• 0 Posts
  • 21 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: August 14th, 2023

help-circle














  • I’m an Australian.

    In the first world war the Australian’s had an iron clad rule, one well known to the Germans. If Australians managed to reach the enemy’s trenches in an assault, they refused to accept a machine gunner’s surrender.

    You don’t get to shoot down your opponents from relative safety and then expect mercy at the very end. Machine Gunners were an elite force of the German Army. They wore special patches denoting their status. That is, the gunner’s not facing the Australian lines. Those machine gunners tended not to wear their status on their uniform. They tended not to survive capture if they did.

    There was an element of hypocrisy in all this too. The Australians also had machine gun battalions. But the difference was that we accepted the rules. Perhaps if drone operators started getting shot out of hand on capture it wouldn’t be so bad? Seems reasonable to me.






  • Thank you for your thoughtful question.

    My response was probably very emotional in that I took the infantry role very personally. There is a million ways for a grunt to get taken out in battle. However, mostly each combatant takes a measure of risk - including pilots and artillerymen. In the case of drone operators you could be blown up by some cunt sitting in his pajamas taking no personal risk in the fight.

    Don’t bother arguing that this also can happen in a score of different scenarios - I get it. This is an emotional reaction, but feel the same as for IEDs. Australia banned the use of landmines under the Ottawa Treaty for this reason in 1999.

    I don’t expect much support for this view, and that’s cool. It just seems cowardly.