Questions on the rules of engagement in armed conflicts, it stands as a stork reminder of the devastating consequences of Foreign Military invasions and occupation of countries. Here is a review of that incident in anot show. The 215 us attack on the msf hospital in kunduz underscored the inherent challenges of conducting military operations in densely Populated Areas and the crucial need for clear rules of engagements to protect civilian infrastructure. The incident also highlighted the importance of robust mechanisms for independent investing. And accountability to prevent such tragedies and uphold International Humanitarian law. In the we hours of october 3rd 2015, as people in their homes and patients in the msf hospital in kundus were asleep, a United States air force ac130 you gun ship opened fire on the hospital. A total of 211 shells were fired. 42 people were killed including medical staff and patients, many others were were injured, according to the msf, quote, our patients burned in their beds, our medical staff were decapitated or lost limbs, others were shot from the air while they fled the burning building. The attack lasted for around one hour, quote, the main Hospital Building came under precise and repeated air strikes while surrounding buildings were left mostly untouched. The charity medical organization said that for the entire one hour, it. Team, quote, desperately called military authorities to stop the attack, the hospital, which provided vital medical assistance to the wartorn region was reduced to rubble. The initial justifications provided by the United States for the attack raised eyebrows among international observers. The us military claimed that it was targeting taliban militants who had allegedly taken over in the hospital leading to the tragic incident. However, investigations and eyewitness accounts offered a different narrative suggesting that there were no armed combatants within the hospital compound at the time of the attack. The attack on the msf hospital sporked Immediate International outrage. Humanitarian organizations, governments and the public demanded independent investigations into the incidents. The United States eventually launched its own investigation, acknowledging that the hospital had been mistakenly targeted due to human and technical errors. This admission further fueled calls for Greater Transparency and accountability in military operations. The repercussions of the condus hospital attack extended beyond the immediate loss of life and destruction. The incident highlighted the challenges faced by medical personnel working in conflict zones and renewed discussions about the protection of Healthcare Facilities during arm. Conflict, the attack also strange relations between the United States and the msf with the organization calling for an independent International Investigation into the incident. The condus hospital attack raised important legal and ethical questions regarding the conduct of warfare. International humanitarian law prohibits attacks on medical facilities and recognizes the protected status of medical personnel and patience in armed conflict. The incidents uh renewed the discussions on the need for enhanced training, improved rules of engagement and a stricter adherence to International Humanitarian law to prevent such tragedies from. Occurring in the future. In the aftermath of the attack, the United States expressed regrets and offered compensation to the victims and their families. However, for many, the compensation alone was not enough to address the profound loss and trauma experienced. Calls for accountability and justice continued and people demanded that those responsible be held to account for their actions. Even though many civilians were killed and injured by the u. S. In that attack, the u. S. Government acted slowly and reluctantly to clarify the details, and no one was held accountable. The loss of life and the other casualties were ultimately conveniently described as collateral damage, and so the United States got away with yet another military strike on civilians in foreign lands. A Palestinian ForeignMinistry Says israel is using internationally banned bombs in gaza as the regime continues with this onslot against the besieg territory. How science un ambassadors describe israels Daily Campaign against gaza as genocide saying regime. Moves amount to war crimes and iran strongly condemns israels atrocities against palestinians and gaza saying regime seeks to massacre people of the besieg territory