PDA

View Full Version : A military behavior question



WishWords
05-10-2007, 11:29 PM
If soldiers were over running an Iraqi base back in 2003 and an armed Iraqi officer were running from them, would they shoot him or would he have to fire at them for them to shoot him? I'm not asking about official policy; I'm asking what would probably happen. They can see his weapon, which he has not used, yet. They can see his rank. He is running away toward a rather large oasis. He is about to escape and they don't know what is in the oasis. What would they do?

Vanatru
05-11-2007, 12:47 AM
If your looking for the "unofficial" tac to take. That would depend on the soldiers in question. Some wouldn't shoot unless fired upon. Some would light 'im up just because. Lots of variables to be taken into consideration.

I'd say "No shoot" till something changed. The ROE advise if he turns the weapon at the troops, they can fire in self defense whether the 'Raqi fires or not. If his back is turned, it'll probably be a no-shoot.

"Officially" the running officer could be shot under the "Hostile Pursuit" rule. An enemy combatant that has just engaged Coalition Forces and it's intent is still unknown.

Oh, keep in mind the ROE can vary slightly from command to command and from service to service.

The brits can vary from our army, as can it vary from our marines, or navy people.

But, when in doubt, shoot.

Histry Nerd
05-11-2007, 05:25 AM
I'll second what Van said. If he's running, most units would probably consider it a no-shoot scenario--but it's heavily dependent on the situation. How heavily has the unit been engaged in that area? And what do they think might be in the oasis? If they've been taking casualties, or guys have been getting hit by concealed shooters, his chances ain't good.

And if they're in the process of assaulting the base, most units won't bother investigating a kill like that--they'll call it legitimate and drive on.

Do we have anybody who was there in '03 who can confirm?

HN

WishWords
05-11-2007, 05:43 AM
The pursuing troops are actually Australian (they are the ones that captured Al Asad), but I have no one I can contact there who might know. So, I'm going to have to use what I can find out about American troops. From what I understand, the takeover of Al Asad was a cake walk considering it was Sadaam's biggest airbase. The Aussies took out the power bunker, hit the runways, then went knocking at the front gate and let themselves in. There was some resistance, but not much. All the aircraft had been buried in the desert the day before so there wasn't any air resistance.

Anyway... I'm thinking it would be best if my little Lt. Col turned toward them and raised his weapon to make it more realistic.

No one ever told me there was so much research to do for a 3000 word horror story.

JJ Cooper
05-11-2007, 05:58 AM
The pursuing troops are actually Australian (they are the ones that captured Al Asad), but I have no one I can contact there who might know. So, I'm going to have to use what I can find out about American troops. From what I understand, the takeover of Al Asad was a cake walk considering it was Sadaam's biggest airbase. The Aussies took out the power bunker, hit the runways, then went knocking at the front gate and let themselves in. There was some resistance, but not much. All the aircraft had been buried in the desert the day before so there wasn't any air resistance.


Your close. This is your lucky day. Send me a PM.

JJ

kg_crow
05-24-2007, 02:38 AM
I served 3 years in the Army but in Germany, no combat. ('69-'72, air traffic control.)

If I was in a fire-fight and I had a bead on an enemy running away, I'd take him out without hessitation.

Shaka Zulu (in the movie of the same name) said, "Never leave an enemy (alive) behind."

The object of war is to defeat the enemy by any means possible.

Why let him escape, only to return and kill my buddies--or me?!

kg_crow
05-24-2007, 03:20 AM
During the American Revolutionary war, the Brits complained that the Americans didn't fighting fair. The Yanks hid behind trees, ambushed then ran away, shot the officers first, etc, etc.

We didn't abide by the 'rules of warfare' as the Red Coats understood them.

They lost the war.

The enemy today (Islamic terrorists, or whatever you wish to call them), does not wear uniforms or conform to any of the Geneva Conventions. Their tactics are unspeakably barbaric. They have no qualms about shooting people in the back, or blowing up women and children in a market place with a bomb. The goal is to win, and win at any cost.

To fight an enemy like this with a one arm tied behind the back, ("don't shoot them if they are running away), is simply crazy.

War is hell even on it's best day, and there's no special place in heaven for those who died because they gave a rabid dog a second chance to bite.

Vanatru
05-24-2007, 07:11 AM
During the American Revolutionary war, the Brits complained that the Americans didn't fighting fair. The Yanks hid behind trees, ambushed then ran away, shot the officers first, etc, etc.

We didn't abide by the 'rules of warfare' as the Red Coats understood them.


The brits didn't have CNN, BBC4, and half a dozen other media outlets watching their every move. They didn't have civil action groups monitoring them. They didn't have politicians more worried about their imagine that whats right or wrong.

You say you'd shoot someone, but till ya have to do it........that's frankly, another thing. Pulling that trigger and sending that lead downrange to tear someone's flesh and life is something powerful.

I'd be inclined to kill half the people in my county back home just because I think they bother me..........but I don't. Shoulda, coulda, woulda is great to say............and every enlisted soldier knows they're politically expendable to officers and the brass asses back home. The media has shown plenty of examples in the last few years.

Also keep in mind we're talking a uniformed Iraqi soldier, not a guerilla. Rules of war are in place and such. :)

However, I could be wrong.............but, re-enlist. Come on over. We'll try both methods and see how things go. :)

Jacob Spire
05-28-2007, 06:20 PM
If they know Arabic, they'd proabably yell at him to stop, threatening to shoot him if he doesn't.

If he doesn't, they shoot once in the air.

If he still doesn't, they aim for his feet.

It he still doesn't, (which probably means that they missed,) they shoot to kill.

Cav Guy
05-28-2007, 09:12 PM
They would have been given cards/basic language indoctrination so that they could yell "halt" in local language. How well they'd do it (as in could the guy running understand them) is open to question.

Typically with someone of that rank (read good intel if you take him alive), they'd try to catch up with him or shoot to wound (leg shots, that sort of thing). That said, shooting to wound doesn't always work. Consider that the shooter is winded/tired/scared and not functioning at his range best. Shots over the head don't always happen, either.

During an overrun in open war, I'd say they'd call out for him to surrender, maybe try a warning shot, then try to wound because he's got (or they think he has) good intel value. Or one of them may think he's going for his weapon and drop him. As has been mentioned, lots of variables.

kg_crow
05-30-2007, 08:31 PM
I'd be inclined to kill half the people in my county back home just because I think they bother me..........but I don't. Shoulda, coulda, woulda is great to say...

Do the people who bother you carry weapons, Sir? Have they just emptied their automatic weapons at your head with the intent of reducing you to dog food?

Are you terrified out of your mind and in total fear of your life? Did these enemy combatants--in uniform or not--just blow your best friend's brains all over your flak jacket?

It's all very nice for gentlemen to talk of the rules of engagement over tea and crumpets, about being 'civilized' and giving a fleeing foe the courtesy of safe escape, but in the end it's kill or be killed.

D'ya you think he's gonna give you the same gracious courtesy?

Wanna tell his widow and fatherless children that you had his killer in your sites and let him go...because it was a nice thing to do?

IMHO, the only reason to let an enemy escape--in fiction--is to show the soldier's weakness when he's 'green' and for the searing irony of seeing the enemy return to kill his best friend.

"The art of war is simple enough. Find out where your enemy is. Get at him as soon as you can. Strike him as hard as you can, and keep moving on."


--Ulysses S. Grant

Vanatru
05-30-2007, 11:12 PM
Do the people who bother you carry weapons, Sir? Have they just emptied their automatic weapons at your head with the intent of reducing you to dog food?

Yes. They run around in packs..........not unlike wolves. It's creepy. Like the time they assaulted the pumpkin patch and slaughtered everything in it. Pumpkins, squash, you name it. It was horrible. ::::shudder::::

Otherwise, the answer is yes.



Are you terrified out of your mind and in total fear of your life? Did these enemy combatants--in uniform or not--just blow your best friend's brains all over your flak jacket?

Not so much these days. I've come to accept death as a given. I'm not even throwing up everyday like I used to. Therapy has been doing wonders for me.



It's all very nice for gentlemen to talk of the rules of engagement over tea and crumpets, about being 'civilized' and giving a fleeing foe the courtesy of safe escape, but in the end it's kill or be killed.

Ya think so? Your not just messing with me are ya? Come on, tell me the truth.

D'ya you think he's gonna give you the same gracious courtesy?



Wanna tell his widow and fatherless children that you had his killer in your sites and let him go...because it was a nice thing to do?


Actually, I've had to tell families already about service members dieing. It sucks.



IMHO, the only reason to let an enemy escape--in fiction--is to show the soldier's weakness when he's 'green' and for the searing irony of seeing the enemy return to kill his best friend.

Sorry.........I'm talking real life. I'm basing my experiences off having to fight and kill these people daily when required to. So, I can't truly speaking from a fictional, armchair general world where things are 'coulda, shoulda, 20/20'. :)

Otherwise, relax.......you seem to have gotten yourself bothered about this. I'll be home in a few weeks, lets just set differences aside and we can have a drink and laugh about it.

kg_crow
06-01-2007, 12:41 AM
You got a deal.

Safe home.

WishWords
06-02-2007, 02:58 AM
As I was reading down the comments here I started to get concerned. Just let me give both of you, Vanatru and kg_crow, my respect. Well done.

Vanatru, I thought you were home all ready. Be careful, yeah?