GWOT IV - Laws Of War
Nov. 10th, 2019 02:13 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
drewkittyWe are using the courtroom for a meeting.
I've called in all the California Republic officers who are going to hear the second round of cases. This has caused more than a little irritation; we're all very busy people, and leaving our seconds and XOs in charge can only be done for a short time before everything falls apart. Costing lives.
"We are now moving into the Laws of War phase of prosecutions. I wish to be very clear about this. We are required by military law to give the benefit of the doubt to lawful military operations. Just as we were ruthless in punishing atrocities, we must now give the benefit of reasonable doubt to lawful military operations."
They look at me as if I have suddenly sprouted three heads, all of which are breathing fire.
"When a soldier breaks the laws of war, resulting in unlawful death, and the violation is consistent with the ordinary understanding of collateral military damage, the execution is to be by gunfire."
Seven heads, each with a different breath weapon effect.
"I've consulted closely with the Adjutant General and with the Provisional Emergency Governor, personally, on these two points. This is military justice, not military revenge or military retribution."
Cue outrage in three, two, one . . .
And the room broke out in pandemonium. I promptly restored order by banging on the gavel rest with the butt of my handgun. I then conspicuously unloaded it, including the round in chamber, and passed it around as a talking stick.
Thank you, Site Location Executive. The trick still works.
"We can't hang people for breaking the laws of war?"
"We can, and we will, but only when it is an atrocity. When it is a civilian as well as a military crime."
"What about setting houses on fire?"
"Tell General Sherman about that."
"With people in them?!?"
"That's different. Were they ordered out? Given a chance to flee or to obey? A lawful collateral damage, as in an air or artillery strike? These are questions of fact, not of law."
"Executions?"
"The lawful authority to execute people on the battlefield is very, very clear. Combatants do not always have a right of surrender. Surrender can be refused, for example in commando operations where the commandos are unable to manage large numbers of prisoners. Once surrender is accepted, however, the POW status is sacrosanct.
"How many of you have killed someone who was expectant?"
I put my hand up, to set example. Reluctantly, about half the room did the same.
"Under a strict reading of the laws of war, so called mercy killing is a war crime. Whether done to enemy personnel or to your own. I am asking you to do something very hard, but very simple. You treat the actions of combatants, whether lawful or unlawful, as if they were committed by California Republic soldiers.
"Thirty prisoners. Only room for twenty on the truck. The other ten are shot. Whether it's Homeland or American Army or the Republic, you try the case the same fucking way. Clear?"
Now everyone is clear that we needed this meeting, that this is not a waste of everyone's time ... and that a larger percentage of people who walk into our courtroom are going to be freed to walk out.
This is a military operation with explicit military objectives.
One of them is to be certain that American forces will still surrender when clearly forced by circumstances to do so.
Another is to protect the thousands of Californians who are still in enemy custody and control. Don't say the word 'hostage' nor even whisper it.
A third, as yet more subtle, is to hold our own forces to a high standard without crippling our own ability to fight. The conventional wisdom is that adherence to the Laws of War favors larger, more powerful armed forces and cripples weaker opponents. I disagree, but it is still America that has the upper hand. I must make American forces fight according to military law, not just because it is the right thing to do, but in order to slow their operational tempo and make them less flexible.
Military justice is a lot like military music. Loud, brassy, cheap, and extremely ugly.
I share all this, including the last.
We end the meeting on time, not because we are done talking, but because we are out of time.
There is another reason we are running out of time.
Collections estimates that American special operations forces will be fully recovered from their exertions in the Sunnyvale raid in less than ten days.
We are the next obvious target for their attentions.
This is one reason I have rushed through the executions of genocidaires and common criminals in Homeland uniforms.
I must safely put them on the shelf of death before any American rescue attempt.
This reminds me of something very important.
I call for Mo. Sergeant Mohammed, to be specific, constantly accompanied by Sergeant-Cadet Mohammed.
We go for a walk. In between discussions of other matters, mostly EOD ordinance related, I whisper him an order. An order to disarm something.
He looks askance at me.
"Do it," I insist. Then we go back to other topics, and I am about to dismiss him when I hand him the small box I have been carrying on my belt this entire time.
He takes it carefully, as bomb techs do.
He nods instead of saluting.
There has been a little speculation about it. What it is, is a small blaster controller, suitable for setting off a single charge.
Or a daisy-chain from a single charge. A daisy chain wired through the entire Unlawful Combatant barracks, with fragmentation overhead and collapse underneath.
If the Americans had hit Alviso instead of Sunnyvale, I would have delivered the guilty - and a few innocents - into the safety of death rather than allowing them to go forth and murder more thousands.
That precaution was no longer needed. Some justice had been done.
More remained to do. And obviously that wasn't the only set of charges laid all through the site.
I've called in all the California Republic officers who are going to hear the second round of cases. This has caused more than a little irritation; we're all very busy people, and leaving our seconds and XOs in charge can only be done for a short time before everything falls apart. Costing lives.
"We are now moving into the Laws of War phase of prosecutions. I wish to be very clear about this. We are required by military law to give the benefit of the doubt to lawful military operations. Just as we were ruthless in punishing atrocities, we must now give the benefit of reasonable doubt to lawful military operations."
They look at me as if I have suddenly sprouted three heads, all of which are breathing fire.
"When a soldier breaks the laws of war, resulting in unlawful death, and the violation is consistent with the ordinary understanding of collateral military damage, the execution is to be by gunfire."
Seven heads, each with a different breath weapon effect.
"I've consulted closely with the Adjutant General and with the Provisional Emergency Governor, personally, on these two points. This is military justice, not military revenge or military retribution."
Cue outrage in three, two, one . . .
And the room broke out in pandemonium. I promptly restored order by banging on the gavel rest with the butt of my handgun. I then conspicuously unloaded it, including the round in chamber, and passed it around as a talking stick.
Thank you, Site Location Executive. The trick still works.
"We can't hang people for breaking the laws of war?"
"We can, and we will, but only when it is an atrocity. When it is a civilian as well as a military crime."
"What about setting houses on fire?"
"Tell General Sherman about that."
"With people in them?!?"
"That's different. Were they ordered out? Given a chance to flee or to obey? A lawful collateral damage, as in an air or artillery strike? These are questions of fact, not of law."
"Executions?"
"The lawful authority to execute people on the battlefield is very, very clear. Combatants do not always have a right of surrender. Surrender can be refused, for example in commando operations where the commandos are unable to manage large numbers of prisoners. Once surrender is accepted, however, the POW status is sacrosanct.
"How many of you have killed someone who was expectant?"
I put my hand up, to set example. Reluctantly, about half the room did the same.
"Under a strict reading of the laws of war, so called mercy killing is a war crime. Whether done to enemy personnel or to your own. I am asking you to do something very hard, but very simple. You treat the actions of combatants, whether lawful or unlawful, as if they were committed by California Republic soldiers.
"Thirty prisoners. Only room for twenty on the truck. The other ten are shot. Whether it's Homeland or American Army or the Republic, you try the case the same fucking way. Clear?"
Now everyone is clear that we needed this meeting, that this is not a waste of everyone's time ... and that a larger percentage of people who walk into our courtroom are going to be freed to walk out.
This is a military operation with explicit military objectives.
One of them is to be certain that American forces will still surrender when clearly forced by circumstances to do so.
Another is to protect the thousands of Californians who are still in enemy custody and control. Don't say the word 'hostage' nor even whisper it.
A third, as yet more subtle, is to hold our own forces to a high standard without crippling our own ability to fight. The conventional wisdom is that adherence to the Laws of War favors larger, more powerful armed forces and cripples weaker opponents. I disagree, but it is still America that has the upper hand. I must make American forces fight according to military law, not just because it is the right thing to do, but in order to slow their operational tempo and make them less flexible.
Military justice is a lot like military music. Loud, brassy, cheap, and extremely ugly.
I share all this, including the last.
We end the meeting on time, not because we are done talking, but because we are out of time.
There is another reason we are running out of time.
Collections estimates that American special operations forces will be fully recovered from their exertions in the Sunnyvale raid in less than ten days.
We are the next obvious target for their attentions.
This is one reason I have rushed through the executions of genocidaires and common criminals in Homeland uniforms.
I must safely put them on the shelf of death before any American rescue attempt.
This reminds me of something very important.
I call for Mo. Sergeant Mohammed, to be specific, constantly accompanied by Sergeant-Cadet Mohammed.
We go for a walk. In between discussions of other matters, mostly EOD ordinance related, I whisper him an order. An order to disarm something.
He looks askance at me.
"Do it," I insist. Then we go back to other topics, and I am about to dismiss him when I hand him the small box I have been carrying on my belt this entire time.
He takes it carefully, as bomb techs do.
He nods instead of saluting.
There has been a little speculation about it. What it is, is a small blaster controller, suitable for setting off a single charge.
Or a daisy-chain from a single charge. A daisy chain wired through the entire Unlawful Combatant barracks, with fragmentation overhead and collapse underneath.
If the Americans had hit Alviso instead of Sunnyvale, I would have delivered the guilty - and a few innocents - into the safety of death rather than allowing them to go forth and murder more thousands.
That precaution was no longer needed. Some justice had been done.
More remained to do. And obviously that wasn't the only set of charges laid all through the site.
