War crimes: A quick hypothetical

[Froggy Slayer]

If an alien species that was at a similar technological level to us invaded, except this species has no concept of morality, and therefore believes that ANYTHING is permitted in a war, should we still hold to the Geneva convention and avoid enacting war crimes upon them?

 

[Hero in a half shell]

Well, they wouldn't have any human rights, if you catch my drift...

So light the flamethrower and break out the mustard gas, it's time to kick some alien ass.

 

[Cabisco]

Nuke em, let other people decide whether it was 'morally' wrong whilst we sit in our caves and eat radioactive super rat/donkey hybrids until the winter passes.

 

[Shock and Awe]

First off, how the hell did they get here if they are at our level?

As for rights, since they aren't recognizing civilians I say fuck em. Capet bomb their asses with napalm and chemical weapons.

 

[Mysterious Username]

I don't think we should suddenly get away from our own morals just because our enemy has none.
I mean just because you're fighting monsters doesn't mean you have to become worse than them.

 

[LtWigglesworth]

I can imagine that it would be disregarded as a) we'd likely be fighting for survival, and b) it'll be hard to emphasise with something extremely alien, and so it'll be easy to gas/napalm them to hell.

 

[Ryotknife]

errrrrr, I can't imagine them adhering to the Geneva convention, so I'd say no.

The same could have been said about Japan in WWII, should we have tortured Japaneese POWs?

I was thinking they'd probably do something along the lines of stereotypical alien stuff (you know, anal probes, etc). So we might as well return the favor =P (for research purposes perhaps? I dunno)

And people said that about the Japanese too. They are abusing our prisoners and civilians, why should we respect them?

You sign on to the conventions because you want to be decent, and you promise to do so even if the other side are asses.

Although if they don't look pretty then I'm sure most people would give up their morals and go for the most barbaric approach possible.

how many people in power actually care if they are decent? Geneva Conventions are merely a PR tool, ones that are not enforced for the most part and parts are usually ignored by many members once an armed conflict breaks out. That does not diminish the Geneva Conventions accomplishments. If it instills even a little bit of civility to conflicts sometimes, it is worth it.

As to the topic of an alien invasion. If their purpose was to wipe out mankind, then all bets are off. Anything and everything is fair game. Why? Because if mankind gets wiped out, every hardship, accomplishment, and sacrifice experienced by any and all people and countries throughout history would have been utterly pointless and meaningless. Without someone to carry on our story, every single human life that ever existed would have meant absolutely nothing. That is a far greater sin than anything we could possibly do to them (other than wipe them out)

killing someone is one thing, rendering their entire existence as meaningless and erasing all traces is quite another.

 

[Blood Brain Barrier]

Surely it matters what kind of creature it is. They may not even have self-consciousness. If they're just a giant sandworm with a pea-sized brain, then war crimes against them will likely be no different from us taking a shower and eliminating the millions of bacteria covering your body.

 

[King of Asgaard]

The Geneva Convention was drawn up as a rule for dealing with humans, so no.
Either we write another convention for an alien species, or hit it with the fuck it stamp and toast us some Sectoids.

 

[BeeGeenie]

People find it easy enough to dehumanize their fellow man. I don't think a completely different species would be a problem for anyone.
Well... PETA might whine about it.

 

[Toy Master Typhus]

The whole idea of war crimes is a little stupid in my opinion. In war unless there is some big strength one side is using there is no need to limit yourself to using aproved weapons, it is only through the horror of war we are able to move past it.

Take the WWII Japan for instance: They were so brainwashed by their leaders that on islands the U.S. retook the population would slit the throats of their children and jump off cliffs because they heard Marines were recruited from insane asylums. They prepared civilians for suicide bombings and back on the mainland trained children as young as 6 how to fight with staffs in the event of a U.S. Invasion. We unleashed the horror of a nuclear holocaust on them and they lost the will to fight. It is better to end wars quickly then to dally with them on rules that only succeed in getting MORE people killed.

Don't hope that Human Rights and Geneva convention will save your ass from humans either. It is just one of those things that allows you to say your a good guy. It will boil down to people betraying to join the aliens or becoming slaves after being experiencing the horrors of being burned by a magnifying glass from low orbit alien ships with no way to fight back.

 

[bauke67]

What would be the point in having morals if you can ignore them when someone else does?
It's not like since a murder was once committed we should prance about murdering eachother, is it?
No that's right, we've got prisons for those people.
Likeways, a couple of aliens who have no manners should not be able to convince us to lose ours.

 

[TwiZtah]

I don't think we should suddenly get away from our own morals just because our enemy has none.
I mean just because you're fighting monsters doesn't mean you have to become worse than them.

Even if we all go extinct because of this? No, that would be utterly fucking stupid.

 

[Mr_Spanky]

Probably depends on whether we were more likely to win or lose the war. If we were likely to win then at least SOME of that Geneva convention moral integrity should be preserved.

If we were more likely to lose then use whatever unpleasant tactics and interrogation techniques you like to stand a better chance of winning. Holding the moral high ground is great if you live to tell the tale - if not then it's merely a hinderance.

Like in WW2 the allies were not exactly an example of compassionate perfection when it came to prisoners and acts of war. But then again its perhaps better that those things were done and the war wasnt won by the Nazis than the other way around.

It also depends if there would be an actual tactical advantage to behaving against common morality. If there was no strategic benefit then no it wouldnt be ok - causing pain and suffering without reason is never acceptable.

 

[Autumnflame]

The geneva convention is just for public on the record warfare.

Thats what Black ops teams are for to do whats illegal in the shadows. and the countries can all deny responisbility

 

[TIMESWORDSMAN]

I just rewatched every episode of Doctor Who since 2005, so any violent opinions I have are met with the face of David Tennant looking cross.

I think that we should adhere to our own moral standards. Just because Geneva doesn't apply to a situation doesn't mean you should do it anyway. Think before you act.

This situation is also highly implausible.