Sparing the lives of POW's

>When we decided it was okay to make war on civilians.
So since the beginning of time?

Hey dude, if you've got a better idea on how to win the air war in europe i'm all ears.

>refers to things as gay
>thinks lots of men dying is funny
14 year old confirmed

>thinks lots of men dying is funny
>implying it's not

Sure.

>When the American attacks began, Speer feared that they were the opening salvos of a “long expected and long feared” single-industry offensive. Fortunately for Germany, they were not. On Sir Arthur Tedder’s orders, American bombers continued to drop most of their tonnage on targets other than oil.
>After the war, Speer told American interrogators that a full-out offensive against the synthetic plants by the combined air armadas of England and America—closely spaced raids, night and day, without cease—could [alone] have brought about Germany’s surrender... in eight weeks.”

Since forever

Having fanatical enemies cornered and holed up, especially with modern weapons is asking for mass casualties on your own side.

Having them surrender will save a lot of your own lives.

Benefits to killing your enemies
1. Demoralizes the enemy nation and army. The cry of widows and war-orphans is going to ring in on the government's ears and make it that much harder to avoid a retreat or surrender.

2. It reduces the amount of spies and infiltration you have. In addition returned POWs may have intel to give to the enemy or even return to the battlefield sometime in the future. They can't do this if they are dead.

3. It reduces expenses but not needing to house, care for, transplant, and apply securities detail to the POW. Even more so it increases the amount of resources you can salvage from the enemy since you don't need to let them have any. It also increases the amount of resources your enemy spend since, if they want to identify bodies, they need to spend their own man-hours sorting it out.

Downsides
1. People on Veeky Forums.org/his/ will consider you 'edgy'

When there were enough peer or near-peer opponent nations that wars started to end on negotiation tables instead of burnt out capitols. Your enemy today could be your ally in 30 years.

Because your enemy has prisoners too.

The idea that soldiers dying is going to encourage a population to surrender can also be said to harden the enemy populace to continue the fight. Prisoners are not invited to your table to discuss your potential movements against their leaders any information they gather in captivity will be limited, information that can be discovered through questioning prisoners would prove more valuable. The cost of keeping prisoners alive is the biggest factor but once prisoners are taken further away from a neutral or friendly border the risk of attempted escape is lower, they are trapped in an unfamiliar area surrounded by people that look, dress and speak completely differently to them and so they know they will stand out. They can then be used as a labor force to support the war effort or just increase agricultural output.

There are more downsides, enemy soldiers refusing to surrender and fighting to the bitter end being one of them. No castle under siege would surrender knowing they'll be executed, a rout and mass surrender on the field is also less likely if your enemies know you'll spare none of them. Basically you either make enemies so scared of you by slaughtering all prisoners that they refuse to fight and they surrender quickly or you treat them leniently. The first option only really works if you're an amazing leader that never loses and you're fighting inexperienced enemies that have weak leadership.

Prisoners of war also served as valuable hostages that can be enslaved/sold back to your enemies for profit or held indefinitely to encourage former enemies not to attack. They can be released as a sign of good will or even hired to serve your own forces. There is also the hope that by treating your enemies well they will do the same if the shoe is ever on the other foot.

So either you are being egdy or you're just a brainlet.

He could easily be both.

>sparred the women and children
lol, picturing that.

"now put on these leather gloves and spar, enemy bitch"

poor Heer pows

they did nothing wrong

this

>can also be said to harden the enemy populace to continue the fight.
This, just look at what German bombing did to Britain and France in the First World War. All it did was cause civilian outrage and an increased demand to absolutely assravage the German nation for being so barbaric.

>Operation HUSKY had exacted a particularly grievous toll from the 180th Infantry Regiment, the pride of Oklahoma and one of three National Guard infantry regiments in the 45th Division. During the 45th’s brief interlude in Oran, en route from Norfolk to Sicily, Patton had lavished his attention on the unit, urging officers to “kill devastatingly,” to be wary of white-flag ruses, and, if enemy soldiers surrendered only when nearly overrun, to “kill the sons of bitches.” The 45th should be known as the “Killer Division,” Patton told them, because “killers are immortal.”

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biscari_massacre

>"lol, I didnt mean it u guyz."

Are you fucking retarded? A massive portion of the Roman economy was dedicated to the slaves gained through taking prisoners.

There is nothing wrong with this