# "War Crime" Question I Dare Anyone to Answer **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 11, 2012, 6:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/war-crime-question-i-dare-anyone-to-answer/609139 "2012-01-11T06:24:16Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2012, 3:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/war-crime-question-i-dare-anyone-to-answer/609139/21 "2012-01-11T15:30:34Z")
> [@firstfalseNero](#): > > Apparently it is a war crime to drip water down a prisoner’s throat (in the case of a certain U.S. facility located on Castro’s island, before returning him to his soccer practice). > But it was NOT a war crime to vaporize two entire cities filled with nothing but civilians days apart in 1945! > Seems the opposite should be true, but then I’m wrong about everything. The answer is simple. In war there are always different standards for what you can legitimately do to an active enemy in the field, and what you can do to a prisoner at your mercy. That does not necessarily mean the atomic bombing of Hiroshima was not a war crime, but it does mean that the question requires a fundamentally different analysis from that of whether waterboarding an “enemy combatant” is a war crime. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2012, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/war-crime-question-i-dare-anyone-to-answer/609139/22 "2012-01-11T15:34:19Z")
> [@firstfalseNero](#): > > before returning him to his soccer practice). There are prisoners who have been in the Guantanamo detention camp for a decade now. Most of the people taken there were eventually released but they spent years in captivity. If you’re implying that most of the prisoners were just picked up for an interrogation and released after a short stay, you’re wrong and I have no idea where you got that impression. Incidentally I think today is the 10th anniversary of the arrival of the first 20 prisoners at the Guantanamo facility. I’ll go waterboard a cake. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2012, 3:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/war-crime-question-i-dare-anyone-to-answer/609139/23 "2012-01-11T15:45:53Z")
> [@firstfalseNero](#): > > Apparently it is a war crime to drip water down a prisoner’s throat (in the case of a certain U.S. facility located on Castro’s island, before returning him to his soccer practice). > But it was NOT a war crime to vaporize two entire cities filled with nothing but civilians days apart in 1945! > Seems the opposite should be true, but then I’m wrong about everything. Apparently you can’t tell the difference between a question and a series of declarative statements. Here’s a clue-\> -\> -\> -\> -\> -\>You put one of these, “?”, at the end of a question. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2012, 3:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/war-crime-question-i-dare-anyone-to-answer/609139/24 "2012-01-11T15:49:26Z")
> [@firstfalseNero](#): > > Apparently it is a war crime to drip water down a prisoner’s throat (in the case of a certain U.S. facility located on Castro’s island, before returning him to his soccer practice). 1. Could you provide an example of a court deeming this to be a “war crime?” Probably not, so who says it’s a war crime? 2. Of course it’s true that targeting civilians with strategic bombing is an awful thing that the Allies did - and not just the atomic bombings, and not just the USA - and nobody was prosecuted for it. The fact that the Allies committed many war crimes and nobody went to jail for them is something that’s been discussed quite a lot. No one denies it. However, 3. It’s also true, as per BrainGlutton’s note, that there is a substantial difference, legally speaking, between military action taken inthe field and what you do to POWs. By international law and convention some people are \*hors de combat - and should not be harmed; POWs, the wounded, shipwrecked sailors, people bailing from stricken aircraft, and the like. A person at your mercy (a good phrase, BG) is not the same thing as a person in a combat zone. There has always been an allowance for SOME collateral civilian death as the result of military action, but killing and torturing defenceless people - civilians or not - is not considered legal by any civilized nation. Of course, that raises the question as to what constitutes appropriate care for avoiding civilian death. Certainly during World War II, the USAAF, RAF and RCAF deliberately targeted and killed civilians. The Luftwaffe did as well. The Soviets may have too; I’m not super familiar with their strategic bombing efforts. ---
**Author:** ![Frostillicus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e9bcb4/32.png) [@Frostillicus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frostillicus)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2012, 3:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/war-crime-question-i-dare-anyone-to-answer/609139/25 "2012-01-11T15:52:02Z")
> [@firstfalseNero](#): > > Seems the opposite should be true, but then I’m wrong about everything. This. ---
**Author:** ![PrettyVacant](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/49beb7/32.png) [@PrettyVacant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PrettyVacant)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2012, 3:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/war-crime-question-i-dare-anyone-to-answer/609139/26 "2012-01-11T15:53:15Z")
The modern concept of ‘war crimes’ didn’t really exist prior to 1945. You might want to talk about Kissenger and Laos though. ---
**Author:** ![Omg\_a\_Black\_Conservative](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/7ba0ec/32.png) [@Omg\_a\_Black\_Conservative](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Omg_a_Black_Conservative)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2012, 3:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/war-crime-question-i-dare-anyone-to-answer/609139/27 "2012-01-11T15:53:43Z")
> [@Frostillicus](#): > > This. “This” to which part? ---
**Author:** ![Acid\_Lamp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/d6d6ee/32.png) [@Acid\_Lamp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acid_Lamp)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2012, 3:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/war-crime-question-i-dare-anyone-to-answer/609139/28 "2012-01-11T15:57:35Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > Of course, that raises the question as to what constitutes appropriate care for avoiding civilian death. Certainly during World War II, the USAAF, RAF and RCAF deliberately targeted and killed civilians. The Luftwaffe did as well. The Soviets may have too; I’m not super familiar with their strategic bombing efforts. snip. Very true. WWII was also really the last theatre where soldiers were permitted to engage in behaviours like looting, beating prisoners, etc.. that would get you court-martialed in today’s military. Modern thought on rules of engagement didn’t really begin until after the end of the conflict. ---
**Author:** ![Mijin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mijin/32/9369_2.png) [@Mijin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mijin)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2012, 3:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/war-crime-question-i-dare-anyone-to-answer/609139/29 "2012-01-11T15:59:04Z")
I’m a bit less cynical than others in this thread. There have been a number of victors’ war crimes judged by the ICC. Unfortunately there has been a lack of will is prosecuting many of them, and the US is big enough to snub the whole thing with no repercussions. But it is not true that the victors get to define or pick war crimes. I also think the geneva conventions make sense (at least given the reality that humans are an aggressive and tribal species). The mistake some are making is imagining them as an agreement between the two parties at war – they aren’t, they are an agreement between a nation and the international community. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2012, 3:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/war-crime-question-i-dare-anyone-to-answer/609139/30 "2012-01-11T15:59:56Z")
The OP (and several other posters) seem to be confused about what a crime is. It’s not just something that’s bad. It’s something that’s illegal. Torturing prisoners is against the generally accepted rules of war. Bombing cities is not. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2012, 4:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/war-crime-question-i-dare-anyone-to-answer/609139/31 "2012-01-11T16:05:47Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > The OP (and several other posters) seem to be confused about what a crime is. It’s not just something that’s bad. It’s something that’s illegal. > > Torturing prisoners is against the generally accepted rules of war. Bombing cities is not. Yes, it is, if the intent is to deliberately target civilians. ---
**Author:** ![mlees](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba8739/32.png) [@mlees](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mlees)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2012, 4:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/war-crime-question-i-dare-anyone-to-answer/609139/32 "2012-01-11T16:07:35Z")
Unrestricted submarine warfare was “banned” by the Second London Naval Treaty, but during WW2, those restrictions were not adhered to by the warring powers. > **[Second London Naval Treaty](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_London_Naval_Treaty)** > > The Second London Naval Treaty was an international treaty signed as a result of the Second London Naval Disarmament Conference held in London, the United Kingdom. The conference started on 9 December 1935 and the treaty was signed by the participating nations on 25 March 1936. > The signatories were France, the United States, and most members of the British Commonwealth: Australia, Canada, India, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom (on behalf of itself and "all parts of the British Empire whic... > **[Karl Dönitz](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_D%C3%B6nitz)** > > World War II > Karl Dönitz (sometimes spelled Doenitz; German: \[ˈdøːnɪts\] (listen); 16 September 1891 – 24 December 1980) was a German admiral who briefly succeeded Adolf Hitler as head of state in May 1945, holding the position until the dissolution of the Flensburg Government following Germany's unconditional surrender to the Allies days later. As Supreme Commander of the Navy beginning in 1943, he played a major role in the naval history of World War II. > He began his career in the Imperial... Practically speaking, international agreements don’t have magical powers of enforcement. They only have power when there is a nation (or group of nations) that have the will and the power to enforce the statutes. No one has the interest or power to enforce the violations of the Second London Naval Treaty on the U.S. or Nimitz. A thousand years from now, assuming we still have a global civilization, will they look back at the 20th century wars like we view the Mongol invasions? “Meh. That’s what those unwashed barbarians did back then. \ We’re more superior now.” ---
**Author:** ![JBDivmstr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b4bc9f/32.png) [@JBDivmstr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JBDivmstr)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2012, 4:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/war-crime-question-i-dare-anyone-to-answer/609139/33 "2012-01-11T16:14:07Z")
If you _ **can** _ _ **catch** _ 'em, you _ **can’t** _ kill 'em. But if you _ **can’t** _ catch 'em, (or haven’t caught 'em _ **yet** _) then it’s _ **okay** _ to kill 'em. Works for me! 😃 (A little over-simplified, but close enough for government work.)😉 ---
**Author:** ![Sailboat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sailboat/32/461_2.png) [@Sailboat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sailboat)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2012, 4:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/war-crime-question-i-dare-anyone-to-answer/609139/34 "2012-01-11T16:15:12Z")
> [@What\_the](#): > > Waterboarding is only a war crime if it is considered torture. > > The Obama admin thinks it is … does that mean that future admins will? > > … or has some world government/entity that we bow to found it to be torture? Remember, all _previous_ American administrations _also_ considered it torture, including Republican ones. Even the Bush administration considered it torture – until they wanted to do it after 9/11. It’s not like Bush came into office and immediately instituted waterboarding. ---
**Author:** ![What\_the](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f4b2a3/32.png) [@What\_the](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/What_the)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2012, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/war-crime-question-i-dare-anyone-to-answer/609139/35 "2012-01-11T16:42:07Z")
> [@Sailboat](#): > > Remember, all _previous_ American administrations _also_ considered it torture, including Republican ones. Even the Bush administration considered it torture – until they wanted to do it after 9/11. It’s not like Bush came into office and immediately instituted waterboarding. I did not know that. Ignorance defeated… assuming you are correct. Spin perpetuated if you are not. ---
**Author:** ![Attack\_from\_the\_3rd\_dimension](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/b38774/32.png) [@Attack\_from\_the\_3rd\_dimension](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Attack_from_the_3rd_dimension)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2012, 8:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/war-crime-question-i-dare-anyone-to-answer/609139/36 "2012-01-11T20:09:28Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Funny, I predicted 2012. 😉 ARggh. Thanks. If the OP is near a major airport, we could probably get someone to drop by and waterboard him on an elective basis, just so he’s up to speed on what if feels like. ---
**Author:** ![Gary\_Robson](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gary_robson/32/3448_2.png) [@Gary\_Robson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gary_Robson)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2012, 8:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/war-crime-question-i-dare-anyone-to-answer/609139/37 "2012-01-11T20:13:12Z")
> [@Acid\_Lamp](#): > > I suggest that anyone that has not been waterboarded should keep their mouths firmly shut on whether or not they feel it is torture. How about an exception for someone who has [waterboarded himself](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=448717)? Anyone with an opinion waterboarding who hasn’t read **Scylla** ’s thread should go read it now. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2012, 8:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/war-crime-question-i-dare-anyone-to-answer/609139/38 "2012-01-11T20:18:16Z")
> [@What\_the](#): > > Waterboarding is only a war crime if it is considered torture. > > The Obama admin thinks it is … does that mean that future admins will? > > … or has some world government/entity that we bow to found it to be torture? [Probably the latter](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterboarding#International_law) **(should** be the latter, certainly); but it appears nobody has yet made a binding definitive ruling; but every international body that has looked at the question says yes. > [@](#): > > **International law** > > All nations that are signatory to the United Nations Convention Against Torture have agreed they are subject to the explicit prohibition on torture under any condition. This was affirmed by Saadi v. Italy in which the European Court of Human Rights, on 28 February 2008, upheld the absolute nature of the torture ban by ruling that international law permits no exceptions to it.[183][184] The treaty states “No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture”.[185] Additionally, signatories of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights are bound to Article 5, which states, “No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment”.[186] Many signatories of the convention have made specific declarations and reservations regarding the interpretation of the term “torture” and restricted the jurisdiction of its enforcement.[187] However, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Louise Arbour, stated on the subject “I would have no problems with describing this practice as falling under the prohibition of torture”, and that violators of the UN Convention Against Torture should be prosecuted under the principle of universal jurisdiction.[188] > > Bent Sørensen, Senior Medical Consultant to the International Rehabilitation Council for Torture Victims and former member of the United Nations Committee Against Torture has said: > > > [@](#): > > > > It’s a clear-cut case: Waterboarding can without any reservation be labeled as torture. It fulfils all of the four central criteria that according to the United Nations Convention Against Torture (UNCAT) defines an act of torture. First, when water is forced into your lungs in this fashion, in addition to the pain you are likely to experience an immediate and extreme fear of death. You may even suffer a heart attack from the stress or damage to the lungs and brain from inhalation of water and oxygen deprivation. In other words there is no doubt that waterboarding causes severe physical and/or mental suffering– one central element in the UNCAT’s definition of torture. In addition the CIA’s waterboarding clearly fulfills the three additional definition criteria stated in the Convention for a deed to be labeled torture, since it is 1) done intentionally, 2) for a specific purpose and 3) by a representative of a state– in this case the US.[189] > > Lt. Gen. Michael D. Maples, the director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, concurred by stating, in a hearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee, that he believes waterboarding violates Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions.[190] > > In a review of The Dark Side: The Inside Story of How the War on Terror Turned Into a War on American Ideals, by Jane Mayer, The New York Times reported on 11 July 2008, that “Red Cross investigators concluded last year in a secret report that the Central Intelligence Agency’s interrogation methods for high-level Qaeda prisoners constituted torture and could make the Bush administration officials who approved them guilty of war crimes”,[191] that the techniques applied to Abu Zubaydah were “categorically” torture,[191] and that Abu Zubaydah had told investigators that, contrary to what had been revealed previously, “he had been waterboarded at least 10 times in a single week and as many as three times in a day”.[191] > > Shortly before the end of Bush’s second term newsmedia in other countries were opining that under the United Nations Convention Against Torture the U.S. is obligated to hold those responsible to account under criminal law.[192][193] > > The United Nations Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment– Professor Manfred Nowak– on 20 January 2009, remarked on German television that, following the inauguration of Barack Obama as new President, George W. Bush has lost his head of state immunity and under international law the U.S. is now mandated to start criminal proceedings against all those involved in violations of the UN Convention Against Torture.[194][195] Law professor Dietmar Herz explained Novak’s comments by saying that under U.S. and international law former President Bush is criminally responsible for adopting torture as interrogation tool.[194][195] ---
**Author:** ![Acid\_Lamp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/d6d6ee/32.png) [@Acid\_Lamp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acid_Lamp)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2012, 9:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/war-crime-question-i-dare-anyone-to-answer/609139/39 "2012-01-11T21:02:51Z")
[quote=“Gary “Wombat” Robson, post:37, topic:609139”] How about an exception for someone who has [waterboarded himself](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=448717)? Anyone with an opinion waterboarding who hasn’t read **Scylla** ’s thread should go read it now. [/QUOTE] Heh exception made. I can’t even begin to _imagine_ doing that yourself…I’d take the tear gas chamber a hundred times over rather than be waterboarded even once again. ---
**Author:** ![Ramira](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ramira/32/344_2.png) [@Ramira](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ramira)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2012, 9:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/war-crime-question-i-dare-anyone-to-answer/609139/40 "2012-01-11T21:18:20Z")
> [@What\_the](#): > > I did not know that. Ignorance defeated… assuming you are correct. Spin perpetuated if you are not. You Americans felt it was torture when done on your soldiers in Vietnam. And to the credit of the Americans, according to this new article, punished it as torture when done by own soldiers, even back to the conquest of the Philippines ([History of an Interrogation Technique: Water Boarding - ABC News](http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/Investigation/story?id=1356870#.Tw37sflbXxM)) > [@](#): > > Water boarding was designated as illegal by U.S. generals in Vietnam 40 years ago. A photograph that appeared in The Washington Post of a U.S. soldier involved in water boarding a North Vietnamese prisoner in 1968 led to that soldier’s severe punishment. > “The soldier who participated in water torture in January 1968 was court-martialed within one month after the photos appeared in The Washington Post, and he was drummed out of the Army,” recounted Darius Rejali, a political science professor at Reed College. > Earlier in 1901, the United States had taken a similar stand against water boarding during the Spanish-American War when an Army major was sentenced to 10 years of hard labor for water boarding an insurgent in the Philippines. > “Even when you’re fighting against belligerents who don’t respect the laws of war, we are obliged to hold the laws of war,” said Rejali. “And water torture is torture.” It is strange revisionism, this doubts of water boarding as torture. And it is very sad statement to mentality. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/war-crime-question-i-dare-anyone-to-answer/609139.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/war-crime-question-i-dare-anyone-to-answer/609139.md?page=3)