Russia said a battalion of Ukrainian prisoners of war, or POWs, would soon be sent to the front lines to fight against their own country, state media reported.
State media said troops had taken an oath of allegiance, but the move could still be a violation of international laws concerning warfare. It also raises questions about the need to use POWs, in particular about the state and quality of Russia’s forces as they suffer a high number of casualties on the battlefield.
On November 7, the Russian state media outlet RIA Novosti said Ukrainian POWs in the “Bogdan Khmelnitsky” battalion swore an oath of allegiance to Russia and would soon deploy into battle. The outlet had said in late October that Russian authorities were planning to send the group — described as a battalion including about 70 prisoners from various penal colonies — to the front lines and that they were conducting relevant training in preparation.
A small decently trained squad who has a plan to obliterate a group of forced and most likely untrained group with less lethal weapons is going to absolutely destroy that untrained group as has been shown multiple times in history. Russia is a common example!
Untrained? They’re prisoners of war, though… As in, they were formerly Ukrainian soldiers. What’s to stop those PoWs from just immediately turning on this supposed “death squad” within their ranks at the first opportunity, as I’m guessing they would greatly outnumber their wardens.
Regardless, for all we know, these PoWs really could have turned coat. Guess time will tell.
Bold of you to assume prisoners of war always means soldiers and not any men who gave the slightest resistance to Russian occupation.
Not really, just means more targets.
Yeah, I guess more targets wouldn’t make things difficult in the heat of battle.
Especially if these targets are shooting back at you.
You have no idea how the modern battlefield works. It is nothing like call of duty with a vast battlefield with a plethora of targets.
It is a hectic blend of small engagements mainly won through surprise and tactics and having a few more targets that you know the location of compared to the overwhelming number of possible surprises isn’t that big of a change.
Sounds like you don’t understand how any battlefield works.
Less lethal? Are they giving out tasers and bean bag guns? What about pepper spray?
Seriously there are few controls and the machine gunning of retreating troops a la ww2 isn’t exactly an easy thing to do in modern warfare.
Not less lethal like police equipment, less lethal like a knife or barely functioning rifle with few bullets vs a light machine gun with plenty of ammunition.
The conscripts are probably unarmed the majority of the time, and poorly armed when thrown into the meat grinder while the leadership will always be well equipped and organized to quickly put down any resistance by conscripts.
You realise that the condition of the weapon doesn’t change it’s lethality?
A rifle capable of firing a round is lethal, full stop.
A knife even when dull is lethal (and more destructive to the person stabbed).
It sounds like you don’t understand how weapons work.
Your post is bad and you should feel bad.
Lol, you’re the one who doesn’t seem to understand how weapons work, so I’ll just continue on with my day.
That’s The Most Dangerous Game, not “a battalion fighting against their own country”.