Kerry expresses outrage after 50 killed in strike on Syrian hospital

[Rogue Valley]

Kerry expresses outrage after 50 killed in strike on Syrian hospital

Sat April 30, 2016

Assad barrel-bombs a pediatric hospital in Aleppo

(CNN) An airstrike on a pediatric hospital in Syria has killed 50 people, rights and humanitarian groups say, as the United Nations warns that the situation in Aleppo has become "catastrophic" amid intensified fighting in recent days. The airstrike killed at least 50 people, according to Pablo Marco, operations manager for Doctors Without Borders in the Middle East. Marco told CNN that at least six of the dead were hospital staff: Two doctors, two nurses, one guard and one maintenance worker. The death toll could still rise. Doctors Without Borders told CNN that two barrel bombs hit buildings near the hospital. The injured were rushed to the hospital and relatives hurried there. A third barrel bomb landed at the facility's gate causing many of the casualties.

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry condemned the attack and pointed a finger of blame at the Syrian government."We are outraged by yesterday's airstrikes in Aleppo on the al Quds hospital supported by both Doctors Without Borders and the International Committee of the Red Cross, which killed dozens of people, including children, patients and medical personnel," he said in a statement. "It appears to have been a deliberate strike on a known medical facility and follows the Assad regime's appalling record of striking such facilities and first responders. These strikes have killed hundreds of innocent Syrians."

Kerry's "outrage" led to an agreement to not include Aleppo in the latest ceasefire agreement. This constitutes a green-light for Assad's air force and Putin's artillery to continue pounding the city. 226 civilians died there last week. The Assad regime's Alawite stronghold of Latakia province is indeed protected by the just negotiated ceasefire.

Battered Aleppo not included in latest Syria cease fire

Aleppo hit by another day of bombing as temporary truce excludes divided city

 

[DA60]

I hope Kerry was as outraged when Americans bombed a hospital in Afghanistan awhile back.

It was a mistake and this was a mistake.

No one in their right minds would deliberately target a hospital.

War is hell.

 

[RetiredUSN]

John Kerry expressing outrage is like a tree falling in the forest.

 

[a351]

I hope Kerry was as outraged when Americans bombed a hospital in Afghanistan awhile back.

It was a mistake and this was a mistake.

No one in their right minds would deliberately target a hospital.

War is hell.

That would you assign the same intentions to our military (who provided information regarding the faulty intel that led to the strike) and Assad, who has repeatedly struck such targets unapologetically, is quite telling.

 

[apdst]

I hope Kerry was as outraged when Americans bombed a hospital in Afghanistan awhile back.

It was a mistake and this was a mistake.

No one in their right minds would deliberately target a hospital.

War is hell.

DWB isn't screaming for war crimes charges this time.

 

[chuckiechan]

In the civilized world a hospital is avoided, in the middle east it is a target.

Maybe Obama should draw a line in the sand about killing civilians in a hospital.

 

[DaveFagan]

Kerry expresses outrage after 50 killed in strike on Syrian hospital


Kerry's "outrage" led to an agreement to not include Aleppo in the latest ceasefire agreement. This constitutes a green-light for Assad's air force and Putin's artillery to continue pounding the city. 226 civilians died there last week. The Assad regime's Alawite stronghold of Latakia province is indeed protected by the just negotiated ceasefire.

Battered Aleppo not included in latest Syria cease fire

Aleppo hit by another day of bombing as temporary truce excludes divided city

Russia and Syria have both denied bombing the Hospital. I wonder who might be instigating a false flag attack. Gee, who commonly uses that technique? Al Queda operates in Alleppo and the US wants them designated as "good guys" by the UN. If it smells like dead fish, put it in the compost pile.

 

[reinoe]

In the civilized world a hospital is avoided, in the middle east it is a target.

Maybe Obama should draw a line in the sand about killing civilians in a hospital.

Obama would have to immediately resign given his penchant for ordering strikes on hospitals and then opening fire on the fleeing victims. BTW, that part about strafing and firing upon people wearing scrubs and patients being pushed on hospital beds to escape the wreckage? That's a thing the Obama admin relishes.

 

[DA60]

That would you assign the same intentions to our military (who provided information regarding the faulty intel that led to the strike) and Assad, who has repeatedly struck such targets unapologetically, is quite telling.

Uhh...it tells you that they both hit the respective hospitals by mistake.

Even a brute like Assad knows full well the damage it could do to his cause (and outside support) if he started deliberately bombing hospitals.

:roll:


I'd ask what you thought I meant by it except for one thing - I don't much care.

Have a nice day.

 

[Beaudreaux]

In the civilized world a hospital is avoided, in the middle east it is a target.

Maybe Obama should draw a line in the sand about killing civilians in a hospital.

In the civilized world, a hospital is not used as a refuge for military personnel, equipment, and ammunition - in the middle east, they are, as well as schools, mosques, and other locations deemed off limits by the Geneva Conventions, which once done so, make them a legitimate and legal military target.

It works both ways - for a hospital, or school, or religious institution (mosque) to remain off limits, the location cannot be utilized as a safe haven for combatants or as a storage facility for military equipment, weapons, or ammunition. I'm not saying that this is what happened in this instance. I'm just responding to your accurate statement, by adding more information.

 

[joG]

Kerry expresses outrage after 50 killed in strike on Syrian hospital


Kerry's "outrage" led to an agreement to not include Aleppo in the latest ceasefire agreement. This constitutes a green-light for Assad's air force and Putin's artillery to continue pounding the city. 226 civilians died there last week. The Assad regime's Alawite stronghold of Latakia province is indeed protected by the just negotiated ceasefire.

Battered Aleppo not included in latest Syria cease fire

Aleppo hit by another day of bombing as temporary truce excludes divided city

If Kerry is outraged, it's his own fault. Everyone knew the risks of not removing Assad and his merry band of mass murderers and bloody torturers at the beginning. We did not push Europe and the Arab League who with Turkey were the neighborhood and should have acted on the r2p rule.

 

[OrphanSlug]

Kerry has unrealistic expectations, and a bloated sense of self-importance. It was foolish to assume all the parties involved here would really agree... on anything.

 

[joG]

Kerry has unrealistic expectations, and a bloated sense of self-importance. It was foolish to assume all the parties involved here would really agree... on anything.

I have never been sure of his feeling as self important as it appears or whether he only looks like a stuffed shirred prigg.

 

[DA60]

DWB isn't screaming for war crimes charges this time.

Who is DWB?

 

[Rogue Valley]

I hope Kerry was as outraged when Americans bombed a hospital in Afghanistan awhile back.

It was a mistake and this was a mistake.

No one in their right minds would deliberately target a hospital.

No mistake. The destruction of medical facilities is intentional. Assad barrel-bombed two Aleppo hospitals on Friday...

[url="http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2016/04/29/canadian-hospital-syria-bombing_n_9809320.html']Canadian-Run Aleppo Hospital 'Completely Destroyed' By Airstrikes[/url]

Al Marjeh Primary Health Centre damage. (Photo: UOSSM-Canada)

 

[apdst]

Who is DWB?

Doctors Without Borders

 

[matchlight]

In the civilized world, a hospital is not used as a refuge for military personnel, equipment, and ammunition - in the middle east, they are, as well as schools, mosques, and other locations deemed off limits by the Geneva Conventions, which once done so, make them a legitimate and legal military target.

It works both ways - for a hospital, or school, or religious institution (mosque) to remain off limits, the location cannot be utilized as a safe haven for combatants or as a storage facility for military equipment, weapons, or ammunition. I'm not saying that this is what happened in this instance. I'm just responding to your accurate statement, by adding more information.

Right on the money.

 

[matchlight]

If Kerry is outraged, it's his own fault. Everyone knew the risks of not removing Assad and his merry band of mass murderers and bloody torturers at the beginning. We did not push Europe and the Arab League who with Turkey were the neighborhood and should have acted on the r2p rule.

The best reason for the U.S. to want Assad's ouster is that for years, he has been cooperating closely with the Islamist regime that controls Iran. Concern about his inhumane treatment of people in Syria has never been a good enough reason to involve the U.S. in removing him from power. Without any stable alternative to replace him, there would outright anarchy in Syria, and it would become an even more threatening haven for jihadists than it is. Something like that has happened in Libya and Yemen, just to cite two countries.

I'm not sure the U.S. should try to prevent jihadists from taking over the government of nations where they are active and powerful. Once they were in power, the U.S. could treat them as a national government that is actively hostile to us--and they don't want that. The idea is to create a mismatch, where the enemy has no answer for the weapons you are using against him. Easier and much more damaging to destroy government buildings, barracks, airfields, rail lines, electrical plants, bridges, refineries, munitions stores, docks, warehouses, and so on with the very heavy weapons the U.S. has, and jihadists don't, than to chase groups of them around the hinterlands with drones, small forces of infantry, helicopters, and the occasional fighter or ground attack aircraft.

That comes too close to fighting them on even terms. It's also too drawn-out and incremental a way of fighting them to allow the kind of sudden, overwhelming military humiliation that would destroy not just the jihadists' ability to fight, but also the prestige that is so important to them. The U.S. should think more in terms of delivering several hundred guided bombs in a single night, so the whole world sees it crushing jihadists en masse without even seeming to break a sweat. Raqqa should have gotten that treatment long ago, and possibly Mosul too.

 

[joG]

The best reason for the U.S. to want Assad's ouster is that for years, he has been cooperating closely with the Islamist regime that controls Iran. Concern about his inhumane treatment of people in Syria has never been a good enough reason to involve the U.S. in removing him from power. Without any stable alternative to replace him, there would outright anarchy in Syria, and it would become an even more threatening haven for jihadists than it is. Something like that has happened in Libya and Yemen, just to cite two countries.

I'm not sure the U.S. should try to prevent jihadists from taking over the government of nations where they are active and powerful. Once they were in power, the U.S. could treat them as a national government that is actively hostile to us--and they don't want that. The idea is to create a mismatch, where the enemy has no answer for the weapons you are using against him. Easier and much more damaging to destroy government buildings, barracks, airfields, rail lines, electrical plants, bridges, refineries, munitions stores, docks, warehouses, and so on with the very heavy weapons the U.S. has, and jihadists don't, than to chase groups of them around the hinterlands with drones, small forces of infantry, helicopters, and the occasional fighter or ground attack aircraft.

That comes too close to fighting them on even terms. It's also too drawn-out and incremental a way of fighting them to allow the kind of sudden, overwhelming military humiliation that would destroy not just the jihadists' ability to fight, but also the prestige that is so important to them. The U.S. should think more in terms of delivering several hundred guided bombs in a single night, so the whole world sees it crushing jihadists en masse without even seeming to break a sweat. Raqqa should have gotten that treatment long ago, and possibly Mosul too.

Interesting take.