US & Israel bomb 307+ medical facilities in Iran

From Mint Press News
April 9, 2026
Alan McLeod

The United States and Israel are systematically targeting hospitals in Iran. In one month of bombing, the two countries have hit at least 307 health centers across the country, according to reports from the Iranian Red Crescent. The carefully planned destruction of the Islamic Republic’s medical infrastructure fits into a long history of deliberate U.S. attacks on hospitals. Since the end of World War Two, Washington has targeted medical centers in at least 16 countries, and the 307 Iranian sites hit does not even come close to the record for the number of hospitals in any country destroyed by American bombs and missiles.

IRANIAN DESTRUCTION

There was no warning. U.S. and Israeli airstrikes hit Gandhi Hotel Hospital in northern Tehran on March 1, and again on March 2. Locals were fasting for Ramadan as missiles tore into the building, shattering glass and wrecking its neo-natal unit and ICU. Completed in 2009 and described as “beacon” of Iranian medicine and one of the most advanced medical centers in West Asia, the 17-storey building was among the country’s most important hospitals. Images of the aftermath show a once proud building in ruins, with floor after floor devastated. Gandhi Hotel Hospital is one of more than 300 medical centers that have been hit by U.S. and Israeli strikes. Nine days afterward, on March 11, the Persian Gulf Martyrs Educational and Medical Center in Bushehr on Iran’s southern coast was targeted and severely damaged.

Missile explosions destroyed much of the hospital’s medical equipment. Even as the glass was still falling, authorities made the decision to rush patients to the nearby Nuclear Scientists Martyrs Hospital, despite the fear of a double-tap strike, like the ones often seen in Israeli attacks on Palestine. On March 21, the Imam Ali Hospital in Andimeshk, Khuzestan Province, was targeted. Video footage from the aftermath of the attack shows wards, waiting rooms, and corridors completely devastated, with both walls and roofs collapsing under the strain of U.S./Israeli bombardment.

The Imam Ali is Andimeshk’s only hospital, and patients were forced to be bussed to healthcare facilities in other cities, according to Hossein Kermanpour, head of public relations for the Iranian Ministry of Health. I wish [Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu] understood that this is a crime against humanity,” he said.

Other medical infrastructure, including a first responders’ center, an Iranian Red Crescent office, and the Pasteur Institute, a medical research laboratory, have also been hit. “What message does attacking hospitals, pharmaceutical companies and the Pasteur Institute as a medical research center in Iran convey?” asked Iranian president Masoud Pezeshkian; “As a specialist physician, I urge WHO, the Red Cross, Doctors Without Borders and physicians worldwide to respond to this crime against humanity.”

The attacks have been largely ignored by Western media. Few newspapers or TV news reports have even mentioned the damage to the country’s healthcare system, let alone centered it as a major news story.

THE U.S.’ LONG HISTORY OF BOMBING HOSPITALS

President Trump has a history of targeting medical facilities. Last year, U.S. forces carried out 14 separate airstrikes on the Al Rasool Al-Azam Oncology Hospital in Saada, Yemen, the centerpiece of the country’s healthcare network. For a full investigation into the attack, and the U.S.’ long history of targeting civilian medical infrastructure around the world, see the MintPress News report:

“With Yemen Attack, U.S. Continues Long History of Deliberately Bombing Hospitals.” Repeated attacks against hospitals is more of a pattern than an aberration for Trump. In 2017, the U.S. carried out 20 strikes against a hospital in Raqqa, Syria, using white phosphorous munitions to do so, killing at least 30 civilians in the process.

Trump’s predecessor, Barack Obama, was not less fond of targeting healthcare facilities. In 2015, his administration ordered a bombing campaign against a Doctors Without Borders hospital in Kunduz, Afghanistan. The building was one of the largest and most recognizable in the city, and an internal inquiry found that the airmen aboard the gunship pushed back against the order, citing its illegality. They were overruled and forced to carry out the strike, killing at least 42 people. Obama’s attack on Doctors Without Borders marked the only time in history that one Nobel Peace Prize winner has attacked another one. During his time in office, Obama bombed seven countries, including Libya, where U.S. planes struck a hospital in Zliten, leveling it completely. At least 11 people were killed in the operation.

Perhaps no nation on Earth has felt the impact of American power in the 21st century as badly as Iraq. Successive administrations attacked critical infrastructure there, including in 2003, when President Bush bombed the Red Crescent Maternity Hospital in Baghdad. While many were killed in the strike, the real death toll, as UNICEF noted, was far higher, as with no medical care, maternal mortality spiked after the attack. The 1990s is often remembered in the West as a time of peace. Yet President Clinton used the period to target medical infrastructure in three separate countries. In Yugoslavia, U.S. planes bombed a number of hospitals, including dropping now-banned cluster munitions on a facility in Niš, killing at least 15 people.

In Somalia in 1993, U.S. soldiers carried out a mortar attack against the Digfer Hospital in Mogadishu, destroying the building’s main reception area. They then proceeded to bomb the journalists attempting to cover the incident. Meanwhile, in Sudan, Clinton ordered a hit on the Al-Shifa medicine factory in Sudan. Fourteen cruise missiles pounded the plant, turning what had been the largest producer of medicine in the country into a pile of twisted metal. The German Ambassador to Sudan estimated that, without the antibiotics, antimalarials, and other drugs it produced, the true death toll of the strike was in the “tens of thousands.” Few Americans know about this incident. The 1980s were a dangerous time to be a doctor in a country designated for regime change.

The U.S. invaded Grenada in 1983, in order to put an end to the socialist revolution on the Caribbean island. In the process, it bombed the Richmond Hill Mental Hospital, killing dozens. In El Salvador, U.S.-backed death squads flying in American aircraft stormed a hospital in San Ildefonso, killing five people. Paratroopers also kidnapped, raped, and tortured the staff, including French nurse Madeleine Lagadec, causing a major diplomatic incident. Between 1981 and 1984, at least 63 health centers in Nicaragua were forced to close, due to attacks from U.S.-backed and trained “Contra” death squads, whom President Reagan labeled “the moral equivalent of our Founding Fathers.”

The violence meted out on Asia by the U.S., however, was on another level entirely. Bombing hospitals was official (if unstated) policy. “The bigger the hospital, the better it was,” said  former Army intelligence specialist Allan Stevenson, explaining the U.S. military’s position on Vietnam.

The most well-documented case of U.S. attacks on Vietnamese medical infrastructure occurred in December 1972, when American planes dropped over 100 bombs on the giant Bach Mai Hospital in Hanoi, killing at least 28 staff and an unconfirmed number of patients. During a Congressional hearing on clandestine activities in Laos and Cambodia, lawmakers were told that bombing of hospitals in those countries was “routine.”

To this day, Laos remains the most bombed country in history. North Korea, however, suffered the brunt of American attacks. In the course of the Korean War, the U.S. military destroyed an estimated 1,000 hospitals through bombing, as entire cities were leveled. Professor Bruce Cummings, America’s foremost expert on Korea, estimates that the U.S. killed around 25% of the entire North Korean population between 1950 and 1953.

ISRAELI CRIMES AND AMERICAN DREAMS

Israel, of course, is no stranger to bombing hospitals, either. Virtually every health center in Gaza has been damaged or destroyed. Israeli Defense Forces snipers have targeted healthcare workers inside hospitals, and have kidnapped, and tortured doctors. A particularly noteworthy example is that of Adnan Al-Bursh, head of orthopedics at al-Shifa Hospital. In December 2023, al-Bursh was arrested and detained for months, and was likely raped to death by IDF troops.

Israel is now systematically targeting Lebanon’s health system, as it did with Palestine, shelling hospitals deep inside the country. As a result, at least 57 Lebanese healthcare workers have died. The U.S. attacks on Iranian infrastructure are part of a wider regime change operation aimed at overthrowing the Islamic Republic and installing a U.S.-compliant administration. In recent times, Washington has assassinated the country’s supreme leader, carried out protracted economic warfare that has seriously harmed Iran, and fomented protests aimed at destabilizing and dislodging the government.

Trump also confirmed that his administration smuggled arms to Kurdish groups and to protestors leading the recent anti-government demonstrations – a key wanfactor in the violence that erupted. Thus, while systematic U.S./Israeli attacks on Iranian hospitals are shocking acts, they fit into a clear pattern stretching back over 80 years. As cataloged here, the United States has bombed healthcare infrastructure in at least 16 countries since the end of World War Two. Hitting hospitals may be a war crime, but it is as American as apple pie.


Alan MacLeod is Senior Staff Writer for MintPress News. He completed his PhD in 2017 and has since authored two acclaimed books: Bad News From Venezuela: Twenty Years of Fake News and Misreporting and Propaganda in the Information Age: Still Manufacturing Consent, as well as a number of academic articles. He has also contributed to FAIR.orgThe GuardianSalonThe GrayzoneJacobin Magazine, and Common Dreams. Follow Alan on Twitter for more of his work and commentary: @AlanRMacLeod.

https://www.mintpressnews.com/us-israel-bomb-307-medical-facilities-in-iran-carrying-on-long-tradition-of-targeting-medical-workers/290826/

UN committee’s bogus Syria “human rights” report ignores evidence. Co-author’s blatant conflict of interest

[Co-author] Karen AbuZayd is a director of the Washington based Middle East Policy Council, itself a strong supporter of the US-led dirty war on Syria. Other MEPC directors include present and former US military, intelligence, oil industry and other US corporate figures.
Global Research, March 03, 2017

A UN committee has produced another one-sided, bogus ‘human rights’ report on last year’s liberation of Aleppo, Syria’s second city. Co-authored by US diplomat Karen AbuZayd and Brazilian Paulo Pinheiro, the report attacks both the Syrian Army and the al Qaeda groups (UNGA 2017).

However its stronger condemnation of the Syrian Army is notable, as part of constant attempts to delegitimise the Syrian people’s struggle to liberate their own country from the NATO-backed terrorists. This report follows similar partisan attacks from ‘watchdog’ groups embedded with the US State Department, Human Rights Watch and Amnesty USA.

None of these groups have condemned the anti-ISIS operation in Mosul (Iraq) in the way they did the anti-al Qaeda operations in Aleppo (Syria).

The principal effect of the one-sided and bogus ‘human rights’ reports on Syria is to prolong the war and embolden foreign powers who, in open breach of international law, arm and finance all the al Qaeda groups in Syria and Iraq.

Although the latest AbuZayd-Pinheiro report is poorly referenced it follows much the same method as other US-backed ‘human rights’ denunciations: (i) speak to a number of anonymous al Qaeda ‘victims’ and their families, mainly in Turkey but some also by phone in the al Qaeda occupied parts of Syria, (ii) collate the latest claims from US-funded and jihadist-linked groups, (iii) make no visit to Syria nor communicate with Syrian organisations (e.g. there is no sign the committee tried to speak with the 4,000 member Aleppo Medical Association) and then (iv) present a thoroughly one-sided judgement.

The western media mounted furious propaganda resistance to the Syrian Army’s operation to take back Aleppo, claiming there were ‘indiscriminate’ airstrikes, and so on. Syria and Russia denied these accusations and the AbuZayd-Pinheiro report has backed them all.

Notable features of the report include: obviously false assertions about supposed ‘daily airstrikes’ on Aleppo city, the suggestion that al Qaeda makeshift clinics were the only ‘hospitals’ in Aleppo, and the baseless claim that Syrian-Russian airstrikes destroyed a humanitarian convoy.

The report claims that “Syrian and Russian air forces conducted daily air strikes in Aleppo throughout most of the period under review”, that is July-December 2016. On this basis the committee adopts the armed groups’ claims that eastern Aleppo was subject to constant ‘barrel bomb’ and chemical weapons attacks (UNGA 2017).

However, unlike the AbuZayd-Pinheiro report, much of the western media did report that air strikes on the city were halted in mid-October, as humanitarian corridors were established for the evacuation of civilians. When Russian air strikes resumed several weeks later, in mid-November (despite efforts by the New York Times on 16 November to fudge this detail), they were on al Qaeda and ISIS groups in rural Idlib and rural Aleppo; not on the city. The liberation of Aleppo between October and December was almost entirely through Syrian ground forces smashing resistance street by street. So the ‘daily airstrikes’ on Aleppo city, spoken of in the AbuZayd-Pinheiro report, is an obvious falsehood.

On hospitals, the report names several armed group makeshift clinics in eastern Aleppo, none of which were marked and registered hospitals. (Clinics lose their protection under international law when they become covert military support installations.) By contrast there is not one single mention of the large hospitals of western Aleppo (Dabbit, Ibn Rush and al Razi), which were bombed by the al Qaeda groups in 2016.

The attack on a UN humanitarian convoy on 20 September (just days after the 17 September US-led airstrike massacre of 80 Syrian soldiers fighting ISIS in Deir Ezzor) was blamed squarely on a Syrian or Russian airstrike, it seems on the basis of evidence from anonymous ‘witnesses’. There is no plausible motive for this. Syria and Russia were and remain the largest providers of services and humanitarian aid to all Aleppo communities.

The report fails to mention the fact that the armed groups in eastern Aleppo had emphatically rejected humanitarian aid, holding a demonstration just one week before the burning of those trucks. A UN spokesperson at the time claimed the armed groups were blocking the delivery of aid for “political gain” (Sanchez 2016). Further, the Russian military had observed that there were no craters on the road nor destruction of the trucks’ chassis, as would be the case with aerial bombing (RT 2016). The area had been occupied by al Qaeda groups who have a record of murder of civilian drivers and burning trucks; they did this two months later when civilian trucks traveled through Idlib to the besieged Shi’a villages of al Fouaa and Kefraya (Pasha-Robinson 2016). The AbuZayd-Pinheiro claims about Russian-Syrian airstrikes on this convoy and therefore baseless and contrary to the known evidence.

The AbuZayd-Pinheiro committee is the same one which, from Geneva, fabricated a report on the terrible Houla massacre of May 2012, in which over 100 villagers were killed by the NATO-backed Farouq Brigade (FSA). At least 15 independent witnesses identified Farouq brigade (FSA) leaders (Abdulrazzq Tlass and Yahya Yusuf) and local collaborators (Haitham al Housan, Saiid Fayes al Okesh, Haitham al Halq and Nidal Bakkur) for the massacre (see Anderson 2016: Ch. 8). The AbuZayd-Pinheiro committee, however, tried to blame un-named “shabiha” militia loyal to President Assad. No motive was given. Some of these villagers had participated in the recent National Assembly elections, over which the jihadists had demanded a boycott. The obvious partisan nature of the Houla report led Russia, China, India and others to withdraw their support from this and future UN Security Council resolutions on Syria.

Karen AbuZayd is a director of the Washington based Middle East Policy Council, itself a strong supporter of the US-led dirty war on Syria. Other MEPC directors include present and former US military, intelligence, oil industry and other US corporate figures. On simple conflict of interest principles she should never have been appointed to such a committee, as a diplomat from one of the warring parties. Former UN Secretary general Ban Ki Moon was responsible for this error. Washington, for its part, has been too absorbed in hubris to notice that it is unseemly to pretend to be both assailant and mediator.

UN special envoy Stefan di Mistura, despite being ‘appalled and shocked’ that the armed gangs were targeting and killing ‘scores’ of civilians in western Aleppo by ‘relentless and indiscriminate’ rocket attacks (BBC 30 October), nevertheless proposed an ‘autonomous zone’ in eastern Aleppo to protect the al Qaeda controlled areas. The proposal was emphatically rejected by the Syrian Government (Reuters 20 November), which went on to eject all the al Qaeda groups from Aleppo in late December 2016.

Purchase Tim Anderson’s book “The Dirty War on Syria” directly from Global Research Publishers

ISBN Number: 978-0-9737147-8-4

Year: 2016

Pages: 240

Author: Tim Anderson

List Price: $23.95

Special Price: $15.00 – click to order

Sources:

Anderson, Tim (2016) The Dirty War on Syria, Global Research, Montreal

Barnard, Anne and Ivan Nechepurenko (2016) ‘Airstrikes on Aleppo Resume as Russia Begins New Offensive in Syria’, New York Times, 16 November, online: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/16/world/middleeast/syria-aleppo-russia-airstrikes.html

BBC (2016) ‘Aleppo siege: UN envoy Mistura ‘appalled’ by rebel attacks’, 30 October, online: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-37816938

Pestano, Andrew (2016) ‘Aleppo airstrikes resume after 3-week pause’, UPI, 15 November, online: http://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2016/11/15/Aleppo-airstrikes-resume-after-3-week-pause/8561479211543/

Pasha-Robinson, Lucy (2016) ‘Buses used to evacuate Syrians from villages ‘attacked and burned’’, 19 December, online: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/syria-crisis-aleppo-what-is-happening-villages-buses-attacked-and-burned-a7482736.html

Reuters (2016) ‘Syria foreign minister says no to east Aleppo autonomous zone’, 20 November, online: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-aleppo-idUSKBN13F0J1

RT (2016) ‘Russian, Syrian Air Forces did not strike UN aid convoy in Aleppo – Russian MoD’, 20 September, online: https://www.rt.com/news/359990-russia-denies-aleppo-strike/

Sanchez, Raf (2016) ‘UN says armed Syrian groups blocking Aleppo aid for ‘political gain’, UK telegraph, 14 September, online: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/14/un-says-armed-syrian-groups-blocking-aid-to-aleppo-for-political/

SOTT (2016) ‘Keeping their word: No Russian or Syrian airstrikes on Aleppo for 7 days, humanitarian corridors open’, SOTT News, 25 October, online: https://www.sott.net/article/332069-Keeping-their-word-No-Russian-or-Syrian-airstrikes-on-Aleppo-for-7-days-humanitarian-corridors-open

UNGA (2017) ‘Report of the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic’, 34th session, A/HRC/34/64, 2 February, online: https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/G17/026/63/PDF/G1702663.pdf?OpenElement

Syrian-Russian offensive against terrorists in Aleppo. US supplies advanced weapons to Al Qaeda

Global Research, September 29, 2016
Moon of Alabama 28 September 2016

Just a few links …

The White House and State Department are miffed that Syria and Russia are cleaning up their Jihadis in Aleppo city.

There is a false claims evolving in western “news” that the current Aleppo operation led to the breakdown of the ceasefire agreement. Two points on this:

1. The ceasefire did not “break down”. It expired after a previously agreed period. Both sides did not agree to a prolongation.

2. The most important ceasefire point was the physical separation of al-Qaida and other U.S. proxy rebels. The U.S. was unable (or unwilling) to fulfill that point.

See: Moscow Makes Public Full Text of Russia-US Deal on Syria

The main priority in Syria, according to the document, is the demarcation of territory controlled by Daesh and al-Nusra Front terrorist groups and territories controlled by Syrian rebels.

After the end of the ceasefire the U.S. and its subaltern allies are flooding Syria with new weapons:

Both rockets and MANPADs are part of a “Plan-B” the CIA had already developed in May 2015 but which was held back until now. There are likely additional military elements to this plan. On the diplomatic side the U.S. (and its stooges) -obviously unable to act rationally- now imitate defiant children. “If we can’t get exactly what we want we will never again talk to you.”

A very major issue for Syria (and one reason why many Syrians flee the country) are U.S. and EU sanctions. Their consequences were so far hardly ever reported. Here is the first major piece in U.S. media about them: U.S. and EU Sanctions Are Punishing Ordinary Syrians and Crippling Aid Work, U.N. Report Reveals

In a 40-page internal assessment commissioned to analyze the humanitarian impact of the sanctions, the U.N. describes the U.S. and EU measures as “some of the most complicated and far-reaching sanctions regimes ever imposed.” Detailing a complex system of “unpredictable and time-consuming” financial restrictions and licensing requirements, the report finds that U.S. sanctions are exceptionally harsh “regarding provision of humanitarian aid.”

An internal U.N. email obtained by The Intercept also faults U.S. and EU sanctions for contributing to food shortages and deteriorations in health care.

The email went on to cite sanctions as a “principal factor” in the erosion of Syria’s health care system.

The piece also explains that the Syrian and Russian behavior towards insurgent occupied cities is in no way more severe than the usual U.S. procedures:

Meanwhile, in cities controlled by ISIS, the U.S. has employed some of the same tactics it condemns. For example, U.S.-backed ground forces laid siege to Manbij, a city in northern Syria not far from Aleppo that is home to tens of thousands of civilians. U.S. airstrikes pounded the city over the summer, killing up to 125 civilians in a single attack. The U.S. replicated this strategy to drive ISIS out of Kobane, Ramadi, and Fallujah, leaving behind flattened neighborhoods. In Fallujah, residents resorted to eating soup made from grass and 140 people reportedly died from lack of food and medicine during the siege.

To help with the sanctions and other issues China had recently agreed with Syria to provide medical support. But just like Russia, China is now considered a U.S. enemy and the CIA and Pentagon are eager to fight it.

Risky business: Is US supporting anti-Chinese militants in Syria? 

With war hawks in US/Turkey/Qatar/Saudi arming and funding anti-Chinese militants in Syria that are planning more attacks on Chinese embassies and interests abroad, coupled with US gunboat diplomacy in the South China Sea, this dangerous “deterring the dragon” combination risks turning into a “provoking the dragon” scenario, and may escalate into a military conflict between two nuclear powers.

(The piece also includes this vignette about the anti-Chinese TIP Uighurs in Syria:

Later videos emerged of US/UK-funded White Helmet members with two captured young Syrian soldiers in Kahn Touman, and taunting “Assad, Russia, Iran and China, are they stronger than god?” The two soldiers were later executed by TIP militants.)

U.S. official: THAAD to be deployed to deter North Korea threats

THAAD is a long range missile defense system. Putting it into South Korea makes no sense if one wants to counter shorter ranged North Korean missiles. The target here is obviously China. This will have consequences.

A lot of hype is made today about two hospitals in east-Aleppo that were allegedly bombed:

The second piece, in the Washington Post, originally included this sentence:

Neither hospital was seriously damaged and both are expected soon to function again, …

I pointed that out several times today to “bombing” hypers including to Washington Post writers. Soon after that the piece was “updated” and the sentence changed to:

Both hospitals are expected to be repaired, but they are badly damaged.

Still, according to the piece, only two people were killed in the relevant strikes and three injured. Had the attacks actually targeted the crowded hospitals both would have been destroyed and many more people would be dead. Instead the hospitals seem to have received only collateral damage from strikes on nearby military targets. But pointing that out does not fit the U.S. propaganda line.

Meanwhile the U.S. and its allies continue their daily business of killing people in Syria and elsewhere.

I somewhat agree with this election take by Peter Hitchens:

The world’s fixated on Trump. But Hillary could drag us ALL into a catastrophic war

After Monday’s TV show with Clinton and Trump CNN had published a poll claiming that Clinton was the winner of the debate by a wide margin. CNN later released (pdf) the poll data. It turns out (page 9) that only white people and only those above 50 years of age responded to the question. The poll was also heavily skewed towards democratic voters. In other words: it was completely fictional and useless besides giving Clinton additional (false) media momentum.

Scott Adams’ take: Clinton won the debate last night. And while she was doing it, Trump won the election. He had one thing to accomplish – being less scary – and he did it.

“There is an army . . . supported by European and American money, which is bombing houses and residential buildings, hospitals, orphanages, and schools — from 20 kilometers away.

Fort Russ

Gorlovka under the shells. Children live here.
in Sputnik Italy
August 14, 2016
Translated from Italian by Tom Winter
September 14, 2015

Total silence of the West on the tragedy of Donbass and the children who continue to die under the bombs in Southeast Ukraine. Even though the media in Italy and the west won’t tell you, the war in the Donbass is continuing into the second year.

Why is nothing being said in Italy about the children dying from the bombing in eastern Ukraine? Do children somehow fall into some different category or not represent any interest in Italy, compared to the football news and the summer gossip?

Sputnik Italy spoke with Ennio Bordato, president of the “Help us save the children,” which directly helps children and victims of war in the Donbass.

Tatiana Santi: The war continues in the Donbass, but nothing is reported about it in Italy. Why do you think that is?

Ennio Bordato: Telling the truth about Donbass means making people think, making people understand where Europe is headed. Europe is hostage to the US, and serves an American policy that absolutely wants to snatch Russia from Europe and Italy from Russia.

Tatiana SantiThe war in the Donbass is therefore part of an even larger project in your opinion?

Ennio Bordato: Yes, it’s a war principally economic in outlook. The Europe that was growing in economic and cultural ties between countries is undermining the US economy, which can not afford to lose Europe and let dialogue and economic relations prosper between Russia and Europe.

Tatiana Santi Just in the city of Gorlovka 16 children died in the first half of 2015. How long will this silence of the West go on, about the children killed in the Donbass? Will this ever get into the press?

Ennio Bordato I believe that it will never. This is a very strange war: there is an army, patched together and supported by European and American money, which is bombing houses and residential buildings, hospitals, orphanages, and schools — from 20 kilometers away. 

It is a particularly vicious and inhumane war. Among the civilian casualties are children who were unable to escape and be greeted by the Russian Federation.

Recall that are more than one and half million civilians, displaced from Eastern Ukraine, have found shelter and social services in Russia.

Over 900,000 refugees from Donbass want to stay in Russia.

Many have fled as refugees to Russia, but many remained in the Donbass, where there’s no longer any infrastructure, not to speak of subsidies.

It is the tragedy in the tragedy. There are children who do not get out of the cellars for months, if only to get some air for an hour, like prisoners, hoping the while that some bomb does not fall on their head.

Tatiana Santi We do not know how long this war is going to last. When will it end? What do you think will become of the rubbled cities of the Donbass?

Ennio Bordato: It’s a matter of the destruction of every economic and civil activity. We speak of people getting bombed out, but let’s also consider the social impact. It is a tragedy that will last for the next 20-30 years. If and when the war will end, it will be up to the political side to solve the problems. At the current stage the policy is dead and so is the capacity for dialogue. The American project is being carried out in perfect conditions. 

We have to continue to open people’s eyes, to state that this war exists! We have to try to make it clear that the solution is European autonomy, a Europe that is not based on money, but on its culture, on relations with all, with the United States, sure, but also with Russia. 

 

http://www.fortruss.blogspot.com/2015/09/there-is-army-supported-by-european-and.html

“Whom are they fighting against?” Kiev targets hospitals, schools, destroys infrastructure — why?

From Fort Russ

“Whom are they fighting against?”
By Yevdokiya Sheremetyeva (littlehiroshima)
Translated from Russian by J.Hawk

In every town and city of the Donbass where we deliver aid, and we deliver it in a targeted manner, to specific houses, apartments, bomb shelters, cafeterias, we hear many stories. At first they are confused, but then something snaps. They start talking and talking. And the stories repeat themselves. I stopped becoming surprised by them. Only for many those are still “untruths” and “distortions,” propaganda.
So here are a few stories from the “civvies”, as the military calls them. And facts from village heads and city administrations.
This is everywhere, you hear? Every place we visited, we were told that when the National Guard and UAF arrived, they targeted the infrastructure for destruction. Please, try to convince me they were defending their land from Russian invaders.

Georgiyevka: The only two kindergartens, Kolosok and Beryozka, and two schools were bombed to bits. The village council was destroyed at point-blank range with incendiary shells. Experts later described munitions used to the head of the village council Yelena Nikolayevna Nikitina.
The former Georgiyevka village council building.

They bombed the cannery, they shot the metal-working shop to bits with rifle fire. The furniture factory was destroyed, all of its equipment was looted, and whatever could not be moved they burned. The metalloplastics plant was destroyed. They crushed gas lines with tanks. When they were asked “why?”, they replied, “you don’t need it.”
Nobody can understand why they crushed a children’s playground with a tank.
Various people told me that the National Guard told the locals “our sheds are nicer than your homes,” “why are you living so poorly?”. Yelena Nikolayevna: “They have no idea whatsoever where they are fighting.”
The Aidar Battalion looted family belongings by the truckload. One woman told me they took away everything from her home, down to spoons. It’s too horrible to even talk about the destruction in Khryashchevatoye and Novosvetlovka. Whole streets are in ruins. They gathered the people all in one place, then went off to loot.
I already wrote about Pervomaysk, but will repeat myself: Hospital No. 2 took five direct hits, including one to the children’s section. No Novorossia units were even in the district. The hospital was targeted on purpose.
Hospital No. 2 in Pervomaysk:

Hospital No. 1 no longer exists, it was totally demolished, only the bomb shelter exists which is now used to house people.
The obstetrics ward was struck by shells three times.
They shelled cafeterias. One shell fell short–it penetrated two top stories in an apartment building adjacent to the cafeteria, so the cafeteria survived.
The town’s best school, No. 6, was shelled four (!) times. It’s damaged beyond repair.
Schools No. 1 and No.2 were shelled three times, so they suffered less.
Pervomaysk School No. 1. The patched up howitzer shell whole where the blackboard used to hang.

The town council was shelled four times–8 direct hits. Technical College No. 31, Technical Schools No. 74 and No. 39, Alenkiy Tsvetochek kindergarten–all destroyed. Two hits to the medical school. Yunost sports complex–the roof penetrated in three places. The first hit was in September, and it was repaied by December. The next hit came right after the repairs were completed.
The kindergarten for handicapped children–destroyed.
The paramedics building was repaired for a long time, but as soon as the repairs were complete it was hit again.
The post office was shelled twice. Direct hits.
Four central heating boiler rooms are damaged, one beyond repair.
First aid clinic–destroyed.
The most important enterprise in the city, Burtsekh–destroyed.
The high pressure gas distribution station, out in the open field, burned out completely. There is nothing even remotely close that would qualify as a military target.
Nearly all the buildings in the city were damaged to some degree. Many were wiped off the face of the Earth.

No Novorossia units were near any of these buildings.
In other words, the buildings were targeted on purpose in order to destroy the city’s infrastructure. They specifically aimed at them. They shelled hospitals, schools, kindergartens, gas distribution centers.
Nearly all water wells in Chernukhino were poisoned. The locals described how the UAF “poured diesel fuel into them.”
–But why? What for?
–God only knows.
Somebody tell me why the Lugansk Geriatric Retirement Home for the Veterans of War and Labor, where there are 250 elderly people, 170 of whom are bedridden and thus can’t be evacuated, was shelled?
The home is in a forest, no Novorossia units even close, so you can’t say they were returning fire.
Why poison wells, crush playgrounds with tanks, shell hospitals and kindergartens?
WHY?
FOR WHAT?
Whom are they fighting against?

Obama’s war on the Donbass — the devastating toll after one year of conflict

Here are statistics for press releases, flyers, talks, and letters to the editor.

by Stephen Lendman
Global Research, April 18, 2015

US combat troops are working with Ukrainian forces. NATO planes arrive regularly carrying heavy weapons, munitions and other war supplies. Sputnik News explained the toll so far after one year of conflict.

UN figures claim 6,072 killed – another 15,345 wounded. Independent sources report much higher figures – multiples more than conservative estimates.

Perhaps 100,000 or more have been killed or wounded – many maimed for life.

The Donetsk People’s Republic (DPR) estimates 1.5 million internally or externally displaced refugees.

OSCE officials report seven journalists killed, another 170 injured. These are conservative figures. More accurate ones are likely higher.

Donbass is one of the world’s most dangerous places for journalists. Kiev forces openly target them. Other times, they’re arrested, detained and tortured. Some die in captivity.

In Donetsk, an estimated 9,464 facilities and other structures were destroyed – including:

  • 5,302 residential buildings;
  • 53 hospitals and other medical facilities;
  • 250 schools and pre-schools;
  • 13 colleges and universities;
  • 17 sports venues;
  • 32 cultural institutions;
  • 88 commercial enterprises;
  • 56 industrial facilities;
  • 605 power lines and distribution facilities;
  • 148 heat supply facilities;
  • 30 water supply facilities;
  • 2,669 gas supply facilities;
  • 53 road and transport infrastructure elements;
  • Donetsk airport – turned to rubble; and
  • the Saur-Monila memorial complex – entirely destroyed.

In Lugansk, an estimated 8,500 facilities and other structures were destroyed – including:

  • 7,899 residential buildings;
  • 65 hospitals, clinics and laboratories;
  • 3 gas distribution stations;
  • 33 heat supply facilities;
  • 43 water supply facilities;
  • 37 government buildings;
  • 97 schools and pre-schools;
  • 68 cultural institutions; and
  • 77 churches.

Billions of dollars are needed to restore what’s lost.  All the above devastation was non-military related. Even in legitimate wars, international law strictly forbids targeting civilians and non-military related sites. Doing so constitutes war crimes. Waging naked aggression is the supreme high crime against peace.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net . His new book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.” http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com. Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network. It airs three times weekly: live on Sundays at 1PM Central time plus two prerecorded archived programs. 

http://www.globalresearch.ca/obamas-war-on-donbass-the-devastating-toll-after-one-year-of-conflict/5443502

Italian medical mission reports on health care crisis in Ukraine: 50 hospitals destroyed (Video)

Posted on Fort Russ

January 7, 2015
Video: Alessandro Ferrucci, Lorenzo Galeazzi e Vauro for Ilfattoquotidianor
Translated from Italian by Tom Winter

First half of video: the hospital of Slovyansk, reduced to rubble; then in Kiev, where there are no medical supplies.

Once at Sloviansk, theater of the last summer’s ferocious fighting between regular Ukrainian troops and the pro-Russian separatists, stood a hospital at the cutting edge; a proper and real provider of health services, now completely destroyed. These images, still to this day never shown in the Italian media, show better than others the grave situation that has befallen on Ukrainian society.
 

Indeed, the outbreak of revolt at Maidan, the war, and the economic crisis have brought the health care system to a collapse. Fifty hospitals have been reduced to rubble, and the price of many drugs has risen 3200 percent. Many drugs are to be had only on the black market. Even in the capital, Kiev, far from the Donbass, where the fighting continues, medical facilities are incapable of meeting the health care emergency, which is worsening day by day. Entire hospitals are without painkillers, analgesics, chemotherapy. Children stricken with cancer, many of them victims of the Chernobyl legacy, are paying the highest price: where a survival rate in Europe would be 75-80%, in Ukraine it is one child out of every two.

As in our earlier work on the Ivory Coast, this report was made possible by the support of Soleterre, a non-governmental organization that has operated in Ukraine since 2003 in diverse ways that contribute to the healing of young patients, from the free supply of pharmaceuticals to psychological assistance, finally to the establishment of a welcoming home to shorten the hospital stays of children suffering from cancer.

Vauro’s tour was supported by the Italian medical charity Soleterre.

Translator’s note:

 We are eager to supply Ukraine with weapons for war; the real needs go begging for charity.