Why rely on complicated stuff like coordinates? Why not just paint a large "H" on the hospital roof?
Editor’s note: This comment has been anonymized in accordance with applicable law(s).
This reminds me of another spectacular blunder by the U.S., less fatal though. It was the bombing with guided bombs of the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade during the Kosovo war.
Guided bombs and missiles coupled with other hi-tech devices are supposed to make wars less fatal for civilians. However, statistics show that the civilian casualty ratio increases as technology progresses and makes wars less fatal for soldiers.
That's very sad.
Guided bombs and missiles coupled with other hi-tech devices are supposed to make wars less fatal for civilians. However, statistics show that the civilian casualty ratio increases as technology progresses and makes wars less fatal for soldiers.
That's very sad.
So far the evidence points to the fact that the coordinates of the MSF Hospital are known to the US Military and even the Afghan forces. That the Hospital was attacked -with several runs- by a US gunship clearly indicates either a very reckless mien or more probably the US wants to make a point and it did as in the shooting down of an Iran Air flight by the USS Vincennes during the Iran/Iraq war.
Either way it sets a dangerous precedent and serves little purpose to checkmate the terrorists now ravaging the AFPAK and Middle East Regions with ever growing escalations in the sub-Saharan African.
Either way it sets a dangerous precedent and serves little purpose to checkmate the terrorists now ravaging the AFPAK and Middle East Regions with ever growing escalations in the sub-Saharan African.
3
"Under the rules, airstrikes are authorized to kill terrorists, protect American troops and help Afghans who request support in battles..."
Doesn't say a thing about not bombing hospitals... Guess that's OK!
Doesn't say a thing about not bombing hospitals... Guess that's OK!
1
The media coverup (protecting Obama) is turning out to be worse than the crime.
1
Clearly we have a bunch of newbies or idiots who don't know what they're doing. Is that the state of our military now?
When you don't know what you're doing, don't do it!
When you don't know what you're doing, don't do it!
4
A war crime is a war crime. What has disgusted me (but not shocked me) has been the relatively minor coverage of this incident in the MSM. I contrast this with the coverage of war crimes and excess 'collateral damage' during the Viet Nam war. Much of this lack of coverage speaks to the bizarre over glamorization of our military presently - or as they are now called- our 'warriors.' In a time of perpetual war, where less than 1% of the population does the dirty work and the rest of us out of perverse guilt, shame, or simple exhaustion of the whole process professes our profound 'thank you for your service', it is no surprise that we turn a blind eye to the ugliness that war entails. And we all know, these 'mistakes' occur day in and day out. How many Afghan/Iraqi weddings or check points have been eviscerated w/o consequence? It is only because MSF is a western organization that the US even remotely cares about the loss of life and symbolic significance of the bombing.
4
Concerning this war crime, it's obvious that relying on the Western media we'll only take notice of excuse and blah-blah-blah while the core question won't be addressed: to bring to international court justice to be trial the military leaders who ordered the perpetration of this war crime.
Case like this highlights the reasons why a country after being bestowed as a superpower, struggles so hard to avoid to not to lose this status quo.
Can guess Imagine whether this war crime being carried out by a rogue nation. Although, being rogue and being superpower are not excluding characteristics...
Case like this highlights the reasons why a country after being bestowed as a superpower, struggles so hard to avoid to not to lose this status quo.
Can guess Imagine whether this war crime being carried out by a rogue nation. Although, being rogue and being superpower are not excluding characteristics...
2
The "investigation" is led by a military officer who reports to General Campbell. What hogwash. How can anyone trust what is said? We've seen this many times before, and while they might allow some facts out, the real story will be concealed and things will just keep going on as they always have. How are all the killings of civilians by our soldiers and drones, and now a sustained attack on a hospital, any different from the actions of the terrorists we are fighting? At least the Taliban are fighting in their own country. We are the invaders and regardless of our intentions are acting no better than them..
3
Anyone can paint a red cross on a building including the Taliban.
What is most important is that the building has been verified as being what it is claimed to be. Buildings cannot get up and walk so the physical coordinates would be the most important detail to verify it and as such it should be of the utmost importance that everyone knows every minute of every day what these coordinates are. Why such carelessness?
What is most important is that the building has been verified as being what it is claimed to be. Buildings cannot get up and walk so the physical coordinates would be the most important detail to verify it and as such it should be of the utmost importance that everyone knows every minute of every day what these coordinates are. Why such carelessness?
4
One might think that schools, hospitals and other important do not bomb ares would be marketed with big red Xs on the local military operations maps. This is clearly the behavior of reckless and negligent leadership!
2
American Army believes that America forces are fungible. It is also a matter of believe that all Afghans are fungible. An hospitalized Afghan can be a replacement for a "terrorist". And by definition any Afghan labelled as a "terrorist" can be removed/expunged. Simple logic. Wake! Wake!
At several points in this article the authors clearly accept the US position that this atrocity was a "mistake" and that the US did not attack the facility knowing full well that it was a hospital and protected under international law. There should be more skepticism about this claim until a truly independent investigation is done.
7
This is not an excuse. Hospitals are made know to the teams controlling the fires. The aircraft should have known it, too. Why haven't we heard about operational lawyers who release targets? Were they involved?
Despite these red herrings, the attack looks like a deliberate targeting of MSF.
The entire chain of command all the way to SecDef should resign over this war crime. An independent investigation ought to be conducted and some semblance of justice and transparency for a credible result.
Those murdered and their families deserves this small token.
Despite these red herrings, the attack looks like a deliberate targeting of MSF.
The entire chain of command all the way to SecDef should resign over this war crime. An independent investigation ought to be conducted and some semblance of justice and transparency for a credible result.
Those murdered and their families deserves this small token.
6
CR - "The entire chain of command all the way to SecDef should resign over this war crime."
Why stop at the SecDef, include the entire chain of command up to and including the CiC.
Why stop at the SecDef, include the entire chain of command up to and including the CiC.
1
So doe the headline suppose to mean that in other parts of Asia such units are allowed to bomb known coordinates of hospitals with no congressional review even after the hospital authorities phone back to high command of the country.
2
Yes, you are right: America does not need permission to KILL and MAIN its ASSUMED enemies, or for target practice. American assumption is that in Kunduz, Hospitals supply HOSPITALITY to assumed enemies. American forces reserve hospitality for themselves. Any more questions?
The hospital had given the coordinates to both Afghan
forces and the US. Didn't special forces know how to
read the coordinates? After the first bomb dropped
the hospital called to inform that a wrong target
is being bombed. Are special forces tone deaf? The
so called northern forces are not only incompetent
but also venal and think nothing of loss of human life.
If caught with the wrong doing they point fingers at
Pakistan or Taliban. They totally refuse to take
responsibility for their mistake or failure. Unfortunately
this is not the first accident of its kind. Wedding parties
have been bombed before. Saudis bombed two wedding
parties in two weeks in a row. They claim that they
were given intelligence by the Americans who are helping
Saudis with intelligence and logistics in decimating Yemen.
forces and the US. Didn't special forces know how to
read the coordinates? After the first bomb dropped
the hospital called to inform that a wrong target
is being bombed. Are special forces tone deaf? The
so called northern forces are not only incompetent
but also venal and think nothing of loss of human life.
If caught with the wrong doing they point fingers at
Pakistan or Taliban. They totally refuse to take
responsibility for their mistake or failure. Unfortunately
this is not the first accident of its kind. Wedding parties
have been bombed before. Saudis bombed two wedding
parties in two weeks in a row. They claim that they
were given intelligence by the Americans who are helping
Saudis with intelligence and logistics in decimating Yemen.
6
America forces assumed that coordinates are given to them for a coordinated attack. The attack was not only coordinated but SUSTAINED. It was mission accomplished. Any more questions.
2
Surely as a 'protected' site it should have been logged as such so at HQ and Gunship level a flag should have been raised when the coordinates were locked in that this is a hospital. What is technology for? At best this appears to be negligence, carelessness and unprofessional, at worst complete disregard for international law and a "nuke the gooks" attitude.
And the plot thickens - not sure we will ever know the truth for at least 50 years or more. "... , a former intelligence official has told the Associated Press that American special operations forces who planned the attack knew it was a hospital because they had been gathering intelligence on it for days. They believed it was being used to coordinate Taliban activity, and considered the strike justified. The report said it was not clear whether the commanders in the gunship firing on the site knew it was a hospital or the details of the allegations."
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/oct/21/kunduz-hospital-attack-even...
And the plot thickens - not sure we will ever know the truth for at least 50 years or more. "... , a former intelligence official has told the Associated Press that American special operations forces who planned the attack knew it was a hospital because they had been gathering intelligence on it for days. They believed it was being used to coordinate Taliban activity, and considered the strike justified. The report said it was not clear whether the commanders in the gunship firing on the site knew it was a hospital or the details of the allegations."
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/oct/21/kunduz-hospital-attack-even...
7
The purpose of technology is to obfuscate facts. Remember the old saying: Adam blamed Eve, Eve blamed the serpent, and the serpent had no legs to stand on. Anybody with better technology will hide the TRUTH better. Since American technology is superior, the magic of our technology can hide all our sins. We are blameless.
1
It is beyond belief that a list of protected structures exists but was not consulted. This is so fundamental a principle that the destruction must be labeled a crime against humanity. If the U.S. forces' safeguards do not reliably prevent such murderous attacks, they must be revised. And if U.S. forces act in contradiction to safeguarding processes and decision rules, they must face the consequences as individuals who were derelict in their duty.
5
I am quite sure that in Asia, Africa, Americas, Europe, DC and elsewhere, the word 'hospital' means the same thing, a hospital.
The fact that all the players did not know each other, does not affect the fact that they all saw 'hospital' and shot at it for 30 minutes.
The fact that all the players did not know each other, does not affect the fact that they all saw 'hospital' and shot at it for 30 minutes.
7
FYI: They shot at it for over 1 hour.
2
What a lame excuse! Rookies from Asia?
Is communication not essential everywhere?
Is bombing a hospital not a war crime in other parts of Asia?
Is toying with people's lives not irresponsible everywhere?
At least have the guts to stand up for that horribly inept mission!
Is communication not essential everywhere?
Is bombing a hospital not a war crime in other parts of Asia?
Is toying with people's lives not irresponsible everywhere?
At least have the guts to stand up for that horribly inept mission!
13
In any America engagement outside America, we care for American lives. Within America, we do further parsing: some lives are more important than others. Mind you some people in America have started believing that, within America non-white lives also matter. That is a discussion for another day!
Here's an idea: When in doubt, don't annihilate a large building in a populated area just because some idiots you don't trust asked you to. And maybe double check to make sure you haven't already been informed that the target is actually a hospital, school, etc.
It's obvious that the military or police forces in this country can make the most outrageous mistakes and kill any number of innocent people and there are no consequences, ever. The fog of war is more like the miasma of incompetence.
It's obvious that the military or police forces in this country can make the most outrageous mistakes and kill any number of innocent people and there are no consequences, ever. The fog of war is more like the miasma of incompetence.
19
Was this hospital marked with red crosses on it roof and grounds around the hospital?
If not, why not? I would think that would be mandatory in a combat zone.
If not, why not? I would think that would be mandatory in a combat zone.
Yes, it was marked. MSF has worked in war zones in numerous other places, and they know all about those sorts of protocols and follows them to a T. That's why the US military had it on their list of places not to bomb.
And then they bombed it anyways, and continued bombing it after the hospital staff called the US military and told them exactly what was happening. That's why I'm of the opinion that this strike wasn't a mistake at all.
And then they bombed it anyways, and continued bombing it after the hospital staff called the US military and told them exactly what was happening. That's why I'm of the opinion that this strike wasn't a mistake at all.
4
Afghania is a Muslim Country. No Red Crosses there. It was probably marked with a Red Crescent. And here is the TRUTH: it was probably purposely hit, for displaying an Afghan National Symbol.
1
An arial image of the hospital showed no visable red cross or red crescent. If the hospital was marked, it must have only been visable from the ground. That complies with international law, but it wouldn't have helped the pilots identify the hospital from the air.
Putting a red cross/crescent on the roof could have prevented this from happening, because the pilots would have seen it and asked to have their target double-checked. But MSF did give their coordinates to their US Military liason. They obviously thought that was enough to keep them safe -- and it should have been.
Putting a red cross/crescent on the roof could have prevented this from happening, because the pilots would have seen it and asked to have their target double-checked. But MSF did give their coordinates to their US Military liason. They obviously thought that was enough to keep them safe -- and it should have been.
1
Sure this wasn't Taliban folks mimicking Afghan army or police and calling in the strike?
In that case, the Taliban knows our radio frequencies, call signs, password of the day, and internal approval codes.
So no, it was not the Taliban
So no, it was not the Taliban
6
I think that the GOP and Fox News critics of this tragic mistake (they happen a lot in war, who'd a thunk it) should rally to see that a replacement hospital is built and protected by a well-regulated militia of their children and grandchildren, nieces, nephews, etc., and commanded on-site by Generals Limbaugh, O'Reilly and Hannity, and Chief Medical Officer Carson.
3
The most likely explanation, is that the hospital was being used to shelter terrorists. Even a cursory search on the internet about Doctors Without Borders (MSF), reveals a left wing organization sympathetic to Islamists in the region. Their YouTube channel has numerous videos that sympathize with the enemies of the American government. It is plausible that the MSF decided to take their activist video renditions to the battlefield. Unfortunately, as with all war, civilians are caught in the crossfire. Perhaps this should be a lesson to the doctors to practice more medicine, and less politics. The doctors credo should rule the day; do no harm.
As a long-time supporter of Doctors Without Borders, I will speak for this marvelous organization and its courageous staff. Throughout the world, the doctors, nurses, and many other technically trained medical personnel sacrifice their time, place themselves in uncomfortable and even life-threatening situations to aid those in need of medical care. MSF conducts its operations in complete non-political terms. I regret that you so profoundly mis-read their admirable record of support for the sick and injured, at great risk to themselves.
18
So you are saying hospitals are fair targets.
Bombing a hospital is covered under the blanket of crimes against humanity, and war crimes. No matter who was being treated there.
Bombing a hospital is covered under the blanket of crimes against humanity, and war crimes. No matter who was being treated there.
9
I've been paying attention to this incident since the story first broke, and the only credible thing that MSF did that doesn't seem right is not have a protective emblem on their roof. That's not a small matter, the principle of distinction applies to them as much as it applies to those fighting. But any notion that MSF brought this on themselves by violating their own principles of impartiality and neutrality in a war zone is totally ludicrous.
They are among the best there is in the humanitarian field, not some crank political organization. If any "activism" was going on in support of the Taliban from their premises, it would have to have been without their knowledge. That doesn't make it impossible, but it does make it very unlikely.
They are among the best there is in the humanitarian field, not some crank political organization. If any "activism" was going on in support of the Taliban from their premises, it would have to have been without their knowledge. That doesn't make it impossible, but it does make it very unlikely.
4
I'm trying to figure out what the corporate legacy and neocon media wants me to think.
Bombing hospitals when the US and Israel does it - always either tragic mistakes or necessary for "defending" against mostly useless rockets that may or may not have been in the area...
But when the Russians bomb terrorists - before the planes have even gotten airborne, we are to decry the fact that they deliberately targeted civilians -
is that right?
http://www.activistpost.com/2015/10/soros-backed-ngo-fakes-photos-to-bla...
Doctors without Borders said things you aren't supposed to say about Israel and its occupation of Palestine. I'm sure that had nothing to do with the bombing of course.
Bombing hospitals when the US and Israel does it - always either tragic mistakes or necessary for "defending" against mostly useless rockets that may or may not have been in the area...
But when the Russians bomb terrorists - before the planes have even gotten airborne, we are to decry the fact that they deliberately targeted civilians -
is that right?
http://www.activistpost.com/2015/10/soros-backed-ngo-fakes-photos-to-bla...
Doctors without Borders said things you aren't supposed to say about Israel and its occupation of Palestine. I'm sure that had nothing to do with the bombing of course.
6
Mister, what is your point. America has sovereignty. We are the James Bond of the World: we have license to KILL. And we kill only those who are unable to defend themselves. And now the Russians are only mimicking us. On the surface America and Russia oppose each other; but when it comes to Aaaarab, and Muuuslim populations, we have the same mission. Please shoe understanding.
If ever there was proof that we don't belong there, that our actions hurt rather than help those in the area, this is it. We fuel the flames instead of quelling them. We knew it was a hospital but bombed it anyway. This is a war crime. How low this great nation has sunk. The only people who recognize the folly of our interventionist foreign policies are Bernie Sanders and Rand Paul.
10
So their latest tactic is to blame their war crime on the New Kids on the Block?
The US warmongers are so craven that they hide behind the cowardly cloak of anonymity and let the New York Times make their excuses for them. And not one presidential candidate or politician (save Rep. Barbara Lee) from either corporate party has had the guts to stand up to deplore this attack and the larger atrocity of the continuing war in Afghanistan, and the de facto wars of US aggression throughout the Middle East and beyond.
Nearly 300,000 people have already signed an MSF petition demanding that President Obama agree to an independent investigation of the attack on their Kunduz hospital. More info here:
https://www.change.org/p/tell-president-obama-to-consent-to-independent-...
The US warmongers are so craven that they hide behind the cowardly cloak of anonymity and let the New York Times make their excuses for them. And not one presidential candidate or politician (save Rep. Barbara Lee) from either corporate party has had the guts to stand up to deplore this attack and the larger atrocity of the continuing war in Afghanistan, and the de facto wars of US aggression throughout the Middle East and beyond.
Nearly 300,000 people have already signed an MSF petition demanding that President Obama agree to an independent investigation of the attack on their Kunduz hospital. More info here:
https://www.change.org/p/tell-president-obama-to-consent-to-independent-...
9
This article's a crock. There was no mistake whatsoever involved. It was an attack on a hospital -- a war crime. (Yes! Us!!) Usually, the Times likes to play it both ways, having a headline say something, then somewhere within the body is the something else. The story, in other words. It's done all the time.
But in this story, there is no something else. Meanwhile, the Associated Press reported last week (!) that American special operations analysts in Afghanistan had been gathering intelligence on the hospital days before it was destroyed on October 3. The official asserts that the analysts “had assembled a dossier that included maps with the hospital circled,” supposedly because they believed a Pakistani intelligence operative was coordinating Taliban activity from inside the hospital.
NBC News reported (also last week) that “cockpit recordings reveal that the crew actually questioned whether the air strike was legal” amid the five separate strafing runs during the attack. The Daily Beast reported that during classified briefings on Capitol Hill last week, the military withheld both the audio and video from inside the cockpit, “even when a lawmaker directly requested to listen to the audio.”
The attack lasted an hour, hospital personnel were calling the US Army, to no avail.
Sound like a mistake to you?
But in this story, there is no something else. Meanwhile, the Associated Press reported last week (!) that American special operations analysts in Afghanistan had been gathering intelligence on the hospital days before it was destroyed on October 3. The official asserts that the analysts “had assembled a dossier that included maps with the hospital circled,” supposedly because they believed a Pakistani intelligence operative was coordinating Taliban activity from inside the hospital.
NBC News reported (also last week) that “cockpit recordings reveal that the crew actually questioned whether the air strike was legal” amid the five separate strafing runs during the attack. The Daily Beast reported that during classified briefings on Capitol Hill last week, the military withheld both the audio and video from inside the cockpit, “even when a lawmaker directly requested to listen to the audio.”
The attack lasted an hour, hospital personnel were calling the US Army, to no avail.
Sound like a mistake to you?
14
This will all come out in the war crimes trials that have been demanded by Nobel Peace Prize-winner Doctors Without Borders.
Until then, this is all speculation.
Until then, this is all speculation.
3
No it will not come out, because our Nobel Peace Prize-winner president will not allow it.
Purposely attacking a hospital is a war crime. Those who made the decision to attack this hospital, which the American forces knew was a hospital should be prosecuted as war criminals. No wonder the people in the Middle East hate America.
21
The problem with our government is that it has denounced the Biblical principle “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth”
The essence of this Biblical principle is that the punishment has to be proportionate to the crime.
The punishment cannot be worse than the committed crime.
If we denounce the terrorism, we have to be better than the terrorists.
If the terrorists attacked the innocent people in the WTC on the 9/11/2001, our government should be more just and fair than the terrorists. We cannot attack the innocent people.
We shouldn’t have invaded Afghanistan and Iraq because the residents of those two countries have not attacked us on the 9/11 but just the members of Al Qaeda, primarily the handful of Saudi and Egyptian citizens.
The Bush Administration was wrong for two reasons. Firstly, it targeted completely innocent people and secondly, it absolutely overreacted.
Bombing of the hospital in Kunduz was wrong for several reasons.
The civil war in Afghanistan is none of our business. They didn’t attack us so we cannot attack them.
Our Constitution prohibits waging the unauthorized wars. After President
Obama declared that the combat operations in Afghanistan were over, he declared the entire war to be over.
Bombing the hospital in Kunduz was an act of war. The prerequisite was to get new authorization from the US Congress.
When our leaders ignore both the Biblical principles and the US Constitution, no wonder that we end up in the terrible quagmires…
The essence of this Biblical principle is that the punishment has to be proportionate to the crime.
The punishment cannot be worse than the committed crime.
If we denounce the terrorism, we have to be better than the terrorists.
If the terrorists attacked the innocent people in the WTC on the 9/11/2001, our government should be more just and fair than the terrorists. We cannot attack the innocent people.
We shouldn’t have invaded Afghanistan and Iraq because the residents of those two countries have not attacked us on the 9/11 but just the members of Al Qaeda, primarily the handful of Saudi and Egyptian citizens.
The Bush Administration was wrong for two reasons. Firstly, it targeted completely innocent people and secondly, it absolutely overreacted.
Bombing of the hospital in Kunduz was wrong for several reasons.
The civil war in Afghanistan is none of our business. They didn’t attack us so we cannot attack them.
Our Constitution prohibits waging the unauthorized wars. After President
Obama declared that the combat operations in Afghanistan were over, he declared the entire war to be over.
Bombing the hospital in Kunduz was an act of war. The prerequisite was to get new authorization from the US Congress.
When our leaders ignore both the Biblical principles and the US Constitution, no wonder that we end up in the terrible quagmires…
3
Your recommendation of following religious teachings when waging a war, sounds exactly like what the Taliban, ISIS and others do every day, follow the religious teachings from a book.
It has not worked out so well for the planet, when people follow religion in combat. 'In the name of god' has been the rally cry of so many crimes against mankind since time immemorial.
It has not worked out so well for the planet, when people follow religion in combat. 'In the name of god' has been the rally cry of so many crimes against mankind since time immemorial.
1
You left out one other problem: Bombing a hospital is a crime against humanity, punishable by life in prison. If you're wondering who came up with that idea, the answer is the US, in 1945. More recently, the International Criminal Court has gone after Bosnian Serb generals for doing precisely what we did in Afghanistan.
The US is obligated by treaty to do exactly what Doctors Without Borders is demanding that they do. I'm not holding my breath though.
The US is obligated by treaty to do exactly what Doctors Without Borders is demanding that they do. I'm not holding my breath though.
Dave K,
You cannot blame the soldiers for following the orders.
Blame the Commanders-in-Chief that issued the orders to our troops to obey and support the Afghan government.
By pure coincidence, I was on the receiving end of the bestial bombings by the Bosnian Serb generals in Sarajevo for almost three years.
Allow me do disagree with your praise for the International Court of Justice in Hague.
The war lasted less than four years but the trials of the politician that gave the orders have been lasting for longer than a decade.
It’s a mockery of justice. Those appearing in the Court as the defense witnesses should be put on trial as the culprits and accomplices in the war crimes...
Those convicted of the war crimes get less than four hours of prison time per killed civilian.
Radovan Karadzic who was directly responsible for starting a civil war in Bosnia and the ethnic cleansing that murdered about 50,000 people has not been convicted yet, but if he ever is, he might get less than two decades of prison time or 3.50 hours per murdered civilian...
Have you ever been served at the gas station by a convicted war criminal?
Go look for Momcilo Kraijsnik, another creator of the ethnic cleansing concept. He is already a free man while being equally responsible for dozens thousands victims...
You cannot blame the soldiers for following the orders.
Blame the Commanders-in-Chief that issued the orders to our troops to obey and support the Afghan government.
By pure coincidence, I was on the receiving end of the bestial bombings by the Bosnian Serb generals in Sarajevo for almost three years.
Allow me do disagree with your praise for the International Court of Justice in Hague.
The war lasted less than four years but the trials of the politician that gave the orders have been lasting for longer than a decade.
It’s a mockery of justice. Those appearing in the Court as the defense witnesses should be put on trial as the culprits and accomplices in the war crimes...
Those convicted of the war crimes get less than four hours of prison time per killed civilian.
Radovan Karadzic who was directly responsible for starting a civil war in Bosnia and the ethnic cleansing that murdered about 50,000 people has not been convicted yet, but if he ever is, he might get less than two decades of prison time or 3.50 hours per murdered civilian...
Have you ever been served at the gas station by a convicted war criminal?
Go look for Momcilo Kraijsnik, another creator of the ethnic cleansing concept. He is already a free man while being equally responsible for dozens thousands victims...
Misery upon misery is firmly on the heads and hearts of those few individuals who followed orders to fire upon the hospital and on the few who gave the orders. The investigations may pinpoint failures, determine what to improve, repair what can be repaired, while all involved forever grieve the rest.
The hospital shelling is incomprehensible. Warfare doesn't give many breaks, but does provide many tragedies.
The hospital shelling is incomprehensible. Warfare doesn't give many breaks, but does provide many tragedies.
The soldiers, who by now for sure are fully aware of this crime, yes, they will carry this guilt to their graves.
The politicians who ordered it? nope, they did not blink when giving the order, they are going to sleep peacefully tonite, and go on to write a book about it later in life.
Such lions, being led by such sheep.
The politicians who ordered it? nope, they did not blink when giving the order, they are going to sleep peacefully tonite, and go on to write a book about it later in life.
Such lions, being led by such sheep.
So this is their plan: everyone was new to the area and they just didn't know what they were doing. Shoot first, ask questions later. Despicable. Our exceptional country is lying its way to oblivion. Get out of there while the getting is good.
8
"They attributed those problems, in part, to the withdrawal of American forces from northern Afghanistan that has been part of the gradual drawdown of United States forces in the country."
John McCain has a solution for that.
John McCain has a solution for that.
"The American airstrike AGAINST a Doctors Without Borders hospital..."
With this inflammatory and misrepresentative lead, the NYTimes has, once again, transparently prostituted its journalistic integrity in pursuit of its narrative. To imply, based on all of the available information, that American command sat in some situation room somewhere and said "Doctors Without Borders Hospital? Oh yeah! Prime target! Let's kill the sick and wounded and all of those idealistic doctors and nurses who treat 'em. That will help the war effort!" is past ludicrous. It also flies in the face of the facts reported in the NYT, _including_ the very focus of the story.
I am not excusing the tragedy. Your story makes the vivid point of what happens when unfamiliarity meets communication failures. Is the U.S. one of the responsible parties? Without a doubt. Was there an intent to destroy a hospital with volunteer doctors? No.
But a reportorial lead such as "The airstrike which struck..." doesn't fit the editorial narrative of Schmitt, Rosenberg and the NYT - an embarrassing, shameless and sad desertion of journalistic ethics.
With this inflammatory and misrepresentative lead, the NYTimes has, once again, transparently prostituted its journalistic integrity in pursuit of its narrative. To imply, based on all of the available information, that American command sat in some situation room somewhere and said "Doctors Without Borders Hospital? Oh yeah! Prime target! Let's kill the sick and wounded and all of those idealistic doctors and nurses who treat 'em. That will help the war effort!" is past ludicrous. It also flies in the face of the facts reported in the NYT, _including_ the very focus of the story.
I am not excusing the tragedy. Your story makes the vivid point of what happens when unfamiliarity meets communication failures. Is the U.S. one of the responsible parties? Without a doubt. Was there an intent to destroy a hospital with volunteer doctors? No.
But a reportorial lead such as "The airstrike which struck..." doesn't fit the editorial narrative of Schmitt, Rosenberg and the NYT - an embarrassing, shameless and sad desertion of journalistic ethics.
3
It was a hospital. The map and intelligence said it was a hospital. They knew MSF ran the place. MSF called the army mid attack asking them to stop.
They still hit it for 30 minutes, in 5 separate bombing runs.
It does sound like an American airstrike AGAINST a Doctors Without Borders hospital.
They still hit it for 30 minutes, in 5 separate bombing runs.
It does sound like an American airstrike AGAINST a Doctors Without Borders hospital.
1
"Doctors Without Borders Hospital? Oh yeah! Prime target! Let's kill the sick and wounded and all of those idealistic doctors and nurses who treat 'em. That will help the war effort!"
There is significant evidence reported in other major news outlets that suggests that that is exactly what happened. Apparently, they targeted the building because somebody who the hospital was treating was considered an important enough target that they decided that violating international law was acceptable.
There is significant evidence reported in other major news outlets that suggests that that is exactly what happened. Apparently, they targeted the building because somebody who the hospital was treating was considered an important enough target that they decided that violating international law was acceptable.
Mr Shark, what intelligence? Please do not abuse my intelligence! The edifice was attacked because it was a hospital! If it were a Saigon-like brothel used for entertaining/hospitality, articles would be written about it as a symbol of Afghan social advancement, under America tutelage.
This was a mistake by those spec op troops involved in a firefight and a dynamic situation.
The bigger mistake was made by Obama - withdrawing so many troops that we had zero presence in the 5th biggest city in Afghanistan.
So imagine this: we have fought for 15 years in the country at great cost to hold all the major cities. But for some political reason, can't spare a few dozen spec ops capable of leading the Afghan troops and calling in airstrikes to defend the 5th biggest city. This decision was made despite having seen the consequences of similarly having ZERO troops in Mosul - ISIS's takeover.
The bigger mistake was made by Obama - withdrawing so many troops that we had zero presence in the 5th biggest city in Afghanistan.
So imagine this: we have fought for 15 years in the country at great cost to hold all the major cities. But for some political reason, can't spare a few dozen spec ops capable of leading the Afghan troops and calling in airstrikes to defend the 5th biggest city. This decision was made despite having seen the consequences of similarly having ZERO troops in Mosul - ISIS's takeover.
4
Don't blame the President. Blame the commanders who knew it was a hospital but allowed it to be attacked anyway. Attacking hospitals is a war crime.
2
Hey Ray, fifteen years and counting, I guess you like to see it hit twenty, thirty maybe? Obama was elected on the promise of ending Bush's ill considered wars, and thats what he is trying to do. If you're not happy about it, vote republican and we can try another few pointless wars. But remember that the original idea was to punish those responsible for 911, so mission accomplished. By President Obama.
1
@David - you have the mission wrong. The idea was not simply to punish those responsible for 911 - the Taliban and al-Qaeda - but also to eliminate their safe havens and prevent them from ever doing it again. The second part may not be important to you in Portland, but it sure is important to us in NYC.
So the mission is not accomplished, especially now when the Taliban and ISIS/al-Qaeda are resurgent and now hold more territory than at any point before.
So the mission is not accomplished, especially now when the Taliban and ISIS/al-Qaeda are resurgent and now hold more territory than at any point before.
1
th trillion dollar military at work
american clowns will never wake up to th atrocities done in their names
i dont believe in hell but at times like this im sorry there isnt one
american clowns will never wake up to th atrocities done in their names
i dont believe in hell but at times like this im sorry there isnt one
4
The attack on the hospital in Kunduz and the downing of the Malay airliner over Ukraine both are in the same category: Civilians show unrealistic expectations as to the capabilities of armed forces in conflict to tell foes from neutrals.
I don't believe for a moment that either case was intentional murder.
The Malay plane was reckless for flying over a war zone. The airline was cheap for not allowing extra fuel to fly around. The hospital was irresponsible for not labeling the structure with the recognized symbols of a medical facility in a war zone. Just some white and red paint and a bit of work would have done.
I don't believe for a moment that either case was intentional murder.
The Malay plane was reckless for flying over a war zone. The airline was cheap for not allowing extra fuel to fly around. The hospital was irresponsible for not labeling the structure with the recognized symbols of a medical facility in a war zone. Just some white and red paint and a bit of work would have done.
First Group has been doing deployments in the Middle East for years. Yes, their expertise/specialization is in East Asian countries/languages/cultures. But they've been rotating in and out of first Iraq and now Afghanistan regularly since at least 2008. Whatever the reason for this tragic and awful error, I don't think it stemmed from the SF guys somehow not knowing how to operate in that arena.
2
Very useful information not being reported well by government or press. And more direct evidence that an independent investigation is essential(petition needing signatures at change.org or msf.org)
My reading indicates the attack lasted for 30 minutes.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/06/world/asia/afghanistan-kunduz-doctors-...
That is not an accident.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/06/world/asia/afghanistan-kunduz-doctors-...
That is not an accident.
6
I've always believed that if you break something you must fix it or pay for it. Well, we broke the Middle East and unfortunately we've been paying for it ever since with American lives and our tax dollars. But worse, millions of innocent civilians have lost their lives, or their livelihoods, and their future.
How do we fix this? It pains me that with the best of intentions we are still killing civilians, with drone attacks and now this hospital run by the bravest of doctors who are respected world-wide. At the same time our service men and women are still being killed. For what?
I suspect in the end our continued presence will only postpone the inevitable and we will be forced to ask, once again (Vietnam), was it all worth it? To the politicians who leveraged the war into election victories and power, yes, this was worth it...after all they didn't die or have to clean up their mess, and they got their laws passed and their Supreme Court judges in place, but for the rest of us?
How do we fix this? It pains me that with the best of intentions we are still killing civilians, with drone attacks and now this hospital run by the bravest of doctors who are respected world-wide. At the same time our service men and women are still being killed. For what?
I suspect in the end our continued presence will only postpone the inevitable and we will be forced to ask, once again (Vietnam), was it all worth it? To the politicians who leveraged the war into election victories and power, yes, this was worth it...after all they didn't die or have to clean up their mess, and they got their laws passed and their Supreme Court judges in place, but for the rest of us?
11
There is no doubt that Senator Obama would have had a much different reaction to this atrocity than President Obama has. As Commander in Chief, President Obama has failed miserably to protect the people in the Middle East.
BTW, here is an EXCELLENT summary of GW Bush and Obama's approach to the region. It may be the only honest assessment of each President, and it correctly faults GW Bush for his decisions. However, it also states clearly that:
"Obama is enormously flawed, and when it comes to his drone assassination program, a war criminal."
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/06/16/1307252/-GW-Bush-s-Iraq-War-vs-...
The bombing of the MSF hospital was a direct result of President Obama's reliance on poor intelligence and remote attacks, and he should be tried as a war criminal.
BTW, here is an EXCELLENT summary of GW Bush and Obama's approach to the region. It may be the only honest assessment of each President, and it correctly faults GW Bush for his decisions. However, it also states clearly that:
"Obama is enormously flawed, and when it comes to his drone assassination program, a war criminal."
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/06/16/1307252/-GW-Bush-s-Iraq-War-vs-...
The bombing of the MSF hospital was a direct result of President Obama's reliance on poor intelligence and remote attacks, and he should be tried as a war criminal.
6
This story reminds me of that rogue bunch of Blackwater security "contractors" that laid siege to an Iraqi town square because they had the guns and the loose command mandate of "go out and kill" and the US will protect you, so they did.
In the media, the terrorists we're fighting are often portrayed as loosely affiliated but not necessarily under any one particular command, rather a general ideology that pushes them all in the same general destructive direction. After reading this, it sounds as if our supposedly highly structured and well-organized military apparatus isn't really any different, other than being thousands of times more destructive. Under the general ideology of "fight terror", and without any cohesive and definitive direction or concrete subject or object, anything and everything is fair game.
From that lost perspective, this whole "war" was lost from the beginning.
In the media, the terrorists we're fighting are often portrayed as loosely affiliated but not necessarily under any one particular command, rather a general ideology that pushes them all in the same general destructive direction. After reading this, it sounds as if our supposedly highly structured and well-organized military apparatus isn't really any different, other than being thousands of times more destructive. Under the general ideology of "fight terror", and without any cohesive and definitive direction or concrete subject or object, anything and everything is fair game.
From that lost perspective, this whole "war" was lost from the beginning.
4
It may not have been the best or most defensible humanitarian decision to treat numbers of wounded Taliban fighters allowing them to get back into action killing, harassing and terrorizing defenseless local civilians in a lawless city. If Taliban are present in and around a facility, then the Taliban are in control, and they are liable to keep doing what they came to the city to do, regardless of 'orders' from unarmed MSF staff.
1
It's entirely defensible and especially in terms of humanitarian decisions. MSF mission is "Medical aid where it is needed most. Independent. Neutral. Impartial".
btw: the Taliban are in many places, but that does not mean they are in control, hence the ongoing and deadly conflicts.
btw: the Taliban are in many places, but that does not mean they are in control, hence the ongoing and deadly conflicts.
Yet another story made up of anonymous leaks and unidentified spokesmen to float yet another story about what happened. But hey, congress has enough on it's plate investigating Benghazi.
5
Fueled? How silly. War is a dangerous business, in addition to the planned killing, accidents happen all the time. To think 'accidents' happen in war is to not understand what war is really about. The 'fog' of war will never be lifted.
2
The fact that accidents happen in war kind of suggests why it was stupid for us to roll on into Iraq behind a pack of lies and lousy planning,mwouldn't you say?
2
Hospital Attack Fueled by Units New to Kunduz
Fueled? That strikes me as an odd and unfortunate choice because it seems to make the soldiers themselves the source of the problem--not inadequate rules of operation, training or safeguards.
Well, it does matter to have an explanation, but it's not an excuse.
Fueled? That strikes me as an odd and unfortunate choice because it seems to make the soldiers themselves the source of the problem--not inadequate rules of operation, training or safeguards.
Well, it does matter to have an explanation, but it's not an excuse.
8
I didn't think President Obama could demean the Nobel Peace Prize any more than he has over the last several years, but with this attack he has indeed done so. If there is any illusion that the United States cares about any of the peoples in the Middle East, this attack should dispel it. The U.S. is all about oil and pipelines. Plus turning obscene profits on military expenditures for their own sake.
13
It might be good to get a map, locate Afghanistan, and figure out where the Mideast actually is. I'd also be innarested in knowing just where the country's oil fields are.
Good grief. I'd thought that poll I saw that said about 20% of Americans were angry about Putin's seizing Crimea because they thought Crimea was someplace in the American Midwest, but I now see that I was wrong.
Good grief. I'd thought that poll I saw that said about 20% of Americans were angry about Putin's seizing Crimea because they thought Crimea was someplace in the American Midwest, but I now see that I was wrong.
1
Screw-ups, , confusion, friendly fire incidents, bad targeting are unintended consequences of war. The one sure way to avoid them is not be there in the first place."... it does not look like this attack can be blamed on the Taliban." Oh really? They did not initiate a fire fight in Kunduz. Calling what happened a War Crime is a stretch. The hospital was not a deliberate target.
It is time to disengage and bring our troops home. In Afghanistan what will be, will be, no matter what we attempt.
It is time to disengage and bring our troops home. In Afghanistan what will be, will be, no matter what we attempt.
1
Reports are they aimed for and hit the target hit.
Pathetic pro forma excuses frm a set script written long ago. Parrot.
Pathetic pro forma excuses frm a set script written long ago. Parrot.
1
Given that his argument is that this isn't a war crime, just a sad consequence of war, and given that he goes on to say we ought to stop this one now, I'd say thatvhe's not the guy parroting a script.
1
You were right on exactly two points. This was very clearly an intentional war crime against a hospital that was already known to the US and terrorized by "anti-terror" Afghans[1], and against an organization that opposes the horrible US- and Obama-backed TPP[2]; no way this was accidental or unintended.
Still, indeed "The one sure way to avoid [war crimes in Afghanistan] is not be there in the first place" and "It is time to disengage and bring our troops home."
[1] http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/07/02/us-afghanistan-hospital-idUSKC...
[2] http://campaigns.msf.ca/tpp/
Still, indeed "The one sure way to avoid [war crimes in Afghanistan] is not be there in the first place" and "It is time to disengage and bring our troops home."
[1] http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/07/02/us-afghanistan-hospital-idUSKC...
[2] http://campaigns.msf.ca/tpp/
1
Do a little research. Hospitals are not always immune from attack per the laws of land warfare including the Geneva Conventions. For one thing they should be clearly marked, e.g. a red cross or red crescent on the roof, which this place was reportedly not. For example see:
http://www.crimesofwar.org/a-z-guide/immunity-from-attack/
"With hospitals, the situation is more complicated since they are permitted to keep armed guards on their grounds. But immunity from attack can be lost if the people or objects are used to commit acts that are harmful to one side in a conflict."
http://www.crimesofwar.org/a-z-guide/immunity-from-attack/
"With hospitals, the situation is more complicated since they are permitted to keep armed guards on their grounds. But immunity from attack can be lost if the people or objects are used to commit acts that are harmful to one side in a conflict."
4
@ez
So you are blaming the hospital for not having a red cross or red crescent on it? Wow...
So you are blaming the hospital for not having a red cross or red crescent on it? Wow...
2
@ez is not blaming the victim but pointing out another element for the cottage industry of analyses that will be performed here. In the end, no one will be satisfied with the recommendations made unless there is a show trial, which will not happen, and some hangings, which will not happen.
I said "for one thing" - what other things were involved? Why don't we wait for the impartial investigation called for by the Doctors without Borders (if one is held) to determine the facts before condemning our military and calling it a war crime. The article references allegation of other things like "the Taliban were fighting from the hospital". Perhaps the Doctors without Borders were between a rock and a hard place and had to co-operate with the Taliban who had controlled Kunduz in the past and will likely do so in the future.
Give all the females in Afghanistan a green card or visa to Germany and let the ones that want to leave, leave, and tell the males to stay. Let them figure it out. The females have to wait ten years to sponsor the men. Then for once females will be worth something in that part of the world. After a year in AFG involved with the insanity on the ground and watching the horrible and violent misogyny of that culture, this seemed to be the only solution
5
Good Grief. The MSF hospital GPS coordinates should have been in a central data base and there should have been a standard protocol in place to check this before any targeted mission was approved anywhere in the world.
Where the troops came from is completely irrelevant,and this kind of mission should have required high level approval.
And why did it take Obama so long to even acknowledge that US planes had bombed the hospital? As commander-in-chief he should have known who was responsible within hours of the strike.
Aside from the horrific tragedy itself, this raises serious questions about how military attacks are ordered, planned and approved.
Where the troops came from is completely irrelevant,and this kind of mission should have required high level approval.
And why did it take Obama so long to even acknowledge that US planes had bombed the hospital? As commander-in-chief he should have known who was responsible within hours of the strike.
Aside from the horrific tragedy itself, this raises serious questions about how military attacks are ordered, planned and approved.
14
That's such a pitiful comment that everyone from Carter down should lose their stars. A hospital is a hospital. Do you think they could understand that. And when the hospital called and said Stop Bombing Our Hospital one would think they could understand that.
How dumb are these people who run the Cheney/Obama wars. A kid playing a computer war game understands Hospital. But No...!
The only intelligent move made by us and any of our so-called indebted allies was this morning when Trudeau said Canada would no longer bomb ISIS.
Schmitt & Rosenberg used to be excellent journalists. Who twisted them? I'm tired of being taken for stupid by politicians, the Intelligence machine, and the media.
How dumb are these people who run the Cheney/Obama wars. A kid playing a computer war game understands Hospital. But No...!
The only intelligent move made by us and any of our so-called indebted allies was this morning when Trudeau said Canada would no longer bomb ISIS.
Schmitt & Rosenberg used to be excellent journalists. Who twisted them? I'm tired of being taken for stupid by politicians, the Intelligence machine, and the media.
6
America is not a country of law any longer.
In a country of law there is a rule of law. The people and elected officials obey the Constitution.
The Constitution prohibits launching any war without the Congressional approval.
Any airstrike is considered an act of war. Any airstrike has to be approved by the Congress.
No President can authorized the airstrikes. Actually, the presidents can authorize the airstrikes but in a country of law they would be impeached promptly.
Why?
By attacking the foreign countries the President incites the locals to hate and attack America in revenge. It’s Biblical principle “An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth”.
We cannot have the American elected officials inciting the foreigners to attack our country without Congressional approval. The Constitution authorized the Congress to decide whether the war is in our best national interests, not any President.
There cannot be a Congressional blank check to the president to attack any country he wished.
We learned very painfully that President Bush attacked Iraq without any justification, thus permanently destabilizing the entire Middle East.
After such a colossal blunder the Congress should have revoked any open-ended authorization to bomb the foreign countries.
Since the White House bombed the civilians across the Middle East, Asia and Africa many, many times and nobody cares about the US Constitution, it’s obvious that we are not a country of law any longer...
In a country of law there is a rule of law. The people and elected officials obey the Constitution.
The Constitution prohibits launching any war without the Congressional approval.
Any airstrike is considered an act of war. Any airstrike has to be approved by the Congress.
No President can authorized the airstrikes. Actually, the presidents can authorize the airstrikes but in a country of law they would be impeached promptly.
Why?
By attacking the foreign countries the President incites the locals to hate and attack America in revenge. It’s Biblical principle “An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth”.
We cannot have the American elected officials inciting the foreigners to attack our country without Congressional approval. The Constitution authorized the Congress to decide whether the war is in our best national interests, not any President.
There cannot be a Congressional blank check to the president to attack any country he wished.
We learned very painfully that President Bush attacked Iraq without any justification, thus permanently destabilizing the entire Middle East.
After such a colossal blunder the Congress should have revoked any open-ended authorization to bomb the foreign countries.
Since the White House bombed the civilians across the Middle East, Asia and Africa many, many times and nobody cares about the US Constitution, it’s obvious that we are not a country of law any longer...
3
This is no excuse. If you can't run your military operations well enough to avoid a murderous airstrike on a neutral hospital, then you shouldn't be running the operation at all. Did this article mention that the MSF called and reported that they were being bombed, but that the bombing continued for 30 minutes? Or did I miss that part? Is that going to be blamed on units from other parts of Asia as well?
If we were an Asian country, the person responsible would be stepping down, apologizing, and on a suicide watch over this. In the US we don't even do the stepping down and honestly apologizing part. I think we should try that.
I hope nobody is trying to justify this kind of military action by claiming that its purpose is keeping Americans safe. In fanning the flames of anger against the US - justified anger in this case - it clearly does exactly the opposite.
If we were an Asian country, the person responsible would be stepping down, apologizing, and on a suicide watch over this. In the US we don't even do the stepping down and honestly apologizing part. I think we should try that.
I hope nobody is trying to justify this kind of military action by claiming that its purpose is keeping Americans safe. In fanning the flames of anger against the US - justified anger in this case - it clearly does exactly the opposite.
18
This sounds like bad management within the armed forces and pushing the blame down the chain of command.
If troops are rotated out then proper training is required.
The suggestion that more troops are required is using the same old military justification.
If the US military complex has its way, troop levels would be higher along with the number of dead US soldiers.
We must not forget the HUGE costs the US has already incurred and continues to incur.
If troops are rotated out then proper training is required.
The suggestion that more troops are required is using the same old military justification.
If the US military complex has its way, troop levels would be higher along with the number of dead US soldiers.
We must not forget the HUGE costs the US has already incurred and continues to incur.
3
This is a case for De Hague, whether the US likes it or not. Someone will have to be indicted and end up in jail. Medcin sans Frontiere are never going to this slide.
2
This is just further evidence that American forces do not belong in Afghanistan, despite requests from the Afghani government. Mr. Obama has caved to military advisers and we all will pay the price. Sometimes American force can do more harm than good. Sure, Taliban and ISIS are horrible realities for the people of the region. But our collateral damage has caused too much harm already. Time to remove all troops from places where we do more harm than good, regardless of the handwringing by the chattering nabobs of negativity. Remember Vietnam?
11
Wow, we have never had this kind of lie before:
"And all of a sudden a hospital, that had been there for years, appeared in the place we wanted to put some bombs on"
Sorry, but that lie does not make the war crime any better.
The US did know the location well, the hospital did not suddenly appear out of nowhere and the aim was to kill suspected fighters in the hospital, accepting massive collateral damage in the case.
The US knew they were attacking a hospital and still went for it.
This is a war crime and nothing else.
Time to send the US commanders to The Hague to stand trial.
And that also includes the Commander in Chief and his generals.
It does not make any difference for the killed people who and why the bombs had been dropped.
Dead is dead and no lie will change that.
"And all of a sudden a hospital, that had been there for years, appeared in the place we wanted to put some bombs on"
Sorry, but that lie does not make the war crime any better.
The US did know the location well, the hospital did not suddenly appear out of nowhere and the aim was to kill suspected fighters in the hospital, accepting massive collateral damage in the case.
The US knew they were attacking a hospital and still went for it.
This is a war crime and nothing else.
Time to send the US commanders to The Hague to stand trial.
And that also includes the Commander in Chief and his generals.
It does not make any difference for the killed people who and why the bombs had been dropped.
Dead is dead and no lie will change that.
19
Why wasn't there a protective emblem (red cross or red crescent) on the roof of the hospital? Unfamiliar or not with the terrain, seeing a visible sign that the building was a hospital might have saved 22 lives.
5
They were following orders so I doubt it would have made a difference if they saw a cross, soldiers not following orders are few and far between and more often castigated and punished than praised for speaking out. Anyway, anyone can paint a red cross what is important is the actual physical coordinates for a verified 'protected' area. Plus given that ambulances, the red cross and red crescent, journalists have been attacked and killed with clearly visible markers and identification I doubt a red cross would have made a difference. The lack of a cross should certainly not figure in any excuse, especially as army had the coordinates and were even called by the hospital while it was happening but continued to bomb for more than half an hour.
1
Seems high level authorization to bomb a hospital is OK because it might be harboring bad guys with guns (most likely our guns). As though we have any idea what constitutes a good guy or a bad guy in this part of the world. We all know that no one high up the chain of command will be held responsible. Mistakes were made. Stuff happens. Sorry.
2
From all the comments I guess most of you just didn't bother to read the part that the hospital has been used as a base of operations for Taliban fighters. I bet the Special Forces group were being attacked from the hospital and called in the airstrike with just cause. You and everyone on this comment board have nowhere the expertise, skill or intelligence to make it in the Special Forces. These aren't just regular Joes. They are highly intelligent and motivated individuals. You people want to watch them burn without even hearing their side of the story. Typical fashion of the ignorant. Even though the enemy they've been fighting have been known to use non target zones/buildings like this to their advantage. They hide behind the civilian population and use them as shields. Yet we put all the blame on the Special Forces group.
7
Don't know your views on this sort of thing being done by other countries/other U.S. administrations, so not replying to you specifically. However, find it interesting how many people find excuses/reasons for the things this administration does that would be unacceptable if another country/administration did them.
2
Odd, then, that you seem to have no prob with their opening fire on a hospital without checking first.
By the way, nobody in the military's saying that our troops were takong fire.
By the way, nobody in the military's saying that our troops were takong fire.
4
"Since the strike, a number of Afghan officials, including Masoom Stanekzai, the acting defense minister, have publicly claimed that the Taliban were fighting from the hospital, and that the insurgents were storing heavy weapons there. There has also been talk of operatives from Pakistan’s main spy agency, the Directorate of Inter-Services Intelligence, using the hospital as a base from which to help direct Taliban fighters in Kunduz."
The men on the ground have yet to talk about what was going on there and the transcript between them and the C-130 has not been released yet. I am going off of speculation that the Special Forces Group were under attack from that hospital. I would give them the benefit of the doubt before I crucify them. If they are proven to act in malice or made an error of judgement then my opinion will change. I am not going to sit here and act like I was in the sandbox with them and play Monday morning quarterback. People on here act like they know the enemy, spend their livelihood training and gathering intelligence on the said enemy. This actually reminds me of that movie Rules of Engagement. People around the world wants to crucify these men and politicians wants to lay all the blame on someone else's feet due to public pressure.
The men on the ground have yet to talk about what was going on there and the transcript between them and the C-130 has not been released yet. I am going off of speculation that the Special Forces Group were under attack from that hospital. I would give them the benefit of the doubt before I crucify them. If they are proven to act in malice or made an error of judgement then my opinion will change. I am not going to sit here and act like I was in the sandbox with them and play Monday morning quarterback. People on here act like they know the enemy, spend their livelihood training and gathering intelligence on the said enemy. This actually reminds me of that movie Rules of Engagement. People around the world wants to crucify these men and politicians wants to lay all the blame on someone else's feet due to public pressure.
1
The problem is that MSF had given the coordinates of the hospital to the US military days before the attack. Therefore, whether or not the troops in the area were new to the area is irrelevant. I guess this is the new trial balloon, full of lead just like the ones before.
16
This is what can transpire as a desperate Rome finds itself in decline. Sic transit gloria mundi.
It was "APPROVED" by our government, a government who assassinates people around the world without a trial or verified evidence. What a joke of an article, another side stepping the real issue of how immoral our government has truly become, disgraceful.
11
As Trump would say STUPID STUPID STUPID.
The buck stops with the President. Obama should accept responsibiity and RESIGN. (only chance for Biden to be president though for only a year)
The buck stops with the President. Obama should accept responsibiity and RESIGN. (only chance for Biden to be president though for only a year)
2
No doubt you also advocated Reagan's resigning after the Marine barracks bombing killed 241, Bush I resigning after we shot down that civilian airliner and killed over 300 Iranian civilians, Bush II resigning after Tora Bora...
1
This article fails to explain why the newly reassigned Afghan and US units were incapable of noting MSF's GPS coordinates, which were provided to them multiple times in the week prior to the intentional shelling of the hospital, or why they failed to stop during the hour long calls to local and DC based personnel. Someone is apparently still not telling the truth, and Obama should be pressing them everyday to do so.
26
Was there a visual and large Red Cross on the roof of the hospital? I have not seen a photo of one. I thought that was common for medical facilities in war zones.
2
Predictable.
Strategic incompetence with a legacy goal of withdrawal led to tactical incompetence, no "what if Mosul" capacity, so when a few attacked and the many ran, panic came down on the unprepared, who then committed a war crime.
ABC.
But neither the no war crowd or the war forever crowd are interested in seeing the obvious.
They care about their narcissisms, not reality, not foreign policy. Not the dead in the Kunduz hospital. Those dead are just useful to the pre chosen story. Like all the other dead, the deaths only matter to serve the narcissism. America's best and brightest.
Strategic incompetence with a legacy goal of withdrawal led to tactical incompetence, no "what if Mosul" capacity, so when a few attacked and the many ran, panic came down on the unprepared, who then committed a war crime.
ABC.
But neither the no war crowd or the war forever crowd are interested in seeing the obvious.
They care about their narcissisms, not reality, not foreign policy. Not the dead in the Kunduz hospital. Those dead are just useful to the pre chosen story. Like all the other dead, the deaths only matter to serve the narcissism. America's best and brightest.
2
The problem with getting old is that one has seen it all before. I have only one comment. Vietnam.
We have long since lost this mess in Afghanistan. Wasted $2T of my hard earned taxes. Achieved nothing.
Time to hand out a bunch of medals, declare victory and get the hell out. And the sooner the better.
Obama is like Bush. A Boy Scout who wants to look tough. And doesn't scare anyone over there.
We have long since lost this mess in Afghanistan. Wasted $2T of my hard earned taxes. Achieved nothing.
Time to hand out a bunch of medals, declare victory and get the hell out. And the sooner the better.
Obama is like Bush. A Boy Scout who wants to look tough. And doesn't scare anyone over there.
32
Peter, I agree, we need to pull our troops out now. Any more deaths of our troops will be in vain.
But I disagree with equating Obama to Bush. Bush left Obama a mess and Obama has spent the last six years trying to clean it up and leave, but the Middle East is a tar pit that is almost impossible to escape, as Mr. Putin will soon learn.
But I disagree with equating Obama to Bush. Bush left Obama a mess and Obama has spent the last six years trying to clean it up and leave, but the Middle East is a tar pit that is almost impossible to escape, as Mr. Putin will soon learn.
1
I know that as good U.S. State Dept. employees Schmitt and Rosenberg want to proceed cover for the U.S. government.
But the hospital attack was a WAR CRIME that must be prosecuted, and someone, an American, must go to prison.
But the hospital attack was a WAR CRIME that must be prosecuted, and someone, an American, must go to prison.
28
I am quite confident that a few weeks after the press coverage has died down, the military will issue a report similar to the one they issued after, to use their terminology, investigating, the attack that killed two Reuters journalists in Baghdad, or the attacks on Al Jazeera reporters, and so on, that the attack was permitted by the rules of engagement. As Nick Turse would say, those rules can be succinctly condensed into Kill Anything That Moves.
30
Or, as they did in the incident in Italy when a US aircraft cut some cable car cable and killed some 20 or people, that they are ohh so sorry that the video of the aircraft was not available any more and the pilots would be charged with ignorance of duty and be discharged from the air force.
But otherwise no harm done.
This is a clear case for a war crimes tribunal.
But otherwise no harm done.
This is a clear case for a war crimes tribunal.
2
Had it not been for the presence of Doctors W/O Borders, this whole issue would have been swept under the rug, and chalked up to "terrorist propaganda". What I have learned is no matter how bad the news, how immoral the act, no matter how unreliable the source, somehow America is behind it and supporting it. America and Washington are no longer one in the same, what runs Washington is wholly immoral and destructive, has has not anything to do with the American people and our desires or principals.
2
The excuse is that these people were not used to working with each other? That doesn't fly, and if accepted will become precedent for more hasty decisions in which the parties will not feel the need to establish the realities before they loose their destruction on innocents.
Incompetence is never an excuse for killing.
Incompetence is never an excuse for killing.
40
We the People are complacent. So They the War mongers keep killing in the Name of We the People.
21
" was approved by American Special Operations Forces normally assigned to other parts of Asia"
I don't get this. Does the word "hospital" have a different meaning in "other parts of Asia"?
If there ever is a lame excuse this is one.
I don't get this. Does the word "hospital" have a different meaning in "other parts of Asia"?
If there ever is a lame excuse this is one.
76
This article provides information about who asked for the strike. It is my understanding that high level Army leaders approve strikes. Why is the leader who approve this strike and what information did this person have?
17
Just another twist to "the fog of war" excuse.
21
So we'll "investigate", make a report, make a weak apology, pay off those who were hurt, and continue as usual. More war and more military involvement in the quagmire we've created. More mistakes, more grudges and more recruits for "terrorist" groups. To those fighting against us, this bombing and the killing of other civilians by Americans must look a lot like the way ISIS killings look to us. Except we're in their country.
45
There still seems to be a question of who is responsible.
My list starts with President Obama and every other politician down the line who still supports this macabre and criminal folly.
My list starts with President Obama and every other politician down the line who still supports this macabre and criminal folly.
41
Wouldn't it be the central question put to all presidential candidates? How much killing of innocents is worth the candle? Who really cares what the republican candidates say? Leave it to the General Staff is their only response. What do the democratic candidates have to say?
9
Our complicit media will never ask a question, THEY DON"T WANT ANSWERED. That is the real evil of our media, its not what they say, but what they don't say, or in this case, don't ask.
3
As I said before, there was panic at the political repercussions of the fall of Kunduz.
6
Panic? What would the perpetrators say about "panic" if it was a group of woman, or third world types who pulled this massive gaff. Oh, I guess it's ok, the big strong, wise masters of war simply panicked? Is that what we pay them the big bucks for?
1
The AP has reported that American tanks have now destroyed evidence at the hospital. Why no mention of this?
50
You will also notice that the Times has given zero coverage to the extensive drones warfare leak published by The Intercept. The reason is quite clear: minimize negative exposure. We cannot have reporters running around, doing unauthorized reporting now, can we?
39
A main reason why I know longer rely on the NYT for news coverage, but rather the "news"/perspectives they want us to read - especially when it comes to the "establishment". NYT just about always wants to lead us towards a specific viewpoint, highlighting one while obscuring another.
Destroying evidence during or before an investigation can be made, especially when innocent, vulnerable human lives have been targeted and killed is NOT good foreign policy, and isn't becoming of a Nobel Peace Prize winner (or a even a human being, for that matter).
Destroying evidence during or before an investigation can be made, especially when innocent, vulnerable human lives have been targeted and killed is NOT good foreign policy, and isn't becoming of a Nobel Peace Prize winner (or a even a human being, for that matter).
7
That was reported on a number of days ago here in Europe – days – and I struggled to find this reported in the American media (and, yes, out of curiosity, I looked through a number of leading American newspaper sites – either there was no mention of this, or it was buried in the site).
It’s stating the obvious, but Americans are patently Not getting the news (from their own news sources and media) that We are getting in the rest of the world. Consequently, when added to a general ‘Fortress America’ mindset, Americans now seem to know ever less about the rest of the world – a direct consequence of which has seen the rise of jingoistic, populist idiots to the fore of the hijacked Republican party, in particular, while the Democrats don’t exactly seem able to be able to pinpoint Paris on a map either.
In this context, with America having been widely reported in the international media of having clumsily crunched with a tank back into the hospital it attacked – thus potentially destroying crucial evidence of American forces’ attack (reports claim that the tank was carrying investigators, which almost makes it a parody) – comes as no surprise, unfortunately.
As we watch this kind of Keystone Cops behaviour, it would be almost laughable except that A) Lots of people were killed, with several patients burning to death in their beds, and B) America Never, Ever gets held to account for these endless 'Oopsies', which then play right into terrorists’ and extremists’ hands.
It’s stating the obvious, but Americans are patently Not getting the news (from their own news sources and media) that We are getting in the rest of the world. Consequently, when added to a general ‘Fortress America’ mindset, Americans now seem to know ever less about the rest of the world – a direct consequence of which has seen the rise of jingoistic, populist idiots to the fore of the hijacked Republican party, in particular, while the Democrats don’t exactly seem able to be able to pinpoint Paris on a map either.
In this context, with America having been widely reported in the international media of having clumsily crunched with a tank back into the hospital it attacked – thus potentially destroying crucial evidence of American forces’ attack (reports claim that the tank was carrying investigators, which almost makes it a parody) – comes as no surprise, unfortunately.
As we watch this kind of Keystone Cops behaviour, it would be almost laughable except that A) Lots of people were killed, with several patients burning to death in their beds, and B) America Never, Ever gets held to account for these endless 'Oopsies', which then play right into terrorists’ and extremists’ hands.
4