Hello Phil,

IIRC during WW II in the ETO there were raiding parties dressed in special uniforms with insignia when captured were shot as saboteurs and/or spies.

Of course a war crime is determined by the side that won.

IIRC in the early stages of WW I German U-boats followed the International Rules of War, by surfacing and giving the target's crew and passengers time to abandoned ship. The British ordered the skippers not to comply and attempt to ram the submarine. Eventually the U-boats stopped the practice and began sinking shipping without warning.

The fact the merchants were ordered to ignore the Rules and attempt to sink the U-boat was ignored, but the sinking of ships without warning where criminal acts.

My personal opinion both were criminal acts, but only the Germans paid a price for them.

Tom R

---

From: "Phil Pugliese (via tml list)" <xxxxxx@simplelists.com>
To: "TML" <xxxxxx@simplelists.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2016 2:07:23 AM
Subject: 'War Crimes' are more a state of mind... was Re: [TML] New toy- "switchblade" loitering munition

This email was sent from yahoo.com which does not allow forwarding of emails via email lists. Therefore the sender's email address (xxxxxx@yahoo.com) has been replaced with a dummy one. The original message follows:

--------------------------------------------
On Wed, 5/18/16, (via tml list) <xxxxxx@simplelists.com> wrote:

 Subject: Re: [TML] New toy- "switchblade" loitering munition
 To: xxxxxx@simplelists.com
 Date: Wednesday, May 18, 2016, 5:15 PM
 
 This email was sent from
 shadowgard.com which does not allow forwarding of emails via
 email lists. Therefore the sender's email address (xxxxxx@shadowgard.com)
 has been replaced with a dummy one. The original message
 follows:
 
 On 18 May 2016 at
 15:06, Phil Pugliese (via tml list) wrote:
 
 >
 =================================================
 >
 >  True . . .
 >  Three months before the planned
 >  invasion date (e.g. just enough time for
 the information to
 >  arrive at the
 target world as part of routine news sources),
 >  the military forces of the invader
 promulgate a set of new
 >  uniform
 regulations. These regs just *happen* to use a
 >  popular line of commercial outdoor
 clothing widely available
 >  on the
 target world as the basis for field dress uniform.
 >  The various unit/rank badges are the
 only things which set
 >  this apparel
 apart as military rather than commercial, with
 >  said badges equipped with
 quick-attach/release capability
 > 
 (ostensibly for protection against snipers picking out
 >  high-rank targets). Blank badges are
 shipped to the force
 >  members as
 commercial cargo (a cover company having been set
 >  up which uses the blank badge shape as
 it's logo), to be
 >  completed on
 site and carried at all times during the final
 >  stage of invasion preparation.
 >  "Bullocks! We're going to
 >  be captured! Quick! Slap on your
 >  badges!"
 > 
 --
 > 
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------
 >  ---------------------------
 >
 > And then;
 >
 > "Sir, we
 captured another group of 5th-columnists."
 >
 > "You know what
 to do with them."
 >
 > "But sir, they claim that they're
 in uniform."
 >
 >
 "Uniform! Those look like civvies to me!"
 >
 > "But they do
 have badges on them."
 >
 > "Badges! What badges? I don't see
 any badges! First Sergeant! You see
 > any
 badges?"
 >
 >
 "Not me sir!"
 >
 > "Proceed with
 'disposal'."
 >
 > "Yes, sir!"
 
 That's a war crime. Not too likely to get
 caught, but still. If any
 of that
 commanders men talk, he's screwed. Especially if they
 wait
 until after the war.
 
 They will have their own
 problems of course. Because *technically*
 they should refuse that as an illegal order.
 Practically, unless you
 are sure most of
 the rest of the unit will agree with you, that would
 be a really bad idea to try to invoke.
 
 On the other hand, if if they
 search you and find badges on you, you
 can
 legitimately be shot.
 
 BTW,
 hiding among civilians may or may not be legal.
 
 Firing from someplace where
 return fire will endanger civilians is a
 war crime.
 
 That's more a case of you being a sniper or
 setting an ambush. If you
 are escoorting a
 group of civilians and come under fire, then you can
 return fire legally.
 
 Same sort of thing goes for using hospitals and
 the like as cover,
 HQ, or the like
 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well we're still waiting for all the war criminals from the VietNam War to be 'outed', not to mention an innumerable number of conflicts since then so I don't think it's really that much of a concern. Probably much more likely to be struck by lightening.
BTW. remember quite a ways back when it was disclosed, by Israeli soldiers who were witnesses, that the Israeli army summarily executed Egyptian army prisoners captured during both the '56 & '67 wars?
There was a brief furor & that was it.
And what happened when the losing side in the Ivory Coast started chopping off the forearms of any villagers they encountered. Not only did they get away with it, the other side went all 'K'kree' &  offered them a place in a coalition gov if they would stop!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
The Traveller Mailing List
Archives at http://archives.simplelists.com/tml
Report problems to xxxxxx@simplelists.com
To unsubscribe from this list please goto
http://archives.simplelists.com

-----
The Traveller Mailing List
Archives at http://archives.simplelists.com/tml
Report problems to xxxxxx@simplelists.com
To unsubscribe from this list please goto 
http://archives.simplelists.com