View Single Post
  #77  
Old 06-06-2011, 07:06 PM
ShadoWarrior's Avatar
ShadoWarrior ShadoWarrior is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Twilight Zone
Posts: 138
Default

War crimes occur in every war (or "police action", or whatever euphemism is being used) by troops from every nation, without exception. Something that I take exception to is when some folks label a country "terrorist" because of the mistakes of few individuals. Besmirching over a half a million troops who've served honorably because of the actions of a few that get heavy media coverage is grossly distorting the reality of how a war is conducted.

The US, along with most UK commonwealth nations, are some of the very few nations on this planet that indict and convict their own troops for violating the rules of war. It should also be noted that the civility of soldiers has improved steadily over the years. The armies of the various NATO nations today are a lot more restrained than they were 30-40 years ago, and those of 30-40 years ago were considerably more restrained than those who fought in WW2. And the trend continues as far back as you wish to go ... for "western" nations.

On the subject of WW2, you can hardly compare the treatment of Allied POWs by the Japanese with the treatment of Japanese POWs by the Allies. Cite me one example of Japanese POWs in a POW camp being slaughtered. Or worked to death. Even the Germans, for the most part, treated US/commonwealth prisoners according to the GC. The same cannot be said for any country that viewed their opponents as subhuman (Germany towards the USSR, USSR towards Germany & Japan, Japan towards anyone else). And, unlike the Germans, Japanese, and Russians, western allied troops in WW2 didn't routinely go rampaging through towns raping and killing everyone. That was an official policy for Germany on the eastern front, and for both the Imperial Japanese and the Russians.

So when discussing war crimes, it helps not to tar an entire nation with the misdeeds of a few. And it helps if you don't compare acts from different eras, when what is unacceptable today (carpet bombing cities, for example) wasn't viewed in the same way then. And to distinguish between plain bad judgment (accidentally killing some civilians with a missile strike) and deliberate criminal acts (targeting a missile at a location known to have many innocents, such as a school or hospital). And one need also be sure of one's definitions. If you aiding a terrorist, you're not 'innocent'. If he's in your house, the house and anyone in it is fair game. Torture is always a crime. And the leaders of countries (such as G.W. Bush) that issue orders that violate international law (such as authorizing torture) should be tried by an international court. No exceptions.

Finally, as several people have mentioned, the winning side in a war seldom, if ever, is held accountable for its war crimes. The winners make up new rules and then inflict them on the losers, retroactively. In a post-apocalyptic setting, where everyone is a loser, the only "justice" is what a powerful enough group can dish out locally ... and get away with.
__________________
If you find yourself in a fair fight you didn't plan your mission properly!

Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who don't.
Reply With Quote