Here we go again..................
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
Law of War/Law of Armed Conflict Discussion
- Thread starter statesman
- Start date
I think the Fog (of War) is settling in...so an AC-130 dealing with "squirters" would be likely inappropriate? It's almost like a JAG has to be embedded everywhere. Sorry, I just think bad guys with hostile intent need to go away pronto, period. If you can bag them, great. I'm sure they're laughing their asses off at our collective hang-wringing while they try to fashion the biggest bang they can. Do you think they try to judge appropriateness of weapon used...quite the opposite! I like what the ATO used to say in Desert Storm: Best Weapon
There is a strong movement towards adding to the LOAC so as to address alot of the concerns/problems unique to the GWOT. Until then, shoot'em if you got'em
It seems we are crossing the streams a bit. Proportionality is a nice to have and a byproduct of the current conflicts we find ourselves in and the touchy feely direction our society has taken.
There is nothing in the Laws of Armed conflict that precludes dropping 155mm artilery, a MK82, a fechette rocket etc etc etc on one guy with an AK if that is what it takes to accomplish your mission. Proportionality is mentioned if the enemy is using cultral, religous or historic sites. Overkill is not out of the box, sometimes it is tactically not the right answer but it is legal.
If the ROE permits, never send a Marine somewhere you can send a bullet first.
There is nothing in the Laws of Armed conflict that precludes dropping 155mm artilery, a MK82, a fechette rocket etc etc etc on one guy with an AK if that is what it takes to accomplish your mission. Proportionality is mentioned if the enemy is using cultral, religous or historic sites. Overkill is not out of the box, sometimes it is tactically not the right answer but it is legal.
If the ROE permits, never send a Marine somewhere you can send a bullet first.
Read lessons we forgot since the battle for Hue City.
Hell look at WWII. Every town my grandfathers unit rolled into the first thing they did was blow the sh!t out of the church bell tower. Pissed the locals off something fierce but they stopped needlessly loosing men to sniper fire.
Harrier Dude
Living the dream
I completely agree. My only reference to the LOAC above was with respect for deliberate and egregious use of force that was disproportionate, when lesser force was clearly easily available.
My point is that if you have to kill somebody, then by all means do it. Use whatever you have. It's completely legal. However, if you deliberately use waaaaaayyyyyyy more force than was necessary, just for kicks, somebody may try to make a charge under LOAC.
It'll almost certainly hit the media and get your ass in a serious crack with the higher-ups in the command structure, but that's a separate issue.
Also a separate issue is wasting ordnance/ammo. That's one of the reasons why the ATO says BEST. In addition to providing flexibility, we're supposed to strive for a proper weapon to target match when able. It doesn't stop you from dropping a GBU-16 on a single dude sitting in the desert. If that's all you have left, then you go with what you got.
That's what I took away from the law classes I had. If it was just me and some dude trying to shoot me, it wouldn't matter how I killed him, as long as he was dead. Hell, I could drive a tank over him squishing him if I wanted to and that's what I felt was needed. The proportionality response comes in when you have that 13 year old in a mosque shooting at you. Then, it's a matter of is the 2000# bomb warranted, thereby destroying the whole building and the five buildings surrounding him, or could we maybe take him out with a well placed mortar or TOW shot, and only damage the building he's in? Direct engagement and proportionality aren't the same.
Wasn't that Grenada? Or have two poor bicyclists been whacked by Cobras with TOW missiles?
I'm actually kind of surprised a human body, or bicycle, sets off the warhead.
Harrier Dude
Living the dream
I heard it was Panama, and I also heard it was a ground based TOW. That was part of the problem, in that he could have just shot him with his rifle/organic small arms.
I'm not even sure it ever actually happenned. Part of me thinks it was probably myth and/or urban legend. I was usuing it to demonstrate a point, so it doesn't really matter.
I have read of a Marine Cobra shooting at a bicyclist in Grenada. Granted, you can't believe everything you read, but it was in a real book. With pages and everything. It's been a while, so I'll try to find the reference or another source.
phrogpilot73
Well-Known Member
My Battalion had a negligent discharge with a TOW in Iraq. Just wanted to say that, and yes - it's true...
Someone hit a single insurgent with a TOW?!
That's one way to make someone go poof.
Harrier Dude
Living the dream
Lemme guess.........
Some poor LCpl to Battalion CO: "Sir, the FAC said he just wanted to look through the sights for a minute and the next thing we know......WWWWHHHHHOOOOOOOOOOOOOSSSSSSSSSSSSSSHHHHHHHHHH!!!!"
Is that about how it happenned?
phrogpilot73
Well-Known Member
That would have made for a better story. One of the "TOW Gurus" from Weapons Company was giving a hip pocket class to some of the Marines and next thing you know... One guy had to be casevac'd because of the back blast.Lemme guess.........
Some poor LCpl to Battalion CO: "Sir, the FAC said he just wanted to look through the sights for a minute and the next thing we know......WWWWHHHHHOOOOOOOOOOOOOSSSSSSSSSSSSSSHHHHHHHHHH!!!!"
Is that about how it happenned?
Luckily, everyone was OK.