What are your thoughts on killing a surrendering enemy or POW

Fascists and islamofascists on soil besides their own - I'd say shoot without a second thought, but they may have useful intel. Get it out of them, then decide.

Just put them in a latex detainment suit or an official POW bunny suit. Come on Jow Forums, we've had this discussion before.

Attached: k warcrime suits temp.png (2096x4196, 3.42M)

The state can't own property because it is illegitimate. Commies aren't people because their fundamental political beliefs violate the NAP and renders their rights forfeit. Bad picture.

dude epic fashwave bro so epic

>>>/Reddit/

>disliking bootlickers is reddit
sir, Jow Forums is to the right

Define commie.
Somebody who doesnt want his country to be slave to wallstreet?

You took up arms against me, and the only reason I am not dead at your hand is because in that moment, I was better than you. You’d kill me, given the chance, so why on earth would I spare you?

but what if he wouldnt?

Honestly if there weren’t the resources to detain them and they hadn’t been killing prisoners or civilians themselves I’d probably have them form two lines depending on which hand they wanted to loose some fingers from and turn them loose. Right hand is guaranteed to loose trigger finger, but more fingers removed from left hands. It would probably be seen as barbaric by anyone who caught wind of it later but I think anyone in the shit would see it as a pretty fair deal given the circumstances.

I really don’t think you should be killing prisoners unless the other guys have been doing the same or worse, and shooting surrendering enemies based on their ideology as opposed to their action only strengthens the beliefs and resolve to fight harder.

Correct line of questioning

The nazis would have gassed you, you're most likely some mutt inbred thats uneducated and out of shape, literal untermensch yet you delude yourself that they would have accepted you. Keep coping

not the guy you're replying to but do you really think people were consistently 100% english/german/french/etc before the late 20th century? I'm not justifying blatant racemixing but the one drop rule literally disqualifying 99% of you stormfags

Americans and Asians - Kill on sight
Vietnamese and Euros - take as PoWs
Africans - release

Would only take White PoWs.

Attached: ADGZ_armoured_car.jpg (966x608, 116K)

State planning and control of the economy, no private property.

Fighting against wealth manipulators and usserers isn't communism, it's patriotism.

ask them who is best girl
if they say Kirino, they get to live

Wouldn’t do it. I’m a good person

If it ain't white, it ain't right.

what is the logic behind this? i'm curious.

Fpbp

Brown or black gets shot on sight
Anything on the left of Mussolini gets the bullet too

>this fuckin thread

uncivilized and unprofessional.

Attached: 1200px-Battle-of-Fontenoy.jpg (1200x777, 151K)

The Selous scouts would like a word with you.

>shuffle the fuck off this mortal coil

Depends on what kind of conflict

>If its a WWI situation where the Brits and the Germans really didn't have a problem with each other it was outside factors
No

>If its a direct conflict like Nam or the Middle East
If I felt like it yes

Attached: 1533505848709.gif (499x408, 446K)

No, because I have standards

Depends on who's surrendering. Are they fanatics that would strap explosives to themselves? Are they conscripts with poor morale that don't want any part of the conflict? Is it someone who just sawed your buddy in half with an MG then threw his hands up? Hell, do you have orders to not take prisoners? It's should be a contextual thing that gets decided there and then, not a "if they're x or y, they die".
All y'all talking about killing every communist you see edit even the Soviets accepted German prisoners at Stalingrad.

>even the Soviets accepted German prisoners at Stalingrad
As livestock.

America accepted Vietnamese as prisoners and defectors. Many of them were very helpful.
But yeah, the Soviets had every right to massacre the Germans surrendering at Stalingrad but they didn't. Whether they accepted prisoners to be decent or to net slave workers is another topic.

The main reason you want to take prisoners (and make it known that they are treated okay) is that it makes the next group you fight more likely surrender. If you have a reputation for killing those who surrender, expect them to fight to the death.

This. Someone post that copypasta.

kill socialist and communists of all stripes on site, yes that includes national socialists. Also religious fanatics are too dangerous to keep around so they get it as well.

Exactly. Looks at how hard of a time the Americans had in the Pacific with getting the Japanese to surrender, the Japanese thought every country treated PoWs like they did. They instilled that idea into their soldiers and into the populations of the home islands and their outposts and so there was mass suicides and a conviction to fight to the end if the invasion to Japan happened.

The contrast to that would be the Eastern Front where many Germans wisely kept fighting until they either died or could find a chance to surrender to the Western Allies. The fervent Nazis fought to the death or chose suicide, but other soldiers did not entirely dismiss surrender as long as it was to the right enemy. But that vengeful Soviet treatment was spawned by how the Germans treated the Soviets (and other others) when they moved East in 1939-41. Knowing what would happen, if I were a German soldier at the end, I probably wouldn't be eager to throw my hands up if I was fighting in Berlin.

Now we're talking

>literal homosexual

This guy knows what’s up

>Fighting against wealth manipulators and usserers isn't communism, it's patriotism.
you sound you’d get along well with old timey american socialists like deleon. fucking statists like any (((communist))) dictatorship tho, I wouldn’t bat an eye for. easy to see right through their red charade it’s not freedom from companies owning everything it’s just one company owning everything and calling itself a government

Go ahead, call the Hague. They can't unfuck you.

I can probably imagine a scenario, a la the pacific campaign or 'Nam where the enemy has fought to the last and in the heat of the moment might summarily execute them as retribution because fuck them should've quit sooner.

Other than that, send them back to S2 or whoever and let them deal with it.

Probably woudln't do that sort of thing myself. I'd try to let them know in a way they understand I'm going to hurt them significantly if they don't do what I say, and it's going to be a lot worse if they want to die. I probably won't enjoy trying to beat them in compliance but if they don't comply I'm going to use the minimum amount of fuck you I possibly can. Worse people have got by with a bit more than that. Might not work and a bit more fuck you might be required here or there.

>What are your thoughts on killing a surrendering enemy or POW

Combative insurgents are not considered soldiers or prisoners. They are all criminals that are to be handed to the local authorities. Capital punishment is to be expected, you can help by applying such sentencing.

The words of an officer is not the actions of the enlisted.

It's a high risk situation once violence has escalated. Once war loses principle, it can no longer be moral.

The only crime in war is to lose. Going against the will of the state already makes you a criminal. You are more likely to be hung as a deserter after being killed as a prisoner.

There is a reason why we now cycle out personnel every 6 months, so the next unit formed that receives surrendering combatants don't immediately execute them.

Attached: 1487144315374.jpg (480x560, 54K)

There are no hostages, only acceptable losses.

Attached: 5id8jvwgtj231.jpg (1218x1232, 176K)

It's relevant for the race war that is coming

The logic is that Americans and "Asians" (Guessing likely Chinese and/or Jap) fight to the death and will actively cause trouble while POWs while Euros collab too damn easy, vietnamese will fight hard but unlikely to cause as much trouble once broken and Africans when the army breaks down cause more trouble for their own side then the enemy or theirs some rape jokes hidden in that post either or both

Attached: 2k22-chan.png (600x358, 321K)

>unless the other guys have been doing the same or worse
Pretty much what happens in the field anyway, especially considering what those ISIS retards did and how giddy they were about their torture, enslavement en genocide practices. Let them surrender and hose down their POW columns or indiscriminately bomb their any given avenues of escape.

yeah, i'm sure cutting their fingers off isn't going to make them want to rat on you twice as much as they already did.

The whole idea that ww2 was about race is stupid. The allies were more and equally racists. They has segregated units. Also the allies were all white nations with some forgone soilders. The axes where made up of Italians and Asia s. Italians were not considered white back then

killing only allowed if they are german

baciami il culo

based and harris pilled

depends how many of my friends died in the fight before the enemy surrendered

I would have to inspect their penis before I make that decision

To be fair a loy of the Japanese used dirty "fake surrender" tricks so that's another reason that the US started shooting pows.

Saying everyone needs to be equal is ridiculous, saying that the extremely competent can help support those who can't isn't unreasonable. The central point there is that everyone needs to want to improve the world around them.

It's great killing prisoners if you want to encourage the rest of that nations armed forces to fight to the death once the word spreads.

It is dishonorable and puts shame on yourself, your nation, and family.

No, only nigger countries let their soldiers do that.

Attached: 1542027624652.png (500x481, 286K)

>What are your thoughts on killing a surrendering enemy or POW
Im not killing (white) surrendering enemys. Sure, i carry a device to measure up the nose length.

Attached: gfj.jpg (1426x754, 219K)

>shitty lefty wall of text meme
lmao bottom text

You're thinking of fascists

You don't have any accomplishments in life, do you? So, being white's the only thing for you.

>Define commie.
someone who answers their own questions right after asking them?

>No, only nigger countries let their soldiers do that.
This

youtu.be/5NPBIwQyPWE

Attached: LiveLeak-dot-com-742_1499822735-Paste71220170_1499822734.jpg (600x466, 215K)

one of the main problems with getting the japs to surrender was that way that you ask them.
The western notion is "you got beat, you are going to get killed surrender and save your self, this war isn't worth it, think about your own life first, ect"
This didn't take with japs.
If you rephrase it in keeping whit what they want to hear "you fought well, you did your duty, you gave your sacrifice, ect and now this "insert slightly higher rank than the guy you think is leading them" orders you to stand down or be attacked" You get a lot better results.

The same goes for many other cultures/civilization. The have their own idea of what it takes to surrender with honor and what would grantee good treatment as a POW.

You can't put yourself in their shoes? What if they just want to get through the war and get back to their family too?

why release the nogs?
The are a bigger danger to you once let loose unarmed behind your lines than armed and in fornt of you

You don't do it because if you do the enemy will and you'll just steel the resolve of your enemies. We nuked Japan because they wouldn't surrender, if we couldn't use the atom bomb it would have been a much bloodier affair.

because if you don't have the outlet of surrendering when things go bad.
You can only fight to the bitter end. And even if things are going bad enough for them to surrender. They might very well cause a few casualties on your side while being taken out.

This.
What did Sun Tzu say about backing your own army into a corner? Something along the lines that they'll fight better because they must.

Spared:
>Europeans (not the new ones lol)
>Soldiers from any Anglo sphere country

Killed:
>Niggers
>Kikes
>Japs, Chinks and Kongs
>'Soldier of any non-white countries'

Attached: tenor (2).gif (360x198, 1.61M)

Total waste of resources and time, diminishing the ability to wage proper war.
If you're going to take prisoners, it must be for some purpose other than just securing, housing and feeding them to be released at a later time, because someone "feels bad" about taking life.

Attached: goat.jpg (634x523, 55K)

M'pow

Stupid. Not only do you bring political pressure down on you, while knowing war is only an apparatus of politics, but it disincentivises enemy combatants to surrender. Look at how quick the psyops campaign as well as shock and awe caused the Iraqi Army to fold in Desert Storm, or even OIF.

That and, as a ground pounder, you would like the option to say fuck it instead of dying face down in some god-forsaken fuckhole to die for cushy generals vying for prestige from their armchairs.

Attached: 1519893257911.jpg (620x746, 183K)

Treat them how you'd want to be treated if it's normal honorable combatants in an organized military. Obviously they were trying to kill you 10 minutes ago, but you were trying to do the same to them. If the tables were reversed, you'd probably appreciate not being killed.
Also, I'd exclude hardcore communists and religious fanatics etc because ideology/anger trumps all and they'll stab you in the back given a chance.

Then you've already decided your opinion you stupid nigger, why are you fishing for ours? You want some confirmation or something? Just because your daddy and Uncle hug you in funny places doesnt mean we want to.

Friendly reminder libertarians aren't people either.

based
i'd make an exception for the japs though
i really like their children's cartoons

completely out of the question, if they surrendered you're responsible for keeping them in humane as possible conditions as POWs
if I was a commander and one of my soldiers would kill a surrendering enemy I'd have them put against a wall and executed

What do you do with the true believers? The people who will try to cut your throat with a spork the second you let your guard down?
You would imprison and release a rabid dog?

>Muh gassing
>Muh naziiiiiissss

You know how I can tell you're swedish?

You just send them to a black or grey site out of US civilian jurisdiction and let them rot. OR, unofficially hand them over to the ISF or ANA, that seemed to work because they seem to have a knack for knowing where the best ditches are.

Given how the Soviets behaved only a fucking retard would have ever surrendered to them.

What about extremists who adhere to non-religious ideologies?
ie. raging antifa commies

Your getting shot by your own men then. Pretty boy shit like this is why Nam had so many frags.

>He thinks he can put his own men against the wall but his men can't shoot the enemy under X conditions

You have to be 18 to post here.

they won't be surrendering in the first place

Sometimes people don't intend on surrendering, but they are captured nonetheless.

They're literally a nothing boogeyman, and the latest generation of faggy college activists.