http://america.aljazeera.com/articl...l-raid-was-attack-on-geneva-conventions1.html This is a complicated mess. It's for certain that US military assets were used to inflict severe damage to a Médecins Sans Frontières (aka Doctors Without Borders) facility in the Afghan city of Kunduz and that there were a large number of casualties, including civilian patients being treated there. But aside from those facts, there's a whole bunch of questions that remain unanswered. IMHO, both the UN and MSF, like ambulance chasing lawyers, are now going after the one with the deepest pockets. In essence, the finger pointing is mostly directed towards the US. But I think that there's plenty of blame to go around. Firstly, MSF while heroic in their attention to the sick, displaced and destitute around many of the world's regional conflicts, I think is a victim of their own success. That is, one cannot hope to stand next to flames and expect not to be burnt every now and again. Secondly, the ethics of the Taliban are well known; their brutal tactics are not new. They were reported by Afghan government forces as having commandeered the hospital grounds and were using it as a firing location against coalition forces, prompting return fire against them. Whether this was an impromptu tactical need of the moment or a more calculated long term strategic political ploy to bring world pressure against their most powerful foe (the American) is not yet certain. But it certainly appears that Taliban battlefield tactics was what elicited that American response.That the Talib are willing to inflict harm on the general public for political or terror motives is a given, and already an established fact. It has been and remains part and parcel of their daily operational methodology. Given the known location of the MSF facility, the UN should have anticipated that Taliban activity would likely endanger the hospital. So, why weren't UN personnel providing security around it to prevent it's takeover by Taliban forces (with its resultant involvement in battlefield targeting)? Despite the unfortunate turn of events. US military units generally have highly restrictive rules of engagement and very rarely produce collateral damage through precise targeting. In fact, in this incident, the area around the hospital grounds reportedly weren't touched. The C130 based firing platform (known as an AC130 Gunship) performed perfectly, hitting it's intended target as requested by a coalition partner. What this whole case centers on is the "why" of the targeting in the first place; whether the US theater commander should have recognized that the targeting request was for an off limits area and whether he should have denied that request. Like I'd stated, lots of unanswered questions, but I think it wholly premature for POTUS to start apologizing to MSF as it gives the impression of total guilt on the part of the US.
