Seriously, why isn't the U.S. Army allowed to kill civilians?

The U.S. has to deal with a hostile population everytime they are over in Afghanistan or Iraq. So why can't we let them just let off some steam and do whatever? I'm serious.

The GC is stupid and pointless. The point of war is to kill and conquer. If civilians don't want to be killed,
>don't be a Muslim
>get out of the way
>stay out a warzone
>and let the soldiers do their job

Attached: afghanistan-ap-jt-171104_12x5_992.jpg (992x414, 73K)

t. mouth breathing retard who slept through history class in high school

Yeah those dirty ragheads should stay out of the way while young men fight and die to secure poppy fields.

yeah dude just kill everyone there will be no political or social blow back whatsoever

Attached: 1549730074958.jpg (665x692, 66K)

Yeah kill em. Based Tarrant.

Look up the German invasion of Belgium in WW1

Because WW2 taught us a lot of shit.
>stay out of a warzone
How do you stay out of a war zone when the war zone is arbitrarily decided by the aggressor, and can be anywhere ranging from open fields to even inside of civilian population centers?
>Get out of the way
Again, how does civilians get out of said warzone, if you don't let them take the roads?
>let soldiers do their job
And who do you think we have to blame for the Geneva Convention? Literally every side in WW2 did horrible shit like the bombing of civilian cities.
Rules are only set because some retards cannot keep themselves in line.

Even Sherman himself would find a person like you detestable.
>I am tired and sick of war. Its glory is all moonshine. It is only those who have neither fired a shot nor heard the shrieks and groans of the wounded who cry aloud for blood, for vengeance, for desolation. War is hell.

Attached: general-william-t-sherman.jpg (647x900, 87K)

He was too good for this sinful world.

Rules are anoying when they stop you from doing whatever you will, bit you will discover how useful they are the moment they stop anyone from doing wathever he wants to you.
American pows were well treated by germans in wwii because conventions

Because we have a bunch of limp-wristed losers who hate our military and hate our troops.

Because of International Law you idiot.
That shit happens anyway.

He literally fired cannons at Atlanta. Dafuq we talking about here. He hated war but he knew how to wage it. He did his duty

So I'm sure you'll understand and be okay with the enemy killing your family in their home because they deemed them to be enemy combatants in a war zone that was mapped by, you guessed it, the enemy...

Attached: Hell on Earth.webm (640x360, 2.68M)

OP here. Who the fuck cares about international law? I frankly don't care what international law has to say. this is the same international law that pisses on America all the time. Fuck international law

They already do that you fucking moron the fuck you think islamic terrorism is

Without trying to shill for OP, I'd like to know one instance where any Muslim adversary ever observed the Westphalian and/or Genevan niceties when we fought them. Or, in fact, when they fought anybody ever.

If you want to be an animal, then why not go live like one?
Strip naked, go out into the sand, kill all the brown women and children, all of the elderly, and show them your war face along the way.

We get it.
You're a fucking hardcore badass motherfucker who fears no death and was born to kill, but can't because the rules are holding him back.

Attached: 089.jpg (1920x1280, 854K)

The Geneva Convention does not apply to terrorists. By all definitions we are not in a proper war with them, and as such we do not need to be humane against them, but the human rights people tend to bitch about this so the military plays it safe. Not to mention that the terrorists like to blend together with the civilians.

The point is that OP is coming across as some whiny boot who's upset that he can't just go full rambo on anything and everything that breaths.
>don't be a Muslim
In other words, "don't be brown or piss me off."

>Who the fuck cares about international law?
>I frankly don't care what international law has to say. this is the same international law that pisses on America all the time.
>Fuck international law

That's probably why you're not in a decision making position.

I'm known to not give a shit but the Geneva Convention and not whole sale slaughter of the countries we invade is a good idea.

Read history and understand why you sound so retarded.

Very nice thread, congratulations OP good job.

i was fifteen once too, OP.

Attached: 1474683136325.jpg (1571x1600, 132K)

Nothing we learned in WW2 is used today.

WW2 was Bomb them until they surrender

Now is "Win the hearts and minds"

you break your enemies will to fight and you win. you don't pussy foot around winning hearts and minds.

Right. Fuck hearts and minds, who cares if the population forms an insurgency lol we'll just keep sending guys over there lol we'll just fight the entire population of every other nation lol aight pussyboi

America spends like half its time pissing on other countries. International law isn't pissing on you, it's bringing you into line with the rest of the world.

At 16 I wanted to crusade around the world and liberate everyone from dictators regardless of race or religion. I can't relate to your adolescent bloodlust because even then my heart was in the right place.

Just vote for politicians who won’t send young men to die overseas so a bunch of old Jews can make more money.

You can only win a war like Afghanistan or Vietnam by having the population on your side - hence the heart and minds policy. Massacring everyone indiscriminately might be very efficient militarily, it will also make you lose your moral high-ground. All other nations will start to see you as an enemy and act accordingly - even worse, they might support your enemy. Troop morale will also go down the shitter. Soldiers came to defend their country, not massacre women and children.

You think randomly killing unarmed unaffiliated people in a troops should be above any morality? I imagine the later because you are a stupid fucker..

>International law
There is no such thing. There are only treaties.

This is not a popularity contest.

That's technically correct. There are however agreements which take place between countries that people can be arrested and prosecuted for, meaning that something close enough exists. For a relevant example, all modern countries condemn murder, meaning it would be a kind of international law, even if not officially.

Insurgency happen because of hearts and minds in an area where that is viewed as a massive weakness.

We went to an area of the world that has been run by Might makes Right for thousands of years. You think there would have been an Insurgency in Iraq if after the first attack we killed every single person in the city one of the attackers came from? If you treat them with mannerisms that they view as weak and pathetic they won't respect you.

i've got a better idea, why don't we just not invade random irrelevant brown shitholes for no reason?

For the record, Iraqis viewed us as literal superhumans who humped around 100 pounds every day (obscene amount of weight to an Iraqi) and had xray Oakley's and killed them with invisible death that rained from the sky. They still fought us.

this guy has to be trolling

And massacring the locals will make them love you? I'm sure the survivors will be all for you when they roam around the open graveyard that used to be their neighborhood.They won't hold the fact that you massacred their neighbors, relatives, and friends in cold blood against you, no sir. In fact, they'll worship you for such acts!

Retard.

Because they didn't fear nor respect you. You don't do things their way so you were still weak in their eyes.

Maybe just stay the fuck out of other countries, you inbred amerifat faggot

What was the Insurgency like in nazi Germany after the government surrendered, cities were in ruin and people were starving to death?

Oh that's right the people had already given up because they lacked the will to fight. Our bombers weren't winning hearts and minds when they carpet bombed civilian targets. They were doing what needed to be done to win.

the germans were civilized europeans accustomed to a modern life which was taken away from them
what the fuck are you going to take away from some afghani tribesmen, his goat?

Not him, but a World War isn't comparable to peacetime occupation.
They bombed to destroy oil refineries, weapon stores, other military supplies, etc.
What you're arguing for is, "Grrrr!! Why can't I kill that civilian old man and rape that 14 year old girl and then kill her too!? This is WAR!!! I should be able to kill anyone!!!"

You're fucking retarded. It's easier to deal with a foreign enemy, especially a terrorist group, when the foreign civilians like you you utter mongoloid.

The Germans were western people who shared a similar way of life (pre nazi germany) to the rest of the west.

Vs

Goat fuckers who only ever read the quran (if they can read) who are taught non-stop that the west is weak and know that you have to follow rules about war that they use to their advantage because you are beneath them.

You act like war is some noble thing, but it's something that should be avoided at all costs but when it does happen it should be total war where every man women and children is treated as a part of a countries war machine that needs to be destroyed.

This is trolling.

What part of PEACETIME do you not understand?
There is no war.

Okay, so what do you get slaughtering pre-teens, women, and the elderly? What possible benefit could you get from lining up every elementary age child you can find against a wall and gunning them down?

I don't want nor would ever rape a girl, I don't know why you want to rape a child.

In war there shouldn't be rules as it needs to be made horrible so there aren't more of them.

The politicians that start wars don't give a shit about how brutal and horrible they are. As long as they can achieve their goals they don't care how many bodies they have to step over.

By your logic, the last war ever should've been World War I because of how horrible and tragic it was, but WWII broke out 20 years later after it ended and was even more brutal than WWI.

And what wars have you fought in, son?
Do tell.

Yeah because massacring random civilians did LOADS of good for us in Vietnam.

Peace, ideologies die when everyone who believes in it dies.

Dude, I thought the Vietnamese loved us after My Lai!

Yes, lets genocide the Iraqis. I'm sure absolutely NONE of our allies will turn against us for the wholesale slaughter of innocents, nope, definitely not. The world would definitely not turn against us over night.

The US people allowed the politicians to start these wars and did nothing to stop them, a government is a reflection of its people.

In the information age ideologies are not restricted to a geographical locale, you can't kill an ideology.

Was it genocide when we killed 8% of germany?

Going by your logic, the US' citizens are equally guilty for permitting the war to happen. Shouldn't they be killed to the last man, woman, and child for harboring beliefs that spread war? According to you, we have to kill every last person to stop an ideology, and "war mongering for silly geopolitical strategic goals" seems like a pretty bad ideology to have.

Attached: 57B983D1-86A9-40C1-9765-EE01F9AB9124.png (900x676, 410K)

Yes you can. as The Uyghurs in China are going to find out.

Congressional Declared War =/= Peacetime Occupation

No, because theres a difference between collateral damage during strategic bombing raids against industrial centers and the systematic genocide that you're advocating for.

>Ethnicity=Ideology
Room temp IQ/10

If the enemy invaded the US you would be killed down to women and children because you are beneath them and you should be their slaves.

OP is definitely going to end up in prison for murder.

Hope you enjoy the dishonorably discharge and all of the goodies that come with it.

>they'd genocide you because they think you should be slaves!
Theres a disconnect somewhere in this line of reasoning, if they wanted slaves they wouldn't kill you they'd enslave you. You can't enslave corpses.

They are being removed because of their ideology. It isn't Chinese so it has to go.

Because that would mean that the war would end and no more money for the MIC.

They enslave those who remain as the ones who fought back (bad for slaves) are dead.

>t. room temperature iq

"Because we allow people to use vague language in our laws which allowed our government to grow too large and out of control, we shouldn't hold the responsibility of its actions"

>Oy vey, Make that war last as long as possible we need more shekels for the MIC and more blood shed for israel

Wars are declared by governments. Governments are the ones stirring such shit in the first place, and you want to slaughter the people who are unrelated to what their government does for what their government did?
Such senseless slaughter will only set the world against you, why be friends with this mad nation who slaughtered the innocent civilians who had no say in what their government did? If they can slaughter that nation's people without blinking their eyes, they can also turn and shoot you in the back as and when they want to as well, do you want to take that risk as the leader of a nation?

To make decisions that would lead to further war is the mark of a fool who does not deserve to lead a nation.

Well that's just a great fucking plan isn't it.
Just kill everyone who could possibly disagree with you, and their relatives just to make sure. If everybody's dead, there'll be no more wars, but that doesn't make it a goal we should look to achieve.

Who even is the enemy in this situation? every single Muslim? all overseas populations?
Because if it's actually the violent extremists, maybe try killing them instead.

Contrary to popular belief, most of us don't want to shoot civvies.

t. Panama and Somalia

Attached: headphones doggo.gif (300x169, 1011K)

War is already horrible enough, hence why there are multiple diplomatic approaches to avoid war, especially within the UN. The whole point of the Law of Armed Conflict is that, should a war happen, it is the least horrible it can be for everyone involved, hence why we cant use flamethrowers and chemical weapons which cause undue suffering. The only people who should be able to be killed, in an 'ideal war', are those who are armed combatants, a.k.a those with the capability to inflict harm on others as part of a uniformed force.

Funnily enough, of all the nations that fully subscribe to the articles of war, the US is the only one who doesnt. And thats because at the minute, theyre the big kid on the block. You can bet your bottom dollar that when the US is on the recieving end, theyll be screeching about LOAC to the heavens. If one day youre the 'uneducated goatfucker' and someones occupying your land, youll be hoping they follow LOAC and dont decide to do what OP thinks is such a good idea.

Because killing civilians is usually not conductive to villagers cooperation or completing their mission.

We actually dont like killing civilians
Now go somewhere else to source your vice article

>Funnily enough, of all the nations that fully subscribe to the articles of war, the US is the only one who doesnt.
Neither does Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, or any of the other forces we've fought in recent history, which is why we keep running into non-uniformed partisans who are selfish enough to use their civvies as camouflage. What these nations have taught us is that you can drag a bunch of people to the front line you would have otherwise conscripted into bottom tier soldiers and keep them as civilians, and the international community will cry foul at whoever bombed them even though the only difference is that in the former case they were wearing a uniform, while in the later case, they aren't.

You have to be above 18 to post here

>Occupying your land
>america

Hey buddy you do realize that would be almost geologically impossible

Tarrant was right that unarmed invaders are far more dangerous than armed invaders. You don't need to kill soldiers or topple a government. All you need to do is play the demographic game over time and gain enough social and political power to change the country. Illegal immigration is an invasion. They should be treated like invaders.

ITT: OP is a faggot that tries to make up an excuse for his desires to kill Muslims or trying to be a cringy edgelord

> geologically
I think you mean geographically. And the whole 'it could never happen to us so we dont care' approach is quite stupid.

Wait they aren't supposed to? Makes a lot more sense now

Thank fuck the media considers him old news now and only a few dedicated Jow Forumstards care about him.
Thank God that people like you and him will never be in a position of authority.

Well, they do. All the fucking time

Little boy I don't think that mommy would like it if she saw you on here.