The real question is did the hospital promise to be more careful next time

According to the Geneva convention, hospitals are not targeted. Maybe we shall offer to drop that part and require hospitals to have their own anti-air defense.

Maybe we should.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kunduz_hospital_airstrike

I'm not even sure if you are joking or you are that out of touch with reality.

Reality does seem quite inconsistent with itself lately. Maybe if I got in touch with it I could tell it to come back when it has fixed all its double standards. But I'm pretty sure it won't listen.

If you wanna try and tell it that, don't start from me - I'm just along for the ride. Same as all the commenters who have no loved one in either hospital but are quick to propose clever solutions to spherical problems in vacuum

This is going meta way above my pay-grade. Sorry, but I haven't read Phillip Dick lately and I can't keep up with your train of thought.

The idea that the "real" problem with criminal activity is that victims aren't properly prepared to defend themselves is odious.

Ultimately it's the patients that are the victims; the institution to which they had entrusted their health was the one that exposed them to remote attack.

Again blaming the victim for not being prepared.

Don't get me wrong, being prepared is important but insufficient prep should never be communicated as a way mitigate the culpability of the attackers.