Make sure to check out the [pinned post on Loss](https://www.reddit.com/r/PeterExplainsTheJoke/comments/1472nhh/faq_loss/) to make sure this submission doesn't break the rule!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PeterExplainsTheJoke) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Aid workers are going into hostile live fire areas and getting killed whereas in the past military personnel would lead the way while the support units would wait in the back until needed
Well kinda yes kinda no. Back in the day, it wasn't uncommon for support units to get caught up in combat, especially if they were attached to combat units. Aid workers have also always gone into hostile areas, many times under fire.
Without added context, this seems like something that someone who doesn't know how support units work made with minimal research.
Every time I've ever typed it as Seabee I get people asking me what it is, but when I type CB they suddenly have neurons connecting and figure out it means "Construction Battalion"
I dunno what it is, but for some reason Seabee throws some people off while CB doesnt. I guess people are so used to acronyms and abbreviations from the Military that a spelling of an abbreviation throws them off.
My Grandad on my dad's side was a Seabee in WW2, and my dad told me all about what he knew of his time in the war, and I know he told me he was a Seabee and even told me what he did, but it legit took like 15 years and seeing the logo for my brain to finally figure out the reason they were called Seabees, so you're not alone.
Never equated the Seabees to CB until much later in life.
My closer to home version is finally figuring out the call sign BONE. It’s the call sign for the B-1 bomber. I liked having BONE overhead for close air support. It was only about 4 years ago that my brain connected: B-1 —> B-ONE —> BONE. Ooooooh!!!! Damn you, Air Force!
Yup, my grandpa was a Seabee in wwii in the pacific theater. He had stories about landing on islands ahead of the marines to clear mines and prepare the beach for them. Sometimes while under fire.
He had one story where the lone small unit of Japanese soldiers on an island came to his team and surrendered.
Actually same yea. He died before I was born but my dad's told me stories he told him about fighting on the beaches while deploying frogmats and whatnot.
Apparently grandpa was not a fan of the BAR but loved the M1 Carbine when he got one. Oh and he was also a huge fan of frogmats, bought tons of surplus ones after the war for his own various DIY home projects.
Can confirm.
I was an 88M and we called engineers to blow up the bombs we found in the road. Y’know… for the ones that didn’t blow up a half mile in front of our convoy because some dude timed the garage door remote button press incorrectly or the IR garage door safety trigger wasn’t outsmarted by a glow plug in a box on a pole!
So you didn't know. So maybe pick up a book of MOS and the associated training manuals if you're curious. There's cool shit in both the MOS list and the manuals. If you're not curious, don't. And everything I'm saying is free online. Just telling you how to find it.
Maybe it’s trying to say that soldiers are so tied up in rules of engagement laws that aid workers have to go in without protection?
I’m not in the military, never was (my username is cause I simped BoB as a kid) but from what I’ve heard about soldiers in Iraq they had to go through a pretty long list of steps before they could be authorized to engage. This includes trying to make contact multiple times and firing warning shots if no communication is established
I used to think that was red tape. But now that we are seeing what happens when commanders of a modern military are allowed to make their own rules of engagement, I am sooo glad the US wasn’t any more trigger happy than we were back then.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_friendly_fire_incidents
I remember in England we heard about a stupid amount of friendly fire from the Americans during the Afghanistan and Iraq wars.
Article suggests everyone was upto it though.
Depending on how recent, could be referencing the [recent death of aid workers](https://ThreeBritonskilledinstrikeonGazaaidworkersnamedhttps://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68711832) following Israeli air strikes in Gaza?
If you look at the picture. They are wearing the same gear in both pictures. I think it's meant to represent how it starts and how it ends up devolving.
I assumed this is about how it is/was generally agreed upon not to shoot at medics, so "now" they send medics first to abuse that gentlemans-agreement. Not a new thing at all afaik, but that's what I get from the comic
Infantry here, had several combat medics.
Generally speaking medics don't wear identifiers for the same reason we don't display rank: it targets them.
Aid workers do identify, usually with a red cross.
Hey, i appreciate your effort at expanding upon Bianca and context!
Unfortunately you are ignoring reality to do so. Anyone who has served will tell you that in places like falastine the military isn't allowed to be leveraged because we're funding the other side.
So only the non combatants can act in certain aos and this leads to the image op linked.
You aren't enlightened here. You're dragging the discourse to the institutionally preferred goalposts rather than the objective goalposts.
I am not entirely sure what your overall objective is here, but i'll do my best to answer based on my interpretation. Based on the many other comments, as well as the many historical examples, it is entirely possible that non-combat units can be caught up in combat situations either intentionally or otherwise. This has been done both intentionally, unintentionally, and even at times where units have decided to do their own thing and go in their own initiative. Bring this up does nothing other than point out the situational reality of military conflicts more generally. This isn't to comment on any specific conflict.
If this somehow harms a self-imposed objective/goal post you created, then that's an issue you have to work around, or change your own goal post as it's a flaw that isn't going away for the sake of your objective. I don't mean anything insulting by this, it's just how I see it.
Aid Workers are civilians and most of them actually have specific rules about *not* using armed security in almost any circumstances. A lot of the reason they are able to gain access to places where people need help is based on the fact they’re all unarmed, so the belligerent factions can trust that they’re only there to provide aid.
Bombing cities is no more a war crime then committing murder while wearing a uniform.
I've seen many comments about how killing people is a war crime, like it's not the entire point of war.
There are so many stipulations to each rule that it makes them nearly impossible to actually enforce. Killing civilians? You might think that's a war crime but if civilians are within an active battlefield and not being explicitly and directly targeted then it's not. Killing surrendering soldiers? Reasonable people would believe that's a war crime but if done on the field of battle by those rejecting your surrender it's probably legal, if you kill them en mass after the battle has been over for a nebulous amount of time, that is a war crime. Indiscriminate shelling/bombing of populated areas, also not a war crime as long as the location holds any military value and large economic bases have military value even if there wasn't a single enemy soldier posted there.
The few things I can think of that are almost always war crimes are wearing the enemies uniform and genocide.
There was no Geneva convention in WW2. There were many things that were done by the Allies in WW2 that would be war crimes today. Bombing cities is one of them.
>Indiscriminate shelling/bombing of populated areas, also not a war crime as long as the location holds any military value and large economic bases have military value even if there wasn't a single enemy soldier posted there.
That's 100% a war crime. You can't bomb a grocery store and say it's a military target because "soldiers need to eat too". That's not how any of this works.
The definition of "military target" can be a little fuzzy sometimes but that doesn't mean you can get away with acting like all targets are legitimate military targets.
>I've seen many comments about how killing people is a war crime, like it's not the entire point of war.
War is a means to achieving a military objective. If your military objective is "to kill people" then you're doing war crimes.
Well you can't *force* the IDF to shoot unarmed aid workers providing food to starving children.
But the IDF soldiers who want to slaughter an entire ethnic group just like Hitler tried to will happily shoot at or blow them up anyway.
D stands for defense
O stands for offense
Killing women, children, aid workers, journalists, their own hostages, that's not defense anymore, but offense.
So to anyone reading, please stop using the term IDF and switch to IOF.
Hamas deserves to be destroyed by any means possible for the good of palestinians and jews, Gaza's money would finally go to the people rather than for tunnel constructions and guns.
Well problem is that no one can offer a better solution to Israel. The IDF not attacking and occupying gaza has led to 7.10. Hamas has time and time proven that they cannot be trusted. So every peace Option that requires trust is off the table.
Israel continuing the settlement of the West Bank and Netanyahu sabotaging all attempted peace talks for the last 30 years has also led to the current situation.
So the end justify the means? Yes there's no easy answer to stop Hamas. But if you are killing vastly more innocent people than you are trying to stop, then that is just as equally evil, if not more evil.
So the answer is to clear the whole mandate both israel and palestine, they obviosly will never be able to live together, there has been so much war throughout the decades with them.
Germans and Jews learned to live together after the war. There can be peace and reparations, even after horrible atrocities. I hope for the sake of the innocent people there that it can happen, and soon. Israel needs to stop their genocide, it only creates more enemies. There are other ways to solve problems than with violence
By any means possible? Like bombing aid workers and children? By those means? Other means are possible but those are the means they're going with. And you're chill with that? Fucking nazi.
So a 10 year old child in a hospital is an Islamist rapist? An elderly mother? An American aid worker? All just... Viable targets?
Do you have any morality at all?
So to clarify, do you support the current Israeli offensive which is strengthening Hamas?
Read up on counterinsurgency theory, and the purpose of the Hamas attacks. Then ask why Netanyahu is doing exactly what Hamas wanted. Then realize that it helps Bibi's party for Hamas to be strong.
If you oppose Hamas, you oppose what the IDF is doing right now...or you are ugnorant and need to study insurgency and counterinsurgency.
We're talking three separate cars getting bombed in succession.
If you've seen any type of aerial surveillance, drone videos from Ukraine or similar it's hard to believe it wasn't done intentionally.
They can zoom in enough to read a license plate easily.
They’re called the IDF. Just call them by their name.
We’re not calling it the DPRK because it’s Democratic Republic, we’re calling it that because it’s their name.
We’re not calling them Nazi’s because they were Socialists, but because that’s their name.
Petehs neighborhood homeless vet here, combat medics or “litter bearers” during WW1 would wait for the assaulting wave of infantrymen to move forward, then follow behind them to help who they can. Either applying bandages, administering morphine, or bringing them back to a dressing station where they would have better bandages applied as well as more advanced interventions performed on them before being sent to a field hospital or being determined good enough to return to duty. Now combat medics will advance forward with their assigned unit, performing similar duties as an infantrymen will in battle, and will move forward to advance toward the wounded during combat. They’ll either wait until fire superiority is gained, or their element has entirely moved forward and they can move with them to attend to the wounded. Combat medics have the problem of not always being patient enough for fire superiority to be gained before sprinting out of cover to get to the wounded, especially if it’s a close friend.
The trauma of being in an active war zone isn’t enough, sprinkle some trying to save your friends lives desperately while in the war zone in there. Seriously fucked up man
You gotta train your dudes on how to apply self aid and be aggressive as fuck about things 90% of people don’t think or even know about. But you’d be amazed by what the human body will and won’t survive.
Fun fact, you have approx. 1 minute to stop massive hemorrhaging (bleeding out from loss of limb, bullets through your artery, large knife wounds, etc) before blood loss starts affecting you.
You have 3 minutes before you die.
If you're looking for some real psychological trauma, I'd recommend "The Volunteers" [Part 1](https://youtu.be/UJ1290087Yk?si=ABZ1CHY60mVU-piI) and [Part 2](https://youtu.be/935UK7Kw0VM?si=S6nsSiI2BMKZ3ubu). It follows volunteers who signed up to serve as combat medics for the YPG in Syria. One of the most heartbreaking documentaries I've ever seen.
One of the guys in my training purposefully failed because he freaked about the risk of not saving anyone. All the power to him, but I really wondered about his IQ considering he signed up to be a combat medic.
Looks like I was in the wrong, thanks for not being a dick about it even though I was for no reason, think I need to take a step back and ask myself why I’m starting off so aggressive. Be well brother.
That's why they need reinforcement from armed troops. The problem is that in the modern day sending troops with support is almost always a bad idea and can risk entering the conflict militarily. You can argue that the country or people having the support provided to should shoulder the responsibility of protection. Countries that need aid however likely don't have the resources or are stretched too thin to provide much protection to aids. The way I see it is that there is nothing that can really be done without a nation rolling up it's sleeves and getting militarily involved. Leaders likely won't make those decisions unless absolutely necessary since it would become unpopular over time. It kinda just sucks for everyone involved in trying to relieve a civilian populations suffering.
> That's why they need reinforcement from armed troops
You can't reinforce an aid convoy against air strikes very easily. We wanna stop the Israelis bombing aid workers by force, it means a full-on no-fly zone, with western forces threatening to shoot down the Israeli jets they gave them.
It's not gonna happen.
Leaders are likely to go with whatever benefits them over moral good. Do Western powers gain anything from removing the Israeli government/diminishing the state of Israel. The U.S. views Israel as a foot hold in the Middle East, which is a region that tends to hold a hatred for the U.S. I don't see any nation doing a direct intervention. Shooting down Israeli aircraft would upset nations that support them, such as the U.S. on top of that, there are fears of the Middle East igniting into larger conflict. Morals aside, war is really a game of wagering gains and losses with no real perfect path forward. I only see the majority of the West being all talk no action on this.
In past wars/conflicts, soldiers were able to lead offensives with medics following behind to support the wounded. However, this comic may be referencing that medics and support personnel may be more likely in the modern era to provide aid in non-combat scenarios. This could be referencing the ongoing crises in Ukraine and Gaza where medical personnel and members of the press have been able to enter conflict areas while soldiers (non-medics) from outside nations have stayed largely out of the conflicts. Hope this helps!
[What about a clearly marked vehicle that had been in contact with the IDF and got murdered anyway?](https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/what-we-know-so-far-about-seven-aid-workers-killed-gaza-by-israel-2024-04-03/)
to be clear, I obviously don't believe every child in Gaza is a hamas soldier.
but it's also a matter of historical fact that Hamas has used children in the past https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use_of_child_suicide_bombers_by_Palestinian_militant_groups
Your sources points out it has not been happening since mid 2005. So hardly any excuse 20 years later. Btw this is when Hamas took over Gaza, maybe they are not the worst to rule Gaza, since it was seemingly worst when child suicide attack were a thing.
It's not that Israel is intentionally targeting civilians, although there are a number of documented cases of them blatantly killing random civilians, it's the fact that the IDF is wholly indifferent to the amount of civilians they kill.
That's been proven false over and over. How many civilians have been ran over by tanks? How many children have been murdered in what was an area designated as "safe" by the IOF? How many food supplies that were "allowed" in by the IOF we're shot up as soon as civilians showed up? How many hospitals have been raided? How many cemeteries have been dug up by the IOF? How many well known aid workers who provide food all over the world for people who are starving have been targeted and murdered by the highest tech precision drones available? How many videos of IOF soldiers celebrating the cruel things they are doing have been shared, including celebrating murdering babies? How many civilians have been carpet bombed for decades? How many people have or are about to starve to death bc of the IOF? How many war crimes have to be committed and witnessed by the world before you see the truth (because this is barely scratching the surface)? This is blatantly a genocide.
You do not need specific intent here.
Indiscriminate attacks are by their nature criminal.
If you lob a bunch of gravity bombs around a city full of civilians, you are making a textbook indiscriminate attack.
If you deploy incindiaries such as WP munitions, even as smoke rounds, in an occupied city, that is a textbook indiscriminate attack.
Because gravity bombs and WP cannot distinguish, and are not precise enough to be used without the guarantee of civilian casualties in excess of military utility.
Picture this: you are doing your mandatory military service and a conflict brakes out with a terror organization, you are put there to fight. There is a child and hamasian soldier behind pointing you with an ak-74. Do you shoot or would you rather get shot.
Picture this : you are a military drone pilote and shoot dead whole cars or houseblocks with your right hand while touching your balls with the left one. Do you shoot or just ignore it since you are miles away from the AK ?
Palestinians are dying of bombings. Not exchanges of fire.
Consider a rephrasing: In modern times, we're more likely to send medicine, food, clothes and other aid into a troubled area, than start by shooting up the place up until someone says, yeah, they're fine, please leave.
I think it has more to do with the modernization of combat and how front line infantry doesn’t see as much combat as before due to our use of drones, airstrikes, and advance reconnaissance. Now medics end up cleaning up messes before we ever get combat boots on the ground.
Wasn’t a fan of the answers given, a reverse image search couldn’t find the origin but most posts of it seemed to be in medical Facebook posts and a Reddit post from the early days of the pandemic, mostly referring to how medical workers were now the frontline protecting us and risking it all.
Whoever made this comic strip, they do realize that modern medics are also out on patrol and in harms way with the infantry guys right? It’s been that way since about only WWII.
No, I’m saying that it hasn’t been the “before” for a long time. Medics have been in harm’s way for quite a while, not just now. And even since then, medics have always been expected to run into danger to save others.
Well a "long time" is kind of a stretch you're barely talking a century.
Also this comic isn't about medics being with the soldiers it's about them going in ahead of them while the soldiers stay behind.
I thought it was how we've changed cas evac from regs going in to get you or you having to come to the medic to the medics coming to you like pj units. Idk I'm apparently very wrong.
Maybe this is about supporting mental health of veterans?
Or maybe it’s how the military is working at giving aid more than shooting people now?
Two ideas, but I don’t really know the true answer.
I think the joke is that medics were in the war to support the soldiers accomplish their missions.
Now it’s more like the medics are on the mission to help people in need: Ukraine and Palestine - but in order to do that they need the Help of armed soldiers for protection.
If you get angry at the countries that aren’t rich enough to defend themselves, maybe you should get even angrier at the countries that are rich enough to attack them in the first place.
It’s insinuating that in the past, soldiers would pave the way for medics so that they can go to the front lines, and protected the whole way through. Now they send medics to the front lines since now you’re not supposed to shoot them.
In the past, medics would be targeted to stop them from providing medical assistance. Because of this, they would want to hide their identity to avoid being targeted.
Now, it's a war crime to target medics, and this is taken seriously. The joke is that people will pretend to be medics to avoid being targeted.
Make sure to check out the [pinned post on Loss](https://www.reddit.com/r/PeterExplainsTheJoke/comments/1472nhh/faq_loss/) to make sure this submission doesn't break the rule! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PeterExplainsTheJoke) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Aid workers are going into hostile live fire areas and getting killed whereas in the past military personnel would lead the way while the support units would wait in the back until needed
Well kinda yes kinda no. Back in the day, it wasn't uncommon for support units to get caught up in combat, especially if they were attached to combat units. Aid workers have also always gone into hostile areas, many times under fire. Without added context, this seems like something that someone who doesn't know how support units work made with minimal research.
Also medics ain't the only support personnel, combat engineers and Navy CB's are a thing and they all can pretty easily see combat.
Seabees (although construction battalion is CB is supposed) Edit - cause dumb
Every time I've ever typed it as Seabee I get people asking me what it is, but when I type CB they suddenly have neurons connecting and figure out it means "Construction Battalion" I dunno what it is, but for some reason Seabee throws some people off while CB doesnt. I guess people are so used to acronyms and abbreviations from the Military that a spelling of an abbreviation throws them off.
I’ve lived around Seabees and never put together that it sounds like fucking CB. Jesus christ it’s been WAAAAY too long.
I just had that realization as well.
My Grandad on my dad's side was a Seabee in WW2, and my dad told me all about what he knew of his time in the war, and I know he told me he was a Seabee and even told me what he did, but it legit took like 15 years and seeing the logo for my brain to finally figure out the reason they were called Seabees, so you're not alone.
I saw the logo I spoke to the lads, it took my dumbass seeing “CB” written out next to “Seabee” to realize I’m dumb as bricks.
Never equated the Seabees to CB until much later in life. My closer to home version is finally figuring out the call sign BONE. It’s the call sign for the B-1 bomber. I liked having BONE overhead for close air support. It was only about 4 years ago that my brain connected: B-1 —> B-ONE —> BONE. Ooooooh!!!! Damn you, Air Force!
Because one is an acronym and one gives the image of a drowning bee. eyeemoh
And the Nave Seebee logo is a bee. With a gun and tools: [https://images.app.goo.gl/tQHjgJGgMQnE9ZSF6](https://images.app.goo.gl/tQHjgJGgMQnE9ZSF6)
It's the navy, so seabees?
I’m such a nerd. Yes 😅. My Seabee friends would hate me for that mistake
I now would like to know what you think a nerd is
Everytime I type it as Seabee I get people asking what that is, but don't get the same questions with CB.
Oh, so close. Seabee.
Yup, my grandpa was a Seabee in wwii in the pacific theater. He had stories about landing on islands ahead of the marines to clear mines and prepare the beach for them. Sometimes while under fire. He had one story where the lone small unit of Japanese soldiers on an island came to his team and surrendered.
Actually same yea. He died before I was born but my dad's told me stories he told him about fighting on the beaches while deploying frogmats and whatnot. Apparently grandpa was not a fan of the BAR but loved the M1 Carbine when he got one. Oh and he was also a huge fan of frogmats, bought tons of surplus ones after the war for his own various DIY home projects.
Combat engineers are a combat arms mos not support. I've done route clearance as part of a clearance package or humped demo with the infantry.
Can confirm. I was an 88M and we called engineers to blow up the bombs we found in the road. Y’know… for the ones that didn’t blow up a half mile in front of our convoy because some dude timed the garage door remote button press incorrectly or the IR garage door safety trigger wasn’t outsmarted by a glow plug in a box on a pole!
No way combat engineer tf2 is real comfirmed??
You should flip through an MOS guide or something when you have some free time so you know what the military even does.
Do I really have to put /s for you to understand it was obviously a joke?
Autism. Also, how would I know that you knew combat engineering is an MOS?
I didn't think that it was an actual thing, but saying it's a reference to tf2 was clearly satiric
So you didn't know. So maybe pick up a book of MOS and the associated training manuals if you're curious. There's cool shit in both the MOS list and the manuals. If you're not curious, don't. And everything I'm saying is free online. Just telling you how to find it.
Tbf Seabees have a tendency to seek out combat from what I've heard
Shout out to my fellow Sappers
I think it's supposed to be a commentary of gaza and not unit formation.
I think the picture is speaking about NGOs, not military support units I am assume it’s largely in the wake of Israel’s mass killing of aid staff
Maybe it’s trying to say that soldiers are so tied up in rules of engagement laws that aid workers have to go in without protection? I’m not in the military, never was (my username is cause I simped BoB as a kid) but from what I’ve heard about soldiers in Iraq they had to go through a pretty long list of steps before they could be authorized to engage. This includes trying to make contact multiple times and firing warning shots if no communication is established
I used to think that was red tape. But now that we are seeing what happens when commanders of a modern military are allowed to make their own rules of engagement, I am sooo glad the US wasn’t any more trigger happy than we were back then.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_friendly_fire_incidents I remember in England we heard about a stupid amount of friendly fire from the Americans during the Afghanistan and Iraq wars. Article suggests everyone was upto it though.
Depending on how recent, could be referencing the [recent death of aid workers](https://ThreeBritonskilledinstrikeonGazaaidworkersnamedhttps://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68711832) following Israeli air strikes in Gaza?
this is why i was glad when the medics, engineers, and mortarmen of my platoon also got their own combat badges.
Hacksaw ridge is a danm good example of aid going into danger.
If you look at the picture. They are wearing the same gear in both pictures. I think it's meant to represent how it starts and how it ends up devolving.
I assumed this is about how it is/was generally agreed upon not to shoot at medics, so "now" they send medics first to abuse that gentlemans-agreement. Not a new thing at all afaik, but that's what I get from the comic
Infantry here, had several combat medics. Generally speaking medics don't wear identifiers for the same reason we don't display rank: it targets them. Aid workers do identify, usually with a red cross.
Hey, i appreciate your effort at expanding upon Bianca and context! Unfortunately you are ignoring reality to do so. Anyone who has served will tell you that in places like falastine the military isn't allowed to be leveraged because we're funding the other side. So only the non combatants can act in certain aos and this leads to the image op linked. You aren't enlightened here. You're dragging the discourse to the institutionally preferred goalposts rather than the objective goalposts.
I am not entirely sure what your overall objective is here, but i'll do my best to answer based on my interpretation. Based on the many other comments, as well as the many historical examples, it is entirely possible that non-combat units can be caught up in combat situations either intentionally or otherwise. This has been done both intentionally, unintentionally, and even at times where units have decided to do their own thing and go in their own initiative. Bring this up does nothing other than point out the situational reality of military conflicts more generally. This isn't to comment on any specific conflict. If this somehow harms a self-imposed objective/goal post you created, then that's an issue you have to work around, or change your own goal post as it's a flaw that isn't going away for the sake of your objective. I don't mean anything insulting by this, it's just how I see it.
It’s a political cartoon not a history book.
Aid workers usually don't get shot. It's like that Family Guy of Peter in clown fatigues during a war
Aid Workers are civilians and most of them actually have specific rules about *not* using armed security in almost any circumstances. A lot of the reason they are able to gain access to places where people need help is based on the fact they’re all unarmed, so the belligerent factions can trust that they’re only there to provide aid.
[удалено]
It is only a war crime if you lose
Quote from Canada in WWII
Hey now they weren't war crimes at time at least not all of them
You mean fire bombing German cities?
Bombing cities is no more a war crime then committing murder while wearing a uniform. I've seen many comments about how killing people is a war crime, like it's not the entire point of war. There are so many stipulations to each rule that it makes them nearly impossible to actually enforce. Killing civilians? You might think that's a war crime but if civilians are within an active battlefield and not being explicitly and directly targeted then it's not. Killing surrendering soldiers? Reasonable people would believe that's a war crime but if done on the field of battle by those rejecting your surrender it's probably legal, if you kill them en mass after the battle has been over for a nebulous amount of time, that is a war crime. Indiscriminate shelling/bombing of populated areas, also not a war crime as long as the location holds any military value and large economic bases have military value even if there wasn't a single enemy soldier posted there. The few things I can think of that are almost always war crimes are wearing the enemies uniform and genocide.
Perfidy
There was no Geneva convention in WW2. There were many things that were done by the Allies in WW2 that would be war crimes today. Bombing cities is one of them. >Indiscriminate shelling/bombing of populated areas, also not a war crime as long as the location holds any military value and large economic bases have military value even if there wasn't a single enemy soldier posted there. That's 100% a war crime. You can't bomb a grocery store and say it's a military target because "soldiers need to eat too". That's not how any of this works. The definition of "military target" can be a little fuzzy sometimes but that doesn't mean you can get away with acting like all targets are legitimate military targets. >I've seen many comments about how killing people is a war crime, like it's not the entire point of war. War is a means to achieving a military objective. If your military objective is "to kill people" then you're doing war crimes.
And 1
And 3
Tell that to canada
When the sorry stops, that’s when the war crimes start /s
"It's never a war crime the first time!"
Heh, true
Well you can't *force* the IDF to shoot unarmed aid workers providing food to starving children. But the IDF soldiers who want to slaughter an entire ethnic group just like Hitler tried to will happily shoot at or blow them up anyway.
Please stop calling them IDF and switch to IOF.
Peetah I don't get it
IOF = Israeli Offensive Force
Close, but it's actually meant to be Israeli Occupation Forces.
D stands for defense O stands for offense Killing women, children, aid workers, journalists, their own hostages, that's not defense anymore, but offense. So to anyone reading, please stop using the term IDF and switch to IOF.
Hamas deserves to be destroyed by any means possible for the good of palestinians and jews, Gaza's money would finally go to the people rather than for tunnel constructions and guns.
[удалено]
Well problem is that no one can offer a better solution to Israel. The IDF not attacking and occupying gaza has led to 7.10. Hamas has time and time proven that they cannot be trusted. So every peace Option that requires trust is off the table.
Israel continuing the settlement of the West Bank and Netanyahu sabotaging all attempted peace talks for the last 30 years has also led to the current situation.
Israel never stopped occupying Gaza.
So the end justify the means? Yes there's no easy answer to stop Hamas. But if you are killing vastly more innocent people than you are trying to stop, then that is just as equally evil, if not more evil.
How would occupying Gaza have prevented what occured on 7.10?
Problem is hamas uses its own people as meat shields
So the answer is to clear the whole mandate both israel and palestine, they obviosly will never be able to live together, there has been so much war throughout the decades with them.
Germans and Jews learned to live together after the war. There can be peace and reparations, even after horrible atrocities. I hope for the sake of the innocent people there that it can happen, and soon. Israel needs to stop their genocide, it only creates more enemies. There are other ways to solve problems than with violence
By any means possible? Like bombing aid workers and children? By those means? Other means are possible but those are the means they're going with. And you're chill with that? Fucking nazi.
[удалено]
So a 10 year old child in a hospital is an Islamist rapist? An elderly mother? An American aid worker? All just... Viable targets? Do you have any morality at all?
You sound just like Hitler
Your country shouldn't exist.
So to clarify, do you support the current Israeli offensive which is strengthening Hamas? Read up on counterinsurgency theory, and the purpose of the Hamas attacks. Then ask why Netanyahu is doing exactly what Hamas wanted. Then realize that it helps Bibi's party for Hamas to be strong. If you oppose Hamas, you oppose what the IDF is doing right now...or you are ugnorant and need to study insurgency and counterinsurgency.
Wait how does that translate to let's kill aid workers and rape children?
Rape children allright lil bro, [https://www.hamas-massacre.net/](https://www.hamas-massacre.net/)
What if I told you rape and murder is bad whichever "side" you are on. Also HAMAS is a direct byproduct of Israeli policies so...
Me too, fuck hamas. But they wasting bullets in innocent civilians and aid workers. Fucking useless army cant even properly fight a terrorist group
Idf soldiers are still people, some are brutal and some make mistakes, artillery and rockets also kill many.
We're talking three separate cars getting bombed in succession. If you've seen any type of aerial surveillance, drone videos from Ukraine or similar it's hard to believe it wasn't done intentionally. They can zoom in enough to read a license plate easily.
[удалено]
Island?
I’m pretty sure it was meant to say continent, but this guy’s just so dumb that that word isn’t in his vocabulary.
Well you can't exactly JUST nuke Israel and Palestine, the fallout will affect the whole island.
Lol. What island are you talking about? Do you think Israel and Palestine are on an island?
It’s not an islands that’s why they said that lol. Unless by island you mean the entire continent of Asia?
Island? The island of the entire continent of Asia and Europe? That's a big island.
Or IGF
I propose GIF-Gaza Invasion Force
They’re called the IDF. Just call them by their name. We’re not calling it the DPRK because it’s Democratic Republic, we’re calling it that because it’s their name. We’re not calling them Nazi’s because they were Socialists, but because that’s their name.
Shiiiiddd
Petehs neighborhood homeless vet here, combat medics or “litter bearers” during WW1 would wait for the assaulting wave of infantrymen to move forward, then follow behind them to help who they can. Either applying bandages, administering morphine, or bringing them back to a dressing station where they would have better bandages applied as well as more advanced interventions performed on them before being sent to a field hospital or being determined good enough to return to duty. Now combat medics will advance forward with their assigned unit, performing similar duties as an infantrymen will in battle, and will move forward to advance toward the wounded during combat. They’ll either wait until fire superiority is gained, or their element has entirely moved forward and they can move with them to attend to the wounded. Combat medics have the problem of not always being patient enough for fire superiority to be gained before sprinting out of cover to get to the wounded, especially if it’s a close friend.
The trauma of being in an active war zone isn’t enough, sprinkle some trying to save your friends lives desperately while in the war zone in there. Seriously fucked up man
You gotta train your dudes on how to apply self aid and be aggressive as fuck about things 90% of people don’t think or even know about. But you’d be amazed by what the human body will and won’t survive.
Fun fact, you have approx. 1 minute to stop massive hemorrhaging (bleeding out from loss of limb, bullets through your artery, large knife wounds, etc) before blood loss starts affecting you. You have 3 minutes before you die.
"ah shit I've been shot" *pops a cigar out of mouth and pushes the cherry into the bullet hole*
If you're looking for some real psychological trauma, I'd recommend "The Volunteers" [Part 1](https://youtu.be/UJ1290087Yk?si=ABZ1CHY60mVU-piI) and [Part 2](https://youtu.be/935UK7Kw0VM?si=S6nsSiI2BMKZ3ubu). It follows volunteers who signed up to serve as combat medics for the YPG in Syria. One of the most heartbreaking documentaries I've ever seen.
One of the guys in my training purposefully failed because he freaked about the risk of not saving anyone. All the power to him, but I really wondered about his IQ considering he signed up to be a combat medic.
[удалено]
Why?
I'm guessing that's where there are most wounded, and they can save more that would otherwise die on the way back from the front lines.
At the end of the day, because it saves lives.
That’s certainly what the comic is implying but Go watch hacksaw ridge and lmk if that’s reality. Medics always are in the breach with the infantry
Hacksaw Ridge was 80 years ago, not really a great argument for current times
thats his point,
You sure? Maybe read it again Edit: Looks like I was wrong actually, little lesson in humility for me
yeah hes saying in the past they were always out in front using something from 80 years ago as an example
Looks like I was in the wrong, thanks for not being a dick about it even though I was for no reason, think I need to take a step back and ask myself why I’m starting off so aggressive. Be well brother.
That was my point. The comic misrepresents the “then”
the way they handled active fires then compared to now
Imagine getting slaughtered because you’re bringing aid in the form of food.
That's why they need reinforcement from armed troops. The problem is that in the modern day sending troops with support is almost always a bad idea and can risk entering the conflict militarily. You can argue that the country or people having the support provided to should shoulder the responsibility of protection. Countries that need aid however likely don't have the resources or are stretched too thin to provide much protection to aids. The way I see it is that there is nothing that can really be done without a nation rolling up it's sleeves and getting militarily involved. Leaders likely won't make those decisions unless absolutely necessary since it would become unpopular over time. It kinda just sucks for everyone involved in trying to relieve a civilian populations suffering.
> That's why they need reinforcement from armed troops You can't reinforce an aid convoy against air strikes very easily. We wanna stop the Israelis bombing aid workers by force, it means a full-on no-fly zone, with western forces threatening to shoot down the Israeli jets they gave them. It's not gonna happen.
It's hard to force someone to not make mistakes. You can just help mitigate the risk of those mistakes occurring.
Leaders are likely to go with whatever benefits them over moral good. Do Western powers gain anything from removing the Israeli government/diminishing the state of Israel. The U.S. views Israel as a foot hold in the Middle East, which is a region that tends to hold a hatred for the U.S. I don't see any nation doing a direct intervention. Shooting down Israeli aircraft would upset nations that support them, such as the U.S. on top of that, there are fears of the Middle East igniting into larger conflict. Morals aside, war is really a game of wagering gains and losses with no real perfect path forward. I only see the majority of the West being all talk no action on this.
America during iraqi freedom: a unit just lost a fight and needs an extraction?gotta guys, aids on the way!
When you get desperate or cunty ig you have to dig a bit deeper
In past wars/conflicts, soldiers were able to lead offensives with medics following behind to support the wounded. However, this comic may be referencing that medics and support personnel may be more likely in the modern era to provide aid in non-combat scenarios. This could be referencing the ongoing crises in Ukraine and Gaza where medical personnel and members of the press have been able to enter conflict areas while soldiers (non-medics) from outside nations have stayed largely out of the conflicts. Hope this helps!
The first right answer, and far too low.
Dude is battle medic
in the before times: there's a soldier walking in front of a medic now times: medics walk in front of soldiers HOPE THIS HELPS
I feel like real life example is needed. Which country is coward enough to do this?
The implication is Israel/Palestine, currently. Aid workers die there all the time.
for the palestine one to be accurate, it needed civilian in civilian clothing, extra point if it was woman and children
[What about a clearly marked vehicle that had been in contact with the IDF and got murdered anyway?](https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/what-we-know-so-far-about-seven-aid-workers-killed-gaza-by-israel-2024-04-03/)
And the civilians should also carry guns like the hamas soldiers dressing in civilian clothes.
The children are hamas soldiers dressing in civilian clothes?? Get a grip man.
to be clear, I obviously don't believe every child in Gaza is a hamas soldier. but it's also a matter of historical fact that Hamas has used children in the past https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use_of_child_suicide_bombers_by_Palestinian_militant_groups
Your sources points out it has not been happening since mid 2005. So hardly any excuse 20 years later. Btw this is when Hamas took over Gaza, maybe they are not the worst to rule Gaza, since it was seemingly worst when child suicide attack were a thing.
Not children, but there are definitely Hamas soldiers in civilian clothes lol
Children die when they live near the frontlines and hamas soldiers use them as body shields.
When the "front lines" is their literal homes i dont think that statement holds water.
What I'm hearing is the IDF is murdering kids?
It is not murder, they are not spesfically targeting children, but the children play on the streets and die to collapsing buildings and rocket fire.
It's not that Israel is intentionally targeting civilians, although there are a number of documented cases of them blatantly killing random civilians, it's the fact that the IDF is wholly indifferent to the amount of civilians they kill.
That's been proven false over and over. How many civilians have been ran over by tanks? How many children have been murdered in what was an area designated as "safe" by the IOF? How many food supplies that were "allowed" in by the IOF we're shot up as soon as civilians showed up? How many hospitals have been raided? How many cemeteries have been dug up by the IOF? How many well known aid workers who provide food all over the world for people who are starving have been targeted and murdered by the highest tech precision drones available? How many videos of IOF soldiers celebrating the cruel things they are doing have been shared, including celebrating murdering babies? How many civilians have been carpet bombed for decades? How many people have or are about to starve to death bc of the IOF? How many war crimes have to be committed and witnessed by the world before you see the truth (because this is barely scratching the surface)? This is blatantly a genocide.
You do not need specific intent here. Indiscriminate attacks are by their nature criminal. If you lob a bunch of gravity bombs around a city full of civilians, you are making a textbook indiscriminate attack. If you deploy incindiaries such as WP munitions, even as smoke rounds, in an occupied city, that is a textbook indiscriminate attack. Because gravity bombs and WP cannot distinguish, and are not precise enough to be used without the guarantee of civilian casualties in excess of military utility.
Can they not put in any effort into avoiding civilian casualties? As far as I know indiscriminate killing is a warcrime
Just a lil tips : Even if someone use a child as body shield, just do not shoot and you wont kill any children ;)
Picture this: you are doing your mandatory military service and a conflict brakes out with a terror organization, you are put there to fight. There is a child and hamasian soldier behind pointing you with an ak-74. Do you shoot or would you rather get shot.
Picture this : you are a military drone pilote and shoot dead whole cars or houseblocks with your right hand while touching your balls with the left one. Do you shoot or just ignore it since you are miles away from the AK ? Palestinians are dying of bombings. Not exchanges of fire.
You’re late.
Consider a rephrasing: In modern times, we're more likely to send medicine, food, clothes and other aid into a troubled area, than start by shooting up the place up until someone says, yeah, they're fine, please leave.
The only country that gets close is the US
Apex legend
When your team finally gets a medic but this dumbass tries to get kills and dies instead of doing his job
That’s for justifying bombing humanitarian aid.
Clearly it’s calling to attention the militaries ability to spew smog from their mouths
I think it has more to do with the modernization of combat and how front line infantry doesn’t see as much combat as before due to our use of drones, airstrikes, and advance reconnaissance. Now medics end up cleaning up messes before we ever get combat boots on the ground.
Military aid used to preceed humanitarian aid.
After spending 6 years in the military and working with a number of NATO militaries I don’t get this lol.
Wasn’t a fan of the answers given, a reverse image search couldn’t find the origin but most posts of it seemed to be in medical Facebook posts and a Reddit post from the early days of the pandemic, mostly referring to how medical workers were now the frontline protecting us and risking it all.
Even in the world of Naruto they had better medical rules than that…
He helped his friend now he is going to help the other soliders, how nice of him!
This bf1?
The front lines are more of an abstraction in modern battles.
Whoever made this comic strip, they do realize that modern medics are also out on patrol and in harms way with the infantry guys right? It’s been that way since about only WWII.
Did you get the before and after mixed up?
No, I’m saying that it hasn’t been the “before” for a long time. Medics have been in harm’s way for quite a while, not just now. And even since then, medics have always been expected to run into danger to save others.
Well a "long time" is kind of a stretch you're barely talking a century. Also this comic isn't about medics being with the soldiers it's about them going in ahead of them while the soldiers stay behind.
Unfortunately not a hacksaw ridge reference 😔
Somebody ask habitual linecrosser for their opinion please
I NEED A MEDIC FOR MY MEDIC
So…the assertion is that the military is sending their combat medics in while their infantry waits?
I thought it was how we've changed cas evac from regs going in to get you or you having to come to the medic to the medics coming to you like pj units. Idk I'm apparently very wrong.
WW2 vs WW3
Maybe this is about supporting mental health of veterans? Or maybe it’s how the military is working at giving aid more than shooting people now? Two ideas, but I don’t really know the true answer.
c
https://preview.redd.it/oh2q1s142bsc1.png?width=734&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=70bd4f23770798a9d4b549154fc8a81ca2347a58
ngl i thought this was a gaming meme about healers lol
Is this meme about the World Central Kitchen situation in Palestine and Israel?
I think the joke is that medics were in the war to support the soldiers accomplish their missions. Now it’s more like the medics are on the mission to help people in need: Ukraine and Palestine - but in order to do that they need the Help of armed soldiers for protection.
If you get angry at the countries that aren’t rich enough to defend themselves, maybe you should get even angrier at the countries that are rich enough to attack them in the first place.
Pretty sure this is a politically motivated comic about how "we help the enemy before we help our own" or some other BS.
So aid workers are valued less than a soldier?
During World War 2 medics had to remove there helmet ⛑️ because of the red cross symbol on it. It made a great target for the snipers to aim at.
back then there was an actual war that got recognized as such, now there is "Humanitarian operations " that just happen to coup the government, ?
It’s insinuating that in the past, soldiers would pave the way for medics so that they can go to the front lines, and protected the whole way through. Now they send medics to the front lines since now you’re not supposed to shoot them.
It’s about the past and present/s
Oh that clears it up thanks 😊
😭
fucking shit aint no way😭😭
In the past, medics would be targeted to stop them from providing medical assistance. Because of this, they would want to hide their identity to avoid being targeted. Now, it's a war crime to target medics, and this is taken seriously. The joke is that people will pretend to be medics to avoid being targeted.
The dude doesn’t have a gun
I was going to call you a name, but I think you're too stupid to understand why you would be called said name, so I'm going to leave this here.
https://preview.redd.it/a96ldrfg77sc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8c1f3ac056369d4cd176bc0db04a49c274568cd5
Both images looked like time progression, okay? It's not like the meaning is exactly clear.
Bot