Ok so everything America says is the truth? :lol:

and how did they know it was a US airstrike?

of course not
obviously George Bush lied about a few things

Who else is running bombing runs in Afghanistan?

I don't see what possible gain the US would have had by deliberately bombing the hospital. I am more willing to subscribe to the "incompetence/ lack of adequate checking" argument, than saying they deliberately targeted the hospital.

Compare to Syria - Russia has a clear interest in maintaining Assad in his position and are therefore happy to bomb civilians in enemy-held areas.

Its not a matter of just "who to believe", its a matter of looking at the broader context and motivation.

What strategic or tactical interest does the US have in bombing a hospital deliberately? I'm not saying they weren't incompetent to the point of negligence - they need to be held accountable.

But there would need to be compelling evidence pointing to why they would deliberately do this before I would subscribe to that theory.

I don't see what possible gain the US would have had by deliberately bombing the hospital. I am more willing to subscribe to the "incompetence/ lack of adequate checking" argument, than saying they deliberately targeted the hospital.

Compare to Syria - Russia has a clear interest in maintaining Assad in his position and are therefore happy to bomb civilians in enemy-held areas.

Its not a matter of just "who to believe", its a matter of looking at the broader context and motivation.

What strategic or tactical interest does the US have in bombing a hospital deliberately? I'm not saying they weren't incompetent to the point of negligence - they need to be held accountable.

But there would need to be compelling evidence pointing to why they would deliberately do this before I would subscribe to that theory.

I don't see what possible gain the US would have had by deliberately bombing the hospital. I am more willing to subscribe to the "incompetence/ lack of adequate checking" argument, than saying they deliberately targeted the hospital.

Compare to Syria - Russia has a clear interest in maintaining Assad in his position and are therefore happy to bomb civilians in enemy-held areas.

Its not a matter of just "who to believe", its a matter of looking at the broader context and motivation.

What strategic or tactical interest does the US have in bombing a hospital deliberately? I'm not saying they weren't incompetent to the point of negligence - they need to be held accountable.

But there would need to be compelling evidence pointing to why they would deliberately do this before I would subscribe to that theory.

oh dear, a 200 year old white man gets to arbitrate on blackness now


http://www.smh.com.au/world/rupert-murdoch-suggests-us-president-barack-obama-is-not-a-real-black-president-20151008-gk4b09.html

Rupert's father Sir Keith Murdoch attained his prominent position in Australian society through a fortuitous marriage to the daughter of a wealthy Jewish family, née Elisabeth Joy Greene. Through his wife's connections, Keith Murdoch was subsequently promoted from reporter to chairman of the British-owned newspaper where he worked. There was enough money to buy himself a knighthood of the British realm, two newspapers in Adelaide, South Australia, and a radio station in a faraway mining town. For some reason, Murdoch has always tried to hide the fact that his pious mother brought him up as a Jew.

Ben and Candy Carson terrific. What about a real black President who can properly address the racial divide? And much else.

Republican presidential candidate Ben Carson on Sunday defended his recent suggestion that President Obama holds anti-Semitic beliefs.

Carson wrote in a recent op-ed piece for The Jerusalem Post that a speech this month by Obama in support of his Iran nuclear deal was “replete with coded innuendos employing standard anti-Semitic themes.”

Carson told “Fox News Sunday” that upon a recent visit to Israel that he “couldn’t find a single person there who didn’t feel that this administration had turned their backs on Israel.”

“All you have to do … is go to Israel and talk to average people on all ends of that spectrum,” continued Carson, a retired pediatric neurosurgeon and social conservative.

EXCLUSIVE-Strategika 51: Six Russian fighter jets type Multirole Sukhoi SU - 30 SM have intercepted 4 Israeli McDonnell Douglas F-15's fighter bombers attempting to infiltrate the Syrian coast.The Israeli F 15 warplanes have been flying over Syrian airspace for months and in particular the coast of Latakia, which is now the bridgehead of the Russian forces in Syria.

The Israeli jets would generally follow a fairly complex flight plan and approach Latakia from the sea

On the night of 1 October 02, 2015, six Sukhoi SU-30 Russian SM fighters took off from the Syrian Hmimim airbase in the direction of Cyprus, before changing course and intercepting the four Israeli F-15 fighters off the coast of Syria, that were flying in attack formation.

Surprised by a situation as unexpected and probably not prepared for a dogfight with one of the best Russian multipurpose fighters, Israeli pilots have quickly turned back South at high speed over the Lebanon.

The Lebanese army has officially announced at 2313 Z (local time) that four "enemy aircraft" (Israeli) had crossed the airspace of the Lebanon.

This 'incident' between the Russian and Israeli combat aircraft struck with amazement the command of the Israeli air force, which has estimated that a possible dogfight between F-15 Israelis and the Russian Su-30 would have led to the destruction of the four aircraft Israelis.

Israel has strongly protested to Moscow of the incident but the Russians demanded explanations about the presence of Israeli military aircraft in full Syrian airspace.

This incident indicates that the protection of Syrian airspace is now under the protection of the Russian air weapon. What causes gnashing of teeth in Washington.

The incident has been ignored by major news agencies but relays political and media of Israel in the United States, Europe and in the Arab world will redouble their efforts to demonize the Russian support for the Syrian Government.
Read more at http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=53f_1443836190#UL6gFTjo6SJ6CPCd.99

Its interesting that Russia has only just recently entered the fold and already taken out many Isis targets the U.S seemingly have been unable to do. Russia is still the bad guy according to western media and politicians.

Its as if the USA does not like Russia taking out the raging Bull they have let loose in the Arab china shop so to speak.
Israel is concerned as well it seems.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=53f_1443836190

Its interesting that Russia has only just recently entered the fold and already taken out many Isis targets the U.S seemingly have been unable to do. Russia is still the bad guy according to western media and politicians.

Its as if the USA does not like Russia taking out the raging Bull they have let loose in the Arab china shop so to speak.
Israel is concerned as well it seems.

Amazing what can be achieved when you're not constrained by rules of engagement, morals or collateral damage concerns.

Amazing what can be achieved when you're not constrained by rules of engagement, morals or collateral damage concerns.

It is irrelevant in the scheme of things. The facts are that they bomb an unaffiliated, globally recognised NGO hospital. You cant go around saying "oooohh the Russians are evil, how dare they attack the rebels/civilians" and then bomb a fucking hospital and say it was an accident, collateral etc. It's actually sickening to think our allies, the supposed "good guys" can do this and show such little remorse for it. This should be treated as a work crime and nothing less but we all know it will get swept under the rug because 'Merica

Like bombing hospitals for instance?

I think the response of some to the American air-strike is disgusting.

I doubt they'd intentionally bomb the hospital, but the story from the white house has changed soooo many times I don't know what to believe.

I can't understand some of the vitriolic-anti-Russia and pro-America people on here. Please take a step back and look at it objectively.

Who's invasion caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of civilians?
Who's ongoing drone strikes are killing civilians, then shrugging it off as "collateral"?
Who dragged Australia into yet another clusterfuck in the ME region?
Who allies with the Saudis, the financial backers of these terrorists and the promoters of Wahhabism?

Hint: it's an evil imperialist regime hell-bent on imposing its hegemony over the world, [spoiler]and its not Russia.[/spoiler]

Edited by 433: 8/10/2015 08:23:21 PM

I can't understand some of the vitriolic-anti-Russia and pro-America people on here. Please take a step back and look at it objectively.

Who's invasion caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of civilians?
Who's ongoing drone strikes are killing civilians, then shrugging it off as "collateral"?
Who dragged Australia into yet another clusterfuck in the ME region?
Who allies with the Saudis, the financial backers of these terrorists and the promoters of Wahhabism?

Hint: it's an evil imperialist regime hell-bent on imposing its hegemony over the world, [spoiler]and its not Russia.[/spoiler]

Edited by 433: 8/10/2015 08:23:21 PM

What confuses me is people to criticize the US for their role in conflicts, and are usually the first people to 'demand' the world does more the stop ISIS. You can't have it both ways. You cannot criticise America for collateral damage and yet expect no incidents involving civilians to occur. I'm sorry but you're completely retarded if you think you can have a war without collateral damage. It's not like ISIS sits in the desert on its own. I hate idiots who will sit back and tell us on their ridiculous blogs that we need to do more to stop injustice in the world and then condemn military action. It's like make up your mind.

Should the US leave the middle east entirely? Absolutely. Their biggest mistake was trying to manage that clusterfuck of a region. Let them kill each other, who cares. That's their problem to sort out. Idiots would still find a way to blame America for internal cultural wars within these countries anyway.

Is this situation over the hospital terrible? Yes, America is negligent. They are responsible for this action. Expecting perfection in a conflict zone I think is unreasonable.

There is killing the odd civilian collateral and then there is directly bombing an NGO hospital and changing your story four times. This is not expecting perfection, this is expecting basic logic and humanity and to be able to send doctors and nurses overseas without the so called "good guys" blowing them to kingdom come. This can't just be brushed under the carpet

I heard the strike was called in by Afghan soldiers?

Humanity in a war zone? Route 1 is to kill the bad guys. Sometimes said bad guys are in close proximity to civilians and hospitals. Sometimes bombs don't hit their exact targets. I feel people are holding the USA to a standard which is unreasonable.

"This was not just an attack on our hospital – it was an attack on the Geneva Conventions. This cannot be tolerated. These Conventions govern the rules of war and were established to protect civilians in conflicts – including patients, medical workers and facilities."

"This attack cannot be brushed aside as a mere mistake or an inevitable consequence of war. Statements from the Afghanistan government have claimed that Taliban forces were using the hospital to fire on Coalition forces. These statements imply that Afghan and US forces working together decided to raze to the ground a fully functioning hospital, which amounts to an admission of a war crime."

But it isn't being swept under the carpet. We will find out what happened.

There is a huge amount of confusion and mis-information (and dis-information) out there. My bet is that someone in the Afghan Army had a reason to bomb the hospital, they called the strike in and the US did it without going through the proper processes to verify the target.

During the original Afghan invasion many of the warlords in the Northern Alliance did the same thing - told the US there were Taliban hotspots, called in airstrikes, only for the US to find out they actually just bombed other warlords who were personal rivals of those calling in the strikes.

In these situations it is best to assume a massive clusterf*ck due to incompetence.

And then we heard that the Taliban was using it as a base and then we heard that it was an accident. Clearly no one knows wtf happened or why and people are now trying to pass it off as collateral and try to forget about it.