Quote:
Originally Posted by SMG
B.
However, if I had a wounded terrorist who had been shooting at me, Probably A.
I don't consider killing a terrorists a crime. The SAS has the only 100% cure for these people.
|
I do not either but the law of the land sees it differently and we all have to abide by the law of the land or suffer the consequences whether you agree with them or not. Why should this man get preferential treatment? he should not imo
---------- Post added at 12:55 ---------- Previous post was at 12:52 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osem
Our forces are out there fighting an enemy that has no rules of conduct. They'll happily kill men, women, children in any way they can without compunction and do not deserve, IMHO, the protection of the Geneva Convention. I think circumstances such as these need to be heavily borne in mind when deciding these matters. It'd be ironic in the extreme if any of our forces were lost affording such an enemy a protection they clearly don't deserve or believe in.
|
you can not have a law and then say it does not apply it is then a war crime . Saddam was hung for not obeying the law various AQ leaders including OBL have been targeted for not obeying international law. How can you fight on the side of that law then say it does not apply because the enemy which we are fighting because of breaches to this law do not follow it???
---------- Post added at 12:57 ---------- Previous post was at 12:55 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by martyh
No it doesn't surprise anyone and we are all aware that these things happen ,the difference ,and it is a massive difference,is we hold ourselves accountable when it happens as we are doing now .
|
how can you say we hold ourselves accountable then say the geneva convention should not apply to others???