Korean Pearl Handled Lugers
 

Haven't been on the forum too much lately, but this made me think of y'all (or "youse all" in my home accent).

Just finished reading The Last Stand of Fox Company: A True Story of U.S. Marines in Combat: By Bob Drury, Thomas Clavin

It was about a hard luck Marine company guarding a pass in North Korea which was vital to the withdrawal of Chosin Reservoir units. Good read.

Anyway, on page 133 it tells of 2 pearl handled lugers taken from a dying Chinese soldier. I guess you never really know where your BBQ guns came from (unless you really know :) ).

jack, I Can't see the photo?

Fixed it... I hope.

Jack

That works now... Thanks Jack.

That's risky and gentlemanly giving an enemy soldier a loaded pistol to end himself. You wouldn't do that in todays wars, you'd be shot.

And why didn't he simply use one of the Lugers?

I took the sentence to mean that Page shot the enemy soldier...

I did also.

Shooting.?
 

..Thats the way I read it also……the GI shot him…...

"Grace" - seldom mentioned outside of Combat Infantrymen & Jarheads & the occasional War Movie.
Usually dispensed with all available honor to enemy combatants who are already dying of their wounds,
but do not wish to dishonor themselves by succumbing to the pain and being "Un-manly".
Or to put it another way, you sort of act as their Kaishakunin for their Seppuku, if that helps.

Downside is you usually have to write a frickin report about it...Army lives for paperwork...
the memory you just compartmentalize & deal with later.

Probably out of ammo...

Or more completely..... "coup de grace":

Coup de grace*\ˌkü-də-ˈgräs\Function:*nounInflected Form(s):*plural*coups de grâce*or*coups de grace*\ˌkü-də-\Etymology: French*coup de grâce,*literally, stroke of mercy:* a deathblow or death shot administered to end the suffering of one mortally wounded*2*:* a decisive finishing blow, act, or event

This makes sense, but we shall never know, I guess.

"...obliged him with his sidearm." When I first read it I saw room for both takes on its exact meaning. Not very clear whichever, but definitely safer to be an angel of mercy than hand over a loaded pistol!

:soapbox:

If the guy was an enemy non-commissioned officer as indicated, he probably had value as an intelligence source no matter how badly he was wounded. He was given the easy way out of revealing what he knew. :eek: Not to mention that the guy who gave him a loaded pistol placed himself and the guy with him in mortal danger!

That is THIS old soldier's viewpoint. I would have done every thing I could to keep him alive until he could be interrogated by someone who could communicate with him.

What might be learned could easily have saved some American fighter's lives. I would have brought court martial charges against the guy who gave him a pistol for "aiding and abetting the enemy."

Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ)

ART. 104. AIDING THE ENEMY

Any person who--

(1) aids, or attempts to aid, the enemy with arms, ammunition, supplies, money, or other things; or

(2) without proper authority, knowingly harbors or protects or gives intelligence to or communicates or corresponds with or holds any intercourse with the enemy, either directly or indirectly;

shall suffer death or such other punishment as a court-martial or military commission may direct


(Get me started and see if I can stifle how I REALLY feel about such behavior!) :grr:

<RANT MODE OFF>

What was done MIGHT be mercy... but it was definitely STUPIDITY.

John, you are thinking like a soldier that was trained this way. WW2 and Korea the rules were there, but things were a bit different.

I am like you, trained to believe a certain way, however, if I have not walked in their shoes.... As a today example; the marines that got into trouble for urinating on dead bodies and then taking pictures, that goes against what we think, however, much worse was done in Vietnam, Korea and WW2 - especially to our folks.

Now, with ISIS, by all accounts is not an 'army' and they have no rules, therefore do we need to give them the typical rules of engagement?
Do we need to treat them with the geneva conventions? (military folks of course know the answer is 'yes' - although our gov't has gotten around the convention rules by keeping folks 'off-country' in Gitmo, etc....

Hard to say and I think I will lock this - not that that will stop you from posting after me :D

In combat we sometimes do things that don't scare us at the time (like walking where mines might be (heck, I didn't know mines were washed down there, but I caught helk later :D) -

or above where he handed a loaded weapon to let a soldier kill themself. But I tend to think it was written nice and the soldier helped a fellow soldier see the afterlife on a quicker pace...

Your sentiments are well founded, but taken in context I think this act is easier to understand (if not condoned):

At this point in the battle, there were already too many Chinese prisoners to be managed. Fox Company (down to <100 "effectives") was surrounded on three sides and outnumbered on the order of 7-10 to one. The only intelligence to be gained was perhaps more Chinese were coming. Fox was holding their position and keeping the pass open at all costs, that is what makes their feat so remarkable.

In addition, scattered among the hundreds of Chinese dead (many inside the perimeter) were wounded communists playing dead and taking out Marines as their last act. The aforementioned "coup de grace" became the order of the day and many wounded were dispatched.

I was not there, will not judge, but my gut says I would have little problem with it. All I can say is may God bless all souls, those who were delivered and those who punched the tickets.

Jack

I can see handing the soldier a loaded weapon to kill himself, albeit very dangerous - why I mentioned it. If you were to shoot him while wounded to execute him, this constitutes a war crime and you would be prosecuted as such - at least under todays military. If you see wounded enemy troops it is your duty to give them medical aid, after all friendly troops and civilians have been treated first - how it is taught.

Today's rules are based on yesterday's things that happened. I believe many rules and regulations and training were after Me Lai in Vietnam IMO.

Rules and regs were always there.

Incidental instances of all descriptions were always there as well.

Honor or ceremony a total BS concept. Seen it done, it is ugly and sometimes takes more than one shot.
Putting the guy out of his misery is most likely.

Whole story sounds shaky to me.

I had a Supervisor, a young guy just back from the first Gulf War. He suffered PTSD to the point that it manifested physical illnesses. He began missing too much work due to it and eventually left on a medical retirement. We shared an office, and often had private conversations about our military experiences.

Tony confided in me that while he was with his Forward Scout Recon. unit they captured a Shell Oil office building taken over by Saddam's Republican Guard. They captured about a dozen of them. An Intelligence Officer arrived to investigate. A Colonial who out ranked his Commanding Officer ordered them to kill the prisoners.

When his CO countermanded the order, the Colonial relieved him of Command and re-issued the order. He said that he and a couple of other soldiers were ordered to shoot them.
He said it had haunted him day and night every since, and was the cause of his PTSD.