Obeying your Commander
-
bottomline is... if you win... you are the law....Originally posted by LazerLordz:If your commander gives you an illegal order that contravenes the Geneva Convention or the Constitution of your country, and you carry it out, you will be charged if caught, as a war criminal.
The Nuremburg Defense is a classic example of how command responsibility does not protect the junior commanders from war crimes charges even if he or she claims they were merely carrying out orders.
You better hope you're on the winning side.
if you loose... may god help your sorry a.s..s...
geneva convention is a load of crap that is designed by weapon manufacturers to keep themselves in buissness by prolonging wars.
and even if they do haul me up ... first i have to live through the war... no point thinking about possible jail term in the future when i am not even sure if i will live long enough to see europe...
oh.... if 500,000 men commits a crime against the geneva convention... where they gonna find the space to lock all of us up.... and i wonder how they feel about feeding us for the rest of our lives with their taxes....
of course... i cannot even begin to imagine the possibilities of locking up millions of soldiers in a jail... like the PLA or USA...
obviously... the geneva convention is a load of hot air.... large numbers of iraqi troops committed heinous crime against the kuwaitis as well as the iranians.... how many really end up in the war trial?
-
it must be understood for those of christian and islamic faith... that massacre of cities in the past had occurred... and.... with GOD's blessing and permision.
it may sounds like GOD is nuts... but the truth is the opposite... absolute horror in war is wat reinforced the human desire for peace....the greater the horror... the greater the desire for peace....
the idea of winning the enemies mind and heart is totally a hogwash... the only way to silent the enemy forever is to bury the other fella alive.
the rules of war was created... because the europeans are so devasted by the horrors of unrestricted war... the only way to prolong the war without destroying the european society was to create rules that is to be observed by both sides...
such wars makes it more bearable.... because its bearable.... the result was endless number of wars.... -
that bayonet babies picture came out in my history assignment..........but then again how u suppose all soldiers follow the geneva rule thing when bullets grenades and sh!t are flying at them from all directions.
in the first place waging war is already sending troops to break those rules... soldiers oso feels fear/feelings/emotions however well they are trained.
if ur a soldier and ur in a war wif potential suicide bombers i suppose u will shoot if the driver/guy/woman/child does not stop at the checkpoint. -
Well Dr. Who if my officer gave an illegal order regarding Malaysians like yourself I'd follow it. You lot are little better than animals. So what are you going to do about it?
-
it depend....for example in german army ...soldier are allowed to questioned and if necessary mutiny if he thought his leader were doing somthing that is wrong....its a failsafe for preventing another hitler.
-
we are not the german army.... but i guess you already knew that.Originally posted by tankfanatic:it depend....for example in german army ...soldier are allowed to questioned and if necessary mutiny if he thought his leader were doing somthing that is wrong....its a failsafe for preventing another hitler.
even if such a permission is acceptable in peace time... rest assured that there will be regulations that would force a soldier to comply without question in wartime.....
frankly... junior officer maybe you can negotiate abit....however... i do not recomend anyone to challenge a direct order from your senior officers.... -
You see, this explanation sounds great when we are having an academic discussion, but now this would mean giving the individual soldier the power of decision in a combat situation. Imagine that you are the sergeant and the car is approaching your checkpoint without slowing down (you suspect explosives), and your man refuses to open fire because he believes it to be an illegal order. Does that count as showing cowardice in the face of fire?Originally posted by LazerLordz:If your commander gives you an illegal order that contravenes the Geneva Convention or the Constitution of your country, and you carry it out, you will be charged if caught, as a war criminal.
The Nuremburg Defense is a classic example of how command responsibility does not protect the junior commanders from war crimes charges even if he or she claims they were merely carrying out orders.
You better hope you're on the winning side.
I feel that the judgment of nuremberg trials gave problem to the individual soldier. You mean I have the right to question my commanders in a firefight? I would either be shot in the field or hung at some trial after the war.
Yeah, better hope that you are on the winning side -
Unfortunately the horrors of the holocaust caused the world to create several precedents that are, at best, very hard to adhere to. As previous posters have stated, the role of the individual soldier is to obey orders, and in grey situations, that is what the soldier has to do.
The Milgram experiments show that the majority of people put under orders will follow those orders, up to and including torturing and killing other human beings. This is simply human nature. The onus, then, is on the commander to ensure that no immoral orders are given. In the absence of moral command the soldier should not be held responsible because he cannot be expected to do much about it. -
In the movies the "warlords"
4000 unarmed soldiers have to be killed to save food for own soldiers because there is no more food for them
da ge shi dui de -
The Milgram experiment...i knew this one..... in nat geo , i think
-
It also means greater legal responsibility is placed on the commander to explain why he gave that order.Originally posted by korusu:You see, this explanation sounds great when we are having an academic discussion, but now this would mean giving the individual soldier the power of decision in a combat situation. Imagine that you are the sergeant and the car is approaching your checkpoint without slowing down (you suspect explosives), and your man refuses to open fire because he believes it to be an illegal order. Does that count as showing cowardice in the face of fire?
I feel that the judgment of nuremberg trials gave problem to the individual soldier. You mean I have the right to question my commanders in a firefight? I would either be shot in the field or hung at some trial after the war.
Yeah, better hope that you are on the winning side
Unless, of course, you're an American platoon sergeant. -
let me first clarify that I, Dr Who is 100% Singaporean........Donno why some of you think I am Malaysian........siow lah you all.....
========================
22 years ago, some pirates attacked the town of Lahad datu in Sabah robbing the people and killing or wouding 23 residents
http://www.nst.com.my/Current_News/NST/Sunday/CatchingUpWith/20070923083954/Article/index_html
The article above mentioned that the Malaysian Police and Navy later killed the pirates.
However, there were rumours that the Malaysians found out from which island the pirates came from and attacked the island, killing everyone on the island-men women and children......(the island belonged to the Philippines)
....since then, there were no more pirate attacks ......... ( later the Abu Sayaf group appeared but that is another story)
It seems sometimes you need to fight terror with terror....but donno if the SAF would obey such orders.....? some people here already say they would not obey any illegal orders. But what about a situation like this? .....ie .....kill the families of the terrorist to show other potential terrorist that we mean business......
Looks like the Malaysian policy worked..... -
they did attack that island...but didnt kill woman and children, what happen is the haul up all the able body male on that island and smack ISA at them. The fate of those man were unknown until now. The operation were executed by Royal Malaysian Police VAT 69. The Ops Name ..Operasi Rambo. So much of their yapping about premptive strike on sovereign soil.
-
Thats something new to me...any links?Originally posted by Dr Who:let me first clarify that I, Dr Who is 100% Singaporean........Donno why some of you think I am Malaysian........siow lah you all.....
========================
22 years ago, some pirates attacked the town of Lahad datu in Sabah robbing the people and killing or wouding 23 residents
http://www.nst.com.my/Current_News/NST/Sunday/CatchingUpWith/20070923083954/Article/index_html
The article above mentioned that the Malaysian Police and Navy later killed the pirates.
However, there were rumours that the Malaysians found out from which island the pirates came from and attacked the island, killing everyone on the island-men women and children......(the island belonged to the Philippines)
....since then, there were no more pirate attacks ......... ( later the Abu Sayaf group appeared but that is another story)
It seems sometimes you need to fight terror with terror....but donno if the SAF would obey such orders.....? some people here already say they would not obey any illegal orders. But what about a situation like this? .....ie .....kill the families of the terrorist to show other potential terrorist that we mean business......
Looks like the Malaysian policy worked.....
-
Originally posted by tankfanatic:
Kinda movie-like name for an operation but then again its in the 80s then! Rambo is famous and popular though now me knew most of it is not accurate at all.
they did attack that island...but didnt kill woman and children, what happen is the haul up all the able body male on that island and smack ISA at them. The fate of those man were unknown until now. The operation were executed by Royal Malaysian Police VAT 69. The Ops Name ..Operasi Rambo. So much of their yapping about premptive strike on sovereign soil. -
at the end of the day, it boils down to hate.
if you hate the enemy that much, even children and women are not exempt from being killed.
i once read 'kill the nigger children before they have the chance to grow up into big nigger bastards'.
this goes the same against the hatred between the japanese and chinese, and even the vietnamese vs. the americans. -
i am sure there will be no lack of hate to kill..... when their blind astros starts slamming into HDB flats....Originally posted by pwnz0r:at the end of the day, it boils down to hate.
if you hate the enemy that much, even children and women are not exempt from being killed.
i once read 'kill the nigger children before they have the chance to grow up into big nigger bastards'.
this goes the same against the hatred between the japanese and chinese, and even the vietnamese vs. the americans.
the only problem is how to kill them the most cost effective way..... bayonet? -
you dont want to fight them in hand to hand combat...believe me. Just stick to stand off weapon.
-
Agree with you that international rules and laws like geneva convention are for academic discussion. It would be your conscience that decide if you would sleep well after the war, not who gave the order or whether you would be tried for the action you took or did not take.Originally posted by korusu:You see, this explanation sounds great when we are having an academic discussion, but now this would mean giving the individual soldier the power of decision in a combat situation. Imagine that you are the sergeant and the car is approaching your checkpoint without slowing down (you suspect explosives), and your man refuses to open fire because he believes it to be an illegal order. Does that count as showing cowardice in the face of fire?
I feel that the judgment of nuremberg trials gave problem to the individual soldier. You mean I have the right to question my commanders in a firefight? I would either be shot in the field or hung at some trial after the war.
Yeah, better hope that you are on the winning side
If you were given the order to shoot and you had all the chance in the world to stop the vehicle, but you turned around and argue with your commander instead, the vehicle went past your sentry, drove 50 meter inside and exploded, hundreds of people whom you know were killed or wounded, how would you feel? your commander was killed so nobody would be there to prosecute you for not taking order.
On the other hand, you took the order and fired just one short at the vehicle, its petro tank exploded and the people inside burn to death. The people later confirmed to be some new contractors coming to work inside the camp. How would you feel? I believe blaming the commander would not erase the screaming of the people burnt to death right in front of you.
The lower the ranking, the fewer information the soldiers have to decide what is a legal or illegal order. Commanders, with more information, better training, are expected to give orders for good reasons, and soldiers are expected to just comply without questioning. But it would be our conscience to question what are orders for good reasons. Orders to kill enemies unarmed with their hands up, women, children, babies, old folks are never for good reasons, by any standard of any civilization.
What are illegal orders? I believe our constitution calls on the SAF to protect the lives and properties of Singapore, besides the sovereignty of the Republic. What if you were given order to fire at some protestors taking part in a demonstration against the government, like what happened in Thailand, would you fire? What if the government mobilize the SAF to fight for Taiwan, alongside the US, when war broke out across the straits? would you report to the mobilization? Are these kinds of orders legal, in view of the nature of war and the role of the SAF specified in our constitutions? 
-
simi hand to hand combat?? i talking about rounding up their civilian... tied them up and stick the bayonet into their chest.... in revenge for their astro rocketing our HDB flat.Originally posted by tankfanatic:you dont want to fight them in hand to hand combat...believe me. Just stick to stand off weapon.
hand to hand with malaysian soldiers??.......
sure... after i chop off their hands.... -
cool down man, we will never allow their astro to come anywhere near. Stay cool.Originally posted by tripwire:simi hand to hand combat?? i talking about rounding up their civilian... tied them up and stick the bayonet into their chest.... in revenge for their astro rocketing our HDB flat.
hand to hand with malaysian soldiers??....... sure... after i chop off their hands.... -
Typical Singaporean nerd.Originally posted by tripwire:simi hand to hand combat?? i talking about rounding up their civilian... tied them up and stick the bayonet into their chest.... in revenge for their astro rocketing our HDB flat.
hand to hand with malaysian soldiers??....... sure... after i chop off their hands....
Face it, Singaporeans especially men, are one of the physically weakest in the world. You'd be lucky if you didn't end up dead. -
sorry to burst your bubble... many malaysian women i know have professed to me otherwise......Originally posted by rooki:Typical Singaporean nerd.
Face it, Singaporeans especially men, are one of the physically weakest in the world. You'd be lucky if you didn't end up dead.
after having tested countless times the "physical" capabilities of singaporean and malaysian man.... -
Your commander sees a group of armed people approaching. He orders you to open fire....you look and see what appears to be kids with toys.....what if he is mistaken in what he saw? What if you are mistaken, and the kids are real;ly armed?
Photo above of kids in West bank playing with toy guns......damn dangerous....may get shot by Israeli snipers.... -
'Kill em all and let God sort them out'.It was a popular T-shirt we used to wear.Originally posted by Dr Who:
Your commander sees a group of armed people approaching. He orders you to open fire....you look and see what appears to be kids with toys.....what if he is mistaken in what he saw? What if you are mistaken, and the kids are real;ly armed?
Photo above of kids in West bank playing with toy guns......damn dangerous....may get shot by Israeli snipers....