamas it seems. Apparently they still cling on to their fantasy of wiping Israel off the map. And as long as they do, one can hardly fault Israel for defending itself.

A contested strip of land called Shebaa farms is still under Israeli occupation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shebaa_Farms



Plus, theres still the matter of the 1000s of missing lebanese, suspected to be held captive.

http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/articl ... le_id=9501

A contested piece of land about which it is unclear whether it originally belonged to Lebanon or Syria. Also, a piece of land of about 25 square kilometers. Hardly a casus belli!

The "Socialist Worker" article you linked to conveniently forgets to mention exactly why Samir Kuntar (whose release is one of Hezbollah's demands) is in jail. It has something to do with bashing the head of a four-year old Israeli girl in with a rifle butt.

There was an Israeli blog claiming it was a hoax. That's all.

The Red Cross, on the other hand, which was actually there, claims Israel attacked their ambulances.

So the Red Cross were able to see the attack vehicles before they came, identify them as Israeli, and then survive the impending missile attacks to tell about it?

*cough*