F1[F2Article 37— Prohibition of perfidy
the feigning of protected status by the use of signs, emblems or uniforms of the United Nations or of neutral or other States not Parties to the conflict.
Not exactly perfidy
Captured vehicles were used by both the axis and the allies, so why would it be different for Italy?
Except it would be being used specifically for that deception purpose. Markings would not be visible at combat speed/distances.
The victor decides what is legal and who gets the firing squad. Italy was losing the war at this point…
The way I understood it, it meant it in the sense that you could not pretend to be neutral, or some sort of aircraft that would be off-limits, similar to how you are not supposed to shoot medics in battle
Since the P-38’s were technically American, and America was taking part in the war
Wouldn’t it be allowed?
No it is pretending to be friendly in order to gain an advantage. Usually wearing the enemy’s uniforms is the most common example. Like the German airborne tried to do during the Ardennes Offensive. But this would have been considered the same thing by the Nuremburg tribunals.
Hmmm… well, I’ll take your word for it. I’m sure the Germans you referenced were probably charged with the war crime, and if they were, then the P-38 would be too
I’m sure that wouldn’t have stopped them from doing it though, depending on how late into the war this was, they could have been desperate
There is a suggestion about this plane:
Imo since we can have captured stuff by Finland and Israel literally in their respective research TTs, there is nothing wrong with captured P-38G used by Italy at least as a premium (maybe not as event, but simple premium or free BP vehicle).
Italian D.520 I would love to see in the regular tree, because it was used in numbers.
6 Likes
You didn’t borher watching the video. It had guns, by witness accounts.
I did. Perhaps you didn’t?
The “witness accounts” are not documented and are second hand. And people lie/are mistaken. Notice that the details of the video and the previous post change with the telling?
Since Italy operated P-38s of various flavors post-war I’m fine with Italy getting one, but at most, this should be just a “semi-historical” skin.
I don’t know semi-historical or tribunals or something. But as a player I’m worried about this one is copy-paste vehicel and it may occupy an event for air. Does it has anything special compared to existing ones? Or as a ground battle cas?
It should get a airspawn… in the enemy team’s spawn point. HArharharhar.
To make it short, here are the photos of the nose.
As you can see, the aircraft is armed.
Ethical concerns are irrelevant — the plane bore the insignia of the Regia Aeronautica when went in action.
It’s a war prize, war prize are spread in a lot of tree so also italy can have access
4 Likes
Special:
- Italian aircraft with interceptor spawn
- Rather strong (and centralized) armament fot its BR
And - Imho it would not worsen Air RB - immersion died long ago.
For the Italian Air TT (in case it would be an event vehicle at Rank III) i see it rather positive as there is a clear lack (=zero) of Italian aircraft with interceptor spawn in the TT.
Especially in small 6 vs 6 or 8 vs 8 matches the MM still creates axis vs allies lobbies and there is not really an “easy going” if the only Rank III fighter (Air RB) with a rather low is the rather painful to fly Re 2001 CN at 3.3.
So if the French, Chinese, Swedish and JP players fly a Rank III P-51 B/C at BR 3.7 whilst the “original” US version is Rank II - why not allowing Italian pilots having a Rank III interceptor at BR 3.3?
This is utter nonsense…
Ofc it’s allowed to use captured vehicles, as long as they have proper insignias and markings. We can see it virtually live in the war in Ukraine, where both side have been using the same soviet era vehicles, weapons and equipment since the beginning. Both their own and captured. Heck, even their uniforms are very simillar or even the same, hence why soldiers of both sides are using bright colour tapes to distinguish who is who. Yet we don’t hear anyone talking about it being a war crime, unlike many other actual war crimes happening there. The only instance I remember was when russians changed their tapes for the ones used by Ukraine, infiltrated their positions and ambushed the defenders. THAT was a war crime…
By your logic, countries using the same vehicles could never fight each other, because they would immediately commit a war crime. Does that make sense to you?
Also, there are many countries in the world, but only a handful of arms manufacturers. Does it mean, that contries buying from the same manufacturers are automatically bonded in an (un)official “alliances” based solely on the vehicles, weapons and equipment they use? I suppose not, or? Not to mention, many countries, especially from the former Warsaw Pact, are using a mixture of western and soviet vehicles and stuff. According to you, those countries can’t fight pretty much anyone without commiting a war crime…
Then read more and type less.
Is this all you’re capable of? OK, I guess. I was hoping to see what you have to say about what I wrote, but apparently you can’t do anything more than that. Nvm, then…
You are under the mistaken belief that I care about your opinion. Have a nice day.
I vote for yes, it looks cool and is diffrent because the weapons was mounted on the wings. (allegedly, cannons + machineguns)
