jhungary
MILITARY PROFESSIONAL
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2012
- Messages
- 19,295
- Reaction score
- 387
- Country
- Location
Wow very informative ideological discussion going on here. That's why I like trolling some times bcz it open a lot more info. Well, wars are chosen by politicians but fought by military. And military guys do not question but perform tasks given to them and in war there are obviously deviations and war crimes which are mostly overlooked due to importance of objectives on sight. But there is a big question that why there are war crimes when oppressors are completely in control of situation. Why r inhumane acts on POW and most of times on captured civvies? Soldiers now have option and authority to be a human being. Can u pls shed some light here?? @mods sorry for little troll, topic is very hot here. ... @Neptune @jhungary
Your question have 2 parts. One being why crime are still committed in a totally controlled environment. Two, Why there are no check and balance system for it, even tho if the situation has already under control.
For the first question, well, No one can answer you that. It is like why Road Rage exist or why people steal stuff when they can just buy them , or any other crime that committed in civilized world when there are no necessity and/or urge to commit them. Yet, crime still exist.
There are many reason for a crime being committed, problem is war is a place full of hate and violence, and on a personal account, it won't take much for a soldier to go snap. A lot easier than it would back to the world. And you do have a lot of opportunities to go violence.
For the second question, many people had asked me about that, why wouldn't anyone do anything after a crime was committed. While there are tend that a soldier can progress from beating a POW up to actually murder him/her, argument was that if we stop the soldier from progressing, ie stop him from beating POW, we could have prevent him progress further and to a point may murder a POW in cold blood.
Now, consider this, this is easier to say than actually implement it. For a platoon commander, you are in control of 40-45 men, for a company commander, you are in control of a whole company, 145 to 150 men
Now, for a platoon leader, he can report abnormal behaviour or anti-social behaviour for soldier under his command, he could testify that maybe his sergeant abuse POW. But for a Company commander, who actually have the responsibility to report it thru the chain of command. He did not see it. Take me for an example. I had command of about 75 people when I was a Captain, I could not be knowing what all of my soldier do and when they are out in the field, and If I have to pursuit every time when one of my subordinate reporting anything. Then most of my time will be used to deal with reports and court martial, and not getting the warfighting done.
Which in most case, there are people backing either side of the story, always, and when there are internal investigation, almost always some people say one thing and other people say differently, and since I did not actually see the incident, I cannot do anything about it or take anyone word for it.
Most case, if the alleged crime were well document, then it could give me or any commander something to go after, but in a typical you say he say situation, there are nothing I can do but let it go.
can you be Rommel in C&C lol?So are you telling me that my dream of being Pakistan's version of Rommel, Montgomery and Patton all rolled into one, is unfounded at best simply because playing Command and Conquer's Generals throughout my college just doesn't cut it ?