Which other countries could produce something like the Navajo code talkers?
- Thread starter Edwin Moore
- Start date
Canada (and by extension Britain and the rest of the Commonwealth). There are a lot of Native peoples in Canada, and a great many languages are spoken by them. I am not sure if any of them are as well suited to code-talking as Navajo, however (Navajo is an incredibly complex language which is not mutually intelligible even with its closest linguistic relatives; in addition, it was an unwritten language at the time, had numerous dialects, and less than 30 non-Navajo could understand the language at the start of WW2).
Italy did it, to a lesser extent, with Sardinian in WW 1. You'd need to have quite the shake-up to get that to be tried again in WW 2 though.
Welsh was used in WWII, but not widely. The RAF were planning on using Welsh further, but this was never implemented.
http://ww2talk.com/index.php?threads/“popty-ping”-welsh-code-talkers.74326/
Wikipedia lists various languages either used for, or were possibilities for, code talking. The US used more than just Navajo during WWII, and more than just Choctaw in WWI.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_talker
The Egyptians apparently used Nubian-speakers as code talkers during the 1973 Arab-Israeli War.
Hey! Navajo words are much longer than Welsh ones.
The use in the US Army in the Great War originated with Cherokees & Choctaw members of National Guard Regiments. Tho there were antecedents in the various 19th Century wars of the US. The practice has not been uncommon globally & frequently is associated with ethnic minority units of members of a commanders staff. A example from the Italian army in WWII was in a infantry division drawing its reservists from north east Italian provinces bordering Yugoslavia. The local dialect Friulian (spelling varies) was used on a formal basis by the division communicators. I've seen claims other units used local Italian dialects of variant languages on a less formal basis.
I had some training in signals security & a point is made this is a bad idea. Signals intel units are concerned with many more things than decoding messages. In this case unit specific codes or language are a easy tag to track the enemy OB around the landscape. The USMC got away with its code talkers because they were used Corps wide. In most other cases its "Sir the 552 Messkit Repair Battalion in in the line again. Their particular gibberish is all over the tactical frequencies again." You don't need to be able to translate. A skilled sigintel section can spot a frequently used but unit unique code.
This problem bites in the case of sloppily trained radio operators. Frequently repeated errors, cute catchphrases, unusual accents, even a peculiarity in the radio transmitter, can tag a unit. Officers who are constantly sending out lengthly messages can be a nast problem. Voice, CW, digital, whatever. You want your transmissions to be brief, and bland with sameness.
One time pads are good, tho a pain to distribute. Packing the KY encryption set in the 1960s-1980s was overloading a already overloaded RO. Berevity codes were great tho sloppily used. Best was to keep your messages consice and brief, which reduced the chance of interception. Also keep the messages timely. Perishable information is of low value. Sending the company attack plan by radio three hours early is a bad idea. Once you get to the battalion CP the slick encryption systems were good. These days we have digital comm pads which people who should know better say cant be hacked. Thats what the USN said about its signals security, until they discovered Walker had handed over two decades worth of encryption keys to the Soviet intel service. My personal view is the less you transit the better off you are. If a commander has to constantly be the Chatty Cathy theres something wrong in that unit.
marathag
Banned
If it can't be decoded within hours, that's secure enough for tactical use, the way the US used the Code Talkers. For longer term messages that retain importance past an hour or so, you want a really secure code.
Germans assumed enigma couldn't be cracked, not just in a timely manner, but for a very long time, so used for both tactical and strategic.
IMO, they would have been better served by using Karl May paperbacks as one time pads.
Just spewed my Breve' Latte laughing at that one.
Most of the literature on the Enigma decrypts focuses on the Battle of the Atlantic & the Fish codes. Probablly the best use of the Engima intercepts was by the Brit Deception Committiee, who coordinated the Brit/US deception ops. By late 1942 they were using high level intercepts to build a feedback loop for the Double Cross system and other deception ops. Analyzing the top level message traffic allowed them to regularly adjust and fine tune the dozens of actions. There was even a bit of cooperation from the Soviet intel agencies on this, concerning Op FORTITUDE.
One of these analytical exercises used Op TORCH as a tool. When the Eastern & Center Task Forces embarked in the UK and departed the news was leaked that it was a invasion force destined successively for Calais, Normandy, & Brittiany, then a reinforcement destined for Egypt via Cape Hope. The high level messages of the Germans and their redeployment of ground & air forces, and submarines were closely studied. Holts 'The Decivers' has a number of sections on this.
for English take Wales
for Belgium take west Flanders Dialect and Walloon dialect
and you see allot WW2 germans interpreter gone shoot them self...
for Belgium take west Flanders Dialect and Walloon dialect
and you see allot WW2 germans interpreter gone shoot them self...
This would have been fatal to German security, and in very short order. What you are referring to, is not one-time pad, a system that requires a random keystream, but to a text-based running key, something that is decidedly non-random, and the principles of solution of which were well understood by Allied cryptanalysts, When you factor in the requirement to operate the system on a massive, continental scale, and the security just evaporates completely because the enemy has so much material with which to work.
Canada did use Cree speakers. Unfortunately they were a small unit and were not allowed to speak of it. A local veteran told his story at his funeral about what he did in the war because he was the sole survivor then to his knowledge
There are many many other native languages in Canada but unfortunately many are from small populations
Have heard of New Zealand using moari speakers
Scots divisions using Gaelic.
Lots of options but alkward to set up unless you have many multilingual people or constant rotation which hurts cohesion of the units
There are many many other native languages in Canada but unfortunately many are from small populations
Have heard of New Zealand using moari speakers
Scots divisions using Gaelic.
Lots of options but alkward to set up unless you have many multilingual people or constant rotation which hurts cohesion of the units
