code talkers

[news]

According to the wikipedia a code talker is

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_talker
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
people who used obscure languages as a means of secret communication during
wartime
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


It goes on to say this, which has a ring of truth to it.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Non-speakers would find it extremely difficult to accurately distinguish
unfamiliar sounds used in these languages. Additionally, a speaker who has
acquired a language during their childhood sounds distinctly different from
a person who acquired the same language in later life, thus reducing the
chance of successful impostors sending false messages.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

There are also references to Basque (and Welsh on this page being used by
the British) although not to any great extent.

Did any other countries use code talkers beside the US, did the Russians or
Germans use them?

If so, does anyone have any information about it?

[Don Phillipson]

"news" <ne...@newsfe01.iad.highwinds-media.com> wrote in message
news:1rijdu88wltrp.r...@40tude.net...

> Did any other countries use code talkers beside the US, did the Russians
> or
> Germans use them?

John Masters mentions in his war memoir The Road Past Mandalay
that Indian Army officers used their regiments' Indian languages
for immediate battle instructions via telephone or voice radio.
The practical point was that battle instructions had a short lifetime
(an hour to a day) and the enemy (Vichy French and Japanese
for Masters) was unlikely to discover any translation in that time.

Most Indian Army officers were British (as was Masters, and earlier
his father) and had to learn the regiment's own language (Gurkhali
for Masters) in the first year or two of their career. (Bonuses were
also paid for passing examinations in other Indian languages. I
think Masters mastered two or three.)

--
Don Phillipson
Carlsbad Springs
(Ottawa, Canada)

[Bill]

Gurkhas.

They worked against the Japanese but came horribly unglued in Korea...

There's a story about Amerindian code talkers in the USAAF in WWII
saying that they were spectacularly successful at first but the
Germans found an elderly professor in a university who'd studied
obscure and complex Amerindian languages and after that they got shot
to bits. I have no idea of the story is accurate.

[Rich Rostrom]

"Don Phillipson" <e9...@SPAMBLOCK.ncf.ca> wrote:

> John Masters mentions in his war memoir The Road Past Mandalay
> that Indian Army officers used their regiments' Indian languages
> for immediate battle instructions via telephone or voice radio.
> The practical point was that battle instructions had a short lifetime
> (an hour to a day) and the enemy (Vichy French and Japanese
> for Masters) was unlikely to discover any translation in that time.

That strikes me as exceedingly foolish, as the
Japanese had tens of thousands of Indian defectors in
their service - the "Indian National Army".

It would be trivial for the Japanese to assign some of
these men to radio monitor duty - in which case they
would intercept and read these messages at once.

Gurkhali might be safe, as I doubt that _any_ captured
Gurkhas joined the INA.

In any case, it would be relying on "security through
obscurity", which is almost always a bad idea, and
vulnerable to extremely damaging failure.

The Navajo "code talkers" succeeded in part because
of the extreme obscurity of their base medium, which
was further encrypted by the use of special jargon.
--
The real Velvet Revolution - and the would-be hijacker.

http://originalvelvetrevolution.com

[Bill]

On Wed, 08 May 2013 12:44:58 -0400, Rich Rostrom
<rrostrom.2...@rcn.com> wrote:

>"Don Phillipson" <e9...@SPAMBLOCK.ncf.ca> wrote:
>
>> John Masters mentions in his war memoir The Road Past Mandalay
>> that Indian Army officers used their regiments' Indian languages
>> for immediate battle instructions via telephone or voice radio.
>> The practical point was that battle instructions had a short lifetime
>> (an hour to a day) and the enemy (Vichy French and Japanese
>> for Masters) was unlikely to discover any translation in that time.
>
>
>That strikes me as exceedingly foolish, as the
>Japanese had tens of thousands of Indian defectors in
>their service - the "Indian National Army".

But not many, if any, Ghurkas...

The bulk of the INA seem to have been Sikhs.

[Stephen Graham]

There was also a significant body of recruits from the Malayan Indian
population, who were predominantly Tamil-speakers.