andyt andyt:
$1:
An argument could be made that the wounded Taliban was suffering and Semrau was only putting him out of his misery.
Drapeau said Canadian and international humanitarian law does not recognize mercy killings and it's unlikely such a defence would stand.
Well, mercy killing should be recognized, in civilian life too. And I think international law does recognized euthanasia in say Holland, Switzerland, etc. This seems to be a similar case. They guy was dying anyway and no treatment would help. So Semrau put him out of his misery. A decent act.
Except that many of the people who defend Semrau would probably howl like dogs if the Talibani did it to one of our guys. Can you imagine Hillier crediting them for a humanitarian act?
I am trained how to react to an ambush. I have rockets or arty coming in on my position and I will act accordingly. Want me to be part of an ambush, go on a patrol, secure and hold an area and I know exactly what to do.
Have me look at a wounded person and decided if they are beyond saving or not and I am absolutely clueless. Mercy killing is illegal for a reason. What would stop some person of say "loose morals" to go to some individual that say has a leg wound and stating he is beyond saving?
A better defense would be killed while attempting escape....
Personally, as an enemy fighter, if he wants to meet Allah let him go screaming in agony the entire way. No need to help him along.
I agree. Discipline must be maintained, especially in combat.
CKA Elite 
