New telling of Laconia incident...

[Feuer Frei!]

Originally Posted by Randomizer

Although involved in life-saving the U-Boats were armed warships and so liable for attack under the customs and usage of international law as it was understood then.

The U-Boat waffe itself established this precedent on 20 September 1914 when OL Otto Weddigen (U-9) torpedoed the Hogue Class cruiser HMS Hogue off the Dutch coast. Having just torpedoed her sister, HMS Aboukir, Weddigen shot Hogue when she was hove to and sending out her boats to rescue the crew of Aboukir which was thought to have struck a mine. U-9 subesquently sank HMS Cressy leaving several thousand men in the water some 1460 of whom would die there.

Dedicated convoy rescue ships, warships and merchants who stopped to conduct rescues were all legitimate targets so why would U-Boats doing the same be exempt? The presence (or absence) of the Red Cross is irrelevant since Feuer Frei points out, usage of the Red Cross by an armed ship was in itself illegal.

This is a complicated story so sweeping accusations and declarations of crimes against humanity add nothing to the dialog. I actually think that Feuer Frei's comment about the attack by the Liberator being in bad taste rather than a war crime is the best description I have yet seen. In any event, the legal framework for judging unrestricted submarine warfare was the London Naval Treaty of 1930 and the Anglo-German Submarine Protocol of 1936 and not the Hague or Geneva conventions. As I understand the Treaty and Protocol, surfaced submarines were liable to be attacked without warning regardless of their activity at the time.

I thank you for your compliments.......
I guess we all would like to believe that in WW2 there were human beings on both sides of the war who "attempted" to do the "right and humane " thing, so it seems in this case, indeed there were countless stories and heroic attempts to save lives of the enemy, can a human being be judged for attempting to do the humane and right thing to save as many lives as possible, and furthermore in admitting their own mistake and attempting to repair or as best as possible attempt to "minimise" the effects that mistake has caused. There is no doubt that the decisions by the U-Boot commander to firstly admit error and secondly to transmit his mistakes and to advise in the most spoken language in the world that a rescue mission would ensue is and was the "right" and "humane" thing to do........"draping" the deck with the red cross..........well, was that a "mistake"? I think once again, the innocent notions behind that move should be clear.........
What would I have done? The same.......
Please note: I am in now way attemtping to hijack this thread or attempt to start something here, not my intention.....this was, as history states a "unfortunate" (very) incident, and my fullest respects to the lives lost.