3 ms·

i wonder, had Prigoshin and his Wagner group marched all the way to the Kremlin, how things would have changed. I also wonder how he didn't expect to be murde

i wonder, had Prigoshin and his Wagner group marched all the way to the Kremlin, how things would have changed. I also wonder how he didn't expect to be murdered in some insidious fashion, since mobsters are gonna mobster.

jjtheblunt 8mo ago
Having read the entire article, I also wonder how the soldiers let commanders execute fellow soldiers? That's got to take some serious psychological breakdown to not pull a sidearm and shoot the corrupt commander.
- Nextgrid 8mo ago
  > not pull a sidearm and shoot the corrupt commander Wouldn't you just get "zeroed" by the upstream commander or court-martialed and sentenced to a gulag?
- cheeseomlit 8mo ago
  What would be your next move after shooting your commanding officer? You're a dead man yourself after that. Possibly even shot by your fellow soldiers who did drink the kool-aid. And your family back home would probably face consequences as well. I wondered the same thing when reading about WW1 where soldiers were ordered to charge at enemy trenches and they'd predictably get mowed down immediately, then the officer would send the next group out. I can't help but think 'just shoot him', but it's a lot different actually being in that situation vs. reading about it
  - expedition32 8mo ago
    Humans are social animals- in prehistoric times that meant charging an angry mammoth together in the 21st century it means charging a machine gun nest. Can't fight your programming.
    - deleted 8mo ago
      [deleted]
- estimator7292 8mo ago
  Fear of being executed, probably. Russia has not historically been friendly to whistle blowing.
  - IAmBroom 8mo ago
    The US would execute such a soldier... after a long, drawn-out appeals process lasting years. And a decade later some journalist might find damning evidence that the soldier was justified.
    - jjtheblunt 8mo ago
      Are there examples where the US did such? I went looking after your comment landed, and didn't find current examples.
- yetihehe 8mo ago
  From other articles I've read: the commanders have their own bodyguards and soldiers get their weapons only when actually sent to front. Also, there are castes of soldiers. Those who are cannon-fodder are sometimes even brought in handcuffs (there are even videos of this).
cedws 8mo ago
I’ve always wondered what made him turn around. Threatened his family? Was Prigozhin a family man?
- tartuffe78 8mo ago
  Probably just realized he didn't want/couldn't lead a military dictatorship, which probably would've been his only option at that point.
  - squidbeak 8mo ago
    If Wagner's rapturous welcome in Rostov was typical elsewhere, he wouldn't have needed to run a military dictatorship. He seemed to lose his nerve after his call with Lukashenko. It's tough to imagine it being anything other than a threat to his family, in which case it was a schoolboy error to fail to secure them before launching the rebellion.
    - whattheheckheck 8mo ago
      And then still gets blown up in a helicopter

jjtheblunt 8mo ago

Having read the entire article, I also wonder how the soldiers let commanders execute fellow soldiers? That's got to take some serious psychological breakdown to not pull a sidearm and shoot the corrupt commander.

Nextgrid 8mo ago
> not pull a sidearm and shoot the corrupt commander Wouldn't you just get "zeroed" by the upstream commander or court-martialed and sentenced to a gulag?
cheeseomlit 8mo ago
What would be your next move after shooting your commanding officer? You're a dead man yourself after that. Possibly even shot by your fellow soldiers who did drink the kool-aid. And your family back home would probably face consequences as well. I wondered the same thing when reading about WW1 where soldiers were ordered to charge at enemy trenches and they'd predictably get mowed down immediately, then the officer would send the next group out. I can't help but think 'just shoot him', but it's a lot different actually being in that situation vs. reading about it
- expedition32 8mo ago
  Humans are social animals- in prehistoric times that meant charging an angry mammoth together in the 21st century it means charging a machine gun nest. Can't fight your programming.
  - deleted 8mo ago
    [deleted]
estimator7292 8mo ago
Fear of being executed, probably. Russia has not historically been friendly to whistle blowing.
- IAmBroom 8mo ago
  The US would execute such a soldier... after a long, drawn-out appeals process lasting years. And a decade later some journalist might find damning evidence that the soldier was justified.
  - jjtheblunt 8mo ago
    Are there examples where the US did such? I went looking after your comment landed, and didn't find current examples.
yetihehe 8mo ago
From other articles I've read: the commanders have their own bodyguards and soldiers get their weapons only when actually sent to front. Also, there are castes of soldiers. Those who are cannon-fodder are sometimes even brought in handcuffs (there are even videos of this).

cedws 8mo ago

I’ve always wondered what made him turn around. Threatened his family? Was Prigozhin a family man?

tartuffe78 8mo ago
Probably just realized he didn't want/couldn't lead a military dictatorship, which probably would've been his only option at that point.
- squidbeak 8mo ago
  If Wagner's rapturous welcome in Rostov was typical elsewhere, he wouldn't have needed to run a military dictatorship. He seemed to lose his nerve after his call with Lukashenko. It's tough to imagine it being anything other than a threat to his family, in which case it was a schoolboy error to fail to secure them before launching the rebellion.
  - whattheheckheck 8mo ago
    And then still gets blown up in a helicopter