Is it a war crime?

[Einsamer Wolf]

On my return to St. Nazaire, sailing in the Bay of Biscay, the Watch Officer spots a British trawler. The weather is pristine, so I order deck and flak guns to be manned, and proceed at maximum speed towards the trawler. Once in range, the deck gun crew opens fire, sinking it in less than three minutes.
My question is--would it be considered a war crime to attack trawlers and fishcutters. They have no military value or purpose. It seems like these are exclusively civilian targets.
Should the trawler have radioed for help, and should the captain have noticed my emblem, I suppose it could be trouble for myself and my crew should Germany lose the war.

EW

[Dantenoc]

Don't worry about it... like you said, you'll only get in trouble if Germany looses the war

ha ha ha

On a more serious tone, if the game gives you renown for it, then its fair game

Edit: well... come to think about it, every single ship you sink is in reality a civilian ship... the strategy is one of victory through attrition, not military conflict. It was the same with strategic bombings from both sides.

[Tikigod]

in the game they will still radio in your position....you are to sink them...its all part of the fog of war anyway......

[panthercules]

certainly - sink them - they are clearly up to no good - there are any number of military purposes they could be fulfilling:

1. Spotting u-boats and other German naval movements and calling in air strikes or just reporting them to the Admiralty for tracking purposes;

2. Signals intelligence - intercepting German u-boat or other naval communications for the boys back at Blechley park to help them try to break our invincible Enigma codes;

3. Weather reports in preparation for allied air strikes or attacks like the Dieppe raid, Normandy invasion, etc.;

4. Pilot rescue picket duty for allied airmen having to ditch at sea because they're unable to make it back to their bases;

5. Catching fish that will be used to make fish and chips to be served to Royal Navy destroyer crews when in port laying over from convoy escort patrols, fortifying them to return to sea to attack your u-boat.

nuff said

[Ducimus]

I think their still classfied as commerce.

Local commerce granted, but a fishing trawler is still providing food to the enemy. Sinking a trawler in and ofitself isnt a crime i dont think.

[Einsamer Wolf]

Originally Posted by Dantenoc

Edit: well... come to think about it, every single ship you sink is in reality a civilian ship... the strategy is one of victory through attrition, not military conflict. It was the same with strategic bombings from both sides.

I do not think so. A C3 stowed with allied armor en route to North Africa is a military target. There may be collateral damage, but it is still an intrinsically valid target. I just do not feel that nailing a fish cutter or trawler is a legitimate target--unless someone can convince me otherwise.
For what it is worth, I am very critical of the actions of the Anglo-American alliance for bombing civilian targets, for colluding with Stalin (See de Zayas A Terrible Revenge), among myriad other transgression in an overall climate of astounding hypocrisy. Truth be told, I am an old-school Nazi sympathizer a la Joerg Haider and Ernst Nolte.
But what is good for the goose is good for the gander. Moral excesses are to be condemned on both sides. If I condemn the Allies for certain abuses, the standard should be applied the same on the other side.
Not that I have much respect for International Law, taking such great precedent from the Siegerjustiz at Nuremberg--but does anyone know if there is any precedent on whether shooting a fishing cutter or trawler is a war crime in naval engagements like this? In addition to what I wrote, it is of interest because the U Boot Waffe in particular was quite scrupulous about these things. And I do not seem them intentionally engaging such a target with no military or strategic purpose.

EW

EW

[Ducimus]

And the thread takes a crash dive into poltics and idiology.


weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee.

[Einsamer Wolf]

I am just placing my query in its proper context.

EW

[Einsamer Wolf]

For what it is worth, I posted a query on uboat.net about the parameters of international law on this.

[AO1_AW_SW_USN]

If you are running IUB 10.2 look really close, some of the Tug Boats carries a deck gun and a small rack of DC's. I don't know if it's in the vanilla SH3 or in RUB, but look anyway.

During the Cold War, England and the US used fishing trawlers and sea going Tug Boats as ASW platforms called SURTASS boats. They appared to be going about doing regular civillian work like net fishing. In reality they used towed array cables with thousands of microphones listening for Soviet submarines.

I wonder if they did the same in WWII? I'll do some research. Maybe then it will justify giving those targets the “Deep-6�.

[Khayman]

No it's not a war crime. If memory serves then the prosecution at Nuremberg brought forth instances of u-boats sinking trawlers - as an example of barbarism.

I believe Donitz pointed out that all British ships, no matter their size or purpose, had been ordered to report U-boat sightings. That made them fair game.

I think the prosecution withdrew that charge. Indeed WW2 US Subs in the Pacific sank sampams and other small ships for the very same reason.

[AntEater]

Well, trawlers engage in commerce, hence they are fair game.
In WW1 the U-Boats waged a regular war on fishing trawlers in the north sea which caused the british to use Q-Ships.
In the Pacific, the US and british sank hundreds of trawlers, sampans, junks and whatever. Problematic was that except for japanese waters, most of the people killed were not japanese, but Indonesians, Filipinos, Malay or whatever. The US subs still had no restriction in sinking trawlers which MIGHT feed japanese troops, even if "friendly" natives were killed.
In the med, both sides shot up small sailing vessels, often also manned by greeks, arabs or whatever....

[Einsamer Wolf]

Anteater and Khayman,

Your responses were very informative. Thanks. I suppose a drop in the bucket rational applies--and contribution to the war time economy makes it fair game. It is one I am not sure I agree with, however.... Given that these vessels had orders to report enemy sightings, that justifies it further.
I think if Nuremberg backed down, that says a lot. I have explained how I take great exception to how Nuremberg played out. The conviction of Kurt Meyer, Karl Doenitz, Albert Speer, to name just a few, belie the courts false Siegerjustiz. That even the Nuremberg tribunal could not trump up charges based on the sinking of these targets eliminates any question whatsoever. They are fair game.

EW

[Einsamer Wolf]

Originally Posted by xrvjorn

Did they use torpedos or deck guns for this? A torp for a trawler seems rather expensive, unless you stumble on them on your way home and have torps to spare.

As I wrote in the initial post:

On my return to St. Nazaire, sailing in the Bay of Biscay, the Watch Officer spots a British trawler. The weather is pristine, so I order deck and flak guns to be manned, and proceed at maximum speed towards the trawler. Once in range, the deck gun crew opens fire, sinking it in less than three minutes.

Actually, a trawler would be too small to hit with a torpedo--and no its not worth the cost of a torpedo in my estimation at least. Strictly a deck gun affair.

EW[/quote]

Originally Posted by AntEater

Well, trawlers engage in commerce, hence they are fair game.
In WW1 the U-Boats waged a regular war on fishing trawlers in the north sea which caused the british to use Q-Ships.
In the Pacific, the US and british sank hundreds of trawlers, sampans, junks and whatever. Problematic was that except for japanese waters, most of the people killed were not japanese, but Indonesians, Filipinos, Malay or whatever. The US subs still had no restriction in sinking trawlers which MIGHT feed japanese troops, even if "friendly" natives were killed.
In the med, both sides shot up small sailing vessels, often also manned by greeks, arabs or whatever....

Exactly the point I was going to bring up. I have seen photos of American destroyers sinking sampans, and they are simple sailing vessels.

Sinking an enemy ship or boat is a part of war. If you don't sink them, you are to be praised for your humanity. If you do sink them, that's part of the job.

Personally, I don't like to waste the ammo.