HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK
---------------------------

[Just in case we're not already outraged enough...]


AP. 18 April 2002. Oct. Bombing Not War Violation.

WASHINGTON -- U.S. airstrikes on a Red Cross warehouse in Afghanistan
last October did not violate the international Law of Armed Conflict,
the U.S. war commander announced Thursday.

Gen. Tommy Franks, commander of the U.S. Central Command, investigated
two U.S. attacks on the warehouse compound in Kabul, the Afghan capital.

The first, on Oct. 16, happened because Taliban fighters were believed
to be using the facility and the International Committee of the Red
Cross had not informed Central Command that it maintained a warehouse at
that location, Franks said.

Also, the facility was not marked to give sufficient visual notice of
the Red Cross presence, he said.

In a brief summary of Central Command's investigation, Franks said that
when it was discovered after the airstrike that the warehouse was used
by the Red Cross, it was removed from Central Command's list of approved
targets. But it was not placed on the command's "no strike" list, he
said.

Even though the warehouse was removed from the approved target list and
new safeguards were implemented to minimize the chance of such mistaken
attacks, the warehouse was bombed by U.S. aircraft again Oct. 26.

Franks' summary made no mention of why the target was struck the second
time, but it said the investigators concluded there was insufficient
evidence to sustain a finding of a Law of Armed Conflict violation.

Even so, the Oct. 26 incident met the criteria under Defense Department
rules as a "reportable incident," Franks said. As a result, Franks on
Nov. 30 forwarded the results of his inquiry to Air Force Chief of Staff
Gen. John Jumper in the Pentagon "for such action as he deemed
appropriate."

Air Force officials said Thursday they could not immediately determine
what, if any, action Jumper took.

There have been a number of news reports in recent weeks quoting
unidentified Pentagon officials saying the target was hit the second
time because an Air Force commander believed he had authority to
restrike partially damaged targets even if they were no longer on
approved target lists.


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Barry Stoller
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ProletarianNews

---------------------------
ANTI-NATO INFORMATION LIST

==^================================================================
This email was sent to: [email protected]

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?a84x2u.a9617B
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^================================================================

Reply via email to