Just now, BritManToo said:

Are pilots given details of their targets, or just GPS coords and a photo?

That's a good question. I don't know the answer to it.

11 hours ago, Patong2021 said:

Ok, an aircraft crashed. If the pilot(s) are captured, they will be POWs, not hostages. Both the USA and Israeli militaries are prepared for events like this. One cannot expect to undertake a military operation like this without losing some aircraft or personnel. No need for histrionics. There are casualties when there is an intervention. The service members who are serving are well aware of the risks of service and accept that they may be injured, killed or captured.

But the point is . This was claimed as being "all sorted "?

Apparently not !

34 minutes ago, Alan Zweibel said:

Well, it's possible that they can be treated as potential war criminals as well. I guess it depends on what qualifies a soldier to be treated that way. Does simple participation in an illegal war count as a war crime? Or does the participant have to actually have committed something more specific like, say, targeting a major health center in Teheran, which actually happened, to qualify? Should I was only obeying orders exonerate a soldier from criminal liability in such an instance?

It has not been established that this is an illegal war. Because opponents of the intervention, and supporters of the Iran regime label it as such does not make the US actions illegal or the conduct of its personnel war crimes. Iran has been at "war" with the USA (and Israel) since 1979 and is a state sponsor of terrorism. To date, there has been no finding that the USA has engaged in illegal acts.

There is no evidence of "war crimes", so why try and taint the activity as a war crime? On the contrary, the loss of the original US aircraft is more likely related to the targeting that US pilots must follow, to minimize collateral civilian damage. Western militaries including Israel are the only militaries in the world that include legal counsel in the targeting authorization process, to minimize the potential for wrongdoing.

35 minutes ago, Alan Zweibel said:

Well, if you know you're bombing an illegitimate target, wouldn't that be "deliberate naughtiness"? By the way, Hegseth said that enemy soldiers should be given no quarter. That means that even if they surrender, they should be killed. That definitely is a war crime.

Come back when and if the wrongdoing occurs. Then you can get on your soapbox and let the 50 or so people who read the topic know.

1 hour ago, FlorC said:

I hope they catch the war criminal pilot and

do what ISIS does with them in countless video's.

FYI - Iranians are not Sunni Takfiri head-choppers. The Wahhabi Takfiri Islamistics take things in the Korean and Hadith literally, which is why they cut people's heads off. Wahhabism is promoted by Saudi Arabia and given support by Türkiye
Iranians are Shia Islam although is Islam, the Persian culture infuses a different level of sophistication into Iranian actions. A downed pilot is going to be treated like a POW.
During the Iraq/Iran war, both side incarcerated large numbers of POWs.

"In neither Iran nor Iraq were the prisoners-of-war (POWs) taken in the conflict between the two countries "treated as badly as alleged by the Government of the other country", nor were they treated as well as claimed by the Government of the detaining Powers, says a report (S/16962) of a three-member United Nations mission that inquired into the situation of POWs, and civilian detainees in the Iran-Iraq conflict."
-https://international.vlex.com/vid/prisoners-war-iran-iraq-finally-end-53294641

1 hour ago, FlorC said:

I hope they catch the war criminal pilot and

do what ISIS does with them in countless video's.

US pilots are in an interesting position as they are officers who are sworn to protect the US Constitution, which means to follow the US Constitution. Treaties, such as Geneva Conventions of 1949, including Geneva Convention IV of 1955 define the protections for civilians and civilian infrastructures and includes protections against collective punishment of civilian populations.
As such, these ratified treaties are "Constitutional" and as such must be adhered to by US military officers under the Supremacy Clause.
"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land.

However, the US Secretary of Defense and President Trump keep saying that all of the rules have been discarded. Hegseth literally said, "The US military will not be bound by rules," and since this conflict began, Trump has promoted a policy of collective punishment via aerial bombing of civilians and civilian infrastructure that US pilots... “We are going to hit them extremely hard over the next two to three weeks — we’re going to bring them back to the Stone Ages where they belong.” (aljazeera.com)

They have blatantly said they are going to engage in behaviors which rise to the level of war crimes. Bombing Iran back to the Stone Age implies collective punishment.

So pilots who engage in illegal actions toward civilians (Jus in Bello - International Humanitarian Law) are dejure, war criminals. They could refuse to follow illegal orders as a US military officer is not beholden to the US President like enlisted, but only to the US Constitution, and the Treaties binding behavior in war are Constitutional under the Supremacy Clause.

So do I feel sorry for US pilots who are shot down? No, not really. They are fighting in an undeclared war of aggression, no different than Hitler's invasion of Poland in 1939 which was the catalyst for World War 2 - plus - they are targeting targets that make their actions rise to the level of war crimes. It was after the horrors of WW2 that the various treaties and conventions were created which defines legal and illegal wars such as the United Nations Charter (1945) as well as conduct during war found in the Geneva Conventions. But remember, the new Secretary of War Crimes, Pete Hegseth, has stated, "No stupid rules of engagement, no nation-building quagmire, no democracy-building exercise, no politically correct wars. We fight to win." (war.gov).

Rules of engagement are military directives that implement (and must comply with) the laws of armed conflict — primarily the ratified Geneva Conventions (1949) and customary international law. Under U.S. constitutional and statutory frameworks: ROE cannot legally authorize violations of the Geneva Conventions (e.g., deliberate attacks on civilians or civilian infrastructure). The Department of Defense Law of War Manual and the War Crimes Act still bind U.S. forces.

7 minutes ago, Patong2021 said:

It has not been established that this is an illegal war. Because opponents of the intervention, and supporters of the Iran regime label it as such does not make the US actions illegal or the conduct of its personnel war crimes. Iran has been at "war" with the USA (and Israel) since 1979 and is a state sponsor of terrorism. To date, there has been no finding that the USA has engaged in illegal acts.

There is no evidence of "war crimes", so why try and taint the activity as a war crime? On the contrary, the loss of the original US aircraft is more likely related to the targeting that US pilots must follow, to minimize collateral civilian damage. Western militaries including Israel are the only militaries in the world that include legal counsel in the targeting authorization process, to minimize the potential for wrongdoing.

Given that the war was waged without UN authorization which the UN treaty requires, there's certainly a very strong case to be made. As for your assertion that the iranian government has been at "war' with the US since 1979, your use of scare quotes says all that needs to be said on that score.

And just blowing up Iran's pre-eminent health center for vaccines and such, by itself would certainly qualify as a war crime. Just because efforts are made to avoid civilian casualties, doesn't mean that attacking non military infrastructure isn't a war crime.

7 minutes ago, Patong2021 said:

Come back when and if the wrongdoing occurs. Then you can get on your soapbox and let the 50 or so people who read the topic know.

This doesn't count?

Iran’s Pasteur medical research centre ‘heavily damaged’ in strike

Large parts of the facility, which plays a key role in combating infectious diseases like cholera and Covid-19, have been reduced to rubble

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/terror-and-security/irans-pasteur-medical-research-centre-damaged-in-strike/

Posts and replies trolling about other members have been removed.

Low value posts and replies were removed:

13. Low-Value Posts - Posts that add no written contribution are not allowed.

    This includes emoji-only replies, very short comments, memes, GIFs, screenshots, or embedded social media posts without explanation or opinion.

11 hours ago, Celsius said:

CNN reports it's F15

We wouldn't really know as the media has been very complicit in this war, just like they were with the Iraq War, we're not getting much in the way of objective analysis.

3 minutes ago, Alan Zweibel said:

This doesn't count?

Iran’s Pasteur medical research centre ‘heavily damaged’ in strike

Large parts of the facility, which plays a key role in combating infectious diseases like cholera and Covid-19, have been reduced to rubble

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/terror-and-security/irans-pasteur-medical-research-centre-damaged-in-strike/

It appears that the facility was not destroyed. The reports indicate that only the sections where there was evidence it was being used for military purposes and/or had dual use were neutralized. It would have been much easier to target the entire location than just a few distinct parts.

Iran has a history of dual purpose activity and the likelihood that the complex was used for biological weapons research was high. I have not seen the evidence for the action. Have you seen the evidence? What I do know is that if these sites are being intentionally targeted, they were subject to a lengthy legal review process and that there was intelligence from Iranians that showed that there was a risk.

19 minutes ago, Patong2021 said:

It has not been established that this is an illegal war. Because opponents of the intervention, and supporters of the Iran regime label it as such does not make the US actions illegal or the conduct of its personnel war crimes. Iran has been at "war" with the USA (and Israel) since 1979 and is a state sponsor of terrorism. To date, there has been no finding that the USA has engaged in illegal acts.

There is no evidence of "war crimes", so why try and taint the activity as a war crime? On the contrary, the loss of the original US aircraft is more likely related to the targeting that US pilots must follow, to minimize collateral civilian damage. Western militaries including Israel are the only militaries in the world that include legal counsel in the targeting authorization process, to minimize the potential for wrongdoing.

Do you believe the war on Iraq was unjust?

Was Bush prosecuted for war crimes?

Of course this is an illegal war - you are just in denial as this is for your 'un'spiritual country Israel.

Only your country and a handful more call Iran terrorist funders. In fact, outfits like Hezbollah are simply allies if Iran. Countries support allies.

Why do you think NATO is not helping USA?

It's not rocket science. Everyone, including 60% of Americans opposed this illegal act of aggression, which killed 165 teenage girls on the first day.

Your continued support of Israeli terrorist activities is winning you no friends.

I wonder if Trump is trying to be a comedian, or if he's just simply doing his daily bit of making himself look like an absolute fool, a goon, and an ignoramus? He's a lot more effective at doing that, than he is at waging a war that's for sure.

Trump has also played up this air dominance over the past two weeks.

“And we literally have planes flying over Tehran and other parts of their country; they can’t do a thing about it,” he said on March 24. He added that the United States could strike a power plant, and “they can’t do a thing about it.”

The president has said for weeks that Iran had “no navy,” “no military,” “no air force” and “no anti-aircraft systems.” In a White House address Wednesday night, he said he could hit Iran’s oil facilities, “and there’s not a thing they could do about it.

“They have no anti-aircraft equipment. Their radar is 100% annihilated,” Trump said. “We are unstoppable as a military force.”

It’s merely the latest example of Trump and those around him apparently exaggerating military success.

Americans have little faith in the mission. They don’t think it’s been explained. The list of four objectives has constantly shifted. And perhaps the biggest problem is economic pessimism resulting from the effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz and the subsequent rising gas prices. Americans just don’t think the war is worth the costs.

https://share.google/QREKR6TPF3J9jt9CF

1 minute ago, Patong2021 said:

Iran has a history of dual purpose activity and the likelihood that the complex was used for biological weapons research was high. I have not seen the evidence for the action.

What a load of cow dung.

Iran hasn't started a war in over 200 years and had absolutely NO intention of starting one. But you don't want Iran to have any defense, do you?

I bet you think Saddam has WMD.

It's all about oil and Israel.

It's all about oil and Israel.

Any unblinkered fool can see this with US aggression in the ME.

US policy is determined my your people in the USA, well the billionaire ones.

6 minutes ago, spidermike007 said:

I wonder if Trump is trying to be a comedian, or if he's just simply doing his daily bit of making himself look like an absolute fool, a goon, and an ignoramus? He's a lot more effective at doing that, than he is at waging a war that's for sure.

Trump has also played up this air dominance over the past two weeks.

“And we literally have planes flying over Tehran and other parts of their country; they can’t do a thing about it,” he said on March 24. He added that the United States could strike a power plant, and “they can’t do a thing about it.”

The president has said for weeks that Iran had “no navy,” “no military,” “no air force” and “no anti-aircraft systems.” In a White House address Wednesday night, he said he could hit Iran’s oil facilities, “and there’s not a thing they could do about it.

“They have no anti-aircraft equipment. Their radar is 100% annihilated,” Trump said. “We are unstoppable as a military force.”

It’s merely the latest example of Trump and those around him apparently exaggerating military success.

Americans have little faith in the mission. They don’t think it’s been explained. The list of four objectives has constantly shifted. And perhaps the biggest problem is economic pessimism resulting from the effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz and the subsequent rising gas prices. Americans just don’t think the war is worth the costs.

https://share.google/QREKR6TPF3J9jt9CF

The whole US foreign policy is a joke, totally bought by Israeli lobby billionaires.

14 minutes ago, Alan Zweibel said:

Given that the war was waged without UN authorization which the UN treaty requires, there's certainly a very strong case to be made. As for your assertion that the iranian government has been at "war' with the US since 1979, your use of scare quotes says all that needs to be said on that score.

And just blowing up Iran's pre-eminent health center for vaccines and such, by itself would certainly qualify as a war crime. Just because efforts are made to avoid civilian casualties, doesn't mean that attacking non military infrastructure isn't a war crime.

Which UN Treaty?

Do you deny that Iran has been in a state of hostility and has undertaken violent acts against the USA and its nationals? A long list of the Iranian actions has been posted multiple times.

You are now presenting a partial strike on a dual purpose facility as "blowing up Iran's pre-eminent health center for vaccines".

Did you know that Iranians have located their military production facilities in close proximity to schools, and medical facilities? It is a common practice of Hamas/Hezbollah and Iran with the intention of discouraging their being targeted as non combatant casualties become likely. So, before you start screaming war crimes have a look at the Iranian strategy first.

5 minutes ago, JimCM said:

What a load of cow dung.

Iran hasn't started a war in over 200 years and had absolutely NO intention of starting one. But you don't want Iran to have any defense, do you?

I bet you think Saddam has WMD.

It's all about oil and Israel.

It's all about oil and Israel.

Any unblinkered fool can see this with US aggression in the ME.

US policy is determined my your people in the USA, well the billionaire ones.

The only cow dung is your entry of multiple falsehoods. Iran is at the center of all conflict in the middle east. Are you upset that the Gulf Arabs and a growing consensus in the Arab world is lining up against Iran? Wait until next week. I think the Arab world has a surprise for you. 😁

20 minutes ago, Alan Zweibel said:

Given that the war was waged without UN authorization which the UN treaty requires, there's certainly a very strong case to be made. As for your assertion that the iranian government has been at "war' with the US since 1979, your use of scare quotes says all that needs to be said on that score.

And just blowing up Iran's pre-eminent health center for vaccines and such, by itself would certainly qualify as a war crime. Just because efforts are made to avoid civilian casualties, doesn't mean that attacking non military infrastructure isn't a war crime.

Why bother debating these people? There is a group of US ideologues on this forum who are cut from the "My Country Right Or Wrong" cloth and who will make excuses to justify war crimes as well as the unprovoked war of aggression that the US has just engaged in against Iran. And they'll agree with the Secretary of War Crimes, Hegseth, that "No stupid rules of engagement..." and "Maximum lethality," against all targets...even children in schools. We'll start to hear that "Collateral Damage" nonsense that was part and parcel of the illegal war waged by the Bush Administration in 2003 in Iraq.

I am positive that in the 1930s that a large segment of the German population with 100% behind Hitler's invasion of Poland in 1939 as well as the pogroms and other acts against humanity which the public overlooked. Like them, we have a group of members who will back the US war 100% regardless of how grievous the crimes, and will overlooks war crimes and acts against humanity, and in some cases will go as far as to blame the victims of the war themselves.

7 minutes ago, JimCM said:

The whole US foreign policy is a joke, totally bought by Israeli lobby billionaires.

Are you frustrated by the reality of the Gulf Arabs and Israel getting along and that the Arab world is condemning Iran, and not Israel or the USA?

I'm off to the Beach Polo display now, so I will leave you and your handful of fellow revolutionaries to your anti Israel chants. I doubt anyone there shares your concern. They will be focused on the excellent buffet the Intercontinental lays out. Weather is marvelous again today too and you should consider getting out.

8 minutes ago, Patong2021 said:

Which UN Treaty?

Do you deny that Iran has been in a state of hostility and has undertaken violent acts against the USA and its nationals? A long list of the Iranian actions has been posted multiple times.

You are now presenting a partial strike on a dual purpose facility as "blowing up Iran's pre-eminent health center for vaccines".

Did you know that Iranians have located their military production facilities in close proximity to schools, and medical facilities? It is a common practice of Hamas/Hezbollah and Iran with the intention of discouraging their being targeted as non combatant casualties become likely. So, before you start screaming war crimes have a look at the Iranian strategy first.

I understand that you don't have the necessary level of sustain attention to actually read documents like the US Constitution or the post-WW2 treaties and the UN Charter. Instead, you come with with trite comments "Which UN Treaty." Really - go figure it out on you own. Those of us who actually have a reading level at the post-university-graduation level have already read these documents or their summaries. No one can stuff that knowledge into the head of someone incapable of understanding, and therefore you remain ignorant and ask really ignorant questions which don't warrant an answer by any of us who have already done the footwork.

16 minutes ago, Patong2021 said:

Do you deny that Iran has been in a state of hostility and has undertaken violent acts against the USA and its nationals? A long list of the Iranian actions has been posted multiple times.

This is pure US State Department and The Council Of Foreign Relations propaganda on steroids.
Iran is not in a "state of hostility" with the US, quite contrary, the US has been in a state of hostility toward Iran 1953 when the overthrew the democratic elected leader of the country, and then after Iranian took the country back from the US proxy, The Shah of Iran.
No US military member has been attacked by Iran on US soil, again, quite the contrary as US military members were in combat zones in Syria and Iraq and were COMBATANTS and perfectly legal target of war.
Then regarding the bombing of the Marines in Lebanon in 1982, the bombing was carried out in response to US battleships actions in Lebanon. The US has always had an Israel First policy, and as such Regan got sucked into the fray and stations ships including battleships to lob shells into the Beeka Valley where they killed not only resistance fighters, but civilians as well (as usual). Realize that it is US policy to label any resistance groups fighting against Israeli aggression and invasions as "terrorists." The bombing is attributed to Hezbollah, but Hezbollah was not formed in 1982, but the bombing was carried out by a Shia resistance group, possible Amal (founded in 1973) in response to the indiscriminate bombings by the US. The bombing was not carried out by Iran.

Again, if the US bombs countries like Lebanon, it's "promoting peace."
If the victims of the bombing or resistance groups fight back, it's "terrorism."

The Marines in the Beirut barracks were legitimate targets of war. The resistance group didn't have battleships to lob 2 ton shells into the Marine Barracks, so they used a car bomb.

The term "terrorists" as it is applied to any group who dares to fight US and Israeli aggression is - Propaganda.

43 minutes ago, Patong2021 said:

The only cow dung is your entry of multiple falsehoods. Iran is at the center of all conflict in the middle east. Are you upset that the Gulf Arabs and a growing consensus in the Arab world is lining up against Iran? Wait until next week. I think the Arab world has a surprise for you. 😁

The USA, a country thousands of miles away is the cause of ME conflicts!!

Do you really expect there to be no American deaths when U.S. troops occupied Lebanon during crises like the 1958 Lebanon crisis and again during the Lebanese Civil War in the early 1980s? When forces are deployed into volatile, factional conflicts they become part of the battlefield. Why exactly were the US occupying parts of Lebanon re 1983? Painting Iran as the aggressors is frankly very short-sighted, nah ignorant. 

Lobbyists like you believe occupation by US or Israel is legal and just, your insane. Your evil is apparent with your support of the genocide in Gaza, the current occupation in Lebanon and the illegal aggression in Iran. You sound like Pete Hegseth, with your ultra fundamentalist Jewish supremacist narrative, trying to label Iran as the aggressors when they haven't started a war since before your countries were established.

Have you ever served in the US army or IDF?

23 minutes ago, JimCM said:

The USA, a country thousands of miles away is the cause of ME conflicts!!

Do you really expect there to be no American deaths when U.S. troops occupied Lebanon during crises like the 1958 Lebanon crisis and again during the Lebanese Civil War in the early 1980s? When forces are deployed into volatile, factional conflicts they become part of the battlefield. Why exactly were the US occupying parts of Lebanon re 1983? Painting Iran as the aggressors is frankly very short-sighted, nah ignorant. 

Lobbyists like you believe occupation by US or Israel is legal and just, your insane. Your evil is apparent with your support of the genocide in Gaza, the current occupation in Lebanon and the illegal aggression in Iran. You sound like Pete Hegseth, with your ultra fundamentalist Jewish supremacist narrative, trying to label Iran as the aggressors when they haven't started a war since before your countries were established.

Have you ever served in the US army or IDF?

You attempting to talk to members who don't study history or have any knowledge of comparative religions. You'll have more luck explaining your position to a Thai water buffalo. These members are ideologues who simply repeat propaganda talking point they here on US mainstream news or out of the mouths of the POTUS or members of his cabinet. They don't have the ability to think and analyze by themselves.

I just them in my "Ignore" list now.

2 hours ago, BritManToo said:

Are pilots given details of their targets, or just GPS coords and a photo?

I would thinking a Pre Opp briefing would be given before a combat mission with Targets identified and in the event of an loss of aircraft where they can look out for a downed pilot.

speaking of things being shot down, check out these blue frickin' laser beams.

1 hour ago, connda said:

Why bother debating these people? There is a group of US ideologues on this forum who are cut from the "My Country Right Or Wrong" cloth and who will make excuses to justify war crimes as well as the unprovoked war of aggression that the US has just engaged in against Iran. And they'll agree with the Secretary of War Crimes, Hegseth, that "No stupid rules of engagement..." and "Maximum lethality," against all targets...even children in schools. We'll start to hear that "Collateral Damage" nonsense that was part and parcel of the illegal war waged by the Bush Administration in 2003 in Iraq.

I am positive that in the 1930s that a large segment of the German population with 100% behind Hitler's invasion of Poland in 1939 as well as the pogroms and other acts against humanity which the public overlooked. Like them, we have a group of members who will back the US war 100% regardless of how grievous the crimes, and will overlooks war crimes and acts against humanity, and in some cases will go as far as to blame the victims of the war themselves.

Why bother debating anybody here? To pass the time.

But this kind of ideological attachment is hardly confined to Americans. Take the case of the Russians invading Ukraine. Purposely attacking civilianpopulation centers. Horrible treatment of POWs. And the list could go on a lot longer than that. And there are actually folks so in the bag for Russia that they refuse to calls it a war what Putin has unleashed. Instead they call it what Putin demands it be called: Special Military Operation. At least people living in Russia can offer the excuse that calling it a war constitutes a crime. You can actually go to prison for that. But what's worse is that there are actually folks living outside of Russia who also refuse to call it a war. They too characterize it as a Special Military Operation. So Orwellian. So bizarre.

1 hour ago, Patong2021 said:

Which UN Treaty?

Do you deny that Iran has been in a state of hostility and has undertaken violent acts against the USA and its nationals? A long list of the Iranian actions has been posted multiple times.

You are now presenting a partial strike on a dual purpose facility as "blowing up Iran's pre-eminent health center for vaccines".

Did you know that Iranians have located their military production facilities in close proximity to schools, and medical facilities? It is a common practice of Hamas/Hezbollah and Iran with the intention of discouraging their being targeted as non combatant casualties become likely. So, before you start screaming war crimes have a look at the Iranian strategy first.

Does the Treaty Establishing the UN outlaw nations from launching wars?

Gemini said

The short answer is yes, but with two very specific exceptions. The UN Charter (signed in 1945) was designed specifically to "save succeeding generations from the scourge of war." It fundamentally changed international law by moving from a system where war was a legitimate tool of state policy to one where the use of force is generally illegal.

1. The General Prohibition

The core of this "outlawing" is found in Article 2(4) of the UN Charter. It states:

"All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state..."

This is a broad prohibition. It doesn't just outlaw a formal "declaration of war"; it forbids almost any physical use of military force or even the threat of using it against another country.

---

2. The Two Legal Exceptions

The Charter recognizes that there are situations where force might be necessary. There are only two ways a nation can legally use force under the UN framework:

• Self-Defense (Article 51): Nations have an "inherent right" to individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs. This right exists only until the UN Security Council has taken measures to restore peace.

• Security Council Authorization (Chapter VII): Under Article 42, the UN Security Council can authorize "action by air, sea, or land forces" to maintain or restore international peace and security. This is often referred to as a "collective security" action.

41 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

speaking of things being shot down, check out these blue frickin' laser beams.

Posting a video from a AI created game, as real thing?

Only real trolls would do something like that

2 hours ago, connda said:

FYI - Iranians are not Sunni Takfiri head-choppers. The Wahhabi Takfiri Islamistics take things in the Korean and Hadith literally, which is why they cut people's heads off. Wahhabism is promoted by Saudi Arabia and given support by Türkiye
Iranians are Shia Islam although is Islam, the Persian culture infuses a different level of sophistication into Iranian actions. A downed pilot is going to be treated like a POW.
During the Iraq/Iran war, both side incarcerated large numbers of POWs.

"In neither Iran nor Iraq were the prisoners-of-war (POWs) taken in the conflict between the two countries "treated as badly as alleged by the Government of the other country", nor were they treated as well as claimed by the Government of the detaining Powers, says a report (S/16962) of a three-member United Nations mission that inquired into the situation of POWs, and civilian detainees in the Iran-Iraq conflict."
-https://international.vlex.com/vid/prisoners-war-iran-iraq-finally-end-53294641

Yes I know the difference between Persians and israel supported ISIS.

High value POW should be excluded from Geneva Convention.

It takes a lot of time and money to train a pilot.

You don't ever hand them over .

10 minutes ago, CallumWK said:

Posting a video from a AI created game, as real thing?

Only real trolls would do something like that

I didn't know it was AI ... could be.