• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

IDF senior officer killed in ambush by Lebanese Army sniper

False, they investigated in order to determine which side the tree was on. That's why they had reviously asked Israel to wait.

Wow, that was a very desperate attempt, but no.
The investigation was declared after the tensions and was done after the tensions have ceased, however UNIFIL soldiers have told the IDF that the fire was unprovoked way ealier.

UNIFIL says IDF activity did not warrant Lebanese fire - Israel News, Ynetnews

that does not answer my question.

what isterest does the LEBANESE REPUBLIC have to ignite a new war with ISRAEL ?

The decision to shoot came from an officer, your question is "what interest does a Lebanese army officer has to incite war with Israel" and my answer was merely one of the possibilities - Hizbollah's infiltration of the Lebanese army and the officer being serving Hizbollah's causes.
 
Last edited:
Well no, aparently you haven't been to the area for a while. CJ is somewhere in the US and I was there only in June.

And yet I was right about the location of the tree and you were wrong.
Surprise surprise.

CJ's satelite picture showed the Kibutz which I also photographed and posted.

Apparently you've missed his point, he has made it clear to you that you were on the Western side of that Kibbutz while the incident has taken place, as I said, several clicks directly north to the kibbutz.
 
Wow, that was a very desperate attempt, but no.
The investigation was declared after the tensions and was done after the tensions have ceased, however UNIFIL soldiers have told the IDF that the fire was unprovoked way ealier.

UNIFIL says IDF activity did not warrant Lebanese fire - Israel News, Ynetnews

Will you please post something other than "Israel News" to prove your point ?
I can also post from a Lebanese paper, where would that lead us ?



The decision to shoot came from an officer, your question is "what interest does a Lebanese army officer has to incite war with Israel" and my answer was merely one of the possibilities - Hizbollah's infiltration of the Lebanese army and the officer being serving Hizbollah's causes.

That does not justify the decision by a republic to declare war against another country.

Hizbollah does NOT command the Lebanese army even if some soldiers are Shi'ite and close in opinion with Hizbollah.
 
And yet I was right about the location of the tree and you were wrong.
Surprise surprise.

Nope, not at all, if I had move my camera slightly to the left, the tree would have been right there on my picture.



Apparently you've missed his point, he has made it clear to you that you were on the Western side of that Kibbutz while the incident has taken place, as I said, several clicks directly north to the kibbutz.

I took the picture of the Kibutz while my friend was driving, you can see the car window in the picture. The other pictures were taken when we stopped and got out of the car and that's when you can see my friend's arm pointing at Israel.
 
Nope, not at all, if I had move my camera slightly to the left, the tree would have been right there on my picture.

Doesn't appear so.

I took the picture of the Kibutz while my friend was driving, you can see the car window in the picture. The other pictures were taken when we stopped and got out of the car and that's when you can see my friend's arm pointing at Israel.

Yes, and I can see that it is not the same area where the incident took place at.
 
Will you please post something other than "Israel News" to prove your point ?
I can also post from a Lebanese paper, where would that lead us ?

I understand that you don't like it when I contradict your statements, but the article speaks about the UNIFIL contradcition of your false and baseless accusation that the attack was provoked by Israel.

That does not justify the decision by a republic to declare war against another country.

Hizbollah does NOT command the Lebanese army even if some soldiers are Shi'ite and close in opinion with Hizbollah.

The decision was of an high-ranking Lebanese army officer, if he is connected with Hizbollah or the Syria camp this could easily be explained with the Hariri murder case, and it makes sense considering the Hizbollah journalists, the Hizbollah pre-destined speech where Nasrallah has blamed Israel for the Hariri murder while condemning the "Israeli attack", and it can pretty much make sense considering the known Hizbollah infiltration of the Lebanese army.

The United States has declared that they would no longer provide arms to the Lebanese army reasoning it specifically with the Hizbollah infiltration of the Lebanese army.
 
Doesn't appear so.



Yes, and I can see that it is not the same area where the incident took place at.

It was Apocalypse. Addayseh, the village, the material used for the paving, the metalic ramp, the poster, my friend's confirmation... exact same spot
 
I understand that you don't like it when I contradict your statements, but the article speaks about the UNIFIL contradcition of your false and baseless accusation that the attack was provoked by Israel.



The decision was of an high-ranking Lebanese army officer, if he is connected with Hizbollah or the Syria camp this could easily be explained with the Hariri murder case, and it makes sense considering the Hizbollah journalists, the Hizbollah pre-destined speech where Nasrallah has blamed Israel for the Hariri murder while condemning the "Israeli attack", and it can pretty much make sense considering the known Hizbollah infiltration of the Lebanese army.

The United States has declared that they would no longer provide arms to the Lebanese army reasoning it specifically with the Hizbollah infiltration of the Lebanese army.


I'm totally ready to believe you. Please provide some sources.
 
I'm totally ready to believe you. Please provide some sources.

I was saying all along that it's merely a possibility.
You've asked for a possible reasoning, I gave you one.
 
I was saying all along that it's merely a possibility.
You've asked for a possible reasoning, I gave you one.

And my reasoning is that Lebanon has absolutely no interest in igniting a war with Israel.
What happened was an unfortunate incident started by a misunderstanding.

I have said all along that the Lebanese army should NOT have shot the commander and Israel should have waited until all was clear before cutting a stupid tree.

5 killed
1 Israeli
4 Lebanese including a civilian

it's sad, it's a waste of lives and a disaster to their families.

Hope this will never happen again

End of story
 
What happened was an unfortunate incident started by a misunderstanding

Say what you will, this was a deliberate attack and not a "misunderstanding", a high-ranking commander who sits on a bench well within Israeli territory hundreds of meters away from the area where a bunch of Israeli soldiers are cutting an Israeli tree doesn't just get shot at as a misunderstanding by sniper rifle, there was a command coming from a Lebanese officer to shoot, and the snipers did.

The way Lebanon has handled its incident is also suspicious, initially lying and claiming that they've only fired warning shots and got fired at back for nothing or claiming that the tree was in Lebanese territory despite the fact that it was south of the international border that they too respect and recognize.
 
Say what you will, this was a deliberate attack and not a "misunderstanding", a high-ranking commander who sits on a bench well within Israeli territory hundreds of meters away from the area where a bunch of Israeli soldiers are cutting an Israeli tree doesn't just get shot at as a misunderstanding by sniper rifle, there was a command coming from a Lebanese officer to shoot, and the snipers did.

The way Lebanon has handled its incident is also suspicious, initially lying and claiming that they've only fired warning shots and got fired at back for nothing or claiming that the tree was in Lebanese territory despite the fact that it was south of the international border that they too respect and recognize.


Fine, if that makes you happy, so be it .

I'm off to enjoy the sun.
 
Will you please post something other than "Israel News" to prove your point ?
I can also post from a Lebanese paper, where would that lead us ?

Its a bit of a problem, as soon as the world realized that Israel was attacked unprovoked in an ambush they stopped caring, if UNIFIL would have ruled out that the area Lebanise I'm sure we'd have resources from around the world and perhaps even be condemed for our aggressive action thorwards the tree in the UN security council
 
Its a bit of a problem, as soon as the world realized that Israel was attacked unprovoked in an ambush they stopped caring, if UNIFIL would have ruled out that the area Lebanise I'm sure we'd have resources from around the world and perhaps even be condemed for our aggressive action thorwards the tree in the UN security council

Are you kidding me?
I would expect no less than 6 different international inquiries and the uniting conclusion that Israel has committed war crimes and crimes against humanity.
That would of course come after the international condemnations fiasco and the thousands of mass demonstrations in Europe against the cutting of an innocent tree by the evil Zionist entity.
 
But they were PRUNING, Joe.

Everybody know that any Jew who prunes should be killed immediately.

heh.

Prune jews.

Helps promote regularity...
 
heh.

Prune jews.

Helps promote regularity...


death2juice.jpg
 
Conclusion
1- the parcel where the tree grew was in dispute
2- the Israelis had expressed their wish to cut the tree but the Lebanese had not yet approved
3- the Israelis didn't wait for the dispute to be solved and they proceded in cutting the tree anyway
4- the Lebanese felt disrespected and their territory violated (2006 is still very fresh in their memmory and 2000 is not that far away)
5- they fired at the Israelis
6- the U.N. went in the next day, inspected the parcel, took measurements and declared that the tree was actually on Israeli territory

result

5 dead

1 Israeli
4 Lebanese including 1 civilian

the stupidest way to die, what a waste :(

Putting aside the "disrespect" nonsense as a justification for anything (I get the obsession with respect that exists in middle easterrn societies as a general compensation for general impotence of the societies there), none of your theorizing or explaining is even remotely consistent with key facts.

In particular, if anything and everything you have been saying is correct, the Israelis fired on would have been the soldier who was on the "wrong side" of the "border" and those working the machinery that he was working with. it most certainly would not have been the highest ranking officers that were within firing range, and therse officers would not have been sitting out in the open had there been any firing prior to them being shot.

For all your "what about this" "what about that" "I was there" stuff, you seem wholly dedicated to ignoring the facts about who was hit, where they were hit, and what implications this has for the various working theories for what happened.
 
If that is so, why did the UNIFIL have to go in and investigate/take measurements after the incident in order to be able to announce the result of their investigation ?
Tell me something Apocalypse. You are convinced that this was an ambush that was set up by the Lebanese army, which means that the Lebanese army had the intention to ignite a new war with Israel.

what interest does Lebanon have to ignite a war with Israel ? (it still hasn't fully recovered from 2006)

I repeat and please reply because I'm genuinely interested in knowing your opinion about this

WHAT INTEREST DOES LEBANON HAVE TO IGNITE A NEW WAR WITH ISRAEL ?


To interject, I have already set out a perfectly workable theory for you.

You seem to be working udner the assumtpion that the Lebanese army is a coherent whole that strictly follows a single chain of command. As you seem to know a lot about Lebanon, you surely must understand that a unified anything in Lebanon is very highly unlikely. My working theory is that the Army division here was run by someone either working for Hezbollah or with strong Hezbollah sympathies, and this incident was initiated to divert attention from the Harari murder.

I don't think this commander would have cared less if he had sucked Lebanon into a war, as his interest was in advancing hezbollah's interests, not his countries. As for Hezbollah, the Iranian proxy decided to use a proxy of its own, to avoid the *** whooping it received the last time around.
 
This is where the two commanders were shot at:

4_wh.jpg


ynet

Holy f***, seriously? Talking about it in abstract and seeing it in pictures are entirely different things.

Mira, you should be on your knees thanking Israel for not bombing Lebanon back to the stone age. That was a pure and total act of war, and Israel would have been completely justified in destorying the LAF's ability to wage war.

That Israel acted with such restrint is a testament to its discipline, though I worry that the limited response erodes its deterence power, which was established so effectively in 2006.
 
WTF was an army commander doing sitting on a picnic bench right in the middle of super high border tension ? where exactly is Lebanon ? Are the buildings on the other hill in Lebanon ?

Are you serious? Seriously?

This was not a "super high tension" anything, it was routine maintenance work. These officers were well behind the border (which is to be expected, why would a colonel be at the scene supervising a tree cutting) and whatever they were doing at the picnic bench is, frankly, totally irrelevant.

Did you ever think of this - they were sitting at the bench because THERE WERE NO SHOTS FIRED UNTIL SNIPERS TOOK THEM OUT. Your working theory of how things unfolded cannot remotely be supported by the behaviour of those on the ground. You only need to ask "WTF was an army commander doing sitting on a picnic bench right in the middle of super high border tension" because your idea of how things unfolded is so absurd that it seems completely disconnected to see where these officers were shot.

Cause it is impossible to sustain any assertion that this was to "defend the border" when you see this information, so it seems to have created this dissonance that makes you ask the question you did.

A better question would be "how must things have unfolded for two seasoned officers to be shot as sitting ducks well behind the front lines sitting at an exposed picnic bench".

I know the answer. So do many people here. You know the answer too, if you just admit it to yourself.
 
Last edited:
Holy f***, seriously? Talking about it in abstract and seeing it in pictures are entirely different things.

Mira, you should be on your knees thanking Israel for not bombing Lebanon back to the stone age. That was a pure and total act of war, and Israel would have been completely justified in destorying the LAF's ability to wage war.

That Israel acted with such restrint is a testament to its discipline, though I worry that the limited response erodes its deterence power, which was established so effectively in 2006.

Yeah, that's exactly what I said, in this case a country is justified in destroying the military of the other country, and all the attempts to cover it up as an innocent mistake have nothing to do with reality.
 
Holy f***, seriously? Talking about it in abstract and seeing it in pictures are entirely different things.

Mira, you should be on your knees thanking Israel for not bombing Lebanon back to the stone age. That was a pure and total act of war, and Israel would have been completely justified in destorying the LAF's ability to wage war.

That Israel acted with such restrint is a testament to its discipline, though I worry that the limited response erodes its deterence power, which was established so effectively in 2006.

This must be by far the most arrogant and inhuman statement that I have read on this thread .

yes I should be grateful that Israel only killed 4 Lebanese including a civilian against one Israeli military.

Holy cow !!!!
 
Back
Top Bottom