U.S. forces carried out a strike on an alleged drug-smuggling boat off the coast of Venezuela on Friday, killing four people, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said.
Unlawful combatant isn’t something they made up, it’s a legit part of the Geneva conventions on warfare.
However, as always, the USians are abusing the term and redefining it - kind of like what Israel is doing to antisemitism.
Unlawful combatants are people waging war not clearly identified on their uniforms as being of that-and-that army. This was meant to catch saboteurs, spies, infiltrators, etc., but is abused to target civians (usually a big no-no).
Unlawful combatants aren’t given almost any protection by the aforementioned conventions, meaning they can be tortured or summarily executed.
Point of clarification. No protection from Geneva conventions is not lack of any protection. Geneva conventions forbade certain acts and weapons, regardless of the target. This includes torture and sexual violence. Combatant status also doesn’t preclude other protections like fundamental human rights protections. You still shouldn’t be summarily executed or tortured due to combatant status.
Using subterfuge and deception is perfectly lawful. Otherwise basic stuff like camouflage would be war crimes. But that’s not what unlawful combatant is about. Terrorism is always unlawful, for example, because the main target is civilians in order to cause, well, terror. It doesn’t matter if the terrorists were using their club’s pin badge that day or not. Similarly, if you are a civilian in civilian clothes and take up a rifle to shoot at a party in an armed conflict, congratulations, you just became a lawful combatant. You became a lawful combat target, your Hawaiian shirt notwithstanding.
You’re an unlawful combatant if you’re targeting protected classes, like civilians, wounded, prisoners, health care personnel, etc. Even if you’re clearly in your new uniform with fresh new tags. Clothing is a secondary aspect. The main defining feature is always role and behavior. Like, creating a combat unit of snipers specialized in targeting journalists, that would be a group of unlawful combatants.
Unlawful combatant isn’t something they made up, it’s a legit part of the Geneva conventions on warfare.
However, as always, the USians are abusing the term and redefining it - kind of like what Israel is doing to antisemitism.
Unlawful combatants are people waging war not clearly identified on their uniforms as being of that-and-that army. This was meant to catch saboteurs, spies, infiltrators, etc., but is abused to target civians (usually a big no-no).
Unlawful combatants aren’t given almost any protection by the aforementioned conventions, meaning they can be tortured or summarily executed.
Point of clarification. No protection from Geneva conventions is not lack of any protection. Geneva conventions forbade certain acts and weapons, regardless of the target. This includes torture and sexual violence. Combatant status also doesn’t preclude other protections like fundamental human rights protections. You still shouldn’t be summarily executed or tortured due to combatant status.
Using subterfuge and deception is perfectly lawful. Otherwise basic stuff like camouflage would be war crimes. But that’s not what unlawful combatant is about. Terrorism is always unlawful, for example, because the main target is civilians in order to cause, well, terror. It doesn’t matter if the terrorists were using their club’s pin badge that day or not. Similarly, if you are a civilian in civilian clothes and take up a rifle to shoot at a party in an armed conflict, congratulations, you just became a lawful combatant. You became a lawful combat target, your Hawaiian shirt notwithstanding.
You’re an unlawful combatant if you’re targeting protected classes, like civilians, wounded, prisoners, health care personnel, etc. Even if you’re clearly in your new uniform with fresh new tags. Clothing is a secondary aspect. The main defining feature is always role and behavior. Like, creating a combat unit of snipers specialized in targeting journalists, that would be a group of unlawful combatants.