Partisan activity in Europe a violation of International law

Discussions on the Holocaust and 20th Century War Crimes. Note that Holocaust denial is not allowed. Hosted by David Thompson.
Panzermahn
Member
Posts: 3639
Joined: 13 Jul 2002, 04:51
Location: Malaysia

Partisan activity in Europe a violation of International law

#1

Post by Panzermahn » 23 Mar 2004, 12:06

CHAPTER I.--On the Qualifications of Belligerents
Article 1
The laws, rights, and duties of war apply not only to armies, but also to militia and volunteer corps, fulfilling the following conditions:

To be commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;

To have a fixed distinctive emblem recognizable at a distance;

To carry arms openly
; and

To conduct their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.

In countries where militia or volunteer corps constitute the army, or form part of it, they are included under the denomination "army."
I just read DT's link to the articles of Hague and Geneva Convention...and i was wondering according to the quote that i posted in here, is there any court ever declared that the partisan activity all over Europe from 1941-1945 were a violation of international law specifically the Hague Convention of 1899?

Partisans wore no uniforms or distinctive emblems nor carry arms openly...

Is this a big violation of the Hague Convention?

Panzermahn
Member
Posts: 3639
Joined: 13 Jul 2002, 04:51
Location: Malaysia

#2

Post by Panzermahn » 23 Mar 2004, 12:08

Image

Is this a violation of the Hague Conevntion? 8) 8)


The lady in the middle looks kinda cute actually :P


User avatar
wright61
Member
Posts: 540
Joined: 20 Jan 2004, 20:01
Location: UK

#3

Post by wright61 » 23 Mar 2004, 12:11

panzermahn wrote:Image

Is this a violation of the Hague Conevntion? 8) 8)


The lady in the middle looks kinda cute actually :P
Yes no recognisable fixed distinctive emblem

Panzermahn
Member
Posts: 3639
Joined: 13 Jul 2002, 04:51
Location: Malaysia

#4

Post by Panzermahn » 23 Mar 2004, 12:14

Oh, finally somebody objective enough to admit it has been a violation of Hague Convention these gunwomen were

Panzermahn
Member
Posts: 3639
Joined: 13 Jul 2002, 04:51
Location: Malaysia

#5

Post by Panzermahn » 23 Mar 2004, 12:19

sorry wrong msg

User avatar
Penn44
Banned
Posts: 4214
Joined: 26 Jun 2003, 07:25
Location: US

#6

Post by Penn44 » 23 Mar 2004, 13:48

panzermahn wrote:Oh, finally somebody objective enough to admit it has been a violation of Hague Convention these gunwomen were
There more of us who are objective, but we simply don't care to respond to every one of your posts.

There are many violations of the laws of war that occur during the course of armed conflict. Some of it intentional, i.e., criminal, some accidental or inadverent. Most professional soldiers are schooled in these laws, and they know what to do or not to do. However, some grassroots partisan movements or individual partisans don't know these laws.

On the scale of things, the fact that these women don't carry distinctive emblems identfying them as members of a partisan organization is a violation of the laws of war, but a relatively minor one. They are carrying their arms openly, and they're not attempting to blend into a civilian crowd. Wearing distinctive insignia is as much a protection for them as for the opposing force (as well as civilians in the area).

Are you're going to post on every conceivable violation of the laws of war no matter how insignficant? If so, this forum is going to bog itself down into minutia and die.


Penn44

Omega-Force
Member
Posts: 111
Joined: 15 Mar 2003, 07:40
Location: Earth

#7

Post by Omega-Force » 23 Mar 2004, 16:35

..
Last edited by Omega-Force on 06 Apr 2004, 07:02, edited 1 time in total.

xcalibur
Member
Posts: 1457
Joined: 20 Apr 2003, 16:12
Location: Pennsylvania

#8

Post by xcalibur » 23 Mar 2004, 17:13

Penn44 wrote:
panzermahn wrote:Oh, finally somebody objective enough to admit it has been a violation of Hague Convention these gunwomen were
There more of us who are objective, but we simply don't care to respond to every one of your posts.


Are you're going to post on every conceivable violation of the laws of war no matter how insignficant? If so, this forum is going to bog itself down into minutia and die.


Penn44
Agreed. This daily dose of sophistry is really becoming quite boring.

Eugene (J. Baker)
Member
Posts: 1177
Joined: 25 Dec 2002, 15:26
Location: Koenigsberg/Kaliningrad, Russian Federation
Contact:

#9

Post by Eugene (J. Baker) » 23 Mar 2004, 17:15

Omega-Force wrote:I have a K98 mauser at home and im a civilian with fixed emblem, I wonder if im breaking the Hague convention too? 8)
I pretty believe somebody want to convict you for repeating violation of Hague convention :lol:

David Thompson
Forum Staff
Posts: 23722
Joined: 20 Jul 2002, 20:52
Location: USA

#10

Post by David Thompson » 23 Mar 2004, 17:29

Panzermahn -- The Hague Convention on the Laws of Land Warfare doesn't apply to most partisan warfare. You can see that by its opening lines:
CHAPTER I.--On the Qualifications of Belligerents
Article 1
The laws, rights, and duties of war apply not only to armies, but also to militia and volunteer corps, fulfilling the following conditions:
In other words, partisan units that don't meet the conditions set forth by the Hague Convention cannot claim its protections. The fact that the Hague Convention doesn't apply to many partisan units doesn't make the unit a criminal formation. An act is a crime under the Hague Convention only if (1) the convention applies to the perpetrator; (2) the act is forbidden; and (3) the perpetrator commits the act anyway.

User avatar
Oleg Grigoryev
Member
Posts: 5051
Joined: 12 Mar 2002, 21:06
Location: Russia

#11

Post by Oleg Grigoryev » 23 Mar 2004, 20:32

Image so here the ones who had red stars on the hats are protected and the ones who don't have it - don't ?:)

User avatar
KalaVelka
Member
Posts: 1087
Joined: 26 Dec 2002, 17:12
Location: Suomi Finland Perkele

#12

Post by KalaVelka » 23 Mar 2004, 20:45

These discussions reminds me one of the (not so) old Conan O' Brien episodes when the reporter is in Quebec and he is asking peoples that what they are thinking about the Quebec separatists. Then there is one guy and the reporter starts the discussion:

Reporter: Hey, can I ask some questions about the separatists and what do you think about them?

Guy: Yeah, why not.

Reporter: So what do you think about the separatists? Would you like to have independent Quebec?

Guy: Yes it would be wonderfull to have independent Queb..(the reporter halts the guy)

Reporter: Did you hear that sound?

Guy: What sound?

Reporter: That nobody gives a fu*k sound!


In these forums people are very interested about the crimes that Germans did, but when the discussion comes to what Allied did to Germans, then "nobody_gives_fu*k_sound" rangs.
There more of us who are objective, but we simply don't care to respond to every one of your posts.
With no offense
Kasper

Witch-King of Angmar
Member
Posts: 915
Joined: 28 Feb 2003, 21:40
Location: Europe

Re: Partisan activity in Europe a violation of International

#13

Post by Witch-King of Angmar » 23 Mar 2004, 21:18

Question for our sophist friend Penn44: partisanship, by itself, is a legal, or at least "normally accepted" way of action, or is the partisan not distinguishable from a bandit? :P

~The Witch-King of Angmar

Omega-Force
Member
Posts: 111
Joined: 15 Mar 2003, 07:40
Location: Earth

#14

Post by Omega-Force » 23 Mar 2004, 22:06

..
Last edited by Omega-Force on 06 Apr 2004, 07:02, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Penn44
Banned
Posts: 4214
Joined: 26 Jun 2003, 07:25
Location: US

Re: Partisan activity in Europe a violation of International

#15

Post by Penn44 » 23 Mar 2004, 22:48

Witch-King of Angmar wrote:Question for our sophist friend Penn44: partisanship, by itself, is a legal, or at least "normally accepted" way of action, or is the partisan not distinguishable from a bandit? :P

~The Witch-King of Angmar

Witch-King of Angmar:

It is inappropriate to insult others.


A partisan is someone who fights for a cause and engages in irregular warfare.

A bandit is someone who robs or steals for personal gain.


Penn44

Post Reply

Return to “Holocaust & 20th Century War Crimes”