• Syrian civilians loyal to Assad willing to be human shields
    26 replies, posted
[QUOTE]In Syria's capital Damascus, some civilians are being armed to defend the city, while others are coming forward to volunteer as human shields around military installations. The regime in Damascus insists it is ready to retaliate whenever an attack is launched.[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23966147[/url] An interesting move, it would mean no matter what America does it would kill civilians.
[QUOTE=dunkace;42078404][url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23966147[/url] An interesting move, it would mean no matter what America does it would kill civilians.[/QUOTE] A person who volunteers to be a human shield is no longer a civilian in my opinion. They are actively helping the fight.
I think this defeats the purpose of using a human shield. Unless they're brainwashed children or something. Otherwise it's at best as useful as arming them, as they'd be shot as enemies anyway.
[QUOTE=sgman91;42078475]A person who volunteers to be a human shield is no longer a civilian in my opinion. They are actively helping the fight.[/QUOTE] It still looks bad though; even if they're volunteering it still boils down to the US blowing up unarmed people and people will use that to smear the US
I wonder if the geneva convention covers this kind of situation If you think about it, it's no different than a medic treating an enemy soldier, they are helping, but they are not actually fighting
[QUOTE=sgman91;42078475]A person who volunteers to be a human shield is no longer a civilian in my opinion. They are actively helping the fight.[/QUOTE] It's more like being sandbags.
They're becoming rebellions of the.. Rebellions? Well, this is turning out to be one odd civil war.
[QUOTE=dunkace;42078404][url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23966147[/url] An interesting move, it would mean no matter what America does it would kill civilians.[/QUOTE] Not really civilians anymore though if you're actively participating in a war, beit civil or otherwise. They're more like Militiamen as opposed to rebels or civilians. Also: [img]http://u.cubeupload.com/BANNED_USER/operationhumanshield.jpg[/img] You're really only proving that the regime is all sorts of fucked up if you're willing to just sacrifice yourself by becoming the barrier between bullets and the soldiers.
No one would volunteer to be literally human shield. It's worded up badly. Probably there's something else to this activity.
people are ignoring that the alawites support assad, because they believe they'll be hunted down and massacred(and that could very well happen if the rebels win). thats why they're volunteering. its going to look VERY badly for the US/west in general if they start bombing civilians who are doing this because they honestly believe they have no other option, or if after assad is deposed, alawites start getting massacred left and right, until there is some kind of international guarantee the alawites won't be massacred by the rebels or even the populace in general, they'll keep supporting assad.
[QUOTE=BANNED USER;42078817]Not really civilians anymore though if you're actively participating in a war, beit civil or otherwise. They're more like Militiamen as opposed to rebels or civilians. Also: You're really only proving that the regime is all sorts of fucked up if you're willing to just sacrifice yourself by becoming the barrier between bullets and the soldiers.[/QUOTE] isn't there an international protocol Saying something along the lines of “not harming unarmed enemies, and those not capable of putting up a fight.”?
[QUOTE=Latex;42079055]isn't there an international protocol Saying something along the lines of “not harming unarmed enemies, and those not capable of putting up a fight.”?[/QUOTE] What's likely going to happen: they're only civilians when rebels are hiding behind their backs. When government does it, they're militia.
Fun fact: Human shields don't work well against Tomahawk cruise missiles.
Forceful persuasion anyone?
[QUOTE=gudman;42079083]What's likely going to happen: they're only civilians when rebels are hiding behind their backs. When government does it, they're militia.[/QUOTE] In my eyes it doesn't matter. If they're unarmed and unable to fend for themselves they shouldn't be attacked in the first place.
[QUOTE=gudman;42079083]What's likely going to happen: they're only civilians when rebels are hiding behind their backs. When government does it, they're militia.[/QUOTE] Said no person
[QUOTE=gudman;42079083]What's likely going to happen: they're only civilians when rebels are hiding behind their backs. When government does it, they're militia.[/QUOTE] I'm not sure what specifically you're referring to w/ rebels using human shields but there is a very large difference between being used as a human shield and volunteering for it.
Didn't Saddam Hussein use human shields?
They're civilians who are placing themselves near target sites so if the US tries to bomb Assad, they will die and the US would be in hot water for killing civilians.
[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;42080461]They're civilians who are placing themselves near target sites so if the US tries to bomb Assad, they will die and the US would be in hot water for killing civilians.[/QUOTE] Human bodies don't stop a GBU Paveway-3 Bunker Buster. Just a small fact to those trying to protect the brass that will be inevitably hiding underground if there really is going to be a strike fore.
[QUOTE=MendozaMan;42080646]Human bodies don't stop a GBU Paveway-3 Bunker Buster. Just a small fact to those trying to protect the brass that will be inevitably hiding underground if there really is going to be a strike fore.[/QUOTE] That's exactly the point though. If the US attacks, civilians die, and now the US has to answer for that. The goal is to make the US refrain from attacking.
[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;42081470]That's exactly the point though. If the US attacks, civilians die, and now the US has to answer for that. The goal is to make the US refrain from attacking.[/QUOTE]... But now if [i]any[/i] civilians die, that can conveniently be rationalized with, "oh, they volunteered to be there, and we tried to hit the least amount of the crazy people as we could." It's not the most effective tactic to deter a cruise missile strike. Not like any of that matters anyway, we can always hit the things that have no people around them. What are they going to do? Are they going to stand near everything in shifts, coordinating their [i]tactical loitering?[/i] (I feel exceptionally clever for thinking that term up, by the way, but I know I shouldn't)
They're hoping that the US wouldn't just go "oh well, should have moved dumb civvies" and bomb away. I'm 50/50 on if it'll actually work. I could see the US refraining from the attack because they don't want the publicity, but I can also see them just labeling them militants / support personnel / whatever and pretending the backlash doesn't exist.
[QUOTE=Ryo Ohki;42078620]I wonder if the geneva convention covers this kind of situation If you think about it, it's no different than a medic treating an enemy soldier, they are helping, but they are not actually fighting[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Latex;42079055]isn't there an international protocol Saying something along the lines of “not harming unarmed enemies, and those not capable of putting up a fight.”?[/QUOTE] people constantly cite the geneva convention and other random UN protocols as if it has ever been followed or any country has ever given a fuck.
[QUOTE=Altimor;42080079]I'm not sure what specifically you're referring to w/ rebels using human shields but there is a very large difference between being used as a human shield and volunteering for it.[/QUOTE] I refer to firing stuff (including mortars) from crowded places and living quarters. Same thing that happens in Gaza.
[QUOTE=sgman91;42078475]A person who volunteers to be a human shield is no longer a civilian in my opinion. They are actively helping the fight.[/QUOTE] Still damages morale. [editline]5th September 2013[/editline] Stupid anyway, the average bullet will punch through two or three people unless it's very low velocity. 9mm, 5.56mm, etc, the kind of bullets NATO would use in Syria, would easily go through a human shield and into the intended target. Needless waste of life.
[QUOTE=Drsalvador;42083790]Still damages morale. [editline]5th September 2013[/editline] Stupid anyway, the average bullet will punch through two or three people unless it's very low velocity. 9mm, 5.56mm, etc, the kind of bullets NATO would use in Syria, would easily go through a human shield and into the intended target. Needless waste of life.[/QUOTE] ... It's not a literal human shield that is a figure of speech. They aren't walking around with SAA soldiers hugging them like a defense basketball player
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.