Geneva Convention

[Double Zero]

It's a given that we have to behave better than people like the Taliban, but the Russians showed what they're like to fight even with the gloves off...

Regarding their alarming progress in Pakistan, it seems we can't use tactical nukes as that would be considered naughty, but how about cluster munitions and fuel-air bombs ?

I know cluster jobs are technically illegal now, and I don't say it lightly as I was at a test range when two bomb disposal people were killed by BL755 sub-munitions.

However, if one is fighting someone like the Taliban, one arm tied behind your back is not a great idea - how about trying to improve the safety of BL755 etc, and letting them have it; I don't recall the Taliban signing up for the convention, and civilians have already got the message and are legging it clear of the area...

[sonicstomp]

Reassure me that you have no influence over anything outside of your own home...

[Just This Once...]

Pretty much goes against everything we stand for, train for and believe in. A huge amount of effort goes into collateral damage assessment, both for pre-planned targeting and in cockpit weapon-to-target matching.

I have been a QTM for many years and I am proud of the efforts everyone puts in to the target-chain to reduce or eliminate collateral damage. We have invested money in new weapons, new weapon-effects technology and bolstered training at every level.

I for one do not feel like I have one hand tied behind my back when operating in the current theatre – we have the use of airpower, where as our opposition has none.

Whilst we may feel frustrated at times we always remember that we are not fighting a war of national survival and we are not at war with a nation state. Airpower has the ultimate high ground; it must be twined with the moral variety too.

[spheroid]

I don't recall the Taliban signing up for the convention


Which bit of it do they have to sign...? There are many conventions....many protocols.,...Britian hasn't signed them all so why should anyone else...?

Besides, the Geneva convention that you (probably) refer to doesn't concern weapons of war. The only stipulation that the UK has signed up to is that we have agreed that we will not use any chemical or gas weapons against our enemies ( we are more than happy to use them against our own folk)......t'other than that we have free reign to use what ever we want and when ever we want - including Electronic and cyber warfare

[soddim]

A word of caution to anyone who sympathises with the argument for abandoning our principles.

Be careful to make sure that winning does not produce an unprincipled winner.

The Taliban might be bad but what would we be without principles?

[Nigd3]

Going to war with principles and keeping to international process and rules, now that would be a first :yuk:

[minigundiplomat]

Why stop at Pakistan or Afghanistan, after napalming the entire Middle East we could turn our attention to parts of Birmingham, London and Yorkshire.

That would possibly free up funds for some new armbands, jackboots and goosestepping lessons. Perhaps even a new national anthem.....England, England uber alles.......

No, I don't think so.

[Double Zero]

I did say that we have to behave better than ' them '.

I just think we need to be pretty severe, considering the attitude - and terrain - the Taliban have, in Afghanistan & even more so it seems in Pakistan.

I doubt special forces play by many rules, maybe we could save some lives ( the good kind ) by letting the Taliban have the pointy end of some of our otherwise redundant weapons ...

[minigundiplomat]

otherwise redundant weapons ...


Why do you think they are redundant? Nuclear weapons havent been used since 1945, we could dust them off and 'cleanse' a few valleys along the Northwest Frontier.

You have dangerous ideas, either stop thinking, or stop sharing your thoughts with us....Please?

[Airborne Aircrew]

1100+ posts? Tell me this is a wind up...

Firstly, the Hague Conventions are far more concerned with what it is you are talking about... Which makes it clear you don't know what you are talking about... Hush..

[Double Zero]

AA & concerned chums,

Actually it was to get you lot talking, and it did !

That's not to say I don't feel our ' redundant ' weapons - which doesn't include nukes - have an opportunity :)

[LH2]

Is this that time of the year again? The Yearly PPRuNe Walter Mittying Contest, I mean. Or is this only a qualifying round?

Bet you the bloke is neither a serviceman nor a pilot, yet he sees fit to spend time in the military branch of a professional aviation forum. Takes all sorts, I know. :rolleyes:

[GPMG]

MGD,
I was nodding my head at your list, but I thought it was because the first two are complete dumps and the third if full of people who talk daft, nothing to do with any 'final solution'.

As for nukes, any chance we could aim one at a certain location in SW1A....say about 1300hrs on a Wednesday?

[VinRouge]

Old Clausewitz and Machiavelli didnt have problems with the like of the Geneva Convention.Then again, Machivelli supported genocide when your opponent was from a significantly different culture.

The corollary of the argument "we cannot win wars unless we do it in an inhumane manner" is thus in my mind - Dont bother fighting them. They are far too nasty and have the ability to drag on as we find. I frankly couldnt give two craps if terry wants to beat up his wife and string up a couple of adulterers. None of my business frankly. Leave the inhumane, illiterate cave dwelling monkeys to it.

We should however maintain the right to self defence. You come F*ck with us, say suicide bombing in a city, we will flatten whole towns of bad guys in response. If anyone is in the way, tough luck. Then, we simply close our borders to anyone with any links to the country involved. Isolation from these backward countries is far less costly in terms of national resource than jaunts to the far side of the globe ever was.

[racedo]

Huh What gives you the idea that Pakistan and the US will be observing Geneva convention in taking on the Taliban in Pakistan ?

No Cooking chance.

Allowing Swat valley treaty was part of the plan in ensuring Taliban would ignore it so giving Pakistan with huge US support the go after them with no limits.

Given Taliban actions in Swat it was also making it fully aware to the rest of Pakistan that were ambivalent on Taliban that next step was them.

Gloves are off and those elements with Pakistan military who have cossetted and funded them for nigh on 20 years now have a clear choice, Taliban or Pakistan.

Taliban have been sucked into a war of destruction and they will get squeezed.

[advocatusDIABOLI]

So,

what if (and when) the T, Take over pakistan's Nuclear Wpns? What then? Are the T then a Strategic Threat, and fit into a different box?

I don't think it was such a daft initial question.

Advo

[VinRouge]

Then I am guessing peshwari naans will start to glow in the dark.

[advocatusDIABOLI]

Vin, you are clearly a smart guy,

Expontial breakdown of a 'Nuclear Power' will clearly cause great angst. Some countries will react differently to others but, the plain truth is: Who is left with the nukes? and can they be used?

There has historically only been one response to nuclear threat........

I don't know about you, but recent news makes me shudder.

Advo

[racedo]

Taliban have no chance at getting near the Nukes.

US pretty much has security sorted on that.......Uncle Sam is not leaving that to chance.

In the event that Taliban got lucky then the Daisy Cutter bombs started getting used anywhere close to where a Nuke is very quickly and lots of them.

Taliban have many charcteristics of policies followed by Mao in control they look for and enough of Pakistan people know the policies followed by them to fight.

Don't expect India to sit by and watch Pakistan fall as they will provide what ever support necessary in going after Taliban.

[advocatusDIABOLI]

And Yes, I think that 'local bread products' could certainly be better than 'background' in terms of radiance in the future.

If local bread is 'High'. We've lost...... and we have to worry about OUR breads.

Advo

[advocatusDIABOLI]

Race,

Nice day in Washingon today? Forcast is for rain later. Watch the 'turnpike' after 3, it's rubbish. Have a nice day.

Advo

[racedo]

ADV

Its dark in Surrey now.

What part of my analysis do you reckon was wrong ?

US looking after Nuke security or India will get involved if it sees a threat to itself.

[advocatusDIABOLI]

Valid Point Race,

Where is the bigger threat? Pakistan taken? (Hypothetically), who is in charge?

Who would 'balance' power?

Well, in my view, India is key. Also a nuclear power.

BUT, this doesn't answer the question: In this / any case can we blow the rules?

My view is yes.

Advo

[racedo]

Rules don't apply in civil wars apparently.

Mind you in WW2 they didn't apply with all countries so why different now.