Medics, injured civilians under attack
Red Cross trucks in south Lebanon targeted by pilots
Update: Billmon:
Back to Main
July 25, 2006
Precise Weapons – Precise Targets + WB: Bull’s Eye
Medics, injured civilians under attack
Red Cross trucks in south Lebanon targeted by pilots
Comments
It’s not widely known, but the Hebrew sign for a bull’s eye is a red cross. No doubt the IDF pilots just got confused.
Posted by: Anonymous | Jul 25 2006 19:51 utc | 1
British anger at terror celebration
The controversy over the plaque and the two-day celebration of the bombing, sponsored by Irgun veterans and the right-wing Menachem Begin Heritage Centre, goes to the heart of the debate over the use of political violence in the Middle East. Yesterday Mr Netanyahu argued in a speech celebrating the attack that the Irgun were governed by morals, unlike fighters from groups such as Hamas.
“It’s very important to make the distinction between terror groups and freedom fighters, and between terror action and legitimate military action,” he said. “Imagine that Hamas or Hezbollah would call the military headquarters in Tel Aviv and say, ‘We have placed a bomb and we are asking you to evacuate the area’.”
But the view of the attack was very different in 1946 when The Times branded the Irgun “terrorists in disguise”. Decades later, Irgun veterans are unrepentant. Sarah Agassi, 80, remembers spying in the King David Hotel.
Posted by: annie | Jul 25 2006 20:00 utc | 2
That looks pretty precise. Precision shooting there!
Posted by: Araneidae | Jul 25 2006 20:38 utc | 3
Sorta makes one wonder. Obviously the IDF had been planning its operations for a long time…and this is the best plan they could come up with? That bubble it shares with the Pentagon planners must not get much oxygen.
Back to following Iraq.
(BTW, what is up with Senate Democrats demanding that Maliki condemn Hezzbolah? (link) Like digby, I’m puzzled. Actually I’m not surprized that Mr. Schumer is involved (a camera was turned on somewhere, I’m sure), but Mr. Reid’s letter sure is unexpected. Are Senate Democrats misreading the US public’s sentiment? Is Schumer worried about his Jewish voters? Any thoughts would be appreciated.)
Posted by: infoshaman | Jul 25 2006 22:12 utc | 4
here’s harry reid’s number, i just called and gave his assistant a piece of my mind. 202-224-3542
Posted by: annie | Jul 25 2006 22:40 utc | 5
“Mr. Reid’s letter sure is unexpected. Are Senate Democrats misreading the US public’s sentiment?”
This is how the REAL Machiavellis play the game. The Dems are taking advantage of Shrub’s colossal fuck up in installing a Shi’a, pro-Iranian government in Baghdad to get to his right on supporting Israel. As they used to say down south, Shrub is being out-segged. They’re hanging Maliki, and his criticisms of Israel’s war on Lebanon, right around his neck.
Posted by: billmon | Jul 25 2006 23:01 utc | 6
The LA Times reported the attack on the Red Cross ambulances with the headline: Israeli Missiles Rip Into Medics’ Esprit de Corps. The article commented, “Perhaps the most dangerous of all, the attack blunted the zeal of the band of gonzo ambulance drivers…”.
It also reports that “A middle-aged man lost his leg from the knee down. His mother was partially paralyzed. A little boy’s head was hammered with shrapnel.” But, I’m paraphrasing here, the biggest problem was that it turned those lovable but crazy ambulance drivers into wimps. I can think of a few other problems: “Israeli Missiles Shred Family” or “Intentional Attack on Ambulances Seen as War Crime”. But no. It’s mainly a wake-up call for those young goof offs who got their kicks driving ambulances in a war zone.
Posted by: Peter | Jul 25 2006 23:54 utc | 7
“It’s mainly a wake-up call for those young goof offs who got their kicks driving ambulances in a war zone.”
That’s what you call your human interest angle.
Posted by: Billmon | Jul 26 2006 0:23 utc | 8
beq, they sem to have a thing for un observers -iain hook
Posted by: r’giap | Jul 26 2006 0:35 utc | 9
Should I be laughing? I feel like Uncle $cam here. I kind of want to make that picture my wallpaper.
Posted by: Rowan | Jul 26 2006 1:38 utc | 10
Yo Billmon, re “Off the Reservation”
Eye witnesses (UN soldiers) to the previous attack on a UN compound that killed over 100 refugees insist it was deliberate. In a documentary interview several testified that while they were on guard duty immediately at the time of the attack they saw Israeli soldiers in guard towers observing their location through binoculars. There is no doubt, as far as they were concerned, that they knew exactly what they were doing in the attack on the compound.
Posted by: Anonymous | Jul 26 2006 6:09 utc | 11
The Israelis are well known for shooting and bombing journalists, ONG’s, the UN, ambulances, and other assorted bothersome observers such as peace activists. They even shot a FOX reporter in Gaza.. and a British official (UN) in Jenin…The US does it too, in Iraq. There are literally 100’s of incidents to be found on the net.
Counterpunch
Milli Gazette
The UN bombing in Baghdad has never been solved, or claimed.
most of the blame fell on the UN itself, for sloppy security. Frechette had to resign and many were demoted or fired.. The FBI concluded it was carried out by ‘a terrorist group.’
Anti war.com
Interesting that these latest examples are creating such an outcry, whereas before, with the exception of Rachel Corrie, it was as if these things didn’t happen. (For many I mean.)
The IDF usually stop the ambulances getting through; or snipes at them, disabling them, occasionally killing someone, but doesn’t target them from the air, afaik.
Posted by: Noirette | Jul 26 2006 9:48 utc | 12
From the point of view of the present regime in the United States of America Rachel Corrie “should have known better”… than to put herself where the Israelis could murder her, I suppose.
Posted by: John Francis Lee | Jul 26 2006 10:29 utc | 13
If a guided munition hit that ambulance, wouldn’t the entire vehicle be in shreds? There’s the high calibre bullet holes in the immediate foreground of the picture, but wouldn’t a projectile large enough to create the hole in the middle of the red cross be full of explosive, and thus blow the whole ambulance to shreds? The only way this could happen is if a missile penetrated the roof of the ambulance and didn’t explode, and in the meantime it was hit with quite a few rounds of normal ammunition as well.
Posted by: Magnum | Jul 26 2006 17:16 utc | 14
Rachel Corrie “should have known better”
she was young , possibly idealist and naive.
another aspect of her death as noirette points out , her death attracted a huge amount of attention to the injustice of the situation. it is amazing how the death one attractive young blond woman captures the medias attention and the sympathy of millions. ultimately it was a choice she made. she will go down in history, she dared them and she lost. or did she? as a martyr she offered the ultimate sacrafice.
my interpretation of the continued debate going on @moa regarding the integrity of the photo above is the ‘intention’ of the IDF. what difference does it make otherwise? the idea that there was the possibility it was just a ‘mistake’ the same way the murdered palestinians on the beach at gaza was a ‘accident’, albeit an accident that broke the ceasefire and justified the continued attacks on the palestinian determined to be ‘on their way’ to reciprocate. somehow the international community has allowed much more leeway for these excuses than would be afforded to a muslim attack. is it ever appropriate for a ‘terrorist’ to excuse civilian death as collateral damage?
racheal corrie’s death, the photo of her standing in front of the bulldozer makes it almost inconcievable to imagine there was any doubt about the ability of the driver to avaoid this tradgedy. the brazen action taken in her death should leave no doubt in anyones mind the ruthlessness of the enemy within the IDF.
cnn (sorry to lazy to link) reported the UN workers had made contact w/israelis 10 times in the few hrs prior to their deaths warning of the closeness of the attacks and given assurances theyir safety would be guarded. this quibbling about the possibility of the intention surrounding the ambulance reeks of infowarfare bloggers spinning their wheels trying to frame this one incident differently as if something profound rests in the resolution of the outcome. it doesn’t. not in my book anyway.
ambulances have been exposed to warzones in the past, does anyone have any idea how many have been ‘accidently attacked’ proportionatetly to their presence?. what about those hospitals in fallujah that were taken out at the beginning of the invasion? was that a ‘accident’. bombing al jazeerah? was that another ‘accident’. would we condem this action as ‘terror’ if it was coming from the enemy?
rachael corrie played a vital role in the shifting of sentiment and called attention globally in universities across the world rallying young people . maybe she knew what she was doing when she put her life on the line w/a full heart and made a choice not so unlike other suicide missions, although her actions didn’t take out any life but her own.
Posted by: annie | Jul 26 2006 18:15 utc | 15
i just reread my last post and wanted to qualify my use of the term suicide mission. it is my opinion that aside from inflicting an effective form of retribution avilable to people with limited access to tools of war, suicide missions bring attention. 8 people died in palestine today, whoopie. a suicide bomber explodes at a cafe it gets attention.
who should we blame for that? by the media ignoring injustice, people will go to much more extreme measures for the recognition of their plight. some people consider it heroic, i have to admit i am one of those people.
Posted by: annie | Jul 26 2006 18:27 utc | 16
The “Hoax” That Wasn’t:
The July 23 Qana Ambulance Attack
On the basis of this investigation, we conclude that the attack on the ambulances was not a hoax: Israeli forces attacked two Lebanese Red Cross ambulances that night in Qana, almost certainly with missiles fired from an Israeli drone flying overhead. The physical and testimonial evidence collected by Human Rights Watch disproves the allegations of a “hoax,” made by persons who never visited Lebanon and had no opportunity to assess the evidence first-hand. Those claiming a hoax relied on faulty conjectures based on a limited number of photographs of one of the ambulances.