Jeff Gilbert

In response to Elementalwarre: You have just changed the mission. The reply I gave deals with most [not all] Recon missions, the "what if" you propose deals with a Direct Action [DA] mission. Different set of rules ... I will give a more thourough reply when my work load slows down some ...

Norse, i seem to have missed the your 1st half analysis ... could yuou point me toward it or email it to me at jgilbert@mchsi.com

I would like to get in on this. Blue side if possible. It apears I've got the time that day ... I also emailed Slagg

Okay, I'll jumnp off my lurker perch once again. I guess what got me is the following question, "A situation to ponder: a SF team is deep behind enemy lines on a recce mission. Despite their best precautions they are discovered by an enemy patrol and, after a brief fire fight, one enemy soldier remains alive and surrenders. They don't believe that the mission has as yet been compromised. What do they do? Is the prisoner a non-combatant now? " and of cource, the one about being discovered by a child ... A little background, I spent 19 of my 21 years in the Army in Special Forces, 12 of that on A-Teams and 5 years as a Team Sergeant. Almost every exercise we ever had someone would have to try to throw this into the mix or grill us during the briefback about our SOP on this matter. Here was our take on it ... the 1st situation posted deals with coming into contact with an enemy patrol and one enemy soldier surrendering ... bottom line ... mission blown, compromised, game over ... get out. Do NOT kill the POW, do not take him with you, drug him and depart the area. 2nd situation, discovered by child. Again, game over, compromised ... call for exfil, take child with us to exfil site and leave him/her there. Again, do NOT kill non-combatants unless they violate that status.

A few remarks about ... #1 <An individual soldier knows he should not commit such crimes and is told by these laws to refuse to carry them out,but on the other hand he also runs the risk of getting a conviction for refusing orders if he denies to carry out an order to do so. This places a huge burden on the shoulder of a regular soldier.> Not so, in my opinion. The "threat" of a court martial does exist however, this only reinforces the seriousness of the decision. On the whole, the average Joe needs to execute the orders given, not to question them. When an order is so egregious that is forces the soldier to sit up and contimplate a refusal to carry it out. Beleive me, a court mrtial is worth much less than my soul. #2 <Theres days there is even trouble about the definition of what is a war, and what is a prisoner of war. As opposed to a criminal prisoner, see current discussion about Al Quida and Taliban on Cuba.> The definition of what is a war has not changed. The people who choose to wage war without the sanction of a Legitimate Government violate their non-combatant status and generally fall into one of two catagories ... spy or criminal ... and need to be treated as such. If they are activly carring arms, they are combatants and need to be dealt with by the force of arms.

Okay ... I'm back on my lurker perch.

A little something I wrote a while back dealing with the "Just War" issue ... St. Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274). Aquinas based himself upon St. Augustine's view of war, elaborating on these teachings. In refining his theory regarding the justness of a war, Aquinas focused on defining the right to make war and the importance of the intent which stands behind the decision to go to war. His attempt was to formulate simple rules which would give guidance on these issues, Aquinas argued that a war is justified when three basic, necessary conditions were met: 1 - the war was prosecuted by a lawful authority with the power to wage war 2 - the war was undertaken with just cause 3 - the war was undertaken with the right intention, that is, "to achieve some good or to avoid some evil." Grotius [16th Century AD] A Dutch Protestant who some call the father of international law. Grotius lived through the aftermath of the Thirty-Years War in Europe and wrote extensively on the right of nations to use force in self-defense in his book Jure Belli ac Pacis ("On the Rights of War and Peace"), which was published in 1625. It was largely Grotius who secularized just war theory, making the theory more acceptable for the age of the Enlightenment. For Grotius, a war is just if three basic criteria were met: 1 - the danger faced by the nation is immediate. 2 - the force used is necessary to adequately defend the nation's interests. 3 - the use of force is proportionate to the threatened danger. Grotius agreed with Cicero's belief of the need for a declaration of war, and also argued that the "purpose of just war theory" is to provide "succor and protection for the sick and wounded in war, combatants and civilians alike." A result of this view is the notion that just war theory exists externally of any recognized legal system, that it is a part of the "law of nations" which is followed by all civilized nations. For Grotius, it is not necessary to prove just war theory by consulting with any of the established laws of the nations of Europe, or their customs. Instead, those laws are known through the universal medium of the natural law, a law which transcends nations and their own particular legal codes, a law which is binding on all human societies in their interactions with each other. Daniel Webster [1842] while serving as the U.S. Secretary of State, acknowledged the legitimacy of the customary norms employed by Grotius to define the just war. This recognition occurred as a result of attempts to resolve the so-called "Caroline Incident." The Caroline Incident occurred while the British were attempting to prevent supplies from reaching Canadian rebels. During these efforts to restrict shipping to the rebels, the British burned the U.S. ship Caroline and killed several U.S. citizens. When the United States protested, the British government responded that its actions were justified as a matter of self-defense. Webster responded by stating that the only way for the British claim to self-defense to stand was if it met the traditional elements of just self-defense. Webster outlined those elements which are based mostly on the writings of Grotius: 1 - consisting of necessity of self-defense 2 - the reasonable and not excessive use of force.

Interesting questions. [climbing off my lurker perch] If you will all indulge me, I will address them seperately and site some historical references at the end ... this will probably drag on ... sorry Q1: since the fundamental nature of warfare has dramatically changed ... should the Laws of War be scrapped and a new set be created? Response to Q1: In a word, NO. One of the things that seperates us from the "Bad Guys" is our adhearance to the rule of law. Yes, I will agree that this makes our tasks much harder however, I don't think any of us would countance the idea of the idea or practice of engaging in what is now codified as a "War Crime" just because our enemies may practice such injustices. Q2: Isn't it insane to impose laws on the conduct of war (violence) when the goal is to win? [very thought provoking question from a youngen] Response to Q2: No, not insane but actually very practical. By restricting the conduct of warfare helps preserve the cultures involved in said conflict. A lot of the Laws of Land Warfare deal with the preservation of historical and religious sites and items, protection of civilians by codifying non-combatant status and rules for the treatment of captured enemy soldiers. I don't find these insane, quite rational when you look at what their design is about. These rules and laws did not just spring into being but were developed slowly over more than 2,000 years beginning back with the Roman orator Cicero then through St. Augustine [4th Century], St Thomas Aquinas [13th Century], Grotius [16th Century], and finally Daniel Webster [19th Century]. I realize there are many others but these were the prime movers in actually putting their thoughts into writing for presentation. Okay, that should about do it for now. I actually sat down and prepared a 3 page paper on this ... way too much to post here ... way too much time on my hands ... Thanks for indulging me.

I knew about the 101-5-1 ... thanks. I guess my question should have been phrased differently. What I meant to ask was: "Has anyone already done the <work> of creating .bmp type files of different unit symbols" Basically, being lazy, I was trying to avoid work.

Great info. One question though. Does anyone know of a set of already made "Graphic Control Measures" that would save me from drawing them from scratch?

I haven't tried this 1940 invasion of Italy yet. Sounds interesting, is it designed as an harassment or is the effort to knock the Italians out of the war?

I have also done it as the Allies. Mostly US troops and used this as part of opening up a second front through the Balkins. Almost more trouble than it wa worth.

Randall, Your point is well taken. However, in reading Von Manstein, he does take the blame in his own failings. But also points out that decisions made by Hitler were not always open for debate. On numerous occasions he argued peronally with Hitler ... won some, lost some ... and this friction ultimately cost him his command. I don't beleive his is a case of "blame the dead guy." Side note: healthy discorse like this is very refreshing and welcome.

Okay, I've lurked here reading and now I will actually write something. I will paraphrase two earlier posts that I must take some exception to. 1st was words to the effect that the German generals drew up and executed the war plans. Although this technically is true I would direct your attention to the fact that they were having bad plans dictated that they had to try to carry out. The two most obvious examples are Hitler's insistance on advancing on multiple objectives without adequate forces, [ie. Moscow, Leningrad, Stalingrad] and the "hold at all costs" orders that doomed the 6th Army in Stalingrad among other smaller disasters [destruction of Army Group Center being one]. A very good writting on Hitler's interference and complete bypass os OKW can be found in "Lost Victories" by Field Marshal Eric Von Manstien. 2nd - Some French person saying, "war is much too important to be left to the generals." I think that the French war record since the 30 years war speaks volumes.

I completely understand. I just glanced through my TacOps4 CD and dida quick match-up with what was available in the Map Room ... looks like they are all there. Some real beauties ... I've got a ways to go on my artwork to catch up. I hope your copy of TacOps4 shows up soon. You will not be disappointed. Good Gaming ...

Yee haa !!! I await the future release with baited breath.

If I am not mistaken, most if not all of the maps in the Map Room are on the TacOps4 CD. Good Gaming ...

Speaking of the new Map Making Tool. I was reading the Guide, specifically looking for the part on blocked or impassable terrain and how it works ... I remember reading it elsewhere but now can't find my notes. Perhaps you could post it here? Thanks in advance for your assistance.

Not gamey at all! I think it is a good use of your available tactical resources. The "snapshot" gained will be of immediate tactical value [less than 5 minutes], but in short order most of what you saw has moved. It is also very useful in trying to predict where your enemy is moving to. Good gaming ...

I also use Photoshop a bit. I am running Photoshop 6 & 7 on Macs and Photoshop 5 on Windows. I am by no means an expert but I might be able to help answer a few questions.

Okay, you will probably want to save TF Mizokami 'till you are very comfortable with the game. I would suggest Team Cahoon or Davis for some good tank/mech work. Both are smaller maps, managable force sizes and, in my opinion, great re-playability. Good gaming!

Sleep is a sign of weakness! My copies of TacOps4 showed up Monday while I was in NC.

Once you get comfortable with TacOps, I am a big fan of the whole Mizokami series. Big, tough and fluid battles.

Major H, I have Macs and I am unfriendly ... can I have the tools?

Well Major, You've got to save something for the add-on pack or v5.