Title.
In: 4
I’m sure there are more technical arguments here, but basically international warfare has regularly been considered almost a “gentleman’s sport” by European military leaders where “honor” held a ton of value win or lose. An honorable loss was considered better than a dishonorable victory. Our men fight your men and shall the best side win while our opposing officers sit back together a drink scotch while things play out. You could use reasonable advantages of technology…etc, but couldn’t play too dirty or use low blows. Chemical weapons were considered dirty and not honorable because they were hard to use against ONLY there target and also made the battlefield impossible to occupy after by the winning army.
Basically there have always been unwritten rules of honor and “fair play” in most warfare that have mostly been followed. Post WWI and WWII, countries got together and codified these rules. Nobody can force you to play by them, but once again military leadership and militaries in general typically lives and dies by codes of honor, so they are mostly followed. The issue is often that insurgents like the Taliban or the Vietcong never shared these cultural values, so even our military leadership feels “if they don’t play by the rules, nether should we” which how we got agent Orange and drone strikes…etc
I’m sure there are more technical arguments here, but basically international warfare has regularly been considered almost a “gentleman’s sport” by European military leaders where “honor” held a ton of value win or lose. An honorable loss was considered better than a dishonorable victory. Our men fight your men and shall the best side win while our opposing officers sit back together a drink scotch while things play out. You could use reasonable advantages of technology…etc, but couldn’t play too dirty or use low blows. Chemical weapons were considered dirty and not honorable because they were hard to use against ONLY there target and also made the battlefield impossible to occupy after by the winning army.
Basically there have always been unwritten rules of honor and “fair play” in most warfare that have mostly been followed. Post WWI and WWII, countries got together and codified these rules. Nobody can force you to play by them, but once again military leadership and militaries in general typically lives and dies by codes of honor, so they are mostly followed. The issue is often that insurgents like the Taliban or the Vietcong never shared these cultural values, so even our military leadership feels “if they don’t play by the rules, nether should we” which how we got agent Orange and drone strikes…etc
Latest Answers