🥲A heartbreaking story in the style of "Russians don't give up".

The Russians carry their wounded man out into the street and order him to carry out a combat mission.

🤯Vanka with a broken leg, tied to a stick with an Esmarch tourniquet, crawled for a good three meters until the pilot of the "Predator" got tired of watching this melodrama.

💥 From the wounded to the 200th. And there are enough such stories in Toretsk for a series.

https://t.me/Khyzhak_brigade/345

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago (11 children)

https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/pt/customary-ihl/v2/rule47

"Geneva Conventions (1949)

Pursuant to common Article 3(1) of the 1949 Geneva Conventions,

[p]ersons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria.

To this end, the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons:

(a) violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture.

Convention (I) for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field, Geneva, 12 August 1949, Article 3; Convention (II) for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces at Sea, Geneva, 12 August 1949, Article 3; Convention (III) relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, Geneva, 12 August 1949, Article 3; Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, Geneva, 12 August 1949, Article 3(1)."

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Not sure if that has kept up with the technology of drones.

It makes sense to not shoot the guy if you are there in person and can help him instead, taking him as a prisoner of war and getting him medical aid.

When you are there with a drone the only option is to put him out of his misery or leave him to die a slow death. Either way he probably dies.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago (2 children)

If he has no hope for being helped, that's his choice to take to end his life or not.
This is without a doubt a war crime. Lower than bombarding a theater full of children, but a war crime nonetheless.
Now that's for a judge to evaluate the full context, but in the current situation an inquiry should be opened.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

This is without a doubt a war crime

There are many doubts. He could be faking injury, drunk, still armed. The observer drone who suspected incapacitation was not the one attacking so you'd have to prove the actual attacking drone operator believed the target was incapacitated. Injured =/ incapacitated and his presence alone at the front occupies enemy territory which means they are a participant.

The bounds on what are 'reasonable' are very different in war than civilian life. This tendency to jump to 'ope warcrime' is as irrational as saying someone with an automatic weapon firing a burst commits a warcrime when the second round in a row strikes the victim. 'They were injured with the first bullet so it is a warcrime and automatic weapons must be prohibited by law'!

Had this soldier been on a stretcher, and/or being attended by an unarmed someone with a red cross on their arm, or had waved a white anything in the air, I'd agree with calling it a warcrime. A still conscious soldier being tossed out on their ass by 2 armed soldiers and 'appearing injured' in this era where the enemy feigns injury/death to avoid drone strikes is not hors de combat.

load more comments (1 replies)

load more comments (8 replies)