• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

MSF Response to Pentagon Claim That Afghan Forces Called For Kunduz Airstrike

The reason why the US bombing of a hospital in Kunduz is news because it happens so rarely, and because US is held to a higher standard (as it should be) than Syria, Saudi Arabia or Russia. That's not to excuse US in any way, but let's keep the incident in perspective: The civilian death toll from Syrian forces, now assisted by Russia, far exceeds the civilian death toll from American fuckups.
The US Has Bombed at Least Eight Wedding Parties Since 2001

So I looked at the first three articles linked in that piece and in two the wedding party was firing into the air (an apparent wedding tradition) and in the third there was a ground operation where US troops were under hostile fire in the village prompting them to call in air support.

This doesn't exactly read like indiscriminate or targeted attacks on wedding parties.
 

So I looked at the first three articles linked in that piece and in two the wedding party was firing into the air (an apparent wedding tradition) and in the third there was a ground operation where US troops were under hostile fire in the village prompting them to call in air support.

This doesn't exactly read like indiscriminate or targeted attacks on wedding parties.

Well the US has changed their story about Kunduz so many times (at least 4 times) that it's hard to know what their story will end up being, but one claim was that it was a mistake.
Now JayJay claimed this sort of thing doesn't happen very often, which is clearly wrong.
You can say that two of the wedding parties may have fired shots ion the air, but that doesn't automatically excuse what happened.
The third is that there was fire coming from the area. I'm sure we can both agree that is just as likely to be lies as it is the truth.

So Jayjay is wrong, so I'm not sure why you are supporting him?
 
People running around and shooting AK-47s is a must for any decent weddings in the ME.
You would think that they would learn that it's not such a good idea by now.
 
So I looked at the first three articles linked in that piece and in two the wedding party was firing into the air (an apparent wedding tradition) and in the third there was a ground operation where US troops were under hostile fire in the village prompting them to call in air support.

This doesn't exactly read like indiscriminate or targeted attacks on wedding parties.

Well the US has changed their story about Kunduz so many times (at least 4 times) that it's hard to know what their story will end up being, but one claim was that it was a mistake.
Now JayJay claimed this sort of thing doesn't happen very often, which is clearly wrong.
You can say that two of the wedding parties may have fired shots ion the air, but that doesn't automatically excuse what happened.
The third is that there was fire coming from the area. I'm sure we can both agree that is just as likely to be lies as it is the truth.

I merely stated what was contained in the source articles for the Engelhardt piece. If you have evidence that contradicts those articles then please post it. Otherwise, do share your secret to clairvoyance.

So Jayjay is wrong, so I'm not sure why you are supporting him?

I'm not able to parse this statement.
 
Well the US has changed their story about Kunduz so many times (at least 4 times) that it's hard to know what their story will end up being, but one claim was that it was a mistake.
Now JayJay claimed this sort of thing doesn't happen very often, which is clearly wrong.
You can say that two of the wedding parties may have fired shots ion the air, but that doesn't automatically excuse what happened.
The third is that there was fire coming from the area. I'm sure we can both agree that is just as likely to be lies as it is the truth.

I merely stated what was contained in the source articles for the Engelhardt piece. If you have evidence that contradicts those articles then please post it. Otherwise, do share your secret to clairvoyance.
So Jayjay is wrong, so I'm not sure why you are supporting him?
I'm not able to parse this statement.
I made my point, if you want to pretend you didn't get it....m'eh
 
So I looked at the first three articles linked in that piece and in two the wedding party was firing into the air (an apparent wedding tradition) and in the third there was a ground operation where US troops were under hostile fire in the village prompting them to call in air support.

This doesn't exactly read like indiscriminate or targeted attacks on wedding parties.

Well the US has changed their story about Kunduz so many times (at least 4 times) that it's hard to know what their story will end up being, but one claim was that it was a mistake.
Now JayJay claimed this sort of thing doesn't happen very often, which is clearly wrong.
You can say that two of the wedding parties may have fired shots ion the air, but that doesn't automatically excuse what happened.
The third is that there was fire coming from the area. I'm sure we can both agree that is just as likely to be lies as it is the truth.

So Jayjay is wrong, so I'm not sure why you are supporting him?
What I was asking for is some common sense perspective. 8 mistakes in 14 years and a few hundred casualties is still several orders of magnitude less than what Assad'ss barrel bombing has done in just four years.

Think about it, why does US hit wedding parties? They obviously tick some boxes that US military confuses with a target of opportunity, such as a lot of people gathering in single remote place and firing their weapons, or including one or more known militants. At least it shows the US makes a conscious effort, albeit pretty incompetently, to pick isolated targets instead of just bombing everything to rubble like Saudi Arabia in Yemen or Assad in Syria. You would never hear Putin or Assad apologize for anything.
 
Think about it, why does US hit wedding parties?
Because people like you and deepak keep apologising for them and making lame attempts to justify what they do and are too intimidated to ask them to take some responsibility.

So they keep doing it.

America can bomb wedding parties kill MSF doctors and sure as eggs plenty of people will tell us all why it was ok and there is no need to actually hold anyone accountable
 
Well the US has changed their story about Kunduz so many times (at least 4 times) that it's hard to know what their story will end up being, but one claim was that it was a mistake.
Now JayJay claimed this sort of thing doesn't happen very often, which is clearly wrong.
You can say that two of the wedding parties may have fired shots ion the air, but that doesn't automatically excuse what happened.
The third is that there was fire coming from the area. I'm sure we can both agree that is just as likely to be lies as it is the truth.

So Jayjay is wrong, so I'm not sure why you are supporting him?
What I was asking for is some common sense perspective. 8 mistakes in 14 years and a few hundred casualties is still several orders of magnitude less than what Assad'ss barrel bombing has done in just four years.

Think about it, why does US hit wedding parties? They obviously tick some boxes that US military confuses with a target of opportunity, such as a lot of people gathering in single remote place and firing their weapons, or including one or more known militants. At least it shows the US makes a conscious effort, albeit pretty incompetently, to pick isolated targets instead of just bombing everything to rubble like Saudi Arabia in Yemen or Assad in Syria. You would never hear Putin or Assad apologize for anything.
Apologies are cheap.
Barrel bomb is not very different from ordinary one, it's just cheaper and more available than alternatives.
If you care so much about Assad using them then you should provide him with better alternative.
 
Think about it, why does US hit wedding parties?
Because people like you and deepak keep apologising for them and making lame attempts to justify what they do and are too intimidated to ask them to take some responsibility.

So they keep doing it.

America can bomb wedding parties kill MSF doctors and sure as eggs plenty of people will tell us all why it was ok and there is no need to actually hold anyone accountable
I'mnot disputing that. The US deserves all the shit it can get form the MSF incident, until it opens up and provides a credible explanation why it happened and what is being done to make sure it doesn't happen again. But at the same time, the death toll from US fuckups are a blip in the radar compared to the truly horrible things perpetrated by Syria, ISIS, Saudi Arabia or Russia. And that was the point I was originally replying to.

- - - Updated - - -

What I was asking for is some common sense perspective. 8 mistakes in 14 years and a few hundred casualties is still several orders of magnitude less than what Assad'ss barrel bombing has done in just four years.

Think about it, why does US hit wedding parties? They obviously tick some boxes that US military confuses with a target of opportunity, such as a lot of people gathering in single remote place and firing their weapons, or including one or more known militants. At least it shows the US makes a conscious effort, albeit pretty incompetently, to pick isolated targets instead of just bombing everything to rubble like Saudi Arabia in Yemen or Assad in Syria. You would never hear Putin or Assad apologize for anything.
Apologies are cheap.
Barrel bomb is not very different from ordinary one, it's just cheaper and more available than alternatives.
If you care so much about Assad using them then you should provide him with better alternative.
The alternative would have been for him not to outright massacre his own people just to stay in power.
 
Because people like you and deepak keep apologising for them and making lame attempts to justify what they do and are too intimidated to ask them to take some responsibility.

So they keep doing it.

America can bomb wedding parties kill MSF doctors and sure as eggs plenty of people will tell us all why it was ok and there is no need to actually hold anyone accountable
I'mnot disputing that. The US deserves all the shit it can get form the MSF incident, until it opens up and provides a credible explanation why it happened and what is being done to make sure it doesn't happen again. But at the same time, the death toll from US fuckups are a blip in the radar compared to the truly horrible things perpetrated by Syria, ISIS, Saudi Arabia or Russia. And that was the point I was originally replying to.

- - - Updated - - -

What I was asking for is some common sense perspective. 8 mistakes in 14 years and a few hundred casualties is still several orders of magnitude less than what Assad'ss barrel bombing has done in just four years.

Think about it, why does US hit wedding parties? They obviously tick some boxes that US military confuses with a target of opportunity, such as a lot of people gathering in single remote place and firing their weapons, or including one or more known militants. At least it shows the US makes a conscious effort, albeit pretty incompetently, to pick isolated targets instead of just bombing everything to rubble like Saudi Arabia in Yemen or Assad in Syria. You would never hear Putin or Assad apologize for anything.
Apologies are cheap.
Barrel bomb is not very different from ordinary one, it's just cheaper and more available than alternatives.
If you care so much about Assad using them then you should provide him with better alternative.
The alternative would have been for him not to outright massacre his own people just to stay in power.
He did not outright massacre anybody. Not until US friends in Qatar and Saudi Arabia saw the opportunity to get rid of him.
 
MSF Email said:
By now you are aware that on Saturday, October 3 at 2:08 am local time, MSF’s trauma hospital in Kunduz, Afghanistan—where we have been working for four years—was repeatedly hit by direct, focused, and sustained air strikes.
We are very grateful for your words of support and donations during these darkest days for our organization, and we have also heard and understand your questions about our statements requesting an investigation of a war crime.
Any deliberately targeted attack on civilians and protected structures during war is a violation of International Humanitarian Law and can constitute a war crime. MSF's public statements about this incident have no political aim. We are defending our rights as an impartial and independent emergency medical aid organization, and seeking accountability for a clear violation of the very laws that make our work possible.
In order for MSF to deliver lifesaving medical treatment to patients in conflict zones who otherwise have no access to healthcare, we require that all warring parties respect the Geneva Conventions and other international laws that forbid targeting medical facilities and staff.
The attacks on the Kunduz Trauma Center lasted for more than one hour, and continued for 30 minutes after desperate calls from MSF team members to both Afghan and Coalition forces asking them to stop bombing the hospital.
The attack on the MSF hospital in Kunduz was the biggest loss of life for our organization in an airstrike. Our patients burned in their beds. MSF doctors, nurses and other staff were killed as they worked. Our colleagues had to operate on each other. One of our doctors died on an improvised operating table – an office desk – while his colleagues tried to save his life.
MSF’s work is by its nature very dangerous. We often operate close to the front lines of conflict, but we mitigate this risk as much as possible by staying in close communication with all sides to the conflict, updating them regularly on the GPS coordinates of our clinics and hospitals. Our ability to work safely depends on our transparency about our principles and objectives of providing medical care regardless of political, religious, or other considerations.
If at any point one side no longer agrees to allow MSF to work, or one side attempts to enter our medical facilities with arms or take it over, we cease work immediately and pull back to reevaluate our ability to continue. There is no scenario in which MSF would continue to provide medical care while armed actors were involved in making warfare inside our hospitals.
We must seek an independent investigation of the events which led to this attack. We are fighting for the respect of the Geneva Conventions, and as doctors, we are fighting for the sake of our patients. We hope you will stand with us as we fight to bring the facts behind this attack to light.
We'll see where this goes. This could be one of the bigger fuck ups in American military history during peace time. The Iranian plane was a single shot. They just kept attacking the hospital.
 
Why Is the U.S. Refusing an Independent Investigation If Its Hospital Airstrike Was an “Accident”?
In Geneva this morning, Doctors Without Borders (MSF) demanded a formal, independent investigation into the U.S. airstrike on its hospital in Kunduz. The group’s international president, Dr. Joanne Liu (pictured above, center), specified that the inquiry should be convened pursuant to war crime-investigating procedures established by the Geneva Conventions and conducted by The International Humanitarian Fact-Finding Commission. “Even war has rules,” Liu said. “This was just not an attack on our hospital. It was an attack on the Geneva Conventions. This cannot be tolerated.”

It's hard to believe this was an accident. Firstly strikes have to be approved, and there are layers to go through. Secondly if it had been a mistake they would have stopped when the hospital contacted them.

This makes it very hard to believe.
https://twitter.com/HNajafizada/status/651439348009799680
 
Ever hear of the Hama massacre?

That was his father, wasn't it?

Oops, you're right. It gets confusing when the new ruler has the same name as the old one!

- - - Updated - - -

Why Is the U.S. Refusing an Independent Investigation If Its Hospital Airstrike Was an “Accident”?
In Geneva this morning, Doctors Without Borders (MSF) demanded a formal, independent investigation into the U.S. airstrike on its hospital in Kunduz. The group’s international president, Dr. Joanne Liu (pictured above, center), specified that the inquiry should be convened pursuant to war crime-investigating procedures established by the Geneva Conventions and conducted by The International Humanitarian Fact-Finding Commission. “Even war has rules,” Liu said. “This was just not an attack on our hospital. It was an attack on the Geneva Conventions. This cannot be tolerated.”

It's hard to believe this was an accident. Firstly strikes have to be approved, and there are layers to go through. Secondly if it had been a mistake they would have stopped when the hospital contacted them.

This makes it very hard to believe.
https://twitter.com/HNajafizada/status/651439348009799680

You're assuming the hospital could prove they really were the hospital.

You really think they don't get false reports of improper targets in order to try to stop attacks???
 
You're assuming the hospital could prove they really were the hospital.

You really think they don't get false reports of improper targets in order to try to stop attacks???
You must think the US military are imbeciles
And you must think that there is some sort of hotline you can call to immediately stop an ongoing military operation. "How is my bombing? Call 555-AMERICA-FUCK-YEAH"

I find it understandable that the operation could not be stopped once started, at least not very easily. But what is a real fuckup is that they did not know it was an MSF hospital to begin with despite having been informed of the locations. That's inexcusable.
 
You must think the US military are imbeciles
And you must think that there is some sort of hotline you can call to immediately stop an ongoing military operation. "How is my bombing? Call 555-AMERICA-FUCK-YEAH"

I find it understandable that the operation could not be stopped once started, at least not very easily. But what is a real fuckup is that they did not know it was an MSF hospital to begin with despite having been informed of the locations. That's inexcusable.

There is evidence that special forces do whatever they want.
Afghan Doctor Slaughter Pulls Back Curtain

U.S. officials claim that their air strikes are carefully designed and vetted by military lawyers and planners to ensure minimum “collateral damage,” but William Arkin discovered a dirty little secret about this process when he was invited to observe an attack on an alleged ACF leader in Afghanistan from the safety of the U.S. Combined Air and Space Operations Center in Qatar.

Arkin watched on a large TV screen as A-10 Warthog planes dropped two 500-pound bombs on a convoy of vehicles. U.S. officials explained that 1,000-pound bombs would have caused more casualties, while 150-pound Hellfire missiles might have missed their target, so the 500-pound bombs were carefully chosen to kill the target without causing unnecessary casualties.

But then one of the planes did something unexpected. It turned to make a second pass and blanketed the whole area with 30mm armor-piercing shells from its Gatling gun, which fires 65 shells per second. A “precision strike” had just turned into an indiscriminate massacre. A U.S. official quickly told Arkin that this was “not unauthorized.”

The dirty little secret Arkin had discovered was that, once such an operation is under way, special forces ground controllers in the area take full control, and the plans drawn up by lawyers and controllers far from the action no longer apply. Similar rules may have applied to the U.S. air strikes on the MSF hospital in Kunduz, making it difficult for anyone in Washington or Kabul to stop them once they were under way.
 
You're assuming the hospital could prove they really were the hospital.

You really think they don't get false reports of improper targets in order to try to stop attacks???
You must think the US military are imbeciles

You're not making sense!

The point is that a claim that the attack is hitting a wrong target isn't something that can be instantly determined.
 
Back
Top Bottom