 |
|
lightblue
|
|
L'Boro, UK
Oct 2001
time: 05:27
|
|
The Russians killed a division worths of their own people in Stalingrad, it did get them victory in the end. With Saddam an admirer of Stalin, maybe he's picking up pointers...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MichaeltheGreat
|
|
Apolyton Grand Executioner
|
 |
mooning the house that Ruth built.
Oct 1999
time: 21:27
|
|
What's wrong with it is that it's murder, and it's widespread in the Iraqi conscript forces.
In the last gulf war, EPW interviews established that Iraqi special security service, military intelligence and Special Republican Guard units summarily executed many dozens, if not several hundred, Iraqi soldiers for trying to surrender. During the Iran-Iraq war, the number is believed to be in the low thousands.
In the US, only one soldier has been executed for desertion and cowardice since the War of Yankee Aggression: Pvt. (E1) Eddie Slovik, in WW2. That was after numerous appeals, and everyone expected that the death sentence was "to send a message" and that it would be modified on appeal. There have been a few (very few) rumored incidents of chickenshit officers being shot in the field (which is technically mutiny and murder, no matter the reason) for refusing to obey orders to advance to help other troops. I've never heard any real substantiation of this, but even something occasional and unsubstantiated is nothing close to the common, entirely "legal" enforcement methods used in Iraq.
Right now, if a US soldier refuses to deploy to the ME (it's happened), they'll get a court-martial, may get prison time, but by no means certain, and likely brief, and will be dishonorably discharged.
If an American officer or NCO clearly shot a soldier or Marine for refusing to engage the enemy (since he's not going to move, it's much harder for there to be an "accident"), it would be very near impossible to cover up, and the military's reaction would be harsh. We have an all-volunteer force, and a different political structure and social tolerance, so cowards are treated a lot more softly. If a few troops beat the **** out of the SOB before he was shipped out of theater, that could get covered up, but murder, no. Mostly, we'd treat the individual in question with the contempt he deserved, and let the MP's and the military justice system process the ******* out.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Traianvs
|
 |
Belgium, land of plenty (corruption)
Jan 2000
time: 06:27
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ned
MarkG, The Roman Republic used decimation on whole units that failed to fight. I don't know how long this lasted into the Empire, when the Army became an professional force.
I think such tatics are used to inspire a conscript army. |
Yes the Romans employed decimation but often the unit (often the remains of a legion that has suffered a humiliating defeat) was simply dishonoured and banned to corsica or other unimportant locations
Also decimation didn't include the whole unit, if I recall correctly it was either half the unit, or one tenth that was killed, I'm not exactly sure anymore which...
Also, when the Aquilifer and Signifer (standard bearers) lost their standards, they were executed 
And, during a night watch, when a soldier fell asleep he was executed as well!!
Harsh measures, but they served well as the Roman army was about the most disciplined and best organized force 
Btw from what I've heard it's the regular Republican Guard that has death squadrons for deserters, the normal army doesn't have them as you would need a whole lot of death squadrons for such a big army!! Naturally the special republican guard doesn't need these squadrons as they are very loyal. That's what a deserted republican guard reported anyway. Another thing is that Iraqi troops often desert... With a death squadron they wouldn't do that so easily I would say
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:27.
Apolyton Time is 00:27. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
28-03-2003 16:59
|