Do war crimes exist?

>>1743090
obviously.

>let's play war by the rules

File: 082.gif (981KB, 1064x589px) Image search: [Google]

981KB, 1064x589px

Nope just a figment of the UN's imagination

>>1743090
According to the victor, yea

War crimes is a meme.

File: basedpunisher.jpg (822KB, 1789x2750px) Image search: [Google]

822KB, 1789x2750px

yes, massacring civilians rarely achieves any strategic goal, they go out of their way to act immorally

>>1743090
They are just social constructs so i wouldnt worry about it.

File: dreku.jpg (34KB, 419x354px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 419x354px

>war
>crimes

>>1743090
War crimes are a meme arbitrarily dished out after the fact by the people who won.

Today they do, way back when not so much.

The world got a lot softer.

I'd say the only actually criminal thing to do in war is slaughter unarmed peoples, but if they're your armed enemy willing to kill you, every tactic is on the table

>>1743154
I don't think that's how that power works

>oh no!
>the military is killing people!

Its sorta a special kind of meme.
Its sorta based on Alexander the Great & Muhammad.

Basically: Normal empires rape, pillage and burn their new areas(city states). Creating massive distrust, opposition, etc.
But usually the empires are also smart enough to replace 90% of the leadership, so the new people in charge can't distrust at the same level.

Alexander and Muhammed(past some point) didn't do so to the same extent. So when they got a new city, and integrated it into the empire trade routes, there was less distrust.
So some point into "Age of Enlightenment" somebody wanted to copy that, and it sorta stuck with us for a few hundred years.
But how it was defined ranged from "chain of command means you can only pillage if the army needs the resources" to "only rape in the capital Ivan"

>>1743314
Saladin forced the women of Jerusalem to pay a fee or else they would be forced to marry one of his solders. Of course this fee was also to pay for his armies and other future wars. Saladin was only noble when he would get something out of it.

>>1743090
If one defines a thing and then shows examples of said thing then the thing exists.

>>1743154
>massacring civilians rarely achieves any strategic goal
If you mean ensuring the military body can no longer be supplied, fed and armed by the civilian body is not a strategic goal then you're retarded.

No, they're a self imposed altruistic handicap upon western nations. Western nations can run the facade of self-restraint in war (mass civillian death still occurs where ever they intervene, but somehow it isn't a war crime when they do it) but when no one else plays by the same rules, accusations of "war crimes" fall on deaf ears.

I'd like to jump on the >war >crimes bandwagon but realistically being at the mercy of armed bands who can torture and rape you on a whim while being to call a tank to blow up your house if you resist, is pretty much the worst thing ever.

It's like a nigger home-invasion on a regional scale and all the cops literally ran away.

White people invented war crimes. Literally. Every other people just treats "war crimes" as part of the territory of warfare.

>>1743090
No

War crimes should be vigorously punished by the winning side if only to attempt to deter future "crimes" and to instill the idea that war crimes should exist in the public consciousness.

>implying all "crime" isn't a social construct

>ITT COD kiddie edge lords

Never change /b/

>>1745068
>everyone who lived before 1946 was an edgelord

>>1743090
Yes

>>1745068
you mean /pol.

>>1745068
>edge

Whenever I see the word edge I take it to mean "I cannot refute you on logical or evidential grounds, so I will paint you as kids".

Here is why war crimes exist, war crimes exist because the only intrinsic right people have is that over their bodies. Taking away life by massacring civilians is the ultimate stealing of someone's rights.

File: mag11_10.jpg (14KB, 220x229px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 220x229px

>>1743090

pretty sure this thumbnail is a thread crime

>>1743090
War is a crime.

If the situation has reached a point where war is justified, then anything is justified.

>>1743090

The essence of war is violence. Moderation in war is imbecility. That said, the winners have the right to declare their vanquished foes not only the losers, but also criminals. Vae Victis.

War crimes exist

Whats really retarded is banning certain weapons due to some sort of inherent "cruelty" factor
like nigga if I stab you with a triple edged balde or shoot you with a holla point i doubt you're really going to care whether or not it was a double edged blade or a normal ass bullet instead

>>1745815
>Whats really retarded is banning certain weapons due to some sort of inherent "cruelty" factor
I think any state of relative sanity should do its utmost to keep weapons of mass destruction from being deployed in any given situation, be it of the chemical or nuclear variety.
I also think certain "deterrent" tactics like "morale bombings" tend to be needlessly cruel, especially the firebombings the allies utilized during the second world war which made the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings seem like mercy in comparison.

File: hate.jpg (94KB, 438x503px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 438x503px

War is a crime

File: unsheathed.jpg (32KB, 367x500px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 367x500px

>War crimes don't exist

>>1745944
>war is about killing the enemy
>international body says you can kill the enemy but you can't kill the enemy
There is either crime or there is war. You can't have both.

War crimes exist. But only the losers should be tried.

>>1746110
ah yes the old having one's cake and eating it too position good show old sport

>>1745952

what about torture? what about mass rape?

you just gonna go ahead and say "ah yes good ol' rape of nanking, that was justified! it's war!"

>>1746147
Yes.

>>1746116
>>1746147
freedom aint free

>>1746147
Vae Victis

>>1743314
>Alexander...didn't do so to the same extent.
>Alexander didn't rape, pillage, and burn his new areas
The nigger devastated a good portion of Persia and committed genocide in Sogdiana/Bactria

>>1745656
>Taking away life by massacring civilians is the ultimate stealing of someone's rights.

I thought it was taking a guys dog, dressing it up like a prostitute (give it a biscuit or two) then talking a "slut walk" with said dog to his house and dropping it off at the door before running off and taking pictures of him taking his missing dog back in then house then posting said pictures in social media with a caption like "Even in this economy John's are having it RUFF with their choice of escorts".

No that's redundant.

>>1743090
The only crime in war is losing.

The problem with modern wars is that, the wars in themselves are crimes. Devised by governments to serve agendas and maintain control of power and resources (in comparison to wars fought to provide citizens resources/protection) Truly the wars we see as of today are not to better the world or protect civilians or promote virtue or morality. Any life lost is a war crime. Human life is not or should not be considered collateral!

File: Cluster_Munitions_Convention.svg.png (100KB, 800x411px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 800x411px

>>1743090
>Do war crimes exist?

Yes, but only if a very wide amount of different states, especially the states in the conflict, had some form pre-war of agreement on what is a war crime. The four Geneva Conventions do have the needed level of agreement, however the Additional Protocols (added in 1977 and 2005) of the Geneva Conventions not so much. Same with the Convention on Cluster Munitions.

File: viper dropping cluster bombs.webm (3MB, 352x262px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 352x262px

>>1746317
>no relevant countries on the cluster munitions treaty signatory list
dog bless

File: 1464431400063.jpg (42KB, 600x799px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 600x799px

>>1745944
>if you kill your enemies they win

>>1744786
Especially if you're like the Nazis who were getting payback from the grumpy Soviets who got crimed on 2 years before

>>1746355
>infants are included in my list of enemies

>>1746372
infants are just future enemies

>>1746372
from a truly psychopathic point of view, infants have the potential to grow up into enemies.

>>1746317
Fucking this. Irritated with all the kiddies ITT. EVERYTHING is a social construct, including crime etc. The only reason why things are called crimes is because no one would like those things to happen to them, and all that is necessary for those things to not happen is for no one to do the things. Basically, don't fuck me over and I won't fuck you over. This is why there was such mistreatment of German prisoners by the USSR and vice versa: the USSR didn't sign the agreement saying "let's not be dicks to each other" so it was a free for all on war prisoners on both sides.

>>1746320
I would agree with you that it is a BS treaty, from a supplies point of view France, Sweden, and the UK are important. Those are 3 major developers and producers of aircraft munitions. The end effect of this that if you want a up to date cluster bomb stock this now means a productions license or importing from the US, China, or Russia.

The limiting of choices does matter a great deal, even if the outcome is not what the treaty makers were looking for.

>>1743090

If you win No
If you lose Yes

>>1745952
>war is about killing the enemy
Ow.

War is about the achievement of objectives via military means.

If it means destroying their capability to resist. good.
If it means scaring/strongarming cunts into submission. even better. That shit is straight up Sun Tzu.

Only edgelords think its about random killing.

>>1746404
Civilians contribute to an enemies ability to resist by manufacturing munitions, farming food, and forming a recruitment base. While indiscriminately killing civilians would initially provide a boost in enemy conscription efforts, as the number of civilians left approached 0, enemy munitions, rations, and medical supplies would plummet in quality and quantity.
Randomly killing some civilians and not others just provides benefits to the enemy and doesn't have enough of an impact on manufacturing to have a noticeable effect.

>>1746412
>Civilians contribute to an enemies ability to resist by manufacturing munitions
Contribution =/= their participation in killing you back.

>>1745815
Mines are fucking bullshit nigga.

Nobody wants minefields.

>>1746375
>From a rational and historically accurate point of view, infants have the potential to grow up into enemies.

Fixed

>>1743154
That depends on whether the civilians are hiding partisans.

>>1745952
>war is about killing the enemy
What war is that? I've never heard of a war simply started to kill someone, without any strategic or tactical interests

Fucking retards like you should just leave this board

>>1746519
It also depends if one decides that the civilians are all "partisans".

>>1743154

if we'd depopulated the ME back in the gulf war times using smallpox or w/e then their spawn wouldn't currently be causing us problems
leaving enemy populations alive just lets them breed more enemies

>>1743110
fpbp

>>1746264
that's actually pretty funny.
it is

>>1746418
Yes that is exactly what it equals to. The people supplying your enemy with food and ammunition are contributing to killing you.

>>1743090
No

International law is absolutely a figment of the imagination more so than actual law

>>1746572
nice job putting words in his mouth faggot.
war is an extension of politics that revolves around killing other people.
there has never been a war where no one has been killed.

>>1746499

Stop roleplaying now please

>>1748736
He's not wrong, though. Children grow up to be pretenders or rallying symbols for reaction. Why do you think that when monarchs were usurped or forced to abdicate, the succeeding party usually had the heirs killed? Because they just like killing or something?

File: 1474950744568.jpg (358KB, 1680x1050px) Image search: [Google]

358KB, 1680x1050px

no they just die.

>>1743090
War is a crime.

>>1746373
not if you don't commit war crimes

>>1749515
heirs are different to your average vietnamese baby

>>1749629
In a war of attrition, not really.

>>1749629
Was Ho Chi Minh not a vietnamese baby at one point?

>>1743090
Yes. For example, war boats and planes must be marked as a combatant during war time in order to initiate an attack. For a war boat that means flying its countries naval war flag. Failure to fly that flag makes the war boat a pirate, not a combatant.

German U-Boats in the Great war and World War II flew their flags while they were submerged for that reason. U-Boat logbooks from both wars record instances when their captains refrained from launching torpedoes while submerged because they knew their flags were gone.

>>1744702
Did you just try to justify murdering civilians en mass

What the fuck am I doing on this website

>>1750506
>try
It's logically sound. Sorry your feels can't handle reels.

>>1743246
>memes
>war crimes
>not knowing the genesis of wars are memes

A war crime is an act that constitutes a serious violation of the law of war that gives rise to individual criminal responsibility. Examples of war crimes include intentionally killing civilians or prisoners, torture, destroying civilian property, taking hostages, perfidy, rape, using child soldiers, pillaging, declaring that no quarter will be given, and using weapons that cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering.

Makes sense. In a war it's possible to get captured on either side, so having a protocol instead of doing whatever the fuck is in mutual interest.

Violence is sometimes necessary, but escalating it - almost never.

>>1752936
Your entire argument is that it's a crime because it's against the law and that' sit. It's misguided fallacy at best.

>yeah warcrimes don't exist

*sips Mountain Dew from a wine-glass

>rape, killing babies and kids?? hardcore as fuck, survival of the fittest

*inspects sword collection

>basically you should do whatever you want in a war. morals are for pussies

*dusts fedora

>forget the bible. forget god, forget human decency, and most importantly forget morals

*adjusts trenchcoat

>civilians killed, even innocent, are guilty of being on the other end of my weapon

*glances at framed portrait of Varg

>the only thing that matters in the end is victory, no matter the cost

*gets tendies from the microwave

>lets get hardcore

*plays some crush 40

>you vape bro?

>>1754080
talk about triggered

>>1743090
Well, the armies are still bound by the military laws of their respective states. They also fall under international military laws enforced by the UN (as long as they are part of the UN), so, yes, war crimes do exist.