Red Tape for Red Cross?

Jiro

If You Know What I Mean
Premium Member
Joined
Apr 27, 2007
Messages
69,284
Reaction score
143
Security Brief: Red Cross defends helping Taliban treat casualties
The International Committee of the Red Cross is defending its practice of providing medical training and basic medical supplies to the Taliban in Afghanistan – saying it is in line with the ICRC’s mandate not to discriminate between different sides in a conflict.

In the latest situation report issued Tuesday the Red Cross disclosed that in April its workers “reached over 100 Afghan security personnel, over 70 members of the armed opposition, taxi drivers involved in the transport of wounded people, first-aiders and its own staff.”

That prompted plenty of quizzical and some critical comments in the international media and among bloggers – and some grumbling among Afghan officials. But an ICRC spokesman in Geneva said the practice is consistent with its obligation of neutrality and its mandate to provide assistance to all sides in conflict.The ICRC says it provides a three-day course that includes lessons in international humanitarian law, practical work with bandages and other basic medical techniques. It says the course is also a chance to remind all sides about respect for civilians and proper treatment of detainees.

Some critics have drawn a distinction between providing medical care to the wounded and training insurgents to do so. But the ICRC says it has provided similar training in Darfur, Sudan and to Hamas members in Gaza. ICRC spokesman Christian Cardon says it has been providing such training in Afghanistan for about four years to the Taliban as well as to Afghan police and civilian first-aiders. He added that the ICRC was not training the Taliban in surgical skills; the focus was on stabilizing those injured.

The ICRC says that roadblocks, fighting and mines have made access to hospitals very difficult – especially in provinces like Helmand and Kandahar in the south of Afghanistan.

It quotes one taxi-driver who regularly ferries people from one part of Helmand to hospital in Kandahar as saying that the insecurity “is endangering the lives of the sick and injured, because it often takes us six or seven hours to get people to hospital instead of two.”

The International Security Assistance Force says it has no issues with Red Cross workers training insurgents in medical care.

“We recognize the need for their work to be executed impartially – and it's precisely for this reason that they are able to gain the access that they do," Lt Col Joseph T Breasseale told CNN. "One of the litany of things that separates the international coalition from the Taliban is that we have frequently provided first aid to injured Taliban fighters and we will continue to do so.”

The ICRC says the three-day first-aid courses are a small part of its program in Afghanistan. In April it conducted a war surgery workshop for dozens of doctors, and supported the regional hospital in Kandahar in performing almost 1,000 operations. The ICRC says it has 1,500 national and 140 international staff in Afghanistan.

Did Red Cross do right thing or not?
 
Red Cross is doing wrong way to treat Taliban if they are knowingly about group is Taliban or not.
 
Wirelessly posted

Um, how is the Red Cross wrong?

Do you not know they are suppose to be neutral to EVERYONE?
 
Exactly. The Red Cross is a humanistic organization. They do not get involved with political agendas nor do they make their decisions based on such.
 
but Red Cross is partly funded by USA via taxpayers?
 
but Red Cross is partly funded by USA via taxpayers?

Where their funding comes from doesn't matter. Donations made to a humanistic organization are still donations made to a humanistic organization. When one donates, they cannot demand that their donations be spent in a specific way in those cases.
 
Where their funding comes from doesn't matter. Donations made to a humanistic organization are still donations made to a humanistic organization. When one donates, they cannot demand that their donations be spent in a specific way in those cases.

It does matter to me because I don't want any humanitarian aids to any groups whoever is terrorist, especially Al Qadea, FARC and Taliban, they are deserved to be left and gone.

If it wasn't funded via taxpayers so I don't care.
 
It does matter to me because I don't want any humanitarian aids to any groups whoever is terrorist, especially Al Qadea, FARC and Taliban, they are deserved to be left and gone.

If it wasn't funded via taxpayers so I don't care.

Well, then , just don't donate to the Red Cross. The Red Cross is non-profit and survives on donations.

The thing is, a humanitarian organization can't base their decisions on where the aid is sent based on political issues. It is simply an issue of need.
 
Well, then , just don't donate to the Red Cross. The Red Cross is non-profit and survives on donations.

The thing is, a humanitarian organization can't base their decisions on where the aid is sent based on political issues. It is simply an issue of need.

Oh, I see and it is okay.
 
but Red Cross is partly funded by USA via taxpayers?

Everyone in the world donates to it. Some people support the Hamas/FARC/Taliban. Some people do not. Because everyone donates to it, regardless of who they are-- the Red Cross cannot have a political agenda.

Like what if the Troubles broke out again in Belfast? The Irish-American sympathizers, who donate to the Red Cross, in the States would cry bloody murder if the Red Cross refuse to treat the IRA, and only treat British citizens.
 
Red Cross is doing wrong way to treat Taliban if they are knowingly about group is Taliban or not.

I am disturbed by your way of thinking :ugh:

I'm very glad to see any medical/humanitarian organization being a neutral one. The American medic do treat the injured enemy. Even if Red Cross is funded by American taxpayers.... it still doesn't matter. What Red Cross did was right.
 
I am disturbed by your way of thinking :ugh:

I'm very glad to see any medical/humanitarian organization being a neutral one. The American medic do treat the injured enemy. Even if Red Cross is funded by American taxpayers.... it still doesn't matter. What Red Cross did was right.

Ouch, sorry to hear about it.
 
You know...

I believe that Human beings deserve to live, whether good or bad. It's not up to me to be judge, jury, and executioner.

Red Cross is great with their humanitarian efforts. Remaining nuetral and providing help where needed, it means there are some people in the world that cares.

In terrorist groups there are bound to be children in them.

You can't hate them for what they are doing. It's all in the way they are raised or influenced, they don't know it's wrong, because they are taught that it is the right way. Then again, we think it is wrong, but their culture believes it's right. We never know, and it is a good thing that Red Cross is there and nuetral.

Those in the Medical Proffession are the same way. Think 'M.A.S.H', it's the oath of people in the profession to tend to all living beings, no matter what side, race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic, heritage, whether they have fur or not. No matter what.
 
According to the Red Cross:

"You can help the victims of countless crises, like the recent earthquake in Haiti, around the world each year by making a financial gift to the American Red Cross International Response Fund, which will provide immediate relief and long-term support through supplies, technical assistance and other support to help those in need. The American Red Cross honors donor intent. If you wish to designate your donation to a specific disaster, please do so at the time of your donation by mailing your donation with the designation to the American Red Cross, P.O. Box 37243, Washington, D.C. 20013 or to your local American Red Cross chapter. Donations to the International Response Fund can be made by phone at 1-800-REDCROSS or 1-800-257-7575 (Spanish) or online at www.redcross.org."

So, yes, you can designate how your donation is applied.
 
Wirelessly posted

In a limited sense, yes. But it still neutral.

Plus, I thought we are talking about the International organization, not a specific branch?
 
Wirelessly posted

In a limited sense, yes. But it still neutral.

Plus, I thought we are talking about the International organization, not a specific branch?
Donors can also designate their gift to the International organization. For example, relief for Haiti, designate "for Haiti" on the check.
 
Back
Top