CIA may have knowingly targeted a registered hospital

Overheal

http://www.mediaite.com/online/shep-explodes-on-former-cia-op-are-you-putting-blame-on-doctors-without-borders/

As you listen to the interview, it is clear from the CIA guy's comments that the CIA has - at least since - the incident, established a justification for why the hospital they accidentally bombed, deserved to be bombed.

Was an airstrike deliberately called when the CIA had enough confidence in killing a handful of Taliban members?

It needs to be investigated as a war crime.

ancapailldorcha

Overheal wrote: »

Was an airstrike called when the CIA had enough confidence in killing a handful of Taliban members?

It needs to be investigated as a war crime.

I, sadly do not see this ever happening. We're still waiting for Lord Chilcot's report on the Iraq war here. It seems more plausible that the CIA made a mess of this rather than deliberately planned it as there is no way that bombing doctors without borders would be perceived in any way other than extremely negatively.

Micky Dolenz

Yeah, they fcuked up. War is a messy business.

Overheal

I see it as potentially being more than just a simple **** up though.

Dohnjoe

Looks like it is going to be investigated, and Obama has been forced to apologise to the head of MSF and the Afghan president, this definitely goes beyond the "fog of war"

I would disregard any comments by ex-CIA staff/pundits for now

Overheal

An airstrike executed with extreme precision:



Doctors were targeted by additional air-to-ground fire by the USAF. I hope the UN or NATO presses to get those guncam videos released.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/doctors-without-borders-report-kunduz-hospital-bombing_563b408ee4b0307f2cac20dc

"MSF says it had reaffirmed already well-known coordinates of the Kunduz trauma center with the U.S. department of defense, U.S. army in Kabul, and Afghan officials, on Sept. 29. It had also placed MSF flags on the roof of the hospital. On Oct. 1, the organization says it received a query from a U.S. official as to whether any Taliban were “holed up” at the facility. This jibes with media reports that the U.S. military was gathering information on the hospital. Afghan officials have also tried to justify the attack by saying the facility was being used by the Taliban, something MSF has characterized as an “admission of a war crime.”"

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2015/11/06/doctors_without_borders_damning_report_on_kunduz_bombing.html

ancapailldorcha

Utterly disgraceful. Sadly, I don't see the UN demanding any such thing from the USAF assuming that such incriminating evidence hasn't "been lost".

Overheal

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Utterly disgraceful. Sadly, I don't see the UN demanding any such thing from the USAF assuming that such incriminating evidence hasn't "been lost".

Well gun camera footage doesn't just go missing, and unlike police you don't get to say "it wasn't recording", when those birds are in the air, in live fire situations in particular, those cameras are running.

pueblo

They were just 'liberating' the hospital ffs...

Manic Moran

Two points to note.

1) the ex CIA bloke doesn't say the hospital was targeted because of the aid given to Taliban wounded, only that it may have been a result of it. I'm willing to accept MSFs statementt that no firing came from the hospital but perhaps the guys on the ground saw folks going in and out. Or maybe someone on the ground was offended by a comment made by an MSF man about his mother and took the opportunity to call in an utterly unwarranted air strike. This brings us to point 2.

2) MSF forgot to mark the hospital like both prudence and the Geneva conventions dictate. "But it had a big MSF flag on it" good for them. Military personnel are under no obligation to recognize or know the organizational flags of all aid agencies. Even if the wind's blowing. Hospitals, however, have an advantage over many other aid facilities, they can put a big Red Cross, diamond, or crescent on the thing, which the military know to look out for. I would wager the average trooper couldn't tell the difference between an MSF flag and a flag of the Burmese Communist Party. Compare the above satellite photo with one of w marked hospital. Go watch an episode of MASH or look at http://www.med-dept.com/images/identification_images/hosp_flag.gif

So, from the perspective of the guy pulling the trigger, it's simple. Check grid on map and look out the window, or follow designator. Is it a building protected by one of the Geneva Convention symbols? No? Ok. Engaging.

"But MSF told the military where they were". Again, good for them. That may be fine for the strike planning process, or artillery barrages, but that doesn't help human aimed systems who are not yet wird into computer databases.

There is no reason to believe that what happened was not simply a U.S. Pilot engaging something he had no reason to believe was a hospital.

deandean

Horrible to see the before/after photos.
I can imagine the gun cam videos...hey there are people in white running away...they must be taliban...smoke 'em..
If it was my hospital, in a war zone, I would have a ruddy big red cross painted on the roof. And floodlit at night.

Overheal

Manic Moran wrote: »

Two points to note.

1) the ex CIA bloke doesn't say the hospital was targeted because of the aid given to Taliban wounded, only that it may have been a result of it. I'm willing to accept MSFs statementt that no firing came from the hospital but perhaps the guys on the ground saw folks going in and out. Or maybe someone on the ground was offended by a comment made by an MSF man about his mother and took the opportunity to call in an utterly unwarranted air strike. This brings us to point 2.

2) MSF forgot to mark the hospital like both prudence and the Geneva conventions dictate. "But it had a big MSF flag on it" good for them. Military personnel are under no obligation to recognize or know the organizational flags of all aid agencies. Even if the wind's blowing. Hospitals, however, have an advantage over many other aid facilities, they can put a big Red Cross, diamond, or crescent on the thing, which the military know to look out for. I would wager the average trooper couldn't tell the difference between an MSF flag and a flag of the Burmese Communist Party. Compare the above satellite photo with one of w marked hospital. Go watch an episode of MASH or look at http://www.med-dept.com/images/identification_images/hosp_flag.gif

So, from the perspective of the guy pulling the trigger, it's simple. Check grid on map and look out the window, or follow designator. Is it a building protected by one of the Geneva Convention symbols? No? Ok. Engaging.

"But MSF told the military where they were". Again, good for them. That may be fine for the strike planning process, or artillery barrages, but that doesn't help human aimed systems who are not yet wird into computer databases.

There is no reason to believe that what happened was not simply a U.S. Pilot engaging something he had no reason to believe was a hospital.

Given the perfectly valid points, there is no reason to blame the military execution - I can't make the claim that a pilot could distinguish eg. scrubs from gunning altitude either. However, the bombing incident went on for an hour, and during that time they were contacting US and military officials to call off the strike. That speaks to a failure to cross-check and/or communicate to the planes to abort the mission.

Joshua J

Manic Moran wrote: »

Two points to note.

1) the ex CIA bloke doesn't say the hospital was targeted because of the aid given to Taliban wounded, only that it may have been a result of it. I'm willing to accept MSFs statementt that no firing came from the hospital but perhaps the guys on the ground saw folks going in and out. Or maybe someone on the ground was offended by a comment made by an MSF man about his mother and took the opportunity to call in an utterly unwarranted air strike. This brings us to point 2.

2) MSF forgot to mark the hospital like both prudence and the Geneva conventions dictate. "But it had a big MSF flag on it" good for them. Military personnel are under no obligation to recognize or know the organizational flags of all aid agencies. Even if the wind's blowing. Hospitals, however, have an advantage over many other aid facilities, they can put a big Red Cross, diamond, or crescent on the thing, which the military know to look out for. I would wager the average trooper couldn't tell the difference between an MSF flag and a flag of the Burmese Communist Party. Compare the above satellite photo with one of w marked hospital. Go watch an episode of MASH or look at http://www.med-dept.com/images/identification_images/hosp_flag.gif

So, from the perspective of the guy pulling the trigger, it's simple. Check grid on map and look out the window, or follow designator. Is it a building protected by one of the Geneva Convention symbols? No? Ok. Engaging.

"But MSF told the military where they were". Again, good for them. That may be fine for the strike planning process, or artillery barrages, but that doesn't help human aimed systems who are not yet wird into computer databases.

There is no reason to believe that what happened was not simply a U.S. Pilot engaging something he had no reason to believe was a hospital.

Ah I see it was the Doctors inside fault and not the military who didnt do their due diligence before blowing innocent people to bits. Collateral damage is a bitch I suppose. Oh well, keep buying up the green lightbulbs people support dem heroes. Heroes everyone of them.

Manic Moran

What "Due dilligence"? Due dilligence as required under international law of not engaging protected targets as marked by one of the three internationally recognised symbols?

Joshua J

Manic Moran wrote: »

What "Due dilligence"? Due dilligence as required under international law of not engaging protected targets as marked by one of the three internationally recognised symbols?

So you DO blame the doctors inside?. Nice one, keep fighting the good fight hoora.

Your post was nothing but pure fantasy. Pure Walter Mitty fantasy and conjecture. Anything but blame the people who pulled the trigger.

Overheal

Joshua J wrote: »

So you DO blame the doctors inside?. Nice one, keep fighting the good fight hoora.

Your post was nothing but pure fantasy. Pure Walter Mitty fantasy and conjecture. Anything but blame the people who pulled the trigger.

Cool it, please. /mod

Overheal

Manic Moran wrote: »

What "Due dilligence"? Due dilligence as required under international law of not engaging protected targets as marked by one of the three internationally recognised symbols?

I'll acquiesce that is an exoneration of the military execution of force, going in. They were briefed to go in on a marked target, etc. which is them 'doing their job', and rightly pointed out the roof was not marked out or anything as a hospital.

It doesn't explain why when there were distress calls coming out of the hospital to stop attacking that the attack continued. I don't know. If the military has to treat that as potentially hostile, I just don't know and I don't know how many attacks the military has come under from false flags (eg. hospitals that are actually operation centers for insurgents, same thing with mosques and schools and other protected structures, civilians in convoys, etc). It still leaves a lot of unanswered questions for the military intelligence though, the CIA for instance, going into the attack. I'm not impressed at the moment and would like to see the independent investigations get into the post-mortem substance.

The US should really on ethos be operating at or above the standard for international law though, I would hope. All that leader of the free world stuff. I understand the job is exceedingly foggy given that insurgents don't play by the normal rules of war which throws up a lot of grey areas.

compo1

Manic Moran wrote: »

Two points to note.

1) the ex CIA bloke doesn't say the hospital was targeted because of the aid given to Taliban wounded, only that it may have been a result of it. I'm willing to accept MSFs statementt that no firing came from the hospital but perhaps the guys on the ground saw folks going in and out. Or maybe someone on the ground was offended by a comment made by an MSF man about his mother and took the opportunity to call in an utterly unwarranted air strike. This brings us to point 2.

2) MSF forgot to mark the hospital like both prudence and the Geneva conventions dictate. "But it had a big MSF flag on it" good for them. Military personnel are under no obligation to recognize or know the organizational flags of all aid agencies. Even if the wind's blowing. Hospitals, however, have an advantage over many other aid facilities, they can put a big Red Cross, diamond, or crescent on the thing, which the military know to look out for. I would wager the average trooper couldn't tell the difference between an MSF flag and a flag of the Burmese Communist Party. Compare the above satellite photo with one of w marked hospital. Go watch an episode of MASH or look at http://www.med-dept.com/images/identification_images/hosp_flag.gif

So, from the perspective of the guy pulling the trigger, it's simple. Check grid on map and look out the window, or follow designator. Is it a building protected by one of the Geneva Convention symbols? No? Ok. Engaging.

"But MSF told the military where they were". Again, good for them. That may be fine for the strike planning process, or artillery barrages, but that doesn't help human aimed systems who are not yet wird into computer databases.

There is no reason to believe that what happened was not simply a U.S. Pilot engaging something he had no reason to believe was a hospital.

The exact co-ordinates were given to the US military. What more did they need? Note too that in modern warfare, many weapons are fired from beyond visual range.

leavingirl

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

Yeah, they fcuked up. War is a messy business.

War? What war? They invaded the country FFS. Don't try dress it up as anything other than a war crime carried out by psychopathic terrorists who tell everybody else they are fighting a war on terror.