[Temujin]

The subject has come up in another thread somewhere on the Geneva Convention, i.e., what is "right or wrong" for a soldier to be able to use as a tool or instrument of war. I have rather strong opinions on this subject for particular reasons; I'm curious as to what other members here think of such "rules for war."

Personally, I believe that their should be no legal rules in war (because in reality - there isn't any); you should be given the tools or be allowed to use tools (weapons) that most efficiently kill your enemy with no restraints. Whatever makes your comrades and yourself safer, whatever best protects your country and all of its citizens - that is the tool(s) that should be used.

I believe that there is no "wrong," per say, in war. If you capture men and women that were in the not-so-distant-past shooting at you and your comrades, then you should be allowed to treat them in any manner of your chosing. That is the reality of war; war is hell, and your objective is to see that your enemies get there long before you do.

If certain liberals/democrats in our government think that balls-to-the-wall torture does not bring about much well-needed information, then perhaps they should ask Lee, Eisenhower (and other American leaders), the Japanese (too many leaders to name), the Chinese, the Koreans, Hitler, Stalin, Genghis Khan, the Romans, the CIA, NSA and many, many, many more people, groups and organizations if torture isn't "the way." Torture is not evil; it is nothing more than an instrument (a brutally effective one at that) of war that helps protect our soldiers on the lines, both directly and indirectly, and in many cases - even our men, women and children at home.

If it takes brutal torture to help prevent 300 school children, possibly even my own children, in my country stay safe from those that would seek to murder and maim them -- then so be it.

Laws cannot "make" people talk; judges cannot "make" people talk; lawyers cannot "make" people talk... Dire pain can and will certainly make the enemy talk.

As for what was stated about the media and reporters with agendas -- nothing could be more true. In my opinion, reporters have no place in war unless they are in or from the military. Aside from the Gulf War, in the last few wars we've had the media has done nothing but demoralize the troops in harm's way and turn our men and women in uniform into literal monsters in the public's eyes. As one American military official said (paraphrased), "I'm not sure who we should shoot at - the men with guns or the men and women with cameras and mics."

...So, it is against the Geneva Convention to kill a man with a .50 BMG (insert caliber here)? Oh well, a .50 leaves strange remains for the coroner.



-Temujin

 

[Aslan]

As far as actual combat, I agree, to a point.

you should be free to use the meanest nastiest weapons at your disposal.

But, I think rules should apply to the treatment of POWs and civilians.

It's kinda difficult, and maybe that's your real point, to fight a war on moral grounds if you exhibit the very behavor you went to war over...

:devil:

 

[Temujin]

The treatment of civilians is one thing, but the treatment of POW's is another, at least to me. It is those same POW's - the ones that were just trying to kill you or to bring down your country, whatever the case may be - that have that oft-times valuable information that can save your own troops and even civilians. It is those individuals that have the blueprints to our schools, the locations of military sites/WMD's, etc. that would be used against you. Any method whatsoever used to bring about that information, to me, is acceptable. As I stated, treating a POW to a shower, food, blankets and an attorney is not going to make him talk, at least not 99.9% of the time. Pain will. That pain inflicted on the enemy directly prevents the deaths of our men and women on the front lines.

I agree that civilians from the opposing country should be treated just the same as our own civilians at home - with respect, dignity and honor; however, those civilians that would dance in the street shouting "death to you"; "you are the great Satan and need destroyed," etc., should be treated as enemies - just as you would treat a hostile military combatant. Why? Because those "civilians" are the ones that supply their troops - the ones trying to kill you - with supplies; they make their weapons, they make their military machines, they make all of their gear... gear that would be used to kill you, your comrades and your fellow countrymen. Those types of civilians are just as much the enemy as the enemies that are firing at you on the battlefield.

I may be far too hostile-minded; I don't know. It just seems logical to me that those individuals - the money and supplies behind the enemy you are fighting - are just as much your enemies as the ones firing at you.

But... if it is a brutal dictator that is, by force, making the people build, fund, etc. his fighting men - then that is another story altogether.

 

[Ankeny]

The entire issue of morality in wartime is a two way street. Where do you draw the line?

 

[Aslan]

I agree that civilians from the opposing country should be treated just the same as our own civilians at home - with respect, dignity and honor; however, those civilians that would dance in the street shouting "death to you"; "you are the great Satan and need destroyed," etc., should be treated as enemies - just as you would treat a hostile military combatant. Why? Because those "civilians" are the ones that supply their troops - the ones trying to kill you - with supplies; they make their weapons, they make their military machines, they make all of their gear... gear that would be used to kill you, your comrades and your fellow countrymen. Those types of civilians are just as much the enemy as the enemies that are firing at you on the battlefield.

I may be far too hostile-minded; I don't know. It just seems logical to me that those individuals - the money and supplies behind the enemy you are fighting - are just as much your enemies as the ones firing at you.

But... if it is a brutal dictator that is, by force, making the people build, fund, etc. his fighting men - then that is another story altogether.

You just pretty much described the liberals as they shout death to conservatives, to the president, etc.

The only difference, is they aren't in a foreign nation, they're here in this one.

And at least one poster here has declared they want to bring down this country.

Should we just shoot them all?

It gets messy...

A violent crowd in a combat zone - my personal preference would be to light em up.

However, the reality is, that CNN, the French, and every other communist news source, would produce footage proving you shot first into a crowd of peaceful unarmed peasants, all on their way to church. There'd be endless shots of all the babies you shot and bayonneted (never mind that there wasn't any children present at that time.)

And, like it or not, that would cause problems for americans.

:devil:

 

[andy]

there AINT any morality in a war in Iraq, never was, never will be. It's none of our biz, and someday we will pay DEARLY for getting involved in it. When the ******** wise up,and pay CAUCASIAN mercs to come here and randomly poison, sabotage, snipe, etc, it will be ON, dude. They have billions of $, those guys will happily do a year's worth of hell-raising for a millon $ each. 1000 guys, each causing as 100x havoc as the unibomber, Tylenol killer, and DC Snipers, oh yeah.

 

[Aslan]

there AINT any morality in a war in Iraq, never was, never will be. It's none of our biz, and someday we will pay DEARLY for getting involved in it. When the ******** wise up,and pay CAUCASIAN mercs to come here and randomly poison, sabotage, snipe, etc, it will be ON, dude. They have billions of $, those guys will happily do a year's worth of hell-raising for a millon $ each. 1000 guys, each causing as 100x havoc as the unibomber, Tylenol killer, and DC Snipers, oh yeah.

wishful thinking.

Hey Andy maybe you can get some of those millions. (you wouldn't make it througha year.)

Of course it won't happen, and for very good reasons.

But that's a whole 'nother discussion

:devil: