Announcement

Join us on Discord: https://discord.gg/nf43FxS
uziq
Member
+343|2205
i don't necessarily disagree with you, but it's a separate debate, about the nature of advanced-technological warfare. releasing chlorine gas or mustard gas with the wind in the trenches probably wasn't 'ethical', either: we've been renegotiating the codes of warfare ever since its major industrialization/mechanization.

(i guess you can thank many engineers and scientists for this contribution to dishonorable mass killing ...)

shooting a prisoner at short-range who is probably bound and restrained is pretty timeless, though. it's murder.

Last edited by uziq (2020-11-19 05:31:51)

Larssen
Member
+43|640
Nah I'm not exonerating anyone. Clearly this group had severe issues and violated numerous laws, not just once but some 30+ times, which ought to be punished.

But extrajudicial killings do happen in warzones, not always at the massive scale of this group here. Not necessarily applicable to this case but I've understood that there are some glaring issues with regard to captured or suspected combatants. As afghan citizens they'll be handed over to afghan military or police and it occured more than a few times that these people were released or disappeared again within days, only to turn up on the battlefield a week later. Rinse and repeat. This confronts people with some ethical and personal questions whether they don't just prefer killing these guys there and then rather than having to face fire or run over an IED planted by the exact same person at a later point in time. All that because the Afghan government doesn't handle them properly or because grey areas in the law avoid prosecution (or punish so lightly the time behind bars is far too short). The system of laws and regulations we deploy for fighting war amongst a civilian population are complicated, frustrating, ineffective and demand from average joe soldier a degree of tolerance and patience that is superhuman, inhuman even, not to mention (social) intelligence certainly beyond what a young regular infantryman has.

At least when you conduct a drone strike the targets will be dead and any other casualties are written off as 'collateral damage'. Avoids any possibility of captured combatants and a whole lot of complicated moral, ethical, judicial questions, which usually greatly damage any sort of war effort to boot if things go wrong. No better propaganda tool than an enemy that 'breaks the rules'. Which is also a certainty in warfare - you will have soldiers that either intentionally or inadvertently cause death that will be considered illegal.
uziq
Member
+343|2205

Larssen wrote:

But extrajudicial killings do happen in warzones, not always at the massive scale of this group here. Not necessarily applicable to this case but I've understood that there are some glaring issues with regard to captured or suspected combatants. As afghan citizens they'll be handed over to afghan military or police and it occured more than a few times that these people were released or disappeared again within days, only to turn up on the battlefield a week later. Rinse and repeat. This confronts people with some ethical and personal questions whether they don't just prefer killing these guys there and then rather than having to face fire or run over an IED planted by the exact same person at a later point in time. All that because the Afghan government doesn't handle them properly or because grey areas in the law avoid prosecution (or punish so lightly the time behind bars is far too short). The system of laws and regulations we deploy for fighting war amongst a civilian population are complicated, frustrating, ineffective and demand from average joe soldier a degree of tolerance and patience that is superhuman, inhuman even, not to mention (social) intelligence certainly beyond what a young regular infantryman has.
i would suggest that is the occupying forces' and their installed government's problem, not the guy being shot in the face out of combat.
Larssen
Member
+43|640
Yeah but I don't think that'll help the people on the ground who are otherwise on the receiving end of bullets and IEDs. While illegal, I can understand the frustration and desire to 'take matters in one's own hands'.

Ah well, in some future we'll have an almost completely robotised/automated battlefield anyway. Already saw this in Ukraine to an extent: the Russians had drones flying over the battlefield identifying enemy combatants who were then immediately struck by artillery strikes. No human intervention needed.
uziq
Member
+343|2205
i doubt aussie special forces were frustrated. more likely it's as dilbert says: they're on the other side of the world being sent to a theatre of combat with which they rightfully have fuck-all attachment or investment. it's a shooting holiday and a bit of adventure. what stake does australia have in the future of afghanistan? no surprises that a bunch of specially trained, over-armed meatheads go and plink a few goatfarmers. boredom is probably a bigger threat than frustration.

these aren't the people being sent out on recce and patrols, either, in long convoys, being targeted by IEDs. they were tasked, if i recall correctly, on dropping into areas to stop opium production. they're flown in by helicopter, catch a few peasants harvesting and processing poppies red-handed, and then murder a few. this is not a unit that has been stationed in helmand for 6 months and has lost 20% of its men, battle-weary, etc, etc.

Last edited by uziq (2020-11-19 07:14:03)

Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,708|4859|eXtreme to the maX
These guys were involved in plenty of firefights with militants, they weren't just policing opium production.

As always the infantry take the hits, the guy dropping JDAMs on farms gets to go home.
Epstein didn't kill himself

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2020 Jeff Minard