TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Is this a war crime.?
Pages (3): [1] 2 3 »

Is this a war crime.?

Picture quality isnt the best. But it suggests a war crime to me. But then again from this you cant get all the facts.

http://www.thenausea.com/elements/u...4/11/crime1.wmv

no,

killing a person in the line of duty is alright, I'm sure if the situation was reversed the 'freedom fighters' would put much more bullets into the other guy

I watched the vid, what is the suspected crime? Shooting someone? They were not obviously surrendering...

didnt know that while having bullets flying past ones head, they're supposed to stop and think about whether shooting back would be a warcrime. get real.

kill or be killed.

your post "suggests" to me that you're not the brightest star in the sky.

>JM<

quote:

Originally posted by Some One no, killing a person in the line of duty is alright, I'm sure if the situation was reversed the 'freedom fighters' would put much more bullets into the other guy

so its alright for them to shoot children randomly aswell then?

quote:

Originally posted by ::TranceVanDyk:: didnt know that while having bullets flying past ones head, they're supposed to stop and think about whether shooting back would be a warcrime. get real.

where were the bullets flying past their heads?

the controversy is that the iraqi was supposed to have been wounded and unarmed
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6502452/

i dont like it, but this shit happens in wars, just watch Private Ryan

quote:

MARINE IN SHOOTING PROBE The United Nations has called for an investigation into a series of alleged abuses in the Iraqi city of Fallujah. Human rights official Louise Arbour said those responsible for any violations should be brought to justice. Controversy over the Fallujah offensive was fuelled by video footage showing a US Marine shooting dead a wounded and unarmed Iraqi. The pictures showed some marines entering the mosque on Saturday. The marine, who has since been taken off battlefield duty, is seen standing above a figure slumped against a wall aiming his rifle at the man's body. "He's f****** faking he's dead," the soldier is heard to shout. "He's breathing... he's f****** faking he's dead." A shot rings out, and the words: "He is now" can be heard on the video. US broadcaster NBC said the dead man, one of about five pictured inside the mosque, was an unarmed insurgent who had been discovered the previous day and been left to await medical attention. The reports said the unnamed marine involved had been wounded in the face the day before the killing but had returned to duty almost immediately. Another soldier had died moving the booby-trapped body of an insurgent. The US military has begun an investigation into possible war crimes over the incident. The First Marine Division said it wanted to determine whether the marine acted in self-defence, violated military law or failed to comply with the international Law of Armed Conflict.

http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/...3249411,00.html

quote:

Originally posted by Kzwei the controversy is that the iraqi was supposed to have been wounded and unarmed http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6502452/:

That helps a little, the video that was linked was pretty useless. Seems like the major issue is wether the person was a POW. If they were then shooting them was illegal but if not then it is less obvious.

Heh, it's difficult to say. Theoretically a soldier shouldn't murder an unarmed insurgent or an insurgent attempting to surrender. The fact that those things happen all the time is a different matter. But the thing that makes Iraqi situation tricky is that those insurgents are often equipped with explosive belts and are just luring the soldiers to come closer and help them so they can kill both themselves and the soldiers. So I'm kinda split on the issue. If it were a regular war, then it would be a violation of Geneva conventions...here...it's hard to say.

quote:

Originally posted by Michael19 where were the bullets flying past their heads?

Exactly.

It is totally wrong. I understand the situation, but if the guy on the deck had a bomb he could of easily popped it and killed the solider anyway, though I understand he might not of. Anyway did he have a bomb? No he did not, if he was an american there would be outcry to the high heavens. There would be revenge..... think about it.

You can say all you like about the guy getting shot in the face the day before but if he was cleared for duty and he wasn't mentally ready then the person who cleared him is, in part, responcible for the result of that, which IS a war crime (that of killing an unarmed combatant). I mean why was the other guy on the ground not shot exactly? Why is ok to kill one, because of suspected bombs, why didn't the other one get the same fate?

Though I do understand the definition of an unarmed person is quite diffectly to sustain either way in this case.

Its not a war crime for this reason (assuming the guy was not a civilian):

The combatant did not wear a uniform or identifying insignia. That is a war crime against the Geneva convention.

If it was iraqi insurgents coming into a room with an american soldier they would have tortured him and then beheaded him on tv. I don't see the problem with this at all, perhaps they should have just let the guy starve to death.

quote:

Originally posted by BadBadNeil If it was iraqi insurgents coming into a room with an american soldier they would have tortured him and then beheaded him on tv. I don't see the problem with this at all, perhaps they should have just let the guy starve to death.

Unfortunatelt, this happens to be an execution, and you cannot execute someone without a court of law. this is a war crime

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley Unfortunatelt, this happens to be an execution, and you cannot execute someone without a court of law. this is a war crime

Actually you can, so long as its in a war zone, and the guy is part of a militia or a combatant.

BTW an execution is a death attributed to a trial or some other formality... perhaps the word you were looking for was "murder".

And just to prove it to you:
Dictionary.Com:

ex�e�cu�tion
n.

1.
a. The act of executing something.
b. The state of being executed.
2. The manner, style, or result of performance: The plan was sound; its execution, faulty.
3. The act or an instance of putting to death or being put to death as a lawful penalty.
4. Law.
a. The carrying into effect of a court judgment.
b. A writ empowering an officer to enforce a judgment.
c. Validation of a legal document by the performance of all necessary formalities.
5. Archaic. Effective, punitive, or destructive action.

quote:

Originally posted by Yoepus Actually you can, so long as its in a war zone, and the guy is part of a militia or a combatant. BTW an execution is a death attributed to a trial or some other formality... perhaps the word you were looking for was "murder". And just to prove it to you: Dictionary.Com: ex�e�cu�tion n. 1. a. The act of executing something. b. The state of being executed. 2. The manner, style, or result of performance: The plan was sound; its execution, faulty. 3. The act or an instance of putting to death or being put to death as a lawful penalty. 4. Law. a. The carrying into effect of a court judgment. b. A writ empowering an officer to enforce a judgment. c. Validation of a legal document by the performance of all necessary formalities. 5. Archaic. Effective, punitive, or destructive action.

Not lawful according to any internatioan treaty i ave ever seen

Obviouskly, if you do knoe an internbational treaty that says otherwise, please enlighten me...

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley Not lawful according to any internatioan treaty i ave ever seen

its not so much that it is lawful as it is that it is not against the law.

quote:

Obviouskly, if you do knoe an internbational treaty that says otherwise, please enlighten me...

And obviously, if you ever find a dictionary, please let me know...

quote:

Originally posted by Yoepus its not so much that it is lawful as it is that it is not against the law. And obviously, if you ever find a dictionary, please let me know...

Hey..its saturday knight so if you ever come over to england and find out the closing times of our pubs let me know!

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley Unfortunatelt, this happens to be an execution, and you cannot execute someone without a court of law. this is a war crime

I don't think killing animals can be considered a war crime.

quote:

Originally posted by BadBadNeil I don't think killing animals can be considered a war crime.

Are animals protected under the Geneva Convention? It would not surprise me if some were (horses, live stock, etc.)

PS - Yoepus has apoint about the uniform. For the geneva convention to apply to a soldier they must be wearing a uniform. This is why captures spies can legal be executed, they are not considered POW. However, I don't think many of the resistance fighters are wearing them.

To be honest I don't care if someones wearing a uniform or not. Killing unarmed people is murder.

But in this case it is hard to know if the guy in question pulled the trigger for the right reasons (that is he belived the guy had a bomb strapped to him).

And it looks as though he didn't. You can't just go around killing people left and right esp unarmed people. I mean what next a man carrying a white flag with half his leg missing.... double tap him just in case? Just incase........ think about it. Why not give them a chance? Why not act in a professional manner?

quote:

Originally posted by DrUg_Tit0 If it were a regular war,

a regular war???

coming from a war torn country in the early 90's should make you realize more than anybody else that there is no normal war...

>JM<

quote:

Originally posted by Dervish I mean what next a man carrying a white flag with half his leg missing.... double tap him just in case? Just incase........ think about it.

with all the shit going on, that would probably be a good idea.

what motivation does that one legged man have to keep living? he already dedicated himself to the cause of fighting, and doesn't care if he dies. chances ARE he will drop the flag, and pull out a weapon...

i say drop him then and there.

kill or be killed.

quote:

Why not give them a chance? Why not act in a professional manner?

you've gotta be kidding me man?? its a WAR!!! and not a community Chamber of Commerce meeting.

>JM<

quote:

Originally posted by Dervish To be honest I don't care if someones wearing a uniform or not. Killing unarmed people is murder. But in this case it is hard to know if the guy in question pulled the trigger for the right reasons (that is he belived the guy had a bomb strapped to him). And it looks as though he didn't. You can't just go around killing people left and right esp unarmed people. I mean what next a man carrying a white flag with half his leg missing.... double tap him just in case? Just incase........ think about it. Why not give them a chance? Why not act in a professional manner?

Can't go by the white flag nowadays either. Just today the insurgents had white flags raised and when soldiers got close they opened fire injuring a few soldiers. This has happened numerous times. Typical rules don't always apply.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.