Why submarine war-crime judgments require legal context

Was USS Wahoo's third patrol a war crime, and how did belligerents compare legally?

Probably in the specific Wahoo case, but a full comparison requires detailed research into the law actually in force at the time.

The immediate judgment is that USS Wahoo's third patrol probably involved a war crime, but that does not settle a complete comparative verdict. A defensible legal conclusion requires the rules and definitions in force when the conduct occurred. Later law cannot simply be applied retroactively, even though some acts may already have violated established natural or humanitarian principles. Comparing belligerent submarine campaigns demands careful research into contemporary law, orders, facts, and the precise conduct alleged.