Discussion: Soldiers in "Hot" zones

[Bethany Kismet]

While the point of view on this will vary from character to character, I'd like to discuss what the "Official Policy" of OSL will be Re: Injured Soldiers in War Zones.

Ostensibly, OSL is a group dedicated to Civilian aid. That being said, is it right and good to leave a solider, even one who is perhaps causing the chaos we are working against, wounded when we could offer aid and possibly save a life?

What are your thought, either IC or OOC (please let us know which it is) on this potentially very sticky topic?

 

[Viviana]

Put em out of their misery.


Er. I mean, we should help them. No matter who they might be, I see this group helping them. The policy should be to help anyome, and everyone.

 

[Garza]

Help everyone. However, if we start to get people who come to our medical facilities, or under our roof, and start to fight with one another. We remove both of them from the equation, and remove both parties involved from receiving help from us unless they stop fighting.

If they want to fight, take it out side. If they want to get patched up, they are welcome inside.

As well, if there is an organization/faction clearly out to harm us, or to hinder our goals, then we do not harbor them. We can either give them over to the opposing side that they are on. *IE We hand Sith over to Jedi* to be tried for their crimes. or if they continue to push us, they won't be someone we save, but someone we must stop.

 

[HK-36]

From what I can recall right now about current armies, they either all have well organized and equipped combat medical services, or they have no need for them, for example my droid army.

So I would say compromise and either evacuate wounded soldiers from the immediate combat area to where their medics can take over or stabilize them enough for them to stay alive long enough for their medics to grab them. After all, the soldiers are there somewhat voluntarily and are the source of the conflict, even if they are only following their orders, the focus should always be first on the civilians who either did not had a choice or enough time to evacuate and got trapped in the crossfire.

 

[Jsc]

On Sith

Helping combatants is a judgement call on the part of the individual operator(s). Let there be no hard policy. It's a gray area for a reason.

However,


On Teamwork

If a team member accepts a team placement they must also accept team commands from their team leaders. Remember, failure to comply with a team captain, or his commands, can compromise the entire team's safety in the field. In truth. If a team member cannot accept that harsh decisions, even moral ones, can be made by a superior officer while under duress? Then they should not volunteer or be assigned to team activities.

 

[Alkesh Vizsla]

I believe in keeping with this group, it would make sense to give aid to all who needed it.

However I believe Monica has a point too - all characters will have differing personal opinions on Sith or various other alignments. It will make for good character development and struggle to do what's 'right' even for someone who's 'wrong'?

I think what we're trying to do here is pretty novel in terms of Chaos, so keeping open communication in future conflicts we're a passive player in is going to be *really* critical to keeping the vision.

 

[Bethany Kismet]

It's sounding to me (and correct me if I am mistaken) that so far the general consensus is:

Official policy should be to help- in whatever way is the best for the situation (evac, patch, get them to their own medics, etc). So we'd be helping, but it would be up to the individual characters in the scene to make the judgement call on what that looks like.

I also agree that we obviously cannot harbor people who have been known to be threats to OSL- so far, we don't have any, which may make it a moot point IC *at this time*.

In the past, Beth *has* given aid to people who have tried to kill her. But she also wouldn't risk the rest of the order to do that, i.e. by bringing them to Sanctuary.

Obviously, that's not the route that everyone would take, and it's not even reasonable to ask everyone to go that far.

Also agreeing that Monastery would be considering a neutral place- we are switzerland. If you come for help, you are welcome. If you pick a fight, out you go until you can learn to solve your differences in a more civilized fasion

 

[Garza]

Agreed

 

[Progflaw99]

Current military policy, at least as far as the Marine Corps and Navy go (US), Corpsmen must aid all. I know it's all anecdotal but I know plenty of Corpsmen personally that have had to face the decision between saving their own brothers (Marines in their platoon) and that of a former enemy combatant (An enemy soldier who had only moments ago been firing on their platoon, could have even been the one who shot his platoon mates).

I think it depends highly (OOC and IC) on what our oaths are, and what the policy is. Personally OOC I would say that I favor the helping everyone, even if they were moments ago causing loss of life, it would help us remain objective in the sense that we would not be helping one side more than another but helping all equally. Wounded soldiers are technically classified as casualties, no longer active combatants - now if a wounded soldier is still waving their weapon around instead of surrendering/laying down their arms - sure, treat them as a threat but I think assisting unarmed or disarmed soldiers would be in keeping with our goals.

[member="Bethany Kismet"]

 

[Bethany Kismet]

Agree with that 100% [member="Artyom Kirilov"]

 

[Garza]

[member="Artyom Kirilov"], Your post made me think.

They pose a threat to me. I shoot them and take them out of the fight. Walk over and apply bandages to the wound.
"What are you doing?"
"I am a Medic. And I have to take care of you that you are injured."
"Why?"
"Because its Ironic, and its my creed to heal all who are injured."

 

[Progflaw99]

[member="Lt. Sage"]

That's basically how it works in modern day US military. Pretty ironic, but it speaks volumes to the people that do the work - truly looking out for humanity. It's unfortunate that people end up in positions like that. The main difference is that we're not primarily a fighting force, we're there to help others and that's the only obligation to fire a weapon is when someone we are helping is in danger, or for our own life - though I would guess even sometimes then there are people who would not raise a weapon. It all depends on the person's personal convictions at that point - but I think the policy we should have defined, so that regardless, we have an upper limit of what actions we can take etc.