http://www.armytimes.com/story.php?f=1-292925-976420.php

A friend showed me this article. A soldier was shot in Iraq and not only survived, but treated the shooter after he got back up.

I'd have been the cruel one who'd rubbed salt in the wound and left him out in the desert.

if you shoot and wound an enemy soldier, say he is sytill alive after the battle is over, you must treat him medically as one of your own soldiers, based on the seriousness of his wounds

geneva conventoin for ya

Even if were one of like 3 countries that actually follow the damn thing

LoL.

I don't think there is any country in the world that follows the whole thing.

Thats so true.

England.

i know for a fact enlang uses some artillery tactics which are disallowed by the geneva convention

Sorry, I was obviously forgetting about your top-level military intel, there.

its actually low level stuff, to do with the use of white phosporous, i've been on excercises with the brits (they use same tactics we do)

Exercises aren't bound by the convention.

Only genuine warfare.

you train on excercises as you train to fight, including the following of your nations tactics......anyway ceres i'm not gonna sit here and argue with you, you haven't been in a combat miltary unit (and probably not in the military at all) so let's just leave it at that

I very much doubt that this is their only breach of the convention anyway, but yeah, I've heard of this.

Glad we're agreed on that.

Would you care to back that up before making ignorant comments?

No.

Firing ranges

oooh nice loophole!

This is not a war, we are merely doing an excercise... you did agree to us invading your country, didn't you know? The paper is in the basement of office building 3a in London. You had all year to make any changes.

I'm sorry ceres but mother england is NOT perfect, and it is very likely that the geneva convention isn't followed to the letter 100% of the time.

Have you even read or studied the convention? or had any experience with it more than what you read on the internet?

I'm acting from a place of reasonable skepticism. If you know anything about formal logic you'll know it's expected of you to have a degree of skepticism.

Neither of you have presented any reliable evidence to support either of your views.

I may be wrong, but I seem to recall that usage of shotguns is prohibited under the Geneva Convention.

Most armies use them regardless.

Nobody follows all conventions to the letter, but England follows the important ones (the Geneva included) better than most. I think what's most important is that the spirit of it is followed, and I think we do.