Russians openly describe soldiers breaking it and being decorated for it.
>>62504493Didn't navy seals dress up like charlie and use AKs and Rpks too. >inb4 zigger, jeet, pol
>>62504493well, russians are known to be subhuman filth, but ukraine sadly has not only to fight with one hand behind their back, but also respect international treaties and such. still, won't save russia.
>>62504493It's acceptable to wear the uniforms and insignia of the enemy on your approach march, but you have to remove it before engaging in combat. The example provided would be a war crime and an example of perfidy at which point the combatant forfeits the protections of the rules of war.
no one on either side is being punished for war crimes because neither side is america, the UK or austrailia.
the thing that separates actual worthwhile people from human-shaped cattle is the understanding that moral behaviour is something you do for yourself, not for other people. you don't obey the laws of war to be nice to russians, you do it because you are constitutionally incapable of lawlessness and cruelty.if you ever even feel like you have a choice, you have already failed.
You should officially do your best to follow the rules but you can overlook the occasional individual who takes out their anger on the Russians.
>>62504876GOOD MORNING SIR
>>62504516Based.
>>62504508If you dress up in the enemies uniforms and conduct military operations against them, don't be surprised when you are summarily executed when you are captured.Classic example of FAFO.
>>62504876Ukraine didn't strike Donbas civilians. Russia and its proxies did, such as the bombing of Kramatorsk, Mariupol, Volnovakha between 2014-2015 and downing of that Malaysian airliner>Usage of civilian buildings by AzovNever happened>Use of chemical weapons since 2014Never happenedAnything else?
>>62504493>wife>skurovWhat did the water bottle mean by this?
>>62504501You've already admitted to it, no reason to beat the dead horse.
>>62504501Yes but the Vietcong weren't wearing uniforms either and neither were legal combatants. The Vietcong would just wear the local peasant clothes and North Vietnam military surplus and stuff made in house with tailors that was just stuff like short sleeve shirts with zippers or something.>>62504493Spetznaz are somewhat notorious for this, they do this in all their conflicts. Also this guy has a chinese vest on this picture and his top is in the pre-release version of desert MARPAT, the one that was basically the prototype with blue/grey along with the beige.
There is literally nothing that Ukraine would do, save intentionally targeting schools and sexually assaulting civilians, that I would protest against at this point desu.
>>62504501Everyone does it. It's only a war crime if you lose.
>>62504501Insurgents, pirates, bandits, and other non-state actors aren't covered by the Hague convention.Using such tactics against them is perfectly legal, it just looks bad in the media.
>>62505013Oh no doubt, but from a legal standpoint, you are protected from prosecution if you do as I say.The likelihood of you getting that far entirely depends on the discipline and mood of the soldiers capturing you.
>>62504493>Should a country respect the law of war if the opponent openly don't ?100% serious answer OP: it depends. There's certain laws of war that are as much about your own self respect and values as anything, and confer zero military advantage. Like don't tolerate torturing POWs. If you just have to execute them (and take into account how that might affect future surrender rates) then so be it, but indulging in torture is bad shit that fucks up the people who do it and witness it as well and will haunt a country. I don't think Ukraine should specifically target Russian maternity hospitals, schools or child shelters either (nor "accidentally ;)", I mean genuine accidents happen but it should be genuine).But other aspects of the laws of war are Game Theory based: if both sides don't do it, neither gains advantage and both sides are better off, and if both sides do it, neither gets any advantage but both are worse off, but if just one does it that side can gain. The only way to ensure the rules are respected in an Iterated Prisoners Dilemma is to punish "defectors", while being ready to go back to the rules if the other side does. So Ukraine should absolutely hit Russia's power infrastructure come winter. They should absolutely hit transport hubs. They should be allowed to aim at military targets that are in the middle of cities and might result in more collateral damage, so long as they truly are military targets they're trying to hit. If the West doesn't want that the West should step in directly, or else massively amp up support, but if Ukraine is on their own then they have every right and reason to make Russia pay for its war crimes.
>>62505371Hard to protest anything from Kiev.
>>62505733https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/January_2015_Mariupol_rocket_attack#:~:text=On%2024%20January%2C%20a%20major,a%20result%20of%20the%20attack.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volnovakha_bus_attackhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/February_2015_Kramatorsk_rocket_attackhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaysia_Airlines_Flight_17
>>62505398The NVA and VC were not a non-state actor.
at a certain point you have to say to yourself that we are the good guys and the good guys don't do this.
>>62505065Isn't the official uniform of Ukraine just blue tape at this point though?
>>62505398>>62505886would this be okay against AZOV or are they offically apart of the military now?
>>62504493>During the ensuing contact, Rekhovsky died from a double bullet wound.
>>62504501>BUT WHAT ABOUTzigger jeet, >>>/pol/
>>62504493>Should a country respect the law of war if the opponent openly don't ?The laws of war were not created to be followed; they were created to punish the losing side more severely. Anyone who isn't a part of the anglosphere doesn't care about the laws of war because if they win they'll get away with it and if they lose then they're most likely dead anyway.In other news, this should be a /pol/ thread.
>>62504493>"actively used enemy clothing, photo is example">marpat carrier and marpat shirt, neither used by Ukraine but already used by SOBR and FSB for at least a decade>still wearing orange st george ribbonsounds like aggrandizing bullshit, as if youd be able to tell marpat from EMR at combat distances. the shirt would similarly look like atacs au from 10 yards.
>>62505886The VC were, yes. They were officially by their own policies the armed wing of the Vietnam Communist Party. The fact that they were sustained by North Vietnam is an obvious fact but one that the VC themselves officially denied and went the whole war denying it. Even then, they were acting in South Vietnam and not North Vietnam so they were a non-state actor in domestic terms.Until 1972 the North Vietnamese government officially denied and refused to publicly identify that the North Vietnamese troops in South Vietnam were from the NV military. Before the 1972 invasion all NVA troops operating in in South Vietnam explicitly wore uniforms with all identifying insigia removed, like rank and branch insignia.>>62505943No, because the funny extra-beige pixel uniform is still issued and their official combat uniform. Just like EMR is the official RU one even if a full third of their forces are wearing Russian and Chinese multicam.>>62506026The Azov units are all official parts of different branches of the Ukraine military so no. They're still quite different than most but one of the points of giving them official status in the National Guard for example is to protect them from this. The Assault Brigade Azov unit is just a regular unit of the Ukraine Army though.
>>62506026national guard, probably for that very reason
>>62506044>The laws of war were not created to be followed; they were created to punish the losing side more severely.That's wrong on both accounts. The laws of war were created to protect non-combatant civillians and to ensure that warfare is only being conducted against other enemy combatants. OPs example is a violation of the laws of war because it also opens up that Vatnik from being shot by his own men. > this should be a /pol/ thread.I can tell already that you spend way too much time on there
>>62504501Vietcong were not a formal army.
>>62504501Delta Force do it basically whatever they feel they need to. But since most of their ops are classified, this can difficulty be prosecuted.The funny thing is Russia admitting it on Telegram instead of staying quiet about it.
>>62506086could russians wear blue tape to do some trolling and it not be a warcrime if they are wearing russian uniforms?
>>62506086>funny extra-beige pixel uniformit has grown on me. I like it.
>>62504493I feel like there are laws of war regarding decorum, of which things like laws covering disguises fall under, and there are laws of war regarding ethics, which shit like not shooting civilians or not killing surrendering or hors de combat adversaries fall under. With the former, if one side breaches the contract then you may as well just go for it. The latter is a matter of preventing crimes against humanity though, so I don't think it can really be justified.
>>62506105True but after the failure of the Tet Offensive, the US was almost always fighting PAVN. And if anything such types of wacky subversive measures increased as the war went on.
>>62505013>when you are summarily executed when you are captured.That's the point. They're trying to discourage their soldiers from surrendering.
>>62504493>Cunning = violation of the laws of warok
>>62506044>The laws of war were not created to be followed; they were created to punish the losing side more severely. Anyone who isn't a part of the anglosphere doesn't care about the laws of war because if they win they'll get away with it and if they lose then they're most likely dead anyway.>In other news, this should be a /pol/ thread.
>>62506914>>Cunning = violation of the laws of war>ok
>>62504493Rules only exist insofar as both sides agree to abide by them. Playing by the laws while the other side has blatantly disregarded such things is like trying to have a honest 1v1 on rust with an aimbotter. Though in truth once you start breaking the rules it's almost always a sign you're not doing too hot and have to resort to underhanded tactics
>>62504508running around someone else's country with a gun is "combat operations" enough that no one's gonna get yelled at for summarily deleting your dumb ass, even if you try to surrender
>>62505711This is probably the best answer in the thread. I will note, however, that the first part is not necessarily universal, and is a concern mostly for Judeo-Christian societies, particularly those with historical Catholic or Protestant backgrounds. And even then, it was the excesses of the Thirty Years' War that spurred on the concepts that would eventually become the laws of war that we know today. Other societies are not necessarily as troubled by things like the torture of prisoners or the massacre of innocents.
>>62506122>Russia admittingAny time they feel pride about something, they'll gloat about it. Remember Crimea? They gloated about taking it and then they tried the same thing in 2022 but ukraine was prepared. Similarly, you got those people showing off their giggle switches on social media only to get caught because of it.
>>62507428>Bad source, likely editted by you to support your point. All of these perpetrated by Ukraine.kys
>>62506195Wouldn't hold up in court because it is completely and 100% clear to both sides and tertiary viewers that blue tape = Ukrainian troops.
>>62504493>perfidy> again/k/ .. Have I ever told you just how fucking much I hate ziggers ..?
He didn't get the medal for the perfidy, he got the medal for dying, jews are depopulating Russia from the few whites left and replacing them with africans and muslims.
>>62505392This
>>62505018lol
>>62504516This.
>>62505711I would like to add that there is a grey area around executing prisoners of war on the assault.It is a generally agreed principle, but still a warcrime by letter, that ceetain troops cannot really care for prisoners without jeopardising their own combat capacity or the execution of their orders and thus can execute enemy wounded and surrendered to be able to freely move on.It is technically a warcrime, but it's something that has happened since WW1 (and presumably before that).If you remember the Ronald Speirs story from BoB, that was basically an "inflation" of a combat action at the end of which three surrendered german soldiers were executed in the early hours of June 6, because Speirs and his detachment needed to move towards their objectives.In the same operation (Overlord), British paratroopers (allegedly) had sweeper teams that would go around executing wounded.Neither of these cases are pretty, but paratroopers and assault groups don't usually have the capacity to guard surrendering enemies. In that, Ukraine often goes above and beyond. It does give them a psychological advantage, as it makes russians more likely to surrender and thus makes it easier to break a defense, but no serious military analyst would fault them for "sweeping".
>>62510053Is that Angolan patch a false flag?
>>62504493What crime? Camo is not a uniform therefore there is not violation as everyone is wearing camo.>inb4 retardAn ongoing problem is because soldiers are improperly dressed they have taken to color tape to prevent friendly fire, camo is a ridiculous garb that has no benefit to the infantryman.
>>62505398This is a very, very common misunderstanding. International law protects ALL combatants even illegitimate ones. It clearly says that combatants that have not been identified as part of a legitimate military force must be arrested and then handed over to local police forces to be treated as common criminals so that a local judge will apply the local penal code to them. At no point it says that they're fair game to kill with no consequences or whatever as so many people on here seem to think.
>>62516279>including Ukrainian flagsretard.
>>62516306This is manifestly incorrect. Like, on nearly every level. The laws of armed conflict offer no protections for unlawful combatants and prohibit no tactics against them. There is no requirement to arrest unlawful combatants and there is no requirement to turn them over to civilian authorities. Whoever taught you LOAC, or more likely wrote the curriculum you were taught, is an absolute retard.
>>62504493>>62516306>>62516941the idea behind the geneva convention is that if you sign it, you commit to implement and enforce it. that includes during all armed conflicts, even when war is not declared, as long as both parties are signatories (which applies to russia/ukraine). if the opponent egregiously breaches the rules by committing widespread or large-scale war crimes, you can ask for intervention from a "protecting power" or the UN security counsel. but for isolated incidents, it's expected that the parties police themselves and after the conflict submit to the jurisdiction of the int'l criminal court.in other words, no, you can't just say "if the rules don't apply to you, they don't apply to me." however, i expect that in narrower situations, there are exceptions. for example, if your opponent is not wearing appropriate uniforms, you can deprive them of the protections of a POW.for non-conventional forces, the situation is still subject to interpretation. it's not a black and white "they have no protections" or "they are fully protected by international law." this stuff still has to get figured out by the ICC.
>>62505392This but losing isn't enough, you need to lose and have your government arrested.The US has lost wars without getting charged for war crimes because the US government was never arrested by an occupying force.Same will happen with Russia, no matter how bad they lose Putin will never see the Hague.
>>62504501>can't engage in some playful chicanery with the enemy by playing dress up as their guys I'd cackle if a MARSOC operator got NJPed for factory resetting an enemy while wearing a Groucho Marx mask.
>>62516941it's more complicated. protection applies to "privileged combatants," which include militias and organized resistance movement provided they have a chain of command, a fixed sign, carry arms openly, and conduct their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.you are correct that unlawful combatants don't get these if they're pirates or bandits. But "insurgents" absolutely can get to "privileged" status.
>>62516941>The laws of armed conflict offer no protections for unlawful combatantsYes they do. For starters legitimate combatants have the obligation to detain people suspected of being illegitimate combatants and investigate whether or not they truly are illegitimate.
>>62504493If you can't win by normal war methods I guess you gotta go for the underhanded shit like this.
>>62517107>>62505392this is your reminder that since signing the hague (and later geneva) convention, the US has investigated and prosecuted its own soldiers for war crimes in WW1, WW2, the korean war, the vietnam war, and the GWOT. (the same can be said for interwar periods.) this includes, notably, 140 WW2 US soldiers actually EXECUTED for crimes against civilians. That's 100 more than Nazis executed after the nuremberg trials.most western governments can say the same, even when they won the war, dating back to ww1 for the brits and ww2 for the french. (for example, the british executed 37 soldiers for murder between 1914-1918). the global south bricshitters are willing to believe that this is either "they're actually more brutal than us" while simultaneously excusing their own behavior by saying "everyone does it, winners write history, etc." it's just not true. good faith and an effort to be open and fair, while imperfect, has actually existed in the west for the last three generations. that's why we run the world and the best everyone else can do is copy us and try to sell us cheap trinkets.
>>62515380he's most probably from there, and worked with Wagner.
>>62504516This is all well and good, but then you end up dead because the enemy was willing to transgress and abuse your morality to survive.It's only based if you do it when you have the freedom to do so.
>>62504537I'm sure there's been more cases where the ukies have done so than we've been privy to, but the fact that they've shown the restraint they have when faced with enemies that wouldn't and in fact doesn't hesitate to resort to war crimes on the daily is, I think, incredibly admirable, and even more so considering they're supposed to be "brother" peoples. The contrast is striking.
the rules of war only apply to NATO countries when at war with other NATO countrieswhich is another way to say never
>>62510053I was half expecting her to fall onto the railing belly first.
