INTENT VERSUS RESULTS

United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Louise Arbour sides with Hezbollah following Israel's recent attack on Lebanon:

Arbour, interviewed by the Israeli daily Jerusalem Post, said that missile attacks aimed at killing civilians, and military strikes in which civilians are unintentionally killed cannot be equated. "In one case you could have, for instance, a very objectionable intent - the intent to harm civilians, which is very bad - but effectively not a lot of harm is actually achieved. But how can you compare that with a case where you may not have an intent but you have recklessness [in which] civilian casualties are foreseeable? The culpability or the intent may not sound as severe, but the actual harm is catastrophic," she said.

Arbour pointed out that Israel could also be guilty of human rights violations for its actions in Lebanon. "When you kill civilians virtually each time [in a military attack], at some point you have to ask yourself, 'Wasn't that foreseeable that so many would be killed?" she said. "That is where I think you start having to engage in the possibility that it is somewhat culpable."

This seems strange reasoning coming from a former Supreme Court of Canada justice, especially in light of Hezbollah's standard operating procedure of locating military assets in civilian areas -- you know, intending to gain propaganda advantage when civilians are inevitably killed.