Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

"An unarmed man being by definition a non-combatant."

So an unarmed enemy messenger carrying orders or a scout acting as a lookout is off limits? A radio operator calling in mortar strikes? You can be a combatant without holding a gun.

You imply classism in that we only buy uniforms so our peasants will fight. I'm curious what the annual salary of a E-1 is versus a suicide bomber? Is there a Jihadist GI bill I'm unaware of? The biggest rich/poor divide I see isn't on our end.

You also imply that we want opposing forces to wear uniforms only because it gives us an advantage. That protecting civilians is just a cover story. If that's the case why send soldiers to Afghanistan at all? If civilians don't matter to us then a single trident sub could handle the whole war for us.

"The whole protecting civilians argument doesn't hold water anyway, the ratio of civilian-military casualties keeps going up in the modern era."

"They fight like guerillas, hiding among civilians, which multiplies their force and we go on to complain how it's illegal according to Western customs"

So the side that wants to fight with uniforms are complainers that kill civilians, and the side that hides behind civilians are just fighting fairly according to their customs? What?



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: