138
u/mikasasimpp 5d ago
They're clankers it doesn't count
49
19
14
u/StallOneHammer 5d ago
Whoa whoa whoa watch the hard r
9
u/Past-Artichoke9148 5d ago
Damm liberal snowflake, those clankers arent on the ORANGE CATHOLIC BIBLE THEY VIOLATE THE PRECEPTS OF THE BUTLERIAN YIHAD
3
67
u/-Im_In_Your_Walls- 5d ago
Say it with me everyone:
The use of flamethrowers against armed combatant is not a war crime in and of itself as recognized by international UN law.
5
u/DigmonsDrill 5d ago
What if used against sheep?
10
u/-Im_In_Your_Walls- 5d ago
Non combatant and destruction of property. War crime but not inherently because of the use of the flamethrower.
3
33
u/YourTypicalSensei 5d ago
Attacking unarmed or wounded military personnel - It's a bit iffy but if they're considered hors-de-combat (out of action and don't pose any realistic threat) then yes it's a war crime
Killing fleeing combatants - No, they're still combatants and still capable of fighting back
Flamethrowers - Not a war crime as long as precautions are taken to prevent civilian deaths or unnecessary harm
4
u/Denpants 5d ago
War crimes are war crimes if:
There is a documented witness that can testify
There is physical evidence of it happening
The perpetrator loses the war and thus can be physically compelled to face the conviction
So basically, war discouragements!
1
113
u/el_butt 5d ago
I’m pretty sure it’s not illegal to kill fleeing combatants. Cause they’re still combatants.
69
u/SemiDiSole 5d ago
This. In fact escaping (So also fleeing/retreating!) is explicitly mentioned as an exception. To quote the red Cross:
Attacks against Persons Hors de Combat
Rule 47. Attacking persons who are recognized as hors de combat is prohibited. A person hors de combat is:(a) anyone who is in the power of an adverse party;(b) anyone who is defenceless because of unconsciousness, shipwreck, wounds or sickness; or(c) anyone who clearly expresses an intention to surrender;provided he or she abstains from any hostile act and does not attempt to escape.
18
u/DigmonsDrill 5d ago
The single most dangerous time on the battlefield is when you're in retreat. It's very easy for someone to panic and break ranks early, and then the people next to them break ranks, and then you get flanked and completely overrun by an advancing enemy. The danger of being slaughtered in case you need to retreat is a major check on an advancing military. Having a guarantee of "safe retreat" is nuts.
10
u/crzapy 5d ago
A fighting retreat is one of the hardest military maneuvers to execute well.
It's why Dunkirk is seen as a victory. (Victory isn't the right word. Maybe pivotal success) 7 Brilliant Military Retreats | HISTORY https://share.google/08NDsK9buJZnCdO04
5
u/AacornSoup 5d ago
Dunkirk was a Tactical Victory for the Germans (the British ran away without their heavy equipment) but a Strategic Victory for the British (their army escaped intact personnel-wise).
7
u/justUseAnSvm 5d ago
It's also the most dangerous time for civilians.
A fleeing army is very upset, they've lost friends, they've lost the objective, and the people standing around make easy targets, and live in a place their government no longer controls.
This happens in almost every war, and some of the worst atrocities from the Ukrainian Invasion were after Russia beat feet the first time.
9
u/TheLazy1-27 5d ago
A combatant can still flee then come back later and still be a combatant. Fleeing isn’t surrendering. They’re trying to escape so they can avoid losing soldiers to getting captured and minimize losses. They’re still combatants and therefore still a threat.
13
30
u/The_Great_Googly_Moo 5d ago
Its not a war crime if there is no in universe Geneva convention or ICC 😉
6
6
u/JakeVonFurth 5d ago edited 5d ago
Actually the term "War Criminal" is used in the series, so we just don't know for sure WHAT defines a war crime from in the SW universe.
5
16
10
u/Troncross 5d ago
flamethrowers are only a war crime in close proximity to civilians or infrastructure.
4
u/First-Recording2489 5d ago
Aren't some geonosians civilians? The ones with wings are soldiers while the ones without are workers. The nests could have had civilians living in them when they started using flamethrowers
5
7
u/GuinnessRespecter 5d ago
"And there is evidence a massacre took place. Satellite imaging shows what appears to be a mass grave."
3
2
4
u/MrPresidentBanana 5d ago
Killing fleeing combatants is not a war crime. If they're surrendering they get protection, but if they're not, that's just pursuit in retreat.
Flamethrowers are legal, with the exception that they're not allowed to be used against forests, unless those forests are concealing combatants or other military objectives, plus the standard stuff like not being legal to use against civilians (like all other weapons). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flamethrower#International_law
1
1
1
1
u/lovinglyme91 5d ago
Reason 151: On why western fiction sucks now. Overanalyzing everything to a stupid degree.
1
0
u/SlideN2MyBMs 5d ago
What video game is this? Is it good?
11
u/DeviousMelons 5d ago
Its Star Wars The Clone Wars and it's a TV show.
6
u/SlideN2MyBMs 5d ago
I seriously didn't know that it was a TV show. I've heard of clone wars but I never watched it.
5
u/Truethrowawaychest1 5d ago
It's good, starts a little rough but turns into some of the best stuff Star Wars has to offer
2
1
u/SemiDiSole 5d ago
Stellaris, it's great by the way! I like Rimworld more but, you know... Both have plenty of war crimes! :)
1
•
u/AutoModerator 5d ago
Hey /u/AacornSoup, thank you for submitting to /r/starterpacks!
This is just a reminder not to violate any rules, located here. Rule breakers can face a ban based on the severity of their rule violation.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.