# Is this a war crime?



## Warrigal (Oct 4, 2015)

Medicins Sans Frontiers (doctors without borders) is the international charity that I support with a regular monthly donation. I admire what they do and the way that they do not allow any government or group to dictate to them about who they will help or treat. They are doctors, and they treat those who need their help and rather than compromise their ideals, they will pull out of a region if they are under pressure to deny treatment to particular classes or tribes.

Like Switzerland and the Red Cross, they are politically neutral.

It is particularly shocking to me that in Kunduz, Afghanistan, the hospital that they were operating was bombed by coalition (? American, ? Afghan) forces, destroying the hospital and killing at least 22 people, including 3 children, who were burned in their beds. Even more people were badly injured. The location of the hospital, including its GPS co-ordinates was known to the coalition forces and once the attack began, authorities were contacted to alert them to the fact that a hospital was being hit but the attack continued for over 30 minutes, destroying the hospital completely. MSF has now left the area because they can no longer serve the people there.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/d...n-were-firing-afghan-hospital-hit-air-n438251


----------



## Falcon (Oct 4, 2015)

Those two groups are at the opposite ends of the thinking mechanism.


----------



## WhatInThe (Oct 4, 2015)

Depends on intent and who ordered regardless of existing information about that hospital. This was supposed to be an Afghanee operation with US advisers. The Afghanees still insist they were being fired on from the building. What the US advisers did or did not do is the question. Also includes training or lack there of on giving civilians priority even though the enemy close by.


----------



## Ralphy1 (Oct 5, 2015)

Unfortunately, collateral damage rears its ugly head on a regular basis...


----------



## Shalimar (Oct 5, 2015)

MSF is the organisation for which my nephew works. We are still waiting to here if anyone he knows was killed or injured.


----------



## Debby (Oct 5, 2015)

Well let's hope there is a truly independent investigation and that they get to the bottom of this and that the families of the dead are compensated for their loss.  Won't bring those people back or erase the horror of the memory of how they died but they deserve something other than bad memories.


----------



## Warrigal (Oct 5, 2015)

A full account of the state of current knowledge of this tragedy

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/10/05/asia/afghanistan-doctors-without-borders-hospital/


----------



## Ralphy1 (Oct 5, 2015)

I am sure some money will be doled out as that is how we usually handle these mistakes...


----------



## Warrigal (Oct 5, 2015)

Mistake or war crime? That is the question.


----------



## Ralphy1 (Oct 5, 2015)

How can it be a war crime?  A general has just said that Afghan forces called for an air strike and we responded.  Just the "fog" of war as they say...


----------



## Warrigal (Oct 5, 2015)

Bullshit Ralphy. That rationale won't work in these days of GPS accuracy and "smart" bombs.


----------



## Ralphy1 (Oct 5, 2015)

Sorry but that's what happened.  Our "highly" trained and expensive Afghan allies blew it.  We must have thought that they were ready to make this kind of call and, obviously, they were not...


----------



## Davey Jones (Oct 5, 2015)

They are in a war zone AND there was the question of ISIS wound members being treated and/or hiding nearby, if that's true then it is a target.


----------



## Warrigal (Oct 5, 2015)

Terror and death rained down on a hospital in the middle of the night, and it was no accident. Patients in ICU were burning in their beds.
The staff that were killed were all Afghans. Way to win the hearts and minds of the local people. No wonder some prefer life under the Taliban.



> Afghan President Ashraf Ghani said the Nato force in his country had apologised for the bombing of the hospital.
> The Nato alliance has admitted its forces may have hit the hospital. NATO? Read US air strikes.
> 
> At least 37 people were seriously injured, 19 of them MSF staff. The testimony of the surviving MSF staff should get a hearing in an international court.
> ...


----------



## Warrigal (Oct 5, 2015)

Davey Jones said:


> They are in a war zone AND there was the question of ISIS wound members being treated and/or hiding nearby, if that's true then it is a target.



First of all, it's the Taliban not ISIS in Afghanistan, and organisations like the Red Cross and MSF do not belong to one side or the other in a war zone. They treat anyone who is wounded. They have always maintained absolute neutrality and civilised countries respect this policy.

Second, MSF denies that the Taliban were hiding in the hospital and I believe their spokesmen. MSF has a policy of pulling out in such a situation. They are fiercely independent and refuse to be used by any side or any government for advantage. This is the reason why I decided to support them with regular donations.

The air strikes concentrated on one particular building and left others in the compound alone. That building was the hospital itself. That is a war crime and has been for over a century. In this case there is no possibility of claiming that it was an accident. The only fog of war operating here is the smokescreen of phoney rationalisations being thrown around.

From the BBC http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-34440965


----------



## WhatInThe (Oct 5, 2015)

Warrigal said:


> Bullshit Ralphy. That rationale won't work in these days of GPS accuracy and "smart" bombs.



For much of the US & allied arsenal anyway. Who called the strike and why is where this chain of events started. If someone insisted regardless of information visible or existing intelligence that this was a medical facility there is the blame. Fog of war or negligence is a possibility.

Side issue. Many are complaining about Russia's use of 'dumb' bombs in Syria speaking of smart bombs.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...bs-making-syria-air-war-even-more-brutal.html


----------



## Warrigal (Oct 5, 2015)

Bombs are never good for the people under them.


----------



## Butterfly (Oct 5, 2015)

Warrigal said:


> Bombs are never good for the people under them.



Neither is the Taliban.


----------



## WhatInThe (Oct 5, 2015)

One of the biggest questions for me is again don't they still use a banner or flag with the medical symbol or a red cross. Besides being on a list how was this facility identified.


----------



## Grumpy Ol' Man (Oct 5, 2015)

Respectfully, there will be many disagree with my take on this.  Sorry....

First, it does appear as if the air strike was called in by the Afghans who said they were taking fire from the facility.  Islamic terrorists, Taliban included, have shown no respect for human life.  If live fire was coming from the facility, it would have been safe to assume the Taliban had overrun the hospital... killed the "good guys"... and were using it to advance their move into the city.  If live fire is coming from a location, with the history of the terrorist organizations, take out the target.

Next, if there was a call that live fire was coming from this location and the "Afghan" had called in an air strike, how was it assured those Afghans hadn't either been held hostage by Taliban or been "turned".  They may well have purposely called in the strike simply to make the U.S. look bad in hopes we would be exiled and they could rest their slaughter on more innocents.

And, here's where I'll catch the flak....  I feel it extremely idiotic and just plain stupid for an organization such as Doctors Without Borders to set up a facility in a country that is home to a large Islamic terrorist organization.  In fact, I have no idea why these people will push to put innocent Americans in any of these Third World countries.  The dollars we spend in aid to these countries should assure that not one ill or injured person go without proper care from their own.  Instead of making sure our foreign aid dollars go to feeding and clothing and healing those in need, we see dictator after dictator live in gold gilded palaces and dine daily on caviar.  Instead of seeing that the billions we hand out actually assist the people in need, we simply pay it as bribes to corrupt leaders and corrupt governments.  Keep Americans home and let the innocents die, until we have the means to deliver the dollars to educate their own to be the health care workers.  
Anyone who volunteers to bring humanitarian aid to these countries housing the terrorist organizations is taking their life in their own hands.  If it isn't death by an error in calling in an air strike, it is apt to be by car bomb or beheading or by being burned alive.


----------



## Warrigal (Oct 5, 2015)

My responses in blue.



Grumpy Ol' Man said:


> Respectfully, there will be many disagree with my take on this.  Sorry....
> 
> I'm one of them, obviously, and I've tried to explain my reasons in blue.
> 
> ...


----------



## Shalimar (Oct 5, 2015)

Thank you Warri. My nephew works for this organisation. Perhaps The other poster is unaware of the fact that Medicin Sans Frontiers was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1999. No, they are not an American organisation. Assumptions are not the same as facts. People need to do their homework. Americans are not the only humanitarians.


----------



## Warrigal (Oct 6, 2015)

The US military has changed its story four times in four days.



> Doctors Without Borders airstrike: US alters story for fourth time in four days  Commander of war in Afghanistan tells Senate panel that US forces had called in airstrike at Afghan request – ‘an admission of a war crime’ says MSF chief.
> 
> General John Campbell says the airstrike was the result of a ‘US decision’.
> 
> ...


----------



## AZ Jim (Oct 6, 2015)

War crimes can only occur in a declared war.  If they could occur in a case like the mess of these muslim extremests don't you thing all those beheadings would qualify.  There are no rules in this conflict and accidents always happen in combat.


----------



## Shalimar (Oct 6, 2015)

Can we say possible coverup? Bring on the independent inquiry. America should be no more exempt from investigation than any other country. I stand with MSF at this time.


----------



## RadishRose (Oct 6, 2015)

There may be a cover up and if so, let's get at the truth, but I want to agree with Jim; no "war" crime if war is not declared. 

Shali has anyone said America _should_ be exempt? Just wondering why your stating it should not be; thanks.


----------



## Shalimar (Oct 6, 2015)

Rose, my term "should" referenced the belief that even the "good guys" should be subject to impartial investigation. Because of global politics, that is not always easy to achieve. Perhaps I could have been more specific.


----------



## Debby (Oct 6, 2015)

RadishRose said:


> There may be a cover up and if so, let's get at the truth, but I want to agree with Jim; no "war" crime if war is not declared.
> 
> Shali has anyone said America _should_ be exempt? Just wondering why your stating it should not be; thanks.




It seems to me that the key word in Shalimar's post is an 'independent' investigation.  The fox should never investigate who stole and ate the chickens right?  I think I read that NATO, the US Dept. of Defence and some branch of the Afghan military (?) are investigating.  Considering that one of NATO's most influential members is the US.....how independent is this really?

And I came across this statement that seems to indicate that this might be a war crime 'depending on what the investigations come up with'.  




US Defense Secretary Ash Carter has promised a full investigation into the airstrike.
Under international law, the bombing would only be a war crime if it was proved that the hospital was attacked intentionally, legal experts told Reuters.


http://sputniknews.com/middleeast/20151006/1028074883/un-investigate-kunduz-bombing.html


So 'declared' war or not, still a war crime if it was intentional.  What do you want to bet a few people are feverishly working to cover their butts?


----------



## Shalimar (Oct 6, 2015)

Debby, in my book, intentional bombing of that hospital would be a war crime. It is important for all countries to abide by international law. However, I don't want to go into "j'accuse!" mode until more information is known.


----------



## RadishRose (Oct 6, 2015)

Shalimar said:


> Rose, my term "should" referenced the belief that even the "good guys" should be subject to impartial investigation. Because of global politics, that is not always easy to achieve. Perhaps I could have been more specific.



Ah, I see Shali. Thanks for clarification.


----------



## Shalimar (Oct 6, 2015)

Rose, you are most welcome.


----------



## RadishRose (Oct 6, 2015)

Debby, why would we bomb a hospital intentionally?


----------



## Warrigal (Oct 6, 2015)

That's what an impartial inquiry would try to find out. 
If the bombing continued after MSF made contact when it started then how is that accidental?


----------



## Debby (Oct 7, 2015)

Shalimar said:


> Debby, in my book, intentional bombing of that hospital would be a war crime. It is important for all countries to abide by international law. However, I don't want to go into "j'accuse!" mode until more information is known.





			
				RadishRose: =#333333 said:
			
		

> Debby, why would we bomb a hospital intentionally?]
> 
> Early on, I believe I read an article where it was suggested that 'someone' said there were terrorists inside the building and shooting at the ground troops which was the justification for bombing the place.
> 
> ...


----------



## RadishRose (Oct 8, 2015)

Deb thanks.


----------



## WhatInThe (Oct 9, 2015)

I guess if it's a crime it should be treated just like a civilian crime including proving a crime "might" have happened, physical evidence, intent, INTENT is the key, were the rules of war purposely or accidentally ignored ie negligence. Mitigating circumstances? Would firing on enemy in or near the facility be considered self defense?


----------

