Title.
In: 4
Conventions of war are basically a “you scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours”. They’re ways to make wars less shit for countries without undermining the actual fighting too much.
Why not ban war? Because you want rules people might actually follow. If you banned all war, great! World peace! Until someone starts a war because it’s convenient, then all the rules go out the window.
When it comes to domestic issues, states don’t want others interfering. Everyone agrees not to interfere in internal affairs of other countries – that’s what sovereignty is. Violating that is usually an act of war.
Both sides of the same coin of countries’ governments acting in their own interests.
Conventions of war are basically a “you scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours”. They’re ways to make wars less shit for countries without undermining the actual fighting too much.
Why not ban war? Because you want rules people might actually follow. If you banned all war, great! World peace! Until someone starts a war because it’s convenient, then all the rules go out the window.
When it comes to domestic issues, states don’t want others interfering. Everyone agrees not to interfere in internal affairs of other countries – that’s what sovereignty is. Violating that is usually an act of war.
Both sides of the same coin of countries’ governments acting in their own interests.
Same reason tasers or directed energy weapons are banned by the Geneva Convention; they are weapons of torture. But your local police arent at war so torturing you to death is just fine by them
Same reason tasers or directed energy weapons are banned by the Geneva Convention; they are weapons of torture. But your local police arent at war so torturing you to death is just fine by them
Wait that’s illegal in warfare? I’m going into recruit training for USMC in march and one event is called The Gas Chamber. Bunch a dudes go into a small room with burning CS gas, take off their masks after a while, then go out. It’s to “build trust in our equipment”
Then again military doesn’t really follow constitutions etc once you sign away to become gov property so I guess it doesn’t matter lol. Glad to know I won’t have to deal with it if I ever see actual combat hopefully
Wait that’s illegal in warfare? I’m going into recruit training for USMC in march and one event is called The Gas Chamber. Bunch a dudes go into a small room with burning CS gas, take off their masks after a while, then go out. It’s to “build trust in our equipment”
Then again military doesn’t really follow constitutions etc once you sign away to become gov property so I guess it doesn’t matter lol. Glad to know I won’t have to deal with it if I ever see actual combat hopefully
Another aspect of the ethics is hard to put in a way that makes logical sense, but I’ll try.
It lowers your opponents ability to defend themselves to an unsatisfactory degree, making them an easy target. To then continue to engage the enemy when they are in such a helpless state that the gas brings could be argued as similar to engaging a disarmed enemy, which is a war crime. That ambiguity is another reason why it is not done in warfare, because it may be more trouble down the line for command than it’s worth.
As for why it is acceptable to use on civilians, this is because unlike in war there is no intention to then engage and destroy the civilians, thus incapacitation is not saddled with the same morally grey baggage.
Another aspect of the ethics is hard to put in a way that makes logical sense, but I’ll try.
It lowers your opponents ability to defend themselves to an unsatisfactory degree, making them an easy target. To then continue to engage the enemy when they are in such a helpless state that the gas brings could be argued as similar to engaging a disarmed enemy, which is a war crime. That ambiguity is another reason why it is not done in warfare, because it may be more trouble down the line for command than it’s worth.
As for why it is acceptable to use on civilians, this is because unlike in war there is no intention to then engage and destroy the civilians, thus incapacitation is not saddled with the same morally grey baggage.
retaliation
If you get gassed by the opposition in a war, you’ll probably respond in kind before you know what the gas is that got thrown at you – so if they launch tear gas at you and you respond with sarine, now everyone is using chemical weapons, and if they launched sarine and you respond with tear gas, you look weak.
civilians tend to not have stockpiles of chemical weapons on hand, so that’s not really a concern in a domestic conflict.
retaliation
If you get gassed by the opposition in a war, you’ll probably respond in kind before you know what the gas is that got thrown at you – so if they launch tear gas at you and you respond with sarine, now everyone is using chemical weapons, and if they launched sarine and you respond with tear gas, you look weak.
civilians tend to not have stockpiles of chemical weapons on hand, so that’s not really a concern in a domestic conflict.
Latest Answers