[Sailorsam]

What causes armies to lose the will to fight? Here's what history tells us -- and what Putin may soon find out | CNN

History is full of examples of dispirited armies that "quiet quit" — stopped attacking the enemy and essentially disengaged from battle. Here's why that happens, and what it could mean for the weary Russian army in Ukraine.

www.cnn.com

There are moments throughout history where entire armies suddenly stop fighting, though they are evenly matched or even numerically superior to their enemy.

What causes armies to lose the will to fight? And how might that play out with the Russian army in Ukraine?

This is the question that CNN asked combat veterans and military historians. While history is full of embattled armies like the Imperial Japanese Army in World War II, which fought with ferocious intensity even though they knew they would not win, it also records other armies that “quiet quit” — stopped attacking the enemy or did the bare minimum to stay alive.

Soldiers are very groupthink. at some point they collectively conclude that they can't win, or that it's not worth it, and they quit. We've seen some of this in Ukraine by the Russian army.

anyone with knowledge of? insight?

(It's kind of amusing, and irritating, to see today's journalists talk of military matters. Collectively they hate the military and totally don't understand it.)

 

[Vinegar Joe]

What causes armies to lose the will to fight? Here's what history tells us -- and what Putin may soon find out | CNN

History is full of examples of dispirited armies that "quiet quit" — stopped attacking the enemy and essentially disengaged from battle. Here's why that happens, and what it could mean for the weary Russian army in Ukraine.

www.cnn.com

There are moments throughout history where entire armies suddenly stop fighting, though they are evenly matched or even numerically superior to their enemy.

What causes armies to lose the will to fight? And how might that play out with the Russian army in Ukraine?

This is the question that CNN asked combat veterans and military historians. While history is full of embattled armies like the Imperial Japanese Army in World War II, which fought with ferocious intensity even though they knew they would not win, it also records other armies that “quiet quit” — stopped attacking the enemy or did the bare minimum to stay alive.

Soldiers are very groupthink. at some point they collectively conclude that they can't win, or that it's not worth it, and they quit. We've seen some of this in Ukraine by the Russian army.

anyone with knowledge of? insight?

(It's kind of amusing, and irritating, to see today's journalists talk of military matters. Collectively they hate the military and totally don't understand it.)

Sam,

I have some knowledge and my insight not for now.

During the Vietnam War, I served in Army dicision with the entire mix of people, volunteers, the drafted, the careerists, the "economic refugees", etc.

It was common for someone to say "I hope we [US] lose.

At morning briefing while sitting in dirt a typical announcement would be eg "Last night Lt Jones and Sgt KIA (killed in action). Someone would quietly say "Good". Some would mouth the words "You're next". A couple could always be seen getting their hands ready to clap.

They did not have the will to fight.

 

[Forrest Mosby]

If I were( currently) serving under Brandon, Id quit

 

[DKR]

I guess it depends on the "Army".

An army of unwilling conscripts is a losing proposition to begin with.

One need only look at:

The many Arab countries' vs IDF battles. The IDF just doesn't quit - they simply cannot. (see Valley of Tears - Wikipedia )

US vs Iraq (Gulf Wars 1.0) many Iraqis could not wait to surrender - again, unwilling conscripts, badly trained (if trained at all) poorly equipped and nearly zero logistical support.
-- The Commander of the US 101st Airborne was asked by a 'reporter' how well green US troops would deal with the "hardened Iraqi veterans"
"We will murder them" - it is to his credit that he didn't slap the SOB asking the question. (See also history on unit - ((http://www.517prct.org/documents/82nd_airborne_poster/82d_poster_photo.gif)

Things that really matter:
Training at the individual and unit level
Logistics support - initial and ongoing
Unit cohesion (+ unit history as noted above)
A working Command structure.
"A reason to fight":

Russia has none of these and has had to resort to hiring mercenaries, with little positive effect.

 

[swamp hodag]

The end of The Soviet Union happened when the army refused to fire on its own people. The coup attempt failed because the army joined the people in the name of Russia. I remember watching it and being amazed at the courage of the people facing the tanks near Parliament. We are part of history, and at that moment the whole world felt it. The Soviet Union fell because the people no longer believed in it.

 

[ralfy]

It's probably the opposite of groupthink.

 

[Arch Stanton]

Propaganda nonsense by the Clinton News Network

 

[SeaBeeDaddy]

It's probably the opposite of groupthink.

Or just another variant of it.

 

[greyguy]

It’s all about leadership. Of course there are other factors but if, for example, you take the Russians. They have Sergeants but not like in the Army or Marine Corps etc. The Russian Sgts are slightly better trained than the recruits and virtually none of them has any idea what’s going on in the battlefield. Contrast that with our NCOs and SNCOs. They know what’s going on, they lead their troops, they train them, they fight with them. Our officers- the smart ones anyway- let the S/NCOs do their thing. They trust them.
Russian Officers are the only ones TRUSTED to handle technical gear and do repairs etc. While in the US Mil snuffies are trusted to handle million dollar systems. The Russian recruit is literally beaten into submission. Who’s gonna follow a guy who beats you constantly? Selfless leadership by American NCOs is what wins battles. Incredible bravery witnessed by your troops is what spurs them on. Not stupid stuff like “Let’s take this hill! Ummm you guys go first!”

 

[Mr. Sockpuppet]

I've met and interviewed many Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Coasties, and Marines who have stated that they left after their contract expired, due to implementations of unpopular policies under Clinton and Obama. This is directly attributable to morale.

Unfortunately, I foresee the Biden Administration continuing the current Democrat trend. Go figure.

I don't have any numbers on retention, but here are some disturbing numbers on recruitment for fiscal year 2022:

• The Army has only met 70% of its recruitment..
• The Air Force met their recruitment goals, but only after increasing enlistment incentive bonuses by $22 million.
• The Marine Corps had was forced to lower their recruitment goals.
• The Navy has met this fiscal year's recruitment goals, though is expecting to fall short of E Reservists, and both WOs and Os for both Active Navy and Reserves.

 

[Mr. Sockpuppet]

...US vs Iraq...

Iraqi soldiers were such a mess, that many surrendered to TV News crews.

 

[charliemeyer007]

Didn't Japan have a few hold outs for like 40 years after the war?
What about the werewolf's and SS after the war?

Brainwashing works, maybe when it fails, people quit.

 

[Mr. Sockpuppet]

Didn't Japan have a few hold outs for like 40 years after the war?

They were/are termed as Japanese holdouts. Most were not aware of the Japanese surrender, others were dubious of the news. The last holdout surrendered in the mid 70s.

I'm sure that there were a few that continued to engage armed combat because they were simply ideologues, but those are not considered holdouts.

The reasoning for the above mentioned individuals, was not "brainwashing," but rather the cultural aspect of loyalty to their leadership.

What about the werewolf's and SS after the war?

There were German troops that were informed and continued to fight as long as four months after Germany's surrender.

Brainwashing works, maybe when it fails, people quit.

People remain or quit for any number of reasons, and brainwashing does work both ways. That is why PsyOps are so effective.

 

[Vinegar Joe]

Didn't Japan have a few hold outs for like 40 years after the war?
What about the werewolf's and SS after the war?

Brainwashing works, maybe when it fails, people quit.

Charlie,

Yes.

I remember when a Japanese soldier was "discovered" - not really a capture; forgot circumstances when discovered.

This was around Agana, Guam I think.

 

[PaulGray]

Being deployed isn't the problem for UK forces, sort of, but when they come home to SSDD, or get effectively sacked by some BS strategic defence review, the mood grows to put in their PVR (Premature Voluntary Release) and walk out under their timetable. Especially those with families who are getting tired with the constant deployment of their serving parent.

Besides, their trade training does make some highly employable and the money plus working conditions are WAY BETTER without the hassle of SSDD military life.

 

[ralfy]

Or just another variant of it.

Groupthink is what keeps a military force together, i.e., following orders without question, which is the opposite of quitting. When some start thinking of quitting, then that's driven by individual thought, which is the opposite of groupthink. Similarly, individual thought takes place when one is persuaded to quit.

 

[Theflyingsmurf]

Iraqi soldiers were such a mess, that many surrendered to TV News crews.

Mobile support units often literally ran into surrendering Iraqis.

It was so bad we often just kept driving since we weren't equipped to deal with prisoners.

 

[Theflyingsmurf]

I think education plays a pretty big role here myself. It's not uncommon for even enlisted folks in the US armed services to either have some college or be actively taking classes while serving.

A lot of foreign troops I encountered had little education. Many couldn't read.

Also, how your treated is important too. While the chow wasn't always the best I NEVER went hungry. Nor did I ever have any problems getting medical or dental when needed. My basic needs were always met.

Failure to do those things will always result in forces that won't fight. And why should they?

 

[SeaBeeDaddy]

Groupthink is what keeps a military force together, i.e., following orders without question, which is the opposite of quitting. When some start thinking of quitting, then that's driven by individual thought, which is the opposite of groupthink. Similarly, individual thought takes place when one is persuaded to quit.

Is that opinion based on experience or what you think happens in the military? I think there is many more variables than just quit/stay. Based on decades of personal experience.

 

[ralfy]

Is that opinion based on experience or what you think happens in the military? I think there is many more variables than just quit/stay. Based on decades of personal experience.

I'm referring to following orders vs. "quiet quit".

I don't care for references to personal experience, as that can't be proven in forums where ID verification isn't needed for registering.