Schäferhund - Vol. 3 Ch. 17
- Thread starter MangaDex
- Start date
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2019
- Messages
- 116
Shooting a medic is no bueno. No sympathy for them when the trials comr after the war
Member
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2018
- Messages
- 37
Erm, war crime here. Yuuto better say something about it.
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2020
- Messages
- 30
@FanofEverything
Honestly, I agree and it doesn't even make sense. Yuuto's stance of "protect everyone no matter the cost" kinda conflicts with his actual actions.
He could have easily taken like two of them as prisoners, not only saving their lives but also getting potential informants for later (not that they'd spill much, but still).
Hell, I'd understand if the others did it on their own, but there's no mention of him being pissed at the sniper anywhere
Honestly, I agree and it doesn't even make sense. Yuuto's stance of "protect everyone no matter the cost" kinda conflicts with his actual actions.
He could have easily taken like two of them as prisoners, not only saving their lives but also getting potential informants for later (not that they'd spill much, but still).
Hell, I'd understand if the others did it on their own, but there's no mention of him being pissed at the sniper anywhere
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2018
- Messages
- 7,309
Holy shit. They getting blown the fuck out. Also lmao at the tiger no longer fully operable.
Actually shooting a combat medic is not a war crime... Shooting an medic post yes that is.
Else you could just march an battalion of combat medics into somewhere and the second your enemy shoots me they commit a crime.
Besides a war is filled with useless death one more or less hardly matters does it.
Else you could just march an battalion of combat medics into somewhere and the second your enemy shoots me they commit a crime.
Besides a war is filled with useless death one more or less hardly matters does it.
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2020
- Messages
- 30
@Hakomako
To get its attention and lead it to the Stug.
@Arkhell
"Modern laws of war, such as the 1949 Geneva Conventions, also include prohibitions on attacking doctors, ambulances or hospital ships displaying a Red Cross, a Red Crescent, Magen David Adom, The Red Crystal, or other emblem related to the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement. It is also prohibited to fire at a person or vehicle bearing a white flag, since that indicates an intent to surrender or a desire to communicate.[citation needed]
In either case, people protected by the Red Cross/Crescent/Star or white flag are expected to maintain neutrality, and may not engage in warlike acts. In fact, engaging in war activities under a protected symbol is itself a violation of the laws of war known as perfidy. Failure to follow these requirements can result in the loss of protected status and make the individual violating the requirements a lawful target."
also, from another article:
"According to the Geneva Convention, knowingly firing at a medic wearing clear insignia is a war crime.[2]"
From Wikipedia, I don't want bother finding a better source.
And the insignia was pretty damn clear to her, I mean, she aimed for the cross
To get its attention and lead it to the Stug.
@Arkhell
"Modern laws of war, such as the 1949 Geneva Conventions, also include prohibitions on attacking doctors, ambulances or hospital ships displaying a Red Cross, a Red Crescent, Magen David Adom, The Red Crystal, or other emblem related to the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement. It is also prohibited to fire at a person or vehicle bearing a white flag, since that indicates an intent to surrender or a desire to communicate.[citation needed]
In either case, people protected by the Red Cross/Crescent/Star or white flag are expected to maintain neutrality, and may not engage in warlike acts. In fact, engaging in war activities under a protected symbol is itself a violation of the laws of war known as perfidy. Failure to follow these requirements can result in the loss of protected status and make the individual violating the requirements a lawful target."
also, from another article:
"According to the Geneva Convention, knowingly firing at a medic wearing clear insignia is a war crime.[2]"
From Wikipedia, I don't want bother finding a better source.
And the insignia was pretty damn clear to her, I mean, she aimed for the cross
Double-page supporter
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2020
- Messages
- 1,165
Shooting the medic ... didn't see that coming. Also why should Yuuto know. He literally is stuck in the Stug III. It is action all around him. He only will know after the reports come in how everybody performed.
On the note of shooting tanks. Not all tanks are created equal. But beside that it is psychological. A veteran will shrug it off fast, but well people do unreasonable things if they are confronted with such situations.
On the note of shooting tanks. Not all tanks are created equal. But beside that it is psychological. A veteran will shrug it off fast, but well people do unreasonable things if they are confronted with such situations.
@Usernamesareoverrated Isn't that the 1949 Geneva convention, though? Isn't this supposed to be WW2, which took place before the signing of the Geneva convention?
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2019
- Messages
- 6
@Driahalt
"Geneva Convention (1864)
Article 2 of the 1864 Geneva Convention provides:
Hospital and ambulance personnel, including the quarter-master’s staff, the medical, administrative and transport services … shall have the benefit of the same neutrality [as military hospitals and ambulances] when on duty, and while there remain any wounded to be brought in or assisted."
This was found on the ICRC webpage, and it show here those that are involved in direct medical aid are to be remained unharmed, meaning medic have been protected by Geneva Convention since it was first introduced
Here's the link if interested: https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v2_rul_rule25
"Geneva Convention (1864)
Article 2 of the 1864 Geneva Convention provides:
Hospital and ambulance personnel, including the quarter-master’s staff, the medical, administrative and transport services … shall have the benefit of the same neutrality [as military hospitals and ambulances] when on duty, and while there remain any wounded to be brought in or assisted."
This was found on the ICRC webpage, and it show here those that are involved in direct medical aid are to be remained unharmed, meaning medic have been protected by Geneva Convention since it was first introduced
Here's the link if interested: https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v2_rul_rule25
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2019
- Messages
- 6
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2019
- Messages
- 13
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2019
- Messages
- 116
@FanofEverything
Yes tell that to the us carpetbombing everything and the germans launching v2s
Whole rules dont matter in a world war. Sure after everything is said and done the looser gets nailed to the cross the victor goes scott free we all know it.
Aka trying to war crime a random medic getting sniped is just plane stupid xD
Yes tell that to the us carpetbombing everything and the germans launching v2s
Whole rules dont matter in a world war. Sure after everything is said and done the looser gets nailed to the cross the victor goes scott free we all know it.
Aka trying to war crime a random medic getting sniped is just plane stupid xD
Supporter
- Joined
- May 7, 2018
- Messages
- 1,203
Geneva conventions also talk about the fair treatment of prisoners of war, and we all know that all sides of WW2 executed prisoners, with it getting increasingly worse the further east you went.
Similar threads
