- Reaction score
- 5
- Points
- 430
I guess I was expecting some SUGGESTION of a threat, rather than just shooting.
Silly me for reading the scenario.
Silly me for reading the scenario.
Brutus said:Nice cut and paste job. My full reponse, with the relevant bits bolded, was:
Brutus said:Can you shoot enemy soldiers who are not armed and actively engaging you? Yes, provided your ROEs don't remove this option from you.
Brutus said:.........., please quote me the LOAC/GC article.
There were. Even in the Second World War there were RoE attempting to limit damage as the Allies pushed through France.George Wallace said:I am sure that there were no ROEs during any war prior to Korea, other than to kill the enemy.
There have been trials for shooting pers that were hor de combat, but can you find one war-time example of a trial for shooting an un-armed enemy soldier who was not hors de combat? Simply not having a weapon in one's hands does not make one hors de combat.George Wallace said:We all know how those wars ended with those who did shoot unarmed enemy troops being put on trial.
ArmyVern said:You're making assumptions; one must deal with the facts at hand. The "facts" you work with are given in the scenario - we are not supposed to "assume" anything; we are supposed to act based on the facts at hand. There's no choking, no knife, no rushing the troop given. Nada. Given that there was none of those in the scenario ... what would you do using the "facts" of the scenario - that is the question.
George Wallace said:I don't know what your fixation is on ROEs. ROEs change with every Peacekeeping Msn. ROEs are a recent invention to put down legal parameters drawn from our existing Laws by which troops would follow on recent Peacekeeping Msns. I am sure that there were no ROEs during any war prior to Korea, other than to kill the enemy. We all know how those wars ended with those who did shoot unarmed enemy troops being put on trial. What makes your interpretation of this scenario any different? You haven't killed an enemy combatant, you murdered him.
KevinB said:Heck note it in your mission log and put Bloggins in for a CDS commendation if you want, it does not bear NIS/MP/CoC Investigation, unless Bloggins dick was out of his pants.
While your instructor may have presented an effective ethical lesson & discussion, he unfortunately reinforced a bad lesson in the laws of armed conflict. Is it possible that you forgot to provide some background on RoE in the scenario you described, or that the "enemy soldier" was less certainly a combatant?Grimaldus said:What I took from the question (which I may not have explained very well in hindsight) in the example given to us was that it was a given that your soldier indeed broke the law ...
Grimaldus said:Then again if you're force protection in Afghanistan there is an "investigation" by the NIS/MP if you fire a pen flare in the air as an ROE escalation..