Democratic Libertarian Party HQ

[Drogue]

I didn't see that coming!!! (and I agree with them too )

Thank you Pande, it is with great humility that I accept

Edit: I like Kirov's idea too.

[Pandemoniak]

To Kirov's idea, I think the REc Commons are enough for pure OT or indirect OT.

[Maniac]

Originally posted by Drogue
OK, do we all agree? (by all I mean myself, Archaic, GT, Maniac and Pande - The main participants)

As Archaic hasn't responded yet to my last large post; I'll just assume he can't deny the truth in what I'm saying. So I'm more then happy to stop debating this issue.

[Kirov]

Originally posted by Pandemoniak
To Kirov's idea, I think the REc Commons are enough for pure OT or indirect OT.

Well, if we spam Rec. Commons with political debates, all other players will vanish without a trace...

[Drogue]

I agree, let's have our own thread at the time we need one (FM vs Planned/Green when a poll comes up, for instance).

Maniac: I think antagonising Archaic (though funny ) is not a good thing when trying to stop all violent and Earthian debates

[Maniac]

[GeneralTacticus]

Just to try and move along, I think we have a new topic for party debate: DBTS' (completely insane) plans for a war against Morgan. As I repeatedly indicated, I have no desire whatsoever for us to attack our valued ally without just cause. What do other members think?

[Voltaire]

Originally posted by GeneralTacticus
Jus tto try and move along, I think we have a new topic for party debate: DBTS' (completely insane) plans for a war against Morgan. As I repeatedly indicated, I have no desire whatsoever for us to attack our valued ally without just cause. What do other members think?

I’ve been arguing for the action; and thus far I have heard no rational reasons not to attack Morgan. Everything in opposition to the operation has thus far been moral or emotional. Just because it could be considered morally reprehensible to attack an ally is not reason enough not to do it. We have enough justification to attack. Morgan is hindering our expansion to the east. We would gain territory, resources, and full bases with infrastructure already developed were we to expand. Besides, as I’ve stated before, as it stands, if we continue to run an economic system other than free market, our pact with Morgan will end eventually, and war may soon follow after. The reality as it stands is that a decisive strike against the Morganites at this time would lead to minimal casualties for both sides. Anyone who is against a war on Morgan on moral grounds that it would result in the deaths of innocent civilians, as well as our own personnel, and is in favor of a war against the Hive is simply being hypocritical. A war against the Hive would result in countless more civilian deaths, as well as the fact that the losses on both sides, military and civilian would be tremendous. This operation would cost relatively little in both economic and industrial terms, furthermore it would be carried out with ease due to the Morganite lack of an effective defense. So please enlighten me, why should we not attack them Morganites in the near future while we have the change?

[GeneralTacticus]

and thus far I have heard no rational reasons not to attack Morgan. Everything in opposition to the operation has thus far been moral or emotional.

There's no need to attack Morgan, he has given no provocation (indeed, it is US giving the provocation, in that we are continuing to interfere with his trade with us through our Palnned economy), and such a war WOULD cost many lives and resources, regardless of what you may think.

. Just because it could be considered morally reprehensible to attack an ally is not reason enough not to do it.

Oh, but it is. We would not want our allies to sneak attack us, would we? 'Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.' Besides, other faction swill take note; our reputation will be permanently tarnished, and rightly so.

We have enough justification to attack. Morgan is hindering our expansion to the east.

And you somehow think thsi constitutes justification to attack? We're hindering Morgan's expansion, too; does that give him the right to attack us?

We would gain territory, resources, and full bases with infrastructure already developed were we to expand.

The infrastructure we would capture would likely take significant damage were we to attack, and the cost could well end up being greater than that if we simply kept on expanding north.

Besides, as I’ve stated before, as it stands, if we continue to run an economic system other than free market, our pact with Morgan will end eventually, and war may soon follow after.

Which is yet another reason to go FM ASAP. Dont' expect me to agree to an action which will be unnecessary if I have my way.

The reality as it stands is that a decisive strike against the Morganites at this time would lead to minimal casualties for both sides.

BS. Do you have any IDEA how many civilians would die if we attacked? Something on the order of 20 000 per base (10 000 at minimum), not including those who will be displaced, or who will starve to the chaos generated by the war. And you are a fool if you think we can defeat Morgan without casualties. They may be light, but they will come.

Anyone who is against a war on Morgan on moral grounds that it would result in the deaths of innocent civilians, as well as our own personnel, and is in favor of a war against the Hive is simply being hypocritical.

Not unless we're against the deaths of our citizens and those the enemy all the time. I'm not. I supprot a war on the Hive ebcause:

1) Yang is a threat that needs to be eliminated anyway, as well as being an evil despot that needs to be dispose dof for the good of his own people.

2) He started this war.

3) Civilian casualties will likely be far light in the Hive than in Morgan's territory (due to perim defences).

A war against the Hive would result in countless more civilian deaths,

Only because there are more bases to take.

well as the fact that the losses on both sides, military and civilian would be tremendous.

It would be worth the price, especially considering that lossess for us wouldn't be that trememdous, assuming we planned things out properly.

This operation would cost relatively little in both economic and industrial terms,

Oh, but ti would. We would need to divert a good bit of industrial might to building up an army to carry out the operation, and then we woul have to support them, not to mention keep order in the Morganite territories and bear the expense of rebuilding.

furthermore it would be carried out with ease due to the Morganite lack of an effective defense.

Not in view of our lack of an effective attack. Of course, we could build one, but that would rather nullify your point that it would cost little, now wouldn't it?

why should we not attack them Morganites in the near future while we have the change?

Because we don't have the chance. If we want to fight him, fine, but we should do it when it's convenient to do so, not build up an army for that sole purpose. Once we ahve a good army, we will be able to crush them at any time fo our choosing; Morgan's military is unlikely to expand much in the meantime, and will still be mostly or completely a garrison force.

[Voltaire]

Originally posted by GeneralTacticus
There's no need to attack Morgan, he has given no provocation (indeed, it is US giving the provocation, in that we are continuing to interfere with his trade with us through our Palnned economy), and such a war WOULD cost many lives and resources, regardless of what you may think.

When has provocation been a necessity for war? I’m arguing that we should do this since it would benefit us.

Originally posted by GeneralTacticus
Oh, but it is. We would not want our allies to sneak attack us, would we? 'Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.' Besides, other faction swill take note; our reputation will be permanently tarnished, and rightly so.

That’s just wishful thinking. “Do onto others before they have a chance to do it onto you.” Is a much more rational policy. Do you honestly think that other factions think the same way? Are we to expect our neighbors to pay us the same curtsy we do to them?

Originally posted by GeneralTacticus
And you somehow think thsi constitutes justification to attack? We're hindering Morgan's expansion, too; does that give him the right to attack us?

Justification and rights; all just semantics. The only justification anyone ever truly needs is mealy the desire to do something, everything else is superfluous. And to answer your question, if Morgan feels that we are impeding his expansion, and desires to attack, that’s all the right he needs. The reason for this, simply put, is that those terms are rather subjective.

Originally posted by GeneralTacticus
The infrastructure we would capture would likely take significant damage were we to attack, and the cost could well end up being greater than that if we simply kept on expanding north.

As I’ve stated time and time again, the reason I support this is because it would benefit the Twin Sea region. Frankly I could care less form a political perspective what the north does, my duty is to the Twin Sea region. And I must do what would be in its best interest.

Originally posted by GeneralTacticus
Which is yet another reason to go FM ASAP. Dont' expect me to agree to an action which will be unnecessary if I have my way.

Well that is assuming we switch to FM; but as it is that seems unlikely.

Originally posted by GeneralTacticus
BS. Do you have any IDEA how many civilians would die if we attacked? Something on the order of 20 000 per base (10 000 at minimum), not including those who will be displaced, or who will starve to the chaos generated by the war. And you are a fool if you think we can defeat Morgan without casualties. They may be light, but they will come.

I never said that there wouldn’t be casualties, but as you have just stated, the casualties would be light.

Originally posted by GeneralTacticus
Not unless we're against the deaths of our citizens and those the enemy all the time. I'm not. I supprot a war on the Hive ebcause:

1) Yang is a threat that needs to be eliminated anyway, as well as being an evil despot that needs to be dispose dof for the good of his own people.

2) He started this war.

3) Civilian casualties will likely be far light in the Hive than in Morgan's territory (due to perim defences).

Good is a subjective term, who are we to decide what is for the good of the Hiverian people?

But casualties on our end of things will be heavier in a war against the Hive than against Morgan.

Originally posted by GeneralTacticus
Only because there are more bases to take.

But they will be considerably heavier for our military.

Originally posted by GeneralTacticus
It would be worth the price, especially considering that lossess for us wouldn't be that trememdous, assuming we planned things out properly.

You’re assuming we can win against the Hive.

Originally posted by GeneralTacticus
Oh, but ti would. We would need to divert a good bit of industrial might to building up an army to carry out the operation, and then we woul have to support them, not to mention keep order in the Morganite territories and bear the expense of rebuilding.

But this would be compensated for by the new territory and resources we gain, and the former Morganite bases would be contribution to our cause after we’ve taken them and would eventual catch up to the rest of our bases and be as productive.

Originally posted by GeneralTacticus
Not in view of our lack of an effective attack. Of course, we could build one, but that would rather nullify your point that it would cost little, now wouldn't it?

Fine, even if the cost is higher than I would estimate it at. It would still be considerable lower than to wage war against the Hive.

Originally posted by GeneralTacticus
Because we don't have the chance. If we want to fight him, fine, but we should do it when it's convenient to do so, not build up an army for that sole purpose. Once we ahve a good army, we will be able to crush them at any time fo our choosing; Morgan's military is unlikely to expand much in the meantime, and will still be mostly or completely a garrison force.

With this statement I full agree; I’m not saying attack him this instant. Just to if when it is convenient for us. But if we are to fight a war against the Hive as everyone wants, and if we are going to build up our forces against the Hive, why not use them against the Morganites as well?

[GeneralTacticus]

When has provocation been a necessity for war? I’m arguing that we should do this since it would benefit us.

Since people have wanted there to be some kind of justice and stability in internationsl relations. We should not behave one way and expect others to behave another; nor should ahyone act in this way.

That’s just wishful thinking. “Do onto others before they have a chance to do it onto you.” Is a much more rational policy. Do you honestly think that other factions think the same way? Are we to expect our neighbors to pay us the same curtsy we do to them?

We are strong enough that we need not stoop to wars of aggression. We can afford to be nice, and preserve the moral high ground, as long as our neighbours are willing to be peaceful.

Justification and rights; all just semantics. The only justification anyone ever truly needs is mealy the desire to do something, everything else is superfluous. And to answer your question, if Morgan feels that we are impeding his expansion, and desires to attack, that’s all the right he needs. The reason for this, simply put, is that those terms are rather subjective.

So, IOW, you want the law of the jungle? That's nice. We don't try to run society this way; why should we run international politics this way?

As I’ve stated time and time again, the reason I support this is because it would benefit the Twin Sea region. Frankly I could care less form a political perspective what the north does, my duty is to the Twin Sea region. And I must do what would be in its best interest.

Your suty is to the PK faction as a whole; we all elected you, not just the citizens of the Twin Sea region. If you, in pursuit of a larger region to govern, act detrimentally to our faction as a whole, then you have failed in your duty.

Well that is assuming we switch to FM; but as it is that seems unlikely.

And that won't be for want of trying. Regardless, I don't expect him to attack for some time, if ever; even if he does, he doesn't have an army either, so we can afford to wait until then to build up and move agaisnt him.

I never said that there wouldn’t be casualties, but as you have just stated, the casualties would be light.

And I doubt they would be worth it.

Good is a subjective term, who are we to decide what is for the good of the Hiverian people?

If we can decide that tyranny is bad for us, then we can damn well decide that it's bad for others.

But casualties on our end of things will be heavier in a war against the Hive than against Morgan.

Your point being? So will the benefits, particularly after Air Power (which will reduce our losses enormously).

But they will be considerably heavier for our military.

See above.

You’re assuming we can win against the Hive.

We can. It's just a matter of production power, transport, time, and good planning (and superior weapons, with the CN, of course).

But this would be compensated for by the new territory and resources we gain, and the former Morganite bases would be contribution to our cause after we’ve taken them and would eventual catch up to the rest of our bases and be as productive.

You do realize, I hope, that the Morganite bases DBTs wants to go after will likely be destroyed rather than captured? We will gain little or nothing from this war, then.

Fine, even if the cost is higher than I would estimate it at. It would still be considerable lower than to wage war against the Hive.

It would cost less, but the benefits would be much less, too.

With this statement I full agree; I’m not saying attack him this instant. Just to if when it is convenient for us.

Good.

But if we are to fight a war against the Hive as everyone wants, and if we are going to build up our forces against the Hive, why not use them against the Morganites as well?

Because there's no need. There's no reason to attack, except for your own desire for a Greater Twin Sea Region, and DBTS' boredom.

[Voltaire]

Originally posted by GeneralTacticus
Since people have wanted there to be some kind of justice and stability in internationsl relations. We should not behave one way and expect others to behave another; nor should ahyone act in this way.

We shouldn’t expect other to behave well towards us, we should expect the worst, and prepare for it.

Originally posted by GeneralTacticus
We are strong enough that we need not stoop to wars of aggression. We can afford to be nice, and preserve the moral high ground, as long as our neighbours are willing to be peaceful.

Do we really need to delude ourselves in some moral high-ground when we’re fighting a war? Ultimately, and I admit this, there is no moral high-ground during a war, both sides believe they are fighting for something greater then themselves, be it ideology, or something equally mundane. And we are no strong enough yet to actually attack anyone, be it the Morganites or the Hive. So we have little choice in the matter for the time being.

Originally posted by GeneralTacticus
So, IOW, you want the law of the jungle? That's nice. We don't try to run society this way; why should we run international politics this way?

Internal affairs and foreign policy need not be consistent. Why no eliminate any potential threats to ourselves on the outside so that we may preserve the interior.

Originally posted by GeneralTacticus
Your suty is to the PK faction as a whole; we all elected you, not just the citizens of the Twin Sea region. If you, in pursuit of a larger region to govern, act detrimentally to our faction as a whole, then you have failed in your duty.

I don’t believe that war with the Morganites sometime in the future will be of such great determent to the Peacekeeper faction. There are downsides of course, but in the end I believe that the Peacekeeper faction as a whole will benefit form an expanded Twin Sea region.

And I’m not looking to govern a larger region, this has little to do with my imperial ambitions. Rather incorporation of the Morganites into our own faction is beneficial to the region and to the faction as a whole.

Originally posted by GeneralTacticus
And that won't be for want of trying. Regardless, I don't expect him to attack for some time, if ever; even if he does, he doesn't have an army either, so we can afford to wait until then to build up and move agaisnt him.

You’re right, we can wait.

Originally posted by GeneralTacticus
If we can decide that tyranny is bad for us, then we can damn well decide that it's bad for others.

What you call a tyrant, they call a benevolent despot.

Originally posted by GeneralTacticus
You do realize, I hope, that the Morganite bases DBTs wants to go after will likely be destroyed rather than captured? We will gain little or nothing from this war, then.

Territory + Resources

[GeneralTacticus]

We shouldn’t expect other to behave well towards us, we should expect the worst, and prepare for it.

If we, because we expect the worst, commit crimes against others, then we will suffer the worst. We will have caused the problem we were trying to avoid. We may suffer the worst in any case; however, we are strong enough that we can suffer tohers doign their worst with little difficulty.

Internal affairs and foreign policy need not be consistent.

Why not? Where is the difference? There is none except in the organization of the system; it remains an interaction between human beings. The organiztion is merely a framework within which everything operates; it is not immutable.

Why no eliminate any potential threats to ourselves on the outside so that we may preserve the interior.

Because Morgan isn't a potential threat. As you keep on pointing out, he is militarily weak; and as I keep pointing out, he has few resources.

I don’t believe that war with the Morganites sometime in the future will be of such great determent to the Peacekeeper faction. There are downsides of course, but in the end I believe that the Peacekeeper faction as a whole will benefit form an expanded Twin Sea region.

Our faction will NOT benefit from the bloodshed that would ensure if we tried to claim a quite frankly pathetic amount of resources to expand your region. We have no need for Morgan's land, and it is of little value.

And I’m not looking to govern a larger region, this has little to do with my imperial ambitions.

You have said yourself, repeatedly, that you want this war so that you can extend your region. Don't try to deny it.

What you call a tyrant, they call a benevolent despot.

Who are 'they'? The Hive Ministry of Propaganda? Besides, from what Aaron Blackwell has reported, most of the workers at the Hive have been so brainwashed that what their view of their rulers is is more or less irrelevant, in much the same way that a lunatic's view of anything is. It's distorted enough to have lost any relevance.

Territory + Resources

And in order to secure those, we would have to rebuild new bases; so in addition to the burden of military action, we would also have to bear the expence of setting up and developing new bases, as opposed to a northward expansion, where we merely have to build the bases.

[Voltaire]

If we, because we expect the worst, commit crimes against others, then we will suffer the worst. We will have caused the problem we were trying to avoid. We may suffer the worst in any case; however, we are strong enough that we can suffer tohers doign their worst with little difficulty.

Crimes against others? Well if you consider war a crime, do not be hypocritical enough to support eliminating the Hive and not the Morganites. This whole issue is more about ideology than anything else; we don’t agree with the Hive and therefore feel it is our “duty” or “right” to eliminate the evils of Chairman Yang. While we are much closer in line with the Morganites, and so we don’t have nearly the same motivation for their elimination. Get off your high horse, we cannot be preaching peace with the Morganites when at the same time preparing for an invasion of the Hive. So if we want consistence between anything, let us have a consistent foreign policy.

Why not? Where is the difference? There is none except in the organization of the system; it remains an interaction between human beings. The organiztion is merely a framework within which everything operates; it is not immutable.

We have a responsibility to our people, this does not extend to others. Foreign policy should simply be another means by which we benefit the people, and carry out their will. The people’s control of our policy does not stop at our borders, it extends beyond them. And as I’ve stated earlier, I’m proposing a alternative to the current government position on the matter of war, and alternatives are what we need, since without them we are little better than the Chairman whom we all so find despicable.

Because Morgan isn't a potential threat. As you keep on pointing out, he is militarily weak; and as I keep pointing out, he has few resources.

Everyone is a potential threat; call me cynical but if we do not switch to free market Morgan will eventually cancel the pact with us, and given more time he may just decide to declare war.

Our faction will NOT benefit from the bloodshed that would ensure if we tried to claim a quite frankly pathetic amount of resources to expand your region. We have no need for Morgan's land, and it is of little value.

Bloodshed? You yourself just said they practically have no military. Our losses, and their losses, will not be so critical. And to emphasize this, I’m not saying there will be no casualties, what I’m saying is that because of the Morganites lack a military, those losses will be light.

You have said yourself, repeatedly, that you want this war so that you can extend your region. Don't try to deny it.

I want this war for the benefit of the Twin Sea region, and yes that benefit includes its expansion. But it is not MY region, I’m not nearly vain enough to even remotely claim that.

Who are 'they'? The Hive Ministry of Propaganda? Besides, from what Aaron Blackwell has reported, most of the workers at the Hive have been so brainwashed that what their view of their rulers is is more or less irrelevant, in much the same way that a lunatic's view of anything is. It's distorted enough to have lost any relevance.

And we’re taking the word of a defector on what the conditions of the Hive are like? Couldn’t be just be possible, even remotely, that the people living under Yang like his rule, and find it effective and efficient? Second hand information, and horror stories about the Hive should be taken with a grain of salt, lets at least have some concrete evidence before we go making wild accusations against them simply because we disagree with them ideologically.

And in order to secure those, we would have to rebuild new bases; so in addition to the burden of military action, we would also have to bear the expence of setting up and developing new bases, as opposed to a northward expansion, where we merely have to build the bases.

Well lets wait before we attack, lets give Morgan time to develop those bases and then take if from him. This would result in little expense to us, his military most likely will be behind ours, and in return for the invasion we would receive bases with full infrastructure.

[Drogue]

Just a couple of points I wanted to address.

Originally posted by Voltaire
Crimes against others? Well if you consider war a crime, do not be hypocritical enough to support eliminating the Hive and not the Morganites. This whole issue is more about ideology than anything else; we don’t agree with the Hive and therefore feel it is our “duty” or “right” to eliminate the evils of Chairman Yang. While we are much closer in line with the Morganites, and so we don’t have nearly the same motivation for their elimination. Get off your high horse, we cannot be preaching peace with the Morganites when at the same time preparing for an invasion of the Hive. So if we want consistence between anything, let us have a consistent foreign policy.

We do have consistancy. 2 reasons, the Hive declared on us, it wasn't our decision; and we the Hive disagrees with us on our main point (democracy) whereas Morgan doesn't. In fact, Morgan is using Democracy. Why would we have a problem with him? We can preach peace with Morgan and War with Yang, because Yang is th only one we have an ideological problem with, and he started on us, and won't declare truce. If Morgan attacks us and won't truce, then let's defend ourselves (by removing him if necessary), but otherwise it is not the same. There is no comparison, if we do this with one we must do this with another.

We are not on high horses, we just don't want war. Realpolitik is fine, I don't want Blitzreig however.

Originally posted by Voltaire
We have a responsibility to our people, this does not extend to others. Foreign policy should simply be another means by which we benefit the people, and carry out their will.

I beg to differ. We have a responsibility to Planet, and to all the people on it. Why should we only care about the people who vote us in? I want a better place to live for everyone, and if that means war, then so be it, but I think, certainly at the moment, Peace is best overall, if not for everyone.

[Voltaire]

Originally posted by Drogue
We do have consistancy. 2 reasons, the Hive declared on us, it wasn't our decision; and we the Hive disagrees with us on our main point (democracy) whereas Morgan doesn't. In fact, Morgan is using Democracy. Why would we have a problem with him? We can preach peace with Morgan and War with Yang, because Yang is th only one we have an ideological problem with, and he started on us, and won't declare truce. If Morgan attacks us and won't truce, then let's defend ourselves (by removing him if necessary), but otherwise it is not the same. There is no comparison, if we do this with one we must do this with another.

We are not on high horses, we just don't want war. Realpolitik is fine, I don't want Blitzreig however.

The fact that the Hive declared war on us is irrelevant to our claims that we must go in and liberate the Hiverian people. I’m not saying we shouldn’t invade, in fact it would be prudent to do so. Rather that we shouldn’t be claiming that we are doing this for anything other than the real reasons. An invasion of the Hive would not be one intended primarily for defense, or anything nearly as noble as the liberation of the Hive. Rather we would be invading to seize as much territory as we can.

And your point about the ideological differences between us and the Hive is exactly what I was trying to get across. But we are hiding behind this ideological difference to justify out intended invasion.

And to finally put a stop to the rampant German analogies, all I’m saying is that we shouldn’t put the welfare of other factions above that of our own people in foreign policy, we should attempt to gain an upper hand. As I’ve stated before, if we can get the Morganite territory through means other than war, let’s do it. War should be a last resort, but one we need to consider seriously rather than dismiss right off hand.

Originally posted by Drogue
I beg to differ. We have a responsibility to Planet, and to all the people on it. Why should we only care about the people who vote us in? I want a better place to live for everyone, and if that means war, then so be it, but I think, certainly at the moment, Peace is best overall, if not for everyone.

It is noble to believe that we have a responsibility to all people on Planet; but this altruistic intention is hardly anything more than just rhetoric. Forgive me for being such a cynic, but I don’t think that humanity has matured, if you will, in this short period on Planet. We are still the same species who murder one another for matters as trivial as ideology. As a faction we must realize that ultimately others if they were in a similar position as us, would attack, despite the fact that we find such thoughts disturbing, they are true. Going about attempting to change human nature through means as this is futile at best, it is useless to preach wisdom to men, you must inject it into their blood.

[Drogue]

We are not claiming ideology as the main reason for the Hive attack (IIRC). We are not wanting to attack the Hive yet. But why start another war when we already have someone to fight. I say we should not attack either.

Humanity has not matured that much, I agree (It may do before we leave, however) but I do believe that. I know our people may just want for themselves, but I want happiness for everyone. Why must we inject or preach wisdom. When we talk of human nature, we are not talking some about some hypothetical people, we are talking about us. I feel I have a responsibility to the human race, and I think some others do too. Why do we need everyone to believe it. What others would do does not matter. It is what we will do that does.

[Voltaire]

Originally posted by Drogue
We are not claiming ideology as the main reason for the Hive attack (IIRC). We are not wanting to attack the Hive yet. But why start another war when we already have someone to fight. I say we should not attack either.

Humanity has not matured that much, I agree (It may do before we leave, however) but I do believe that. I know our people may just want for themselves, but I want happiness for everyone. Why must we inject or preach wisdom. When we talk of human nature, we are not talking some about some hypothetical people, we are talking about us. I feel I have a responsibility to the human race, and I think some others do too. Why do we need everyone to believe it. What others would do does not matter. It is what we will do that does.

Whatever our own personal ideals and wishes for the human race are, we as organisms are slaves to our biology. Humans by nature are collective, we don’t wish to be free, but rather to be controlled. This is why for the majority of human history we have lives under despots, monarchs, etc. Though education we have escaped, or avoided that aspect of human nature, but conformity is still ever present in our society. Wars, though seemingly pointless, do serve a purpose, even wars for matters such as ideology or religion. Wars between forces are fought under the pretenses of morality, but in the end they are about resources, for we are conformists wish to gain an advantage of our side, we wish to ensure the survival of those who share similar ideals, and to do this we often are willing to kill. Again a cynical look upon human nature, nevertheless an accurate one. If you desire to change humanity, start at their genes, alter the very base of what is meant to be human, only then can you truly change humanity. Until such a time we have to resort to imperfect methods.

All I’m saying is that we should consider war as a tool, we may find it undesirable, but nevertheless simply because it is undesirable does not mean that it cannot serve some useful purpose.

I commend you for taking the stance that we should do what we believe is correct, regardless of what others would do to us in a similar case. But that stance is foolish. We need to be pragmatic about this, we cannot afford to be sentimental and lower our guard. The points made about a war on Morgan are well taken, I perfectly well understand that he has given us no provocation, or direct provocation for war. And as it stands, he is our ally, though not a very strong one. The proposal for an attack on him is one for the future, one we should consider, that is all that is being asked for. We should not outright dismiss it. Let us have all possible options at our disposal, and let us hope we don’t have a need for them, but we should still be prepared.

[GeneralTacticus]

Crimes against others? Well if you consider war a crime, do not be hypocritical enough to support eliminating the Hive and not the Morganites.

I consider aggressive war without provocation to be a crime. The assault on the Hive would be neither.

[GeneralTacticus]

We have a responsibility to our people, this does not extend to others.

Why not? They're every bit as human as us.

Foreign policy should simply be another means by which we benefit the people, and carry out their will.

Internally, the will of our people is not permitted to result in murder; why should it be allowed to do so externally?

And as I’ve stated earlier, I’m proposing a alternative to the current government position on the matter of war, and alternatives are what we need, since without them we are little better than the Chairman whom we all so find despicable.

I never said you shouldn't have suggested this, I said we shouldn't do it.

Everyone is a potential threat; call me cynical but if we do not switch to free market Morgan will eventually cancel the pact with us, and given more time he may just decide to declare war.

Ok, you're a cynic. What relevance does it have if Morgan declares war? He has no capacity to hurt us.

Bloodshed? You yourself just said they practically have no military. Our losses, and their losses, will not be so critical. And to emphasize this, I’m not saying there will be no casualties, what I’m saying is that because of the Morganites lack a military, those losses will be light.

Our miltiary losses will be light, theirs will not be; and their civilian casualties will be apalling. IF we go ahead with this war, we will have the blood fo tens of thousands of innocents on our hands, for nothing more than some extra land of little value.

I want this war for the benefit of the Twin Sea region, and yes that benefit includes its expansion. But it is not MY region, I’m not nearly vain enough to even remotely claim that.

Regardless of what you call it, it is the region you govern and the one you will probably continue to do so for the forseeable future. You have stated yourself that you want this war because it will expand your region (and their will be no benefits for it besides that).

And we’re taking the word of a defector on what the conditions of the Hive are like? Couldn’t be just be possible, even remotely, that the people living under Yang like his rule, and find it effective and efficient?

Why, then, would he need to employ a police state? Why would we even have a defector among us? Why would anyone undertake a long and dangerous journey, at great risk to his own life, without even knowing where he was going, if conditions under his rule were good?

Well lets wait before we attack, lets give Morgan time to develop those bases and then take if from him. This would result in little expense to us, his military most likely will be behind ours, and in return for the invasion we would receive bases with full infrastructure.

Minus whatever was destroyed in the fighting, which would be quite significant.

[GeneralTacticus]

The fact that the Hive declared war on us is irrelevant to our claims that we must go in and liberate the Hiverian people. I’m not saying we shouldn’t invade, in fact it would be prudent to do so. Rather that we shouldn’t be claiming that we are doing this for anything other than the real reasons. An invasion of the Hive would not be one intended primarily for defense, or anything nearly as noble as the liberation of the Hive. Rather we would be invading to seize as much territory as we can.

That's YOUR view, and YOUR reason for supportng it. I, and those others who actually have some kind of morality, have other reasons. Would you support an invasion if it had been the Gaians or the Morganites across the sea, and they hadn't declared war? I wouldn't.

And your point about the ideological differences between us and the Hive is exactly what I was trying to get across. But we are hiding behind this ideological difference to justify out intended invasion.

'Hiding behind' it? We have no real choice but to invade, because we will never be safe until we can eliminate the Hive - by their choice, not ours.

And to finally put a stop to the rampant German analogies, all I’m saying is that we shouldn’t put the welfare of other factions above that of our own people in foreign policy, we should attempt to gain an upper hand.

We've gained the upper hand peacefully; there's no reason to kill countless people in order to increase it by force.

As I’ve stated before, if we can get the Morganite territory through means other than war, let’s do it. War should be a last resort, but one we need to consider seriously rather than dismiss right off hand.

What is it that makes you so fixated on obtaining the Morganite land? What do we need it for?

[Voltaire]

Originally posted by GeneralTacticus
That's YOUR view, and YOUR reason for supportng it. I, and those others who actually have some kind of morality, have other reasons. Would you support an invasion if it had been the Gaians or the Morganites across the sea, and they hadn't declared war? I wouldn't.

So now since I don’t agree with your morality, I have none? That’s not the issue, and I’m getting off topic. No I would not support an invasion overseas if the Gaians were located in the present location of Yang, if they were not being aggressive; wars overseas are too costly. Had they, like Yang, declared hostilities, the situation would be different.

Originally posted by GeneralTacticus
'Hiding behind' it? We have no real choice but to invade, because we will never be safe until we can eliminate the Hive - by their choice, not ours.

All fine, but then don’t go claiming that we must liberate the Hive.

Originally posted by GeneralTacticus
We've gained the upper hand peacefully; there's no reason to kill countless people in order to increase it by force.

Ok. Nevertheless does this warrant the complete disregard for warfare as a tool for achieving goals of foreign policy?

Originally posted by GeneralTacticus
What is it that makes you so fixated on obtaining the Morganite land? What do we need it for?

One of our most paramount goals has been expansion and exploration, Morgan is indirectly interfering with this.

[Voltaire]

Originally posted by GeneralTacticus
Why not? They're every bit as human as us.

Because they’re not the ones in control of our government, our citizens are. If our citizens as a whole mandate that we go and help others, fine; in not, fine. We are simply to carry out their will.

Originally posted by GeneralTacticus
Internally, the will of our people is not permitted to result in murder; why should it be allowed to do so externally?

Internally we alongside democracy place liberty as a ideal, that every citizen be both free as well as safe. Our constitution does not in effect place any restrictions on foreign policy in terms of war; and if we value democracy so highly, we would if the people desired something through means such as war, carry out their wishes.

Originally posted by GeneralTacticus
I never said you shouldn't have suggested this, I said we shouldn't do it.

Fair enough.

Originally posted by GeneralTacticus
Ok, you're a cynic. What relevance does it have if Morgan declares war? He has no capacity to hurt us.

Well you’re looking for a reason to attack him if we were going to go to war with Morgan, if he were the one to declare war, as you have many times repeated, we would have little choice but to fight back. So why have a plan in reserve for our military operation against him if he attacks, since from the looks of it we’re not going to attack first?

Originally posted by GeneralTacticus
Our miltiary losses will be light, theirs will not be; and their civilian casualties will be apalling. IF we go ahead with this war, we will have the blood fo tens of thousands of innocents on our hands, for nothing more than some extra land of little value.

And we can justify the losses suffered by the Hive, both military and civilian, simply because they are the aggressors?

Originally posted by GeneralTacticus
Regardless of what you call it, it is the region you govern and the one you will probably continue to do so for the forseeable future. You have stated yourself that you want this war because it will expand your region (and their will be no benefits for it besides that).

Yes, and as long as I govern that region I must pursue the course of war against the Morganites since the Twin Sea regions benefits. If I were to become governor of a different region, my support for it would cease since another region would not benefit from the war as directly.

Originally posted by GeneralTacticus
Why, then, would he need to employ a police state? Why would we even have a defector among us? Why would anyone undertake a long and dangerous journey, at great risk to his own life, without even knowing where he was going, if conditions under his rule were good?

So you’re basing this on the fact that there was one person that we know of who was dissatisfied with life in the Hive; there are more of course, but you’re generalizing that the entire population is so miserable and hates living in the Hive.

Originally posted by GeneralTacticus
Minus whatever was destroyed in the fighting, which would be quite significant.

Well, if they have perimeter defenses the infrastructure damage would be less, and if we given them time to develop their infrastructure until the point where they have perimeter defenses then this wouldn’t be as great of a problem.

[Voltaire]

Originally posted by GeneralTacticus
I consider aggressive war without provocation to be a crime. The assault on the Hive would be neither.

Fair enough.

[GeneralTacticus]

It is noble to believe that we have a responsibility to all people on Planet; but this altruistic intention is hardly anything more than just rhetoric. Forgive me for being such a cynic, but I don’t think that humanity has matured, if you will, in this short period on Planet. We are still the same species who murder one another for matters as trivial as ideology.

What you seem to be creating, Voltaire, is a self-fulfilling prophecy - you want us to kill because it's human nature to do so, and then you say it's human nature to kill because we did.

As a faction we must realize that ultimately others if they were in a similar position as us, would attack, despite the fact that we find such thoughts disturbing, they are true.

So what?

Going about attempting to change human nature through means as this is futile at best, it is useless to preach wisdom to men, you must inject it into their blood.

If you want to change the world, start with yourself.

Whatever our own personal ideals and wishes for the human race are, we as organisms are slaves to our biology.

This statement is relevant how?

Humans by nature are collective, we don’t wish to be free, but rather to be controlled.

Then why did democracy ever emerge at all?

This is why for the majority of human history we have lives under despots, monarchs, etc. Though education we have escaped, or avoided that aspect of human nature, but conformity is still ever present in our society. Wars, though seemingly pointless, do serve a purpose, even wars for matters such as ideology or religion.

Oh, they serve a purpose, all right. Doesn't mean the purpose is a good one.

Wars between forces are fought under the pretenses of morality, but in the end they are about resources, for we are conformists wish to gain an advantage of our side, we wish to ensure the survival of those who share similar ideals, and to do this we often are willing to kill.

'We'? We must be ready to kill, if necessary, but in the case of Morgan, it's not necessary. Morgan is not a threat to our factional well-being, and is in fact an asset to it.

If you desire to change humanity, start at their genes, alter the very base of what is meant to be human, only then can you truly change humanity. Until such a time we have to resort to imperfect methods.

You seem to be advocating some form of eugenics here. Genetic engineering isn't going to rid us of the darker side to our nature; education and morality will help to control it.

All I’m saying is that we should consider war as a tool, we may find it undesirable, but nevertheless simply because it is undesirable does not mean that it cannot serve some useful purpose.

And I've never disagreed with you on that, just on what is and isn't a useful purpose.

I commend you for taking the stance that we should do what we believe is correct, regardless of what others would do to us in a similar case. But that stance is foolish.

Why is it foolish? It would be so if doing what was right threatened us with serious harm, but it doesn't.

We need to be pragmatic about this, we cannot afford to be sentimental and lower our guard.

There's a big difference between wanting to let our guard down and disagreeing with an aggressive war. Saying that we shouldn't go out and attack others isn't the same as saying we shouldn't defend ourselves.

The points made about a war on Morgan are well taken, I perfectly well understand that he has given us no provocation, or direct provocation for war. And as it stands, he is our ally, though not a very strong one. The proposal for an attack on him is one for the future, one we should consider, that is all that is being asked for.

The plan DBTS posted is meant for implementation NOW. If your position is that we should attack sometime in the future, fine, we can't know what will happen in the future and how the situation may change. The original questin for the party that I posted was how to react to DBTS' plan, not to the possibility of a future attack.

We should not outright dismiss it. Let us have all possible options at our disposal, and let us hope we don’t have a need for them, but we should still be prepared.

Of course.

All fine, but then don’t go claiming that we must liberate the Hive.

The fact that the Hive citizens will be better off without Yang is mainly a bonus; it wouldn't warrant an invasion by itself. The fact that we need to invade at some point does, this fact just removes another reason not to.

Ok. Nevertheless does this warrant the complete disregard for warfare as a tool for achieving goals of foreign policy?

No. Just that we shouldn't just call for the conquest of other faction's land solely in order to gain more power at their expense.

One of our most paramount goals has been expansion and exploration, Morgan is indirectly interfering with this.

How? By existing? Besides, we already know everything in Morgan's territory, and the and you want to take is hardly very valuable for expansion. We would be better served to expand at sea and to the north.

Because they’re not the ones in control of our government, our citizens are. If our citizens as a whole mandate that we go and help others, fine; in not, fine. We are simply to carry out their will.

PErfectly true, but that shouldn't be used as an argument that we have the right to go out and conquer other faction; 'You have the right to tell me what to do, now tell me to go off and kill people in your name.'

Internally we alongside democracy place liberty as a ideal, that every citizen be both free as well as safe. Our constitution does not in effect place any restrictions on foreign policy in terms of war; and if we value democracy so highly, we would if the people desired something through means such as war, carry out their wishes.

See above. The fact that we are obligated to follow the will of the people should not be used in an argument to try to influence it.

Well you’re looking for a reason to attack him if we were going to go to war with Morgan, if he were the one to declare war, as you have many times repeated, we would have little choice but to fight back. So why have a plan in reserve for our military operation against him if he attacks, since from the looks of it we’re not going to attack first?

I don't understand what you mean here and I don't think you understood what I meant either. Why should we launch a pre-emptive strike on Morgan when he has no capacity to hurt us if he attacks us?

And we can justify the losses suffered by the Hive, both military and civilian, simply because they are the aggressors?

Yes. Yang started this war, and it will never truly end until either we are destroyed or he is gone. Obviously, we need to eliminate him.

So you’re basing this on the fact that there was one person that we know of who was dissatisfied with life in the Hive; there are more of course, but you’re generalizing that the entire population is so miserable and hates living in the Hive.

No they probably don't; there will be citizens that benefit from his rule, because they are the ones who enforce it, and are rewarded with a slice of the wealth Yang loots from his people. Others will simply be blinded to the truth by the lies they are fed constantly.

Well, if they have perimeter defenses the infrastructure damage would be less, and if we given them time to develop their infrastructure until the point where they have perimeter defenses then this wouldn’t be as great of a problem.

They will still lsoe facilities, if not as many, the perim. defences will result in much higher casualties, and we can expect any field troops Morgan has to destroy their infrastructure as they retreat.

[Drogue]

Originally posted by Voltaire
Whatever our own personal ideals and wishes for the human race are, we as organisms are slaves to our biology. Humans by nature are collective, we don’t wish to be free, but rather to be controlled. This is why for the majority of human history we have lives under despots, monarchs, etc. Though education we have escaped, or avoided that aspect of human nature, but conformity is still ever present in our society. Wars, though seemingly pointless, do serve a purpose, even wars for matters such as ideology or religion. Wars between forces are fought under the pretenses of morality, but in the end they are about resources, for we are conformists wish to gain an advantage of our side, we wish to ensure the survival of those who share similar ideals, and to do this we often are willing to kill. Again a cynical look upon human nature, nevertheless an accurate one. If you desire to change humanity, start at their genes, alter the very base of what is meant to be human, only then can you truly change humanity. Until such a time we have to resort to imperfect methods.

That is very much your opinion, and one I disagree with. Some wars are not fought under 'the pretences of morality', so actually are about morals, and not land. It is cynical, and as GT said, self proclaiming. If we believe that, it may well happen, however I will argue against it to my last breath. And human nature is not to be controlled, it is to be controlling, which is why we have years of despot rule. It is not because the people wished to be controlled, but because the despot wished to control others.

Originally posted by Voltaire
All I’m saying is that we should consider war as a tool, we may find it undesirable, but nevertheless simply because it is undesirable does not mean that it cannot serve some useful purpose.

I agree, we should consider it, but at the moment with Morgan it should not be used, and later, I think pacifism in general is still the best option, even if it is not used universally.

Originally posted by Voltaire
I commend you for taking the stance that we should do what we believe is correct, regardless of what others would do to us in a similar case. But that stance is foolish. We need to be pragmatic about this, we cannot afford to be sentimental and lower our guard.

It is not foolish. It is against human nature, but if a few people stand in the way of human nature, we may be able to stem the tide. We will win, we will become all powerful, and I think we should win in the way we want to govern in the end. We can afford to lower our guard to our friends, and if they bite us, we bite back. We should not bite first, because we think they will bite us later however. We cannot see the future, we do not know Morgan will attack. As such, we should not attack until he does.

Originally posted by Voltaire
And we can justify the losses suffered by the Hive, both military and civilian, simply because they are the aggressors?

Yes we can. I want peace as soon as possible, and we continually ask for it. We have no other option until Yang declares truce. I do not want bloodshed, but if it is forced upon us, we must defend ourselves. 'Reasonable force' is the legal term I believe. We must attack until he is no longer a threat, ie. when he ends the war.

[Kirov]

GT, one request: could you please not to cut the others' posts several times and comment everything separately? It takes sometimes 3 - 4 screens to read/scroll and besides, you often comment separate sentences rather than someone's opinion or debate's topic in general.

Note it's a request and there is no saying things like "Oh yea? Because you said so?".

[GeneralTacticus]

I formed this habit because it makes it a lot easier to write up the rebuttals if you only have to deal with one piece at a time. It also helps to identify which bit is directed at what.

[Drogue]

I do understand GT's point, but often it seems you rebut every sentance but miss the point of the whole.

[GeneralTacticus]

If I do miss the point, feel free to tell me so and also tell me what the actual point was.