|
Is this a war crime.?
|
View this Thread in Original format
| 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 |
|
|
| auujay |
| I watched the vid, what is the suspected crime? Shooting someone? They were not obviously surrendering... |
|
|
| ::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. :rolleyes: |
|
|
| JM |
kill or be killed.
your post "suggests" to me that you're not the brightest star in the sky.
>JM< |
|
|
| Michael19 |
| 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? |
|
|
| Michael19 |
| 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. :rolleyes: |
where were the bullets flying past their heads?:conf: |
|
|
| Kzwei |
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 happens in wars, just watch Private Ryan:happy2: |
|
|
| Michael19 |
| 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 |
|
|
| auujay |
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. |
|
|
| DrUg_Tit0 |
| 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. |
|
|
| Dervish |
| quote: | Originally posted by Michael19
where were the bullets flying past their heads?:conf: |
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. |
|
|
|
|
