[Ryzorian]

UCMJ is for military personal, reguaring military discipline amoung the ranks. Military rules of engagment for combat operations however, are designated by the commander in chief or congress. Generals recieve thier orders and carry them out as best they can. Our military is controled by civilians, that's one of the biggest things that sets us apart from most other nations.

I know several Vietnam vets, they were severely limited in half the engagements because of stupid rules, one of them personally lost 7 men because the enemy retreated into a monestary and he couldn't get artillery support because it was "against the rules". Lucky for him a barrage from the Iron Horse brigade's 8 inch guns cleared out the viet cong and saved his unit...because the South Korean's didn't have the same "rules of engagement" that we did.

That's the one draw back of our system, civilians many times, specially ones with limited or no military experiance themselves, try legislateing combat rules they think are "morally justified" for the war. I can understand thier truely trying to be the good guy in these, but more often than not they just create a mass of red tape that gets troops needlessly dead. That's where we have the problems, trying to obey shira law and following local law is due to civilian orders, and it's getting our troops killed.

Us civil law doesn't apply to the battlefield, enemy troops don't get miranda rights or constitutional rights. It's the UCMJ that's applied in those situations, it why troops accused of murder and the like are tried by military tribunal, not a civilian court. In fact, according to Geneva rules non uniformed combatants can be shot in the field as spies and sabatours. Jihadi's don't have national uniforms nor claim any national lag . So legally we don't have to take prisoners at all.