For what exactly? Your issues with that program probably has more to do with Taliban war crimes. Don't forget it's a war crime to not wear a uniform during combat.
It just goes down to the function of such a rule. Who made that rule? It’s just power dynamics. It’s simply oppressive to force weak militaries to lose. Weak countries that will lose in head to head combat. In paraphrasing but there’s two ways to fight the U.S. the stupid way or guerrilla warfare. Let’s not forget how the revolutionary war against Britain was won because they didn’t follow formalities.
The US won the Revolutionary War because ultimately France joined in against the British. The French provided substantial support and training for the Continental Army, and the French navy held the British fleet at bay.
The land battles that were won by the Continental Army were won using the standard tactics of the day.
There’s lots of reasons, they had the forage war and used guerilla tactics, ambushes and non conventional warfare since they’d lose a head to head war.
"Aged like milk" Bill Cosby aside, he had a great bit if more things were decided by coin toss.
The Americans win the coin toss; they can wear whatever they want and hide behind trees and rocks. The British will be forced to wear bright red and march in straight lines.
I'd reckon that the 'war crime' of a lack of a uniform is lower on the scale than a drone strike on a civilian aide to the U.S. during the withdrawal from said State.
Nope that drone strike only happened because of the lack of uniform and clear insignia. If they didn't use that tactic the strike would never have happened.
Following interviews of the man's employer, and the official word from the DoD "we tracked the vehicle from a known ISIS safehouse."
The vehicle was a Toyota Corolla whose driver took his coworkers home, and one coworker's home was "a known ISIS safehouse" even though he had long been working for the U.S. effort, in full support of the U.S. effort.
Let alone, ISIS isn't quite a government entity, but rather a terrorist group so not explicitly going to follow international treaties. Their premise is to blend in - the U.S. shouldn't be allowing the collateral damage to happen on our watch, rather do it's best to stop damaging and hurting civilians.
"Said was asked to investigate the Aug. 29 drone strike on a white Toyota Corolla sedan, which killed Zemerai Ahmadi and nine family members, including seven children. Ahmadi, 37, was a longtime employee of an American humanitarian organization."
What uniform would have avoided the tragedy?
You are blaming ISIS' lack of uniforms for the drone strike on this man and his nine family members?
> Don't forget it's a war crime to not wear a uniform during combat
lol those dudes are getting shot at with gunships and tanks and have AKs and old mines and stuff to fight back with. They should invest in uniforms to make it "fair"?
It's not about making it fair. When soldiers dress as civilians in civilian areas during combat. It's nearly impossible to make sure a real civilian doesn't get harmed.
Whether or not that is an isolated incident is irrelevant. The US has a reputation for shooting civilians. The US media doesn't help either, often portraying soldiers shooting civilians even in fiction.