That goal was not acceptable if it required the murder of the two people.The purpose was to destroy the boat and its cargo.
You keep changing the justification.
That goal was not acceptable if it required the murder of the two people.The purpose was to destroy the boat and its cargo.
I am concerned about rights and our rule of law, you appear not to be.Because whiners, like you, are more concerned about the supposed "Rights" of drug smuggling terrorists in international waters than you are about the crimes they're committing.
And in those cases, war crime trials don't happen. War is about human suffering and unnecessary deaths. Those are two things that define war.That is stupid. Many are settled with a peace deal that appeases both sides. That is the best result. But rightys care little about human suffering and unnecessary deaths.
So you cant discuss, understood.looks like someone needs a refresher on combat..............oh, wait. You were never in combat, were you?
Did you not see the "IF", dumb shit!You wouldn’t appear to be so ignorant and uninformed if you would just be quiet and allow those who are informed to inform you.
https://www.hindustantimes.com › World news › us news
4 days ago — The White House defended a Navy admiral's decision to order a second strike on a drug boat, stating it was lawful.
I'm unconcerned about either in a FUCKING WAR! War is not about policing. It is not about bringing the bad guys to justice. It is not about arrests and trials. It is about killing the enemy, destroying all their shit, blowing the fuck out of their stuff and in general making them beg you to stop.I am concerned about rights and our rule of law, you appear not to be.
Who are "they"?So they are not terrorizing American citizens?
Misspelled. You should have written "Khaaaaaaaaaaaaaan!"Khaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaan!
This is not a complete sentence.Because of my superior intelligence.
You have no idea of what my children are capable.So you're an American citizen who is not being terrorized?
Can a magat here show me anywhere in the code conduct that allows anyone in the military to put this rule aside if, in their discretion they believe "...a survivor... out of combat... due to ship destruction...", is not "... considered hors de combat (out of the fight)..." and thus can be targeted and killed?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From the U.S. Military Code of Conduct
- and survivors of maritime warfare who are “out of combat” due to ship destruction
- Enemy personnel in the water from a destroyed vessel are considered hors de combat (out of the fight)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
If an American war ship was blown up and some of the personell was floating in the water clinging to wreckage, an opposing army could assume they were trying (hoping) for a US war ship to save them and they would rejoin the fight. So do magats believe every single US service person in that spot is fair game to kill, if the opposing commander simply says 'I think they were trying to rejoin the fight"?
I would say resources make deaths necessary.And in those cases, war crime trials don't happen. War is about human suffering and unnecessary deaths. Those are two things that define war.
What the hell do think? That was is just a more serious version of the police?
Are you senile? The so called nacro-terrorists.Who are "they"?
That's the British version.Misspelled. You should have written "Khaaaaaaaaaaaaaan!"
Neither is that one.This is not a complete sentence.
Put down your half pipe.You have no idea of what my children are capable.
During an active war against Nazis you cannot do that. You are not firing on their boats to bring them to justice or arrest them. You bomb their ship to blow it out of the fucking water and destroy that ships capabilities and kill all on it.To ensure the target was completely destroyed. The military wasn't there to "bring them to justice" or to arrest them. They were there to blow their boat out of the fucking water and destroy their cargo. End of story.
That's mafiaism and mobism. Also Machiavellism.I'm unconcerned about either in a FUCKING WAR! War is not about policing. It is not about bringing the bad guys to justice. It is not about arrests and trials. It is about killing the enemy, destroying all their shit, blowing the fuck out of their stuff and in general making them beg you to stop.
All MAGAt cracker retards care about is what their Orange Jesus tells them to care about. They will violently overthrow our Republic, shred our Constitution and murder all brown Americans if told to do so.I am concerned about rights and our rule of law, you appear not to be.
No one cares about YOUR beliefs. You can believe the world is flat and that is OK.I'm unconcerned about either in a FUCKING WAR! War is not about policing. It is not about bringing the bad guys to justice. It is not about arrests and trials. It is about killing the enemy, destroying all their shit, blowing the fuck out of their stuff and in general making them beg you to stop.
Agreed. You can't strafe the water shooting survivors either. Leaving them to drown violates the law of rendering assistance unless leaving to for a legitimate reason such as actively pursuing another target or to avoid attack by enemy forces.During an active war against Nazis you cannot do that. You are not firing on their boats to bring them to justice or arrest them. You bomb their ship to blow it out of the fucking water and destroy that ships capabilities and kill all on it.
And yet legally you can not just bomb the capsized disabled ship again and you MUST render aid to the nazi's stranded in the water.
There is no fucking war, you are an idiot. Even in WAR the Military Code of Conduct applies.I'm unconcerned about either in a FUCKING WAR! War is not about policing. It is not about bringing the bad guys to justice. It is not about arrests and trials. It is about killing the enemy, destroying all their shit, blowing the fuck out of their stuff and in general making them beg you to stop.
Hindustani Times?You wouldn’t appear to be so ignorant and uninformed if you would just be quiet and allow those who are informed to inform you.
https://www.hindustantimes.com › World news › us news
4 days ago — The White House defended a Navy admiral's decision to order a second strike on a drug boat, stating it was lawful.
Inversion fallacy.Says the scumbag condoning the pedo party
With very rare exceptions, war crimes are only pursued and trials for them carried out by the winning side against the loser in a war.
Does that mean the law should not be followed?With very rare exceptions, war crimes are only pursued and trials for them carried out by the winning side against the loser in a war.