By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - Red Cross defends helping Taliban treat casualties

This isnt new at all


Wounded British soldiers are waking up in hospital to find Taliban prisoners being treated in the next bed.

Servicemen at Camp Bastion in Afghanistan say it is appalling that our soldiers are forced to share a ward with enemy fighters who could have fired the shots that injured them, or killed their friends.




And this is a fine example why we shouldnt save their lives, Whilst we are treating there wounded in our hospital beds, they are entering our hospital to kill our wounded 


UK NEWS

WOUNDED HERO KILLS TALIBAN FIGHTER FROM HOSPITAL BED

Private Anthony Myers on the front line

Thursday July 9,2009

By Chris Riches

A BRITISH soldier was hailed a hero yesterday for shooting dead a Taliban fighter from his field hospital bed.

 

Private Anthony Myers, 19, was being treated for his wounds after being shot in the shoulder as he battled insurgents in Afghanistan.

As he lay bleeding and in pain in a medical centre tent, he spotted two armed Taliban preparing to kill injured troops. He leapt up and shot one, alerting colleagues who shot the second.

Pte Myers saved not only his life but that of a wounded colleague in the bed next to him.

The Territorial Army soldier has been dubbed an “inspiration” by Army chiefs.



Around the Network

I'd say that is what they should do as distasteful as it may seem to us. If two western oriented countries were at war, would we want them choosing sides then? What if they decided that the U.S. was actually doing more harm than whatever other western country (in this hypothetical situation) and refused to help US soldiers? The thing is once you make the decision that one group (the taliban in this case) is so wicked that they do not deserve medical assistance then you have actively become a political organization and in any kind of situation or conflict the question arises "who is worthy of medical assistance based on their moral and political views? Is their morality in line with ours to such an extent that we will assist them? Where do their political views differ from ours? Will assisting them hinder political agenda A?" And who would be setting their moral and political compass that decides who they do and don't help?

You don't want a neutral medical organization being filled with political advocates and bureaucrats, or else they will cease to be even remotely effective as an organization, and will probably be even more morally abhorrent than what we perceive them to be now because of their actions.



You can find me on facebook as Markus Van Rijn, if you friend me just mention you're from VGchartz and who you are here.

famousringo said:
Garnett said:
highwaystar101 said:
Chairman-Mao said:
What the fuck? Red cross helps the taliban?!?! Wow I'm never going to donate to the red cross in the future. They should not be helping the enemy.

They're also not your ally. To the Red Cross/crescent the taliban are not the enemy, they are soldiers being wounded and this is their only concern, they do not hold bias. They help USA forces too.

The Red/Cross doesnt get funded from the Taliban, and im sure they wouldn't help them if a doctor was beheaded on LIVE TV.

If America (and the free world) gets take out, then who the hell is gonna fund the Red Cross? Not the taliban.

@ Pastro243

Its always nice to see them supporting terrorism and 9/11.

The Afghan Red Crescent Society survived the last period of Taliban rule, so I suspect they'll survive your fantasy world where Al Qaeda has managed to detonate a WMD that kills only people who vote.

So let the Afghan Red Cresecent help them, We should NOT be helping them. They are

1. Civilizans with Guns, not soldiers.

2. Trying to kill our soldiers.

 

Im not gonna offer the guy who is trying to kill my family lemonade, that would be stupid.



Garnett said:
famousringo said:
Garnett said:
highwaystar101 said:

They're also not your ally. To the Red Cross/crescent the taliban are not the enemy, they are soldiers being wounded and this is their only concern, they do not hold bias. They help USA forces too.

The Red/Cross doesnt get funded from the Taliban, and im sure they wouldn't help them if a doctor was beheaded on LIVE TV.

If America (and the free world) gets take out, then who the hell is gonna fund the Red Cross? Not the taliban.

The Afghan Red Crescent Society survived the last period of Taliban rule, so I suspect they'll survive your fantasy world where Al Qaeda has managed to detonate a WMD that kills only people who vote.

So let the Afghan Red Cresecent help them, We should NOT be helping them. They are

1. Civilizans with Guns, not soldiers.

2. Trying to kill our soldiers.

Im not gonna offer the guy who is trying to kill my family lemonade, that would be stupid.

"We?"

Your profile doesn't mention anything about being from Switzerland.

The article:

The International Committee of the Red Cross is defending its practice of providing medical training and basic medical supplies to the Taliban in Afghanistan.

Wikipedia:

The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) is a private humanitarian institution based in Geneva, Switzerland. States parties (signatories) to the four Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their Additional Protocols of 1977 and 2005, have given the ICRC a mandate to protect the victims of international and internal armed conflicts. Such victims include war wounded, prisoners, refugees, civilians, and other non-combatants.

Whether the Taliban are soldiers or civilians with guns is irrelevant to the International Committee of the Red Cross's mandate to protect war wounded persons. Furthermore, the notoriously and staunchly neutral Swiss don't have a side in this conflict. And finally, both the United States and Afghanistan, as signatories of the Geneva Conventions, recognize the ICRC's mandate to protect the health and welfare of those wounded in armed conflict, regardless of their allegiance.



"The worst part about these reviews is they are [subjective]--and their scores often depend on how drunk you got the media at a Street Fighter event."  — Mona Hamilton, Capcom Senior VP of Marketing
*Image indefinitely borrowed from BrainBoxLtd without his consent.

The Red Cross is a relic from a time when there were rules of engagement in war, but ultimately a good relic. So long as they're strictly looking to alleviate human suffering, and not toying with the conflict in a given way (or at least toying with it moreso than making combatants more able to fight than they otherwise would be)



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

Around the Network
famousringo said:
Garnett said:
famousringo said:
Garnett said:
highwaystar101 said:
 

They're also not your ally. To the Red Cross/crescent the taliban are not the enemy, they are soldiers being wounded and this is their only concern, they do not hold bias. They help USA forces too.

The Red/Cross doesnt get funded from the Taliban, and im sure they wouldn't help them if a doctor was beheaded on LIVE TV.

If America (and the free world) gets take out, then who the hell is gonna fund the Red Cross? Not the taliban.

The Afghan Red Crescent Society survived the last period of Taliban rule, so I suspect they'll survive your fantasy world where Al Qaeda has managed to detonate a WMD that kills only people who vote.

So let the Afghan Red Cresecent help them, We should NOT be helping them. They are

1. Civilizans with Guns, not soldiers.

2. Trying to kill our soldiers.

Im not gonna offer the guy who is trying to kill my family lemonade, that would be stupid.

"We?"

Your profile doesn't mention anything about being from Switzerland.

The article:

The International Committee of the Red Cross is defending its practice of providing medical training and basic medical supplies to the Taliban in Afghanistan.

Wikipedia:

The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) is a private humanitarian institution based in Geneva, Switzerland. States parties (signatories) to the four Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their Additional Protocols of 1977 and 2005, have given the ICRC a mandate to protect the victims of international and internal armed conflicts. Such victims include war wounded, prisoners, refugees, civilians, and other non-combatants.

Whether the Taliban are soldiers or civilians with guns is irrelevant to the International Committee of the Red Cross's mandate to protect war wounded persons. Furthermore, the notoriously and staunchly neutral Swiss don't have a side in this conflict. And finally, both the United States and Afghanistan, as signatories of the Geneva Conventions, recognize the ICRC's mandate to protect the health and welfare of those wounded in armed conflict, regardless of their allegiance.

We as the free world, Taliban are nothing more than 3rd world Terrorist. They would not treat us with such health care, they would behead us or let us die.

As  phinch1 pointed out, The Taliban tried to kill injured soldiers, we should not be helping these Animals, they show no mercy upon OUR wounded troops, we shouldnt show mercy upon theirs.

 



Garnett said:
famousringo said:
Garnett said:
famousringo said:
Garnett said:
highwaystar101 said:
 

They're also not your ally. To the Red Cross/crescent the taliban are not the enemy, they are soldiers being wounded and this is their only concern, they do not hold bias. They help USA forces too.

The Red/Cross doesnt get funded from the Taliban, and im sure they wouldn't help them if a doctor was beheaded on LIVE TV.

If America (and the free world) gets take out, then who the hell is gonna fund the Red Cross? Not the taliban.

The Afghan Red Crescent Society survived the last period of Taliban rule, so I suspect they'll survive your fantasy world where Al Qaeda has managed to detonate a WMD that kills only people who vote.

So let the Afghan Red Cresecent help them, We should NOT be helping them. They are

1. Civilizans with Guns, not soldiers.

2. Trying to kill our soldiers.

Im not gonna offer the guy who is trying to kill my family lemonade, that would be stupid.

"We?"

Your profile doesn't mention anything about being from Switzerland.

The article:

The International Committee of the Red Cross is defending its practice of providing medical training and basic medical supplies to the Taliban in Afghanistan.

Wikipedia:

The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) is a private humanitarian institution based in Geneva, Switzerland. States parties (signatories) to the four Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their Additional Protocols of 1977 and 2005, have given the ICRC a mandate to protect the victims of international and internal armed conflicts. Such victims include war wounded, prisoners, refugees, civilians, and other non-combatants.

Whether the Taliban are soldiers or civilians with guns is irrelevant to the International Committee of the Red Cross's mandate to protect war wounded persons. Furthermore, the notoriously and staunchly neutral Swiss don't have a side in this conflict. And finally, both the United States and Afghanistan, as signatories of the Geneva Conventions, recognize the ICRC's mandate to protect the health and welfare of those wounded in armed conflict, regardless of their allegiance.

We as the free world, Taliban are nothing more than 3rd world Terrorist. They would not treat us with such health care, they would behead us or let us die.

As  phinch1 pointed out, The Taliban tried to kill injured soldiers, we should not be helping these Animals, they show no mercy upon OUR wounded troops, we shouldnt show mercy upon theirs.

 

Yeah, only people from the US and Europe are human.

Is it really that hard to get the red cross isnt allied with the US?



Garnett said:
famousringo said:

"We?"

Your profile doesn't mention anything about being from Switzerland.

The article:

The International Committee of the Red Cross is defending its practice of providing medical training and basic medical supplies to the Taliban in Afghanistan.

Wikipedia:

The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) is a private humanitarian institution based in Geneva, Switzerland. States parties (signatories) to the four Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their Additional Protocols of 1977 and 2005, have given the ICRC a mandate to protect the victims of international and internal armed conflicts. Such victims include war wounded, prisoners, refugees, civilians, and other non-combatants.

Whether the Taliban are soldiers or civilians with guns is irrelevant to the International Committee of the Red Cross's mandate to protect war wounded persons. Furthermore, the notoriously and staunchly neutral Swiss don't have a side in this conflict. And finally, both the United States and Afghanistan, as signatories of the Geneva Conventions, recognize the ICRC's mandate to protect the health and welfare of those wounded in armed conflict, regardless of their allegiance.

We as the free world, Taliban are nothing more than 3rd world Terrorist. They would not treat us with such health care, they would behead us or let us die.

As  phinch1 pointed out, The Taliban tried to kill injured soldiers, we should not be helping these Animals, they show no mercy upon OUR wounded troops, we shouldnt show mercy upon theirs.

 

You claim to hate the Taliban, yet you eagerly allow them to define your moral position on what ought to be done with a wounded enemy. I think the Swiss would just as soon keep their moral high ground rather than adopt your lowest common denominator sense of ethics.



"The worst part about these reviews is they are [subjective]--and their scores often depend on how drunk you got the media at a Street Fighter event."  — Mona Hamilton, Capcom Senior VP of Marketing
*Image indefinitely borrowed from BrainBoxLtd without his consent.

pastro243 said:
Garnett said:
famousringo said:
Garnett said:
famousringo said:
Garnett said:
highwaystar101 said:
 

They're also not your ally. To the Red Cross/crescent the taliban are not the enemy, they are soldiers being wounded and this is their only concern, they do not hold bias. They help USA forces too.

The Red/Cross doesnt get funded from the Taliban, and im sure they wouldn't help them if a doctor was beheaded on LIVE TV.

If America (and the free world) gets take out, then who the hell is gonna fund the Red Cross? Not the taliban.

The Afghan Red Crescent Society survived the last period of Taliban rule, so I suspect they'll survive your fantasy world where Al Qaeda has managed to detonate a WMD that kills only people who vote.

So let the Afghan Red Cresecent help them, We should NOT be helping them. They are

1. Civilizans with Guns, not soldiers.

2. Trying to kill our soldiers.

Im not gonna offer the guy who is trying to kill my family lemonade, that would be stupid.

"We?"

Your profile doesn't mention anything about being from Switzerland.

The article:

The International Committee of the Red Cross is defending its practice of providing medical training and basic medical supplies to the Taliban in Afghanistan.

Wikipedia:

The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) is a private humanitarian institution based in Geneva, Switzerland. States parties (signatories) to the four Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their Additional Protocols of 1977 and 2005, have given the ICRC a mandate to protect the victims of international and internal armed conflicts. Such victims include war wounded, prisoners, refugees, civilians, and other non-combatants.

Whether the Taliban are soldiers or civilians with guns is irrelevant to the International Committee of the Red Cross's mandate to protect war wounded persons. Furthermore, the notoriously and staunchly neutral Swiss don't have a side in this conflict. And finally, both the United States and Afghanistan, as signatories of the Geneva Conventions, recognize the ICRC's mandate to protect the health and welfare of those wounded in armed conflict, regardless of their allegiance.

We as the free world, Taliban are nothing more than 3rd world Terrorist. They would not treat us with such health care, they would behead us or let us die.

As  phinch1 pointed out, The Taliban tried to kill injured soldiers, we should not be helping these Animals, they show no mercy upon OUR wounded troops, we shouldnt show mercy upon theirs.

 

Yeah, only people from the US and Europe are human.

Is it really that hard to get the red cross isnt allied with the US?

No... You can be 3rd world and civilized, if you go around killing for a "peaceful" relgion then your an animal (IMO)and the same applies for EVERYONE! Christans, Jewish people and every other Relgion. You must care for other human beings and learn how to respect their opinons.

 

Again, who the hell funds the Red Cross? Not the Taliban, and there are rules with the Red Cross, such as trying to kill soldiers in the hospital. They dont deserve the our help, and by OUR i mean the US/EU and Freeworlds help, we fund the Red Cross without us they wouldnt exist.

 

@Famous Ringo

 

I hate the Taliban, not because their belifes but because they are cowards, they are cowards and do not deserve our help. What moral high grounds? Them being scared to refuse a Terrorist in their hospital? Switzerland cant be friends with everyone, and they have yet to realize this.