We’re just speedrunning through the Geneva Conventions now. Who will be first to shoot a pilot parachuting from a disabled aircraft?
Dw even if it was real in the second the chaos starts maybe they can cause some chaos behind lines
I actually disagree with this one. Pilots will kill more people through bombing unless killed if allowed to return to their planes later. Unless you can be sure of their capture there’s no reason to let them live, from a humanitarian perspective. There was even this case where a pilot from a Russian aircraft killed a civilian on the ground. This rule just never made sense to me - you don’t have that with the crew leaving a tank, do you?
The idea is that they have to be given a chance to surrender. If they don’t do so, the Geneva Convention (specifically Protocol 1, Article 42) has no issue with you gunning them down. They just have to be given the chance to surrender, which they obviously can’t do while parachuting
But if they land somewhere the opposing troops can’t reach them, you can know in advance they won’t surrender.
Edit: it shouldn’t be a controversial notion that you won’t surrender in friendly territory.
“I know in advance this medic might become a soldier. I’ll shoot him now while he’s carrying that body!”
But the pilot is already a soldier
No he’s a pilot. He’s not emergency-ejecting with his rucksack and his m1.
The medic is also a soldier, I meant a valid target solider. You know what I meant
So we’re supposed to just wait until he’s emergency-killing those civilians to avoid discovery/steal from them while on the ground, like the Russian bloke did? Or bombing cities, killing hudreds or thousands?
Not that this is really new, ukraine forces ukrainian men to fight and russia forces russian men; their will was never relevant, just different excuses for what is essentially slavery.
Difference is that Russia is forcing Ukrainians - which is a violation of the Geneva convention.
Lots of countries have conscription, America too just incase that’s where you’re from and you’re throwing shade.
The purpose of this post is to highlight that Russia is sending prisoners of war to fight against their home country.
I certainly intended to throw shade on mandatory conscription, not the main topic but quite pertinent.
Of course I’m not trying to say it’s the same thing (not at all), just that a “you were born here, so go die” is on the same page.
I absolutely agree with conscription being wrong, same as mandatory service.
Yeah, and every kind of conscription is wrong.
That’s not the debate like it’s completely different, one is a breach of the Geneva convention.
Conscription is based, especially mandatory conscription
