Wars and ConflictsΒ permalink
X Corps Mutiny
This discussion has been closed.
-
Message 1.Β
Posted by Pete- Weatherman (U14670985) on Sunday, 21st November 2010
I asked this question in my Salerno Thread but I think it deserves it's own.
Dose any one know about the Mutiny by X (10) Corps at Salerno. In a nut shell, Troops from the 8th Army who had been sick or wounded were told they were going to be sent back to there units now in Sicily / Italy. Still not marked as Fit for duty. but they saw as there Duty to get back to there units. An order by Mongomery reinforced this fact when he side "Every man should make his way back to his own unit at any coast." They then found (At the last min) that they were going to be Attached to the US 5th Army at Salerno. Hundreds of men refused to do so after threats and missleding requests for volunters, this came down to 191who stood firm and refused to join another unit.
It was these that were done for Mutiny. The court marshel was a sham and only one wittness could be called in defence as the rest were "needed" at the front. 3 Sgt were sentencet to death, the others were given long sentences with hard labour. with in weeks these were commuted and ALL prisoners freed, but NOT pardoned. Medals were with drawn and non-exeistent punisments created (Not alouded to leve the frount even when all the others were on leave) None of these men refused to fight, none were seen as cowerds, all they whanted was to go back to there units (As promised) Most were not fully fit and the way some officers act, it left them feeling demoralised.
In 2000 a pardon was tryed for, but the then Minister of the armed forces said
Quot
"It has long been a basic tenent of military life ... That a solider has NO defence in military law that allows him to choose which lawfull order he will obay or which he will not".( No Pardon)
By that same rule the SS were only obaying orders (NOT). All orders Might at the time be seen as Lawfull, but later found to be unlaw full, so where dose the poor BL**dy squaddy draw thre line. Damed if you do and damed if you do'nt.
Give them the Pardon. All in favor say AY! -
Message 2
Posted by TimTrack (U1730472) on Monday, 22nd November 2010
By that same rule the SS were only obaying ordersΒ
A somewhat excessive comparison. The key word here is LAWFUL order.
There was a TV documentary about this a few years ago. Unfortunately, a quick Google failed to locate any details on this.I got the general impression that both sides allowed their emotions to run away with them. The army assigns men to where the army wants them, it seems to me. Once a soldier has raised an objection formally, but been told to get on with it, then they should indeed get on with it.
The army, though, certainly over-reacted, and some men were, quite disgracefully, kept in the line in the hope they would become casualties. Many did indeed become casualties.
All orders Might at the time be seen as Lawfull, but later found to be unlaw fullΒ
I don't think you would stretch thiis to a soldier deciding which unit to serve in. -
Message 3
Posted by rhmnney (U14528380) on Thursday, 25th November 2010
TimTrack, all orders are lawful, even given by a senior soldier, anyone who signed on before you. The trial after the war was a farce, just that the victors demanded it. If you have experienced military life you know quite well you must obey all orders and question them afterwards if so inclined. The last order regardless of given by whatever rank is obeyed.
The Allies made their own rules to gain their revenge, there was a good chance that before the end of the war, what was left of the German Army would be rearmed and join the Allies to defeat Russia. A very real possibility at the time. -
Message 4
Posted by rhmnney (U14528380) on Thursday, 25th November 2010
Pete when in India unsure of the date but around 1946 we heard that Commandos had staged a mutiny in Malay over spit and polish, around that time in the Battalion our Platoon officer gave us a lecture regarding Mutiny. I did read of British Troops who had fought forced to return or to be transported back or to another country after the War, it included senior NCOs they were given long prison sentences. I did meet a RAF airman in India he said his airfield in India did have a mutiny and was put down with Indian Troops.
Surprising how senior British officers shake and tremble in the presence of Politicians, totally xxxx scared. -
Message 5
Posted by TimTrack (U1730472) on Friday, 26th November 2010
all orders are lawfulΒ
No they are not. And that is the opinion of the courts, not just me.
To claim that all orders are lawful is to place the military above the law. Only fascists claim the military is above the law. In fact, this defence was rejected as far back as 1474 with the trial of Peter von Hagenbach. The Nazis were merely being disingenuous when they claimed this in the post war period.
Only a fool does what he is told regardless of the legality of the order. Only a coward would carry out an immoral order.
The trials of the nazis were not a farce. They were a moral necessity in the face of acts so evil they are barely describable.
There was absolutely no chance whatsoever that the German army was going to be re-armed as it was constituted in April/May 1945. Frankly, this is a fantasists version of history. -
Message 6
Posted by rhmnney (U14528380) on Friday, 26th November 2010
TimTack obviously you have never been exposed to any situation where you were required to follow orders. British soldiers during WW1 were executed for failing to carry out orders, if the orders were unlawful or otherwise it still caused their deaths. You will have to do a lot of unravelling of history and verdicts handed down from Law Courts, as courts have interpreted cases depending on and of the times. Verdicts are reversed constantly.
Where do you get your information that the German Army was never going to be rearmed, and by and by what authority? Perhaps you are aware that many top Nazi who could be accused of war crimes were given asylum in the USA and other countries and not for their knowledge of rockets etc, it has not been revealed why they were singled out for amnesty.
During WW2 British and American soldiers were ordered to salute and give respect to all German officers prisoners of war as they did to their own officers, and this was when Allied soldiers were fighting and dying attacking the German Army.
quote, 'Only a fool does what he is told regardless of the legality of the order'.
'Only a coward would carry out an immoral order'.
So you are claiming to be both Judge and Jury? Quite good of you. Saves all that confusion and bother. -
Message 7
Posted by TimTrack (U1730472) on Friday, 26th November 2010
rhmnney,
All you are doing is presenting a series of non-sequitur points.
Whether I have been in the army or not is irrelevant. Whoever is in the army must not follow an order that is obviously illegal. If they do, the law can, and does, prosecute them.
As for the possibility of the German army being turned on the Soviets, this is clearly a nonsense. The allies had no taste for starting a new war against the Soviets, with or without German assistance. The reaction of the public to such a move would have been immense. The armies were exhausted. The only 'source' in favour of this is wishful thinking, usually on the part of the Nazis.
The grabbing of nazi scientists to assist with post war weapons development is not the same as turning either the German or the Allied armies on the Soviets. -
Message 8
Posted by rhmnney (U14528380) on Friday, 26th November 2010
TimTrack, you know history as you read or fancy it, I lived it, plus know history of that time from the American point of view. Did the Americans have another A-Bomb at the time, and the means to deliver it to any place in the world? (only the Shadow knows) Granted British spies fed the Soviets information on American nuclear secrets so at that time so could have information of other things.
Doubtful if you can bring those British soldiers back to life, given orders and refused to obey them.
Adios. -
Message 9
Posted by arty macclench (U14332487) on Saturday, 27th November 2010
I believe officer POWs on all sides were meant to be accorded respect due their rank. The senior British Officer in Germany 1940-45 was given a sentry with fixed bayonet who he sent back for having dirty boots.
-
Message 10
Posted by caveman1944 (U11305692) on Saturday, 27th November 2010
Message 5
Only a fool does what he is told .
Quite. I may have been a POW in Saigon when picked on and ordered 'kit inspection' when others were at work while i was engaged in cooking sweet potatoe chips and egg with the workers due in ;along of course with my mucker.
Kit ? A back pack, bed sheet and blanket ! I protested and asked if i could have it along with the others. Order repeated and refused. Up before the Major...three days pay. A repeat in Thailand.
Had I obeyed that order I would have been a nothing person.
It was a test of will, but why me ? and only me ?
Crap
John
About this Board
The History message boards are now closed. They remain visible as a matter of record but the opportunity to add new comments or open new threads is no longer available. Thank you all for your valued contributions over many years.
or Β to take part in a discussion.
The message board is currently closed for posting.
The message board is closed for posting.
This messageboard is .
Find out more about this board's
Search this Board
Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ iD
Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ navigation
Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ links
Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ Β© 2014 The Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.