General Discussions
This is the place to discuss general issues related to the U-boat war or the war at sea in WWII.
RE: killing the enemy is no atrocity
Posted by:
Dave McQueen
()
Date: June 30, 2001 03:11PM
<HTML>Kurt
I have probably more understanding how ww2 was fought than yourself as it\'s been the most significant area of study of my life\'since i was about 10 years old?
Not just on U-Boats.
But it\'s the way war is fought\'that i am debating.
To me a guy wading ashore alongside his own side who are intent in taking a target and he has dropped his weapon\'but is with his still armed comrades and it\'s obvious he intends to take part in the assault is a legitimate target.
A guy struggling out the water with no allies in site and obviously up to his nose in it and without a weopon should be taken prisoner and not just shot because it\'s one less of the enemy.If he runs away fine then kill him as he has no intention of giving himself up and i don\'t begrudge him a bullet in the back.
it\'s all to do with judgement and sometimes things like this happen in the heat of battle quickly and can\'t be helped\'but i am talking of giving an enemy THE CHANCE to be a non combatant IF THE OPPURTUNITY ARISES and if he does\'nt want it fine\'ill cap him.
The Iraqi\'s had not surrendered and were still armed to the teeth.
The war had not ended and just because an army is in retreat\'does not mean it should be left alone?All the troops who wanted to live had to do was ditch their weapons and give themselves up to nearest allied soldier.They were even giving themselves up to Apache copters.So all those killed on the road back to Iraq were legitimate targets in my view anyway\'until they surrendered.
</HTML>
I have probably more understanding how ww2 was fought than yourself as it\'s been the most significant area of study of my life\'since i was about 10 years old?
Not just on U-Boats.
But it\'s the way war is fought\'that i am debating.
To me a guy wading ashore alongside his own side who are intent in taking a target and he has dropped his weapon\'but is with his still armed comrades and it\'s obvious he intends to take part in the assault is a legitimate target.
A guy struggling out the water with no allies in site and obviously up to his nose in it and without a weopon should be taken prisoner and not just shot because it\'s one less of the enemy.If he runs away fine then kill him as he has no intention of giving himself up and i don\'t begrudge him a bullet in the back.
it\'s all to do with judgement and sometimes things like this happen in the heat of battle quickly and can\'t be helped\'but i am talking of giving an enemy THE CHANCE to be a non combatant IF THE OPPURTUNITY ARISES and if he does\'nt want it fine\'ill cap him.
The Iraqi\'s had not surrendered and were still armed to the teeth.
The war had not ended and just because an army is in retreat\'does not mean it should be left alone?All the troops who wanted to live had to do was ditch their weapons and give themselves up to nearest allied soldier.They were even giving themselves up to Apache copters.So all those killed on the road back to Iraq were legitimate targets in my view anyway\'until they surrendered.
</HTML>
