War crimes: A quick hypothetical

[Ryotknife]

Greets!

Indeed, dropping two nuke bombs onto major population centers was quite patriotic of the Americans.

good thing it saved many more lives in the end. Still a terrible thing though (second bomb is definetely debatable). not to mention we are defending their country for them now........

 

[Treblaine]

If an alien species that was at a similar technological level to us invaded, except this species has no concept of morality, and therefore believes that ANYTHING is permitted in a war, should we still hold to the Geneva convention and avoid enacting war crimes upon them?

You don't need to hypothesis of aliens, plenty of human organisations think anything is permitted in war if it progresses towards their victory.

And all current international conventions of warfare limit what you can do to human opponents, it wouldn't be a war crime to kill a non-human. Every year billions of rats are exterminated en-mass with no option to surrender, no imprisonment, no trial. This is not a war crime. If the army shoots a load of chimpanzees, this is not a war crime. Intelligence isn't a factor, being a Homo Sapien is. And don't give me BS like "well what is really human" there is no ambiguity there.

The only non-humans that get any kind of protection are species that are both endangered and NATIVE. An invading alien force qualifies as neither. Every last one of them could be exterminated and it wouldn't apply to any international conventions.

 

[bauke67]

You're thinking of it too much as a human vs human-like scenario.

An alien race who has absolutely no compunction about wiping us off the face of the earth clearly does not adhere to the morals that make us human. Just as they would surely wonder 'why aren't these idiots busting their hump to kill us? a strange war they wage, unlike us civilised denizens' or words to that effect. Without an in depth sociological and psychological study/profile of the enemy at hand, understanding their morals is reduced to the simple fact that: they are willing to destroy us and spare no expense in doing so.

Therefore... no holds barred, everything's fair. The aliens view us as animals to be culled and don't look as though they're going to change their opinion any time soon... *shrug*

True, and I don't say we shoudln't fight them in every way possible, all I'm trying to say is that morals are not about what the other thinks, it's about YOU. What YOU think is the right thing to do. What another would do in the same situation should not affect your values, or there would be no point in having them.
(to clarify, I'm talking about horrendously torturing POW's or causing more pain then is absolutely necessary. You know, war crimes, what the thread's about, that's not to say we shouldn't be waging war.)

 

[jklinders]

Since the Geneva convention was pretty much ignored by all major powers the last time we had what I would consider a total war (WWII) I would tend to think this question purely academic. When it's total war, meaning victory or annihilation I pretty much think all bets are off and do what ever the hell it takes to live. The idea that we can follow a "gentlemanly code of conduct" in total war is laughably naive.

 

[bauke67]

Mor

YES WE DO!. We hear about it all the time in the news when a person finds their boyfriends/girlfriend/spouse cheating and murder them. We see it in war when a soldier suffers enough stress they commit atrocities. Whether you help an old lady across the street or shoot up an elementary school on their first day you are still human and no amount of good deeds or sick crimes will make you better or worse.

Morals are about as important as titles and only have as much worth as the individual believes in them: You may call yourself a king and feel like a king but if you have no land or people to follow you you are no king.

Eeeeerrrmmm..

Sooo, what you are trying tell me is that you think we SHOULD murder our cheating spouses?

The second bit of your post, though, only goes to emphasize my point: they are only worth as much as the individual who believes in them, so when others don't have the same views(like certain invading aliens for instance)nothing about those views has to change because they are still your personal views. Not theirs.

 

[WanderingFool]

I think it all depends on just how much firepower is needed to fight the aliens. FI we can get by without using those weapons seen as "immoral", than fine. But if this ends up like Halo, than fuck the Geneva convention, this is a matter of survival.

*Edit*

Since the Geneva convention was pretty much ignored by all major powers the last time we had what I would consider a total war (WWII) I would tend to think this question purely academic. When it's total war, meaning victory or annihilation I pretty much think all bets are off and do what ever the hell it takes to live. The idea that we can follow a "gentlemanly code of conduct" in total war is laughably naive.

The Geneva Convention came into existance after WWII. In fact, it was because of WWII that the Geneva Convention actually exists. Still doesnt change the spirit of your post. Which I do agree with still.

 

[Squilookle]

the whole thing is a moot point- either they have nukes like us, in which case they can drop them from orbit at their leisure, or they don't, in which case we can use ours in a show of force to convince them to leave/surrender.

In the meantime, do we treat any prisoners with respect? Absolutely. Ill trreatment of another group, no matter what the method- only breeds more hatred and conflict. The moral measurement of all civilisation is not how it treats its friends, but how it treats its enemies. Be barbaric to a hostile force and you're no better than the worst xenophobic stereotype you think them to be.

You don't know from the outset that they have no concept of morality, and even if they don't- you're best bet to avoiding future conflict is an attempt to introduce one, or at the very least foster some sort of understanding between the two sides.

I'm actually a bit shattered by how quickly most of you are to jump down to the level you think the enemy is at. Extremely disappointing.

 

[OldNewNewOld]

Just because they go so low doesn't mean we should trow away our human side, or what is left of it during war. Same could be said for any murderer. We don't just kill them or torture them like they did with their victims. Just because they have no morality doesn't mean we should have any also.

Morality isn't there just for the others but also to make your self feel better. When you win the war, would you be happier that you did all you could to keep your humanity or that you trow out your humanity right from the start?

 

[bauke67]

what is the point of morals/honor/civility if it causes billions of people to be slaughtered needlessly?

there is a time and a place for those kinds of things, at least where countries are involved. That doesnt mean we should be immoral jerks all the time, throwing out morals should be as a last resort. If the decision is between acting morally or saving many lives, im sorry lives should win out. You can always re-evalute your morals or try to change yourself afterwards, but you cant bring back the dead.

It is the same thing as a person defending themselves and killing an attacker (even though killing is immoral), or a starving family stealing food.

Yeah, but, dude, usually people's morals honor and civility have a very clear opinion on the slaughtering billions for no apparant reason. And saving many lives is usually considered morally good, isn't it?
If you are sure aliens are going to kill everyone, then you should do whatever you can to stop it, as long as it does not involve killing even more billions.

Like in your example, defending yourself and killing an attacker may involve killing, but only to stop another killing(and possibly more, if you meet someone who would do that more than once), and when an entire family dies, that's worse than a bit of food being stolen, isn't it? It is. And according to what? Our moral views.

 

[Fayathon]

Follow the Geneva convention until you are certain that it will lead to the demise/enslavement/whathaveyou of our species, then fuck the convention, use every bastard weapon we have.

EDIT: If they pull some shit like the beginning of Independence Day, or we have been in contact and they express the desire to wipe us out/enslave us/etc then fuck 'em applies much sooner.

 

[Froggy Slayer]

the whole thing is a moot point- either they have nukes like us, in which case they can drop them from orbit at their leisure, or they don't, in which case we can use ours in a show of force to convince them to leave/surrender.

They don't want to use nukes; they want to replace us as the main civilised species on Earth and would prefer a world that isn't radioactive. They also have good point defence systems on their ships.

 

[WanderingFool]

the whole thing is a moot point- either they have nukes like us, in which case they can drop them from orbit at their leisure, or they don't, in which case we can use ours in a show of force to convince them to leave/surrender.

They don't want to use nukes; they want to replace us as the main civilised species on Earth and would prefer a world that isn't radioactive. They also have good point defence systems on their ships.

Are they EMP shielded? Cause if they are, Im calling Villian Sue'ing on them...

 

[Froggy Slayer]

the whole thing is a moot point- either they have nukes like us, in which case they can drop them from orbit at their leisure, or they don't, in which case we can use ours in a show of force to convince them to leave/surrender.

They don't want to use nukes; they want to replace us as the main civilised species on Earth and would prefer a world that isn't radioactive. They also have good point defence systems on their ships.

Are they EMP shielded? Cause if they are, Im calling Villian Sue'ing on them...

They don't need to be. EMP doesn't work in the same manner in space.

 

[GiglameshSoulEater]

First off, how the hell did they get here if they are at our level?

As for rights, since they aren't recognizing civilians I say fuck em. Capet bomb their asses with napalm and chemical weapons.

Technological advance is not necessarily linear in the sense everything improves at the same rate. Can you imagine the difference it would make if instead of studying new weaponry we devoted the effort and funds into space travel?

OT: Kill most of them, but preserve some for science.
The things we would learn! Actually we should test out the chemical weapons to see the effects upon their biology.

 

[Squilookle]

the whole thing is a moot point- either they have nukes like us, in which case they can drop them from orbit at their leisure, or they don't, in which case we can use ours in a show of force to convince them to leave/surrender.

They don't want to use nukes; they want to replace us as the main civilised species on Earth and would prefer a world that isn't radioactive. They also have good point defence systems on their ships.

So what? do they have radio? Communication? An alphabet? I consider these factors to be far more important than their point defense network, which could probably fail anyway if every nuke in the US was launched up at them at the same time, only needing a single hit in all likeliness.

 

[Froggy Slayer]

the whole thing is a moot point- either they have nukes like us, in which case they can drop them from orbit at their leisure, or they don't, in which case we can use ours in a show of force to convince them to leave/surrender.

They don't want to use nukes; they want to replace us as the main civilised species on Earth and would prefer a world that isn't radioactive. They also have good point defence systems on their ships.

So what? do they have radio? Communication? An alphabet? I consider these factors to be far more important than their point defense network, which could probably fail anyway if every nuke in the US was launched up at them at the same time, only needing a single hit in all likeliness.

Oh yeah, they have communications and an alphabet and radio and shit, some communications more advanced than ours. The transport ships are staying quite far away from Earth and quite spread out, though, so I doubt that the nukes could reach them reliably.

 

[Squilookle]

OK, that's something, I suppose. Did they bring their whole population Independence Day style, or just the overflow?

 

[Froggy Slayer]

Some more info. Mating is a much less personal affair for them; they simply wish to have as much 'new meat' for the war machine as possible. The species breeds fast. Around 20 eggs in each clutch, with a gestation period of 2 months. The hatchling grows to adulthood in about 3 years. Average lifespan is around 50 years until expiration by old age. Their society is racist to other species; they see the Earth and other planets that are similar to their homeworld as their birthright, and see any civilised species that lives on these planets, such as us, to be an inconvenience.

 

[6urk17s]

Wouldn't the moon nazis take care of that for us?

OT: What ship types are in their invasion fleet then? By what means did they arrive(FTL, sleeper ships, stargate, e.t.c.) here and are they human like or monsterish?

 

[Agow95]

if a superior species travelled for about a hundred years at the speed of light to reach our planet for some inane reason that meant they couldn't just go to one without nuclear weapons then I imagine it wouldn't matter what we did these bastards are determined to profit and we will die.