View Single Post
Old July 10 2013, 11:22 PM   #358
Crazy Eddie
Rear Admiral
Crazy Eddie's Avatar
Location: I'm in your ___, ___ing your ___
Re: Scotty and his military comment

KGator wrote: View Post
The true cognitive dissonance here is that you fail to comprehend that if an organization is armed it is no longer non-military and by current and historic legal definition it is most decidedly a MILITARY FORCE!
The Hagannah was sufficiently well-armed to fight successful wars against the British, Jordanian, Egyptian and Syrian militaries in 1947 and 48. They did not become a military force, however, until the State of Israel incorporated them into the IDF.

This is also true of most of the major combatants of the Indian Wars from the 1790s through the 1880s; with the possible exception of the Iroquois Confederacy, none of the tribal nations actually bothered to create a combat organization and simply called up everyone who could carry a weapon and organized them into war parties.

International convention...
Would identify Starfleet under the umbrella definition of "armed forces." Significantly, "armed forces" and "military" are not interchangeable terms.

Basically, you bolded the wrong portion:

In essence, this definition of armed forces covers all persons who fight on behalf of a party to a conflict and who subordinate themselves to its command. As a result, a combatant is any person who, under responsible command, engages in hostile acts in an armed conflict on behalf of a party to the conflict. The conditions imposed on armed forces vest in the group as such. The members of such armed forces are liable to attack.
This definition of armed forces builds upon earlier definitions contained in the Hague Regulations and the Third Geneva Convention which sought to determine who are combatants entitled to prisoner-of-war status. Article 1 of the Hague Regulations provides that the laws, rights and duties of war apply not only to armies, but also to militia and volunteer corps fulfilling four conditions:
Meaning one does not need to be a member of one's military to be considered a combatant and therefore subject to POW protections of the Geneva Conventions. Which is why "the rights and duties" also apply to non-military organizations that choose to take part in war as combatants.

If you don't recognize Starfleet as a military...
... it's because

1) "Armed forces" and "military" are not interchangeable terms and
2) The Federation is not known to be a signatory of the Geneva Conventions.
The Complete Illustrated Guide to Starfleet - Online Now!
Crazy Eddie is offline   Reply With Quote