• Scubus@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 days ago

    That is super fair, did not think about that. I suppose my issue with punji sticks is that theyre not neccassarily designed to kill, thats why they were often coated in feces. The intent was infection afaik because that disabled the soldier and those who had to help him. But yes, I view bouncing betties in the exact same light. Maybe not illegal, but i cannot understand why, since other weapons thats sole goal is to cause nonlethal permanent damage are banned, such as laser weapons. And yeah, I agree, even starting off this thread i dont think anyone has even attempted to claim the US were the good guys.

    • acockworkorange@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 days ago

      And another common tactic was lining the path enemy soldiers would take with the sticks and drop a grenade amongst them. Some would jump away towards them, amplifying the result of a single grenade with cheap materials.

      They wouldn’t need to cover them in feces though. The jungle environment and lead time to medical treatment all but guaranteed some infection.

    • acockworkorange@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 days ago

      The intent was infection afaik because that disabled the soldier and those who had to help him.

      Maiming vs outright killing was the design intent behind the 5.56mm cartridge/M16, which were first deployed by the US on the Vietnam war. For the same reasons.