Meanwhile, in Germany...

[Alyrium Denryle]

Fuck it. We have lawyers and historians in here, and I am not inclined to trust my knowledge of the history of interpretation and enforcement of this pact other than to say that in practice, it has been worth less than the paper the certified copies have been printed on.

ARTICLE I

The High Contracting Parties solemly declare in the names of their respective peoples that they condemn recourse to war for the solution of international controversies, and renounce it, as an instrument of national policy in their relations with one another.

ARTICLE II

The High Contracting Parties agree that the settlement or solution of all disputes or conflicts of whatever nature or of whatever origin they may be, which may arise among them, shall never be sought except by pacific means.

[Aaron MkII]

So my nation is not allowed to defend itself? That's nice to know.

[Skgoa]

The Germans appear to be talking small to justify not doing anything.

No. We don't celebrate war because *drumroll* WE FUCKING HATE WAR. The government sends soldiers away to an illegal/unconstitutional occupation to suck the US president's cock. That doesn't mean I have to be grateful for that. Actually, it means that everyone who willfully participates in this deserves to be spat in the face and/or be thrown in prison. The "I was only following orders" defense ended with the Nürnberg trials. Escpecially so when it's a well-payed job they themselves chose. I wonder if people who have to live their whole life in war regions are more scarred from the experience or less than the carreer soldiers that get to leave after a couple of months.

So, you feel that US soldiers are operating being fully aware that the war is illegal (even though that issue is debated inside the security council). Yet, even though the security council is debating this a US soldier is suppose to have clarity above these people and conclude that the war is illegal. Fascinating. I love the mindset that the subordinates are held to higher standard then their leaders and expected to know more than their leaders. Do you apply this logic to every aspect of your life?

OK you fucking idiot:
1) Funny how everything is about the US, even when we are in a thread that has "Germany" in the title and when I am answering a post that has "Germany" right there in the quote.
2) I haven't written that it's less illegal for (german) politicians to wage an offensive war. In fact, conspiracy to prepare an offensive war is illegal, too.
3) Everyone has to make their own choices and stand for them. If you volunteer to go to a foreign country to wage war*, than you are a collosal douche-bag in the least. No debate over wether this war or that war is sanctioned by the UN can change that.

* Side note for you mouth-breathing 'Murrrikan: Germany doesn't deploy her soldiers against their will and there are a lot of types of people in the army (and even more so in navy and air force) that simply will never be deployed. So there really is no excuse. If you are a german soldier on a deployment, you have spent years working towards that, you knew exactly what you got into.

[thejester]

Wait, isn't Afghanistan 'legally' self-defence through some interpretation of NATO?

[Skgoa]

Unfortunately, we will most probably never have a definitive answer to that, since federal prosecutors had already refused to investigate the lead-up to the Kosovo war. I am of the opinion that a single (or low number of) person's attack on a nation is not the same as the person's government attacking that nation. I.e. it's not a case-of-defense and thus illegal under german law.

Though the original statement, that people who volunteer to wage an offensive war deserve to be send to prison, isn't affected by that. The notion that this scum should be venerated is vile, to say the least.
edit: And just to make this abundantly clear: I do include Chancellor Schröder and Minister Fischer in this.

[Kamakazie Sith]

OK you fucking idiot:
1) Funny how everything is about the US, even when we are in a thread that has "Germany" in the title and when I am answering a post that has "Germany" right there in the quote.

You're the one that brought the US into this. Not me. "The government sends soldiers away to an illegal/unconstitutional occupation to suck the US president's cock"

2) I haven't written that it's less illegal for (german) politicians to wage an offensive war. In fact, conspiracy to prepare an offensive war is illegal, too.

I haven't said it was. My point is that when you say "Actually, it means that everyone who willfully participates in this deserves to be spat in the face and/or be thrown in prison." you're failing to address the totality of the situation.

3) Everyone has to make their own choices and stand for them. If you volunteer to go to a foreign country to wage war*, than you are a collosal douche-bag in the least. No debate over wether this war or that war is sanctioned by the UN can change that.

Soldiers volunteer to join. That's the only volunteer point. After that you are legally obligated to follow orders. There is no choice at that point unless you're given an order that is clearly illegal like shooting unarmed civilians.

* Side note for you mouth-breathing 'Murrrikan: Germany doesn't deploy her soldiers against their will and there are a lot of types of people in the army (and even more so in navy and air force) that simply will never be deployed. So there really is no excuse. If you are a german soldier on a deployment, you have spent years working towards that, you knew exactly what you got into.

Side note to you german elitist pig. If your soldiers were given an order...they would follow it against their will or not. Stop living in make believe land. Holding them, or any other soldier accountable for law violations when the fucking security council is debating on the issue is fucking stupid.

[D.Turtle]

Soldiers volunteer to join. That's the only volunteer point. After that you are legally obligated to follow orders. There is no choice at that point unless you're given an order that is clearly illegal like shooting unarmed civilians.

Wrong. You can refuse to go on foreign commitments. It will obviously hurt your career a lot, but you don't have to go if you don't want to.

Side note to you german elitist pig. If your soldiers were given an order...they would follow it against their will or not. Stop living in make believe land. Holding them, or any other soldier accountable for law violations when the fucking security council is debating on the issue is fucking stupid.

Wrong again. German soldiers not only have the possibility to ignore illegal orders - and waging offensive war is illegal - they have a duty to do such. However, AFAIK, all law suits against the wars in Kosovo and Afghanistan were won by the government side, which makes them legal - even if people like Skgoa are of other opinion.

[Simon_Jester]

If Skgoa thinks that it is a violation of German law for German soldiers to fight outside the borders of Germany, and the German court system thinks it isn't... I'm taking the court's word for it.

There's pacifism and then there's twisting the facts.

[Aaron MkII]

Wait, isn't Afghanistan 'legally' self-defence through some interpretation of NATO?

Article 5 iirc in the NATO charter allows for member nations to come to the aid of an attacked member, which was invoked after 9/11.

That said, it doesn't mean we have to help for ten years, and we should have bogged off after it became obvious that no one knew what the fuck they were doing. That's the sticking point in all this, buffoonery, not legality.

[Simon_Jester]

See, now that I can work with. "We should have gone home when we realized you didn't know what you were doing and didn't really have a plan for ending the war" is pretty sensible.

But people who are so determined to interpret the national and international law codes to define war as illegal that they ignore their own courts are taking a principle too far.

[Skgoa]

OK you fucking idiot:
1) Funny how everything is about the US, even when we are in a thread that has "Germany" in the title and when I am answering a post that has "Germany" right there in the quote.

You're the one that brought the US into this. Not me. "The government sends soldiers away to an illegal/unconstitutional occupation to suck the US president's cock"

Are you really that stupid? Yeah, I'm not even going to read the rest of that post...

[Thanas]

What did Vietnam have to do with 'nationalism'?

Well, considering that the war seems to be portrayed as "US gets stuck due to unproven fear of Communist taking over former allied colonies" I'd say it was based on more of a nationalistic reflex aka "we cannot let those damned commies take over". But if you disagree, fine - I want no argument on this matter especially as it in no way or form impacts my larger point.

[Kamakazie Sith]

Are you really that stupid? Yeah, I'm not even going to read the rest of that post...

You're striking me as really stupid yourself but I chalk it up to you just being very passionate. The soldiers being US or not doesn't actually matter. What matters is the fact that there is debate among the higher levels of leadership. You call the occupation illegal/unconstitutional. However, the security council is in debate over that. So, when you make statements suggesting that all the soldiers who participate deserve to be spat on or thrown in prison you ignore the totality of what is actually going on and is absolutely unreasonable.

[Kamakazie Sith]

Wrong. You can refuse to go on foreign commitments. It will obviously hurt your career a lot, but you don't have to go if you don't want to.

I think I'll need a bit more than your say so. You're basically telling me that German soldiers can disobey orders and the only consequence will be damage to their career?

Wrong again. German soldiers not only have the possibility to ignore illegal orders - and waging offensive war is illegal - they have a duty to do such. However, AFAIK, all law suits against the wars in Kosovo and Afghanistan were won by the government side, which makes them legal - even if people like Skgoa are of other opinion.

I didn't think I had to specify that the orders would have to be legal. Did your soldiers refuse to deploy to Kosovo or Afghanistan until after the courts decided it was legal?

[thejester]

You're misunderstanding him dude. Soldiers are given a choice regarding overseas deployment. Although it's not regulated in the same way, unofficially the same thing happened in Australia in 1999 before the Timor deployment.

[D.Turtle]

I think I'll need a bit more than your say so. You're basically telling me that German soldiers can disobey orders and the only consequence will be damage to their career?

As thejester pointed out: Soldiers are given a choice with regards to overseas deployments. In my unit, we had a Hauptfeldwebel refuse to go on deployment, for example. It hurt is career, but thats it.

I didn't think I had to specify that the orders would have to be legal. Did your soldiers refuse to deploy to Kosovo or Afghanistan until after the courts decided it was legal?

AFAIK, the fact that there were severe reservations about the legality of the deployments to Kosovo or Afghanistan was and is reason enough to refuse to be deployed to these areas. In general, if a soldier can make a reasonable case that doing a certain job, or following certain orders, goes against his conscience, then they have the right (and even the duty) to refuse to do that job or follow those orders. A soldier can't be punished for doing that. Instead the Bundeswehr has to give that soldier the possibility of being assigned a different job within the Bundeswehr which is not in conflict with his conscience.

As an example, there was a Major who refused to work on certain software, as it could support the US deployment in Iraq. There was also a Lieutenant-Colonel who requested transfer to another assignment, as he had severe reservations about supporting the commitment of Tornados to Afghanistan.

Both of these were deemed acceptable (after several court cases), because of the freedom of conscience of soldiers.

[Thanas]

Or, in a more recent cases, several military doctors and medics won the right to refuse deployment to Afghanistan because they feared that the nature of guerilla warfare would necessitate them picking up a gun to defend themselves. The case was based on the fact that we have now started arming our medics (a violation of the Geneva convention) when they accompany patrols in those areas assigned to us.

[Kamakazie Sith]

I think I'll need a bit more than your say so. You're basically telling me that German soldiers can disobey orders and the only consequence will be damage to their career?

As thejester pointed out: Soldiers are given a choice with regards to overseas deployments. In my unit, we had a Hauptfeldwebel refuse to go on deployment, for example. It hurt is career, but thats it.

I didn't think I had to specify that the orders would have to be legal. Did your soldiers refuse to deploy to Kosovo or Afghanistan until after the courts decided it was legal?

AFAIK, the fact that there were severe reservations about the legality of the deployments to Kosovo or Afghanistan was and is reason enough to refuse to be deployed to these areas. In general, if a soldier can make a reasonable case that doing a certain job, or following certain orders, goes against his conscience, then they have the right (and even the duty) to refuse to do that job or follow those orders. A soldier can't be punished for doing that. Instead the Bundeswehr has to give that soldier the possibility of being assigned a different job within the Bundeswehr which is not in conflict with his conscience.

As an example, there was a Major who refused to work on certain software, as it could support the US deployment in Iraq. There was also a Lieutenant-Colonel who requested transfer to another assignment, as he had severe reservations about supporting the commitment of Tornados to Afghanistan.

Both of these were deemed acceptable (after several court cases), because of the freedom of conscience of soldiers.

Alright. I concede.

Or, in a more recent cases, several military doctors and medics won the right to refuse deployment to Afghanistan because they feared that the nature of guerilla warfare would necessitate them picking up a gun to defend themselves. The case was based on the fact that we have now started arming our medics (a violation of the Geneva convention) when they accompany patrols in those areas assigned to us.

Are your medics still wearing the red cross symbol when they're sent out on patrol?

[Thanas]

Are your medics still wearing the red cross symbol when they're sent out on patrol?

I don't know. Given that it is standard to equip them with that, I would think so, but I cannot find any confirmation.

[Aaron MkII]

Its not illegal to arm medics, its illegal for them to use arms except to defend their patients. Or so our medics explained.

[Captain Seafort]

Its not illegal to arm medics, its illegal for them to use arms except to defend their patients. Or so our medics explained.

What about self-defence?

[Aaron MkII]

I think that's ok as well, they've traditionaly had only sidearms because of the GC, until our High Powers were all worn out.

[Thanas]

Its not illegal to arm medics, its illegal for them to use arms except to defend their patients. Or so our medics explained.

Right, however the line got a lot blurrier. For example, we started equipping our medics just like regular infantrymen - G36, sidearms, grenades etc. That was the point where they refused to carry that stuff.

[Aaron MkII]

Yeah, things are murkier then they were, and more then I would like.

[Simon_Jester]

Do Afghan guerillas make a practice of not shooting at medics?