Have a head of state die in battle in the industrialized age.
- Thread starter Maxell
- Start date
Well, the Soviets came really close to taking him when he was inspecting troops at the front in 1943, so there's that.
Coup attempts are probably your best bet since they tend to put key figures directly at risk and often sidestep the enormous scope of warfare between states.
During a thermonuclear war the POTUS really fully embodies the "command in chief" aspect of the job, directly commanding nuclear forces and becoming a primary target themselves.
They may be manhandled out of bed by Secret Service agents, thrown onto a helicopter flying nap of the earth and spitting flares then rushed onto Air Force 1 or an E-4 that is making a combat take-off, mere moments before the airfield gets nuked.
They then spend 48 hours in the air before landing somewhere with hopefully an intact bunker or a ground mobile command post.
They can be killed at any point by nuclear strike, mishap, friendly fire or assassins and likely most of their friends and family are dead, all of their assets destroyed and while they are better off then most survivors they still face uncertainty, violence and hardship in their future.
I know that's not what you're looking for but I think that's the closest you will get to a modern head of states experience being comparable to a typical combatants in a war. A SAC crew on a bomber or in a silo faces simular stresses and arguably a Boomer crewman faces less risk.
Who knows, maybe in the chaotic aftermath the President has to pick up an M-16 and defend themselves against an angry mob or a warlords forces.
They may be manhandled out of bed by Secret Service agents, thrown onto a helicopter flying nap of the earth and spitting flares then rushed onto Air Force 1 or an E-4 that is making a combat take-off, mere moments before the airfield gets nuked.
They then spend 48 hours in the air before landing somewhere with hopefully an intact bunker or a ground mobile command post.
They can be killed at any point by nuclear strike, mishap, friendly fire or assassins and likely most of their friends and family are dead, all of their assets destroyed and while they are better off then most survivors they still face uncertainty, violence and hardship in their future.
I know that's not what you're looking for but I think that's the closest you will get to a modern head of states experience being comparable to a typical combatants in a war. A SAC crew on a bomber or in a silo faces simular stresses and arguably a Boomer crewman faces less risk.
Who knows, maybe in the chaotic aftermath the President has to pick up an M-16 and defend themselves against an angry mob or a warlords forces.
Alija Izetbegović was the President.
Actually, the deputy Prime minister of Bosnia and Herzegovina at the time, Hakija Turajlić, was killed by a Bosnian Serb soldier, but it was in cold blood while he was on a diplomatic mission, not in battle.
During the Peninsula Campaign, Lincoln and his two Cabinet secretaries travelled to the Union Navy anchored off Norfolk, took command of local bombardment operations, then took a small boat to shore to personally conduct reconnaissance on the banks of the James River (May 8, 1862) before the landing 2 days later. That's the closest incident I can think off to an American President putting himself directly at risk during an industrial war (say he's killed by a Confederate sharpshooter covering the retreat down the river).
- To the Gates of Richmond: The Peninsula Campaign (by Stephen Sears)
- To the Gates of Richmond: The Peninsula Campaign (by Stephen Sears)
Last edited:
Lincoln also when to see the fighting in Early's valley campaign in 64 and apparently came under fire, so could easily have been shot there.
During the run-up to D-Day, Churchill started insisting that he'd go along to watch the landings from one of the warships involved. He was only dissuaded from this when George VI said that if that would be safe enough for the PM to do then it should be safe enough for the monarch as well and he'd accompany Churchill. It's probable that this was a bluff, to get Churchill to back down, but if that had been a serious intention on George's part instead then potentially we could have lost both of them in the same incident.
(N.B. In his younger years, George had served in the Royal Navy: He was at Jutland, as a Midshipman, commanding -- IIRC -- one of the turrets on Jellicoe's flagship.)
Churchill literally almost got blown up by German artillery because he crossed the Rhine River in 1945 when fighting was still going on.
Re Churchill, I doubt that he getting killed would count, given that technically, the UK's head of State, is the reigning monarch, not the PM. So, I suppose that the incident of the 13th of September of 1940, 'd be likely the one with the better probabilities to fit the OP request.