murder or justification in the war?

[Tyrannis]

MarineUS:
If the sniper had known standard procedure was to kill captured snipers, why would he not shoot the messenger(s)?

The Americans were ordered to shoot any sniper that ignored surrender pleas to kill more soldiers.

because german snipers would board themselves in a hard to get place. and hold out as long as they could killing whoever when they were surounded. and THEN only surender because they ran out of supplies.


i think the americans did this because they wanted it to be known to the rest of the german snipers that if they ignored surender requests to take more kills. then they would be put to death on the spot.

[Shuffler]

hey guys, i thought i'd ask everyone this to see what they thought on the subject.


me& a friend were discussing band of brothers yesterday, and it boiled down to this:

i told him about how i had seen in a documentary, that americans would shoot surendering snipers. and here is the reason why.

the documentary stated that, the snipers would ignore chances to peacefully surender given to them, and would procede to kill as many americans as they could. then when they ran out of ammo, they would surender to save themselves from being killed.

in the documentary, they had footage of a sniper who was dug into a windmill, it stated that that an american unit had offered the sniper a peaceful surrender, and even sent a messenger to deliver this to the sniper(unarmed).

the sniper shot the messenger, and 4 other americans. after 3 days the sniper decided to surrender due to lack of food. in the footage it shows the sniper taking a white flag&stuffing it down his rifles barrel. he then came out, held the white flag up, and backed up towards the awaiting americans. when the sniper got to about point blank range. the americans shot him in the back of the head.

the argument me&my friend had is, were the americans justified in killing the sniper? or was it murder?


i personally feel it was justified, the sniper had no chance of escape or shooting his way to freedom. he was offered a chance to surrender peacefully but shot the messenger and then anyone who he could. and then he only attempted to surrender because his supplies were running low, so he wanted to save himself.


my friend tho feels it was murder, due to the sniper surrendering. he said that the sniper was only following orders and therefore didnt deserve to be killed like he was.

what do you guys think? was it wrong or right to kill the sniper?

We will let your friend "volunteer" to take the next one a message.

[Yeager]

I would have shot him.  No doubt about it.  you do not SNIPE soldiers (especially unarmed and approaching under truce) and then surrender to them.

Any sniper that kills and then surrenders to the forces he was killing is an idiot.

[Dadsguns]

Atrocities like this happened on a much more grander scales than the single life of a lone sniper, many civilians and alike were not even afforded an opportunity to surrender and were brutally murdered for nothing, the countless bombings of civilian towns on both sides was terrible enough.  

War is beyond anyones comprehension and certainly morality takes a back seat to survivability, its either kill or be killed.  

These types of things happened on all sides of the war, some more than others, too many of these types of stories are out there, Japan was one of the worst culprits of the time.

[dedalos]

hey guys, i thought i'd ask everyone this to see what they thought on the subject.


me& a friend were discussing band of brothers yesterday, and it boiled down to this:

i told him about how i had seen in a documentary, that americans would shoot surendering snipers. and here is the reason why.

the documentary stated that, the snipers would ignore chances to peacefully surender given to them, and would procede to kill as many americans as they could. then when they ran out of ammo, they would surender to save themselves from being killed.

in the documentary, they had footage of a sniper who was dug into a windmill, it stated that that an american unit had offered the sniper a peaceful surrender, and even sent a messenger to deliver this to the sniper(unarmed).

the sniper shot the messenger, and 4 other americans. after 3 days the sniper decided to surrender due to lack of food. in the footage it shows the sniper taking a white flag&stuffing it down his rifles barrel. he then came out, held the white flag up, and backed up towards the awaiting americans. when the sniper got to about point blank range. the americans shot him in the back of the head.

the argument me&my friend had is, were the americans justified in killing the sniper? or was it murder?


i personally feel it was justified, the sniper had no chance of escape or shooting his way to freedom. he was offered a chance to surrender peacefully but shot the messenger and then anyone who he could. and then he only attempted to surrender because his supplies were running low, so he wanted to save himself.


my friend tho feels it was murder, due to the sniper surrendering. he said that the sniper was only following orders and therefore didnt deserve to be killed like he was.

what do you guys think? was it wrong or right to kill the sniper?

It was murder but justified.  Isn't that what war is?

That is assuming the above story is true.  Did you happen to see the messenger get shot in that film or was that what they said after?

[ROX]

You should have seen what the Soviet soldiers did to captured flame thrower operators in WWII.

[SmokinLoon]

Be very careful judging when you have not walked in the shoes of those being judged.

This goes for LEO's, soldiers (etc), victims, etc, etc.

[guncrasher]

We will let your friend "volunteer" to take the next one a message.

many have walked in those same footsteps.  also have read many accounts of soldiers who shot prisioners, not one of them said it was ok or justified.  they all said they killed them because they were angry and wanted to get back at them for whatever reason.  prisoners were killed in the thousands by all the sides along with innocent civilians.

You should have seen what the Soviet soldiers did to captured flame thrower operators in WWII.

or to most german soldiers captured.  including civilians, rape/murder was widespread.

semp

[curry1]

I smell BS how the hell did a sniper know that the guy was unarmed and why the hell would anyone volunteer to be a messenger and run out in the open where a sniper could see you?

[AAJagerX]

The better call would be to send him to the intel boys for interrogation.  Snipers were well trained and more than likely had info that would've been useful. 

[Jayhawk]

From our warm comfy chairs, it's very easy to look at the situation in hindsight and make a judgment of the situation.  I would agree that the best decision would not have been not shooting him, but I would never pass moral judgment or support any disciplinary action against the soldiers.

It makes me think about some of the pressures on law enforcement.

[AAJagerX]

I support disciplinary action being levied on soldiers only if they're doing the Macarena.

[Jayhawk]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gh2zRBJcZ4Q

[Tyrannis]

I smell BS how the hell did a sniper know that the guy was unarmed and why the hell would anyone volunteer to be a messenger and run out in the open where a sniper could see you?

The sniper was surounded and cut off from any chance of being rescued. they thought they would give him the chance to surender and avoid bloodshed on both sides.


in the video i think they show the messenger. they show a guy walking towards the windmill with his hands in the air, he was holding up a white flag in one and what looked like an envelope in the other. the only cloths he had on were pants. no shirt or shoes it didnt look like. and i didnt see a pistol belt on him. he got to where he was allmost to the windmill when he got shot. the sniper then proceded to shoot anyone who tried to rescue the the guy.

im not sure if the man was the messenger but i think he was.

[Ack-Ack]

the argument me&my friend had is, were the americans justified in killing the sniper? or was it murder?

It's war.  It's no different than when a former US president strafed Japanese life boats in his dive bomber, war is Hell.

ack-ack