It’s war. Your on a mission where taking a prisoner with you just isn’t feasable but he has surrendered. Perhaps your one against one but he had no weapon or your on a stealth mission where bringing along a prisoner would jeopardize your life. What does the Geneva Convention or any other convention say is the proper course of action?
He is the enemy. kill him/her.
Simple.
Even more simple, Booker57, is the charge under the UCMJ (this is assuming a US military member committing that crime) for the murder you just described.
Lawrence of Arabia sliced open the soles of the prisoner’s feet, so he wouldn’t be able to get back to warn anyone until Lawrence & Co. were safely out of there. If I recall, this was like a 13 year-old boy.
On the other hand, this was before the Geneva Convention.
Throw a ball in the woods and tell him to fetch 
Assuming anybody finds out.
Unfortunately, the Geneva Convention, at that point, assumes that you have to let him go. The only alternative is to shoot him, which is against the UCMJ (and trust me on this; I’ve had a number of classes on it.)
My best make of the situation would be to tie him up and leave him. It’s a gray area.
It’s OK to tie the shmuck up and let him/her die of hunger/thirst/exposure (slow and painful), but illegal to put a bullet through his/her head (instant, painless (allegedly))?
I love the concept of “humane warfare” :rolleyes:
Most people, when tied up, eventually are able to squeeze out of their bonds, happyheathen, especially if that is the intent of the captor.
Was the scene with the prisoners in the second episode of Band of Brothers based on a true story? I remember that one of the Airborne guys starts chatting with a German-American Nazi soldier, walks off, and then hears all of the prisoners being machine-gunned.
In Saving Private Ryan, they just let the guy go. Of course, they met up with him later.
When you start having rules in warfare, it sort of defeates the purpose.
He was not a civilian, he was the enemy. You kill the enemy. Any way, at any time. Play to win or get out of the game.
Yeah! Let’s bring back mustard gas and serrated bayonets!
You seem to be missing the point, Booker57. The question is not what you would do or what you think others should do. The question is what the rules of warfare demand. Whether you believe such rules ought to exist is a matter to be taken up in Great Debates, not General Questions.
Would anyone find out though, if you killed a prisoner in a war? How hard would it be to claim that they weren’t a prisoner, or were trying to escape, etc?
The question is “what are you supposed to do?” Your “supposed” to not kill them.
If the question was what are you “GOING” to do…I would think killing them is the more often used act.
Talk to any combat vet and ask them what really happened…I bet you’d find yourself face to face with a lot of “war-criminals”
I well remember, word for word, the lecture by an excited instructor in my U.S. Army basic training:
Maybe that’s one of the reasons I didn’t re-enlist.
During the Gulf War, a friend of mine had this problem with Iraqi soldiers. They were a convoy of fuel tankers heading to the front, supplying armored vehicles. Starving groups of unarmed Iraqis soldiers would constantly try to wave them down and surrender. The convoy was in no position to stop and take prisoners. They had to get the fuel they carried to the front so the offensive could keep moving. So the Americans would throw food and water out to the Iraqis and just wave them to keep going toward the American lines.
My friend always wondered if feeding the Iraqis MREs would constitute a war crime. Apperently the Chicken Royal was none too tasty, so naturally those would be the first packets tossed to the Iraqis.
My uncle, a WWII vet, said that in the last days of the war against Germany, they simply disarmed the prisoners, took away their helmets, and told them to march themselves to the rear and surrender again to whoever would take them. The orders he had (he was in the Third Army) were to advance as quickly as possible. My uncle said that it was not uncommon to find entire German units simply marching for days behind our lines looking for whoever would take them prisoner in a more formal manner. The Americans sometimes simply stopped these groups and used them for whatever labor they needed, like loading trucks or clearing debris from a road, feed them, and tell them to keep marching to the rear. His take was that enemy soldiers over the age of 30 or so would be eager to surrender, those under the ago of 30 would be more likely to fight and so would not become prisoners anyway. His experience was that once they decided to surrender, they did not try to escape very much - the Nazis were likely to treat them harshly for having surrendered in the first place, and they were afraid of our retaliation if they were captured again.
I sometimes thought about asking the same question, but contrarily to bibliophage, my question wasn’t : “what are the soldiers supposed to do according the international conventions”, not even “what do they actually do?” but : “what are they instructed to do?”.
Here, the military (in particular the conscripts) had some kind of course about the Geneva convention, etc…And I assume it’s the same in most western armies. But What are people who are the most likely to find themselves in such a situation actually instructed to do? I’m thinking in particular to soldiers in elite units, paratroopers, special forces, etc… which are likely to be send in hot spot, behind the ennemy lines,…as opposed to say, your avarage conscript tank gunner in the army.
I began to wonder about that after reading reports about the behavior of elite Tsahal units who reportedly were instructed to kill ennemies surrendering or wounded. Only reading these report I realized that most probably nobody would tell soldiers sent for some special missions to free ennemies who could report their presence, let alone forget about the mission to bring back the prisonners safely, Geneva convention notwithstanding.
So, does anybody has a clue about what these guys are actually instructed to do? I don’t have much doubt about the answer, but still I thought I would ask…