Quote:
Originally Posted by Splitter
158. This is perhaps a convenient opportunity
to say a word about the ethics of shooting
at aircraft crews who have "baled out"
in parachutes.
159. Germans descending over England are
prospective Prisoners of War, and as such
should be immune. On the other hand, British
pilots descending over England are still
potential Combatants.
160. Much indignation was caused by the
fact that German pilots sometimes fired on our
descending airmen (although, in my opinion,
they were perfectly entitled to do so), but
I am glad to say that in many cases they refrained
and sometimes greeted a helpless
adversary with a cheerful wave of the hand."
This surprises me.
|
Someone wrote that Churchill himself intervened in shooting pilots. Yet allowed to bomb German cities late in the war. Ok to bomb civilians but not shoot chutes?
No matter how hard I try I can't believe ethics got anything to do with Churchill's intervention. I think he saw that if British pilots start shooting chutes in Battle of Britain, then German pilots will begin to do the same, and it is British who will lose in that game for they wont get pilots back to flying. Captured German pilots could also been interrogated about German squadron strenghts and stuff. I have understood British got notable advantage in that their pilots could continue flying about the next day after shot down in Battle of Britain. How would had the Battle of Britain ended if all chutes were shot down on both sides? I don't know, but definetly Churchill didn't want to gamble that, which was wise.
*
While #159 makes sense, it can be argued that chute pilot has surrendered (given up) and therefore should not be shot down. If we compare that to Japanese early war doctrine where Japanese pilots did not have parachutes so that they could not "give up" (and would have to fight harder), not shooting chutes makes even more sense ethically, thus effectively countering RAF ethics about accepting chute shooting in the name of potential future combatant argument.
So I see #159 as just a way to try make British pilots accept that even if Germans shoot chutes we can't do so because Germans are "entitled" to do so.
*
If we can talk about ethics I might say shooting a chute is unethical since the chute pilot has surrendered. But if we can't talk about ethics there is pragmatical view which says chute pilots are potential future combatants and has not been captured (eliminated) yet. Like in France where resistance groups helped pilots to get back to England.
Edit: "There is no challenge" and "helpless" arguments are valid in sports and honour, not in war. For the best time to attack is when the enemy is helpless.
Edit: Huh, it seems that shooting chutes in
war is not unethical because the chute pilot is in state of "tactical retreat", and there is not much reason for the victorious pilot to gamble in that will the chute pilot be captured or not. You can freely hate me because of this conclusion.