• Saleh@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        9 days ago

        Assasinations of individuals using perfidity are illegal under the Geneva convention. It is explicitly mentioned in the article. For a more detailed look read through this:

        https://lieber.westpoint.edu/assassination-law-of-war/

        Note that Westpoint is an American military academy. I hope this removes your worries of Russian trolls.

        • Skua@kbin.earth
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 days ago

          Please stop misreading (or misrepresenting, whichever it is) this source. As I mentioned in my other reply to you, the only definition of perfidy given in the Geneva Conventions is the invitation and betrayal of confidence. To quote your link:

          Treachery comprised a breach of confidence by the attacker in a situation where the victim had reason to trust that attacker. In that sense, it foreshadowed the distinction between ruses and perfidy that would appear in 20th-century treaties and customary law of war.

          • Saleh@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            9 days ago

            This is not true, see the reply to the prohibitions around booby-traps, which explicitly notes them to be devices that can constitute treachery and perfidy. Which of course they are.

            I find it hard to understand, how you get to the conclusion that having civilian objects explode in a civilian area is somehow considered an non treacherous attack, especially as treachery originates, as the article describes, from an understanding of “chivalry”.

            • Skua@kbin.earth
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              9 days ago

              Because, as I have already said to you, the device was manually triggered according to Russia. This makes it definitionally not a booby trap. If that did count as a booby trap, then a sniper waiting for someone to leave cover would be a booby trap, which is clearly nonsense.

              I find it hard to understand, how you get to the conclusion that having civilian objects explode in a civilian area is somehow considered an non treacherous attack

              Because the Ukrainians are under no obligation to announce what they are doing to the Russians and are therefore not betraying anything. It is not a war crime to employ stealth. It is perfidy to invite trust and then betray it, as I have pointed out to you in the Geneva Conventions and your source several times.

              • FelixCress@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                8 days ago

                He is either a Russian shill or a “useful idiot”, you are wasting your time. And the mod removing my previous comment in which I called him the same should better read his posts again.

      • XIIIesq@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        9 days ago

        Semantics.

        So what? You’d be fine with the title if it said “killed in action” or something like that?

        • Skua@kbin.earth
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          8 days ago

          I mean yeah, they probably would. The words have specific connotations; murder is not just killing, it’s unlawful or unjust killing. This is like the opposite to when police shoot someone dead at a traffic stop and the headline is “black man passes away after interaction with police”

          • XIIIesq@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            7 days ago

            I’d argue that KIA implies that they were on the front lines, but once again that’s semantics.

            I think the vast majority understands the meaning of the headline and aren’t overly concerned with the dictionary definition of murder.