A Hospital ship was sunk by a U-boat and it was considered a war crime, with charges being laid. Is there a parallel to the ‘kill them all’ story?
You may not be familiar with the Hospital ship HMHS Llandovery Castle; however, it was torpedoed by a U-boat off the coast of Ireland. and that unspeakable act was considered a >>> “War Crime.”
Given today’s events, the question now is, how is that any different from the “kill them all” order against the defenceless Venezuelan boat crew? And, ‘up till this time of writing, there was no war declared or charges laid.
Here is my opinion with a few facts, and then you decide whether the “kill them all and the hospital ship Llandovery Castle” should be considered the same.
The Llandovery Castle was originally built as a Canadian merchant ship and then recommissioned as a hospital ship in July 1916. (during the First World War) According to regulations, hospital ships have to be clearly marked with all the proper insignia’s of a ‘H- White coloring,’ which it was.
On the evening of 27 June 1918, while sailing from Halifax, Nova Scotia, to Liverpool, England, the Canadian hospital ship Llandovery Castle was torpedoed and sunk by a German U-boat (U-86). Of the 258 crew and passengers, only 24 survived.
Almost all the Canadian Army Medical Corps personnel were killed. Only one lifeboat escaped; the rest as thought were attacked by the U-boat gunner, as the photo shows.
Sinking a defenseless hospital ship with only war wounded and medical staff by a U-boat was considered a >>> “War Crime.” <<<
- So in today’s world, I have to ask again, what makes this Llandovery Castle sinking with hundreds of defenceless dying people any different from the ‘KILL THEM ALL’ order, “Nothing”.
- In my opinion, this is a war crime committed by someone in the Trumps inner circle. This act should be resolved with War Crimes against humanity charges.
The sinking of the hospital ship HMHS Llandovery Castle was the deadliest Canadian naval disaster during the First World War. The fate of the crew, particularly the nursing sisters, angered the public and became a rallying call. After hearing of the incident public reaction to this inhuman act was swift.
The Allies capitalized on the horrific event and created posters and illustrations that featured dying nursing sisters in the sea, targeted by U-boat machine gunners.
*** Under the Hague Convention, it was against “International Law” to attack any hospital ship. And in 1921, three U-86 officers, including the captain, Helmut Patzig, were charged at the Leipzig war crimes.
The Hague Conventions according to Wikipedia?
The Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907 are a series of international treaties and declarations negotiated at two international peace conferences at The Hague in the Netherlands. Along with the Geneva Conventions, the Hague Conventions were among the first formal statements of the laws of war and war crimes in the body of secular international law. A third conference was planned for 1914 and later rescheduled for 1915, but it did not take place because of the start of World War I.
This loops me back to this part of the story. Is there a parallel between HMHS Llandovery Castle and ‘Kill them All’ order?
Web search explains “KILL THEM ALL ORDER” this way.
The United States military began executing airstrikes on vessels in the Caribbean Sea in September 2025, positioned by the administration of President Donald Trump
The phrase “kill them all order” refers to a controversial directive allegedly issued by U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth concerning military strikes on suspected drug-smuggling boats.
The Incident: In September 2025, a U.S. military strike on a suspected drug boat in the Caribbean left two survivors clinging to the wreckage. There fate was probably already sealed at that point.
Supposedly, there was a “kill them all order given. A second missile strike was then conducted, “KILLING THE TWO SURVIVERS” clinging to the debris in the water. “They posed no threat to the US warships like suggested.”
*** Should the rule of law be upheld by the world court? Should there be charges laid for someone given the order in the US Trump Administration for this maritime war crime?
Like the HMHS Llandovery Castle and the defenseless survivors being eventually killed, ‘floating in the water,’ or is ‘International Law’ considered a guideline and not binding to “some” in today’s world?
International Rules and the Rule of Law.
To the not to savvy person on laws of the land, I’ll ask this question for all of us that’s not sure how International Law is important or not.
*** How binding is “International Law“?
Here is a web summery; “International Law’
International law is a body of rules, norms, and standards governing relations between sovereign states, international organizations (like the UN), and, increasingly, individuals, covering areas like trade, war, human rights, and diplomacy, aiming to foster peace and order by defining legal responsibilities and providing frameworks for cooperation, though enforcement relies heavily on state consent rather than a single global police force.
‘Rule of Law’ description:
A fundamental principle in many nations, including Canada and the United States, is the “rule of law,” the Rule of Law is a principle where everyone, including the government and its leaders, is subject to and accountable under the same fair, clear, and publicly known laws, ensuring power isn’t arbitrary and people’s rights are protected through accessible, impartial justice.
It means laws apply equally to all, promoting stability, predictability, and holding power accountable, preventing rulers from acting above the law.
*** International Law is Just a Guideline ***
Then I asked this question; Is International Law and International Criminal Court (ICC) the same?
Answer: No, the International Criminal Court (ICC) is not the same as International Law, but it’s a key institution within the system of international law, specifically for prosecuting individuals for the most serious international crimes (genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, aggression) when national courts can’t or won’t.
If I wasn’t confused before, now, I’m really confused.
So let’s see if I got this correctly, The International Criminal Court, which dictates war crimes, and an “legal binding amunst members” and a arrest warrant by the International Criminal Court (ICC) for two senior Israeli officials, “Benjamin Netanyahu, the prime minister of Israel.”
The same ones, “as we speak,” are being wined and dined by the US Administration and on US soil.
*** Instead of Trump abiding by International Law, these bandits by order of the International Criminal Court,” are treated like royalty.
Take for another example;
In the news, on 17 March 2023 an arrest warrant was issued for Vladimir Putin following an investigation of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. Those are serious charges, and was long overdue for the International Criminal Court (ICC) to issue these arrest warrants.
However, the same Russian President Vladimir Putin who was supposed to be hand-cuffed and jailed for his war crimes against humanity was given the red carpet treatment in Alaska by the US President. The US is part of the International Law community, why do they not abide by the same law as the rest of then world community?
Baffled by the royalty treatment by US Donald Trump, I had to ask this question again from a different source and with a different perspective, >>> I’m a still confused Canadian. <<<
I asked this online question from an ordinary Canadian perspective.
“what is “International Law from a different source”?
“International Law” is the vast body of ‘rules’ governing relations between states, while the International Criminal Court (ICC) is a court that enforces certain aspects of that law by holding individuals accountable.
*** It expects its members to abide by the rules they themselves laid out.
*** However, there is no policing by the world body.
“International Law is Just a Guideline.”
- Here is something interesting worth reading;
Host, Ed Sullivan from the iconic ‘Ed Sullivan TV Show’ refused to cut a performance the FBI deemed unfit for public viewers. So the FBI threatened to pull his programming.
“YOUR PUTTING A COMMUNIST ON NATIONAL TELEVISION? <<< That was the FBI’s concern.
Going back to the War crimes committed by the US in Venezuelan boat incidents. and the “kill them all order by “Pete Hegseth. Surely there must be international rules in place for such crimes against humanity. These sailors floating in the water pose no threat to the US fleet, and by the news, their fate was already sealed.
Back to the research for clarification, “This is the answer I got.”
Intentionally, killing unarmed, shipwrecked, or incapacitated sailors (known as being “hors de combat”) would be a grave breach of the Geneva Conventions and a “war crime” under International Law.
This applies even if the individuals are considered “combatants” in an armed conflic. <
- Donald Trump has just given the middle finger of defiance to the International Criminal Court. (ICC) The same laws that all men and countries agreed to abide by.
Through Trump’s normal rhetoric, and threatened to pull major funding for the International Criminal Court organization if, he doesn’t get his own way. He even went as far as asking the International Criminal Court (ICC) to exempt him and his followers from any war crimes. Meaning … yesterday, today and or in the future.
We will see how that blackmail turns out with the Trump administration vs the future events. And while you’re at it, he says, “I want Russian President Vladimir Putin and Benjamin Netanyahu exonerated for their wartime activities.”
So now you have to wonder, has the United States lost its moral compass that they are demanding, or are they in that state of mind that International laws and covering body rules don’t apply to the US? Did Trump and his henchmen get full immunity for their criminal acts against humanity? Well, folks, we will see because the proof is in the pudding; however, not much has come down the International Criminal Court pipe stream to suggest otherwise.
What is the Geneva Conventions?
The Geneva Conventions are core international treaties establishing the rules of war, aiming to limit suffering by protecting people not participating in hostilities (civilians, medics, aid workers) and those unable to fight (wounded, sick, POWs).
Established in 1949 and updated with Additional Protocols, they form the foundation of International Humanitarian Law, setting standards for humane treatment during armed conflict and requiring nations to punish serious violations (war crimes). “Geneva Convention is Based on Guidelines.”
TO GET THE CORRECT ANSWER ON THE WEB, YOU HAVE TO ASK THE RIGHT QUESTIONS.
* Is International law considered a body of actual, legally binding rules that nations feel obligated to obey, or merely a non-binding “code of conduct”. ****
Neither was the answer.
The international system is not founded on Law. International law has no Legal or Moral authority. It is the collection of treaties, customs, and common usage that countries have adopted as suggested modes of conduct. That means that violations of international law might be wrongful, but they might not. It depends on the specific act.
Another answer
That is one of the really ‘big questions’ in jurisprudence. But ultimately it comes down to how you define things.
The first difficulty we have is effectively defining ‘what is a law’. There are lots of competing definitions and descriptions for what a law really is. But whilst I don’t think there is a universally agreed concept, most people regress to the ‘command of the state’ concept. If that is so, then international law is clearly not ‘law’ in that sense – it does not represent the command of any state.
The second problem we have is the whole question of ‘what is the substantive content international law’ is actually pretty fuzzy. The boundaries and the detailed rules are far from clear. So we are not even certain what it is we are trying to find a definition for.
I personally think the term ‘international law’ is both misleading and unhelpful, and it would have been far more preferable if we had come up with a difference concept on day dot (maybe ‘international legal norms’ would have been better, or ‘documented diplomatic undertakings’).
International law lacks many of the keys concepts that we traditionally associate with the term ‘law’: the rules do not represent the command of any state or sovereign there is no tribunal with original jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the rules most international laws only exist because the parties have voluntarily subjected themselves to them there is no penalty or sanction for breach or non-compliance – ‘remedies’ in international law tend to be of the self-help nature where they even exist, but countries do not get ‘fined’ or ‘sent to jail’.
Another Reader commented.
Consequences for Violations: Although there is no global police force or “jail” for countries, breaches of international law can lead to a range of real-world consequences, including: Diplomatic protests and political disapproval, however, in the end;
*** International Law is Just a Guideline ***
In case you’re wondering, “What is the United Nations?”
The United Nations (UN) aims to maintain world peace, develop friendly relations among nations, foster international cooperation on global issues (economic, social, cultural, and humanitarian), and promote respect for human rights, serving as a central forum for countries to harmonize their actions for these common goals.
Its primary mission, born from World War II, is to prevent conflict, build peace, and address challenges like poverty, disease, climate change, and injustice.
- In essence, the UN acts as a global forum to address shared challenges and promote a more peaceful, just, and prosperous world through collective action.
CAN MONEY MAKE PEOPLE DO EVIL THINGS ? “click here to read more”
***QUESTION: Does the United Nations have any power?
Yes, the United Nations has significant power, particularly through its Security Council, which can issue binding resolutions, authorize sanctions, and even mandate the use of force; however, its overall authority relies heavily on member states’ cooperation, as it’s a diplomatic forum, “not a world government.”
The UN’s power stems from its Charter, making its decisions (especially Security Council ones) international law that members are obligated to follow, enabling action on peace, human rights, development, and law. The United Nations has just “guidelines” for members to follow, “no law enforcement.” ***
“United Nations is just a bunch of Guidelines.”
WORLD COURT EXPLAINED by AI
The “World Court of Justice” refers to the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the principal judicial body of the United Nations, located in The Hague, Netherlands, that settles legal disputes between states and provides advisory opinions on international law, operating under UN principles to maintain global peace.
Key Functions & Roles
Dispute Resolution: Hears cases between UN member states on matters of international law, such as border disputes or treaty violations, if those states accept the ICJ’s jurisdiction.
Advisory Opinions: Offers non-binding legal advice on questions referred by authorized UN organs and specialized agencies.
Structure & Operation
- Composition: Consists of 15 judges, elected by the UN General Assembly and Security Council for nine-year terms.
Independence: Judges serve as independent magistrates, not representing their countries.
Languages: Its official working languages are English and French, with broader UN language support.
History
Established in 1945 with the UN Charter, succeeding the Permanent Court of International Justice, to provide a new forum for international justice after World War II.
In essence, the ICJ acts as the UN’s global court, providing a peaceful, legal avenue for nations to resolve conflicts and clarify international legal principles.
AI Overview
International law is considered a body of actual, legally binding rules that nations feel obligated to obey, not merely a non-binding “code of conduct”.
**** Are these International bodies of Law Just a Guideline? ****
Conclusion.
The title “Sinking of HMHS Llandovery Castle” was a little misleading, considering where the story ended up with “Kill them All”; however, hopefully, it parallels today’s events. Donald Trump and his entourage of lawyers must assume ‘international law’ is just a guideline and the Geneva Conventions don’t apply to the United States, and to top that off … ‘The International Criminal Court’, well, he said, “we own them.”
All these world governing laws that sound impressive to the norm are, in the end, only guidelines. Codes of Conduct and Ethics: Public office holders and civil servants are subject to specific values and ethics codes designed to ensure integrity and non-partisanship. But only guidelines in the end.
The US President publicly said he wants to pull itself away from all these world organizations. At face value, he believes they serve no purpose; however, we know what Donald Trump says is different than his real objectives behind the scenes.
This story is only my opinion, however, >>> “The proof is in the pudding.
☕ If you found my story interesting or food for thought, please consider buying me a coffee through a secure system called “PayPal.” Thank you. ☕
