Insurgents Attack Medevac Helicopters. AFGN STH.

#1
KABUL, Afghanistan - Earlier this afternoon, an International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) convoy, in southern Afghanistan, struck an Improvised Explosive Device (IED) resulting in the wounding of soldiers. When helicopters arrived to evacuate the wounded soldiers the insurgents opened fire on the medical evacuation operation, damaging one of the helicopters.

An attack on clearly marked evacuation aircraft is in clear violation of international accords for the protection of medical personnel.

One helicopter left the scene with all the wounded personnel whilst the damaged helicopter remains on the ground.
http://www.nato.int/isaf/docu/pressreleases/2009/07/pr090729-540.html
 
#2
A disturbing development, but not an altogether suprising one. Since when have the insurgents worried about the niceties of international law? Hope the injured guys are okay.
 
#4
Hmm, what if a drone stuck a Hellfire up a Tali-Medi wagon, they'd point out the rules then!
 
#5
An attack on clearly marked evacuation aircraft is in clear violation of international accords for the protection of medical personnel.
There are some interesting questions.

1. What international convention is meant?
2. Do NATO forces and American ones recognize that Taliban fighters are under protection of the international conventions as well.
3. Do captured Talibs enjoy status of POWs or are they merely 'illegal' combatants'?
 
#6
Military necessity and proportionality ? Get your own house in order first ISAF!

The number of civilians killed in the conflict in Afghanistan so far this year has risen 24% compared with the same period last year, the UN says.
More than 1,000 people were killed in the first six months of 2009, according to a UN report.
The UN blamed insurgents for using increasingly deadly modes of attack. It also said air strikes by government-allied forces were responsible.
There has been widespread concern in Afghanistan about civilian death tolls.
In June the US military called for better training in an effort to reduce the numbers of civilian deaths.
Pasted from <http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/8177935.stm>
 
#7
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/geneva05.asp

Convention (I) for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field, August 12, 1949
...
Art. 13. The present Convention shall apply to the wounded and sick belonging to the following categories:

(1) Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict, as well as members of militias or volunteer corps forming part of such armed forces. (2) Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, belonging to a Party to the conflict and operating in or outside their own territory, even if this territory is occupied, provided that such militias or volunteer corps...
...
Art. 19. Fixed establishments and mobile medical units of the Medical Service may in no circumstances be attacked, but shall at all times be respected and protected by the Parties to the conflict.
...
Art. 21. The protection to which fixed establishments and mobile medical units of the Medical Service are entitled shall not cease unless they are used to commit, outside their humanitarian duties, acts harmful to the enemy.
 
#8
Does the Geneva convention and all that it entails cover Asia?

I would guess, that given the fact they are known to cut the heads of prisoners, the answer is no.

So why is this such a surprise?



Any enemy that executes kids for being gay, or women for killing husbands that rape their own kids, isnt really likely to worry about a medivac chopper are they?
 
#9
KGB_resident said:
An attack on clearly marked evacuation aircraft is in clear violation of international accords for the protection of medical personnel.
There are some interesting questions.

1. What international convention is meant?
2. Do NATO forces and American ones recognize that Taliban fighters are under protection of the international conventions as well.
3. Do captured Talibs enjoy status of POWs or are they merely 'illegal' combatants'?
You raise some good questions.....answers from the coal-face...
1. The prevalence of an international convention governing the en forces is absent, the operate under a neblous quasi-religous code that is as contradictory/hypocritical as it is changing. Nothing is OOB and even the Quran is mis-interpreted to try and add justification to the en actions.

2. Yes, we do recognise them to be under the protection of LOAC, we apply ROE judiciously mindful of the safety of the civillian populus as main effort

3. Injured en forces are treated in the same way as our forces. Moreover, the status of the Talibs (your description) is as whatever the Afghan authorities deem to class them for prosecution by the Afghan judicial , system. This will range to a combatant to criminal to enemy of Afghanistan, delete as appropriate.

The bigger question is should WE discriminate between CAEVAC/MEDIVAC ac and our tactical ac. If the en fails to observe the conventions (of morality - ours I know) then should we remove the big red and white aiming mark on our soldiers/sailors and airman and vehicles?
 
#11
hackle said:
Gren said:
Does the Geneva convention and all that it entails cover Asia?

I would guess, that given the fact they are known to cut the heads of prisoners, the answer is no...
WAH?
WAH? not at all, I know what it covers, but given the way most Asian countries and their forces??? for want of a better term act, then hence the question.

Read what the GC covers and then ask me.
 
#13
Not the first time they've done it - It wont be the last!
 
#15
The key here is "clearly marked... aircraft", if any vehicle, building or person has the red cross/crescent marked on it then it is not a legal target in accordance with the Geneva Convention.

1. I'll wager that we do not have the ability to mark up every helicopter before it undertakes a medevac, particularly if it is diverted mid-flight from another task.

2. It is unlikely that the Taliban mark their medevac equipment (if they have any!) appropriately. If they did then we would not engage.

In any case the majority of Taliban do not know of the Geneva Convention and none of them care about it - why should they?
 
#16
Quite right. Their culture predates the Geneva Conventions by several hundred years..
 
#17
The Viet Cong (who are supposedly a little more culturally civilised than Terry) did the same thing to Huey Dustoffs, although the horrendous torture inflicted on the captured aircrew afterwards would make mere decapitation seem very hospitable indeed.

-DC
 
#18
msr said:
Quite right. Their culture predates the Geneva Conventions by several hundred years..
culture :rofl:

Sorry. I know you used that word correctly. But that word in that context just "sounds" wrong. "Traditions", not so much. We are dealing with people that revere almost prehistoric values.
 
#19
When will people realise that the "insurgents", for want of a better name, do not subscribe to international law except when it suits them. They dont want international law, they want Sharia law - but only their variety of Sharia law. They want to rule the world with a religious fervour born of religio-political leaders who despise everything that has been developed in the civilised world, except that which they can espouse to gain power. They mobilise ignorance, fear, discrimination, hatred, poverty.... Anything which will further their aims.

This evening I had a discussion with a friend of long standing - 30 years (a Bangladeshi and Muslim who owns an Indian restaurant), he told me that the whole of Islam has been disrupted by these lunatic despotic rulers and clerics who advocate violence and intolerance. And whilst Broon and Co are dispensing British aid where, to benefit some poor twat in a third world country cost 50,000 usd to administrate 5 dollars of food - and it is done by a foreign entity under some misconcieved idealogical Labour party plan, or a thieving NGO, by order of labour yoghurt knitting central. The taliban have a much simpler concept: Join us or be killed.

So why expect them to be constrained by a recent (in historical terms) Western ideology of gentlemanly warefare. They are out to win. And will use any strategy to do so. No surprise there.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top