Medics

>>33511344
ethics and morality are what separates us from from mudslimes

Targeting medics produces nothing but suffering for both sides as whichever side targets the medic is bound to have the same happen to them in retaliation which leads to suffering of wounded on both sides.

>>33511344
If they've got a weapon and they're not on your side, shoot.

File: animeriflegirl.gif (132KB, 117x125px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 117x125px

>>33511344
>is it viable to target medics during a war?
yes
100%

There's a reason medics don't wear the red cross and carry guns now.

>>33511344
If you're armed and not surrendering I'm going to kill you. If you're unarmed and helping my enemy I'm going to kill you.
Surrender to me and I will work with you to help your wounded as best I can.

>>33511344
>viable to target medics during a war?
I don't even think that can be practically done. How often are you just going to see say a platoon a men walking in the open to where one observing them could just say "Hey, when we start to fire on them, let's target the medic!"? On top of that, how is it that he would be quickly and verify-ably distinguished as the medic from the other men? And people seem to forget, battle are fought at very large ranges, in a group of men, you're just going to try and hit any of them, I doubt one would actively try and engage the medic individually.

>>33511344
In some romantic view of war between two nations, sure. Against a bunch of savages not aligned to any state with no concept of human decency, better make sure your medics don't have a giant target on them.

>>33511412
you conducting dorito warfare from your basement kiddo?

File: BHdU5D7.jpg (55KB, 742x442px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 742x442px

>>33511420
>dorito
>not mtn

Japs pretty much put an end to the labeled Medic.

If you watch Clint's Letters from Iwo Jima, there is a scene where the head nip says for every Corpsman they shoot a dozen Marines will die unattended.

I've heard mostly the Germans didn't shoot American medics, but the Japs sure did along with a litany of other war crimes. President Truman's justification statement for dropping the nukes includes all the fucked up shit they did during the war and how they weren't entitled to any special protection under the rules of traditional warfare. It started with Pearl Harbor and ended with the summary execution of POWs.

>>33511414
I'm not saying you look at an enemy formation and purposely try to take out the medic over the rest of them. I mean in the sense if you see one tending to a wounded man or so.

>>33511344
In most scenarios there isn't much point to it because a soldier who needs a medic is already out of the fight. It's not like Team Fortress 2 where he has the medic beam and the ubercharge.

>>33511344
Nobody a medic says is probably not gonna get back into a fire fight within 3 days, let alone a single firefight, so no, I see no reason to shoot them. Medics save lives, lives that are general out of the fight.

File: 1487198679309.png (12KB, 390x470px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 390x470px

>>33511412
>that entire post

>>33511344
Ignoring the Geneva convention and my own overall squeamishmness at the idea of killing noncombatants who may even treat my wounds and the wounds of my men if the worst comes to pass and we must surrender? It's viable. Watching medics die would be a huge blow to morale and a given unit's overall ability to function is highly dependent on the medics who keep the people who make up that unit in good health. At one time, watching clergymen die would have a horrific impact on morale, but because religion is dying down these days, maybe less so now, although I will admit that, even as an atheist, a clergyman could provide me with valuable ethical counsel and help me keep certain weights off my chest and shoulders. It would still hurt morale a fair bit.

Maybe I'm just soft, but I don't like the idea of targeting medics/chaplains. Especially in a draft war situation where medics may be serving against their will and just trying to save anyone they can.

>>33511344
>Ignore laws/agreements regarding their protection, is it viable to target medics during a war?
Yes, even if you don't ignore it. Just call in a drone strike (or if an older era; carpet bomb) the shit out of what is a hospital and when the media and/or UN call you out on your shit just feign ignorance.

Like what Amer- scratch that, what everyone is doing in the middle east these days.

>Or do you consider the tactic tasteless/unethical.
I do, but that isn't going to stop me if the enemy I am fighting does it.

If I shoot their medic, I have just forced my enemy to fight to death and - should I win - I have lost a guy I could force to give my mates help at gunpoint.
If the enemy shoots my medic, now I am forced to fight to death.

>What about clergy?
Killing the clergy provides even less benefits than killing the medic.
I can understand the logic behind killing the guy who brings bandages to a gunfight.
I can't understand the logic behind killing the guy who brings a book to a gunfight.

Real life isn't a vidya game
Medics don't magically get men up to continue fighting
Killing medics is beyond inhuman behaviour, literally killing someone who is only trying to preserve life.

>>33511344
>medics
They are a legal combatant and actively participate in firefights, so yes.
>clergy
Uh. WHY would you ever be in a situation where a uniformed military has clergy in a position they could be fired upon by anything other than artillery or bombs? At least under Western doctrine they carry no weapons *at all* and are prohibited from being on the front lines.
>b-but muh turrists!
Well, with a non-uniformed military as an adversary, the second they pick up a weapon they become a legal combatant and have at it. Not like you'd know they were an adversary until they did anyway, what with the lack of uniform and all.

>>33511553
>the Germans didn't shoot American medics
Explain how they suffered disproportionately higher casualty rates on the Western Front then? You were literally safer being an RTO than you were a medic.

>>33512257
You do realize that in every military that even has designated medics, they are a combatant FIRST, right? They ALL carry rifles (and are expected to be competent and contributing members of their fireteams), they ALL have either subdued or no marking delineating them as medics.

This is because the best way to prevent casualties is to kill the other fuckers first.

>>33511344
If they're unarmed and not fighting shooting them is just going to make everyone way more fucking miserable. Combat medics are fair game, but not anyone following conventions.
As for clergy I don't really know what they'd be doing at the front but same rules apply.

>>33512316
>intentionally
more medics were killed in ETO because casualties were higher there overall. japs explicitly aimed for medics, especially ones carrying strechers. most germans would hold their fire if they knew someone in front of them was a medic, but when 75% of a nation's casualties are in the front fighting the germans, its inevitable that more medics will be killed, mistaken for regular GIs.

>>33512391
Do you not understand rates?

You had better odds of dying on the Western Front as a medic than any other single job. They were specifically targeted. There are first-hand accounts of German POW's saying they had explicit orders that they acted on to specifically target medics, the Luftwaffe had specific orders that prioritized ambulances as targets as well.

Does this mean that literally every single German to ever fire a shot in anger went out of his way to shoot medics? No. But enough did, and were explicitly ordered to do so.

Germany committed so many war crimes that the fact their fighter pilots DID NOT machinegun parachuting opponents is famous because it's an OUTLIER.

>>33512442
do you have some sources for that?
Stephen E. Ambrose, one of the most renowned WWII historians ever, has mentioned in most of his books that the Germans were usually honorable concerning medics, but has a full chapter on it in Citizen Soldiers, complete with testimonials from both Germans and Americans, including medics from both sides. If he's wrong he's wrong but I'd like to see a source.

>>33512296
>muh turrists!
This is a good point to bring up as well; civilians.

I'm not going to claim that soldiers has ever been lenient on civilians or vice-versa, but since the 2nd World War we have seen more wars being fought against guerilla warriors; Vietnam, Ireland, Afghanistan, Syria etc.

This makes it incredibly hard to distinguish between hostile combatants and civilians who doesn't give a shit about fighting and just wants to live. Therefore it is more often than not easier to shoot civilians first and ask questions later, perhaps consequently the enemy isn't afraid of striking against your civilians population like we saw with 9/11 and see with the regular incidents in Europe (though they in my opinion more often than not seem so poorly executed that I can't help but to think they aren't "professionals" but only "enthusiasts" whose work ISIS takes the credit for).

Ideally your troops would treat the local civilians with kindness and politeness, however this is more often than not the case or a possibility as it also puts the soldiers at risk for a hostile ambush to happen.

Much of this is basically 'muh terrorists', but essentially if the enemy attacks civilians and hide amongst the civilians it becomes next to impossible to avoid civilians casualties. Mostly because at that point it has already happened.

>>33511344
There's basically no way in hell that I'd shoot a clearly marked noncombatant medic. Not only is a war crime, it's also a waste of bullets and a soldier that will likely be treating your soldiers too once the fight is over.

>>33512475
>[A wounded American soldier] kept calling for someone to help him. Isn't anybody going to take care of me? he was saying ... and then he'd cry. [Medic] Pico ... couldn't stand it. He grabbed a Red Cross flag and ran across the snow waving it. There was no mistaking what he was doing. He was kneeling by the wounded man; he had just given him a shot and was putting on a dressing when the machine gun cut him in two. The German was clearly having a lot of fun because he kept on firing long bursts into the wounded man and into Pico, keeping the bodies jumping and spreading red all over the snow. He'd used the wounded man for bait, an old SS trick.

>>33512529
>a single anecdote about the SS, one of the most war-crime-happy forces in WWII, after claiming front-wide orders to kill medics and medics being one of the most dangerous positions statistically

Do you know how this works?

>>33512576
Have more

The following email was received from Walt "Pete" Peters...Thank you Walt:

I was an infantry combat medic with the 106th Div. 331st Batallion, with the 422, 423 and 424th Regiments. We were the Division--green as grass, mostly ASTPs hurriedly sent to Camp Atterbury for training and then to replace the 2nd Div. just before the Battle of the Bulge in the Ardennes Forest where no one believed the Germans would attack.

The 422nd and 423rd Reg. were captured during this action. Luckily, for me, the 424th was not, because that's the one I found myself with at the time. However, I and a bunch of my buddies got caught in the chaos and after floundering thru the snow, surviving nights, and days, of bitter cold, skulking through the morning fog, where, by only the grace of a Higher Power, we succeeded in eluding the Germans all around us, we finally got back to our own army.

As a medic I found myself on detached service all the time because there just were not enough medics to go around. I even was sent to accompany the 82nd Airborne on a glider flight behind the German lines, a very interesting, and unnerving, experience.

Medics were being picked off by the Germans who used our helmut red crosses to sight on. I couldn't believe your statement somewhere on your website that the Germans respected the medics and didn't shoot at them. That may have been some medics' experience, but it certainly was not mine.

[continued]

>>33511344
Clergy? Yes. No problems there. But medics I'd prefer to try and avoid. medics are there to actually help people. Minimizing casualties on both sides is a good thing.

>>33512678
[remainder]
I was wounded by shrapnel from a mortar, sent to St. Vith and then to Cherbourg. Thought I was going back to England and then home, but, as I said, medics were in short supply. Sent back as an ambulance driver and then on into Germany where I was bivouacked with a German doctor and his family. I was a "watchdog" over the doctor; it was not a very pleasant situation for him--nor me

I had amassed a bunch of points from the battles I served in and finally got word I was going home. When I got on the ship, the Mormackport, my comrades made me take the best bunk in our area because----I was a combat medic.

>>33512696
CPL. PRZYGOCKI RESCUES A WOUNDED SOLDIER UNDER HEAVY ENEMY FIRE

With the 36th "Texas" Division-The phone in the Medical Battalion Aid station, rang sharply. Everything and everyone was interrupted by the harsh buzz of reality. The men in the room cleared their eyes of drowsiness. The coldness of the room was momentarily forgotten. Someone picked up the receiver and the buzzing stopped. It was "A" Company of the 141st Infantry Regiment. They wanted medics, immediately!

[redacted for post length, background paragraph]

Sergeant John C. McIntosh, of New Castle, Pennsylvania, felt the responsibility rest heavy on him. He had seen it all from Salerno to the present. He had lost too many buddies. He couldn’t and wouldn’t influence any of the men either way by his example. He saw the strained faces of his fellow medics. "Who’s going with me?" The words came out of Val’s mouth without him realizing it. Private Harold R. Sorrel, Wellstone, Ohio, a new man with the medics, was the first to answer. "OK, count me in," he said matter of factly. Private first Class Melvin Johnson, Morea Colliery, Penn., looked at the others and said very unconvincingly, "I’ll be damned if I go." And then he walked over and joined the first two volunteers. Sergeant McIntosh completed the squad.

With Val in the lead, the four medics took off crawling on their stomachs through the foot thick snow. From the hill, the infantry watched with growing excitement and mounting fear as the quartet made their way forward with painful slowness. The platoon sergeant cursed softly to himself as he watched, "They’ve got too much guts for their own good," he said to no one in particular. The litter squad was now some 50 yards from their objective. There had been no fire. They had not been spotted. But from here on there would be no more concealment. Val called back to the others. "Can anyone see the guy?" They raised up slightly for a better view.
[continued]

>>33512762
[conclusion]
They couldn’t see him with their limited field vision. Val rose up still higher. He saw the wounded man. Suddenly before the others realized what had happened, he was running fully erect with his hands in the air, to show he was unarmed. The Red Cross on his helmet caught the sun. Quickly he was at the side of the wounded man. He grabbed him by the collar and started pulling him towards the others. That’s when the German’s opened up. The bullets were hitting all around Val. The snow seemed to come to life. It jumped up in a hundred different spots, leaving little black holes in the white carpet.

"I was sure Val would get it," said Johnson. " I still can’t see how they missed. Standing up against that snow he was like a bullseye on a target." But Val didn’t let go. He crouched now, keeping a firm grip on his patient. He kept going. Meanwhile, the third platoon had opened up. "It seemed like every rifle and machinegun in the army had turned on those Krauts." Said McIntosh. "That’s what probably saved us," he continued. "After those first shots at Val, they didn’t get a chance to get in a good shot. They stayed pinned down deep in their holes". The litter bearers completed their mission; they got the wounded man back to the aid station.

>>33511344

Because clergy are not typically found on the front line and it's generally unacceptable to fuck with them as a whole I would say they are off limits.

>>33511617
While medics are primarily there to save lives for a higher level of care, they are the first line of defense of disease prevention and food safety in the field.

>>33511355
What were popular tactics during the Troubles?

No, assuming they haven't been shooting at our medics/their medics haven't been going out of their way to shoot at anyone not attacking them.

Shit like the geneva convention isn't around because of morals or anything like that, it's because it's a list of shit that nobody wants happening to their side, so they mutually agree to not do it to eachother under threat of the victim biting back just as hard.

>>33511344
>Ignore laws/agreements regarding their protection, is it viable to target medics during a war? Or do you consider the tactic tasteless/unethical.What about clergy?


I would not shoot a medic I agree withn the sentiment of the law

"
Chapter IV, Article 25 of the Geneva Convention states that: "Members of the armed forces specially trained for employment, should the need arise, as hospital orderlies, nurses or auxiliary stretcher-bearers, in the search for or the collection, transport or treatment of the wounded and sick shall likewise be respected and protected if they are carrying out these duties at the time when they come into contact with the enemy or fall into his hands." Article 29 reads: "Members of the personnel designated in Article 25 who have fallen into the hands of the enemy, shall be prisoners of war, but shall be employed on their medical duties insofar as the need arises."

According to the Geneva Convention, knowingly firing at a medic wearing clear insignia is a war crime.[
"

Ni insignia...fair game.

Secondly Chaplains.

I would not shoot the Chaplains of a Christian enemy but would have no compunction about killing Muslim clerics if they were in uniform in combat, Civilised rules for civil opponents. Savage rules for savages.

>>33511344
>>33511355

Considering that the UN doesn't even bother to protect the Red/Cross/Crescent/Star/Whathaveyou anymore, you're free to blow up military hospitals all you like.

A law without enforcers is toothless.

>>33512897
>christians
>civilized
I wasn't aware burning people alive was considered 'civilized'.

>>33512989
>burning people alive
If you're referring to the inquisition, which was barely as bad as protestant propaganda made it to be, then you're several hundred years late.

>>33511355
>ethics and morality
>killing people
War is dumb

>>33512684
And what do you think the clergy does? Remember, there are no atheists in foxholes

>>33512989
/k/ is a Christian board, convert or get out

File: 1487553971829.jpg (50KB, 625x700px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 625x700px

>rules of war

>>33511344
>Ignore laws/agreements regarding their protection, is it viable to target medics during a war?

Not particularly, because it will be met with the targeting of one's own medics, which needlessly increases suffering on both sides.

>Or do you consider the tactic tasteless/unethical. What about clergy?
I consider the tactic unethical as long as the medics/clergy are not active combatants

>>33512989
Disregarding the fact you're confusing being christian and being part of "The Church"

of all the things you can legitimately criticize Christianity as a whole, you chose something that verifiably is barely even true

>>33511390
Because muslims don't care about the Geneva Convention

Fun fact: In WW2, German medics on the Western Front did not carry weapons. But on the Eastern front, German medics did carry weapons because the Soviets never signed whichever convention protects medics.

So to sum up, if your opponent is going to respect your medics, there's no need to attack theirs. You don't really gain anything from killing medics, all you do is convince them to start killing your medics.

You might actually lose out; medicine takes a lot of infrastructure. I'd rather my opponent waste time and energy medevac'ing wounded people rather than ignoring dead people.

>>33511344
I don't think specifically targeting medics serves any meaningful tactical purpose in modern combat.

>>33513010
>>33513143
>Catholics on damage control

>>33513148
Exactly.

>>33513148
>Soviets never signed whichever convention protects medics.
Soviets never formally signed anything (because they were in the transitional period during those times), but there was a formal request sent by the Soviets to the Germans which basically begged them to agree to fighting by convention laws, because they heard about how shit Germans were treating their prisoners.
Needless to say, the Germans never did anything with the request and every crime the germans committed, the Russians returned with 5x the brutality.

File: ICC.jpg (193KB, 1280x960px) Image search: [Google]

193KB, 1280x960px

>>33512511

Why not treat terrorists not as enemy soldiers, but as the criminals they are? I'm talking about using detective work to figure out the identities of insurgents, marching down their city and knocking down their doors and arresting both them and anyone that tries to shelter or hide them as accomplices and shipping them off to international court to be tried, sentenced, and sent to Guantánamo, kept in the International Criminal Court in the interm.

I always had the creeping suspicion that we're going about these "wars" entierly wrong. You defeat by arresting them and locking them up in prisons, and the great thing about criminals is that they can be either military or civilian and there is little if any difference to how you're supposed to treat them. If half a town's population turns out to be criminals, so be it, it's time international law be updated to handle trying mass amounts of convicts. If they try to resist, only then do you go Waco Siege on them and burn down wherever they're holed up.

>>33513068

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enver_Hoxha

On the contrary, atheists can become respectible killing machines if they're sufficiently convinced that both they and the guys they're destroying are soulless automatons.

File: 2b3835ab88226d6366285097f423f1ac0787ec63903359b57610499905599c1d.jpg (72KB, 774x744px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 774x744px

>>33511344
By targeting medics you encourage the enemy to leave their wounded to die. Do you know how many resources go to injured soldiers? They're total dead weight. Maybe 1/100 of them will fight again anyway. Also its a dick move, and you'll make the opposite side angry.

>>33511355
Implying anyone in 4chan has eithics or morality

>>33513292
Battlefield forensics started getting big around the time of the Troubles with the IRA. It's a pretty large and developed (and expensive) field now to combat insurgency. The US used mass gathering of biometric data during Iraq in particular, for the very purpose of locking up suspected terrorists and insurgents.

Shooting medics is something only an asshole and a moron would do, at least if they would like to live.

You start shooting enemy medics and they will start shooting yours. So instead of being patched up and sent to an aid station you just bleed out and die in the dirt.

Not to mention wounded soldiers are out of the fight anyway, when sent back they take up more time and resources from the enemy at every stage from the aid station to rehabilitation at a hospital if they make it. If they die they are buried and that is it.

Purposefully shooting medics seems like a great way to get your enemies to torture/execute you if you are captured.

Lets say you're a soldier and you've just won a battle, and your CO isn't looking. Who are you more likely to kill/mutilate, the enemy who surrendered after only shooting at combatants, or the enemy who purposefully shot at your medics?

>>33513395
>the meaning

>your head

clergy dont take the field and all medics are armed nowadays. the point is moot because we don't have dedicated no-guns medics. blowing up field hospitals on the other hand is probably a no-no but honestly if there was a world war or some other big conflict, no one would give a shit.

>>33513552

>http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/09/suspends-syria-aid-convoy-bombed-160920080213025.html
>http://www.nytimes.com/2001/10/27/nyregion/a-nation-challenged-the-bombing-us-planes-bomb-a-red-cross-site.html

It appears nobody cares now.

>>33511344
War itself is unethical, so it never made much sense to me that there are laws regarding war. Basically civilized countries only fight barbarians, who don't care about those laws, so you're artificially making the war harder for yourself. I don't think I would personally break any of those laws, if the situation allows it but I also don't see the big deal about breaking them.

>>33513597
See >>33511873
>when the media and/or UN call you out on your shit just feign ignorance

"Hey dude, you just bombed a humanitarian convoy."
Oh my bad, drone cameras are so bad, you know?

>>33513601
>war itself is unethical
That doesn't deny there are morale ways to conduct it.

>>33511873
Per killing Clergy, it helps to affect the morale of the religious. The person who helps justify killing. Once he's dead, the next chaplain won't be as welcomed as he will be an unfamiliar stranger.

Sure, he is not a fighter, but when you kill the person who helps justify their actions, you weaken the enemy's resolve.

File: No_Gods_No_Masters.png (60KB, 240x240px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 240x240px

>What about clergy?

Mankind will know peace once the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest.

File: 9N0N1ys.png (30KB, 1058x892px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 1058x892px

>>33511699
>squeamishmness
>as an atheist

>>33511344
Targeting medics is fine, as long as you were willing to put up with your own being targeted in retaliation, or your people being executed in anger instead of taken in and treated honorably as POWs.

File: 1488480126161.jpg (64KB, 658x718px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 658x718px

>>33515263

File: 52644b0aba765809dbb676c6ca2a1611575077c6ee02b788b0d59f206d28cfbb.jpg (24KB, 527x497px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 527x497px

>>33515263
edgy
d
g
y

>>33515193
>The person who helps justify killing
So does the politicians, superior officers and even journalists.

>>33512989
>burning people
>in this century
mAYYbe in africa

another thread devolves into anti-nazi shillposting
NOW WITH LESS CITATIONS

>muh germans killed muh medic and then made him into a bar of lampshade soap
>t. unsourced but russian so trust me

Let's be real here. Don't kill anyone patching anyone up and you won't have their guys calling in airstrikes purely because they're pissed off and no longer want to be economically efficient about killing you.

>>33512684
Maybe kill yourself

>>33516553
What the fuck are you going on about

>>33516553
People literally said the opposite you fucking retard.
Russians killed medics in the Eastern Front. In the West the Geneva Convention was respected.

>>33511344

Depends on the objective. If you are in a situation where you are gona get fucked and don't feel like being a bitch and begging for mercy then everyone is a target.

If you need to do a Roman style occupation same thing applies.

But anything else is probably dumb and will backfire in the future. Unless you are winning.

>>33512475
>Stephen E. Ambrose, one of the most renowned WWII historians
????

>>33511355
You can always tell a Muslim cleric. The be the one farthest from the battle shouting the loudest.

>thinks shooting medics is unethical.
>Adopts area bombing of cities as primary strategy.

Wow how ethical of you America.

>>33517176
>Russians killed medics in the Eastern Front.
Germans did first, but whatever.

File: 1489917075446.gif (2MB, 176x144px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 176x144px

Kill.
Them.
All.

>>33511377
the thing is that practically all medics carry a rifle & they forfeit their protection under Geneva conventions if/when they start using their weapons.

as for clergy; I think chaplains are also protected under the Geneva conventions, but naturally if a chaplain starts shooting at you he/she is fair game.

File: i-qwRh6SL.jpg (1MB, 1948x976px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1948x976px

a post as day/k/are as this and nobody posted PA yet? For shame.

File: laughing.jpg (40KB, 283x352px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 283x352px

>>33511412
how is 4th grade going?

>>33511344
If you can spot the medic you know who the platoon commander or WO is so shoot them first.If he is firing than yes but if not than no. Guy is trying to save his budies he is out of the fight and if he has troops helping him than they are too.

>>33520948
I'd try to take the Forward Observer out before the platoon commander