Lauchs@lemmy.world to Fake History Porn@lemmy.worldEnglish · edit-21 year agoThe Navy's "Skins vs Shirts" policy was short-lived (1944)NSFWlemmy.worldimagemessage-square8fedilinkarrow-up153arrow-down13
arrow-up150arrow-down1imageThe Navy's "Skins vs Shirts" policy was short-lived (1944)NSFWlemmy.worldLauchs@lemmy.world to Fake History Porn@lemmy.worldEnglish · edit-21 year agomessage-square8fedilink
minus-squaregibbedygook@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2·1 year agoi totally understand why the pilot did it, of course. but technically, isn’t he violating international law (i think its the geneva convention) which says you have to wear a distinguishable uniform in battle?
minus-squareEspecially_the_lies@startrek.websitelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up6·1 year agoHe’s not on the battlefield, he’s in a machine with his country’s identifier painted on it. Now, if the plane crashed and he survived it might be an issue.
i totally understand why the pilot did it, of course. but technically, isn’t he violating international law (i think its the geneva convention) which says you have to wear a distinguishable uniform in battle?
He’s not on the battlefield, he’s in a machine with his country’s identifier painted on it.
Now, if the plane crashed and he survived it might be an issue.