Korean Job Discussion Forums

[Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee]

Iran fined $2.65 billion for �83 Beirut bombing
Judge awards sum to families of U.S. service members killed in barracks

[Masta_Don]

Only Americans would be thrilled by a show trial resulting in the empty promise of lots of moola.

[Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee]

[Masta_Don]

[Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee]

You are correct

[Kuros]

[Nowhere Man]

Hmm... Do we owe anybody money?

Vietnam, maybe?

Do we owe Iraq? Can we charge them for dictator removal?

The implications are massive.

[Gopher]

[deadman]

I wonder if the judge looked at evidence of who was responsible for the attack, or just assumed from the start that it was Iran.

Is there any actual evidence that it was Iran, or is it just speculation?

[Gopher]

[Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee]

[Kuros]

[arjuna]

Shameless

Behind the marine barracks bombing - Lebanon

By: Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18348.htm

09/09/07 "ICH" -- -- As Americans we have a particular mindset. Our belief in our altruism would be tolerable were it not so dangerous, especially when White House occupants threaten the stability of the world. The danger lies in that we believe that no matter what the U.S. policy, be it coups, sabotage, or illegal wars, America is always in the right and it is the �other� that is evil. Our irrational support of the government�s implausible and unacceptable actions has always been without scrutiny or self-examination.

In the latest fiasco, a US Federal court, ruled that Iran should pay $2.65bn to the families of the 241 marines killed by Hezbollah in Lebanon in 1983[i]. It is worthwhile making a simple parallel before delving into the policies and facts of the matter.

Iran�s support of Hezbollah is akin to U.S. support of Israel although Israel is supplied with an inordinate amount of military goods, including bunker-busters. Israel deliberately killed U.N. peacekeepers in last year�s 33-day war[ii]. Given that the U.S. deliberately stopped the cease-fire and supplied Israel not only with arms, but a carte blanche to kill at will, which country should be sued for the death of the peace keepers? The U.S., Israel, or is the U.N. the �other� evil?

[...]

Initially, on August 20, U.S. Marines landed in Beirut with a clearly defined mission - to supervise the evacuation of the PLO guerillas. This was accomplished at the end of the first week of September. There was no longer a need for a peacekeeping force. �Mission accomplished�. However, 19 days later, after the Israeli invasion and occupation of West Beirut, and the brutal Sabra � Sahtila massacres under the supervision of Ariel Sharon, a larger US force returned to Beirut � this was with a very different mission in mind. Theirs was not only to secure the airport, but to help the new Gemayel regime �consolidate� power .

Per the Reagan strategy, the additional forces were showing a permanent US presence in the Middle East, more pertinent to the events, some 100 field grade US Army and Special Forces officers were training �the most highly motivated� Lebanese brigades, that is, those with strong Phalangist militia components[v]. According to the �Britannica Concise Encyclopedia�, these were the same militias who under Sharon�s supervision massacred 800- several thousand women, children and elderly at Sabra and Sahtila.[vi] �Peace-keeping� had clearly taken on a new definition.

By September 1983, U.S. warships were shelling Syrian and Druze militia positions outside Beirut, and Marine ground forces were trading artillery and sniper fire with Shi�a [the Hezbollah are Shi�a] and Druze fighters[vii]. On October 23, 1983, two trucks hit a building housing US Marines killing most � �peace-keepers�

Iran�s implications in the incident may be that the Islamic regime had proven itself capable of challenging the world�s superpower with a simple religious ideology � Islam. The Hezbollah had borrowed from the same ideology and resisted the American/Israeli occupation by looking towards Iran as a source of inspiration, but to hold Iran accountable is not only irresponsible, but outrageous.

[...]

[arjuna]

The Beirut Marine Barracks Bombing

http://ariwatch.com/OurAlly/BeirutBombing.htm

Beirut is the capital of Lebanon, which borders Israel to the north. The Mediterranean Sea borders both countries to the west. In the late 1970s Lebanon was torn by a civil war among rival religious groups, sects within such groups, and gangster families. We will need to know that in Lebanon there were camps of Palestinian refugees expelled from Israel. And to complete our thumbnail sketch, the Palestinian Liberation Organization, claiming to represent all such Palestinians, had military bases in Lebanon.

In 1978, fearing a PLO alliance with Syria, which borders Lebanon to the north and east, Israel invaded Lebanon in an attempt to rout the PLO from southern Lebanon. The attempt failed. Afterward Israel and the PLO periodically exchanged barrages over the Lebanese border.

About this time the Mossad � Israel�s foreign intelligence agency � began cultivating Bashir Gemayel, head of one of the more brutal religious sects called the Phalangists (a Christian sect to which some of the Lebanese Christians belonged) fighting for control of Lebanon. Like Israel, Gemayel too wanted the PLO out of Lebanon. In 1979 he allowed the Mossad to set up and maintain a radar station within Lebanon in return for money (between $20,000 and $30,000 a month), military equipment, and training (for example Israel trained a group of Phalangists at the Haifa military base in 1980). Even the collaboration with Israel by itself was an advantage to Gemayel, because none of the other Lebanese factions were in a position to fight Israel.

So much for background. It is now the summer of 1982. Israel�s prime minister is Menachem Begin, its defense minister Ariel Sharon. On June 6th, in another attempt to dislodge the PLO, Israel invades Lebanon again. While attacking the PLO in southern Lebanon other Israeli forces join Gemayel�s Phalangists outside of Beirut, situated halfway up Lebanon on the Mediterranean coast. As they enter the city at first they are hailed as liberators by the Christian residents, but these soon get caught in the crossfire between the PLO on the one hand and the Israelis and Philangists on the other. The Israelis and Phalangists seal off several thousand PLO, along with half a million civilians, in West Beirut. The siege lasts ten weeks and includes aerial bombing by Israelis from American-made planes. Then, per agreement with the PLO and the U.S., they cease the bombardment and allow the PLO to evacuate the city. In August a U.S.-French-Italian peacekeeping team arrives which, after assurances from Israel that the Israeli military will not occupy the city, departs after about a month.

On September 14th Israel�s collaborator Gemayel (now president-elect of Lebanon) and about a hundred other Phalange Party members are assassinated at their headquarters in East Beirut by a hidden bomb placed there by a rival gang, the Syrian People�s Party.

On the morning of September 16th, top Israeli leaders meet with the Lebanese Forces Chief of Staff Fady Frem and his intelligence chief Elias Hobeika (variously spelled Ilyas or Eli Haqiba), a Phalangist who had attended the Israelis� Staff and Command College in Israel. Even at this time Hobeika was a known barbarian.

Frem says to the Israelis that Hobeika will take his men into the Shatila Palestinian refugee camp in West Beirut, then both Frem and Hobeika say there will be a kasach � Arabic for a chopping or slicing act. Major General Amir Drori, head of the Israeli Northern Command, gives them the go-ahead. [2]

The result of this meeting is related by Victor Ostrovsky, former Mossad case officer (a cadet at the time): [3]

�At 5 p.m. on September 16, Hobeika assembled his forces at Beirut International Airport and moved into the Shatila camp, with the help of flares and, later, tank and mortar fire from the Israeli Defense Force (IDF).�

They begin slaughtering the Palestinians in Shatila and in the adjacent camp Sabra.

�The next day, Hobeika received Israeli permission to bring two additional battalions into the camps. Israel knew the massacre was taking place. Israeli forces even set up observation posts on top of several seven-story buildings at the Kuwaiti embassy traffic circle, giving them an unobstructed view of the carnage.�

It lasts about 36 hours. President Reagan, upset by the slaughter and Israel�s role in it, and still believing the U.S. is a global police force, in early October sends the peacekeeping force back to Beirut, augmented to 1,200 men, mostly Marines. They are joined by 1,560 French and 1,200 Italian troops. This time they stay there. [4]

So, the U.S. Marines are in Beirut because of Israel�s occupation of the city, and the U.S. government�s altruistic idiocy. Is idiocy too strong a word?

Now some further background. For some time Israel had imposed a huge import tax on merchandise coming from Lebanon, which naturally resulted in smuggling to evade it. The goods were smuggled by cars and trucks modified for hidden storage. The Mossad station in Beirut had a certain informant who knew people working at a local garage which specialized in such modifications. Thus the Mossad occasionally obtained a good description of a vehicle that they could pass on to Israeli border guards, foiling many smuggling attempts.

Back to our story. In the summer of 1983 this informant tells the Mossad that Shi�ite Muslims are refitting a large Mercedes-Benz truck with extra-large hidden storage areas for holding bombs. Again quoting Mr. Ostrovsky:

�... the Mossad knew that ... there were only a few logical targets, one of which must be the U.S. compound. The question then was whether or not to warn the Americans to be on particular alert for a truck matching the description.

�The decision was too important to be taken in the Beirut station, so it was passed along to Tel Aviv, where [Nahum] Admony, then head of Mossad, decided they would simply give the Americans the usual general warning, a vague notice that they had reason to believe someone might be planning an operation against them. But this was so general, and so commonplace, it was ... unlikely to raise any particular alarm or prompt increased security precautions. ... One more would not heighten U.S. concerns or surveillance.

�Admony, in refusing to give the Americans specific information on the truck, said �... we�re not there to protect Americans. They�re a big country. Send only the regular information.�

�At the same time, however, all Israeli installations were given the specific details and warned to watch for a truck matching the description of the Mercedes.

�At 6:20 a.m. on October 23, 1983, a large Mercedes truck approached the Beirut airport, passing well within sight of Israeli sentries in their nearby base, going through a Lebanese army checkpoint, and turning left into the parking lot. A U.S. Marine guard reported with alarm that the truck was gathering speed, but before he could do anything, the truck roared toward the entrance of the four-story reinforced concrete Aviation Safety Building, used as headquarters for the Eighth Marine Battalion, crashing through a wrought-iron gate, hitting the sand-bagged guard post, smashing through another barrier, and ramming over a wall of sandbags into the lobby, exploding with such terrific force that the building was instantly reduced to rubble.

The blast and crushing debris kills 220 Marines, 18 Navy personnel, and 3 Army soldiers, 241 in all, most sleeping in their cots at the time. (70 men are injured. The Lebanese janitor for the building is killed.) It is the highest single-day death toll for American soldiers since the Vietnam Tet offensive.

A few minutes later another truck smashes into the French compound two miles away, killing 58 French soldiers. Mr. Ostrovsky continues:

�Within days, the Israelis passed along to the CIA the names of 13 people who they said were connected to the bombing[s] ..., a list including Syrian intelligence, Iranians in Damascus, and Shi�ite Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah.

�At Mossad headquarters, there was a sigh of relief that it wasn�t us who got hit. It was seen as a small incident so far as the Mossad was concerned � that we had stumbled over it [that is, onto it in advance] and wouldn�t tell anybody. The problem was if we had leaked information and it was traced back, our informant would have been killed. The next time, we wouldn�t know if we were on the hit list.

�The general attitude about the Americans was: �Hey, they wanted to stick their nose into this Lebanon thing, let them pay the price.�

�For me, it was the first time I had received a major rebuke from my Mossad superior ... . I said at the time that the American soldiers killed in Beirut would be on our minds longer than our own casualties because they�d come in with good faith, to help us get out of this mess we�d created. I was told �Just shut up. You�re talking out of your league. We�re giving the Americans much more than they�re giving us.� They always said that, but it�s not true. So much of Israeli equipment was American, and the Mossad owed them a lot.�

[Gopher]

Arjuna: we get it: you are arguing Tehran's case for attacking the Marine Corps and you are ridiculing this American court's decision to hold Tehran accountable for it while bitterly attacking the American govt's Idealistic rhetoric in world affairs.

Understood. Long, pro-enemy (that is, sypmathetic and apologetic for Tehran and Hezbollah and hostile to Washington) and self-righteous Op-eds, and without your own commentary, are hardly necessary to state your position on this.

By the way, Victor Ostrovsky? Is that all you have got as far as evidence goes? A single source, an Israeli malcontent who asks us to take his word at face-value and presents no evidence whatsoever? I have read both of his books, by the way. They read an awful lot like Richard Marcinko's Navy-Seals novels. That is, anyone with a sensationalist spy-buff worldview and access to microfilm and newspapers from the 1980s and 1990s could have told the stories he tells...