Ruff, there's no real need to confront these people directly, I prefer the truth be posted alongside their rantings, so that the whole world knows their game:
IAF report quickly dispels rumors on Gaza strike
By Ze'ev Schiff
There is one document that, in some ways, offers
even better testimony than do real-time
photographs from a pilotless drone as to what the
Israel Air Force command really knew about
Monday's missile strikes in Gaza. It is an
internal report on the operation sent by IAF
headquarters to all air force units.
This document, which reached
hundreds of personnel, was
sent out after news reports
began claiming that
helicopters had deliberately
fired missiles into a crowd
of Palestinian civilians
gathered near one of the
targets.
The drone's camera showed no such crowd, but the
camera's lens might not see everything
happening on the ground around the target.
But anyone who thinks it is possible to lie in a
bulletin sent to every unit of the IAF and not
be caught does not know the air force. Any lie
or distortion would quickly be noticed - and
leaked.
The bulletin was sent out on Tuesday in response
to plea by two IAF base commanders who, having
heard the media reports, wanted to know what
really happened. It was drafted by the head of
the operations division, with the approval of
IAF Commander-in-Chief Major General Dan
Halutz. The following are excerpts from the
text. The full text, minus a few operational
details having mainly to do with munitions,
appears in today's Hebrew Haaretz; details
omitted even in the Hebrew are marked here by
ellipses:
"The following document briefly describes
yesterday's [i.e., Monday's] operational
activity. The document is being sent so that
you will know the facts ...
I. The IAF conducted five strikes against
terrorist organizations in the Gaza Strip
yesterday ...
III. Following are the operations and the main
results, in chronological order:
A. An attack on a plant for manufacturing
explosives: ... Moderate damage was caused to
the building.
B. An attack on a car carrying weapons: Two
missiles were fired, which hit the car
directly.
C. An attack on a munitions warehouse: 1. One
missile was fired, which destroyed the
building. 2. The building blew up, indicating
the presence of munitions.
D. An attack on a car carrying suicide
terrorists: Two missiles were fired, which hit
the car and killed the two suicide terrorists
inside it.
E. Another attack on the explosives
manufacturing plant (the plant attacked in item
A): 1. It was attacked with ... to minimize
collateral damage. 2. The result was ... and
the building was seriously damaged. 3. The
attack was halted because people approached.
IV. Main points: ...
C. All the targets were targets belonging to
terrorist organizations engaged in producing
arms or organizing attacks.
D. In the planning and execution, maximum
efforts were made not to hurt uninvolved
persons. Despite this, when [there is] fighting
against terrorists who deliberately live among
a civilian population, uninvolved persons are
sometimes hurt.
E. With respect to the media reports of a
missile that went astray and massive injury to
uninvolved persons, it is important that you
know the facts:
1. All the munitions struck their targets
exactly.
2. In every attack, at the time the munitions
were fired, neither the operational nor the
video films showed any uninvolved persons.
3. There was no firing of munitions into a
crowd.
4. In the attack on the car carrying the suicide
terrorists, the second missile was fired about
a minute after the first missile struck. At the
time the missile was fired, no uninvolved
persons were spotted, but by the time the
missile hit, a small number of people had
apparently already arrived at the scene. In any
event, according to the films, there was no
massive injury to uninvolved persons and there
was no firing into a crowd.
V. Summary
A. The results were very good.
B. Planned terror attacks were prevented and
many armaments were assaulted.
C. Maximum precautions were taken, in both
planning and execution, to avoid harming
uninvolved persons."
The above document reflects what the IAF knew,
but it does not offer a full explanation for
the large number of Palestinian casualties. In
any event, air force policy on the conflict
with the Palestinians remains unchanged, so
this is probably not the last time such
operational-ethical questions will arise. |
