To the editor: Just a few weeks in the past, two survivors of a missile strike have been rescued from the water and ultimately launched to their house nations.
If these two survivors had been thrown again within the water and machine-gunned, would that be a battle crime (“Killing survivors is just not a authorized or ethical grey space,” Dec. 2)? Within the alleged double-tap incident, does utilizing a missile make it much less of a battle crime? What can be the distinction between a second missile strike and machine-gunning the survivors?
In World Battle II, a German U-boat commander ordered his sailors to machine-gun survivors of a torpedo strike. The British tried and convicted him of a battle crime and executed him.
Has using drones and missiles made violations of the Geneva Conference and of the U.S. Division of Protection’s personal Legislation of Battle Handbook much less of a battle crime?
Mark Henderson, El Dorado Hills
..
To the editor: If some other nation on the planet was attacking small boats off the coast of sovereign nations and in worldwide waters, killing their crews and their passengers who had been accused of drug trafficking seemingly with out proof, the US authorities would often be calling for expenses of battle crimes towards that nation. The silence is deafening.
Donald Peppars, Pomona
..
To the editor: The drug downside on this nation is a matter of provide and demand. Take away the demand, and the availability takes care of itself. The demand is homegrown, so why does the US proceed to punish beleaguered nations for apparently assembly that demand (“Trump weighs choices on Venezuela strikes amid congressional alarm,” Dec. 1)?
Whereas the U.S. is conducting extrajudicial killings of seamen departing from Venezuela allegedly smuggling medication, why the saber-rattling by a president who claims to finish wars and to not begin them? Wouldn’t or not it’s extra efficacious to work on the demand aspect of the equation right here at house?
Denys Arcuri, Indio
..
To the editor: I flew American planes in the course of the lamented Vietnam Battle. Considered one of my missions was to patrol the coastal waters of Vietnam, looking for and maybe destroying boats that have been supplying enemy troops within the south. A lot of the boats we encountered have been harmless fishermen. These appeared precisely like enemy provide craft, so there was not a lot we may do aside from report every contact to headquarters in Saigon.
I can not learn of in the present day’s destruction of small boats, in addition to the cold-blooded killings of the crews on these boats, when there isn’t a extra direct proof of a menace than there was by harmless fishermen in days passed by.
Stephen Sloane, Lomita
..
To the editor: It’s indeniable that giving no quarter is a violation of well-established guidelines of battle and the American code of army conduct. What additionally must be acknowledged is that if our army ignores these guidelines, it supplies an incentive and excuse for our adversaries, whether or not already predisposed or not, to present no quarter to our army personnel once they’re hors de fight or captured. What goes round typically comes round.
Howard R. Worth, Beverly Hills
..
To the editor: If our president is so intent on killing drug-smuggling “terrorists,” I’m having problem understanding why is he pardoning Honduras’ former president, who’s a convicted drug trafficker (“Trump says he’ll pardon former Honduran President Hernandez, convicted of drug trafficking,” Nov. 28). Is that this what they name “cognitive dissonance”?
How about, extra merely, “what President Trump does is unnecessary”?
Henry Rosenfeld, Santa Monica
