Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

NYT says US special forces killed North Korean civilians in botched 2019 mission

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–37 of 37 posts

Re: NYT says US special forces killed North Korean civilians in botched 2019 mission

#31

Post by locallost »

neilv wrote: post #23
jandrewrogers wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are different clandestine and covert legal authorities under which these kinds of operations can be conducted with different rules of engagement. While most don't, some of these authorities may allow for killing of innocents in furtherance of the mission. The article implies that the rules of engagement for this particular mission allowed for the elimination of witnesses. Governments around the world have stron…

Thanks for the explanation. Isn't this a pretty dangerous power and precedent to have, if you're the good guys? Especially if you don't have a lot of confidence that the top of the command chain will always be of the utmost integrity and decency?

There are no goods guys. Just a series of rationalizations on why something wrong is justified. Even the Nazis saw themselves as the good guys.

Instead, justice is blind for a reason. Your declared noble intentions are irrelevant.

Re: NYT says US special forces killed North Korean civilians in botched 2019 mission

#32

Post by NaomiLehman »

neilv wrote: post #23
jandrewrogers wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are different clandestine and covert legal authorities under which these kinds of operations can be conducted with different rules of engagement. While most don't, some of these authorities may allow for killing of innocents in furtherance of the mission. The article implies that the rules of engagement for this particular mission allowed for the elimination of witnesses. Governments around the world have stron…

Thanks for the explanation. Isn't this a pretty dangerous power and precedent to have, if you're the good guys? Especially if you don't have a lot of confidence that the top of the command chain will always be of the utmost integrity and decency?

There are no good guys. There are just different flavors of bad guys. All power corrupts.

Re: NYT says US special forces killed North Korean civilians in botched 2019 mission

#33

Post by croes »

victorbjorklund wrote: post #13
ekianjo wrote: post #3

> A classified Pentagon review later concluded the killings were justified under the rules of engagement, the report said. Justified against unarmed civilians?

Wait until you find out how many unarmed germans died in ww2.

In which war are North Korea and the US?

Re: NYT says US special forces killed North Korean civilians in botched 2019 mission

#34

Post by croes »

2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #9
ekianjo wrote: post #3

> A classified Pentagon review later concluded the killings were justified under the rules of engagement, the report said. Justified against unarmed civilians?

[flagged]

Of course not a war crime because North Korea and the US are not at war.

Just a crime

Re: NYT says US special forces killed North Korean civilians in botched 2019 mission

#35

Post by CamperBob2 »

croes wrote: post #33
victorbjorklund wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait until you find out how many unarmed germans died in ww2.

In which war are North Korea and the US?

The Korean War, which has never actually ended.

Re: NYT says US special forces killed North Korean civilians in botched 2019 mission

#36

Post by tomjakubowski »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #35
croes wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In which war are North Korea and the US?

The Korean War, which has never actually ended.

The DPRK and UN Command (which includes the US) do have an armistice agreement though.

Re: NYT says US special forces killed North Korean civilians in botched 2019 mission

#37

Post by esbranson »

neilv wrote: post #17

> The civilians appeared to be diving for shellfish when they inadvertently came across the detachment of SEALs as they splashed ashore at night, the Times reported. The American forces opened fire, killing all those aboard the small fishing vessel, the report said, without specifying the number of casualties. [...] A classified Pentagon review later concluded the killings were justified under the rules of engagement…

The rules of engagement are probably to consider everyone hostile unless and until proven otherwise. If you're a California male citizen for example, you probably have no clue that you've been declared a combatant. By law. (Military and Veterans Code § 122.) North Koreans are probably less sexist and ageist, and less ignorant and naive than Californians to boot. On a state-owned vessel.

Enemy combatants don't magically get immunity from war when they don't have a weapon on them, nor do military forces have to go into a state property and politely ask everyone without a weapon if they're an enemy combatant before they can fire on it and turn everyone into dust. Nor are they required to refrain from engaging enemy forces because someone else is likely to get hurt. Your entire line of assumptions and the questions that flow from them is detached from reality.

The military law of your jurisdiction, at a minimum, would be a good book to read, if you can afford it. I think a one-time purchase from Thomson Reuters for the California Code would cost you $41,000 USD and a pretty onerous contract. If you tried to take one from a library, I'm sure they'd only give you a couple nights in jail and a year of probation. I think you can get Hong Kong's for $90,000 if that's where you live.

Post reply on HN