From: "Rich Gauszka" 


"Monte Davis"  wrote in message
news:9mdo22di1fa5tg54jpks89tv9c7ch5vfat{at}4ax.com...
> John Cuccia  wrote:
>
>>The "laws and
>>customs or war" are peacetime constructs which have no influence on
>>wartime conduct.
>
> I can't agree. The professionalization of European war *did* lead to
> less misery for civilians in the 18th and 19th centuries. (The 20th
> told itself it had invented total war, when in fact it had simply gone
> back to the 17th and before.)
>
> The bad rep of gas in WWI -- regardless of whether it was practical,
> or more or less "inhumane" than bullets and shells -- *did* constrain
> its use in WWII.
>
> The bad rep of nuclear weapons *has* constrained their use against
> non-nuclear powers for 60 years.
>
> That constraints like these -- and on a smaller scale, the issues of
> POWs at stake in this thread -- are fragile, incomplete, and liable to
> be discarded in desperation, or by an evil regime, doesn't mean
> they're without value. They get stronger, and gain wider adherence,
> with time.
>
>

While there are attempts to civilize warfare, for every gentleman's
agreement one can find an act of sheer butchery. As in the Civil War on can
find an honorable gentleman of an  officer or one can find those that
stocked  Andersonville or it's Northern equivalent Fort Delaware.

I would rather us not endow war with any attribute other than the total
abomination that it is. That is it may be necessary at times should be
regarded with sorrow.

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5