What's new

Obama Bombs a Hospital: War Crime, or Historic Achievement?

Obama Bombs a Hospital: War Crime, or Historic Achievement?

If the U.S. is actually responsible for bombing a hospital full of volunteer doctors and maimed Afghanis — and there's still no way to know for certain — it would mark the first time in human history that a Nobel Peace Prize winner bombed a fellow Peace Prize recipient. That counts for something, right?



Historians agree that the historic murder of peace prize winners by a peace prize winner would have been even more historic if it had been done with a baseball bat. Next time?
For anyone vaguely familiar with U.S. foreign policy, October 3, 2015 was much like any other day: Some bombs were dropped, some people died, and yadda yadda yadda. In the annals of U.S. hospital/school/wedding bombings, the massacre which occurred in Kunduz, Afghanistan was more or less standard operating procedure.

Except this particular hospital was operated by English-speaking volunteer doctors who were once awarded the same peace prize that Barack Obama currently keeps in his desk drawer. To make matters slightly more difficult to sweep under the rug, the volunteer doctors repeatedly advised the U.S. military of the exact GPS coordinates of the hospital. They did so most recently on September 29, just five days before the strike. Beyond that, MSF personnel at the facility “frantically” called U.S. military officials during the strike to advise them that the hospital was being hit and to plead with them to stop, but the strikes continued in a “sustained” manner for 30 more minutes.

How would the Pentagon normally respond to a “regrettable boo-boo” such as this? Let us consult the best-selling U.S. Army field manual, So You Committed a War Crime. Now What?

1. Plausible deniability. For example: “It could have been the Taliban Air Force”. If this doesn't work, then:

2. Blame the brown-people government of the brown-people country that you are currently occupying. If this doesn't work, then:

3. Weapons were actually being stashed at the hospital, so it was a legitimate target. If this doesn't work, then:

4. Hey, look. Another school shooting.

You would think that considering the extraordinary circumstances the Pentagon would go “off script” to handle a PR nightmare like this. Think again.

In its first article on the attack, The Washington Post also previewed this defense, quoting a “spokesman for the Afghan army’s 209th Corps in northern Afghanistan” as saying that “Taliban fighters are now hiding in ‘people’s houses, mosques and hospitals using civilians as human shields.'” AP yesterday actually claimed that it looked at a video and saw weaponry in the hospital’s windows, only to delete that claim with this correction.

Doctors Without Borders is now publicly stating that this is a war crime. Meanwhile, the U.S. military is changing its story every 30 minutes.

As you probably recall, Barack Obama won a Nobel Peace Prize for being the first half African American leader of a global empire. And now he has blown up a hospital full of actual peace-spreaders, while simultaneously bad-mouthing Russia for launching air strikes against terrorists. What more can be said of this sad episode? It reminds us of Obama's other stunning contributions to history:



obama-trans_0.png

Cool


And who could forget the time he used his peace trophy to advocate for more war?



obama-war.png

I can't see what's wrong with the bombing.

As many of you know, the way to win a war with your enemy is to bomb their civilian, killing to more civilian the quicker it get to end that war, and when it come down to it, as head of state, yes, Obama is responsible for the bombing, and the WINNING strategy. So what's wrong and what's so surprise for other to see this as a "usual" incident. That how war are won, right?

In case you really take it seriously, I was being sacrastic
 
You are entitled to your views, of course, but the investigation and its results are nonetheless important as due process. President Obama has apologized to the MSF President already, and has assured that the investigation will be open and complete.
Believe what you like. I doubt that anything will come of this "investigation".
 
Yep. Epic achievement of the Drag queen American army.
 
Personally, I do not see why the U.S. would ever benefit from attacking
a hospital run by MSF. It is bound to give bad press.

I don't see how this can result in a white wash.

I assume that this is a result of incompetence inside both the Afghan Army and the U.S. Army/Air Force.
I don't expect the Afghan Army to know/respect the Geneva Convention.
I expect that a U.S. soldier knows that Hospitals may be attacked if they contain military targets, but perhaps not know that the hospital must get ample warning and given a chance to evaquate any Military from its grounds.
Not everyone knows manuals by heart, or consults them.

It is not an excuse, to not know the manual of course.

It is hard to explain that it took a long time to stop the attack, when MSF called in.
Is the expectation of the speed of military chains of command too high?

The only was I can see the U.S. getting out of this, is if it can be shown that the
Afghan Army claimed they detected Talibans inside the hospital, it was warned
but the Taliban remained and posed a great threat.

Maybe MSF did not pay off some Afghan War Lord, which got revenge by calling for Air Strikes. Apparently local feuds have caused casualties before when one of the parties claimed the other party to be terrorists.
 
Last edited:
Except, you know, the families of the dead.

I am sure they will be recompensed adequately, which is never going to be enough for their losses, I know, but it will help them in every way possible.
 
Snowden Has a Simple Solution to Get to the Bottom of the US Afghan Bombing 'War Crime'
But then maybe some don't want the truth

This article originally appeared at Zero Hedge


Overnight, Medecins Sans Frontiers, or the “Doctors without Borders” medical group which suffered a tremendous loss of life at the hands of US bombardment this past Saturday, stepped up its criticism of what it has previously called a US “war crime.”

As Reuters reports, earlier today it called for an independent international fact-finding commission to be established to investigate the U.S. bombing of its hospital in Kunduz, Afghanistan, which it deems a war crime, and which it would use to decide whether or not to file criminal charges, although it was unclear against whom precisely: perhaps 2009 Nobel Peace Prize winner Barack Obama?

Why independent: because as MSF said “we cannot rely on internal investigations by U.S, NATO and Afghan forces.”

Instead, the medical charity said that the commission, which can be set up at the request of a single state under the Geneva Convention, would gather facts and evidence from the United States, NATO and Afghanistan. MSF said it sent a letter on Tuesday to the 76 countries who signed up to the additional protocol of the Geneva Convention that set up the standing commission in 1991.

There is one problem: neither the United States nor Afghanistan are signatories and Francoise Saulnier, MSF lead counsel MSF, said that the consent of the states involved is necessary.

Good luck getting it.

Assuming the US does “agree” to comply with this fact-finding mission, we expect the full data dump - after all the necessary scrubbing of the evidence of course - to take place, some time in 2019.

For now, however, the MSF is not backing down: “If we let this go, we are basically giving a blank check to any countries at war,” MSF International President Joanne Liu told a news briefing in Geneva. “There is no commitment to an independent investigation yet.”

MSF is in talks with Switzerland about convoking the international commission of independent experts.

“Today we say enough, even war has rules,” Liu said.

Again, good luck with all of that.

Then again, none other than US persona non grata #1 has provided a quick and easy solution.Yes, quick and easy, unless it is mysteriously revealed that all the AC-130 audio and video record is stored on the clintonemail.com server. We all know what happens then.

AC-130 warplanes record the gunner's video and audio. It's time to release the tapes to an #IndependentInvestigation.pic.twitter.com/jtFyVCJ7Uw


Believe what you like. I doubt that anything will come of this "investigation".
 
Just the usual American hospital bombing. Nothing to see here folks.

US Air Force gives Al-Qaeda and ISIS air cover and bomb those evil hospitals.

Murica.

I wish US air offensives against ISIS (physical structures in Raqqa, e.g., if not moving targets) over the past 12 months had been as effective as the Kunduz massacre.

***

'The AC-130 records its attacks with high resolution gun cameras. According to military procedure, this footage should have been retained along with the cockpit audio'



WikiLeaks offers $50,000 reward for Kunduz bombing video or cockpit audio

Keep up with the news by installing RT’s extension for Chrome. Never miss a story with this clean and simple app that delivers the latest headlines to you.
 
Are hospitals protected by the Geneva Convention? If the hospital contains not only the sick & medical staff, but also some terrorist in hidding or if the terrorist are patients themselves, can any nation simply dismissed the Geneva Convention & carry out the attack?
 
Last edited:
I wish US air offensives against ISIS (physical structures in Raqqa, e.g., if not moving targets) over the past 12 months had been as effective as the Kunduz massacre.

***

'The AC-130 records its attacks with high resolution gun cameras. According to military procedure, this footage should have been retained along with the cockpit audio'



WikiLeaks offers $50,000 reward for Kunduz bombing video or cockpit audio

Keep up with the news by installing RT’s extension for Chrome. Never miss a story with this clean and simple app that delivers the latest headlines to you.

US military's strategy is to invade a poor and defenceless country, line up all the women and children, rape and kill them and brag what a superpower military it is.

Raping women, killing children, bombing hospitals, bombing schools while young children are trying to learn, bombing embassies.

These are the things the US and the US military is good at.
 
Are hospitals protected by the Geneva Convention?
Yes, but the hospital's location must be known and clearly ID-ed. Basically, anyone and anything that is used for medical purposes are excluded from being legitimate targets in war.

Emblem: relevant articles of the 1949 Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols
Hospital zones shall be marked by means of red crosses (red crescents, red lions and suns) on a white background placed on the outer precincts and on the buildings. They may be similarly marked at night by means of appropriate illumination.
A medic must be clearly marked such as an armband with the red cross, for another example.

If the hospital contains not only the sick & medical staff, but also some terrorist in hidding or if the terrorist are patients themselves, can any nation simply dismissed the Geneva Convention & carry out the attack?
Yes. The moment a medical facility, a place of worship, or a civilian structure is used to wage war, that location become a legitimate target. It does not matter if the hospital staff object and even fought the takeover. The moment a hospital is used to wage war, it loses its protected status.

Like every time there is an error in war that involves US, everyone loves to jump to conclusions and most of the time, they ended up looking like fools when more details emerges. But when it is their people who screws up, they demand that everyone wait for the official government statements or even tries to make excuses for their people.
 
Are hospitals protected by the Geneva Convention? If the hospital contains not only the sick & medical staff, but also some terrorist in hidding or if the terrorist are patients themselves, can any nation simply dismissed the Geneva Convention & carry out the attack?

A hospital is protected in the Geneva Convention, but only as long it is not used for military purposes. Treating war casualties is not a military purpose,
but using the hospital as an observation post or firing from it render it legal for an attack.

Unlike other civilian structures, hospitals have extra protection, since when military use has been detected, the hospital must be contacted and given warning that the military activities must cease.

If it does cease, then the hospital must be left alone, but if it continues then, like any military target, it can be attacked. There is always an issue of proportion.

It is unclear who is responsible if the Afghan Army requests the US Air Force,
to make an Air Strike vs a hospital.
The responibility definitely ends at the Air Force level, since the Instruction Manual
makes these rules clear.
Thus, I do not see Obama beeing responsible for these bombings.
He is responsible for having a real investigation completed,
and that possible dereliction of duty by US soldiers gets proper handling.
 
Last edited:

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom