Re: Who killed who
- From: richardcasady@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (Richard Casady)
- Date: Mon, 01 Oct 2007 12:07:22 GMT
On Sun, 30 Sep 2007 16:11:07 +0100, Andrew Swallow
<am.swallow@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Richard Casady wrote:
On Sun, 30 Sep 2007 14:55:42 +0100, Andrew Swallow
<am.swallow@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Acts of terror are banned by the laws of war.
So are medical persons and chaplains.
You post that before your morning coffee, or what?
Casady
I probably should have reversed the order of the lines. In return
for their privileged status medical persons and chaplains lose
the right to take part in combat.
Do those people have the basic right of self defence against plain
murder [as opposed to legit military killing] ? I understand that
during the Viet Nam war some concientous objectors, who were medics,
would carry a rifle to blend in. In a average ambush, medics were a
priority target, right after the radioman, and ahead of the machine
gunners and the officers.
Casady
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Who killed who
- From: Andrew Swallow
- Re: Who killed who
- From: Fred J . McCall
- Re: Who killed who
- Prev by Date: Re: Who killed who
- Next by Date: Re: A "Cruise of the Emden" movie?
- Previous by thread: Re: Who killed who
- Next by thread: Re: Who killed who
- Index(es):