Nihonkoku Shoukan - Vol. 2 Ch. 9 - Support Attack - Remastered

[MangaDex]

 

[Ultraninja]

Ah yes, war crimes, a Japanese classic

 

[Wildfire]

I feel the the Japanese could easily have made a show of power along with request for the enemy to retreat.

 

[Khri_na]

This tsundere oji-san is kinda a bit annoying XD
But I don't hate him tho

 

[WolfN18]

Now I know that the enemy are a conquering warmongers and probably a lot of them are "bad guys". But damn they could've fired a warning shot or something. 20000 people, that is easily a stadium of people blown to bits

 

[Lev360]

Japan can literally conquer the whole world. I wonder what is the president thinking

 

[Mr_Detective]

Ah yes, war crimes, a Japanese classic

Project more.

 

[xXPenisXx]

I'm convinced they're deploying MLRSes just to give the keiretsus' heavy industry plants contracts for economic reasons, because this is more like fumigation than an actual military engagement. There's no strategic reason to cluster bomb horse cavalry, but the C-suite demon from Mitsubishi Chemical got a half chub when you mentioned needing to resupply after using explosives on the local marauding rapists.

 

[Kanelel]

lmao, they immediately commit war crimes for no reason. I love it.

 

[Judgement_Annhilator]

My brother that ain't war. That's a f*cking massacre ToT

 

[KideReadLook]

Ah yes, war crimes, a Japanese classic

It's not a war crime since it's on an open field. Besides, it's not the JGSDF's fault that the Laurians brought a massive amount of soldiers.

 

[Ultraninja]

It's not a war crime since it's on an open field. Besides, it's not the JGSDF's fault that the Laurians brought a massive amount of soldiers.

Nope, even on a open field, its still a war crime
From the UN website itself "The Convention on Cluster Munitions (CCM) prohibits under any circumstances the use, development, production, acquisition, stockpiling and transfer of cluster munitions, as well as the assistance or encouragement of anyone to engage in prohibited activities."
Still a war crime

 

[KideReadLook]

Nope, even on a open field, its still a war crime
From the UN website itself "The Convention on Cluster Munitions (CCM) prohibits under any circumstances the use, development, production, acquisition, stockpiling and transfer of cluster munitions, as well as the assistance or encouragement of anyone to engage in prohibited activities."
Still a war crime

Oh, okay. First of all, thank you for the information. Second of all even if it is a war crime, those knights/pricks died rather too quick than they deserved. Third, "Convention"? Don't you mean SUGGESTION?

 

[Ultraninja]

Oh, okay. First of all, thank you for the information. Second of all even if it is a war crime, those knights/pricks died rather too quick than they deserved. Third, "Convention"? Don't you mean SUGGESTION?

Lmao, true, nothing is a crime until youre arrested am I right

 

[jc9]

Lmao, true, nothing is a crime until youre arrested am I right

A bit late to the party but that's kind of how it works in real world, especially with laws regulating war.

Jokes aside, using cluster munitions is NOT a war crime. Convention on Cluster Munitions is just a treaty that many countries have signed (including Japan in this case) and many have not, for various reasons (lets just say Russia China India Pakistan Ukraine USA both Koreas Poland or Finland).
If story takes place before 2008, then everything is clear, as treaty wasn't even a thing. If it's after, then Japan would be breaching that specific treaty - but it does not make it automatically a war crime. Using weapons banned by a specific treaty (even if you signed it) makes you break that one specific treaty, not Hague/Geneva Conventions.

This was an attack on a standing, uniformed, under banners army, in an open field (so no risk for additional civilian casualties/excessive property damage), that was given a reasonable warning (2 hours to retreat) - even though it wasn't necessary - but instead started mobilizing after receiving a warning, that wasn't surrendering/trying to do so (in some situations still a valid target tbh), that wasn't retreating (still valid target even if they were). Additionally said army was at war (declaration or lack of it doesn't change anything here) with Japan's ally, on territory of said ally, being an imminent threat to a fortified city (basically laying siege/preparing for one), and which had recently commited war crimes themselves at another city (which is kinda irrelevant from legality standpoint tbh).
Hell Japan even ensured there would be no friendly fire. It even fired at the army in the field, not in camp (so any reasoning about excessive force and killing civilian servants/slaves fails here).

Just because you overwhelm your enemy at the incomprehensible level and basically eliminate their whole army in one volley doesn't mean the attack was not lawful.

 

[Ultraninja]

A bit late to the party but that's kind of how it works in real world, especially with laws regulating war.

Jokes aside, using cluster munitions is NOT a war crime. Convention on Cluster Munitions is just a treaty that many countries have signed (including Japan in this case) and many have not, for various reasons (lets just say Russia China India Pakistan Ukraine USA both Koreas Poland or Finland).
If story takes place before 2008, then everything is clear, as treaty wasn't even a thing. If it's after, then Japan would be breaching that specific treaty - but it does not make it automatically a war crime. Using weapons banned by a specific treaty (even if you signed it) makes you break that one specific treaty, not Hague/Geneva Conventions.

This was an attack on a standing, uniformed, under banners army, in an open field (so no risk for additional civilian casualties/excessive property damage), that was given a reasonable warning (2 hours to retreat) - even though it wasn't necessary - but instead started mobilizing after receiving a warning, that wasn't surrendering/trying to do so (in some situations still a valid target tbh), that wasn't retreating (still valid target even if they were). Additionally said army was at war (declaration or lack of it doesn't change anything here) with Japan's ally, on territory of said ally, being an imminent threat to a fortified city (basically laying siege/preparing for one), and which had recently commited war crimes themselves at another city (which is kinda irrelevant from legality standpoint tbh).
Hell Japan even ensured there would be no friendly fire. It even fired at the army in the field, not in camp (so any reasoning about excessive force and killing civilian servants/slaves fails here).

Just because you overwhelm your enemy at the incomprehensible level and basically eliminate their whole army in one volley doesn't mean the attack was not lawful.

Fair enough, I'm not all too knowing I'm the topic, just a bit from history classes, the fact that it's only a crime if it's before 2008 is pretty funny lol