You don’t need a trial to determine it. If they are not army soldiers, wearing uniforms of a nation’s army, they are not army soldiers. They are enemy combatants and as such are not given the protections of the Geneva Convention as a ‘soldier’.
“You don’t need a trial to determine it. If they are not army soldiers, wearing uniforms of a nation’s army, they are not army soldiers. They are enemy combatants and as such are not given the protections of the Geneva Convention as a ‘soldier’.”
See post 22, one thing that I never heard discussed among LRRPS was simply murdering people because they weren’t easily defined by (idiots?), you try to legalize murder and me and my fellow American GIs and veterans will close ranks against you.
Not exactly. Check the wording more carefully, and you’ll see that it’s more complex than that.
But in any case, that just would mean that they would not be subject to POW status and Convention III, but would instead be covered under Convention IV and, therefore, subject to prosecution in court of law.
The Conventions are quite clear that you can’t shoot bound and blindfolded men in the head, unless they are psychics and not hors de combat. Since these victims were not known to be firing psychic blasts or launching telekinetic attacks, I assume they were hors de combat.