UN ambulance transports gunmen in Gaza, caught on video
Are we ready to be shocked and outraged? Here's a video that shows a UN ambulance in gaza giving a ride to some gunmen. The anti-Israel news agency Reuters sat on the footage to two weeks. It's not known who was driving.
How will the PA react?
How the will the UN react?
Currently on the front page
Link to video. Hope it works.
Are we shocked and outrage or will we find a way to twist this into being Israel's fault?
How will the PA react?
How the will the UN react?
Currently on the front page
Link to video. Hope it works.
Are we shocked and outrage or will we find a way to twist this into being Israel's fault?
Comments
Originally posted by Scott
Are we ready to be shocked and outraged? Here's a video that shows a UN ambulance in gaza giving a ride to some gunmen. The anti-Israel news agency Reuters sat on the footage to two weeks. It's not known who was driving.
How will the PA react?
How the will the UN react?
Currently on the front page
Link to video. Hope it works.
Are we shocked and outrage or will we find a way to twist this into being Israel's fault?
Why not US's, hell I will bet the "usuals" here will find a way to inject the possibility that Bush has some connection to this. Or maybe it is Condi Rice.
Originally posted by bunge
What's proper protocol when you pick up an injured person but others jump in the ambulance?
I think that the unarmed medical personnel are supposed to order the armed gunmen to get the hell off of the ambulance, or else... right?
Originally posted by FormerLurker
I think that the unarmed medical personnel are supposed to order the armed gunmen to get the hell off of the ambulance, or else... right?
Well, judging by the video that may very well be what happened. I mean, how likely is it that an ambulance driver could get armed gunmen out of his cab? Would he even try if they had a wounded man with them?
I don't know the context of the video but this isn't damning of the UN so much as it is damning of Palestinian gunmen, something we already knew.
Originally posted by NaplesX
Why not US's, hell I will bet the "usuals" here will find a way to inject the possibility that Bush has some connection to this. Or maybe it is Condi Rice.
It is that kind of thinking that keeps you from actually digesting anything tht is said here by anybody critical of Bush.
You merely think that we automatically hate him and aren't actually thinking.
It is obviouse that it was you, under a pseudonym, that linked to that atrocious article about the 'elite liberal america haters' by some absolute idiot in Texas, but you are wrong wrong wrong . . . I love America and hate to see it run down by an'elite' and sheep who refuse to see him for what he is . . . and I am even willing to point out when he does something good . . . such as when he went on Arab TV to talkabout Abu Ghraib . . . that probably startled alot of Arabs with regards to what they think of the US . . . after all, their leaders would never apologize for abuse in prisons . . . it set a good precedence, which they might now demand of their leaders . . other than that, though, nothing so far
Originally posted by bunge
Well, judging by the video that may very well be what happened. I mean, how likely is it that an ambulance driver could get armed gunmen out of his cab? Would he even try if they had a wounded man with them?
I don't know the context of the video but this isn't damning of the UN so much as it is damning of Palestinian gunmen, something we already knew.
Indeed. But who the hell knows what's going on in that video. It looks like a serious firefight and the gunmen are retreating with an injured man. And then the ambulance backs out with the door open. For all we know, the driver backs out of the street into relative safety and the guys got out.
Man. Can you imagine driving a UN ambulance in Gaza? The sheer ethical dilemmas that you have to face every day?
Originally posted by midwinter
Can you imagine driving a UN ambulance in Gaza? The sheer ethical dilemmas that you have to face every day?
No such dilemmas when viewing a shitty, out-of-context video on the Internet.
It is clear that the UN wants all Jews dead.
The other variation is also not surprising, the using of those ambulances as a secure way of getting out of the action, or as a sort of tank or shield like the using of civilians as human shields as they obviously don't have the ability or technology to build tanks or rocket-proof cars.
The resistance fighters use every way possible to be successful, guerillia-wars were never clean and clear, with uniformed soldiers on both sides duking out while the civilians sit at home, and wait for the message of win and loss. That sort of war has long ago vanished. Every war in the last century after worldwar1 was a war against civilians.
And if people didn't have a an army with adequate weapons, planes, tanks, rockets, and jets, etc.. they use instead guerillia-tactics not in order to defeat the superior army but in order to make it unattractive for the occupier to uphold the occupation.
Nightcrawler
No one's bothered by the militarization of what's supposed to be a humanitarian vehicle?
No one's bothered by the fact that this puts all ambulance drivers in Gaza in harms way?
Doesn't someone think the UN and Red Cross/Red Crescent should do something about this?
1. why has this been supressed for 3 weeks before being aired? why was the media hiding this from all of us when it was pertinant?
2. Why is Israel not entitled to now assume all UN ambulaces are in fact "a sort of tank or shield" as nightcrawler is suggesting above?
I mean how would any westeren military force deal with a similar scenario where its troops know that UN ambulances are actually used by enemy fighters?
Originally posted by Scott
So no one is bothered by the flagrant violation of the Geneva Convention?
I'm sure Rumsfeld is livid.
Originally posted by pfflam
It is that kind of thinking that keeps you from actually digesting anything tht is said here by anybody critical of Bush.
You merely think that we automatically hate him and aren't actually thinking.
It is obviouse that it was you, under a pseudonym, that linked to that atrocious article about the 'elite liberal america haters' by some absolute idiot in Texas, but you are wrong wrong wrong . . . I love America and hate to see it run down by an'elite' and sheep who refuse to see him for what he is . . . and I am even willing to point out when he does something good . . . such as when he went on Arab TV to talkabout Abu Ghraib . . . that probably startled alot of Arabs with regards to what they think of the US . . . after all, their leaders would never apologize for abuse in prisons . . . it set a good precedence, which they might now demand of their leaders . . other than that, though, nothing so far
You, sir, are the one who is wrong, and underhanded.
I hope that you asked yourself these questions before you posted:
1. Do I have proof of this thing I am accusing someone of?
2. Does it fit with the normal pattern and supported by other actions?
I bring these up, because you have totally ignored certain things to come to that conclusion. Have you ever known me to avoid controversy? I didn't think so. Do I hide behind the shield of anonymity? No to that one also.
If you must cast aspersions and seed doubt to get your ideas across, maybe you should reexamine your ideas. I really thought that there were some kind of gentlemen's rules at play here. However, Giant and now you have proven there is no level you won't sink to.
Congratulations. You just lowered the bar.
it is UN policy for the ambulances it operates in Gaza to transport terrorists
or
at least one of the ambulance crews has started a sideline in taxi services
or
two gunmen hijacked an ambulance to transport a third, injured gunman to a hospital.
I know which one I find most plausible.
Originally posted by Scott
No one's bothered by the fact that this puts all ambulance drivers in Gaza in harms way?
What exactly are you implying here?
Originally posted by rashumon
Two points come to mind in light of this:
Why is Israel not entitled to now assume all UN ambulaces are in fact "a sort of tank or shield" as nightcrawler is suggesting above?
I mean how would any westeren military force deal with a similar scenario where its troops know that UN ambulances are actually used by enemy fighters?
1. The resistance-fighters are not enemy fighters, that is not a war between two countries, it's one country opressing and occupating another country, and the resistance is a guerillia-war and the resistance-fighters are freedom fighters. So, the resistance fighters don't have to follow the Geneva Conventions, though the occupiers have to follow these Conventions. Maybe you cry foul and say that if the "enemy" isn't following conventions then why should Israel? That's the price an occupier has to pay, besides the occupier is always on the wrong moral side and the resistance fighters are always on the right moral side, espescially if the occupation lasts for decades without either annexating the areas or withdrawing from them.
2. If Israel decides that UN-ambulances are to be regarded as tanks or shields for guerillia-fighters and fires at them, then Israel breaks the Geneva Conventions it has signed and the special responsibility occupiers have regarding the occupied. It can definetly do so, but would rightly so lose further respect and must await further condemnation if done so, same applies here for the human shields some guerillia fighters are using.
Yes, Israel can shoot the ambulances (which Israel has already sometimes done) and shoot the human shields (which also has been done before) and claim it's the fault and responsibility of the resistancefighters, but noone will believe Israel (besides off course the US), because Israel is the one creating resistance by occupating and suppressing/opressing the palestinians.
Nightcrawler