Afghanistan: US Airstrike Hits Kunduz Hospital

[Kidlicious]

No. No. The battle was taking place in the proximity of the hospital when the US/Afghan forces were notified. What you're saying is that the hospital was bombed. Then the hospital reported the bombing to the military but they kept on bombing. That's not what the report says.

[Proteus_MST]

It says in the article that Afghan police said the enemy was firing from the hospital.

Which doesn´t give the US the right to attack the hospital ...
as I quoted in Article 19 of the geneva conventions, in this case the hospital staff would have to be informed before any attack, with enough time to evacuate the patients and staff.
As the USA are signatories of the geneva conventions, including part IV, which covers hospitals, they are bound by these articles

[Kidlicious]

I didn't say that gave the US the right to attack the hospital. I'm saying the Taliban were using the hospital to their advantage.

[Kidlicious]

Let whoever is at fault receive the appropriate punishment but take off your tinfoil hat for now.

[Proteus_MST]

I didn't say that gave the US the right to attack the hospital. I'm saying the Taliban were using the hospital to their advantage.

Yes, but it doesn´t make it less of a war crime, if the USA (or afghan government) bombs the hospital in response to the Taliban using the hospital as cover.

[ricketyclik]

Yes, the Taliban are bastards. Does that excuse the US actions?

[Proteus_MST]

Let whoever is at fault receive the appropriate punishment but take off your tinfoil hat for now.

That´s what I hope ... that those who are responsible are punished accordingly ...
and that not any lower ranking scapegoats have to bea5r the responsibility in order to protect any higher-ups in the military command chain

[Proteus_MST]

No. No. The battle was taking place in the proximity of the hospital when the US/Afghan forces were notified. What you're saying is that the hospital was bombed. Then the hospital reported the bombing to the military but they kept on bombing. That's not what the report says.

Here:

... We reiterate that the main hospital building, where medical personnel were caring for patients, was repeatedly and very precisely hit during each aerial raid, while the rest of the compound was left mostly untouched. ...

http://www.doctorswithoutborders.org/article/statement-kunduz-hospital-bombing

And here:

...MSF also claimed the sustained aerial bombing continued for 30 minutes after the charity made frantic phone calls to US and Afghan officials, informing them that the hospital was being hit. ...

... “The bombs hit and then we heard the plane circle round,” said Heman Nagarathnam, MSF Head of Programmes in northern Afghanistan. “There was a pause, and then more bombs hit. This happened again and again. When I made it out from the office, the main hospital building was engulfed in flames." ...

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/13802186.Nato_and_US_knew_precise_location_of_hosp ital_one_before_bombing_raid_killed_19_doctors_and _patients/

[Kidlicious]

That´s what I hope ... that those who are responsible are punished accordingly ...
and that not any lower ranking scapegoats have to bea5r the responsibility in order to protect any higher-ups in the military command chain

Well sure, but it's not reasonable to assume someone gave the order to bomb a hospital. I mean sure worse orders have been given, but it's much more reasonable to assume that the fighting was in the vicinity of the hospital and there was either a **** up or someone lost it in the heat of battle.

[Kidlicious]

Yes, but it doesn´t make it less of a war crime, if the USA (or afghan government) bombs the hospital in response to the Taliban using the hospital as cover.

Not likely to have happened.

[Apocalypse]

Legally, they would not have been targeting a hospital. They would be targeting the fighters inside the hospital, and there are reports of an active fight from Afghanistan police. This becomes an issue of Self Defense and not a preplanned target. Art 18 and Art 19 do not apply.

[kentonio]

Legally, they would not have been targeting a hospital. They would be targeting the fighters inside the hospital, and there are reports of an active fight from Afghanistan police. This becomes an issue of Self Defense and not a preplanned target. Art 18 and Art 19 do not apply.

How exactly does a hospital suddenly become not a hospital if someone is firing from it? The Geneva Conventions could hardly be any clearer.

[Kidlicious]

Actually art 19 makes it clear that a force can defend itself from a hospital that is shooting at it.

[Proteus_MST]

Actually art 19 makes it clear that a force can defend itself from a hospital that is shooting at it.

Article 19 makes it clear however that it also has to inform the hospital staff about it (that is, the loss of its hospital status) ...
with ample time between warning and attack. This warning obviously didn´t take place

[kentonio]

Article 19 makes it clear however that it also has to inform the hospital staff about it (that is, the loss of its hospital status) ...
with ample time between warning and attack. This warning obviously didn´t take place

Bingo. This is a war crime. The US can mount a defense of it being a genuine mistake, and if they can show it was honestly just one of those terrible accidents that can happen in the heat of combat then they deserve a pass (and the victims families deserve an apology and compensation). If it was a result of negligence or deliberate indifference by US commanders though, they should be brought up on charges and prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

Innocent people including children burned to death, this is not some partisan bull****.