Why Did We Shoot Spies?

[bainbrig]

Why did we execute spies? What harm could they do once we’d locked them up? Why didn’t we treat them like other POWs?

Was it just habit?

[sandyRoe]

As a deterrent, maybe.

[kvalidir]

I imagine like Sandy deterrent, social propaganda that we're cleverer than the enemy and our wrath is terrible, and to generally point score on the enemy making recruitment less appealing to future spies.

[andy-hughes]

I think there was far more of a sense of outrage at the notion of treason than there is today.

A chap who couldn't 'play the game' was really not acceptable, so he had to go.

[tonyav]

This is interesting.
http://dictionary.sensagent.com/Treachery%20Act%201940/en-en/

[Theland]

A deterrent?

[andy-hughes]

Theland - // A deterrent? //

Possibly - but in the same way that I believe that Capital Punishment is not a 'deterrent', and for exactly the same reason - I don't believe that anyone embarks on a career as a spy expecting to be caught.

But more likely in the case of a spy, the risks of being found, and the consequences, will have been explained in advance, so anyone who continues is aware of what they are getting into/

[Theland]

Risks versus patriotism?

[Togo]

Every spy probably, and knowingly, condemned hundreds of people who trusted him/her to death. They still live amongst us you know.

[kvalidir]

That's a really interesting link TonyV x

[Theland]

Togo - Good answer. They could kill more than a squaddie with a rifle.

[IJKLM]

This document (para 5, page 3.2) seems to say that spies do not have the status of prisoners of war.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/619906/2017-04714.pdf

As 'Unlawful combatants', spies have less protection under the Geneva Convention thn normal soldiers/combatants. However, the GC still insists they should not be murdered.

http://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/documents/atrocity-crimes/Doc.33_GC-IV-EN.pdf

Seems this was honoured more in the breach

The brutal answer? because they could.

[shoota]

They did, so we did...?

[bainbrig]

Yes, but one reason why POWs were treated well by both Allied and Nazi captors was so that the OTHER side would have some obligation to do the same.

And an air crew could and did kill hundreds, sometimes more (Dresden, Hamburg, Tokyo) on a single raid, so the number of attributable deaths argument doesn’t hold up.

[rowanwitch]

Because we didn't have the means of extracting info from them we have today..... and because we were living in brutal times. Because we have a deep and abiding loathing of the underhand despite doing it ourselves, but that's ok because they are ours.

[emmie]

i go along with Togo, that spies didn't often just condemn one person but hundreds, why not get rid, the Germans did at every turn, men and women alike

[emmie]

BB

you left out London, Liverpool, Coventry, where many thousands were killed. And plenty more places besides.

[waterboatman]

Spies are not covered by the Geneva Convention.

[bainbrig]

Yes emmie (you left out London, Liverpool, Coventry, where many thousands were killed. And plenty more places besides.)...

but we didn’t execute the German aircrews when they were shot down and captured!

[emmie]

no we interned them for the duration, but spies were not in the Geneva Convention, so many women and men were killed by the Nazi's proclaiming them spies, but i wonder if that was the case.

[naomi24]

//we didn’t execute the German aircrews when they were shot down and captured! //

German air crews weren't spies. We executed spies for the same reason other countries executed spies. Because they were spies.