Ruses de Guerre


In the thread Disappointing battle sequence...
captmagenta (Thu Dec 15 2005 commented and then wrote
BTW: trivia: anyone know why it was important for Steiner to insist the Paratroopers have their German Uniforms under the british outfits?
and laszlozoltan (Sat Dec 24 2005 ) replied
"According to the Geneva conventions, a soldier wearing either civilian or the military uniform of another country may be considered a spy and is not subject to the rules of war protecting the rights of soldiers who surrender or are captured; this may mean execution, torture, denial of medical aid, food etc.
At least since the Napoleonic wars wearing the uniform of another country was a death sentence if captured."

I thought these posts were well worth promoting to a thread in their own right. Laszlotoltan has stated the legal principle accurately. I would just like to remind everyone of the time-honoured naval practise of flying "false colours" that is, flags of a country not your own, in order to get close to the enemy and take them by surprise. It was held legitimate if one's own colours were run up before firing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruse_de_guerre is an interesting article concerning this and other subterfuges.

especially this
"German commando Otto Skorzeny led troops wearing American uniforms behind the American lines during the Battle of the Bulge. Skorzeny later reported that he was told by experts in military law that wearing the American uniforms was a defensible ruse de guerre, provided his troops took off their American uniforms, and put on German uniforms, prior to firing their weapons. Skorzeny was acquitted by a United States military court in Dachau in 1947, after his defense counsel argued that the "wearing of American uniforms was a legitimate ruse of war for espionage and sabotage" as described by The New York Times.[5]"

I have read a book about the German Brandenburg Division, which was the WW2 equivalent to Special Forces, which said that they used this tactic from the beginning of WW2, and even before it had officially started. A preferred ruse was to wear headgear and overcoats of the enemy, over the top of german uniforms. This was most effective in semi-darkness or fog. They practised quickly dropping the disguise if they had to open fire. Acording to Skorzeny's biography, Commando Extraordinary, he preferred NOT to fire if possible, so that the trick could be repeated, without alerting other enemy nearby.

They operated just inside the laws of war if they could, and would go outside them if the mission was important enough.

reply

Interesting on the history of false flags, but I think the real answer in terms of this movie is that they wanted the water wheel scene for the drama.

They could have had the townspeople find out who was in their midst in another way, but I think they wanted both the scene and the irony from the fact that it came about through a heroic act for the English girl by the soldier who died.

reply

I agree totally, and that is why I wanted to make the point that the drama is not contrived, but firmly based on facts.

I have now thought of another movie about The Battle of the Bulge, where some german soldiers were captured, and they were wearing white capes over their uniforms, for camouflage in the snow. The americans confiscated the capes and used them themselves. It could be argued that they were then in the enemy's uniform, or part of it.

I would then argue that the capes had no badges or lettering or distinctive shape that made them recognizable as german.

cheers

reply

It seems to be a prop. Nobody in their right minds would tolerate such a dangerous unprotected device on a public road.

reply