What does PrepHole think of the Highway of Death and the morality of killing retreating soldiers generally? For those who don't know near the end of Gulf I the coalition air forces thoroughly fucked up the columns of Iraqi vehicles fleeing north on the Kuwait-Basra highway. A lot of people were upset that they killed retreating troops, with some saying that the Geneva conventions protect any troops "out of combat" or that by retreating the Iraqis were complying with the UN resolution demanding their withdrawal from Kuwait. Norman Schwarzkopf justified his order by saying:
>The first reason why we bombed the highway coming north out of Kuwait is because there was a great deal of military equipment on that highway, and I had given orders to all my commanders that I wanted every piece of Iraqi equipment that we possibly could destroy. Secondly, this was not a bunch of innocent people just trying to make their way back across the border to Iraq. This was a bunch of rapists, murderers and thugs who had raped and pillaged downtown Kuwait City and now were trying to get out of the country before they were caught.
What does PrepHole think about this? To my mind, if a soldier sees he's on the losing side and wants to live he can surrender, which many did of course, and even from the Highway of Death itself about 2,000 Iraqis did abandon their vehicles and surrender. Note too that a lot of guys, stuck in a traffic jam and hearing strafing, just abandoned their vehicles and ran into the desert, so despite the name and the photos of endless destroyed vehicles, the human toll from the HoD was not that horrific. But yeah personally I don't see how retreating with all your weapons and vehicles exempts you from getting got. Retreaters can always regroup and come back and seem to me like valid military targets, if you want to live you can surrender imo. What do you guys think?