←back to thread

182 points _tk_ | 4 comments | | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
gadders ◴[] No.44386276[source]
I've seen some of these FPV videos of kills of unarmed Russian soldiers. I honestly don't know why the pilots are not prosecuted for war crimes.

(and I'm sure Russia does the same to Ukraine, I just haven't seen those videos).

replies(6): >>44386299 #>>44386340 #>>44386354 #>>44386423 #>>44386492 #>>44387440 #
1. gooseus ◴[] No.44386340[source]
It's because killing unarmed soldiers during war is not a war crime.

Rule 3. All members of the armed forces of a party to the conflict are combatants, except medical and religious personnel.

https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/customary-ihl/v1/rule3

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

https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/customary-ihl/v1/rule47

A surprise drone attack on any Russian combatant that isn't a medic or chaplain is "lawful", even if they aren't holding a weapon at the time.

replies(1): >>44386445 #
2. gadders ◴[] No.44386445[source]
Pretty sure I've seen some that fall under Rule 47.
replies(1): >>44386912 #
3. originalvichy ◴[] No.44386912[source]
There’s regularly uploaded footage of clearly surrendering soldiers directed towards a safe zone to give up. Propaganda is propaganda, but it happens more often than we might think.
replies(1): >>44387286 #
4. gadders ◴[] No.44387286{3}[source]
Glad to hear it.

I wonder if some "Surrendering to a Drone" protocol couldn't be codified under the Geneva Convention EG "Visibly disassemble your gun, throw the bits in several directions" etc.