« Shooting At Seattle Jewish Federation | Main | One More Thing... »

Hezbollah Still Using UN Posts as Shields

From LGF:

From today's United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon press release, more reports of Hizballah using UN positions as cover:
There were two direct impacts on UNIFIL positions from the Israeli side in the past 24 hours. Eight artillery and mortar rounds impacted inside an Indian battalion position in the area of Hula, causing extensive material damage, but no casualties. One artillery round impacted the parameter wall of the UNIFIL Headquarters in Naqoura. There were five other incidents of firing close to UN positions from the Israeli side. It was also reported that Hezbollah fired from the vicinity of five UN positions at Alma Ash Shab, At Tiri, Bayt Yahoun, Brashit, and Tibnin.


All UNIFIL positions in the area of operation remain permanently occupied and maintained by the troops. UNIFIL dispatched three logistic convoys to resupply some positions yesterday. Additional convoys are planned for today, particularly to the forward positions in the eastern and central sectors which are facing critical shortages of basic supplies. The number of troops in some Ghanaian battalion positions is somewhat reduced because of the increased safety risk for the troops due to frequent incidents of Hezbollah firing from the vicinity of the positions, and shelling and bombardment close to the positions from the Israeli side.


Comments (6)

Well, I look on the bright ... (Below threshold)

Well, I look on the bright side.

It's about time someone got some use out of UN troops.

It goes without saying too... (Below threshold)
Steve Crickmore:

It goes without saying too, that that the UN observation posts are located in presumably high ground that both sides desire for tactical reasons, but the Hezbollah holds, such as occured, in the bloody battle of Bint Jbail "Hezbollah's most troublesome position from which it fired upon soldiers was the towering mosque in the village.
There were maybe 30 terrorists [in the mosque]," Shalom said

Sorry for my ignorance as t... (Below threshold)
jpm100:

Sorry for my ignorance as to exactly who, but whoever is in charge of the UN deployment should also get some credit for leaving them there.

If its Kofi, he deserves his props on this. If its somehow us, someone deserve it too and has some explaining to do.

Someone somewhere has the power to pull these guys out or at least allow them to vacate when things get rough.

Steve: Are you rea... (Below threshold)
Lurking Observer:

Steve:

Are you really suggesting that Hizb'allah forces are using mosques as military sites? This would mean that Hizb'allah was operating in violation of international law. It would even allow the Israelis to fire upon mosques, since they are now being used for military operations.

Lurking Observer..from the... (Below threshold)
Steve Crickmore:

Lurking Observer..from the Israeli soldier's testimony, I'm sure the Hezbollah fighters were in violation of international law. But didn't our president say our treatment of terrorists isn't protected by the Geneva Conventions either. All sides seem to abide by international law when it pleases them. and the UN especially, is everyone's whipping boy, J the best exemplar of this is of course, in John Bolton, Bush's choice for American ambassador to the UN.: "While treaties may well be politically or even morally binding, they are not legally obligatory. They are just not "law" as we apprehend the term. And what happens to countries when they do not adhere to international law on some matter? Usually nothing. Why, then, do we continue to talk about international "law"? Because the word has a strong emotive appeal."

Lurking Observer..from the... (Below threshold)
Steve Crickmore:

Lurking Observer..from the Israeli soldier's testimony, I'm sure the Hezbollah fighters were in violation of international law. But didn't our president say our treatment of terrorists isn't protected by the Geneva Conventions either. All sides seem to abide by international law when it pleases them. and the UN especially, is everyone's whipping boy, the best exemplar of this is of course, in John Bolton, Bush's choice for American ambassador to the UN.
John Bolton :"While treaties may well be politically or even morally binding, they are not legally obligatory. They are just not "law" as we apprehend the term. And what happens to countries when they do not adhere to international law on some matter? Usually nothing. Why, then, do we continue to talk about international "law"? Because the word has a strong emotive appeal."




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy