Why does anything count as a "crime" during war? Isn't

>the act of war already extralegal to begin with
No it's not.

>>2007620

There are laws against killing people in most countries.

>>2007630
But no country persecutes policemen who kill criminals in the right circumstances. Same goes for killing combatants during war - it's perfectly legal if the circumstances are right.

>>2007608
Cultures have always tried to regulate war through customs or law. It being forbidden to fight during the Olympic Games in Ancient Greece, Israelites requiring to at least offer peace before a siege, Augustine of Hippo's just war theories and Grotius' De jure belli ac pacis are just a few examples of laws of war.

Ever since Grotius, however, there have even been increasing attempts to formally internationalize laws of war, leading to treatises like the Hague and the Geneva Conventions.

>>2007608
>why are war crimes, some of the most horrific acts ever committed by humans punishable offenses?

Gee, I wonder.

>>2007608
We would not have this conversation if war was not regulated. Some things are indeed spooks but not all of them.

>it's a "guy who doesn't know shit about law tries to negate the need for regulations that were established after centuries of evolution" episode

>>2007683

If it's a matter of not wanting to cause suffering, why not just consider any sort of war a crime?

>>2007690
Aggressive wars are all outlawed (for the 40 ratifying states of the Briand-Kellogg-Pact; for the members of the UN due to Article 2 of the UN Charter), nowadays.
But you really can't outlaw defensive wars.

>>2007608
Because wars could be Just in various cultures and theologies. The Idea of Crimes in war, in the west at least, is a continuation of the code of Chivalry, or things people would not wish done to their own people, eg torturing villagers and razing cities.

>>2007655

>right circumstances

you do realize that saying "lol, I had to, bro" doesn't resolve the investigation of such case?

The whole idea of persecution is to determine whether the means taken by someone where adequate to the situation. Even when it's clear that the law officer was dealing with a fucking dangerous animal deserving all the bullets in the world, 9 out of 10 times he gets removed from force and faces other consequences because of "muh civil rights".

The world ain't no Death Wish, son.

>>2007711
He obviously simply meant "convicts", rather than "persecutes".