At what point does military action cross into murder?

[wordsmith]

Well, killing someone is always murder.

What about manslaughter?

I'd consider it indirect, unintentional (not as in "I shall beat you up and hope you don't die", because they should've been prepared for that possibility when they went and beat someone up) or justified murder.

My point is that killing someone may not always be murder.

As for the OP: According to the Nuremberg Trials, Military action crosses into murder as soon as you lose the battle. After all, it's the winners who write the history books, and the winners never murder anyone, they vanquish

 

[The Rockerfly]

Killing someone is killing someone

Although if you mean when it becomes completely immoral then usually civilian killing

 

[Oneirius]

There is no such a thing as killing for no reason at all. There is a motivation for every behavior. Something is alwayes gained when you kill someone.
The question is "Is it worth it?"
But it never does.

 

[Lord Mountbatten Reborn]

As for the OP: According to the Nuremberg Trials, Military action crosses into murder as soon as you lose the battle. After all, it's the winners who write the history books, and the winners never murder anyone, they vanquish

"Haha! I have vanquished these helpless civilians under the treads of my tank!"

 

[wordsmith]

As for the OP: According to the Nuremberg Trials, Military action crosses into murder as soon as you lose the battle. After all, it's the winners who write the history books, and the winners never murder anyone, they vanquish

"Haha! I have vanquished these helpless civilians under the treads of my tank!"

I think you'll find those "civilians" were strapped with bombs, and it was a 2CV that the plucky soldier commandeered after running out of bullets. If he hadn't managed to stop them, they would have blown up the animal sanctuary!

[sub] geez, you need some lessons in propaganda...[/sub]

 

[Lord Mountbatten Reborn]

As for the OP: According to the Nuremberg Trials, Military action crosses into murder as soon as you lose the battle. After all, it's the winners who write the history books, and the winners never murder anyone, they vanquish

"Haha! I have vanquished these helpless civilians under the treads of my tank!"

I think you'll find those "civilians" were strapped with bombs, and it was a 2CV that the plucky soldier commandeered after running out of bullets. If he hadn't managed to stop them, they would have blown up the animal sanctuary!

[sub] geez, you need some lessons in propaganda...[/sub]

That's some excellent spin-doctoring. It's a good example to everyone on how the truth can be twisted.

 

[MakerOfRoads]

The only time murder isn't murder is when its in self defense. And even then should only EVER be used as a last resort. Murder is murder plain and simple. Even if war still makes us do horrible things we can at least make the better choices rather then take the life when there is a simpler solution.

So under your definition, it would be murder to shoot someone who is about to stab my wife in the neck with a knife? I have the power to stop him from committing that act, and save her life, am I not justified in doing so? He knew he was probably going to meet at least some resistance with his plan to stab someone, and in this scenario, should have expected it. Does that make me a murderer still?

 

[Kevlar Eater]

I consider it murder when a village is bombed to hell for no reason and the surviving have to eat their dead to sustain themselves.

 

[generals3]

Yeah, killing is killing is killing.

Pretend you have noble reasons, but in the end, you still pulled the trigger. Worse still, you did it because you were told to.
That's who you are.


At least people who kill for pleasure or to satisfy a need are getting something out of it.

I wont even say how unintelligent that is . But than again i guess if it was up to ppl like you Bad guys would always win .

 

[Captain Pancake]

War becomes murder when the other guy is unarmed.

 

[Ares Tyr]

Yeah, killing is killing is killing.

Pretend you have noble reasons, but in the end, you still pulled the trigger. Worse still, you did it because you were told to.
That's who you are.


At least people who kill for pleasure or to satisfy a need are getting something out of it.

Okay. How about all the American soldiers just quit their jobs. Hang up the hat, go home, and just defend their own asses from now. I'm sure nothing bad will come from it.

Ever.

Murder is the crime of killing. Killing the innocent, the unthreatening, those not involved in a conflict. That's where war-crimes come in, like the Holocaust. War is when warriors and soldiers from opposing sides meet on the battlefield.

 

[Abedeus]

Murder isn't the same as killing someone in defense or in the military.

If a cop kills someone who is pointing a gun at someone and is clearly going to shoot, it is NOT a murder. Or if someone breaks into your house with a knife in hand, attacks you and you use your own knives to throw at him and kill him. You are defending yourself.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder

Unlawful killing of other human being with intent. War's laws are different - kill or be killed.

But if someone bombs a village full of people because "a suspect might be there", then it IS murder. They didn't have to kill everyone, just the suspects and only if they were either wanted dead or neutralized by any means necessary.

I appreciate your point of view, but thats where the other factors come into play.

In this villiage scenerio, how does one know that they arent lawful combatants? Just because someone doesnt have a gun in their hand doesnt mean they arent ready and willing to commit grievous harm if given the opportunity. Do we have to wait until they produce a weapon and harm someone to take action?

Uh. Yeah, they do have to wait until they are armed. If they want to get armed, anyway. You can't kill someone for crimes they MIGHT commit. Otherwise, you should shoot every tenth person you see, because at one time or another they will ruin someone's life.

That and the concept of Total War.
Under that ideal, they are directly aiding those who seek to destroy others, whether they know it or not (though, for example, working in a factory that produces tanks, id like to think any normal person would understand their role in the situation). Does their direct involvement in the war effort make it "ok" to kill them? Or is that still classified as murder?

We should also call everyone who works in a knife factory a murderer, because every year thousands of people die of stabwounds. Everyone who makes CDs/DVDs/BDs should be called a thief, because people use his products to make illegal copies. Everyone who makes cellphones is guilty of helping the mob communicate and commit crimes.

But I have nothing against arresting (NOT KILLING) people that sell illegal weapons to people. "Merchants of death", who do inspire war and killing others.

 

[MakerOfRoads]

I see what you mean about waiting for someone to be armed, a rightful point of view, but one other question, does it change anything if you know this person to of been a combatant at one point in time, is still affiliated with those who commit heinous acts, and would commit them themselves, if only they had a weapon present. And what if they do have a weapon, its just not visible? (example being a hidden pistol/firearm or some hidden explosive device, this being the chief concern and reason they could be considered lawful combatants)

And you misunderstand me, about the knife factory. Knives arent exclusively militaristic. They have peaceful uses. A tank, has a few less peaceful uses than a simple kitchen blade. Maybe a better example is factory workers in WW2 who constructed bombs for aircraft. Are they fair targets? Or are they still just harmless civilians working their jobs?

 

[Ares Tyr]

I wont even say how unintelligent that is . But than again i guess if it was up to ppl like you Bad guys would always win .

I appreciate it.
Since you've managed to restrain yourself, I won't point out that you have no right to call anything I say or do unintelligent when you don't even know how to use a period, or how your simplistic black and white view of morality is something I'd expect from a child.

Okay. How about all the American soldiers just quit their jobs. Hang up the hat, go home, and just defend their own asses from now. I'm sure nothing bad will come from it.

Ever.

Murder is the crime of killing. Killing the innocent, the unthreatening, those not involved in a conflict. That's where war-crimes come in, like the Holocaust. War is when warriors and soldiers from opposing sides meet on the battlefield.

Well, it would end a few pointless wars.

I'm not saying "murder is bad."
I'm just saying that killing someone is killing someone, no matter why you did it.

I don't make a distinction between "killing someone" and "murdering someone."
I see no point in doing so.

Because, to me, there's a difference between struggling with another armed, well trained soldier on the battlefield, and going up to an old lady and beating her to death with a crowbar.

I'm not saying killing and violence is a good thing, but there is such thing to me as "noble combat" and "senseless murder". There's a difference between a soldier and a serial killer to me.

 

[Unknower]

There's this term called military necessity. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_necessity] Here's some nice quotes from the article:

An attack or action must be intended to help in the military defeat of the enemy, it must be an attack on a military objective,[1] and the harm caused to civilians or civilian property must be proportional and not excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated.

In other words, killing prisoners of war and civilians doesn't help in achieving the military defeat of the enemy so killing them on purpose is murder. On the other hand, it's not murder to bomb a house full of enemy soldiers and kill couple of civilians in the process but bombing a house full of civilians to kill couple of enemy soldiers is murder.

 

[Skeleon]

Civilians, really.
Yes, they may help the war effort by producing stuff, shipping goods or helping in hospitals. But you cannot kill people for that.