--------------------------------------------
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!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
