Jump to content


Photo

Meanwhile In Afghanistan


  • Please log in to reply
282 replies to this topic

#21 Adam Peter

Adam Peter

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,338 posts

Posted 05 October 2015 - 1316 PM

The view of the DWB: http://www.doctorswi...hospital-kunduz

 

An interview with a Hungarian nurse, Jecs Zoltán Lajos, about what happened: http://index.hu/kulf...lebombazasarol/

 

He says he was shocked, the attack lasted for half hour, a patient on the operating table and a doctor died, some patients burned alive, the other wing with patients in bed was unharmed.


  • 0

#22 WRW

WRW

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,795 posts

Posted 06 October 2015 - 0206 AM

why so much fire damage and refernces to burning?


  • 0

#23 T-44

T-44

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 581 posts

Posted 06 October 2015 - 0220 AM

why so much fire damage and refernces to burning?

Oxygen? It's a hospital, after all.


  • 0

#24 Simon Tan

Simon Tan

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 13,121 posts

Posted 06 October 2015 - 0250 AM

HEI-T.


  • 0

#25 Panzermann

Panzermann

    REFORGER '79

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,443 posts

Posted 06 October 2015 - 0535 AM

Even the tracers alone might ignite a fire if they hit something inflamable.

 

MSF demands an independent investigation of course and claims that yes, there have been Taliban, but in the beds being treated and that the hospital was not occupied.

http://www.doctorswi...hospital-kunduz

So why did the Special Forces attack the hospital? They should have known it is a hospital.

Edited by Panzermann, 06 October 2015 - 0546 AM.

  • 0

#26 DB

DB

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,311 posts

Posted 06 October 2015 - 0700 AM

US claiming that the strike was called in by Afghans, which is a nice piece of blame shifting.

 

MSF claims that the "good guys" were informed that the hospital was active and in their control as recently as the day before and that calls were made after the strike began, to no avail.

 

It occurs to me that if you volunteer to treat casualties in a conflict zone, then you risk getting dead. 


  • 0

#27 swerve

swerve

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,779 posts

Posted 06 October 2015 - 0826 AM

Yes, but you don't expect to be deliberately targeted by an air force that you have taken care to make your location known to. It's illegal to deliberately attack medical facilities, except in narrowly specified circumstances. The presence of weapons or armed men on the premises, for example, does not in itself render a hospital liable to attack. From my reading, it's legal to attack only if it's being used to attack you or your allies from, & after issuing a warning, those attacks continue. 


  • 0

#28 Panzermann

Panzermann

    REFORGER '79

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,443 posts

Posted 14 October 2015 - 1517 PM

The Taliban declare success and withdraw from Kundus after plundering:

http://edition.cnn.c...awal/index.html

Fighters "seized military equipment, APCs, launchers, tons of heavy and light arms ammunition as
well as archived documents from the ministry of national directorate services and other organs" and
proved they could achieve their objectives in "every part of the country" despite the continued
presence of foreign forces, the statement said.


Edited by Panzermann, 14 October 2015 - 1518 PM.

  • 0

#29 Panzermann

Panzermann

    REFORGER '79

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,443 posts

Posted 18 October 2015 - 0221 AM

US tank enters ruined Afghan hospital
putting 'war crime' evidence at risk
(guardian)

whiskey tango foxtrot? What happened there and why?

Edited by Panzermann, 18 October 2015 - 0222 AM.

  • 0

#30 FALightFighter

FALightFighter

    Red-Legged Ilk

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,417 posts

Posted 18 October 2015 - 0935 AM

I don't think there are any US tanks in Afghanistan.

 

I love the presumption that the attack was a war crime. Mistakes happen, and we KNOW that the enemy use prohibited targets to avoid our fire power - which, by its nature, eliminates the protection of the prohibited target by using it for a military purpose.


  • 0

#31 JasonJ

JasonJ

    nonbiri

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10,992 posts

Posted 18 October 2015 - 0943 AM

Tanks, they were tanks, APCs don't make the monies and political points.


  • 0

#32 urbanoid

urbanoid

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 5,412 posts

Posted 18 October 2015 - 1215 PM

I don't think there are any US tanks in Afghanistan.

 

I love the presumption that the attack was a war crime. Mistakes happen, and we KNOW that the enemy use prohibited targets to avoid our fire power - which, by its nature, eliminates the protection of the prohibited target by using it for a military purpose.

 

The M1A2s were deployed since 2010.


  • 0

#33 FALightFighter

FALightFighter

    Red-Legged Ilk

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,417 posts

Posted 18 October 2015 - 1600 PM

USMC sent a company to Helmand. Those are the only US tanks I've ever heard of there. Helmand is a long way from Konduz.


  • 0

#34 Panzermann

Panzermann

    REFORGER '79

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,443 posts

Posted 18 October 2015 - 1624 PM

For journalists any armoured car is "tank". Any boat with grey paint is a "battle ship". Every pistol is a "Glock" and every rifle is "Kalashnikov". <_<


I guess it was an MRAP or maybe one of those IED disposal trucks. Why did it crash into the hospital?
  • 0

#35 swerve

swerve

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,779 posts

Posted 18 October 2015 - 1646 PM

I don't think there are any US tanks in Afghanistan.

 

I love the presumption that the attack was a war crime. Mistakes happen, and we KNOW that the enemy use prohibited targets to avoid our fire power - which, by its nature, eliminates the protection of the prohibited target by using it for a military purpose.

From my reading, it's slightly more complicated than that. Protected status isn't completely & immediately eliminated by use for a military purpose. It depends on the type & amount of the military use. It has to continue, not be fleeting, & has to be aggressive, not just something like taking shelter. 


Edited by swerve, 18 October 2015 - 1647 PM.

  • 0

#36 Panzermann

Panzermann

    REFORGER '79

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,443 posts

Posted 18 October 2015 - 1829 PM

https://www.afghanis...ture-of-kunduz/
  • 0

#37 Panzermann

Panzermann

    REFORGER '79

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,443 posts

Posted 20 October 2015 - 1839 PM

Oct 19, 2:28 PM EDT

PENTAGON ADMITS MISTAKEN FORCED ENTRY AT AFGHANISTAN CLINIC

BY ROBERT BURNS
AP NATIONAL SECURITY WRITER

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The U.S. military acknowledged Monday that an armored vehicle carrying U.S. personnel deliberately crashed through the closed gate of the compound in northern Afghanistan where 22 people had been killed two weeks ago in a U.S. air attack on a hospital run by Doctors Without Border.
...

http://hosted.ap.org...EMPLATE=DEFAULT
  • 0

#38 JasonJ

JasonJ

    nonbiri

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10,992 posts

Posted 20 October 2015 - 2117 PM

Why does it have to be the president apologizing? Shouldn't it be one of the senior commanders over seeing the operation?
  • 0

#39 Simon Tan

Simon Tan

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 13,121 posts

Posted 20 October 2015 - 2121 PM

He specializes in apologies and enjoys doing it. Why deny him these small joys? Of course this is only to furriners. Racist bible gun clingers do not deserve apologies.
  • 0

#40 EchoFiveMike

EchoFiveMike

    I offer safe passage through the wasteland

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,798 posts

Posted 21 October 2015 - 0058 AM

Legal??  Against head choppers?  In a "country" full of pederasts?  

 

You people crack me up.  Rules are followed when both parties follow them.  If you're the only side abiding by 'the rules', you're a fucking chump and an idiot and people should make fun of you.  S/F....Ken M  


Edited by EchoFiveMike, 21 October 2015 - 0058 AM.

  • 0