The State of Other Armies in the Late Twilight War

[sglancy12]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

I agree wholeheartedly about the desertion issue as described by sglancy. I'd even go so far as to extend the arguement to cover Soviet troops in Poland - Home is a VERY long walk away through terrain absolutely crawling with marauders and rear eschelon units just waiting to pounce upon deserters.

As much as I wanted to get into these issued I thought perhaps they warranted their own thread. I think Raellus did an excellent job covering the state of the US Armed Forces overseas (particularly in Europe), and I wasn't sure I wanted to muddle his thread with discussions about other national armed forces.

But first of all I have to point out what an ungrateful bastard I am for turning around and disagreeing (at least partially) with Legbreaker after he so graciously agreed with me.

I believe that since Soviet troops can walk home (no matter how far it may be) they are are more likely to desert than US troops who can't get home without crossing huge expanses of ocean.

While it is a long way from Lublin to Moscow, I don't think it's the distance that dissuades them from deserting. I think it's all those KGB and MVD troops in the rear who have nothing better to do than police up Red Army deserters and shoot them. The US Army in WWII executed one soldier for desertion... the Red Army may have executed as many as 158,000 troops for desertion... of course Smokin' Joe Stalin considered surrendering the same as desertion and any liberated prisoners were sent to penal battalion or Siberian Gulags. No doubt that brutal reputation was well deployed during the Twilight War to discourage desertion.

What happens instead is that individual Soviet soldiers do not commonly desert. Instead whole units mutiny. They want to get home, but they know they need the firepower to brush aside those KGB border guards and MVD internal defense troops. Sometimes the mutiny engenders a complete breakdown of order and the unit breaks up. But not every time. In the TW2K time lines the Soviets have a real problem with low category divisions raised in a particular geographic area, mutinying and trying to return to the region from where they were raised. If everyone is from the Kiev area, then the mutinous troops can move as a group to get everyone back to their home towns and families.

Certainly though when a unit mutinies, not everyone is keen on the idea of the long march back to Smolensk (or wherever they are from). Some may still be loyal communists. Others may simply not have approved of the violence of the mutiny if certain officers were murdered in the process. Some may not want to risk the KGB reprisals or perhaps they prefer the relative safety of a Red Army unit in cantonment. What happens to those members of the unit who didn't participate in the mutiny but find themselves without a legal command structure to answer to? Well, I guess they desert from the mutinous unit and try to find there way to friendly forces... of course, with the Red Army, that might be easier said than done.

With political officers looking over their shoulders, many Red Army commanders might be hard pressed not to brutalize or execute deserters who voluntarily return to Red Army units. While the Red Army commander is probably happy for any manpower he can police up, there's a good chance that the Kremlin issued some wasteful and brutal orders concerning the disposal of "traitors" at the front. If he doesn't execute all "traitors" he might be declared one himself. On the other hand, if his Zampolit isn't a total fanatic, and is capable of understanding that the war is thinning the Red Army fast enough without accelerating the destructing with endless executions, maybe individual commanders would be able to reabsorb "stragglers" as they saw fit.

However, considering the brutal hazing in the Red Army at the best of times, I'm imagining a nasty reception for any troops rejoining the Red Army. At the bare minimum they might be forced to run the gauntlet: where the until lines up and the soldier petitioning to return to duty is subjected to a beating where everyone hits him once. Hopefully they'll only beat him with the flats of their leather belts and not rifle butts or boot heels.

Worse case scenario, returning deserters could be placed in a penal squad. When the squad's numbers get above ten, the unit is decimated. That is, one returning deserter is selected and shot as an example to everyone else about deserting. In order to bind the other returned deserters to the Red Army unit, they might very well have to select the soldier to be made an example of and even be forced to carry out the execution.

Hey, the Red Army has a reputation for brutality that is not undeserved.

Does anybody else have any thoughts on this? Especially for ways that Soviet commanders at the front could balance their operational needs with the unrealistic orders coming from the Kremlin.

A. Scott Glancy, President TCCorp, dba Pagan Publishing

[Fusilier]

Originally Posted by sglancy12

What happens instead is that individual Soviet soldiers do not commonly desert.

They do.

[sglancy12]

Originally Posted by Fusilier

They do.

Let me make myself clearer.

I am speaking only to the late Twilight War after the nuclear exchanges. Before for the nukes fly I imagine that the Soviets have a very high desertion rate. Once the nuclear exchange has started, the average Soviet serviceman is faced with the same problem that most servicemen have: "Where am I going to desert to?"

With society in ruins there is a greater chance of avoiding the Soviet security apparatus, or at least the KGB and MVD become a more localized threat, incapable of coordinating their manhunts over large areas. On the other hand, with society in ruins, any single individual moving east away from the front is going to stick out even more. There would be fewer and fewer communities to blend into.

That's also why I see Soviet units suffering a higher rate of mutiny. Rather than chance deserting alone, dissatisfaction in the unit builds until the mutineers are confident that they can seize control and take the entire unit out of the line with the intention of going home. With low readiness category divisions raised in particular geographic areas, this makes the mutineers job even easier because they everyone in the division (mostly) has the same destination in mind. They can travel as a group, with all the advantages and disadvantages that implies, rather than break up into tiny groups all heading to different destinations.

A. Scott Glancy, President TCCorp, dba Pagan Publishing

[Raellus]

I think desertion is key to supporting the various local Polish ORMO "militias" described in canon.

From discussions with a former Polish Army soldier (post Cold War), I take it that the actual Cold War ORMO was a very small organization. They were not generally armed with military grade weapons, if they were armed at all. This person is of the opinion that the Communist Polish government would never have considered arming civilians. Besides, most able-bodied males would have been conscripted into the Polish Army once the war was in full swing.

The only explanation for the number and strength of local militias, in my mind, is that thousands of Polish soldiers deserted- likely after the nuclear exchanges were well under way- with their weapons, returned home, and formed the cadres for the various local militias described in canon.

Polish troops- especially wartime conscripts- would have ample cause and opportunity to desert.

[sglancy12]

Originally Posted by Raellus

I think desertion is key to supporting the various local Polish ORMO "militias" described in canon.

The only explanation for the number and strength of local militias, in my mind, is that thousands of Polish soldiers deserted- likely after the nuclear exchanges were well under way- with their weapons, returned home, and formed the cadres for the various local militias described in canon.

Polish troops- especially wartime conscripts- would have ample cause and opportunity to desert.

I could not agree more. I also think that this would be a similar problem for every other military engaged in hostilities close to or within their national borders. The Poles, the Czechs, the Hungarians, the Germans, the Dutch, the Danes, the Norwegians, the Austrians, Italians, etc... all these armies must have had huge problems with desertion following the nuclear exchange.

Only the UK would have a lower rate of desertion for no other reason than there's that inconvenient moat around the country that prevents the average Tommy from just walking home to look after his family. Besides, with the BAOR making an organized (albeit slow) withdrawal back to Blighty, why paddle across in a rowboat only to face charges of desertion?

Most community militias west of the Rhine would be bolstered by deserters, quite often veterans, who have simply decided to look after their own until things get back on track. They're not necessarily going to be separatists or even disloyal to the remnants of the pre-war government, but they have adopted a different set of "mission priorities."

I'm particularly thinking of the Germans and Austrians here. I think the main thing keeping the German army together is the presence of Soviet and Czech troops in their territory. The moment the Soviets withdraw, those German units are going to start hemorrhaging personnel.

A. Scott Glancy, President TCCorp, dba Pagan Publishing

[Legbreaker]

Distance from home and the ease of getting there will be very important factors in desertion. As has already been mentioned, US troops in Europe are likely to have a low desertion rate while those units within the US are likely to be nearly haemorrhaging soldiers.

The same goes for the Soviets in Alaska, not to mention Division Cuba. Soldiers are much more likely to remain with the military organisation than attempt to head out on their own.

There will of course be exceptions to this general rule. It is quite possible individuals and small groups of a few disaffected soldiers will desert in a foreign land and become marauders, or even switch sides completely, but these will be relatively rare.

However, even if a unit is located within their national boundaries, many soldiers may choose to stay with the unit. It is much more likely that these nationalities have had the chance to find out the situation at home and may even be in fairly regular contact. It could be that by staying in the military they are able to assist their families (or what's left of them) by sending money (if it's still got any value) or even food and clothing parcels. It might even be in the Army's best interest to provide such packages to soldiers, even supplying the transportation for them back to their families - a bit like a reverse care package.

A happy soldier unworried about their loved ones is after all much more likely to stick around than one who's family is starving, in danger, sick, etc.

[Webstral]

One wonders how many marauder units are made up of soldiers who intended to go home, but it didn't work out. One wonders how many individual soldiers and small units were seduced by clever marauders who claimed they were headed home, just as soon as they accumulated what they needed to make the trek.

For the reasons given in earlier posts in the thread, I think some units in CONUS would have worse desertion problems than others. For instance, a formation that is directed to move from its cantonment to a new region in 1999 or later may discover that a large percentage of its troops simply disappear. This said, units operating within a narrow geographic range may find retention a bit easier. State Guards/State Defense Forces with high proportions of married men whose wives and children are in the main cantonment may find that rates of desertion are fairly low.

Of course, as others have suggested there's the issue of perception. If the troops percieve themselves to have a better situation in uniform than out, they will stay. We've explored this ground before, regarding the break-up of a number of formations in Howling Wilderness. It's good to refresh, though. Every new voice brings something new to the table. I don't think we've covered things from the Soviet point of view very much.

Webstral

[sglancy12]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

It could be that by staying in the military they are able to assist their families (or what's left of them) by sending money (if it's still got any value) or even food and clothing parcels. It might even be in the Army's best interest to provide such packages to soldiers, even supplying the transportation for them back to their families - a bit like a reverse care package.

A happy soldier unworried about their loved ones is after all much more likely to stick around than one who's family is starving, in danger, sick, etc.

If there was any way to make this happen, it would be in the interest of every national government remnant to make this happen. Soldiers who aren't worried about their families are less likely to desert.

After all, it wasn't until after Sherman's March to the Sea and the raising of South Carolina that the Army of Northern Virginia started to hemorrhage deserters. They went home not only to protect their families from the Union troops looting the Rebels' backfield, but also to help provide for their families during the famines that followed the economic devastation left in the Union Army's wake.

Of course, it is hard to imagine that MilGov or CivGov having the ability to keep the US Postal Service going... but you know... I gotta tell ya... I can't think of a more important service when it comes to keeping the nation from falling into regionalism.

Sure, you've got to have security, and the armed forces fill that role, but you've got to have communications beyond simply those of the government. Otherwise people are going to stop thinking about the country (or even the state) as a whole and end up thinking like Medieval peasants.

I can't imagine MilGov or CivGov having the resources for a postal service outside the military resupply convoys that move back and forth between unit cantonments. So I guess it's going to fall to private enterprise to fill this gap. Merchant convoys will most definitely be carrying what little mail is moving.

All references to David Brin's book (and the less successful movie) aside, a successful mail service would be an excellent bulwark against desertion.

A. Scott Glancy, President TCCorp, dba Pagan Publishing

[Raellus]

We had a bit of a discussion here a while back about the mail and how important it would be in preventing desertion. I tried to address the subject a bit in my essay too but I'm not really confident that I have the answers so I didn't go into much detail.

I think the Mil/CivGov schism would make a national/international mail service more difficult to resurrect. But I risk another thread-jacking with this.

EDIT: Found it!

http://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.php?t=790

[Legbreaker]

The "care package" idea I think would only work where the communications lines were relatively short and confirmation could reach the soldiers that their families were being looked after.

In a T2K, European environment, I'd say anything beyond a few dozen miles could be classified as out of reliable communication.

[sglancy12]

Thanks Raellus for the link to the Mail Thread.

So... on the subject of other armies... I've made some mention of the Soviets and Germans and even Brits... The French and Belgian Armies would suffer fairly normal rates of desertion on the grounds that there really is a life of comparative ease for them to slink off to. Although it's beyond me why you would forgo a regular paycheck, a functional mail system and access to government facilities (which are likely in slightly better shape than civilian ones in France) only to have the French Security Services on your tail for desertion when you aren't exactly having to fight anything more challenging than Dutch guerrillas and German refugees.

I'm presuming that any other NATO army not facing enemy forces on their home soil is going to be hemorrhaging troops as everyone heads off to look after their families and form local defense militias. The Pact forces will have this same problem but will be none-too-gentle when it comes to discouraging deserters. However, I think that making brutal examples of deserters is only going to encourage mutinies among truly desperate troops.

(I'm repeating myself now)

Just thought of another belligerent that is worth looking at. Mexico (per the canon) would have a pretty serious desertion problem on account of several factors.

1) Deserters can actually get home on foot.

2) With the Civil War going on, there will be strong political reasons for Pre-war army units to disintegrate and reform as civil war "banderas" loyal to one civil war faction or another. Units will declare for one side or another or disintegrate into factional warfare within the unit. Those units that turn on themselves will cause their troops to either seek out banderas that match their political loyalties, turn marauder, or make their way home to look after their families.

3) The chaos of the Civil War will endanger the lives of loved one back home, so deserters will be under even more pressure to return home and look after loved ones.

4) Those Mexican soldiers fighting in America may have soured on the "glorious cause" of returning the lands stolen by the "Colossus of the North" to Mexico. Abandoned by headquarters in America, cut off from resupply, forced to live off the land, many of these Mexican soldiers may just say "enough" and go back to Mexico.

Any other thoughts on Mexico and it's armed forces vis-a-vis the issue of desertion? How would Mexican units handle troops rejoining units? How would they punish attempted desertions or attempted mutinies?

A. Scott Glancy, President TCCorp, dba Pagan Publishing

[Marc]

Bon dia!

Here are some thoughts from one Western European point of view. Here, nationalities inside the legal state must be taken into account. It’s a day to day fact in the normal life of some European countries. Peaceful and non-peaceful tensions between nationalities and legal states exists in peace time. Tensions would grow up with the prewar scalation. And there’s a good chance that some kind of violent conflict would erupt with the war.

This could affect the number of desertions of the soldiers belonging to these nationalities. The use of the forced conscription option by the state can be the critical point. In most cases, nationalities would tend to disagree with the implication of the state in a foreign war. If conflict erupts between a nationality and the state, a good number of conscript and professional soldiers could choose to desert. This could be aggravated due to the reaction of the state against the nationality and the use of the army inside the state’s borders. As an example, in Catalunya, the forced conscription of Catalan soldiers to fight in the Spanish Army in Morocco started an uprising in 1909.

Another point is the capacity of administration to identify and act against deserters. After the nukes, few of them will have this capacity. In a lot of countries, people could blame the government for the destruction. “Look what have caused our implication in other’s war�. I’m pretty sure this will be the feeling in Spain or Italy, for example. People will not collaborate in reporting deserters. In some places, one self’s country will end in the borders of one self’s village. The deserters will be needed at home.

[sglancy12]

Originally Posted by Marc

Here are some thoughts from one Western European point of view. Here, nationalities inside the legal state must be taken into account. It’s a day to day fact in the normal life of some European countries. Peaceful and non-peaceful tensions between nationalities and legal states exists in peace time. Tensions would grow up with the prewar escalation. And there’s a good chance that some kind of violent conflict would erupt with the war.

This could affect the number of desertions of the soldiers belonging to these nationalities. The use of the forced conscription option by the state can be the critical point. In most cases, nationalities would tend to disagree with the implication of the state in a foreign war. If conflict erupts between a nationality and the state, a good number of conscript and professional soldiers could choose to desert. This could be aggravated due to the reaction of the state against the nationality and the use of the army inside the state’s borders. As an example, in Catalunya, the forced conscription of Catalan soldiers to fight in the Spanish Army in Morocco started an uprising in 1909.

I think Americans, and non-Europeans in general, tend to forget that even the so-called Nation-states of Western Europe are in fact patchworks of smaller nationalities sewn into a larger political entity. I'm not talking about the now-famous recently added Muslim immigrant minorities in Spain, France and Germany. I'm talking about ethnic minorities that have lived in Europe for centuries. Catalonia is an excellent example. Germany certainly is a patchwork of political states sewn together by Bismark... how much ethnic and national tension is there between Bavarians and Prussians? My friends in Germany were more likely to comment on divisions between "Osties" and the folks who'd grown up in the Federal German Republic.

For that matter, following the creation of the Dead Zone and the occupation of all areas west of the Rhine, where does the Dutch speaking population in Belgium come down on this issue? Are they Pro-France, Pro-Netherlands, or do they just support France's actions by maintaining their silence? Certainly I can see them hiding Flemish deserters from the Belgian Army. Would Flemish deserters join the Dutch resistance?

Originally Posted by Marc

Another point is the capacity of administration to identify and act against deserters. After the nukes, few of them will have this capacity. In a lot of countries, people could blame the government for the destruction. “Look what have caused our implication in other’s war�. I’m pretty sure this will be the feeling in Spain or Italy, for example. People will not collaborate in reporting deserters. In some places, one self’s country will end in the borders of one self’s village. The deserters will be needed at home.

Another excellent point. The tendency for folks to desert will depend on their likelihood of being turned in to the authorities once they get home. In the former Warsaw Pact countries there is a culture of informants that the Communists have nurtured for fifty years. So I imagine that your chances of getting turned in are pretty good... if the informant can find anyone to turn you in to. But I'm not so sure about Western Europe. Unless the newly returned deserter is causing trouble, where's the motivation to turn them in? The reward? Is there a bounty? Will the bounty be enough to offset the enemies the informant would make by turning in the deserter?


A. Scott Glancy, President TCCorp, dba Pagan Publishing

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Originally Posted by sglancy12

...Another excellent point. The tendency for folks to desert will depend on their likelihood of being turned in to the authorities once they get home. In the former Warsaw Pact countries there is a culture of informants that the Communists have nurtured for fifty years. So I imagine that your chances of getting turned in are pretty good... if the informant can find anyone to turn you in to. But I'm not so sure about Western Europe. Unless the newly returned deserter is causing trouble, where's the motivation to turn them in? The reward? Is there a bounty? Will the bounty be enough to offset the enemies the informant would make by turning in the deserter?


A. Scott Glancy, President TCCorp, dba Pagan Publishing

I'm reminded of the treatment of even petty criminals in the Soviet Union, everyone was encouraged to report on them and they were often forbidden to live or work in the major cities. Moscow had a number of communities made up of those exiled from the city or those forbidden to enter it for whatever reason. They lived in people's cellars, the tunnels under the city, abandoned buildings and so on all to avoid being seen and reported.

[B.T.]

This is a very interesting thread.

Some things to mention:
When in comes to the state of affairs in Germany, there are two things, that I would like to add to the discussion:
1. As Scott pointed out, there are some tensions between the "Ossies" (former GDR) and the "Wessies" (former FRG). Although it depends on the timeline of your choice, there will be a portion of former East German soldiers, who will eventually join their former allies (the Sovjets!).
But the majority of the East Germans were no friends of the Soviet Forces in Germany. Therefore the percentage of "Ossies" who really want communism back, would be very small.
I could imagine, that the deserters from East Germany would return to their hometowns and form some kind of militia.
The same would happen in the western part of the country: Deserters try to go back to their homes. Espacially in the western parts, that were occupied by French forces, this will lead to another problem (And to be honest: I'm glad that my PCs all stem from the US - I'm not quite shure, how some kind of partisan warfare in the Niederrhein-region would work!) - some kind of partisan warfare would certainly occure!
2. One thing should not be forgotten: Some of the regions with the highest density of population were nuked. Many of the soldiers from these areas have no place to return to!

But there is another point and I'm not shure, how to handle this. Many units will get smaller and smaller, like a snowball melting in the sun. When there is the time, where your company has a strength of something like 20 men, what will the CO do? Will he really try to find another unit and keep up the fighting? I can imagine, that a certain percentage of (former) soldiers will be amalgated by the civilian population. And if the guys are nice, we should not forget about the war widows in the area. If the mayor of a small Polish village can hold some skilled soldiers in his town, why not encouraging the young women or said widows, to try and have some kind of relationship with this nice guy from Germany, Sweden, Oklahoma, Britain or wherever?
I would think, that a not to small percentage of the soldiers, who know that their homes have been destroyed, could be bound to a new home in such a way.
The militias in disputed areas - in my Twilight World - have a percentage of soldiers, that do not stem from the region.

Well, just some thoughts, mostly from a German point of view. But I think, the same (or similar) processes could take place in various regions (Brits from Bristol, staying in Hannover or whatdoiknow ...).

I do not think, that deserters (if they behave!!!) would be reported in the Western states of Europe. But that just a guess.

[Legbreaker]

Originally Posted by B.T.

When there is the time, where your company has a strength of something like 20 men, what will the CO do? Will he really try to find another unit and keep up the fighting?

The great majority of units are still in contact and under the command of higher units. A Company comander for example is reporting to, supported by and under the orders of his Battalion. The Battalion is likewise subject to the Brigade and the Brigade to the Division.

There appears to be very few units out of contact of higher command which are Brigade sized or less. Therefore, I doubt the Company commander of his 20 men is going to have much choice in the matter - if his unit is incapable of carrying out it's assigned tasks due to lack of manpower, it will be amalgamated with other understrength units either by being broken up and it's members used as reinforcements, or having other units broken up and their members reassigned to it to bring up the numbers.

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

There appears to be very few units out of contact of higher command which are Brigade sized or less. Therefore, I doubt the Company commander of his 20 men is going to have much choice in the matter - if his unit is incapable of carrying out it's assigned tasks due to lack of manpower, it will be amalgamated with other understrength units either by being broken up and it's members used as reinforcements, or having other units broken up and their members reassigned to it to bring up the numbers.

Unless they desert en-masse. Is battalion or whatever going to send men after them? Maybe; maybe not. It depends on a number of circumstances. Could make for an interesting encounter, though. If the deserters somehow got away- and it seems like this could be more and more likely as the war wears on and everything, including the military chain of command breaks down- it seems perfectly reasonable that the bits or large chunks of the unit would integrate itself into a local community' militia force. Think of the Seven Samurai x3 or 4!

For example, in my T2K campaign, the experienced core of the Gora Kalwaria militia consists of Polish army deserters. There were also a couple of ex-NATO soldiers serving in the militia as well.

How many T2K parties (mostly NATO) settled down in some Polish or German ville and became the core of that settlement's defense force?

[Adm.Lee]

Two bits to throw in here. Two weeks ago, I was at a con, and discussing Eastern Europe. One guy told about his grandfather, who had been in the Austro-Hungarian army in WW1, somewhere out in Ukraina when everything collapsed in the summer of 1918. His unit, reduced by desertion, marched a lot, and then wintered over in some peasant village. They had been lugging a heavy MG all this time, at the captain's insistence. While there, they fought off numerous bandit, Red, White, Green attempts to forage the peasants' food stocks. The village elders pleaded with them to stick around as long as they wanted, but the guys all wanted to get back to their own homeland(s).

The lesson the narrator learned is that if one man has food, and another has a gun, the man with the gun will not go hungry.

Originally Posted by Raellus

How many T2K parties (mostly NATO) settled down in some Polish or German ville and became the core of that settlement's defense force?

I'm pretty sure I've told this before, but one of my players was pretty freaked out about a dream he had when I ran the Polish modules at Allegheny. He dreamed he was his character, and the party overnighted with a Polish widow and her kids in a shack. In the morning, the party was getting ready to leave, and he heard himself saying, "No, I'm staying here," which woke him up. He couldn't remember if the widow looked like his then-girlfriend, but I suspect she might have.

So, no I haven't run that (yet), but I think it could have plenty of possibilities. I still want to run Twilight:1918, for that matter.