# Why aren't Iraqi soldiers allowed to surrender? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [March 18, 2003, 5:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-iraqi-soldiers-allowed-to-surrender/162317 "2003-03-18T17:26:20Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![ZenBeam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/3ab097/32.png) [@ZenBeam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ZenBeam)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2003, 10:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-iraqi-soldiers-allowed-to-surrender/162317/21 "2003-03-18T22:30:30Z")
> [@](#): > > Yes, they’re being asked to surrender, but not until the war actually starts. For purposes of surrendering, does the war start when the 48 hours is up, or when? ---
**Author:** ![catdog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/c6cbf5/32.png) [@catdog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/catdog)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2003, 11:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-iraqi-soldiers-allowed-to-surrender/162317/22 "2003-03-18T23:32:02Z")
WAG here, but would they have to treat them differently (special, or perhaps better)if they were defectors vs. POW’s? ---
**Author:** ![Bongmaster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Bongmaster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bongmaster)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2003, 1:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-iraqi-soldiers-allowed-to-surrender/162317/23 "2003-03-19T01:23:43Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by ZenBeam \* > \*\*For purposes of surrendering, does the war start when the 48 hours is up, or when? \*\* Bush mentioned “A time and place of our choosing.” ---
**Author:** ![scr4](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/59ef9b/32.png) [@scr4](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/scr4)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2003, 1:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-iraqi-soldiers-allowed-to-surrender/162317/24 "2003-03-19T01:26:06Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by catdog \* > \*\*WAG here, but would they have to treat them differently (special, or perhaps better)if they were defectors vs. POW’s? \*\* I was wondering that too. And why can’t they defect? ---
**Author:** ![jackelope](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/a6a055/32.png) [@jackelope](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jackelope)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2003, 1:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-iraqi-soldiers-allowed-to-surrender/162317/25 "2003-03-19T01:33:25Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Gorsnak \* > **Would you care to provide a link? I’ve searched CNN’s site backwards and forwards, and there’s nothing there that I can see.** Here’s a story from a local (i.e., Memphian) who’s over there and has been sending e-mails back home to the school where he’s a music teacher: [http://www.gomemphis.com/mca/america\_at\_war/article/0,1426,MCA\_945\_1815292,00.html](http://www.gomemphis.com/mca/america_at_war/article/0,1426,MCA_945_1815292,00.html) > [@](#): > > Battaly relates incidents like one in which a group of British soldiers near his camp briefly ventured across the border, only to find Iraqi soldiers running toward them trying to surrender. > > “The Brits had to turn coat and run to keep from starting an international incident. I guess the Iraqi soldiers will just have to wait and surrender some other day.” ---
**Author:** ![KidCharlemagne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed8c4c/32.png) [@KidCharlemagne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KidCharlemagne)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2003, 1:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-iraqi-soldiers-allowed-to-surrender/162317/26 "2003-03-19T01:56:41Z")
The obvious difference between surrender and defection is that the former implies that there is a war. I wouldn’t have been surprised if they were taken into custody had they simply chosen the right word. ---
**Author:** ![Essured](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/278dde/32.png) [@Essured](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Essured)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2003, 2:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-iraqi-soldiers-allowed-to-surrender/162317/27 "2003-03-19T02:06:14Z")
Does ‘defect’ imply leaving the country ? Maybe they want to stay in Iraq ? ---
**Author:** ![djbdjb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a87d85/32.png) [@djbdjb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/djbdjb)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2003, 6:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-iraqi-soldiers-allowed-to-surrender/162317/28 "2003-03-19T06:30:52Z")
I’m wondering if there are Iraqi border guards in any kind of entry point close to the northern border of Kuwait (Hi! Where are you coming from? Bringing in any fresh fruit? Welcome to Iraq.) As a huge bunch of armored vehicles starts to get in line to go into the little toll booth, I think the guards should wander south for a little get-to-know-you visit and to make “arrangements” ---
**Author:** ![HPL](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/3da27b/32.png) [@HPL](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HPL)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2003, 7:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-iraqi-soldiers-allowed-to-surrender/162317/29 "2003-03-19T07:28:31Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by djbdjb \* > \*\*I’m wondering if there are Iraqi border guards in any kind of entry point close to the northern border of Kuwait (Hi! Where are you coming from? Bringing in any fresh fruit? Welcome to Iraq.) > > As a huge bunch of armored vehicles starts to get in line to go into the little toll booth, I think the guards should wander south for a little get-to-know-you visit and to make “arrangements” \*\* Are they gonna ask for a bunch of dimes? ---
**Author:** ![sjc](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e5b9ba/32.png) [@sjc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sjc)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2003, 7:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-iraqi-soldiers-allowed-to-surrender/162317/30 "2003-03-19T07:53:32Z")
I’m a bit skeptical of these reports. Though to be fair these are the first I’ve heard of them and I haven’t been following the news closely enough anyway. It just makes sense that this could be propaganda. Maybe not even explicit, but just a false story circulating among soldiers that got picked up by the news. The US and coalition forces will definitely be using propaganda in the war.\* Saying that some soldiers tried to defect would make Saddam Hussein and other Iraqis in charge suspicious of their own troops. Provided that they believe it. And if they don’t it’s no skin off our nose, it still boosts our morale because we think the Iraqis want to surrender. Having said that, I’m totally willing to be convinced the stories are true. The whole “not yet at war, can’t take prisoners of war” theory seems plausible enough to me, but that isn’t a reason for me to believe it, but rather a reason for me to not disbelieve it. \*I suppose this is debateable, but propaganda is a part of modern war and I’ve seen plenty of examples of propaganda by the US reported in the New York Times and other reputable sources. They even wanted to make an Office of Strategic Information if I remember correctly. ---
**Author:** ![sjc](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e5b9ba/32.png) [@sjc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sjc)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2003, 8:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-iraqi-soldiers-allowed-to-surrender/162317/31 "2003-03-19T08:08:55Z")
Just checked [CNN.com](http://CNN.com). I typed “surrender” and found this > [@](#): > > WASHINGTON (CNN) – U.S. officials told CNN Wednesday that “secret surrender” negotiations have begun with key Iraqi military officials in hopes some military units will not fight U.S. and coalition forces should there be a war. > > \ > The United States already has a widely publicized public effort to encourage surrender by the Iraqi military that includes dropping hundreds of thousands of leaflets with specific instructions on how to position units so they are not hostile, radio broadcasts with similar messages, and e-mails encouraging commanders to defect. Didn’t see anything on attempts to surrender by Iraqi soldiers though. ---
**Author:** ![jacksen9](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ce73a5/32.png) [@jacksen9](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jacksen9)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2003, 10:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-iraqi-soldiers-allowed-to-surrender/162317/32 "2003-03-19T10:38:55Z")
What happened to the soldiers that surrendered during the Gulf War? I mean, did they end up having to go home and “face the music”? ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2003, 10:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-iraqi-soldiers-allowed-to-surrender/162317/33 "2003-03-19T10:50:39Z")
I wouldn’t consider CNN to be a good or reliable source. I already gave one quote above from Fox News. Also, I found mention of the report in today’s online Washington Post. It was easy to find through Google News. I do know the answer to when the war begins because I saw that on the news yesterday. It begins when President Bush signs an order instructing the Secretary of Defense to act. ---
**Author:** ![KidCharlemagne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed8c4c/32.png) [@KidCharlemagne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KidCharlemagne)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2003, 1:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-iraqi-soldiers-allowed-to-surrender/162317/34 "2003-03-19T13:27:04Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Libertarian \* > \*\*I wouldn’t consider CNN to be a good or reliable source. I already gave one quote above from Fox News. \*\* I’m with you on CNN. Wolf Blitzer can’t even fake a decent facade of objectivity. But Fox? They should call that channel “A Current Affair 24/7.” ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Slant](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/c57346/32.png) [@Mr.Slant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Slant)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2003, 1:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-iraqi-soldiers-allowed-to-surrender/162317/35 "2003-03-19T13:35:01Z")
This morning, Fox News was saying that we’ll be accomodating surrenders by disarming the soldiers, except that officers will be permitted to retain sidearms, and _LEAVING THE SURRENDERING FORCES IN THEIR BUNKERS_. I couldn’t believe what I heard, but I guess it’ll save us the hassle of building POW camps. ---
**Author:** ![Philster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/13edae/32.png) [@Philster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Philster)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2003, 1:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-iraqi-soldiers-allowed-to-surrender/162317/36 "2003-03-19T13:50:21Z")
It’s safe to believe that Iraqis have tried to surrender. Also, I’ve seen major outlets carry similar stories. As for handling surrenders/prisoners: Many will be disarmed and sent away with instructions. Resisting troops forced to give up will be POWs. Can’t have either until a conflict starts. Also, there has been satellite phone contact with Iraqi commandors to organize surrenders already. ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2003, 2:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-iraqi-soldiers-allowed-to-surrender/162317/37 "2003-03-19T14:09:11Z")
Huh. Another possible reason for not accepting preemptive surrenders _IF THEY WERE TRYING TO_ would be the risk that the positions they abandon would then be filled by better-motivated replacements: the only way to avoid that would be to indeed walk in and start taking Iraqi positions… and that means we then operate _on the Iraqi commanders’ schedule_ rather than ours. Heck, that would be itself suspect of being a tactical move on Saddam’s part: slow them down with waves of disorderly defections and refugees. And we definitely want to be sure those we agree to “leave alone” at their bases are thoroughly disarmed. ---
**Author:** ![Gorsnak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gorsnak/32/7587_2.png) [@Gorsnak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gorsnak)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2003, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-iraqi-soldiers-allowed-to-surrender/162317/38 "2003-03-19T17:57:46Z")
NYT’s banner headline at the moment is a report of 15 Iraqi soldiers actually surrendering, and being accepted, it being noted that they are technically deserters and not yet POWs as hostilities have not commenced. [They are believed to be the first Iraqis to have surrendered](http://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/19/international/middleeast/19TROO.html), (free registration required - if you don’t like handing out your demographic info, give them a throwaway hotmail address and say your zip code’s 90210 :)) Many of the details of the story don’t fit real well with the earlier reports, but that could be just a sign that the army had a strong hand in how this story came to light, and was trying to suppress the earlier events, though to what end I have no idea. I’ve begun wondering if mass surrender of frontline troops might actually be a plan on Saddam’s part, on the theory that a surrendering troop will slow down US forces more than one who tries to fight in the open desert. And as a US officer, I’d be concerned about my troops beginning to underestimate the opponent - something which is just begging to get your face kicked in. Hopefully American troops are too professional to fall for that. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2003, 6:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-iraqi-soldiers-allowed-to-surrender/162317/39 "2003-03-19T18:11:20Z")
Well, there may be the added element that if Iraq’s army is shown to be completely unwilling to fight, it would suggest IRaq does not, in fact, pose a threat, and hence thaat the war isn’t justified. It’s in the interest of Washington that Iraq seem at least mildly threatening, n’est-ce pas? If that sounds like a GD post, my apologies; it’s just a suggested reason. I don’t think the Allies would look good if they attacked after half the Iraqi Army gave up before the shooting started. Another possibility is that the Allies would rather not have guys executed on their behalf. A soldier who surrenders when attacked, because fighting has become hopeless, is still a soldier. A soldier who surrenders before the war even starts is, technically, a traitor. If these guys are taken prisoner AFTER the war starts they’ll be okay, in all likelihood, but if they were caught afterwards having deserted it’s possible they could be considered traitors. **Gorsnak,** the same though occurred to me today; what if the frontline troops are being deliberately set up to offer no resistance and walk quietly into surrender, and then WHAM, you hit the real resistance around Basra and Baghdad, guys dug in with tanks and heavy guns? Perhaps the Allies are being cautious. ---
**Author:** ![Dogface](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9d8465/32.png) [@Dogface](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dogface)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2003, 6:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-iraqi-soldiers-allowed-to-surrender/162317/40 "2003-03-19T18:13:02Z")
Right now, they would be considered “defectors”, not POWs. If you round up a bunch of POWs, even though they cooperate very nicely, it’s permitted to impose certain security measures upon them, in case there are any sleepers mixed in. One is usually supposed to treat “defectors” with more deference. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-iraqi-soldiers-allowed-to-surrender/162317.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-iraqi-soldiers-allowed-to-surrender/162317.md?page=3)