>>64231103
>>64231114 (me)
>because they will certainly become international law after all
Okay, fuck it, let me explain to you in detail why you are stupid and this won't happen. Let's take your example, a 30:1 ratio of hostages to combatants, and make that the ceiling. If you have more than 30 hostages per soldier, it becomes punishable to bomb the target, you have to send in infantry. Immedeately, some shitskin will go
>hmm, so if I take 31 hostages, then they have to walk into the killzone!
Creating numeric values to human shields ENCOURAGES the use of human shields, leading to greater overall instances of warcrimes, both from the direct usage, and from all the militaries all over the world that are going to say "that's fucking stupid, I'm going going in there, call an airstrike. Go ahead, send my ass to jail, it beats being dead."

This is, again, the part of military law that retards like you actively refuse to understand. Laws that do not provide one side immunity when responding to the other team's crimes create MORE crimes, because it INCENTIVIZES the commission of warcrimes for tactical and operational advantage.