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.