At Least 9 Doctors Killed In US Airstrikes On Hospital

There still needs to be a military tribunal.
And what you are proposing is a clearly show trial,
hence you're still a promoter to commit war crimes / be a war criminal.

 

Please stop pretending there are no enemies of the western nations plotting to destroy us.

 

There is no evidence that the Medicine san Frontieres' hospital was being used by combatants.

There is no evidence that the Medicines San Frontieres' hospital was being used by combatants. Your repeated statements that there were, or usually are, are quite frankly meaningless until you backup your claims.

Medecins San Frontieres is a widely respected global medical aid agency. If you think that non-aligned medical staff should not be in a war zone, fine. If you believe that "many" being treated in that hospital were terrorists, then you are going to have to provide evidence, as MSF, the people who are on the ground running the hospital state that your claim is BS.

MSF were the only aid agency in Rwanda to pull out of the refugee camps in Burundi during the genocide in Rwanda. They pulled out of the camps because the Hutu death squads were taking control of the camps and prioritising food supplies for their troops, before going back across the Rwandan border to continue the massacre. No other international aid agency pulled out of those camps, and MSF's pleas to the world were either ignored or dismissed. If you have any evidence from this situation that brings their reputation into disrepute, please share it here?

Pleading ignorance to what? You have not presented any information relating to the incidence outside of your general opinion about the way of such incidents.

What am I ignorant of? The fact that medics will fulfill their hippocratic oath and treat injured people. Throughout history, there have always been combatants who were treated by the opposing army, and neutral medical organisations. The US military has a fine record on this matter. But of course you disagree with this policy and you generalise about the patients in that hospital. As if to say that no civilians in the area were admitted to the hospital due to the ferocious fighting.

I have heard doctors experienced in the field explaining that you can only make a call on a case-by-case basis, and that often when a man is going to die without medical care, the doctor has no ethical option but to act. According to MSF “It was the only functional hospital in Kunduz since the fighting had begun and we have shared extensively the locations of this hospital with all warring parties in Afghanistan.” And yet you claim that "The doctors killed were fools". Many, many fine US doctors voluntarily give up a year of their life to work for MSF. I think that maybe it is time for you to contact one of them to find out what the reality of their work is?

 

Strawman. If you want to discuss this general issue as opposed to the particular incident at hand, start a thread and I will join you.

 

Are you suggesting that Amnesty should ask ISIS to sign up to the Geneva Convention? If you are you have no understanding of the asspirations and goals of that little band of merry men.

A free democratic country does not set its humanitarian standards by the way the lowest savages that they fights conducts themselves. I find it strange that I have to explain this.

 

ISIS operate in Syria and Iraq, not afghanistan.

 

So what's America's existential excuse for such activities?

 

I suspect that you are not entirely clued in to the history of the region. Hint: The US supplied Afghan combatants with copious amounts of heavy armaments and a lot of cash, while they were fighting the Russians.

 

A couple of hundred of thousands of people in sandals with an AK-47 can destroy the United States ..... Therefore, the US killed several million people, and destroyed five countries and spent trillions of dollars. Stupid Country.....
[video=youtube;fys3MsKMpms]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fys3MsKMpms[/video][video=youtube;d6qIoMjfECo]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6qIoMjfECo[/video]

 

I was just trying to knock down sandcastles. You wanted evidence that the Taliban used schools and hospitals for military safehavens---and I gave it to you. And now you're not happy.

 

I have only asked, repeatedly, for evidence that this was the case in the MSF hospital. No such evidence has been given, yet.

 

My problem isn't with you---it's with the Ivory Tower hypocrites that cry about things like the 9 doctors getting killed while helping out terrorists, and then point fingers only at the people doing their best to fight them under the rules.

The merry men at Amnesty Intl. and such places must hold everyone to the same standards of conduct. Does not matter if one is an ignorant Hutu chopping up a Tutsi with a machete, or a learned ISIS caliph beheading a Christian man and taking his daughter as a slave, all should be held to same standard as a West Point officer.

It is the very duty of crybaby liberal multi-culturalists to demand one standard of conduct for their one world order.

 

No, a bit too early to say for sure---but looks like it was another Taliban safehaven on the surface.

 

Well go tell that to the Afghan forces who called in the strike.

There is no evidence that the Medicines San Frontieres' hospital was being used by combatants. Your repeated statements that there were, or usually are, are quite frankly meaningless until you backup your claims.

Moot point, they are very respected by the enemy forces.

Active combat zone, learn the difference. Anyone in an active combat zone places themselves in harms way especially when the enemy does not respect the rules of war.

Don't put words in my mouth or try to insinuate that is why the attack occurred.

Your claiming I made such a claim is BS and shows you can't make an argument based on what I do say.

It has NO bearing on the issue here.

To what you were demanding proof. So were you denying it as a matter of fact or pleading ignorance?

And if they choose to stay there they choose to place themselves in harms way and no a doctor has no obligation to put someone else's life before theirs meaning that they will no longer be able to treat others because they are DEAD.

- - - Updated - - -

I suggest you are totally naive to the threats we face and apparently ignorant of how that enemy fights and the history of events.

- - - Updated - - -

Are you denying the attack was called in by the Afghan security forces fighting in that area? If you agree they did then go take it up with them.

 

Irrelevant. There is no such thing as... it's okay to bomb doctors in their hospital if....

 

Same difference, IMO.

 

In war zones, NGOs often reluctant to say who's responsible if it's govts. MSF changing that:

http://www.doctorswithoutborders.or...social&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=social …

 

THE salient point, if it was then there is no immunity for it.

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The deadly air strike that hit a hospital in the Afghan city of Kunduz was a mistake made within the U.S. chain of command, the American commander of international forces in Afghanistan said on Tuesday.

Army General John Campbell also made clear he favored a rethink of a plan to withdraw almost all U.S. troops by the end of next year. He said rising threats in Afghanistan from the Islamic State and al Qaeda were among factors informing his recommendations to the White House on future troop levels.

Saturday's strike on an Afghan hospital run by Doctors Without Borders, or Medecins Sans Frontieres (MSF), killed 22 people and deeply angered the medical charity. MSF officials have blamed the United States, demanding an independent investigation into the incident and calling it a war crime.

Campbell said U.S. forces had responded to a request from Afghan forces and provided close air support as they engaged in a fight with Taliban militants in Kunduz, a provincial capital that the Taliban captured late last month.

"To be clear, the decision to provide aerial fires was a U.S. decision made within the U.S. chain of command," Campbell said in testimony to the Senate Armed Services Committee. He added that U.S. special forces nearby were communicating with the aircraft that delivered the strikes.

"A hospital was mistakenly struck," Campbell said. "We would never intentionally target a protected medical facility."

 

I am not going to go into your general criticisms, perhaps that is something to be teased out on another day. I will respond re Amnesty International, as they would be a good starting point in relation to what you talk about.

For example, this year in Afghanistan Amnesty campaigned against the introduction, by the Afghan government, of the Criminal Procedure Code, which barred family members of victims of violence during the conflict from testifying. It won't come as a surprise to you that the majority of the violence against the locals, is done by the hands of the Taliban etc. The fact that family testimonies were outlawed, essentially meant that any crime committed against a woman was never going to see the inside of a courthouse, due to the strict adherence to tradition in the country. In short every rape committed by the Taliban, every beating, and every case of harassment against women was going to be side lined by this law. Both houses of the Afghan parliament passed the law. President Karzai refused to sign off on the law and it was not passed.

 

The doctors who run the hospital and who were present at the timer, disagree with you. They lost many of their colleagues as a result of the air strike.

 

If idiots did not arm Taliban then this war do not exist now.....
[video=youtube;NsZg_maF0ow]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NsZg_maF0ow[/video]

 

It was a hospital in a 'combat zone', the only functioning hospital in the city, at the time. These doctors are unpaid volunteers. They would have been highly trained as to how to operate in a war zone. Most likely by US military specialist. They knew the risks involved. I am sure their families were worrying every day that they spent there, just like US miltary families. If it is your belief that only combatants should be in a war zone, then you are going against two centuries of US activity in this area.

Evidence is what backs up a claim. You haven't provided it yet. And I am the ignorant one? Do you have any evidence that terrorist were using the building, not.

I'm Irish, I think I know a thing or two about sadistic terrorists that target civilians. Not the same brand of savagery as these guys, but killers, all the same.

Is that a question, or an inference? Considering I haven't commented on the matter.

If the US military can't rely on the Afghan military (one with a less than dazzling short history), in such matters, then that is for them to address, and them alone.

 

It is not, though. The have essentially gone to war against each other.

 

Total of 22 People were killed in this American airstrike.