Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Yet, where is the outrage...

http://www.npr.org/2015/10/27/452163596/doctor-recounts-airstrikes-against-his-hospital-in-syria

Russia has been accused of hitting a hospital in the Syrian province of Idlib. Dr. Mohamed Tennari of the Syrian American Medical Society says his hospital has already been hit 18 times by the regime.

Well, it doesn't really surprise me.

Whataboutism

 Freakazoitt wrote:
Whataboutism

Absolutely wrong response if your country just bombed a fething hospital.

I'm still saddened and appalled by our colossal error. Completely preventable. Horrible tragedy.

Syrian American Medical Society

What's that?

 Freakazoitt wrote:

Syrian American Medical Society

What's that?

In their own words
https://www.sams-usa.net/foundation/index.php/who-we-are/mission-vision

 Freakazoitt wrote:
Whataboutism

Consider the fuss we made about the US military bombing a hospital, no, not at all. The Russian military did something they shouldn't have.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Freakazoitt wrote:
Whataboutism

Consider the fuss we made about the US military bombing a hospital, no, not at all. The Russian military did something they shouldn't have.

Aye, but judging from the last thread, there were obviously people firing from the hospital, the presence of soldiers makes it a viable target, and nobody will have any problems if the Russians roll their military into the bombed out remains to carry out an "impartial investigation", right?

My opinions haven't changed from the last thread, but I'm looking forward to the inevitable 180 some posters will do.

I think this one is actually the third or fourth they have hit, along with several ambulances they specifically targeted.

I would not be really surprised. The Russian military has a history of using excessive force and collateral damage. They have razed entire towns to the ground to get at terrorists in the past.
The difference between the American and Russian militaries however, is that the Americans pretend to care for international law and human rights, their image depends on it. Russia on the other hand has no such concerns, its image depends on brute military force. That difference in image is why the US bombing a hospital is much more of a shock than Russia doing the same.

There is also the fact, that unlike the American bombing, there is no evidence here that Russia actually was involved. It may as well have been Syrian aircraft hitting those hospitals,

 -Shrike- wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Freakazoitt wrote:
Whataboutism

Consider the fuss we made about the US military bombing a hospital, no, not at all. The Russian military did something they shouldn't have.

Aye, but judging from the last thread, there were obviously people firing from the hospital, the presence of soldiers makes it a viable target, and nobody will have any problems if the Russians roll their military into the bombed out remains to carry out an "impartial investigation", right?

You understand that an "impartial investigation" does not necessarily need to be conducted by an outside agency, right?

 Kanluwen wrote:

 -Shrike- wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Freakazoitt wrote:
Whataboutism

Consider the fuss we made about the US military bombing a hospital, no, not at all. The Russian military did something they shouldn't have.

Aye, but judging from the last thread, there were obviously people firing from the hospital, the presence of soldiers makes it a viable target, and nobody will have any problems if the Russians roll their military into the bombed out remains to carry out an "impartial investigation", right?

You understand that an "impartial investigation" does not necessarily need to be conducted by an outside agency, right?

True, but it would be better.

 LethalShade wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 -Shrike- wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Freakazoitt wrote:
Whataboutism

Consider the fuss we made about the US military bombing a hospital, no, not at all. The Russian military did something they shouldn't have.

Aye, but judging from the last thread, there were obviously people firing from the hospital, the presence of soldiers makes it a viable target, and nobody will have any problems if the Russians roll their military into the bombed out remains to carry out an "impartial investigation", right?

You understand that an "impartial investigation" does not necessarily need to be conducted by an outside agency, right?

True, but it would be better.

It would be better certainly, but it also tends to be a good thing to actively secure the scene of a crime.

Not saying I distrust Doctors Without Borders, but if it truly was being used as a place to store weapons like the Afghani government claimed then securing the place for investigators is paramount--even if the US Army isn't the ones doing the investigation.

 Iron_Captain wrote:
I would not be really surprised. The Russian military has a history of using excessive force and collateral damage. They have razed entire towns to the ground to get at terrorists in the past.
The difference between the American and Russian militaries however, is that the Americans pretend to care for international law and human rights, their image depends on it. Russia on the other hand has no such concerns, its image depends on brute military force. That difference in image is why the US bombing a hospital is much more of a shock than Russia doing the same.

There is also the fact, that unlike the American bombing, there is no evidence here that Russia actually was involved. It may as well have been Syrian aircraft hitting those hospitals,

Give me a break. It is not hard to figure out what planes are flying what missions and I know for a fact we have guys looking at that (one is a good buddy of mine).

The mental gymnastics you go through to first claim 'Russians don't pretend to care for international laws' then to spin like a top stating 'there is no evidence it was the Russians' is particularly funny to me.

Take a stance, stick with it. Provide sources. You'll do better.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kanluwen wrote:


Not saying I distrust Doctors Without Borders, but if it truly was being used as a place to store weapons like the Afghani government claimed then securing the place for investigators is paramount--even if the US Army isn't the ones doing the investigation.

More reporting is coming out about ongoing collection against the MSF facility in Afghanistan showing we were pretty sure it was under Talib control and being used as a C2 base. It would not be the first time MSF has given in to an insurgent or terrorist organization in order to be allowed to run a facility in areas they control.

I'm waiting on the investigation on this one.

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

 Freakazoitt wrote:

Syrian American Medical Society

What's that?

In their own words
https://www.sams-usa.net/foundation/index.php/who-we-are/mission-vision

This is a bizarrely specific humanitarian group

Isn't "there's no evidence it was us!!!" like the official Russian mantra?

They're like a noble house in Menzoberranzan.

 LordofHats wrote:

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

 Freakazoitt wrote:

Syrian American Medical Society

What's that?

In their own words
https://www.sams-usa.net/foundation/index.php/who-we-are/mission-vision

This is a bizarrely specific humanitarian group

http://www.crimsonlanguage.com/sites/default/files/imported/docs/Syria/The_Syrian_American_Medical_Society_v1.pdf
Who work with the The Syrian British Medical Society http://sb-ms.org/mission-statement/
And also the Syrian Expatriate Medical Association‏. http://syriareliefnetwork.com/en/. Who do some fine work as this picture shows

Despite having no funds. https://companycheck.co.uk/company/08723781/SYRIAN-EXPATRIATE-MEDICAL-ASSOCIATION/summary
So who pays ?

 Iron_Captain wrote:
I would not be really surprised. The Russian military has a history of using excessive force and collateral damage. They have razed entire towns to the ground to get at terrorists in the past.
The difference between the American and Russian militaries however, is that the Americans pretend to care for international law and human rights, their image depends on it. Russia on the other hand has no such concerns, its image depends on brute military force. That difference in image is why the US bombing a hospital is much more of a shock than Russia doing the same.

There is also the fact, that unlike the American bombing, there is no evidence here that Russia actually was involved. It may as well have been Syrian aircraft hitting those hospitals,

In summary:

Russia is okay with collateral damage when fighting terrorists

Americans are pussies that are pretending to not be okay with collateral damage due to public image concerns

Russia has cultivated an image of brutality

That's why people care when the US does something but those same people do not care when Russia does the same thing

It probably wasn't Russia because you have no proof

It could as easily have been Syrians bombing the hospital

Might want to spoiler the pic with a language warning, it got removed last time.

 Iron_Captain wrote:
I would not be really surprised. The Russian military has a history of using excessive force and collateral damage. They have razed entire towns to the ground to get at terrorists in the past.
The difference between the American and Russian militaries however, is that the Americans pretend to care for international law and human rights, their image depends on it. Russia on the other hand has no such concerns, its image depends on brute military force. That difference in image is why the US bombing a hospital is much more of a shock than Russia doing the same.

This doesn't make it any less reprehensible.

That being said I would not put it past ISIS to shell hospitals, and I wouldnt expect a doctor to know the difference.

 Orlanth wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:
I would not be really surprised. The Russian military has a history of using excessive force and collateral damage. They have razed entire towns to the ground to get at terrorists in the past.
The difference between the American and Russian militaries however, is that the Americans pretend to care for international law and human rights, their image depends on it. Russia on the other hand has no such concerns, its image depends on brute military force. That difference in image is why the US bombing a hospital is much more of a shock than Russia doing the same.

This doesn't make it any less reprehensible.

That being said I would not put it past ISIS to shell hospitals, and I wouldnt expect a doctor to know the difference.

Pretty sure DaIsh is not flying jet plans and helicopters, as are the Russians. I would also bet most doctors can recognize an airplane or helicopter as opposed to a truck bomb coming through the front gate.

 Frazzled wrote:
Yet, where is the outrage...

http://www.npr.org/2015/10/27/452163596/doctor-recounts-airstrikes-against-his-hospital-in-syria

Russia has been accused of hitting a hospital in the Syrian province of Idlib. Dr. Mohamed Tennari of the Syrian American Medical Society says his hospital has already been hit 18 times by the regime.

I am outraged, but I hadn't seen this one yet,

I was too busy being outraged by this one by the Saudis (& the government not quite in exile) in Yemen

http://www.doctorswithoutborders.org/article/yemen-msf-hospital-destroyed-airstrikes?utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=social


Automatically Appended Next Post:
War crimes investigations all round,

and IF it can be proved the hospitals were deliberately (as opposed to incompetently) targeted without due cause as defined by the Geneva convention (yes I do recognise ther are circumstances when they can be shot at),

and that the hospitals complied with legal minimal standards of marking themselves as hospitals (people on the ground have to be able to tell it's a hospital)

then I would hope to see some convictions and prison sentences

 SlaveToDorkness wrote:
Isn't "there's no evidence it was us!!!" like the official Russian mantra?

They're like a noble house in Menzoberranzan.

Dat reference tho

 Freakazoitt wrote:
Whataboutism

Actually its whataboutism to say that critiquing Russia for blowing up a hospital is whataboutism.

Pretty much the perfect expression of it, actually.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Iron_Captain wrote:
They have razed entire towns to the ground to get at terrorists in the past.

I have some serious problems with Ivan, but on this count I am in agreement with them. I don't really care that they bombed a hospital, but I definitely see a lack of outcry about it in comparison to the yelling when America accidentally did the same thing.

Difference: USA tries to minimize collateral damage & is HIGHLY accountable when they do. Russia purposefully inflicts collateral damage & then shrugs with a smile.

There's an argument there to be made about which country is waging war in a more honest manner, but moral inconsistency in regards to identical tragedy is just weak. I mean really.

 Peter Wiggin wrote:

 Freakazoitt wrote:
Whataboutism

Actually its whataboutism to say that critiquing Russia for blowing up a hospital is whataboutism.

Pretty much the perfect expression of it, actually.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Iron_Captain wrote:
They have razed entire towns to the ground to get at terrorists in the past.

I have some serious problems with Ivan, but on this count I am in agreement with them. I don't really care that they bombed a hospital, but I definitely see a lack of outcry about it in comparison to the yelling when America accidentally did the same thing.

Difference: USA tries to minimize collateral damage & is HIGHLY accountable when they do. Russia purposefully inflicts collateral damage & then shrugs with a smile.

There's an argument there to be made about which country is waging war in a more honest manner, but moral inconsistency in regards to identical tragedy is just weak. I mean really.

Kinda like when the russian special forces killed 170 of their own people with gas and refused to tell doctors what it was so they could try and save those who actually made it out of the theater?

It's the Russian way.

I think no one says anything about Russia is because they know Russia doesn't care. America will try to defend themselves and make it right (or at least pretend they are).

Russia will tell people to go feth themselves.

That's true. Mujahedeens in Afghan village? Blow up village. Terrorists in Grozny? Blow up whole city. Terrorists captured hospital in Budyonovsk in 1995. "Negotiations? What negotiations? We did not have orders to negotiate" (Note how it is similar to 40k Imperial Guards act) They stormed hospital two times. They tried to blow up bus with terrorists and hostages later (bus changed it's route to prevent that).
But who the feth that Syrian-American Dr. Mohamed Tennari? Why his organization was ok with terrorists blowing hospitals and killing stuff and screams 10 times in FB about a probable Russian attack on hospital?

Russia is in town.

Hide yo kids

Hide yo wife

Hide yo hospitals

 CptJake wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:
I would not be really surprised. The Russian military has a history of using excessive force and collateral damage. They have razed entire towns to the ground to get at terrorists in the past.
The difference between the American and Russian militaries however, is that the Americans pretend to care for international law and human rights, their image depends on it. Russia on the other hand has no such concerns, its image depends on brute military force. That difference in image is why the US bombing a hospital is much more of a shock than Russia doing the same.

This doesn't make it any less reprehensible.

That being said I would not put it past ISIS to shell hospitals, and I wouldnt expect a doctor to know the difference.

Pretty sure DaIsh is not flying jet plans and helicopters, as are the Russians. I would also bet most doctors can recognize an airplane or helicopter as opposed to a truck bomb coming through the front gate.

Sure but an artillery shell is not a truck bomb, and ISIS do have captured artillery.
Who is Dalsh?