Specially Protected Persons in Combat Situations (new title)

[jmm99]

are a "form of martial law" - governed by the Laws of War (or more quaintly, the "laws of honest warfare").

And, yes, I do "know what you mean"; but fail to see why it's a difficult topic to discuss in the public domain. No one is asking anyone to lay bare what they have actually done. The issues hinge on who should be killed in armed conflicts and under what circumstances - not an unknown public discussion topic by any means.

The basic question is what alternatives one can present (if one so believes) to the conduct exemplified by and to Anne de Batarnay de Joyeuse, Baron d'Arques, Vicomte then Duke of Joyeuse (d. 20 Oct 1587), who massacred 800 Huguenots at Saint-Eloi, Poitou, 21 June 1587; but who lived by that sword, died by that sword, at Coutras:

The Catholic line was shattered into fragments and rolled up from the flank; Joyeuse took to his heels and was cornered by a group of Huguenot cavalry. He threw down his sword and called: "My ransom is a hundred thousand francs!" His reward was a shot in the head: for the commander who had ordered Huguenot wounded to be killed on the field and who had butchered garrisons that had surrendered relying on the laws of honest warfare, there could be no quarter.

Those particular and other incidents in the "Wars of Religion" started folks thinking about the "laws of honest warfare" (that is, warfare with honor). The irregularities of the next subsequent Thirty Years' War further exemplified the need for what are in effect "honor codes".

Like other "honor codes", they can be bypassed by winks and nods, as illustrated by this example of convoluted logic:

from JMA
I am not against tribunals at all but I do see claims of "jungle justice" and "kangaroo courts" being raised and even to a more shrill level if the death sentence is dished out. You are talking about a form of martial law right?

I do not advocate shooting prisoners but I am not a proponent of taking prisoners (if you know what I mean) unless they are really needed for intel gathering purposes.

Like giving only limited quarter is not a form of "jungle justice".

Those "laws of honest warfare" also do not operate so well where "insiders" and "outsiders" are involved, and where reciprocity does not exist.