[Sandwich]

Originally posted by Ghostavo
MMMMMMMMMULTIPOST!!!

ROFL!! That's worth not deleting those extra posts for!

[Gank]

Originally posted by Sandwich
Mmm. Tell me, what army in the world doesn't use standard 5.56mm ammo? Far as I know, that was banned in the Geneva Convention for being to brutal. Of course, this was something I (thought I) learned in my early army days, when my Hebrew wasn't all that good. It was either the ammo size or the rifled barrels of the M16s, I'm pretty sure. If someone could hunt up an English version of the Geneva Convention agreements (i.e. not legalese please), I'd like to look at it.

Eh, no. theres nothing in the geneva convention about ammunition calibers or barrel rifling, it concerns wmds and the treatment of prisioners and civilians. Good man Sandwich, nice to see exactly how knowledgable the IDF keeps its men on the international treatys it claims to uphold.

Btw, you may be reffering to the Hague Convention which prohibts the use of hollow-point or dum-dum bullets, these are illegal under that treaty but I dont think any other army considers them standard ammo. That would be FMJ.

[Gank]

Originally posted by Flipside
Ewwwwwwwwwwwww...sticky one...
 

Its not a sticky one, its open and shut. The man executed a wounded and unarmed prisioned. Nobody would be going on about miigating circumstances had it been an insurgent who executed a unarmed wounded US soldier, ditch the hypocrisy.

[Flipside]

But it's not open and shut, as I said, I can't say what happened because I don't know what happened, I've heard a few versions even in this thread. Hypocrisy would be assuming I did.

[aldo_14]

The argument for mitagting circumstances - in case it's not been mentioned before in this thread- is that the marine who did the shooting had recently seen a colleague killed by a booby-trapped body.  So it's really a question of whether the movement seen by the injured insurgent was sufficient to justify said threat - and a secondary question of whether said marine was even in a fit mental state to be fighting (having also been injured the previous day).

[Beowulf]

Originally posted by Sandwich
You guys are being dumb. Snipers are among the scariest things the enemy has. Out of nowhere, John Doe on your left has a bullet rip through his left eyeball, leaving a gaping exit hole in the back of his helmet, blood and brain spatter on the guy meters behind him.

And nobody has a friggin clue where the shot came from.

Go ahead, call it overkill. Morons.

Agreed.

I love how we all sit around on our little forum commenting on how incompetent everyone is when no one who does so has any idea what warfare is like.

[Gank]

Riiight. You do know it was caught on camera right?

[Flipside]

Well, the fact of the matter is that, if this guy 'assassinated' someone then he deserves to be dealt with one way or the other, no matter what the mitigating circumstances.

However, I am not stuck in the middle of a Warzone, I don't know the pressures and fears these people, on both sides, have to live with each day. That is probably why I am uninclined to pass judgement on him.

[aldo_14]

Originally posted by Beowulf


Agreed.

I love how we all sit around on our little forum commenting on how incompetent everyone is when no one who does so has any idea what warfare is like.

It's either that or give the military carte blanche to do what it wants without having to worry about criticism.  After all, are most politicians soldiers?  Usually not - so why should they tell the military what to do? In fact, most people have no experience of working in politics and balancing social welfare, etc, so maybe we shouldn't be criticising politicians either?

[Gank]

Flipside, here ya go:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6556034/

[Sandwich]

Originally posted by Gank


Eh, no. theres nothing in the geneva convention about ammunition calibers or barrel rifling, it concerns wmds and the treatment of prisioners and civilians. Good man Sandwich, nice to see exactly how knowledgable the IDF keeps its men on the international treatys it claims to uphold.

Btw, you may be reffering to the Hague Convention which prohibts the use of hollow-point or dum-dum bullets, these are illegal under that treaty but I dont think any other army considers them standard ammo. That would be FMJ.

I could have sworn there was something against 5.56mm rounds, perhaps in combination with the rifled barrels. It was in regards to how those bullets, once they encounter resistance, will completely rip the target up from the inside, going in every which way. There was this one case of a guy who got shot by one bullet and had 3 entrance wounds and 3 exit wounds.

The classic demonstration is to fill a container full of water - doesn't have to be a big container - shoebox size. Fire a 5.56 from an M-16 at 50 yards, and then go look at the entrance and exit holes. They won't be in line with each other.

Anyway, the whole thing is from my memory of what we were told over 7 years ago, in the fall of '97, so I wouldn't be all that surprised to find out I remembered wrongly. However, one thing I do remember for sure is the whole phosphor-as-a-weapon issue (phosphor grenades for example) being outlawed by the same convention. Does that help narrow things down?

[Janos]

Originally posted by Sandwich


Anyway, the whole thing is from my memory of what we were told over 7 years ago, in the fall of '97, so I wouldn't be all that surprised to find out I remembered wrongly. However, one thing I do remember for sure is the whole phosphor-as-a-weapon issue (phosphor grenades for example) being outlawed by the same convention. Does that help narrow things down?

Wouldn't that be Hague convention?
Here's some linky people might find useful when preaching about "Genova this and that! THEY FORBID NAPALM"

[Gank]

The 1899 convention is the one which covers expanding or exploding bullets. If I get you right Sandwich you're saying the IDF use hollow-points as the standard round? Because no other rifle ammunition is illegal.
http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/b0d5f4c1f4b8102041256739003e6366/f5ff4d9ca7e41925c12563cd0051616b?OpenDocument

Neither is phosphorous as a weapon afaik.

White phosphorus shells lit up the sky as armour drove through the breach and sent flaming material on to suspect insurgent haunts.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/11/09/wirq09.xml

You may be thinking of Phosgene, which was one of the main gases used in ww1 and most definitley is illegal.

[Janos]

Originally posted by Gank
The 1899 convention is the one which covers expanding or exploding bullets. If I get you right Sandwich you're saying the IDF use hollow-points as the standard round? Because no other rifle ammunition is illegal.
http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/b0d5f4c1f4b8102041256739003e6366/f5ff4d9ca7e41925c12563cd0051616b?OpenDocument

Neither is phosphorous as a weapon afaik.
 
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/11/09/wirq09.xml

You may be thinking of Phosgene, which was one of the main gases used in ww1 and most definitley is illegal.

All flame weaponry (flame-throwers, FAE, thermite, napalm, TOS etc.) is legal, even though they are not to be used against targets with civilian value, or something as vague.

Bah, it all comes up to pressing and holding A, then giving your fire team a point fire area and advancing on bound overwatch, while using the other fire team's M203 gunner against the goddamn Zeke who is holding you back.

[Beowulf]

Originally posted by Gank
Riiight. You do know it was caught on camera right?

Thank you for proving my point.

Have you been involved in urban warfare for the past two months, going from door to door watching your buddies get shot up? Do you know what it's like to pass someone you think is dead then find out he's pointing an AK at your fire team?

You don't take chances in war. How do you know that man wasn't wounded and waiting for a soldier to come closer to let go of a grenade? I am not going to take a chance that risks my life or my buddy's life, nor would any other sane individual.

I don't see a western outcry when terrorists hijack a bus full of newly trained Iraqi police men and slaughter them all, or decimate a police station and leave dozens dead.

Say what you want. It's easy to do from a keyboard.

~Beowulf

[vyper]

[q]Have you been involved in urban warfare for the past two months[/q]

Have you?

[aldo_14]

Originally posted by Beowulf

I don't see a western outcry when terrorists hijack a bus full of newly trained Iraqi police men and slaughter them all, or decimate a police station and leave dozens dead.
 

Actually, you do.  

But it's also expected of these people - would you expect the same from professional soldiers?

[Hippo]

I've got a friend who swears that smaller callibur bullets are banned, since they tend to leave the victim alive to bleed to death. he said that someone named Shugart (Itallian i belive) outfitted his troops with larger bullets, because the smaller ones (before banned) would often fail to even knock over an enemy soldier, and simply made holes in them...

[Gank]

Originally posted by Beowulf
Thank you for proving my point.

You dont have a point, if you read the article I posted where the cameraman who shot the footage describes the incident, you'll see that the soldier shot one wounded man and left two who were also alive, ****ting all over your arguement that he was covering his back.

Btw, who the **** are you to lecture other people on whether or not they're qualified to talk on a subject a seventeen year old obviously isnt. You're not even eligible to join the military yet, let alone lecture other people on how ****ing hard it is to be in it. You're right you're not going to take that risk, you're in college. ****ing hypocritical ******.

http://www.kevinsites.net/2004_11_21_archive.html#110107420331292115

I interviewed your Commanding Officer, Lieutenant Colonel Willy Buhl, before the battle for Falluja began. He said something very powerful at the time-something that now seems prophetic. It was this:

"We're the good guys. We are Americans. We are fighting a gentleman's war here -- because we don't behead people, we don't come down to the same level of the people we're combating. That's a very difficult thing for a young 18-year-old Marine who's been trained to locate, close with and destroy the enemy with fire and close combat. That's a very difficult thing for a 42-year-old lieutenant colonel with 23 years experience in the service who was trained to do the same thing once upon a time, and who now has a thousand-plus men to lead, guide, coach, mentor -- and ensure we remain the good guys and keep the moral high ground."

I listened carefully when he said those words. I believed them.

So here, ultimately, is how it all plays out: when the Iraqi man in the mosque posed a threat, he was your enemy; when he was subdued he was your responsibility; when he was killed in front of my eyes and my camera -- the story of his death became my responsibility.

Originally posted by Hippo
I've got a friend who swears that smaller callibur bullets are banned, since they tend to leave the victim alive to bleed to death. he said that someone named Shugart (Itallian i belive) outfitted his troops with larger bullets, because the smaller ones (before banned) would often fail to even knock over an enemy soldier, and simply made holes in them...

Sounds like dung Hippo, you cant just change smaller caliber bullets for bigger ones, you have to change weapons as well. The problem hes heard of is a US one with the standard 5.56 round, was happening in Somalia and recently in Afghanistan. The round was supposed to be replaced, not sure if it was.

[Hippo]

Changing weapons was implied...