Rules of Armed Conflict, Rule 47

[Jarod]

That they are.

The boat was destroyed, why the second

 

[zymurgy]

derp derp go the retards

 

[zymurgy]

speaking o f retards......

hi tbird

 

[Into the Night]

These people were clearly shipwrecked.

Rule 47.​

Attacks against Persons Hors de Combat​

Rule 47. Attacking persons who are recognized as hors de combat is prohibited. A person hors de combat is:
(a) anyone who is in the power of an adverse party;
(b) anyone who is defenceless because of unconsciousness, shipwreck, wounds or sickness; or
(c) anyone who clearly expresses an intention to surrender;
provided he or she abstains from any hostile act and does not attempt to escape.

Stop making shit up, Pretender.

 

[Into the Night]

^ that is the /Debate of this discussion and why no Magat will even attempt to address the content of it.

It is written in a way, DELIBERATELY, to deny military personnel discretion of 'THINKING' a person might still be a threat so 'i will kill them regardless'.

That is why it states as FACT that 'shipwrecked personnel are "out of the fight".

"Out of the fight" is a full stop statement. No debate. No discretion. No substitution your own judgment.

and no one can legally kill anyone "out of the fight".

They sure can. It is legal to destroy pirate and smuggling ships.

 

[Into the Night]

These people were clearly shipwrecked.

Rule 47.​

Attacks against Persons Hors de Combat​

Rule 47. Attacking persons who are recognized as hors de combat is prohibited. A person hors de combat is:
(a) anyone who is in the power of an adverse party;
(b) anyone who is defenceless because of unconsciousness, shipwreck, wounds or sickness; or
(c) anyone who clearly expresses an intention to surrender;
provided he or she abstains from any hostile act and does not attempt to escape.

Stop making shit up, Pretender.

 

[Into the Night]

View attachment 67330

Certainly no better than any other 'fact checker'. He makes shit up just like a lot of them do.

 

[Into the Night]

Am I wrong?

Yes, Pretender. You are wrong.

 

[Into the Night]

Poor @Lionfish. He cannot debate or make counterarguments. He can only post memes.

YARP

 

[Into the Night]

^ that is the /Debate of this discussion and why no Magat will even attempt to address the content of it.

It is written in a way, DELIBERATELY, to deny military personnel discretion of 'THINKING' a person might still be a threat so 'i will kill them regardless'.

That is why it states as FACT that 'shipwrecked personnel are "out of the fight".

"Out of the fight" is a full stop statement. No debate. No discretion. No substitution your own judgment.

and no one can legally kill anyone "out of the fight".

Made up shit is not a fact, Kewpie.

 

[AProudLefty]

@Into the Night

 

[Into the Night]

So you're saying the US committed a war crime?

No, retardo.

 

[Lionfish]

Certainly no better than any other 'fact checker'. He makes shit up just like a lot of them do.

His shit is more often. TDS runs deep in that individual.

 

[Lionfish]

TRUE

That does not make it true.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

I believe in the rule of law, not kings.

If you believe in the rule of law, what is your position on the WACO siege?

 

[SmarterthanYou]

and again, if you have not experienced combat, you do not need to be chiming in.

 

[Jake Starkey]

Combtants that remain in the fight are fair game.

The book of Clint Eastwood.

What a stupid comment.

 

[Jarod]

I

If you believe in the rule of law, what is your position on the WACO siege?

I not know enough facts about it to have an opinion.

Do you think it was illegal? Why?

 

[zymurgy]

and again, if you have not experienced combat, you do not need to be chiming in.

derp derp

"the only people that have a say are war veterans"

derp derp

JFC.

 

[Lionfish]

What a stupid comment.

https://va.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_t6q4y7I27D1yj3z74.mp4