Mecha Ethics

[proEuphie]

The Court Martial of A Mecha Pilot

Let us imagine the court martial of mecha pilot Shinji Ikari

Prosecutor Mombuto:

"Colonel Shinji Ikari, why didn't you capture the enemy commander, at the Battle of Madnug, after you so brilliantly destroyed her mecha? Standing orders say that whenever possible an enemy leader of the rank of general or above must be captured to be used as a hostage to stop the battle. And killing a defenseless enemy instead of capturing her is clearly an act of murder, punishable by death."

Fickle spectators boo Colonel ikari.

Judge Gomez: "Silence!"

Colonel Ikari. "It was not possible to capture the Azurian commander, so I had to blast her into atoms with my mega-cannon."

Fickle spectators cheer Colonel Ikari.

Judge Gomez: "Silence!"

Prosecutor Mombuto: "Why wasn't it possible to capture the enemy leader? Why didn't you use some sleep gas on her?"

Fickle spectators boo Colonel Ikari.

Judge Gomez: "Silence!"

Colonel Ikari: "My sleep gas canister was punctured during the previous battle. I requested a replacement and it arrived the Tuesday after the Battle of Madnug."

Fickle spectators cheer Colonel Ikari.

Judge Gomez: "Silence!"

Prosecutor Mombuto: "Why didn't you use your net thrower on the enemy commander?"

Fickle spectators -- well, you got the idea by now.

Colonel Ikari: My net was broken. The replacement net arrived the Tuesday after the Battle of Madnug."

Prosecutor Mombuto: "How does a steel cable net get broken?"

Colonel Ikari: "Well, ah, er, we were having some drinks and I bet Captain Ivanov that I could net and capture his mecha despite his best evasive moves. It turned out that I could snag the mecha in the net but the force of the moving mecha was just too much for my net and it snapped."

Prosecutor Mombuto: "Why didn't you use your mecha's sonic blaster to knock the Azurian general unconscious?"

Colonel Ikari: "Well, the power unit on the battalion coffee machine was broken so I replaced it with the power unit from my mecha's sonic blaster, which was rarely used since we almost never see an enemy outside of the protection of his mecha. The replacement power unit arrived the Tuesday after the Madnug Battle. So you see, I had absolutely no way to capture the enemy general alive and I had to either just let her go or blast her to atoms with my mega-cannon."

Prosecutor Mombuto: So you claim that you had no way to capture the enemy general alive, despite the fact that she was unarmed and just a couple of dozen feet away from your mecha?"

Colonel Ikari: "Yes, sir. It is impossible for a mecha pilot to capture an enemy if all three of his capture devices, the sonic blaster, the net thrower, and the sleep gas, are all disabled at the same time. It was just a tragic series of equipment failures at the same time which made it absolutely impossible for me to capture the enemy commander alive. I had no malice or criminal intent toward her.”

Prosecutor Mombuto: “Honored members of the court, please look at prosecution Exhibit A, a letter written by the deceased, Azurian General Rei Ikari, a year ago, at the start of this terrible civil war. Recorder, please read from your copy for the benefit of the spectators.”

Recorder (reading from the letter): “Shinji, my father, please forgive me for the terrible things I said to you when you said you were going to join the Viridians. Please, please forgive me. I have already forgiven you for what you said to me in your anger. I beg you to send me a message telling me that you forgive me for joining the Azurians.”

“People can only choose to fight for the side that they are convinced is right, and if the mere fact that someone they love is fighting on the other side is not enough to change their convictions, they must fight against the side of even their most beloved family members. But somehow we must find the strength to still love each other, despite my hatred for the Viridian cause and your hatred for the Azurian cause.”

“Though I will give the Azurian cause almost all my loyalty and devotion, because of you I will not give it all my commitment. I will reserve some loyalty to you, my dear father, and to humanity. If by some dread chance we meet in battle, I will capture you or surrender to you, run away or let you escape, instead of forcing a fight to the death between us.”

“And I promise to fight against the hatred that this horrible civil war will bring and try to be as kind as possible to all the Viridian prisoners and civilian population, seeing you in all of them, hoping to set a good example for my fellows and keep the hatred to a minimum.”

“Your loving daughter, Rei Ikari.”

Prosecutor Mombuto: “That letter from the deceased, Azurian General Rei Ikari, was found in the possessions of the accused, Colonel Shinji Ikari -- her father.”

Gasps from the court and spectators.

Prosecutor Mombuto:”Honored members of the court, please watch the screen where I will play Exhibit B, a video taken by a camera on the torso of Colonel Ikari’s mecha during the Battle of Madnug in which the deceased, General Ikari was killed.”

Colonel Ikari: “What! I wasn’t told there was a camera on my mecha!”

Judge Gomez: “Well, now you know. The prosecution should have an explanation for the presence of that camera when they give their full case against you.”

The video opened with pieces of a destroyed mecha raining to the ground and a mecha pilot parachuting to safety, having ejected in time. The pilot landed and disengaged from the parachute. She walked toward the camera and stopped about thirty feet away and twenty feet lower than the camera. She unholstered her pistol and held it out by the barrel with a resigned expression on her pretty young face. Her blue flight suit was wet with sweat and stuck closely to her.

Colonel Ikari appeared on the ground walking away from the camera and toward the Azurian officer, who looked surprised, then ran up to Ikari and hugged him Colonel Ikari in his green flight suit pushed her away from, snatched the pistol out of her hand, and shot her with it. There was a startled expression her faces as she crumbled to the ground..

Prosecutor Mombuto: “Notice that Colonel Ikari is not wearing his holster or pistol, which is against regulations and an indication that he felt perfectly safe in the situation.”

Colonel Ikari turned back toward the camera and walked back to his off screen mecha. After a few seconds a blast from his off screen mega-cannon blasted the enemy officer’s body to atoms.

Prosecutor Mombuto: “You can examine Exhibit C, a pistol with the inscribed name of ‘R Ikari’ which was found in Colonel Ikari’s possession and has a serial number which does not match that of any pistol issued by our armed forces.”

Prosecutor Mombuto: “If Colonel Ikari felt so safe that he didn’t even bother to take his own pistol with him when he went out to General Ikari, I find it hard to believe that he was afraid that General Ikari would resist or try to shoot him. Thus I believe that taking General Ikari a prisoner as per the normal procedure would have been almost as safe for Colonel Ikari as killing General Ikari was.”

Prosecutor Mombuto: “But suppose that you think that if capturing General Ikari was not exactly as safe for Colonel Ikari as killing General Ikari, the little bit of extra danger involved in capturing General Ikari would have been enough to making killing her not murder but an acceptable behavior on the part of Colonel Ikari. If any of you think that, you will be surprised to learn that there was another way Colonel Ikari could have captured General Ikari alive which was even safer to Colonel Ikari than killing General Ikari was.”

Gasps from the court and spectators.

Prosecutor Mombuto: "Honored members of the court, I wish you all to examine Exhibit D, life sized reproductions of a letter written by Colonel Ikari last week. Notice anything unusual?"

General Chandraputra: Colonel Ikari's handwriting is unusually large and clumsy for an adult and an officer, but what has that to do with this case?"

Prosecutor Mombuto: Colonel Ikari wrote that letter using the hands of his mecha."

Gasps from the court and spectators.

Prosecutor Mombuto: Colonel Ikari is very dexterous with the hands of his mecha. He can do very fine work with them, as the letter shows, or he can use enormous strength, as exhibit E, a photo of him tossing Lieutenant McFly into the air and catching him, shows."

That may not sound impressive, but the photo showed that Lieutenant McFly was in his mecha when Colonel Ikari tossed him up and caught him.

Colonel Ikari: So I'm handy with the hands of my mecha. What does that prove?"

Prosecutor Mombuto: "So why didn't you simply pick up the enemy commander in the hand of your mecha to capture her?"

Gasps from the court and spectators.

Prosecutor Mombuto: "It might be claimed that there was some mechanical failure with the hands of Colonel Ikari's mecha at the time of the Battle of Madnug. But I have witnesses to testify that Colonel Ikari performed his usual post-battle ritual immediately upon returning to the post, and before there was any time to do any repairs to the hands of his mecha. And this video, exhibit F, shows just what the ritual was. Colonel Ikari in his mecha, juggled three jeeps, put them down, and then juggled his mechanics, privates Jones and Chang."

Colonel Ikari: "Oh, Oh"

Yes, it seems that there is no way a mecha pilot accused of killing an unarmed foe who was on the ground, outdoors, and close to his mecha, can claim that he had no way to capture him alive, that he was forced to kill him.

The mecha in different anime have a wide range of abilities and missions. Naturally they are equipped with a wide number of lethal weapons to use in those missions. Weapons like sniper rifles, machine guns, swords, grenade launchers, cannons, mega-cannons, rocket launchers, atomic bombs, lasers, planetary disruptors, force fields, death rays, etc. etc. etc.

I believe that any good and decent military organization which uses Mecha should equip each mecha with at least one nonlethal weapon to use for capturing prisoners. Something like a lasso, a net thrower, an electric stun gun, a stun ray, knockout gas, a tranquilizer dart gun, etc. etc. etc.

I wonder if there is any anime in which a military force uses mecha equipped with nonlethal weapons for capturing prisoners whenever possible, with or without other, lethal weapons for killing enemies. I wonder if there is any anime mecha force or individual mecha pilot known to certainly not have any nonlethal weapons for capturing prisoners.

Is there any anime in which it is shown that the hands of those particular mechas are too strong and clumsy to grab someone safely, that they would always crush a person to death? How many animes are there in which it is clearly shown that the hands of mechas can gently pick up people without hurting them?

Is there any anime character who stupidly let an enemy run away to safety when he could have simply picked up the enemy in the hand of his mecha?

Is there any anime character who killed someone he could have captured by simply picking him up in the hand of his mecha?

[AznOtaku]

tl;dr.

[CerebralDivinity]

I wonder if there is any anime in which a military force uses mecha equipped with nonlethal weapons for capturing prisoners whenever possible, with or without other, lethal weapons for killing enemies.

Giant robots are for kicking ***, not picking flowers.

I'm kidding. I can't actually think of any relevant examples, but you do bring up some interesting points. Mecha are almost always shown to have extremely dexterous hands/claws/whatever, but rarely do you see this being used on the battlefield outside the obligatory "rescue a comrade/love interest" scene. This seems like a lot of wasted potential. I will contemplate this more and try to come up with a meaningful response.

[MangaFanGuy]

man that took a long time to read.

Originally Posted by proEuphie

Yes, it seems that there is no way a mecha pilot accused of killing an unarmed foe who was on the ground, outdoors, and close to his mecha, can claim that he had no way to capture him alive, that he was forced to kill him.

Depends on the Mecha, depends on the foe, depends on the tactical situation etc
I believe you have generalized way too much and corrupted your own point.

The mecha in different anime have a wide range of abilities and missions. Naturally they are equipped with a wide number of lethal weapons to use in those missions. Weapons like sniper rifles, machine guns, swords, grenade launchers, cannons, mega-cannons, rocket launchers, atomic bombs, lasers, planetary disruptors, force fields, death rays, etc. etc. etc.

True

I believe that any good and decent military organization which uses Mecha should equip each mecha with at least one nonlethal weapon to use for capturing prisoners. Something like a lasso, a net thrower, an electric stun gun, a stun ray, knockout gas, a tranquilizer dart gun, etc. etc. etc.

no
What is the point?
In a military sense you should only put on the stuff you think you should need.
how well do you think modern day commandos or spec ops would do if they all had to carry around extra LTL weapons that they will only ever use once in a very specific situation against a very specific enemy?.
many mecha are weapons designed to fight other mechas and nothing more and so are equpped as such. anything more is just dead weight
If you were to design a mecha for urban pacification or crowd control then you wouldn't want to weigh it down with the same weapons designed to punch through mecha armour would you?

I wonder if there is any anime in which a military force uses mecha equipped with nonlethal weapons for capturing prisoners whenever possible, with or without other, lethal weapons for killing enemies. I wonder if there is any anime mecha force or individual mecha pilot known to certainly not have any nonlethal weapons for capturing prisoners.

none that I know of.
But what I do know of in terms of mecha animes they tend to leave the taking of prisoners to the regular soldiers without mechas.
Mechas are really impractial for taking prisoners due to not only being primarily powerhouses in combat but the scale of weapons makes them impractical for capturing soft bodied people (Would you want a mecha sized net landing on your head?)

Is there any anime in which it is shown that the hands of those particular mechas are too strong and clumsy to grab someone safely, that they would always crush a person to death? How many animes are there in which it is clearly shown that the hands of mechas can gently pick up people without hurting them?

Most mechas show dexterity of the fingers close to that of a persons hand

Is there any anime character who stupidly let an enemy run away to safety when he could have simply picked up the enemy in the hand of his mecha?

Yes all the time in Mecha shows.

Is there any anime character who killed someone he could have captured by simply picking him up in the hand of his mecha?

*Start the Trumpets*
Euphemia (Cos lets face it it was all building to this) had many more factors building to her deatht then simply "He couldn't pick her up"
She was killed for specific reasons (Militaristic, political etc) and in the end it was better for Zero to kill her then any of the other situations.
And because of the dexterity he didn't even have to leave his mecha.
So he did her a favor by at least letting her know who it was that killed her.

[blackrosetwilight]

Ever seen a F-22, Apache Helicopter, and Abrams tanks carring non-lethal weapons? You should already know the answer/reason and that is why most "Real Type Mecha" dont carry non-lethal weapons, see keep it simple.

P.S. I skimmed through most of your post so correct any of my mistake if there are any

[proEuphie]

Originally Posted by blackrosetwilight

Ever seen a F-22, Apache Helicopter, and Abrams tanks carring non-lethal weapons? You should already know the answer/reason and that is why most "Real Type Mecha" dont carry non-lethal weapons, see keep it simple.

P.S. I skimmed through most of your post so correct any of my mistake if there are any

Spy satilites used to send canisters of exposed film back to Earth. As they parachuted toward the ocean, planes would h catch the canisters in giant nets. Ejecting enemy pilots parachuting to safety could be caught in a similar way, keeping them from fighting again without killing hem. jet fighters could not be equipped with devices to snag pilots parachuting to safety because the jets travel way too fast. Robot planes coud accompany jet fighters into battle, decelerate to safe speeds, catch parachuting fighters in nets and take them back to base. Of course by the time such robot planes were developed most fighter craft will probably be robots and/or flown by remote control.


If someone ever invents a sleep gas that is not almost as lethal as poison gas tanks or helicopters could spread it over an area in a surprise attack before anyone could put on gas masks. Then soldiers would find every unconscious person and sort them into enemy, noncombatant, and uncertain groups and detain the members of enemy and uncertain groups for questionings and/or imprisonment.

In the world of my example it is possible that earlier in the war the Virdian mechas were mostly used to beak through enemy infantry and tank lines with deadly weapons and them pursue the fleeing enemies and capture many with non lethal weapons. The masses of prisoners could be used to pressure the Azurians into making peace to save the prisoners from captivity or also be brainwashed into joining the Viridian side. When the Azurians got many mechas of their own the situation changed into mechas fighting mechas.

Remember the Balrog in Lord of the Rings had a whip as well as a sword?

The Balrogs were demons who served Sauron's original master, Morgoth, orginator of all evil and the first dark lord. At the Battle of Sudden Flame Glaurung the Golden Father of Dragons, led the way, followed by Balrogs and hordes of orcs.

After Mogorth's final defeat hordes of elves were released from his fortress where they had been enslaved as workers and smiths for decades and centuries. So Morgoth wanted prisoners as slave workers. One theory about the origin of orcs is that they were captured elves who had been corrupted by Morgoth. So Morgoth may have wanted many elf prisoners in the hope of turning them into orcs after thousands of years.

In battle the Balrogs were used against elfen and human infantry and cavalry like mechas would have been used against infantry and cavalry. Since Morgoth gave his Balrogs whips as well as swords they may have been ordered to whip many enemies into submission to take prisoner.

Mechas used to break infantry lines could be armed with thousands of feet of whips to be unreeled to any desired length. The whips could have thousands of tiny sedative-injecting needles (like jelllyfish tenticles) and/or shocking electrodes. When the enemy broke and ran the mechas could pursue them whipping them into unconsciousness for capture by the following troops.

If the mechas have a good nonlethal sleep gas and fear gas they can release invisible fear gas over a wide area and sleep gas (with some additive to make it visible) over a smaller area closer to them. When the enemy affected by the fear gas see their fellows falling down unconscious they will assume they have been killed by poison gas and run away in panic.

In Code geass when the Britannians had a monopoly on nightmares they may have been used to break enemy infantry lines in similar ways, possibly using nonlethal weapons.

Anyway, the point of this thread is that mechas are unlike tanks, jet planes, helicopter gunships, etc, etc. in that they have hands that are usually very capable. If an unarmed enemy is standing right at the feet of your mecha, you can't say that you have to kill him because your mecha has no nonlethal weapons or they are out of service. You can always pick up the enemy in the hand of your mecha and capture him instead of killing him.

[blackrosetwilight]

"sigh" go watch Kenshin I dont feel like preaching about ethic becasue I just dont have the time

[MangaFanGuy]

Originally Posted by proEuphie

In the world of my example it is possible that earlier in the war the Virdian mechas were mostly used to beak through enemy infantry and tank lines with deadly weapons and them pursue the fleeing enemies and capture many with non lethal weapons. The masses of prisoners could be used to pressure the Azurians into making peace to save the prisoners from captivity or also be brainwashed into joining the Viridian side. When the Azurians got many mechas of their own the situation changed into mechas fighting mechas.

I fail to see what this has to do with anything?
You cannot make up Mechas for one world and then apply their ideas to anouther.
If (Like is the obvious case) you are trying to compare them to britannian forces I think you are sadly mistaken.
In that regard the images we saw of the original invasion showed their mechas were never intended to be peaceful machines at all and were always equipped with lethal weaponry and not LTL for capturing civilians.
Also the readiness of Brittanian forces to massacre civilians means it is unlikely they ever considered LTL and so bears little to no relationship to your own example.

Remember the Balrog in Lord of the Rings had a whip as well as a sword?

The Balrogs were demons who served Sauron's original master, Morgoth, orginator of all evil and the first dark lord. At the Battle of Sudden Flame Glaurung the Golden Father of Dragons, led the way, followed by Balrogs and hordes of orcs.

After Mogorth's final defeat hordes of elves were released from his fortress where they had been enslaved as workers and smiths for decades and centuries. So Morgoth wanted prisoners as slave workers. One theory about the origin of orcs is that they were captured elves who had been corrupted by Morgoth. So Morgoth may have wanted many elf prisoners in the hope of turning them into orcs after thousands of years.
In battle the Balrogs were used against elfen and human infantry and cavalry like mechas would have been used against infantry and cavalry. Since Morgoth gave his Balrogs whips as well as swords they may have been ordered to whip many enemies into submission to take prisoner.

this is a pointless few paragraphs

Mechas used to break infantry lines could be armed with thousands of feet of whips to be unreeled to any desired length. The whips could have thousands of tiny sedative-injecting needles (like jelllyfish tenticles) and/or shocking electrodes. When the enemy broke and ran the mechas could pursue them whipping them into unconsciousness for capture by the following troops.

How many infantry lines did we see?
How many were backed up by Tanks? Mechas? Helicopters?
Your theory may be somewhat sound but really has little practicality versus the high armour targets normally shown

If the mechas have a good nonlethal sleep gas and fear gas they can release invisible fear gas over a wide area and sleep gas (with some additive to make it visible) over a smaller area closer to them. When the enemy affected by the fear gas see their fellows falling down unconscious they will assume they have been killed by poison gas and run away in panic.

Dude 2 word
Gas masks

In Code geass when the Britannians had a monopoly on nightmares they may have been used to break enemy infantry lines in similar ways, possibly using nonlethal weapons.

The enemy still had large tanks and armoured columns
And LTL then requires you to house/detain all of those thousands of prisoners.
There are such things as overloading your own troops with prisoners to the point where all your military force is busy and the enemy is left the perfect chance to counterattack.

Anyway, the point of this thread is that mechas are unlike tanks, jet planes, helicopter gunships, etc, etc. in that they have hands that are usually very capable.

However the use of the hands can be impractical and unneeded.

If an unarmed enemy is standing right at the feet of your mecha, you can't say that you have to kill him because your mecha has no nonlethal weapons or they are out of service. You can always pick up the enemy in the hand of your mecha and capture him instead of killing him.

Ok first you say Unarmed.
Euphemia wasn't unarmed so that point is destroyed
Secondly you assume the person want to take prisoners.
It isn't as cut and dried as "Oh take them prisoner"
Then What?
You have taken part of your mecha out of service and now have to negotiate a hostile zone whilst trying to protect a person held in your mechas hand.
And what is the benefit of doing this?
So you can feel a little better?
Scant excuse for a person in a war zone.

If you can provide a decent example of why? How? when? a person would simply try to capture prisoners in a war zone using an oversized tin can with fingers then you may be able to provide a decent point.

at the moment however I see no contradiction in weapons of war being used to kill and not simply save every random in their way.

[wolfgirl90]

Okay, AGAIN, Lelouch did not want to capture Euphemia. THAT was never an option that popped to his head. Since he really can't use Euphemia as a bargaining chip, the BEST option in that situation was to give the Japanese what they wanted: Euphemia's death and to use that death to start a riot and have the Japanese turn towards his cause. And I don't know where you live, but someone does not commit genocide and still have the support of the people who were involved. Those people would want that person dead. Not a prisoner. Dead.

Note: I have already explained that using Euphemia as bargaining tool wouldn't really work since Cornelia can't give away Japan in exchange for her sister. Cornelia is the Viceroy, a representative of the REAL owner: Charles. Only Charles would be able to do an exchange like that (the minute Cornelia would try it, Charles would step in). This includes using Euphemia to stop the fighting since, again, Charles easily trumps Cornelia's power. And since Charles was more than content to watch his daughter slaughter thousands of people, he was certainly not beyond sacrificing her to fulfill his own purposes (he has shown several times that he does not care about his children AT ALL).

Second Note: Euphemia could command soldiers but ONLY because she was the Sub-Viceroy and had to be obeyed by both citizens and military personnel. Cornelia is both the Viceroy and the Chief General (meaning she is actually IS in the military...and one of very few members of the Imperial family who actually is) so Cornelia trumps Euphemia in that regard (in that she is higher in rank than Euphemia and is an high-ranking officer [well, the HIGHEST one] who has been trained to lead).

By the way, again, you should be more specific about what you are talking about. Yes, soldiers have been tried for killing certain enemies but killing the person is not really not what got them into trouble; other circumstances played a part (something I am not about to go into right now). Otherwise, one does not get in trouble for merely shooting a hostile enemy. I mean, that is what happens during a war. During a huge battle, yes, IT IS fair game at that point and, with the exception such obvious rules such as not using a tank to kill one person or using poison to kill, there really aren't that many rules about killing an enemy plenty of rules for including the death of an officer (there are plenty of rules for POWs however). While you are using your world as an example, your world does not represent the real world nor every anime world. For example, in YOUR world, a soldier killing an enemy officer is a punishable offense. In the real world, it is not.

The assumption that you running on (you are really good at making assumptions and using those [wrong] assumptions as fact) is that military forces take (or should take) prisoners in every single mission and should therefore be equipped for such a thing. As I have pointed out to you, the military does not do this. If prisoners ARE taken, it is a result of the mission, not the mission itself, and the soldiers are the ones equipped for securing prisoners, not a tank in the distance somewhere. Tanks are for blowing things up and carrying soldiers, not for temporary POW holding cells.

As MangaFanGuy pointed out, the Britannian forces were not ones to show mercy to other belligerent forces (that is called "giving no quarter" which, in the real world, is a war crime; however, since Code Geass takes place in a fictional universe, ALL the laws of war in our world do not and can not be applied...so stop trying). Taking prisoners was not an option; killing them all in a hell-storm of bullets was. So Knightmares were not equipped with devices to hold prisoners or to simply "knockout" their opponents.

In your example, Shinji Ikari (very original name, by the way) did not commit a war crime (and therefore murder, as murder is the UNLAWFUL killing of a another human being) as the female officer was still armed at the time. Section II, Chapter I, Article 23 of the Hague Convention (yes, I am applying real world laws to your example, since you apparently want to bring them up) states that a soldier is prohibited from killing or wounding an enemy that is unarmed or, having lost their defenses, has surrendered at discretion (meaning that Shinji stated that she needed to surrender and she accepted it).

The female officer, while appearing to give a truce, was still armed at the time (if she put down her gun before hand, this would be a different story). Shinji is not obligated to accept whatever form of truce that was given to him, even if he felt safe during the situation or not (Section II, Chapter III, Article 33 of the Hague Convention), and was even allowed to defend himself if he felt threatened (either for his life or of being taken advantage of for information; remember Rei Ikari was the one armed at the time) and thus, at most, he is guilty of insubordination for going against orders and for not carrying his gun and not murder.

Third Note: Shinji WOULD have been guilty of a war crime if he had indeed "blast[ed] [General Ikari] to atoms with [his] mega-cannon", as per the provisions given in the Hague Convention, but either he lied the whole time or you changed the story to match that of Code Geass since the camera on his mech showed him killing her with her pistol, not his "mega cannon". Keep your stories straight.

Fourth Note: In the military, many procedures are taken before a mission. This includes making sure that everyone's arms are up to regulation (and that fact that they HAVE them in the first place). Shinji Ikari would not have gotten away with not have having his gun on him (not for that long anyway), especially when there was a camera on his mech.

Also, I find it hard to believe that this Shinji Ikari, who has shown that he only a few steps above idiot during his tribunal (using a power unit from a mech blaster to power a coffee machine is one thing that would be considered "stupid"), also had the balls to mercilessly kill his own daughter. And not by firing a "mega-cannon" at her from the safety of his mech but by shooting her dead blank WITH HER OWN GUN (after she even hugged him)!! Try developing your characters more.

[proEuphie]

Originally Posted by MangaFanGuy

I fail to see what this has to do with anything?
You cannot make up Mechas for one world and then apply their ideas to anouther.
If (Like is the obvious case) you are trying to compare them to britannian forces I think you are sadly mistaken.
In that regard the images we saw of the original invasion showed their mechas were never intended to be peaceful machines at all and were always equipped with lethal weaponry and not LTL for capturing civilians.
Also the readiness of Brittanian forces to massacre civilians means it is unlikely they ever considered LTL and so bears little to no relationship to your own example.

this is a pointless few paragraphs

How many infantry lines did we see?
How many were backed up by Tanks? Mechas? Helicopters?
Your theory may be somewhat sound but really has little practicality versus the high armour targets normally shown

Dude 2 word
Gas masks

The enemy still had large tanks and armoured columns
And LTL then requires you to house/detain all of those thousands of prisoners.
There are such things as overloading your own troops with prisoners to the point where all your military force is busy and the enemy is left the perfect chance to counterattack.

However the use of the hands can be impractical and unneeded.

Ok first you say Unarmed.
Euphemia wasn't unarmed so that point is destroyed
Secondly you assume the person want to take prisoners.
It isn't as cut and dried as "Oh take them prisoner"
Then What?
You have taken part of your mecha out of service and now have to negotiate a hostile zone whilst trying to protect a person held in your mechas hand.
And what is the benefit of doing this?
So you can feel a little better?
Scant excuse for a person in a war zone.

If you can provide a decent example of why? How? when? a person would simply try to capture prisoners in a war zone using an oversized tin can with fingers then you may be able to provide a decent point.

at the moment however I see no contradiction in weapons of war being used to kill and not simply save every random in their way.

For someone with military interests you forgot to point out that my original story of the court martial left out a very important factor to save space and because it was not relevant to the situation of Zero and Euphemia.

Do you wish to point out what that is?

[proEuphie]

Originally Posted by wolfgirl90

Okay, AGAIN, Lelouch did not want to capture Euphemia. THAT was never an option that popped to his head. Since he really can't use Euphemia as a bargaining chip, the BEST option in that situation was to give the Japanese what they wanted: Euphemia's death and to use that death to start a riot and have the Japanese turn towards his cause. And I don't know where you live, but someone does not commit genocide and still have the support of the people who were involved. Those people would want that person dead. Not a prisoner. Dead.

Note: I have already explained that using Euphemia as bargaining tool wouldn't really work since Cornelia can't give away Japan in exchange for her sister. Cornelia is the Viceroy, a representative of the REAL owner: Charles. Only Charles would be able to do an exchange like that (the minute Cornelia would try it, Charles would step in). This includes using Euphemia to stop the fighting since, again, Charles easily trumps Cornelia's power. And since Charles was more than content to watch his daughter slaughter thousands of people, he was certainly not beyond sacrificing her to fulfill his own purposes (he has shown several times that he does not care about his children AT ALL).

Second Note: Euphemia could command soldiers but ONLY because she was the Sub-Viceroy and had to be obeyed by both citizens and military personnel. Cornelia is both the Viceroy and the Chief General (meaning she is actually IS in the military...and one of very few members of the Imperial family who actually is) so Cornelia trumps Euphemia in that regard (in that she is higher in rank than Euphemia and is an high-ranking officer [well, the HIGHEST one] who has been trained to lead).

By the way, again, you should be more specific about what you are talking about. Yes, soldiers have been tried for killing certain enemies but killing the person is not really not what got them into trouble; other circumstances played a part (something I am not about to go into right now). Otherwise, one does not get in trouble for merely shooting a hostile enemy. I mean, that is what happens during a war. During a huge battle, yes, IT IS fair game at that point and, with the exception such obvious rules such as not using a tank to kill one person or using poison to kill, there really aren't that many rules about killing an enemy plenty of rules for including the death of an officer (there are plenty of rules for POWs however). While you are using your world as an example, your world does not represent the real world nor every anime world. For example, in YOUR world, a soldier killing an enemy officer is a punishable offense. In the real world, it is not.

The assumption that you running on (you are really good at making assumptions and using those [wrong] assumptions as fact) is that military forces take (or should take) prisoners in every single mission and should therefore be equipped for such a thing. As I have pointed out to you, the military does not do this. If prisoners ARE taken, it is a result of the mission, not the mission itself, and the soldiers are the ones equipped for securing prisoners, not a tank in the distance somewhere. Tanks are for blowing things up and carrying soldiers, not for temporary POW holding cells.

As MangaFanGuy pointed out, the Britannian forces were not ones to show mercy to other belligerent forces (that is called "giving no quarter" which, in the real world, is a war crime; however, since Code Geass takes place in a fictional universe, ALL the laws of war in our world do not and can not be applied...so stop trying). Taking prisoners was not an option; killing them all in a hell-storm of bullets was. So Knightmares were not equipped with devices to hold prisoners or to simply "knockout" their opponents.

In your example, Shinji Ikari (very original name, by the way) did not commit a war crime (and therefore murder, as murder is the UNLAWFUL killing of a another human being) as the female officer was still armed at the time. Section II, Chapter I, Article 23 of the Hague Convention (yes, I am applying real world laws to your example, since you apparently want to bring them up) states that a soldier is prohibited from killing or wounding an enemy that is unarmed or, having lost their defenses, has surrendered at discretion (meaning that Shinji stated that she needed to surrender and she accepted it).

The female officer, while appearing to give a truce, was still armed at the time (if she put down her gun before hand, this would be a different story). Shinji is not obligated to accept whatever form of truce that was given to him, even if he felt safe during the situation or not (Section II, Chapter III, Article 33 of the Hague Convention), and was even allowed to defend himself if he felt threatened (either for his life or of being taken advantage of for information; remember Rei Ikari was the one armed at the time) and thus, at most, he is guilty of insubordination for going against orders and for not carrying his gun and not murder.

Third Note: Shinji WOULD have been guilty of a war crime if he had indeed "blast[ed] [General Ikari] to atoms with [his] mega-cannon", as per the provisions given in the Hague Convention, but either he lied the whole time or you changed the story to match that of Code Geass since the camera on his mech showed him killing her with her pistol, not his "mega cannon". Keep your stories straight.

Fourth Note: In the military, many procedures are taken before a mission. This includes making sure that everyone's arms are up to regulation (and that fact that they HAVE them in the first place). Shinji Ikari would not have gotten away with not have having his gun on him (not for that long anyway), especially when there was a camera on his mech.

Also, I find it hard to believe that this Shinji Ikari, who has shown that he only a few steps above idiot during his tribunal (using a power unit from a mech blaster to power a coffee machine is one thing that would be considered "stupid"), also had the balls to mercilessly kill his own daughter. And not by firing a "mega-cannon" at her from the safety of his mech but by shooting her dead blank WITH HER OWN GUN (after she even hugged him)!! Try developing your characters more.

For someone with military interests you forgot to point out that my original story of the court martial left out a very important factor to save space and because it was not relevant to the situation of Zero and Euphemia.

Do you wish to point out what that is?

[MangaFanGuy]

Originally Posted by proEuphie

For someone with military interests you forgot to point out that my original story of the court martial left out a very important factor to save space and because it was not relevant to the situation of Zero and Euphemia.

Do you wish to point out what that is?

Oh please be so kind as to enlighten me.
Or unless my original guess is wrong the original post had to with Mechas picking people to capture them and a story with vague resemblance to Euphie and Lelouch.
It also had end ending part about LTL capabilities on mechas

Your final questions were also desgined around the idea of picking people up which in a war and with no redeemable reasons is pointless.

[B Gundam]

I wonder if there is any anime in which a military force uses mecha equipped with nonlethal weapons for capturing prisoners whenever possible, with or without other, lethal weapons for killing enemies. I wonder if there is any anime mecha force or individual mecha pilot known to certainly not have any nonlethal weapons for capturing prisoners.

You capture enemies by holding lethal weapons at them and see if they surrender. You're somewhat overly obsessed with keeping everything alive. Yeah its an ideal, but war is war and not a game of dodgeball because you kill and destroy.

Is there any anime character who stupidly let an enemy run away to safety when he could have simply picked up the enemy in the hand of his mecha?

Photon Lab corps: "No Kouji! We can find the location of Bardos Island if you let it escape!"

Also, while this always seems pretty easy in certain mecha anime, doing so without squishing the target is rather problematic. the Mecha's hand isn't yours, its solid and hard and doesn't feel. You can only put the hand down open if people are willing to walk onto it. But someone trying to run away, well, you're just gonna squish him at the attempt unless you have extreme state of art control over the unit.

Is there any anime character who killed someone he could have captured by simply picking him up in the hand of his mecha?

Uso, when he was down to one infanterist in Angel Halo, he responded to shooting his back by vaporising her with a beam sabre.

Wufei *shoud have* done this to Treize. But he jumped out to duel him instead and... yeah.

Kouji would have done that to Ashura if not for the above.

Sousuke: "If potentially posing any further threat the logical step is to neutralize the target."

Ryouma: *goes axe-crazy on feeble old man Saotome in his Getter one*
It just didn't work, but its not like Ryouma knew it wouldn't work.

Not to mention thats why Ben Barberry died.

And Euphemia.

[wolfgirl90]

Originally Posted by proEuphie

For someone with military interests you forgot to point out that my original story of the court martial left out a very important factor to save space and because it was not relevant to the situation of Zero and Euphemia.

Do you wish to point out what that is?

Technically, I am not a person with military interests; I am already IN the military. "Militarily inclined" might be a better phrase to use.

Also, considering that 1) your story is so full of holes and inconsistencies that it can barely be used as a comparison of anything, whether fact or fiction and that 2) YOU are the person telling the story, the person who created the thread and, therefore, the person who has the burden of proof, I do not have (nor should I have to) point out anything in your rather pointless story. Hell, I have already done a little bit already:

1. Shinji Ikari would not have gotten away with not having his gun if it was a policy to have it on him at all times. Not having a military-issued weapon on you when you are supposed to is something that is rather hard for anyone to overlook. So its amazing that the first time that anyone found out about it was when the footage was reviewed (again, if you are going to apply real-world military policy, you need to be aware of it).

2. For some reason, Shinji chose to lie about how he killed Rei (actually either he lied about it or it is something you didn't catch). Neither the prosecutor nor anyone else catches this lie. Had he actually killed Rei in the manner in which he stated, he would indeed be guilty of a war crime.

3. Since Rei is a general, she either should be 1) not on the battlefield at all or 2) in a mech that distinguishes her as a general. If there is a standard order for generals to be captured, why would her mech have been destroyed in such a manner? Hell, what sense does it make for her to even be there in the first place?

4. Shinji is one of most incompetent military officers I have read about, from powering a coffee machine with a mech blaster power unit to breaking a steel cable net during a bet (not to mention his almost Looney Tune-ish reaction when he found out that he might be convicted of murder). To subsequently believe that he would also kill his daughter in cold blood would be pushing it.

5. Speaking of Rei, I also find it amazing that she was the general of ANYTHING considering her reaction, from the resigned attitude (seriously?) to the hug. Also, I don't understand how she would outrank her father by such an outrageous amount considering her age. Using real-world ranks (whether Japanese or American), she would outrank her father by a full 4 ranks (assuming that she is but one general and not the General of the Army). To put in prospective, one doesn't get to the rank of "Colonel" until after about 22 years of service, around 35-40 years old (to go higher to Brigadier General, you have to be recommended); unless the Azurian Army is so seriously desperate that they would have anyone with a pulse as a general, Rei must be one amazing person to outrank her own father by a full 4 ranks. Again, I think it was one of those things you decided to add for the sake adding without truly knowing anything about it.

6. You are using this fictional story in order to make a more than obvious allusion to Code Geass. You are also using this fictional story as proof of your accuracy on how Code Geass (and the world) should work, despite the fact that both the story and Code Geass are fictional and have absolutely no baring whatsoever on the real world, as no real world laws can be applied to either one.

You have the burden of proof here, not me (as you are the one making the point in the first place), so if there is something else that I missed, you need to catch it, not me.

Although, I seriously doubt that there is anything that you could tell me now that would change anything about your hopeless story.

[proEuphie]

Originally Posted by wolfgirl90

Okay, AGAIN, Lelouch did not want to capture Euphemia. THAT was never an option that popped to his head. Since he really can't use Euphemia as a bargaining chip, the BEST option in that situation was to give the Japanese what they wanted: Euphemia's death and to use that death to start a riot and have the Japanese turn towards his cause. And I don't know where you live, but someone does not commit genocide and still have the support of the people who were involved. Those people would want that person dead. Not a prisoner. Dead.

Lelouch should have wanted to capture Euphemia, since that would have been more humane than killing her.

Saying that there is no point in describing how Lelouch could have captured Euphemia because Lelouch never thought of capturing Euphemia is the same thing as saying that there is no point in showing how Hitler and the Nazis could have kept the European Jews, Gypsies, etc. etc. alive and used theirs skills for the benefit of the Nazis because Hitler and the Nazis never considered not exterminating the Jews, Gypsies, etc. etc. as soon as possible. In both cases proving that the accused clearly had alternatives to killing proves they killed because they wanted to kill, not because they had to kill or gained something from killing.

Below I show that Lelouch could use Euphemia as a bargaining chip and actually tried to do so in an earlier episode.

After the Fuji massacre started Lelouch escaped in his powerful Gawain nightmare -- they didn't show if he tried to stop the massacre using the Gawain or just left as fast as he could. When he returned with the Black Knights thousands of Japanese were already dead and the Britannians were scattered to hunt down and kill fleeing Japanese. Lelouch did not need to kill Euphemia to start a riot. By this time the fighting was already far beyond what could be called a riot.

The Black Knights were cheered by Japanese civilians as they arrived and began to fight the Britannians. Clearly rescuing the survivors of the Fuji Massacre made the Black Knights very popular. Lelouch told the Kyoto Group they would have to obey him or die, taking control of all the rebels, and gave his speech in the stadium declaring a new Japan when none of the Japanese knew if Euphemia was alive or dead.

Lelouch began to mark on Tokyo with the Black Knights and all the other Japanese Resistance groups which joined him, eager to take advantage of this chance to capture the capitol. Lelouch planned to invite the Emperor to a meeting (and now doubt use his geass to take over Britannia) as soon as they proclaimed Japanese Independence in the Tokyo Government Center.

Lelouch's plan only required the support of the Black Knights and of the other rebel groups with military weapons and trained warriors, and only for a comparatively short time until the visit from the Emperor which Lelouch expected. Lelouch had far more support from the Japanese public than he needed, even before the japanese knew that he had fatally wounded Euphemia. Lelouch did not need to murder Euphemia to get much more popularity than his plan required.

To be continued.

Originally Posted by wolfgirl90

Note: I have already explained that using Euphemia as bargaining tool wouldn't really work since Cornelia can't give away Japan in exchange for her sister. Cornelia is the Viceroy, a representative of the REAL owner: Charles. Only Charles would be able to do an exchange like that (the minute Cornelia would try it, Charles would step in). This includes using Euphemia to stop the fighting since, again, Charles easily trumps Cornelia's power. And since Charles was more than content to watch his daughter slaughter [i]thousands of people, he was certainly not beyond sacrificing her to fulfill his own purposes (he has shown several times that he does not care about his children AT ALL).

But Lelouch did try to use Euphemia as a hostage, in "Island of the Gods" just a few days before the Fuji Massacre. Lelouch expected it to work then, and nothing seemed to have happened to change his mind about it.

You say that Cornelia could not grant independence to Japan, implying that if the maximum possible goal could not be achieved there would be no point in using Euphemia as a hostage. I remind you that president Santa Anna of Mexico (who ordered a massacre of surrendered Texans at Goliad) did not own Texas and had no right to grant Texan independence, but he he did anyway after being captured by the Texans. And he repudiated his treaty after being set free, as did his successors, but the Mexicans could not get their political and military act together enough to invade Texas before the US annexed Texas ten years later.

And Charles's lack of love for his children would not keep the Britannians on the spot from making some concessions to save Euphemia.

To quote from my post # 179 in "Did Euphemia Escape from the control of her Geass Before Lelouch Shot Her?":

"You keep saying that because Emperor Charles doe not love his children Lelouch could not use her as a hostage. Emperor Charles was not in Japan and he was not in his office at Pendragon ready to answer a phone call from Tokyo. Instead he was up in the clouds somewhere observing everything which went on and unable to quickly give orders.

In the next episode Prince Odysseus was seen dealing with the situation in Pendragon because the Emperor was still absent. So the question becomes how much do Suzaku, Cornelia, and Odyseuss love Euphie, not how much Charles Loves her."

In the next episode Lloyd dangled the keys of the Lancelot, refusing to let Suazku have them, and Suzaku punched Lloyd and took the keys to go get revenge on Lelouch for murdering Euphemia. It seems probably that Suzaku would have defied orders and punched Lloyd to take the Lancelot to met Zero and save Euphemia's life, even if it meant handing the Lancelot over to Zero.

I say that Lelouch should have believed the odds of success using Euphemia as a hostage to stop the fighting at Fuji were so great that not doing so makes Lelouch guilty of murdering every Japanese person who was killed after he could have captured Euphemia and used her as a hostage to stop the massacre.

Originally Posted by wolfgirl90

[i]Second Note: Euphemia could command soldiers but ONLY because she was the Sub-Viceroy and had to be obeyed by both citizens and military personnel. Cornelia is both the Viceroy and the Chief General (meaning she is actually IS in the military...and one of very few members of the Imperial family who actually is) so Cornelia trumps Euphemia in that regard (in that she is higher in rank than Euphemia and is an high-ranking officer [well, the HIGHEST one] who has been trained to lead).

Originally Posted by wolfgirl90

By the way, again, you should be more specific about what you are talking about. Yes, soldiers have been tried for killing certain enemies but killing the person is not really not what got them into trouble; other circumstances played a part (something I am not about to go into right now). Otherwise, one does not get in trouble for merely shooting a hostile enemy. I mean, that is what happens during a war. During a huge battle, yes, IT IS fair game at that point and, with the exception such obvious rules such as not using a tank to kill one person or using poison to kill, there really aren't that many rules about killing an enemy plenty of rules for including the death of an officer (there are plenty of rules for POWs however). While you are using your world as an example, your world does not represent the real world nor every anime world. For example, in YOUR world, a soldier killing an enemy officer is a punishable offense. In the real world, it is not.

Originally Posted by wolfgirl90

The assumption that you running on (you are really good at making assumptions and using those [wrong] assumptions as fact) is that military forces take (or should take) prisoners in every single mission and should therefore be equipped for such a thing. As I have pointed out to you, the military does not do this. If prisoners ARE taken, it is a result of the mission, not the mission itself, and the soldiers are the ones equipped for securing prisoners, not a tank in the distance somewhere. Tanks are for blowing things up and carrying soldiers, not for temporary POW holding cells.

Originally Posted by wolfgirl90

As MangaFanGuy pointed out, the Britannian forces were not ones to show mercy to other belligerent forces (that is called "giving no quarter" which, in the real world, is a war crime; however, since Code Geass takes place in a fictional universe, ALL the laws of war in our world do not and can not be applied...so stop trying). Taking prisoners was not an option; killing them all in a hell-storm of bullets was. So Knightmares were not equipped with devices to hold prisoners or to simply "knockout" their opponents.

Originally Posted by wolfgirl90

In your example, Shinji Ikari (very original name, by the way) did not commit a war crime (and therefore murder, as murder is the UNLAWFUL killing of a another human being) as the female officer was still armed at the time. Section II, Chapter I, Article 23 of the Hague Convention (yes, I am applying real world laws to your example, since you apparently want to bring them up) states that a soldier is prohibited from killing or wounding an enemy that is unarmed or, having lost their defenses, has surrendered at discretion (meaning that Shinji stated that she needed to surrender and she accepted it).

are you sure you are reading the same article 23 as I just found:
Article 23
Besides the prohibitions provided by special Conventions, it is especially prohibited:--
To employ poison or poisoned arms;
To kill or wound treacherously individuals belonging to the hostile nation or army;
To kill or wound an enemy who, having laid down arms, or having no longer means of defence, has surrendered at discretion;
To declare that no quarter will be given;
To employ arms, projectiles, or material of a nature to cause superfluous injury;
To make improper use of a flag of truce, the national flag, or military ensigns and the enemy's uniform, as well as the distinctive badges of the Geneva Convention;
To destroy or seize the enemy's property, unless such destruction or seizure be imperatively demanded by the necessities of war.

Originally Posted by wolfgirl90

The female officer, while appearing to give a truce, was still armed at the time (if she put down her gun before hand, this would be a different story). Shinji is not obligated to accept whatever form of truce that was given to him, even if he felt safe during the situation or not (Section II, Chapter III, Article 33 of the Hague Convention), and was even allowed to defend himself if he felt threatened (either for his life or of being taken advantage of for information; remember Rei Ikari was the one armed at the time) and thus, at most, he is guilty of insubordination for going against orders and for not carrying his gun and not murder.

Article 23 prohibits killing or wounding any enemy who lays down their arms or loses their means of defense and surrenders at discretion. It says that it is always illegal to kill someone in such circumstances. It says nothing about whether it is always legal to kill an enemy who is armed. Obviously article 23 leaves open the possibility that there might be rare circumstances when it is illegal to kill an armed enemy.

And another part of article 23 gives one situation when it is prohibited to kill or wound an a enemy soldier or civilian: "To kill or wound treacherously individuals belonging to the hostile nation or army" This sentence does not state that it applies only to unarmed soldiers and civilians. And it does not specifically define treachery.

There are elements of treachery in both Shinji Ikari's killing of Rei Ikari and Lelouch's killing of Euphemia. Thus there seems a strong probability that such cases would be tried as murder and possibly result in convictions in our world.

Article 33
The Chief to whom a flag of truce is sent is not obliged to receive it in all circumstances.
He can take all steps necessary to prevent the envoy taking advantage of his mission to obtain information.
In case of abuse, he has the right to detain the envoy temporarily.
Article 34
The envoy loses his rights of inviolability if it is proved beyond doubt that he has taken advantage of his privileged position to provoke or commit an act of treachery.

This does not say that an officer has the right to kill someone he suspects of misusing a flag of truce. It gives him the right to detain him and keep him from sending information back to his side.

Originally Posted by wolfgirl90

Third Note: Shinji WOULD have been guilty of a war crime if he had indeed "blast[ed] [General Ikari] to atoms with [his] mega-cannon", as per the provisions given in the Hague Convention, but either he lied the whole time or you changed the story to match that of Code Geass since the camera on his mech showed him killing her with her pistol, not his "mega cannon". Keep your stories straight.

I didn't change my story about how Shinji killed Rei. I didn't change it from blasting her with
the mega-cannon to shooting her with a pistol. Here is the section of my story from my opening post:

"The video opened with pieces of a destroyed mecha raining to the ground and a mecha pilot parachuting to safety, having ejected in time. The pilot landed and disengaged from the parachute. She walked toward the camera and stopped about thirty feet away and twenty feet lower than the camera. She unholstered her pistol and held it out by the barrel with a resigned expression on her pretty young face. Her blue flight suit was wet with sweat and stuck closely to her.

Colonel Ikari appeared on the ground walking away from the camera and toward the Azurian officer, who looked surprised, then ran up to Ikari and hugged him Colonel Ikari in his green flight suit pushed her away from, snatched the pistol out of her hand, and shot her with it. There was a startled expression her faces as she crumbled to the ground..

Prosecutor Mombuto: “Notice that Colonel Ikari is not wearing his holster or pistol, which is against regulations and an indication that he felt perfectly safe in the situation.”

Colonel Ikari turned back toward the camera and walked back to his off screen mecha. After a few seconds a blast from his off screen mega-cannon blasted the enemy officer’s body to atoms."

There. You see that I wrote that Colonel Ikari killed General Ikari by shooting her (fatally or non fatally) with her pistol, causing her to fall to the ground, and then blasting her living or already dead body to atoms with his mega cannon.

You assumed that General Ikari died almost instantly when Colonel Ikari shot her in an unspecified part of her body. I can just imagine you doing triage: "He's motionless and so either unconscious or dead, therefore he must be dead, don't waste any time on him."

Originally Posted by wolfgirl90

Fourth Note: In the military, many procedures are taken before a mission. This includes making sure that everyone's arms are up to regulation (and that fact that they HAVE them in the first place). Shinji Ikari would not have gotten away with not have having his gun on him (not for that long anyway), especially when there was a camera on his mech.

Also, I find it hard to believe that this Shinji Ikari, who has shown that he only a few steps above idiot during his tribunal (using a power unit from a mech blaster to power a coffee machine is one thing that would be considered "stupid"), also had the balls to mercilessly kill his own daughter. And not by firing a "mega-cannon" at her from the safety of his mech but by shooting her dead blank WITH HER OWN GUN (after she even hugged him)!! Try developing your characters more.

[wolfgirl90]

Umm...protip: if you are not going to say anything about certain parts of my post, then don't quote them. Your posts are already long, no point in making them longer by quoting me over and over and not say anything.

Originally Posted by proEuphie

Saying that there is no point in describing how Lelouch could have captured Euphemia because Lelouch never thought of capturing Euphemia is the same thing as saying that there is no point in showing how Hitler and the Nazis could have kept the European Jews, Gypsies, etc. etc. alive and used theirs skills for the benefit of the Nazis because Hitler and the Nazis never considered not exterminating the Jews, Gypsies, etc. etc. as soon as possible.

You can show alternatives all you want...in a discussion that deals with them. If you are having a discussion about how Hitler could have kept the Jews and gypsies alive, then you can discuss it all you want. However, if you having a discussion about what ACTUALLY happened, then showing alternatives to something that never happened is pointless. It doesn't prove anything. It doesn't move the discussion forward.

Same thing with Lelouch. If we were having a discussion about how Lelouch COULD have saved Euphemia's life, then you would be welcome to share whatever ideas you had. However, since we discussing events that ACTUALLY happened and since Lelouch was not going to save Euphemia in the first place, there is no point in giving alternatives on how he could have done something that was wasn't going to happen. You are not helping your own discussion (if it could honestly be called such).

Originally Posted by proEuphie

Lelouch did not need to kill Euphemia to start a riot. By this time the fighting was already far beyond what could be called a riot.

Assuming he killed Euphemia to START the riot, which is not the case. He killed her to make Japanese come to his side, not to start a riot (the original plan was to start a riot).

Originally Posted by proEuphie

Lelouch did not need to murder Euphemia to get much more popularity than his plan required.

Again, that is something that can argued about for a long time. Whether he HAD to kill Euphemia or not can be debated all day. HOWEVER, since he DID kill Euphemia, that is all that really matters right now. You can discuss it as a possible plot hole, but that is it. It doesn't really change what happened in the series (or make you anymore right than you are now...which is barely).

Originally Posted by proEuphie

But Lelouch did try to use Euphemia as a hostage, in "Island of the Gods" just a few days before the Fuji Massacre. Lelouch expected it to work then, and nothing seemed to have happed to change his mind about it.

Granted, in that episode, he was using her to merely stop the fighting; you have been suggesting that he use her as a way for Britannia to give back Japan altogether, something I have debunked more than once.

Originally Posted by proEuphie

I remind you that president Santa Anna of Mexico (who ordered a massacre of surrendered Texans at Goliad) did not own Texas and had no right to grant Texan independence, but he he did anyway after being captured by the Texans. And he repudiated his treaty after being set free, as did his successors, but the Mexicans could not get their political and military act together enough to invade Texas before the US annexed Texas ten years later.

I have said this before and I will say it again: nice try. As the President of Mexico, Santa Anna DID "own" Texas, but they seceded, declaring themselves an independent republic. After the war, Santa Anna did not "give" them independence (since they technically already had it) but rather recognized the independence they had. Cornelia can't do the same thing as a Viceroy (you are basically comparing apples and oranges...and using real-life applications for a fictional cartoon, the futility which being something I have already told you).

Also, the new Mexican government took away Santa Anna's power, which voided the Treaty of Velasco (Santa Anna can't back out of a treaty that technically never existed).

Originally Posted by proEuphie

And Charles's lack of love for his children would not keep the Britannians on the spot from making some concessions to save Euphemia.

Unless Charles used his power to prevent them from doing so. Again, if you are making the argument about Euphemia being used to give the Japanese their land back, Lelouch would to deal with Charles and Charles wouldn't care about Euphemia (hell, it wouldn't be unlike him if he ordered her dead). Of course, the soldiers could ignore him at the blatant risk of insubordination, the punishment of which I can only guess at.

Originally Posted by proEuphie

In the next episode Prince Odysseus was seen dealing with the situation in Pendragon because the Emperor was still absent. So the question becomes how much do Suzaku, Cornelia, and Odyseuss love Euphie, not how much Charles Loves her."

And if they have power they can readily exercise to get her back. Charles maybe "up in the clouds" but he is certainly not ignorant of what is going on and he is not that far away.

Originally Posted by proEuphie

I say that Lelouch should have believed the odds of success using Euphemia as a hostage to stop the fighting at Fuji were so great that not doing so makes Lelouch guilty of murdering every Japanese person who was killed after he could have captured Euphemia and used her as a hostage to stop the massacre.

Again, what YOU SAY doesn't mean anything as long as you are either dead wrong or spouting crap. You are better off saying "in my [honest] opinion" instead of "I say"; this prevents you from sounding like you are four and looking stupid when you are wrong ("I say" makes it seem that you are right no matter what, which is certainly not the case as I have proven you wrong multiple times).

So let me get this straight: since Lelouch didn't save Euphemia to use her as a hostage to stop the massacre, he is guilty of murdering every single Japanese that was killed, even though killing her ALSO stopped the massacre?! Yeah, again, nice try.

Originally Posted by proEuphie

It says nothing about whether it is always legal to kill an enemy who is armed.

That's because, right at the very beginning, it says this: "Besides the prohibitions provided by special Conventions, it is especially prohibited..."

That part of the Hague Convention only mentions certain actions that are not already covered in special treaties and conventions; its not an exhaustive list. Since those treaties and conventions ALREADY list the prohibitions, there is no reason to repeat them here.

Originally Posted by proEuphie

And another part of article 23 gives one situation when it is prohibited to kill or wound an a enemy soldier or civilian: "To kill or wound treacherously individuals belonging to the hostile nation or army" This sentence does not state that it applies only to unarmed soldiers and civilians. And it does not specifically define treachery.

AGAIN, it does not define "treachery" because that is something that has already been taught and explained to soldiers; its not going to be repeated again here. Also, this particular article only deals with SOLDIERS. Civilians are not part of it because, like I said before, this are entirely separate treaties and conventions (like the Fourth Geneva Convention) that deals with them (again, its not going to be repeated over and over).

Originally Posted by proEuphie

There are elements of treachery in both Shinji Ikari's killing of Rei Ikari and Lelouch's killing of Euphemia. Thus there seems a strong probability that such cases would be tried as murder and possibly result in convictions in our world.

I guess, but since we are dealing with a world that you made up with circumstances that you also made up (and can therefore change), I am not about to argue with you on that (you can make up anything you want and change your posts; I am not about to argue about the definition of treachery in your story since you can obviously change it).

Originally Posted by proEuphie

This does not say that an officer has the right to kill someone he suspects of using a flag of truce. It gives him the right to detain him and keep him from sending information back to his side.

Umm...you may want to rewrite that. Its not merely someone who is using a flag of truce but someone who is abusing it for enemy advantage (ie obtaining information). The commanding officer does not have to accept the truce. They can detain the envoy, however, if its proven that the envoy has used the "truce" to obtain information and betray them, then the envoy has basically signed his own death warrant (at that point, he has lost inviolability, meaning no laws can protect him, even the ones that would have kept him from being killed).

Originally Posted by proEuphie

I didn't change my story about how Shinji killed Rei. I didn't change it from blasting her with
the mega-cannon to shooting her with a pistol.

I know how the story goes, but it makes no sense for Shinji to have lied about the way he killed Rei since "blasting her with a mega-cannon" would have gotten him in significantly more trouble (depending on circumstances) than merely shooting her with a gun (your story only mentions that her mech was destroyed or rather seen falling in pieces; it doesn't make it completely clear whether Shinji shot her down or someone else did). In fact, if he was supposed to capture her anyway, why would he make it so blatantly clear that he went against orders (and made his situation significantly worse by blasting her), in yet be surprised that he is sitting in court (I'm assuming that he has the smarts and military expertise of a man of his rank not to do anything that dumb, despite evidence that proves that he one can short of a six pack)?

Originally Posted by proEuphie

You assumed that General Ikari died almost instantly when Colonel Ikari shot her in an unspecified part of her body. I can just imagine you doing triage: "He's motionless and so either unconscious or dead, therefore he must be dead, don't waste any time on him."

Umm...was the triage thing pointed at me as an insult (considering that triage is a process used in every hospital emergency room and on the battlefield)? I don't get what you are driving at.

And yes, I did assume that General Ikari died since you did not describe anything about her after she was shot (other than the startled expression on her face). Heck, since this was an obvious allusion to Code Geass, I am rather surprised you didn't have her say "Father, why?" (a la Euphemia) before she was blasted.

If you going to mock me for assuming that someone died after being shot at POINT BLANK RANGE, then go right on ahead.

[Funkgun]

Watch Patlabor, they had Non Lethal billy stick type weapons that could be used along with lethal type weapons as well.

[proEuphie]

Originally Posted by wolfgirl90

Technically, I am not a person with military interests; I am already IN the military. "Militarily inclined" might be a better phrase to use.

Also, considering that 1) your story is so full of holes and inconsistencies that it can barely be used as a comparison of anything, whether fact or fiction and that 2) YOU are the person telling the story, the person who created the thread and, therefore, the person who has the burden of proof, I do not have (nor should I have to) point out anything in your rather pointless story. Hell, I have already done a little bit already:

So you say that people actually in the military are not a subgroup of "people with military interests"? If that is correct maybe you should explain to the brass in the Pentagon what it is about military service which causes recruits with military interests to lose all their military interests once they are in the service.

The factor which I omitted mentioning in my story is something which you might possibly have to decide whether or not to do sometimes during your military service, so I thought you might have thought of it by now.

Originally Posted by wolfgirl90

1. Shinji Ikari would not have gotten away with not having his gun if it was a policy to have it on him at all times. Not having a military-issued weapon on you when you are supposed to is something that is rather hard for anyone to overlook. So its amazing that the first time that anyone found out about it was when the footage was reviewed (again, if you are going to apply real-world military policy, you need to be aware of it).

If Shini Ikari had no co-pilot or crew in his mecha there would be no one to stop him if he decided to take off his holster and gun before leaving his mecha.

Beside, I implied that the civil war had been going on for about a year (if the Ikaris chose their sides at the beginning) and there is no evidence whether the Ikaris or anyone else in their world had any previous military experience.

Amateur soldiers are not always up to the standards you expect in the modern professional military. In the US Civil war for example, General Turchin's wife once commanded his brigade while he was sick, completely against regulations, and a lot easier to notice than someone not carrying a pistol.

The two youngest Union drummer boys known to be killed both enlisted at the age of twelve, looked small and childlike, and were well known to the officers who enlisted them, yet are both described as eighteen in their official papers. Apparently the officers who enlisted them believed the regulations prohibited enlisting anyone younger than eighteen in the United States Volunteers and so simply exaggerated their ages by fifty percent.

Another famous twelve-year-old drummer boy was first mustered in during May-June of 1862 during the Peninsular Campaign with the note that he had enlisted in December 1861 and had done daily duty with his company, but had not been mustered in or paid because of the false belief that he was too young. Too young to be mustered in or paid, but old enough for hard and dangerous work. His records indicate that he was later very briefly enlisted in three different regiments at once.

Amateurs.

In About face: The Odyssey of an American Warrior by David H Hackworth, there is a lot of mention of the peacetime army's obsession with keeping units in top condition. Peacetime officers feared black marks on their records if they failed to keep all their men on duty or to properly account for them and if any military equipment was missing or malfunctioning.

But in Vietnam during war when units needed to be in top condition they often were not. In many cases a lot of men were absent for various reasons, a lot of equipment was missing or not working, and insufficient supplies were being supplied. Nobody seemed to notice or care about problems ten times worse than what would have ruined an officer's career during peacetime now that near perfection was actually needed.

Originally Posted by wolfgirl90

2. For some reason, Shinji chose to lie about how he killed Rei (actually either he lied about it or it is something you didn't catch). Neither the prosecutor nor anyone else catches this lie. Had he actually killed Rei in the manner in which he stated, he would indeed be guilty of a war crime.

Since the evidence shows that Rei Ikari took the customary surrender posture in her world, and was very affectionate with Shini Ikari, it seems to me that choosing to kill her with either method is equally murder.

Here are the statements from my story:

1) Colonel Ikari. "It was not possible to capture the Azurian commander, so I had to blast her into atoms with my mega-cannon."

2)Colonel Ikari: "Well, the power unit on the battalion coffee machine was broken so I replaced it with the power unit from my mecha's sonic blaster, which was rarely used since we almost never see an enemy outside of the protection of his mecha. The replacement power unit arrived the Tuesday after the Madnug Battle. So you see, I had absolutely no way to capture the enemy general alive and I had to either just let her go or blast her to atoms with my mega-cannon."

3) Prosecutor Mombuto: So you claim that you had no way to capture the enemy general alive, despite the fact that she was unarmed and just a couple of dozen feet away from your mecha?"

Colonel Ikari: "Yes, sir. It is impossible for a mecha pilot to capture an enemy if all three of his capture devices, the sonic blaster, the net thrower, and the sleep gas, are all disabled at the same time. It was just a tragic series of equipment failures at the same time which made it absolutely impossible for me to capture the enemy commander alive. I had no malice or criminal intent toward her.”

I see that prosecutor Mombuto described Rei Ikari as being unarmed. Either he was exaggerating or nobody considered a pistol to be the least bit dangerous to a mecha.

4) Colonel Ikari appeared on the ground walking away from the camera and toward the Azurian officer, who looked surprised, then ran up to Ikari and hugged him Colonel Ikari in his green flight suit pushed her away from, snatched the pistol out of her hand, and shot her with it. There was a startled expression her faces as she crumbled to the ground.

Prosecutor Mombuto: “Notice that Colonel Ikari is not wearing his holster or pistol, which is against regulations and an indication that he felt perfectly safe in the situation.”

Colonel Ikari turned back toward the camera and walked back to his off screen mecha. After a few seconds a blast from his off screen mega-cannon blasted the enemy officer’s body to atoms.

Apparently Shinji Ikari had to say that he had blasted Rei Ikari with his cannon to cover up that he had shot her with (her) pistol instead of accepting her surrender. And he did shoot her living or dead body with his mega-cannon to vaporize the evidence and probably leaving evidence that someone had been blasted there. So he had to claim that he had no way to capture her alive (apparently he would have claimed that she refused to surrender) and had no choice except blasting her to atoms.

Originally Posted by wolfgirl90

3. Since Rei is a general, she either should be 1) not on the battlefield at all or 2) in a mech that distinguishes her as a general. If there is a standard order for generals to be captured, why would her mech have been destroyed in such a manner? Hell, what sense does it make for her to even be there in the first place?

I hear that in Code Geass Cornelia was the commanding general of the entire Britannian army. In any case she was a very high ranking military leader. No doubt you can quote posts where you have criticized her for being on the front lines in her nightmare in many battles.

As for why Rei Ikari's mecha would have been destroyed, we know that it was destroyed spectacularly but that Rei was able to eject and parachute to safety.

two possibilities:
A) If her cockpit was in the head Shinji Ikari might have exploded the legs and the lower torso, permitting Rei to safely eject.

B) Or perhaps Rei's Azurian mecha was badly damaged so she lassoed Shinji's Viridian mecha and turned on the winch to pull his mecha closer to her's, turned on the self destruct, and ejected. But Shinji realized what was happening and quickly used hes mega-cannon to blast the Azurian mecha into pieces which scattered away from his mecha right before the fragment with the self destruct mechanism exploded.

Originally Posted by wolfgirl90

4. Shinji is one of most incompetent military officers I have read about, from powering a coffee machine with a mech blaster power unit to breaking a steel cable net during a bet (not to mention his almost Looney Tune-ish reaction when he found out that he might be convicted of murder). To subsequently believe that he would also kill his daughter in cold blood would be pushing it.

If Rei Ikari was aged about 20 to 30 her father Shinji would probably be about forty five to sixty and probably too old to make silly bets when half drunk or to use a piece of military equipment for unauthorized purposes. But I could come up with some soap opera story of how Rei was Shinji's illegitimate daughter born when he was only fourteen. Her mother gave her up to an orphanage (or died in childbirth?) but when Shinji was an adult he found Rei and and raised her as his daughter.

That would make Shinji aged about thirty four to forty four at the time of the battle of Madug. I believe that in history a number of competent high ranking military officers of that age have still been young enough to be known for engaging in childish pranks and stupid drunken bets and other conduct unbecoming officers and gentlemen.

I haven't decided if Shinji killed Rei in cold blood. He might have gotten very excited during the previous portion of the Battle of Madnug.

It is possible that when Shinji saw that the Azurian was his daughter Rei, he decided to accept her surrender and use that chance to make up with her. So he may have left his gun behind in the cockpit of his mecha to reassure Rei or even give her the chance to turn the tables and capture him. But perhaps his old rage at her for choosing the Azurian side suddenly overcame him and he snatched her gun and shot her without premeditation. Then he would have blasted her body and lied about it to cover up his impulsive murder.

Originally Posted by wolfgirl90

5. Speaking of Rei, I also find it amazing that she was the general of ANYTHING considering her reaction, from the resigned attitude (seriously?) to the hug. Also, I don't understand how she would outrank her father by such an outrageous amount considering her age. Using real-world ranks (whether Japanese or American), she would outrank her father by a full 4 ranks (assuming that she is but one general and not the General of the Army). To put in prospective, one doesn't get to the rank of "Colonel" until after about 22 years of service, around 35-40 years old (to go higher to Brigadier General, you have to be recommended); unless the Azurian Army is so seriously desperate that they would have anyone with a pulse as a general, Rei must be one amazing person to outrank her own father by a full 4 ranks. Again, I think it was one of those things you decided to add for the sake adding without truly knowing anything about it.

Why shouldn't Rei Ikari have had a resigned expression when she prepared to surrender? If you wouldn't have resigned yourself to surrender in that situation, how would you have tried to defeat the Viridian mecha towering over you or escape from it?

And why should a young woman refrain from hugging her estranged father who she hasn't seen in a year merely because they are high ranking officers on opposite sides of a civil war? I am sure you can find example of male generals in the US Civil War, for example, hugging and otherwise being affectionate with old friends and close relatives they find as prisoners or otherwise happen to meet.

Your assumption that Rei was somehow at least four ranks higher than her father ignores the fact that most of the readers here are civilians and thus my story is written in Civilianese instead of Militaryese. The court martial would probably use the correct ranks of the characters but in Civilianese a Colonel can be a Lieutenant Colonel or a Colonel and a General is a general officer, a Brigadier General or higher. Thus it would be logical to assume that Rei out ranks her father by one rank (Colonel to Brigadier General) to five ranks (Lieutenant Colonel to General). Considering her age she is probably only a brigadier General or Major General.

The statement that people don't get to be Colonel until after abut 22 years of service is not as universally correct as you may think. In the army reorganization act of 1866 the youngest Civil War general, Uriah Galusha Pennypacker, became the youngest colonel in the history of the regular army. If he had 22 years of service by 1866 he would have began his service in 1844. His birth date is sometimes given as 1 June 1842 but more often as 1 June 1844.

IN the Viridian-Azurian Civil War any preexisting military would have ballooned in size as civilians were rapidly enlisted. Many regular military officers or civilians appointed to command would have had meteoric rises in rank during that civil war.

Originally Posted by wolfgirl90

6. You are using this fictional story in order to make a more than obvious allusion to Code Geass. You are also using this fictional story as proof of your accuracy on how Code Geass (and the world) should work, despite the fact that both the story and Code Geass are fictional and have absolutely no baring whatsoever on the real world, as no real world laws can be applied to either one.

You have the burden of proof here, not me (as you are the one making the point in the first place), so if there is something else that I missed, you need to catch it, not me.

Although, I seriously doubt that there is anything that you could tell me now that would change anything about your hopeless story.

[proEuphie]

Originally Posted by wolfgirl90

U
You can show alternatives all you want...in a discussion that deals with them. If you are having a discussion about how Hitler could have kept the Jews and gypsies alive, then you can discuss it all you want. However, if you having a discussion about what ACTUALLY happened, then showing alternatives to something that never happened is pointless. It doesn't prove anything. It doesn't move the discussion forward.

If for some strange reason you believe that Hitler and the Nazis had no possible alternative to exterminating the Jews, the Gypsies, etc. etc. than you would have to believe that the Holocaust was not a terrible crime but a tragic but necessary action. Since almost everyone believes that the Holocaust was one of the worst crimes in all of history, despite all the competition for places in top ten worst crimes in history lists, it can be deduced that almost everyone believes that Hitler and the Nazis had other and thus better choices.

I don't see how it could be logically possible to claim that the Holocaust was a terrible crime and also to claim that Hitler and the Nazis had no other choices. Thus any discussion about how evil the Holocaust was must mention that it would have been possible for Hitler and the Nazis to not carry out the Holocaust.

If you object to all discussions of alternative actions in attempts to prove that the courses of action actually taken were not the best possible ones, you will not be open to constructive criticism and you will not learn from your mistakes. And you will not learn from all the mistakes in the history books and will be a less competent citizen than otherwise.

Your words: "However, if you having a discussion about what ACTUALLY happened, then showing alternatives to something that never happened is pointless. It doesn't prove anything. It doesn't move the discussion forward." are rather puzzling. If someone is discussing something which actually happened, then he is discussing something which is different from something that never happened. He is discussing an alternative to something which never happened. Thus all discussions of what actually happened are discussions of an alternative to what never happened.

Perhaps you went to write that showing alternatives to what actually happened is pointless.

Originally Posted by wolfgirl90

Same thing with Lelouch. If we were having a discussion about how Lelouch COULD have saved Euphemia's life, then you would be welcome to share whatever ideas you had. However, since we discussing events that ACTUALLY happened and since Lelouch was not going to save Euphemia in the first place, there is no point in giving alternatives on how he could have done something that was wasn't going to happen. You are not helping your own discussion (if it could honestly be called such).

You know that the point of almost all my posts is to show that Lelouch wrongfully and evilly murdered Euphemia. If people believe that Lelouch had no other choice than to kill Euphemia then they would believ that it was a tragic but necessary action. Thus I have to show that Lelouch could have saved Euphemia to prove my point that he murdered Euphemia. Thus by saying that I shouldn't discuss alternatives to what actually happened you are trying to stop me from doing what is necessary to convince people that Lelouch murdered Euphemia.

You write: "and since Lelouch was not going to save Euphemia in the first place,". Exactly what do you men about when Lleouch was not going to save Euphemia? Do you mean after the Fuji Massacre started and Lleouch started to follow what I call his plan three, a slightly modified version of the plan two which he was following up until he made peace with Euphemia and accepted the sAZ plan?

Or do you mean Lelouch's plan two, which he probably modified from his previous plan one (the coup plans he was working on at the beginning of episode 21) by changing the time and place of the violent incident that would start his revolution to the opening of the SAZ? Or do you mean that Lelouch never planned to save Euphemia during the planning for his plan one-- the coup plans he was working on at the start of episode 21?

or do you mean that Lelouch never planned to save Euphemia since she came to Japan in episode 5? Or do you mean that Lelouch never planned to save Euphemia whenever he dreamed of taking revenge in the seven years since his mother's murder and the invasion of Japan?

And by "not going to save Euphemia" do you mean that Lelouch always intended to kill her if he could?

Originally Posted by wolfgirl90

Assuming he killed Euphemia to START the riot, which is not the case. He killed her to make Japanese come to his side, not to start a riot (the original plan was to start a riot).

I may make a separate post to try to clear up the confusion about exactly what you mean here.

Originally Posted by wolfgirl90

Again, that is something that can argued about for a long time. Whether he HAD to kill Euphemia or not can be debated all day. HOWEVER, since he DID kill Euphemia, that is all that really matters right now. You can discuss it as a possible plot hole, but that is it. It doesn't really change what happened in the series (or make you anymore right than you are now...which is barely).

to be continued

Originally Posted by wolfgirl90

Granted, in that episode, he was using her to merely stop the fighting; you have been suggesting that he use her as a way for Britannia to give back Japan altogether, something I have debunked more than once.

reply

Originally Posted by wolfgirl90

I have said this before and I will say it again: nice try. As the President of Mexico, Santa Anna DID "own" Texas, but they seceded, declaring themselves an independent republic. After the war, Santa Anna did not "give" them independence (since they technically already had it) but rather recognized the independence they had. Cornelia can't do the same thing as a Viceroy (you are basically comparing apples and oranges...and using real-life applications for a fictional cartoon, the futility which being something I have already told you).

Also, the new Mexican government took away Santa Anna's power, which voided the Treaty of Velasco (Santa Anna can't back out of a treaty that technically never existed).

to be continued

Originally Posted by wolfgirl90

Unless Charles used his power to prevent them from doing so. Again, if you are making the argument about Euphemia being used to give the Japanese their land back, Lelouch would to deal with Charles and Charles wouldn't care about Euphemia (hell, it wouldn't be unlike him if he ordered her dead). Of course, the soldiers could ignore him at the blatant risk of insubordination, the punishment of which I can only guess at.

to be continued

Originally Posted by wolfgirl90

And if they have power they can readily exercise to get her back. Charles maybe "up in the clouds" but he is certainly not ignorant of what is going on and he is not that far away.

to be continued

Originally Posted by wolfgirl90

Again, what YOU SAY doesn't mean anything as long as you are either dead wrong or spouting crap. You are better off saying "in my [honest] opinion" instead of "I say"; this prevents you from sounding like you are four and looking stupid when you are wrong ("I say" makes it seem that you are right no matter what, which is certainly not the case as I have proven you wrong multiple times).

to be continued

Originally Posted by wolfgirl90

So let me get this straight: since Lelouch didn't save Euphemia to use her as a hostage to stop the massacre, he is guilty of murdering every single Japanese that was killed, even though killing her ALSO stopped the massacre?! Yeah, again, nice try.

To be continued

Originally Posted by wolfgirl90

That's because, right at the very beginning, it says this: "Besides the prohibitions provided by special Conventions, it is especially prohibited..."

That part of the Hague Convention only mentions certain actions that are not already covered in special treaties and conventions; its not an exhaustive list. Since those treaties and conventions ALREADY list the prohibitions, there is no reason to repeat them here.

to be continued

Originally Posted by wolfgirl90

AGAIN, it does not define "treachery" because that is something that has already been taught and explained to soldiers; its not going to be repeated again here. Also, this particular article only deals with SOLDIERS. Civilians are not part of it because, like I said before, this are entirely separate treaties and conventions (like the Fourth Geneva Convention) that deals with them (again, its not going to be repeated over and over).

to be continued

Originally Posted by wolfgirl90

I guess, but since we are dealing with a world that you made up with circumstances that you also made up (and can therefore change), I am not about to argue with you on that (you can make up anything you want and change your posts; I am not about to argue about the definition of treachery in your story since you can obviously change it).

to be continued

Originally Posted by wolfgirl90

Umm...you may want to rewrite that. Its not merely someone who is using a flag of truce but someone who is abusing it for enemy advantage (ie obtaining information). The commanding officer does not have to accept the truce. They can detain the envoy, however, if its proven that the envoy has used the "truce" to obtain information and betray them, then the envoy has basically signed his own death warrant (at that point, he has lost inviolability, meaning no laws can protect him, even the ones that would have kept him from being killed).

Yes I rewrote it to say someone misusing a flag of truce. Thank you.

Originally Posted by wolfgirl90

I know how the story goes, but it makes no sense for Shinji to have lied about the way he killed Rei since "blasting her with a mega-cannon" would have gotten him in significantly more trouble (depending on circumstances) than merely shooting her with a gun (your story only mentions that her mech was destroyed or rather seen falling in pieces; it doesn't make it completely clear whether Shinji shot her down or someone else did). In fact, if he was supposed to capture her anyway, why would he make it so blatantly clear that he went against orders (and made his situation significantly worse by blasting her), in yet be surprised that he is sitting in court (I'm assuming that he has the smarts and military expertise of a man of his rank not to do anything that dumb, despite evidence that proves that he one can short of a six pack)?

Actually the prosecutor says that Shinji destroyed General Ikari's nightmare: "Colonel Shinji Ikari, why didn't you capture the enemy commander, at the Battle of Madnug, after you so brilliantly destroyed her mecha?"

I say that it might make sense for Shinji to lie about how he killed Rei. the following is copied from my post # 18 above and contains quotes from my post number one.
__________________________________________________ _____________
Here are the statements from my story:

1) Colonel Ikari. "It was not possible to capture the Azurian commander, so I had to blast her into atoms with my mega-cannon."

2)Colonel Ikari: "Well, the power unit on the battalion coffee machine was broken so I replaced it with the power unit from my mecha's sonic blaster, which was rarely used since we almost never see an enemy outside of the protection of his mecha. The replacement power unit arrived the Tuesday after the Madnug Battle. So you see, I had absolutely no way to capture the enemy general alive and I had to either just let her go or blast her to atoms with my mega-cannon."

3) Prosecutor Mombuto: So you claim that you had no way to capture the enemy general alive, despite the fact that she was unarmed and just a couple of dozen feet away from your mecha?"

Colonel Ikari: "Yes, sir. It is impossible for a mecha pilot to capture an enemy if all three of his capture devices, the sonic blaster, the net thrower, and the sleep gas, are all disabled at the same time. It was just a tragic series of equipment failures at the same time which made it absolutely impossible for me to capture the enemy commander alive. I had no malice or criminal intent toward her.”

I see that prosecutor Mombuto described Rei Ikari as being unarmed. Either he was exaggerating or nobody considered a pistol to be the least bit dangerous to a mecha.

4) Colonel Ikari appeared on the ground walking away from the camera and toward the Azurian officer, who looked surprised, then ran up to Ikari and hugged him Colonel Ikari in his green flight suit pushed her away from, snatched the pistol out of her hand, and shot her with it. There was a startled expression her faces as she crumbled to the ground.

Prosecutor Mombuto: “Notice that Colonel Ikari is not wearing his holster or pistol, which is against regulations and an indication that he felt perfectly safe in the situation.”

Colonel Ikari turned back toward the camera and walked back to his off screen mecha. After a few seconds a blast from his off screen mega-cannon blasted the enemy officer’s body to atoms.

Apparently Shinji Ikari had to say that he had blasted Rei Ikari with his cannon to cover up that he had shot her with (her) pistol instead of accepting her surrender. And he did shoot her living or dead body with his mega-cannon to vaporize the evidence and probably leaving evidence that someone had been blasted there. So he had to claim that he had no way to capture her alive (apparently he would have claimed that she refused to surrender) and had no choice except blasting her to atoms.
__________________________________________________ __________

Thus it is possible that Shinji Ikari felt or thought that it would be better to say that he couldn't capture the Azurian general and had to blast her with his cannon instead.

Originally Posted by wolfgirl90

Umm...was the triage thing pointed at me as an insult (considering that triage is a process used in every hospital emergency room and on the battlefield)? I don't get what you are driving at.

And yes, I did assume that General Ikari died since you did not describe anything about her after she was shot (other than the startled expression on her face). Heck, since this was an obvious allusion to Code Geass, I am rather surprised you didn't have her say "Father, why?" (a la Euphemia) before she was blasted.

If you going to mock me for assuming that someone died after being shot at POINT BLANK RANGE, then go right on ahead.

[Kamen Rider V3 Blue]

Why do ya have to pick on poor Shinji Ikari hasn't he suffered enough in his OWN series?

[proEuphie]

Originally Posted by Kamen Rider V3 Blue

Why do ya have to pick on poor Shinji Ikari hasn't he suffered enough in his OWN series?

He's not the same Shinji Ikari. He's a totally different character who just happens to have the same name due to my lack of originality and twisted sense of humor.