
The Example of Private Slovik (1987) - smacktoward
https://www.americanheritage.com/example-private-slovik
======
PaulAJ
The military has one overriding priority: that when an officer says "charge"
the men charge. If that doesn't happen you don't have an army, just a bunch of
people holding guns. __Everything __is subservient to that one priority.
Justice, fairness, honour, life, all are irrelevant except to the extent that
they serve that priority.

Slovik's death was one part of maintaining that discipline. Everyone in the
army had to _know_ that if they walked away they would be shot, and shooting
Slovik showed that the army was serious about it.

But once a retreat turns into a rout that is no longer the case; assuming the
general manages to rally the army and re-establish discipline there is no
point in shooting half the remaining troops. Maybe he shoots a few of ones who
left early, just to make the point, but mostly he has to carry on with what he
has got.

------
baybal2
An argument about Slovik's case that was not mentioned: were the judges on the
court martial themselves afraid of getting court martialed for being lenient.

I only read a single account in a publication from sixties, allegedly from one
of those judges who was the career barrister, and it was allegedly a
confession written in his last will.

~~~
trhway
reminded me of
[https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0050825/](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0050825/)
, especially when it comes to the kangaroo court of military justice. Great
movie by Kubrik with Kirk Douglas.

~~~
5555624
Also, "The Execution of Private Slovik"
([https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0071477/](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0071477/))
starring Martin Sheen.

------
baybal2
Ask yourself a question, what would happen if allies shot every deserter and
dereliction of duty offender?

The death count will go into hundreds of thousands, a far from small part of
the whole allied force.

Soviets, on other hands, possibly executed close to a million of own troops,
_including generals,_ but it did not stop the extreme desertion rates.

~~~
myst
What is your data source of the Soviets executing millions of own troops? Just
curious.

~~~
ncmncm
The attitude in USSR at the time was that anyone, and any activity, not
actively advancing the interests of the Party and the Revolution was not just
useless, but actively harmful: mercy, justice, humanity included. I.e.,
showing evidence of concern for any of those was to demonstrate divided
loyalty.

It was very dangerous to suggest not exterminating any person or group.
Eagerness was evidence of commitment. Everybody needed to provide such
concrete evidence of commitment, or be labeled a class enemy.

------
safanycom
I am struck by similarities between this and L'Etranger

A matter of fact trial and execution

------
doctor_eval
As if there wasn’t already enough death in that god forsaken war.

~~~
ashleyn
That "god forsaken war" was both started by, and ended, white fascism in
Europe. I can name you plenty of examples of "bullshit wars." The Allies'
effort in WW2 was a noble fight.

~~~
doctor_eval
The American war, which the OP is actually about, was arguably a fight against
Japanese aggression in the Pacific, and arguably caused by a US blockade
targeting oil imports to Japan. The entry of the US into the European war
happened well after the rest of the allies had been fighting their hearts out
for years.

My point however was the killing of a person by their own government during a
time of war. This guy could have gone on to do all sorts of things to support
the effort. He self reported his own desertion. Killing him was sick.

And you can contradict me all you like, but the whole article is about how the
people that actually made the decision and had it carried out, regret it.

