Would you be willing to die for your country?

[ran 0]

i simply can't shooot somebody who wears the same colors and insignas as me

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (ran @ Nov. 12 2002,20:48)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">who told you about letting him go home ?

the chances of survival in a warzone are pretty small when alone and unarmed .....

i'm kinda sadistic<span id='postcolor'>

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">i simply can't shooot somebody who wears the same colors and insignas as me <span id='postcolor'>

Well then it seems to me that your problem is more that you personally would not like to shoot deserters, but that you have no problem with them getting killed. Do you think that anybody likes shooting their own men?

Refusing to shoot a deserter because it is uncomfortable for you is in principle the same as deserting. You are running away from your duties and letting others do your nasty business for you.

[ran 0]

and by loosing 1 men , i prefer to loose him MIA .. sounds better on the squad's registers .... and he keeps a few bits of the already small rests of his honor ....

after several days in the nature , the guy would either fall on an enemy or friendly unit , the enemy would keep him prisonner or kill him and the friendly forces would ask him why isn't he carrying any insignas .... he would have serious problems then .....

[Renagade 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Nov. 12 2002,20:55)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (ran @ Nov. 12 2002,20:48)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">who told you about letting him go home ?

the chances of survival in a warzone are pretty small when alone and unarmed .....

i'm kinda sadistic<span id='postcolor'>

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">i simply can't shooot somebody who wears the same colors and insignas as me <span id='postcolor'>

Well then it seems to me that your problem is more that you personally would not like to shoot deserters, but that you have no problem with them getting killed. Do you think that anybody likes shooting their own men?

Refusing to shoot a deserter because it is uncomfortable for you is in principle the same as deserting. You are running away from your duties and letting others do your nasty business for you.<span id='postcolor'>

welll it should be quite easy to invade ur country becuase u`ll all be TKing each other

[ran 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Nov. 12 2002,20:55)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Refusing to shoot a deserter because it is uncomfortable for you is in principle the same as deserting. You are running away from your duties and letting others do your nasty business for you.<span id='postcolor'>

my bullets , if i fire them are for my enemies , not for my own men , even if they're guilty of treason , yes , it is uncofortable to burry a grave in the middle of a battlefield under barrage fire , it is unconfortable to signal the motives of the execution , and as long as a death can be avoided i'll try to avoid it , i got another methods that consist in sending my men on the front with my sidearm in their back . way less engaging and it's 1 more reason to get either yourself killed by your own men or having half of your ex-squad wandering in the nature

i work on this basis : i trust them , they trust me , i would never do something that isn't in their interest , so they have to do the same with me , we would have lived during several months together , and a real comradeship would have been formed , and it's the only  way to prevent desertion

i don't see the need of killing somebody "for the exemple"

-edit- : the only cases of desertion i've seen or heard of were under the command of inapt , harsh , cruel officers

if everything has been done correctly , people only desert when there's something wrong , if one day denoir , 1 of your man desert , you'll first have to ask yourself why , the desertion is the main sign of a cohesion problem in the combat unit

[ran 0]

and , if i find deserters coming from other combat units , then i'll take them to the battlefield under the surveillance of my own men's weapons

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (ran @ Nov. 12 2002,21:03)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">my bullets , if i fire them are for my enemies , not for my own men , even if they're guilty of treason<span id='postcolor'>

Do you know why officers have sidearms? I'll give you a hint: it is not for shooting at the enemy.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">i work on this basis : i trust them , they trust me , i would never do something that isn't in their interest , so they have to do the same with me , we would have lived during several months together , and a real comradeship would have been formed , and it's the only way to prevent desertion

i don't see the need of killing somebody "for the exemple"<span id='postcolor'>

Just because they trust you it is your duty to them to shoot the deserter. The other alternative would be to let the other members of the deserters unit lynch him (which they would be more then happy to do), but I think it is better to keep a good order and do it yourself.

[Erex 0]

HEY CALM DOWN GUYS!!!

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (ran @ Nov. 12 2002,21:03)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">the only cases of desertion i've seen or heard of were under the command of inapt , harsh , cruel officers

if everything has been done correctly , people only desert when there's something wrong , if one day denoir , 1 of your man desert , you'll first have to ask yourself why , the desertion is the main sign of a cohesion problem in the combat unit<span id='postcolor'>

Yes, and I am 100% sure that none of the men in KJ, in my unit would ever desert. They are too proud and too well trained for that.

The problem of desertion is more associated with regular units that consist of draftees that were forced to fight. For them a different set of rules apply, there shooting deserters is an important deterrent.

[ran 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Nov. 12 2002,21:08)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">3--></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (ran @ Nov. 12 2002,213)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">my bullets , if i fire them are for my enemies , not for my own men , even if they're guilty of treason<span id='postcolor'>

Do you know why officers have sidearms? I'll give you a hint: it is not for shooting at the enemy.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">i work on this basis : i trust them , they trust me , i would never do something that isn't in their interest , so they have to do the same with me , we would have lived during several months together , and a real comradeship would have been formed , and it's the only  way to prevent desertion

i don't see the need of killing somebody "for the exemple"<span id='postcolor'>

Just because they trust you it is your duty to them to shoot the deserter. The other alternative would be to let the other members of the deserters unit lynch him (which they would be more then happy to do), but I think it is better to keep a good order and do it yourself.<span id='postcolor'>

have you ever really served in an infantry unit ?? have you ever been in a REAL combat zone ?? have you ever experienced real combat sensations or sentiments ?? deserters generally don't desert during the fight .......

as far as i've been briefed : officer's sidearm is here to provide light personnal defence and last ressort weapon

as i told you , the desertion is not always an act of betrayal that deserve death , most of the time , it's a call for help

i've served for around 15 years , i think i've more operation about the field than you have ... , maybe you'll understand later when you'll have a combat squad under your orders

i know my men , the last thing they want is to deceive their leader and their comrades

i don't understand your so deep hate against deserters ...

[advocatexxx 0]

I see the dillemma between you two.  Ran, while your values are filled with positive ethics you might find yourself watching your whole squad desert you, and then you'd be the one all alone in enemy territory. No matter how well you know and trust your men they all have their breaking points, and once they snap you can't predict their actions.

Denoirs principles are somewhat barbaric but would definitely preserve the chain of command and send a shiver down the spine of each squad member, not to mention seriously lower their morale seeing how they now face death from the enemy and friend.

What I would do is strip the soldier of all his insignias/ID, take all of his weapons away, all this at a gunpoint, then give him a 20 second margin to start running away before I order my whole squad to open fire at him...   It might seriously have him reconsider..

On the other hand if he wouldn't tell me about wanting to leave but rather just took off and ran without responding to me I'd shoot him in the legs then call to have him picked up and imprisoned.

[ran 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Nov. 12 2002,21:12)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Yes, and I am 100% sure that none of the men in KJ, in my unit would ever desert. They are too proud and too well trained for that.

The problem of desertion is more associated with regular units that consist of draftees that were forced to fight. For them a different set of rules apply, there shooting deserters is an important deterrent.<span id='postcolor'>

my unit is a voluntary reserve unit , the men who are there have choosen it , actually , this unit is full effective and combat ready , i know most of the men i have under my orders since 6 months and have regular contacts with them in civilian life , i learn to know them , they learn to know me , and if , i'm given a little non-combat draftee , then he'll be ready to fight really fast ... uner my impulsion and my other men's impulsion

you know , most of the time , lost effectives aren't directly replaced on the field ......

and .... the french army doesn't count anymore "draftee" , the french army is either a professionnal or volunteer army , we made an oath and promised to obey to it , if somebody doesn't respect it , then good for him , but he'll live in the shame as long as his ex-comrade in arms will be alive and that's already enough to me

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (ran @ Nov. 12 2002,21:14)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">have you ever really served in an infantry unit ?? have you ever been in a REAL combat zone ?? have you ever experienced real combat sensations or sentiments ?? deserters generally don't desert during the fight .......<span id='postcolor'>

I have served in an amphibious regiment as kustjägare (costal ranger) and later with A-dyk (attack divers). The only "combat zone" I have been to is Kosovo, but I didn't serve there as a grunt. So yes, I do not have the experience of serving in a "real war". I have however been under direct fire several times (we discussed this in a thread before), so I would say that I have some combat "sensations and sentiments".

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">as far as i've been briefed : officer's sidearm is here to provide light personnal defence and last ressort weapon

<span id='postcolor'>

You have been briefed wrong.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">maybe you'll understand later when you'll have a combat squad under your orders

<span id='postcolor'>

lol. I have been a squad leader, platoon leader and company leader, so I would say that I have some experience there

[ran 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (advocatexxx @ Nov. 12 2002,21:14)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I see the dillemma between you two.  Ran, while your values are filled with positive ethics you might find yourself watching your whole squad desert you, and then you'd be the one all alone in enemy territory.  No matter how well you know and trust your men they all have their breaking points, and once they snap you can't predict their actions.

[...]

What I would do is strip the soldier of all his insignias/ID, take all of his weapons away, all this at a gunpoint, then give him a 20 second margin to start running away before I order my whole squad to open fire at him...   It might seriously have him reconsider..

On the other hand if he wouldn't tell me about wanting to leave but rather just took off and ran without responding to me I'd shoot him in the legs then call to have him picked up and imprisoned.<span id='postcolor'>

advocate , there's stilla limit point where i would start to threaten them

i agree with your principes advocate , but shooting in the legs is a bit harsh .. maybe a few somations before

in any way , i wouldn't like to kill a deserter , maybe wound him ... but then he'll have what he was looking for , even if its a little more painfull than he thought

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (advocatexxx @ Nov. 12 2002,21:14)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">What I would do is strip the soldier of all his insignias/ID, take all of his weapons away, all this at a gunpoint, then give him a 20 second margin to start running away before I order my whole squad to open fire at him...   It might seriously have him reconsider..<span id='postcolor'>

Lol. You call that less barbaric?

[ran 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Nov. 12 2002,21:21)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (ran @ Nov. 12 2002,21:14)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">have you ever really served in an infantry unit ?? have you ever been in a REAL combat zone ?? have you ever experienced real combat sensations or sentiments ?? deserters generally don't desert during the fight .......<span id='postcolor'>

I have served in an amphibious regiment as kustjägare (costal ranger) and later with A-dyk (attack divers). The only "combat zone" I have been to is Kosovo, but I didn't serve there as a grunt. So yes, I do not have the experience of serving in a "real war". I have however been under direct fire several times (we discussed this in a thread before), so I would say that I have some combat "sensations and sentiments".

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">as far as i've been briefed : officer's sidearm is here to provide light personnal defence and last ressort weapon

<span id='postcolor'>

You have been briefed wrong.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">maybe you'll understand later when you'll have a combat squad under your orders

<span id='postcolor'>

lol. I have been a squad leader, platoon leader and company leader, so I would say that I have some experience there <span id='postcolor'>

ok , lol , spoken a little bit too fast

but that discussion is interesting , the confrontation of two different views of platoon commanding and army in general

we aren't 19th century or ww1 anymore , we can't shoot deserters like that , and in most of the today's situations , deserting is purely impossible

[ran 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Nov. 12 2002,21:25)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (advocatexxx @ Nov. 12 2002,21:14)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">What I would do is strip the soldier of all his insignias/ID, take all of his weapons away, all this at a gunpoint, then give him a 20 second margin to start running away before I order my whole squad to open fire at him...   It might seriously have him reconsider..<span id='postcolor'>

Lol. You call that less barbaric?<span id='postcolor'>

gives him an option tho ....

[Renagade 0]

I would love to read this thread through the eyes of a psychologist.

I shall reply later..........

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (ran @ Nov. 12 2002,21:26)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">but that discussion is interesting , the confrontation of two different views of platoon commanding and army in general

we aren't 19th century or ww1 anymore , we can't shoot deserters like that , and in most of the today's situations , deserting is purely impossible<span id='postcolor'>

I agree on both points

Did you know that we in the Swedish military have an expression "To be Glocked" refering to getting shot by your officer (officer's sidearms are Glock 17's). The expression is used though not in connotation to deserting, but more like training motivation: "You better run faster or the lieutenant will glock you!"

[ran 0]

lol ... and i use my beretta to hunt birds ... lol

[Bart.Jan 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (ran @ Nov. 12 2002,18:19)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">you've all to understand that battle fatigue and psychological troubles caused by war situation can lead to desertion, and it's often that the soldier didn't think enough about how to get out of the place he is in actually

i'm am sub-officer in charge of a squad , my role is to understand my men , and during my long military and paramilitary career , i've seen many different cases including a few desertions

most of the deserters just weren't good enough to support military life , it's just like when someone is strangling you , you tend not to ask kindly that person to remove her hands from your neck and to struggle a bit , i think that in most of the times , desertion is better than having a psychologically or/and physically weak man under your orders

i think that if a man is well trained , physically and mentally , he doesn't desert , but there are always a few black sheeps , and death is a too harsh sentance for them , if they get caught , i'm ok with a prison penalty or something approaching , but not death penalty , including in war time<span id='postcolor'>

As squad leader you have great responsibility for your men, their training, so it's your job to mark and send away weak that can jeopard your sqad -if they can not be properly trained.

About imprisoning war deserters: What can you do if the whole sqad or a platoon decided to go to prison instead of figt ? What can stop another soldiers from following their example ?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">just stay back and look for every movements of your men , if one looks like he wants to leave the expedition , ask him gently to leave all his heavy weapons and to give you all his additional cargo of ammo , and it's also the role of the sub-officer in war time to observe the moral and mentality of his men , to discuss with them , and if ever they show signs of weakness , it's up to the sub officer in charge of that man to ask him to give the special weaponary to somebody more fiable<span id='postcolor'>

You are talking about men you know. But there will be new members of your squad - replacement because of casualites. They will have different training (especially newbies).

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">it's my personnal opinion about the sub officer's role , i don't wanna shoot men with who i've lived during months , but i'll try to do my best to make him do it via the official way . and if it's not possible then ..... , he gives me his ammo and his rifle and all is possibly interresting gear

-edit-: i forgot : i would take him his rank and regimental insignas

the role of a sub officer is to listen and to examinate his men's thoughts and to take decisions according his men's moral and physical and psychological status <span id='postcolor'>

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">i'm kinda sadistic <span id='postcolor'>

Yes, you are soooo mean !  What will any patrol do if they spot someone with uniform but without ranks and insignia ? I think they will be shoot first and then they'll check what kind of uniform that man weared and if he had some hidden weapon. I think man in that (non)uniform should be considered as spy on sight by all fighting sides.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">

i simply can't shooot somebody who wears the same colors and insignas as me<span id='postcolor'>But you may be ordered to do it.  

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">i know my men , the last thing they want is to deceive their leader and their comrades

i don't understand your so deep hate against deserters ... <span id='postcolor'>Problem is, as i wrote above, you may be commander of new soldiers or you may be moved to another unit and there will be no time to become friend with them. Your commander will simply need good sergant that can handle his men.

Hate - I consider deserter as traitor who leaved his companions in mess. He must pay for it. Maybe it's barbaric but his act is much worse, in my opinion.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">gives him an option tho ....<span id='postcolor'>He can use his weapon against you.

I think you are great peace-time leader but I don't know how you can handle war-time dury. Plese don't be offended.:) I'm serving 6th year and mostly not as leader. Without war-experience.

[Balschoiw 0]

...never experienced a case of deserting.

But what did happen quite often were soldiers going mentally insane during firefights and at "special" locations like mass graves. Whenever body parts were lying around or we had injured or deaths within the unit, some got real problems with keeping themselves on track. We took ammo and weapons away from the person, fixed him with cablestraps or tape to a secure spot or vehicle and brought them back to camp after the mission. Most of the times they were sent back home afterwards. I guess we need to decide between traumatic experiences that lead to a mental shutdown and soldiers that take their fleeing from unit serious and refuse to carry on with the current mission. Nethertheless people can get really weird if they are put under heavy pressure. By the way I have seen this things with almost any nation so it´s not true that some are weaker or harder. There are things that you can´t be prepared on. And these are the things that let the guys get weird. After firefights people act totally different. Some need to talk, some get more silent any time they had to do their job and some do suffer from "post traumatic stress disorder" A very well known expression in all army´s on this planet. We had a major once that was retired from duty cause he was not able to lead us any longer. He kept talking of his family all day long and more than one time we had to bring him back to camp crying. That was a very bad situation as he was highest in rank and did not agree with us that he was no longer able to lead us. He was alos very much afraid of the consequences he will have to face when back in homecountry. He was a real risk to us as he was not able to cope with everyday scenarios. Finally he was sent back and one of us took command. That was a very good thing for all of us.

[Sam Samson 0]

the prussians had a saying: a soldier needs to fear his officer more than the enemy. (so much for the origin of german discipline )

in the US they don't like to call them deserters. make that going AWOL (absent without leave ).

in a democracy you can't just shoot the nervous critter for hopping into the bushes.

this is supposed to be government for the people by the people. can't kill peoples sons just so.

however, when it is done it is punishment and deterrent all at the same time.

napoleon once said when he observed the people storm the palaces: blast the first 500 avec cartouches. the rest will quietly go home all by themselves.

[Sam Samson 0]

about following orders:

I agree that the ability to obey orders is paramount.

if you can't obey you're not worthy to lead in the first place.

authority which doesn't get any active respect through submission, ceases to be authority, and then you have anarchy which hinders all progress.

but there's definitely a threshold where you have to refuse orders.

what I mean is what they called "befehlsnotstand" in germany after ww2.

so many soldiers had done things under orders which they said they didn't want to do, that the country faced a giant moral dilemma afterwards.

germany changed though. they've been working this out. I personally like their concept of "innere führung", of being led in accordance with your convictions. (I have a friend in the german gsg. an officer, not an active commando. )

there's a time (very seldom, especially in the army of a liberal nation ) when you have to refuse. and then you'll have to be ready to bear the consequences.

then you might not be dying for your country, but for your ideals at the hand of your country.

(I imagine this is very hard to do for somebody without faith in God. )

[Balschoiw 0]

your friend didn´t tell you about a very important thing on orders in german army.

1. order is given (legal or not)

2. order has to be followed by all means

3. afterwards you are allowed to hand in a written complaint

but the order has do be followed !

So it´s obeying orders as usual, with the little option to hand in a complaint on the order after the order has been fulfilled. This is significant cause orders (right or wrong) have to be fulfilled.

An exclusion is made for orders against current law, orders against human rights (like torturing) and direct orders to kill unarmed people. I am not that fit with the treatment of deserters at current state of law in german BW, but I assume the death penalty is not active as it is not founded in the law of germany. We thankfully got rid of that barbaric methods.

BTW GSG9 is no part of german army. It´s more likely an elite police unit.