German peacekeepers to Lebanon?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

In reality I can think of no reason why Germany should not send peace keepers. You aren't responsible for what your grandparents did. We shouldn't even be disscussing this.

In this Germany should be no different than any other country.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

In reality I can think of no reason why Germany should not send peace keepers. You aren't responsible for what your grandparents did. We shouldn't even be disscussing this.

In this Germany should be no different than any other country.

Agreed.

*thinks* I can't believe I had to type that much to make a point this one made in four short sentences */thinking*

[Pannonian]

In reality I can think of no reason why Germany should not send peace keepers. You aren't responsible for what your grandparents did. We shouldn't even be disscussing this.

In this Germany should be no different than any other country.

Merkel doesn't think so. In the recent crisis, Merkel asked Britain and France to do the talking for Europe as she felt Germany, with its history, could not ask anything of Israel.

[Divinus Arma]

Nobody should send any peacekeepers. Olmert should have continued with the fight without one hand tied behind his back. Israel can never expect to win the propoganda war, so it should only worry about military victory. They should have destroyed Hizbullah.

But since that is no longer reality, and a peacekeeping force is imminent, then Germany should participate. They have big opinions but never take action. One thing that should be a worry: Hizbullah will likely dress as Israeli forces and attack German troops in order to cause the kind of worry being discussed here. But in reality, Israel is NEVER going to attack UN troops. It would be on the European s*** list even more than it is now. Even I, a staunch supporter of Israel, would raise an eyebrow if they started attacking an international body. It simply wouldn't happen. Hizbullah, on the other hand, could do anything it wants and just show some Shiite lady wailing to the sky over the loss of her home and be off the hook.

[Duke of Gloucester]

Israel is NEVER going to attack UN troops

They already have!

How UN Lebanon post was bombed - BBC link

[Dâriûsh]

They already have!

How UN Lebanon post was bombed - BBC link

That was a Hizbullah fighter-jet, silly.

[Tribesman]

They have big opinions but never take action.
Yeah its disgusting Divinus , only 10 germans have been killed on UN peacekeeping missions , they really should do more .
But in reality, Israel is NEVER going to attack UN troops. Since when ?

[Strike For The South]

No let these ol boys figure it out themselves. Why Germany is all excited about this is beyond me. Any reference to the houlacuast in this therad should be burned alive as that has no bearing now. Isreal and Hiezzbolah started this they may finish it. no need to get anyone involeved

[Husar]

Nobody should send any peacekeepers. Olmert should have continued with the fight without one hand tied behind his back. Israel can never expect to win the propoganda war, so it should only worry about military victory. They should have destroyed Hizbullah.

Maybe some sane, nice people from outside can change the minds of people and lower support for Hesbollah. At least we show that we DO care about the Lebanese people.

[orangat]

Nobody should send any peacekeepers. Olmert should have continued with the fight without one hand tied behind his back. Israel can never expect to win the propoganda war, so it should only worry about military victory. They should have destroyed Hizbullah.

But since that is no longer reality, and a peacekeeping force is imminent, then Germany should participate. They have big opinions but never take action. One thing that should be a worry: Hizbullah will likely dress as Israeli forces and attack German troops in order to cause the kind of worry being discussed here. But in reality, Israel is NEVER going to attack UN troops. It would be on the European s*** list even more than it is now. Even I, a staunch supporter of Israel, would raise an eyebrow if they started attacking an international body. It simply wouldn't happen. Hizbullah, on the other hand, could do anything it wants and just show some Shiite lady wailing to the sky over the loss of her home and be off the hook.

So you prefer to shut your eyes to the truth and extol persecution and human suffering as just.

The trouble didn't start with the capture of 2 Israeli soldiers. Israel systematically leveled Arab villages and uprooted farms, stole water by diverting rivers in Lebanon decades ago to create its settlements, still occupy the Shebaa farms there today and holds 10,000 Arab political prisoners.

Israel found out the hard way that unlike the West Bank, Gaza and Israel proper, it cannot control or restrict the media as much as it wants in order to hide the fact that Israeli cities only suffer superficial damage and to minimise the impact of Arab civilian casualties. The frustration has built up to the point where majors and full bird colonels are beating up reporters.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/750876.html

[Divinus Arma]

This is what I feel like when I post in the backroom now:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gG6kp36QAS0

(Good thing I have a truth stick. )

Seriously though. Do you people really think that Israel intentionally bombed the UN post because it was UN? We already know that it was being used by Hizbullah as a shield.

[Ironside]

This is what I feel like when I post in the backroom now:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gG6kp36QAS0

(Good thing I have a truth stick. )

Seriously though. Do you people really think that Israel intentionally bombed the UN post because it was UN? We already know that it was being used by Hizbullah as a shield.

That was news to me. Didn't we have a thread here saying otherwise?

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Briefing by Ms. Jane Holl Lute, ASG for Peacekeeping Operations

Yesterday's events unfolded as follows: beginning at approx 13:20 local time, Patrol Base Khiyam, a long-established and clearly–marked UN position in the eastern section of UNIFIL's area of operation, close to the town of Khiyam, came under recurrent incidents of close firing.

UNIFIL reported that, in total, 21 strikes occurred within 300 meters of the Patrol Base and 12 artillery rounds fell within 100 meters of the Base, four of which hit the Base directly. To our knowledge, unlike in the vicinity of some of our other Patrol Bases, Hezbollah firing was not taking place within the immediate vicinity of the Patrol Base.

Throughout the day, UNIFIL had protested, directly to the IDF each of these incidents of firing close to Patrol Base Khiyam. The Deputy Secretary-General and I made several calls to the Permanent Mission of Israel to the United Nations reiterating these protests and calling for an abatement of the shelling.

Two final firings close were reported before communications with the position were lost.

At 19:17 local time Lebanon, UNIFIL Headquarters in Naqoura lost communications with Patrol Base "Khiyam", where four unarmed military observers of the Observer Group Lebanon were deployed.

http://www.un.org/apps/news/press/Te...sp?NewsID=1084

Hitting the wrong target for at least 6 hours despite incoming reports and complaints throughout that time?

[Divinus Arma]

I think it is more than plausible that the IDF was striking the surrounding area because Hizbullah was involved in guerilla activity in that area. I find it also more than plausible that the UN post was accidentally bombed as the IDF attempted to use precision munitions in order to avoid the UN post. A tragedy? Of course. Intentional? I think it is less than plausible that the IDF intentionally targeted and destroyed a UN post for no reason whatsoever.

I am open to hear why, exactly, you fine folks think that the IDF intentionally bombed this post.

[rory_20_uk]

Germany needs to get over it. It was over 50 years ago under a different regieme. It's not like they were the only anti-semites in Europe.

Contrast with Israel's attitude that they seem to view killing others to be their God given right and get quite tetchy when anyone should dare question unilateral illegal operations.

IF peacekeepers go in they need to be armed to the extent that they can see off the IDF is required. "Stop" only works if 5 mins later there's a smart bomb fishtailing onto the IDF position. They've killed 4 UN peacekeepers, and IMO that should mean zero tolerance to any more "accidents"...

[Banquo's Ghost]

IF peacekeepers go in they need to be armed to the extent that they can see off the IDF is required. "Stop" only works if 5 mins later there's a smart bomb fishtailing onto the IDF position. They've killed 4 UN peacekeepers, and IMO that should mean zero tolerance to any more "accidents"...

Yes, because what the region needs is another group of heavily armed people with zero tolerance....

[Pannonian]

Yes, because what the region needs is another group of heavily armed people with zero tolerance....

It would be fun to watch, as long as we're clear of it. I wonder how the vaunted IDF would fare against a European army with full retaliatory powers.

[Fragony]

It would be fun to watch, as long as we're clear of it. I wonder how the vaunted IDF would fare against a European army with full retaliatory powers.

Since they have the same equipment and they know the terrain better, they would probably fare pretty well.

OT, I don't understand the undying support americans give Israel. It isn't like the Israeli's had any gripes with attacking the USS-Liberty.

[Horatius]

It would be fun to watch, as long as we're clear of it. I wonder how the vaunted IDF would fare against a European army with full retaliatory powers.

Very well actually, the IDF has a higher proffessionalism and fire power then the militaries of Greece, Spain, Italy, Germany, Switzerland, Sweeden, Norwiegh, and Ireland, and Britain would never help Hezbollah.

[Banquo's Ghost]

Very well actually, the IDF has a higher proffessionalism and fire power then the militaries of Greece, Spain, Italy, Germany, Switzerland, Sweeden, Norwiegh, and Ireland, and Britain would never help Hezbollah.

It is my opinion that the IDF would kick the IDF's butt.

[Husar]

Very well actually, the IDF has a higher proffessionalism and fire power then the militaries of Greece, Spain, Italy, Germany, Switzerland, Sweeden, Norwiegh, and Ireland, and Britain would never help Hezbollah.

That has to be the reason Hezbollah stopped their advance...

I agree with Banquo.

[rory_20_uk]

What, the UN goes in with no guns to stop two sides fighting? great plan!

For Israel to be stopped from unilateral, illegal action there needs to be a threat that will occur immediately, not a sharp letter passed to Israel's UN ambassador in a month's time. And Hesbollah too, but they are Terrorists after all, and I didn't think that needed stressing.

I did point out that the PDF already killed 4 UN peace keepers. How many have to die before you think that possibly something might be done? Yes, I know guns are nasty and possibly if peacekeepers offer both sides ear massages it might all go away, but if I were sent to the area I'd rather an aircraft carrier with Eurofighters onboard waiting off the coast.

[Banquo's Ghost]

What, the UN goes in with no guns to stop two sides fighting? great plan!

For Israel to be stopped from unilateral, illegal action there needs to be a threat that will occur immediately, not a sharp letter passed to Israel's UN ambassador in a month's time. And Hesbollah too, but they are Terrorists after all, and I didn't think that needed stressing.

I did point out that the PDF already killed 4 UN peace keepers. How many have to die before you think that possibly something might be done? Yes, I know guns are nasty and possibly if peacekeepers offer both sides ear massages it might all go away, but if I were sent to the area I'd rather an aircraft carrier with Eurofighters onboard waiting off the coast.

I don't believe the UN should be going in. The conditions are not right.

Of course a soldier wants to know he has massive retaliatory backing, but this rarely, if ever happens for peacekeeping missions. If the mission is likely to end up in a firefight, you get the hell out. Otherwise it becomes peace-making, which is a whole different ballgame. Even US power can't enforce peace in Iraq, how much chance do you think anyone has in Israel's part of the Middle East?

It's precisely why countries are being very cautious about sending anyone. Everyone knows this will blow up again, and no-one wants to be there when it does.

Peacekeeping requires peace, and parties that want peace but need reassurance that the other guy wants it too. If they lose it momentarily, you have to take it on the chin and see if they will calm down. You are there to build calm, not ratchet up the body count.

Gung-ho attitudes are simplistic and lead to unforeseen consequences - ask Ehud Olmert.

[Horatius]

Germany should send nobody, the EU should boycott the anti-European ceasefire resoloution, and Italy should retract it's pledge to send troops, and the 50 French Troops there should leave at once.

The ceasefire only authorizes the peace keepers to fire on Israelis, not Hezbollah, even if Hezbollah rockets hit them.

The UN mandate is Europeans stand still and get killed, and he European response should be a sound (fill in blank innapropriate word for somebody you are angry at) you Kofi Annan in response.

No troops, from Germany or anyone else.

Moderators-The fill in blank is ok right since I didn't actually say any unnaceptable word?

[Redleg]

I don't believe the UN should be going in. The conditions are not right.

Of course a soldier wants to know he has massive retaliatory backing, but this rarely, if ever happens for peacekeeping missions. If the mission is likely to end up in a firefight, you get the hell out. Otherwise it becomes peace-making, which is a whole different ballgame. Even US power can't enforce peace in Iraq, how much chance do you think anyone has in Israel's part of the Middle East?

It's precisely why countries are being very cautious about sending anyone. Everyone knows this will blow up again, and no-one wants to be there when it does.

Peacekeeping requires peace, and parties that want peace but need reassurance that the other guy wants it too. If they lose it momentarily, you have to take it on the chin and see if they will calm down. You are there to build calm, not ratchet up the body count.

Gung-ho attitudes are simplistic and lead to unforeseen consequences - ask Ehud Olmert.

Some here need to re-read this post. Very well stated concerning the situation.