“Different rules apply.”
As a whole, troops are sent in to accomplish a couple of things not just an attack. Such things as support for the ally we are entering with an intimidating show, secondly to place a foothold of a location to muster an action if needed, and thirdly to actually engage.
So most of what we go in for is not to fight, but to assist. And unless there is all out combat where are going into, the fear of this illness has put a lot of new rules for us to abide by. Just playing the game. But those new rules can sometimes step on old ones.
wy69
As a whole, troops are sent in to accomplish a couple of things not just an attack. Such things as support for the ally we are entering with an intimidating show, secondly to place a foothold of a location to muster an action if needed, and thirdly to actually engage. So most of what we go in for is not to fight, but to assist. And unless there is all out combat where are going into, the fear of this illness has put a lot of new rules for us to abide by. Just playing the game. But those new rules can sometimes step on old ones.
I'm afraid that we may be talking at cross purposes, or misunderstanding one another.
I am not restricting myself to "war-time conditions."
Even during peace time, U.S. troops can cross many international borders / enter many countries (esp. NATO countries), e.g., without a passport. Rather than a passport, their military I.D. is considered adequate.
I would assume (but I admit that it is only a speculation of mine) that the same applied to such matters as 1) customs (declaring, e.g., how much liquor or coffee they have in their luggage), 2) vaccine booklets, or 3) firearm restrictions. I therefore highly doubt that armed, uniformed U.S. troops entering a foreign country, e.g., on board military aircraft, are required to jump through the same hoops that you or I, as civilians, are required to.
Regards,