World News

“forcibly conscripted men”

Conscription isn't voluntary... that's the whole point of conscription.

Wasn't there an article recently where they told them not to report the crime from vets? Since they did they tour instead of full time in prison, all those model citizens are home. I guess a bullet is cheap solution to that problem.

You don't even have to go that far back.

Enemy at the gates, Both movie (2001) and book (1973), give a graphic depiction of Stalin's Not a step back command, Order No. 227, where soldiers were shot for refusing orders to die where they stand and not retreat in WW2.

There was no arrest, trail and formal execution as seen in Paths of Glory. The troops had the choice to be shot by the Germans in front of them or by the USSR Political Officers behind them.

Has Russia's morality ever been above that? Apart from some minor glitches in the system seen as chaotic, its history goes from one dictator to another.

Hot take that’s his best film. Not that the rest aren’t great(Barry Lyndon aside)

Threatening hundreds of armed men doesn’t seem like a smart thing for a commander to do.

Well, good thing they are not armed!

This is utterly asinine. The only way to survive artillery when you're spotted is to run somewhere. The king of battle will zero in and wipe out everyone otherwise.

Threatening hundreds of armed men doesn’t seem like a smart thing for a commander to do.

They tried that in 1917, too - it most definitely wasn't a smart thing to do.

Next they'll use decimation like ancient Roman armies.

There has already been the mutiny of the Wagner mercs, I wounder how far away it is for the army proper.

Not defending Russia, but I believe most militaries have rules on the books saying that field executions for disobeying orders are a necessary part of war.

The last time western powers seriously used this was WW1. WW1 was quite famous and hated exactly because of the flippant use of executions of soldiers who weren't willing or able to follow horrific orders. After that you'll find a hard time to find examples. Especially after WW2. I certainly haven't heard of a single US soldier for example who was executed in the field in Iraq or Afghanistan nor any death penalty even when found guilty of serious charges against them like Abu Ghraib.

So yeah, no. Russia isn't just doing what every other military is doing as well.

In the past, maybe. In the modern world I doubt it. But from Russia I'm not surprised, they have a habit of disregarding life for quite a long time.

The utility is sufficiently explained by the fact that diligently denying things creates the impression that not denying things means that it's true.

The pop culture myth of Soviets killing anyone who retreated is potentially based on a few real incidents of it, but the barrier troops were formally there to detain/arrest and most of them were sent back to active duty. It wouldn't necessarily have been for "retreating" either but for abandoning your unit, a unit could very well engage in a "retreat." There's also conflation between motivating propaganda saying things like "no retreat!" and supposed "no retreat laws." None of this is really unique to the Soviets or Russia either.

The beatings will continue until morale improves

They forcibly recurit people. Thats why so many young russian men left the country since the invasion.

They can't build morale so they use fear. I have a suspicion it mustn't be as effective.

How do they maintain morale for the remaining troops if they execute their own?

They don't care about morale. They rule their troop with brutal means.

And how would they recruite fresh ones if this will be the possible fate of the troops?

Through forced conscription.

They don't have a choice