Quote:
Originally Posted by SteaminDemon
We need to maximize collateral damage around X target, the 16" will do the job and so on and so forth.
|
UTTER NONSENSE.
Among numerous reasons, *maximizing collateral damage* is NOT a legitimate objective in the US Navy.
From the COMMANDER’S HANDBOOK ON THE LAW OF NAVAL OPERATIONS (July 2007 Edition) :
(emphasis added)
Quote:
8.9.1 General Rules
The United States is a party to Hague Convention No. IX (1907) Respecting Bombardment by Naval Forces in Time of War. That convention establishes the general rules of naval bombardment of land targets. These rules have been further developed by customary practice in World Wars I and II, Vietnam, the Falkland/Malvinas Conflict, the Arabian Gulf, and Operations Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom. Underlying these rules are the broad principles of the law of armed conflict that belligerents are forbidden to make noncombatants and civilians the target of direct attack, that superfluous injury to, and unnecessary suffering of, combatants are to be avoided, and that wanton destruction of property is prohibited. To give effect to these concepts, the following general rules governing bombardment must be observed.
Link
|
Only Terrorists will seek to *maximize collateral damage* as an organizational goal.
