The finer points of the Geneva conventions. - General

Use 2 Inch rounds on Gatling guns for shits n giggles.

[QUOTE=Herbie3;18271143]A .50 BMG round will blow you in half.[/QUOTE] A .22 LR will kill you. A .50 BMG on the other hand, kills you, and everyone else in the room. [media]http://www.yjvf.se/50bmg.jpg[/media]

All is fair in war.

[QUOTE=Xybjj;18276172]A .22 LR will kill you. A .50 BMG on the other hand, kills you, and everyone else in the room. [media]http://www.yjvf.se/50bmg.jpg[/media][/QUOTE] Yeah if they are standing in a row.

[QUOTE=archangel125;18271124]Let's look at some of the 'Rules of war' today. Not simply those from the Geneva Conventions, but also from other similar accords. I believe that most of us will agree that torturing POWs is wrong, as is killing unarmed children and civilians in cold blood. There are certain rules that really should be upheld by all countries (As much as we know that is not the case). However, there are those rules or guidelines that simply irritate anyone who is knowledgeable about professional soldiering. There are movements around the world, for example, to ban large-caliber rounds like the .50 BMG and the explosive shells fired by Armored Personnel Carriers and attack choppers. 20mm, 25mm, 30mm, stuff like that. I'm personally of the opinion that these movements are led by the bleeding-heart, soccer-mom demographic that just doesn't want to come to terms with the reality of war - it's messy. There's blood, guts, dismemberment and a million painful, nasty ways to die. Soldiers all know this and all willing combatants are aware of it as well. When someone's shooting at you and you can hear bullets cracking past your head and sparking off the asphalt at your feet, when you can feel the air vibrate with the passage of each round, I can guarantee that the last thing on your mind would be the question of whether Old Mrs. Frannie Doe back Stateside in her retirement home would approve. Using the .50 BMG on an enemy combatant is a mercy, in a way. They'll bleed out so fast they won't have long to suffer. Your thoughts?[/QUOTE] You do realize the point of an actual war is to annihilate the other country right? Or to slaughter so many of them that they surrender. We've not had an actual war in so long that people have already forgotten that you DO SLAUGHTER CIVILIANS in war. They are the backbone of the enemy economy and are prime soft targets. World War II had a huge focus on striking at the heart of your enemy to disrupt their ability to manufacture weapons and continue to have a functioning economy. And every war before it has had similar goals.

[QUOTE=GunFox;18277330]You do realize the point of an actual war is to annihilate the other country right? Or to slaughter so many of them that they surrender. We've not had an actual war in so long that people have already forgotten that you DO SLAUGHTER CIVILIANS in war. They are the backbone of the enemy economy and are prime soft targets. World War II had a huge focus on striking at the heart of your enemy to disrupt their ability to manufacture weapons and continue to have a functioning economy. And every war before it has had similar goals.[/QUOTE] It depends on the war you're fighting. If you are trying to occupy the country it is probably best to leave factories, cities, and civilians untouched as possible since once you take over they are going to be pretty much working for you.

Reminds me of how some convention banned expanding hollow point rounds. Which is funny considering when I carry, I only use hollow points.

[QUOTE=Ltp0wer;18277420]Reminds me of how some convention banned expanding hollow point rounds. Which is funny considering when I carry, I only use hollow points.[/QUOTE] Hollow points are common for civilian use because they're more accurate I think but most military forces rarely use hollow point rounds. I'm pretty sure of this but I would have to look it up.

[QUOTE=MuTAnT;18277464]Hollow points are common for civilian use because they're more accurate I think but most military forces rarely use hollow point rounds. I'm pretty sure of this but I would have to look it up.[/QUOTE] Hollow Points don't penetrate armor quite as well as Full Metal Jackets. Which is one reason the Military uses them. Also, according to The Hague Convention, you aren't supposed to use hollow points, but I'm not sure which countries(if any) follow The Hague Conventions these days.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;18277506]Hollow Points don't penetrate armor quite as well as Full Metal Jackets. Which is one reason the Military uses them. Also, according to The Hague Convention, you aren't supposed to use hollow points, but I'm not sure which countries(if any) follow The Hague Conventions these days.[/QUOTE] Yeah, penetration is an issue, but it is still funny they are "banned"

[QUOTE=Ltp0wer;18277521]Yeah, penetration is an issue, but it is still funny they are "banned"[/QUOTE] I agree. War isn't supposed to be nice or anything. I agree with most of the Geneva Convention, and there should be some rules that prevent innocent people from being hurt, and protect PoW's from being tortured, but no matter what you do war will never be pretty and in the end it is always young people killing other young people in the name of older and richer people.

[QUOTE=Jessesmith1;18271178]cool, lets cause panic by making a loud boom, and making a huge mess of brain matter ! CANT CATCH ME IM THE GINGERBREAD MAN HAHAHAHAHAHAHA[/QUOTE] Not if you're a 1.5 kilometers away.

[QUOTE=Hullu V3;18277552]Not if you're a 1.5 kilometers away.[/QUOTE] Most assassinations don't happen from 1.5km, that's just the effective range of the weapon they are using, and in reality, getting a good shot from that far away takes a great deal of skill(and a bit of luck) since you have to take into account like 50 different variables.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;18277558]Most assassinations don't happen from 1.5km, that's just the effective range of the weapon they are using, and in reality, getting a good shot from that far away takes a great deal of skill(and a bit of luck) since you have to take into account like 50 different variables.[/QUOTE] Yep. But the weapon has been employed before for assassination missions, the range being the biggest advantage.

[QUOTE=archangel125;18271124] Your thoughts?[/QUOTE] Your totaly right man, let us use nukes and biological wepons too!

Don't forget landmines!

I see nothing wrong with a some rules of war. Who does it harm to prohibit some sort of weapon? People are still going be killing each other, one less type of weapon makes no obvious difference to me. I just fail to see the problem.

[QUOTE=CubeManv2;18274059]Let's go back to WW2 fighting. No Thermal techonogly, No Nukes. Just some good old Garands, Kar98's, Mosins, Thompsons, PPSH's, Mp40/44, BAR's. And grenades. And basic artillery. All you ever needed[/QUOTE] Lets make war 10x more brutal than necessary! That'll improve things.

[QUOTE=archangel125;18271124]Soldiers all know this and all willing combatants are aware of it as well.[/QUOTE] But maybe the civilians, POWs, etc, aren't as happy go-lucky about it? [editline]07:56PM[/editline] It'll be cool if they'd null the Geneva convention and your country got invaded by Super Enhanced Nuclear Supermarines with strap-on Dildolaserchainguns in .50 BMG.

[QUOTE=Wu-Zi-Mu;18282134]Your totaly right man, let us use nukes and biological wepons too![/QUOTE] Funny. The reason I'm talking about ammunition for guns rather than nukes and biochemical weapons is because guns can be AIMED.

[QUOTE=Wu-Zi-Mu;18282134]Your totaly right man, let us use nukes and biological wepons too![/QUOTE] Hell yeah!

[QUOTE=yawmwen;18277506]Hollow Points don't penetrate armor quite as well as Full Metal Jackets. Which is one reason the Military uses them. Also, according to The Hague Convention, you aren't supposed to use hollow points, but I'm not sure which countries(if any) follow The Hague Conventions these days.[/QUOTE] Well in the UK armed forces, their use requires permission from the Home Secretary. Its Milliband atm, he'd allow it, however I'm unsure if we bothered making them after phasing out the old .303's.

[QUOTE=Xybjj;18276172]A .22 LR will kill you. A .50 BMG on the other hand, kills you, and everyone else in the room. [media]http://www.yjvf.se/50bmg.jpg[/media][/QUOTE] hehe straight off mythbusters. it was funny. [editline]03:53PM[/editline] On-topic: Warfare without guns. Fuck 'em. Fist fight, who's with me?

There are no real rules when it comes to war. So long as you win, you'll get away with anything you do. It's the losers who get hauled over to the other side and tried as a war criminal for what they did, even if what you did was a hell of a lot worse. You can say, "don't shoot medics!" but they're still gonna be one of the first targets for the enemy.

To all the people opposing the OP;- Imagine [I]you[/I] were a soldier fighting out there.

[QUOTE=Hullu V3;18277552]Not if you're a 1.5 kilometers away.[/QUOTE] You do know that assassins almost never use sniper rifles for kills, right?

Well, we could always pretend that we lost our copy, and thus couldn't check the rules in the middle of a battle, particularly because the enemy didn't listen when we called timeout.

I think incendiary weapons should be banned. without getting too creative, burning is pretty much the worst way to go.

[QUOTE=Roll_Program;18271243]Thread probably written by a 13 year old who's only seen war in COD4.[/QUOTE] Even if that were true he still has a point. [editline]04:10PM[/editline] Oh yeah, there's also a loophole in the law described in the OP. If there is an investigation, you can say that you targeted someone's equipment - that can mean anything including their clothing - rather than the soldier himself and get away with it. Anyway, who gives a flying shit about the M82? The M2HB (.50 BMG machinegun) has a higher muzzle velocity AND fires in full bloody auto, and that's used against troops in open combat, never mind assassinations. EDIT: Oh and it's used more often in close(r) combat (Than the M82) meaning the bullet will be travelling faster when it hits its target (Than one fired from an M82).

It's a shame that the US Military is one of the few countries that actively enforces the Geneva Conventions- many of which are absurd. We're fighting people who have no value for human life at all, but we have to cripple ourselves just to prove we're not the demons their propaganda accuses us to be. We're not fighting a war, we're putting on a dog and pony show to win the hearts of the region. But that's what we have to do, I suppose. You cannot defeat insurgency by killing it. You have to stop it at the source- make the people love you.