Topic Actions

Topic Search

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 9 guests

Did the MBS corner the market on trade?

Join us in talking discussing all things Honor, including (but not limited to) tactics, favorite characters, and book discussions.
Re: Did the MBS corner the market on trade?
Post by ThinksMarkedly   » Wed Oct 28, 2020 8:23 pm

ThinksMarkedly
Vice Admiral

Posts: 1630
Joined: Sat Aug 17, 2019 10:39 am

cthia wrote:I agree on separating the civies from the military. But I can see the benefit having them together. If it is a civilian firm that supplies parts or consulting expertise it is a no brainer as far as efficiency if they are together. It is probably good for morale as well having some "babes" around. Even if it is your own wife.


I agree too. Customarily, someone who did manage to threaten the station would have given sufficient time for evacuations, so customarily civilians were not in big danger. But yes, the stations were legitimate military targets. It was Manticore's own failure protect its civilians.

As for what else constitutes military target or not, you have to draw the line somewhere. And this is subjective. A subcontractor making parts for a missile? Probably. A subcontractor that makes molycirc components that go everywhere including missiles? It's arguable. The engineering schools that teach programming and nanofarm assembly? Doubtful. The architect firm that designed the living space aboard the military stations? Probably not.

In the end, history is written by the victors and they set precedent. They'll convene a tribunal and pass judgement on the defeated. Vae victis
Top
Re: Did the MBS corner the market on trade?
Post by cthia   » Thu Oct 29, 2020 6:26 am

cthia
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 12968
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2014 12:10 pm

cthia wrote:I agree on separating the civies from the military. But I can see the benefit having them together. If it is a civilian firm that supplies parts or consulting expertise it is a no brainer as far as efficiency if they are together. It is probably good for morale as well having some "babes" around. Even if it is your own wife.
ThinksMarkedly wrote:I agree too. Customarily, someone who did manage to threaten the station would have given sufficient time for evacuations, so customarily civilians were not in big danger.

But yes, the stations were legitimate military targets. It was Manticore's own failure protect its civilians.

I disagree with that part. Customary as of fairly recently, perhaps. But historically, no. Remember, EE violations is what gave the mighty gorilla it's wisdom teeth to bite. I suspect that in the pre-Edict era, warnings were a pipe dream. Heck, I doubt Masada cared about warning Grayson.

ThinksMarkedly wrote:As for what else constitutes military target or not, you have to draw the line somewhere. And this is subjective. A subcontractor making parts for a missile? Probably. A subcontractor that makes molycirc components that go everywhere including missiles? It's arguable. The engineering schools that teach programming and nanofarm assembly? Doubtful. The architect firm that designed the living space aboard the military stations? Probably not.

No, your enemy does not have to draw the line anywhere. It'd be "nice" of them. But war isn't nice, has never been nice, and never will be nice. Honor, Theisman and a few other Peeps showed that it is only civil when it is fought by "human beings." A government simply cannot base the safety of its citizens on the disposition of its enemy's humanity.

Any industry making molycircs is a target. They can be refurbished to make molys for the war effort if need be. Recall the many reallocations of US industry during the war. You were making toasters one minute and guns the next. Also, Manticoran schools that teach programming and nanofarm assembly? Hell yes! That leads to job lots of highly qualified people. Heck, I'd imagine Saint-Just would not have blinked at all before shutting down Manticore's "education factories and assembly lines" that were churning out significantly more qualified people at alarming rates.
ThinksMarkedly wrote:In the end, history is written by the victors and they set precedent. They'll convene a tribunal and pass judgement on the defeated. Vae victis

I agree. But that's still no reason not to expect lots of charges being levied because of the many horrendous transgressions. Retribution has never been a deterrence to war.

War is only waged nicely by entities with bigger guns.

Son, your mother says I have to hang you. Personally I don't think this is a capital offense. But if I don't hang you, she's gonna hang me and frankly, I'm not the one in trouble. —cthia's father. Incident in ? Axiom of Common Sense
Top
Re: Did the MBS corner the market on trade?
Post by tlb   » Thu Oct 29, 2020 8:31 am

tlb
Admiral

Posts: 2067
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 10:34 am

cthia wrote:
cthia wrote:I agree on separating the civies from the military. But I can see the benefit having them together. If it is a civilian firm that supplies parts or consulting expertise it is a no brainer as far as efficiency if they are together. It is probably good for morale as well having some "babes" around. Even if it is your own wife.
ThinksMarkedly wrote:I agree too. Customarily, someone who did manage to threaten the station would have given sufficient time for evacuations, so customarily civilians were not in big danger.

But yes, the stations were legitimate military targets. It was Manticore's own failure protect its civilians.

I disagree with that part. Customary as of fairly recently, perhaps. But historically, no. Remember, EE violations is what gave the mighty gorilla it's wisdom teeth to bite. I suspect that in the pre-Edict era, warnings were a pipe dream. Heck, I doubt Masada cared about warning Grayson.

ThinksMarkedly wrote:As for what else constitutes military target or not, you have to draw the line somewhere. And this is subjective. A subcontractor making parts for a missile? Probably. A subcontractor that makes molycirc components that go everywhere including missiles? It's arguable. The engineering schools that teach programming and nanofarm assembly? Doubtful. The architect firm that designed the living space aboard the military stations? Probably not.

No, your enemy does not have to draw the line anywhere. It'd be "nice" of them. But war isn't nice, has never been nice, and never will be nice. Honor, Theisman and a few other Peeps showed that it is only civil when it is fought by "human beings." A government simply cannot base the safety of its citizens on the disposition of its enemy's humanity.

Any industry making molycircs is a target. They can be refurbished to make molys for the war effort if need be. Recall the many reallocations of US industry during the war. You were making toasters one minute and guns the next. Also, Manticoran schools that teach programming and nanofarm assembly? Hell yes! That leads to job lots of highly qualified people. Heck, I'd imagine Saint-Just would not have blinked at all before shutting down Manticore's "education factories and assembly lines" that were churning out significantly more qualified people at alarming rates.
ThinksMarkedly wrote:In the end, history is written by the victors and they set precedent. They'll convene a tribunal and pass judgement on the defeated. Vae victis

I agree. But that's still no reason not to expect lots of charges being levied because of the many horrendous transgressions. Retribution has never been a deterrence to war.

War is only waged nicely by entities with bigger guns.

You are consistent in your pessimistic views on the rules of war, but there is historic evidence that they do modify behavior:
In WW1, the German submarines only stopped giving warning to evacuate ships when Great Britain began to deploy armed mechant men.
In WW2, the Nazi government had no objection to using poison gas internally; but did not employ it against enemy armed forces.

Retribution is not a deterrence to war, but it is a deterrence to the wholesale breaking of the rules of war. It is normally only when asymmetric warfare lapses into terrorism that the rules are set aside.
Top
Re: Did the MBS corner the market on trade?
Post by cthia   » Thu Oct 29, 2020 8:53 am

cthia
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 12968
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2014 12:10 pm

cthia wrote:
cthia wrote:I agree on separating the civies from the military. But I can see the benefit having them together. If it is a civilian firm that supplies parts or consulting expertise it is a no brainer as far as efficiency if they are together. It is probably good for morale as well having some "babes" around. Even if it is your own wife.
ThinksMarkedly wrote:I agree too. Customarily, someone who did manage to threaten the station would have given sufficient time for evacuations, so customarily civilians were not in big danger.

But yes, the stations were legitimate military targets. It was Manticore's own failure protect its civilians.

I disagree with that part. Customary as of fairly recently, perhaps. But historically, no. Remember, EE violations is what gave the mighty gorilla it's wisdom teeth to bite. I suspect that in the pre-Edict era, warnings were a pipe dream. Heck, I doubt Masada cared about warning Grayson.

ThinksMarkedly wrote:As for what else constitutes military target or not, you have to draw the line somewhere. And this is subjective. A subcontractor making parts for a missile? Probably. A subcontractor that makes molycirc components that go everywhere including missiles? It's arguable. The engineering schools that teach programming and nanofarm assembly? Doubtful. The architect firm that designed the living space aboard the military stations? Probably not.

No, your enemy does not have to draw the line anywhere. It'd be "nice" of them. But war isn't nice, has never been nice, and never will be nice. Honor, Theisman and a few other Peeps showed that it is only civil when it is fought by "human beings." A government simply cannot base the safety of its citizens on the disposition of its enemy's humanity.

Any industry making molycircs is a target. They can be refurbished to make molys for the war effort if need be. Recall the many reallocations of US industry during the war. You were making toasters one minute and guns the next. Also, Manticoran schools that teach programming and nanofarm assembly? Hell yes! That leads to job lots of highly qualified people. Heck, I'd imagine Saint-Just would not have blinked at all before shutting down Manticore's "education factories and assembly lines" that were churning out significantly more qualified people at alarming rates.
ThinksMarkedly wrote:In the end, history is written by the victors and they set precedent. They'll convene a tribunal and pass judgement on the defeated. Vae victis

I agree. But that's still no reason not to expect lots of charges being levied because of the many horrendous transgressions. Retribution has never been a deterrence to war.

War is only waged nicely by entities with bigger guns.

tlb wrote:You are consistent in your pessimistic views on the rules of war, but there is historic evidence that they do modify behavior:
In WW1, the German submarines only stopped giving warning to evacuate ships when Great Britain began to deploy armed mechant men.
In WW2, the Nazi government had no objection to using poison gas internally; but did not employ it against enemy armed forces.

Retribution is not a deterrence to war, but it is a deterrence to the wholesale breaking of the rules of war. It is normally only when asymmetric warfare lapses into terrorism that the rules are set aside.

Although I agree, my argument is that you can't bank on it.

Desperate times may call for desperate measures. See the SL. See Japan and Pearl Harbor. See the World Trade Center and The Pentagon. See the entire 911 operation.

See the coronavirus?

Son, your mother says I have to hang you. Personally I don't think this is a capital offense. But if I don't hang you, she's gonna hang me and frankly, I'm not the one in trouble. —cthia's father. Incident in ? Axiom of Common Sense
Top
Re: Did the MBS corner the market on trade?
Post by tlb   » Thu Oct 29, 2020 12:40 pm

tlb
Admiral

Posts: 2067
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 10:34 am

cthia wrote:See the coronavirus?

Except there was a plan and if not, there was the entire history of what worked and did not with the "Spanish" Flu (called Spanish, because that was the main European country that was not censoring the news of the outbreak because of the war). There is a reasonable mathematical model for diseases that spread by aerosols. The main new points that were discovered early on were the possibilities of asymptomatic spreading and of super-spreader events.
Top
Re: Did the MBS corner the market on trade?
Post by ThinksMarkedly   » Thu Oct 29, 2020 2:31 pm

ThinksMarkedly
Vice Admiral

Posts: 1630
Joined: Sat Aug 17, 2019 10:39 am

cthia wrote:I disagree with that part. Customary as of fairly recently, perhaps. But historically, no. Remember, EE violations is what gave the mighty gorilla it's wisdom teeth to bite. I suspect that in the pre-Edict era, warnings were a pipe dream. Heck, I doubt Masada cared about warning Grayson.


Even historically, because it would have been blindingly obvious a hostile force was coming to your planet, as wedges can be detected from light-minutes away. And usually you'd have a fleet opposing those hostiles, so you'd buy more time.

What changed and what made OB possible at all was that the attack did not have to be noticed or go through the existing defences.

ThinksMarkedly wrote:In the end, history is written by the victors and they set precedent. They'll convene a tribunal and pass judgement on the defeated. Vae victis

cthia wrote:I agree. But that's still no reason not to expect lots of charges being levied because of the many horrendous transgressions. Retribution has never been a deterrence to war.

War is only waged nicely by entities with bigger guns.


War between two opponents of similar size would need to take retributions and penalties after the war into account, since one side can't be sure they'll come out on top. War between opponents of vastly different capabilities does not need to descend into war crimes because the winner is never in question.

This breaks down in two cases. First, as we saw with Saint-Just: desperation. When one's back is against the wall, expect lashing out. The best case scenario here is a regime change that ends the war, but if you have fanatics in power and they can't be removed...

The second is the case of the Alignment: those who mistakenly believe themselves to be immune from retribution. This often comes with fanaticism and zealotry, as was with the Masadans, but isn't necessarily so.
Top
Re: Did the MBS corner the market on trade?
Post by Jonathan_S   » Thu Oct 29, 2020 3:35 pm

Jonathan_S
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 6776
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 1:01 pm
Location: Virginia, USA

ThinksMarkedly wrote:War between two opponents of similar size would need to take retributions and penalties after the war into account, since one side can't be sure they'll come out on top. War between opponents of vastly different capabilities does not need to descend into war crimes because the winner is never in question.

This breaks down in two cases. First, as we saw with Saint-Just: desperation. When one's back is against the wall, expect lashing out. The best case scenario here is a regime change that ends the war, but if you have fanatics in power and they can't be removed...

The second is the case of the Alignment: those who mistakenly believe themselves to be immune from retribution. This often comes with fanaticism and zealotry, as was with the Masadans, but isn't necessarily so.

While wars between opponents of vastly different capabilities may not need to descend into war crimes historically there are certainly cases where they've done so.
One that comes to mind it Italy using chemical weapons in its colonial war against Ethiopia in '35-'36. They didn't fear retribution from Ethiopia, and they rightly judged that other nations wouldn't take effective actions to punish that war crime. So even though they were clearly the more powerful military they still opted for chemical weapons.

Also, in even more mismatched fights your two cases where it breaks down - desperation and fanaticism - can drive the weaker power into committing atrocities and war crimes as they seem themselves as having nothing to lose - and having no chance in a clear or fair fight. See various guerilla and other asymmetrical wars; which rarely restrict themselves entirely to "legitimate" military targets.
Top
Re: Did the MBS corner the market on trade?
Post by Brigade XO   » Thu Oct 29, 2020 5:38 pm

Brigade XO
Admiral

Posts: 2611
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 11:31 am
Location: KY

The Alignment blew up the station out in Talbott which promped Byng- who was already predisposed to hate Manticore and - he did have the energy weapons live and aimed at the destroyers BEFORE the explosion happened, "just in case". And then the Alighment has been bombing Mesa for at least YEARS before they did the "Final Flourish" and then they blew the housekeeping/ vaporize what ? 30 parts of Mesa "just" to hide themselves. And Mesa was their original home.
And then the Alighment, not being content to manuver the League and SLN into Operation Buccaneer, put nuclear bombs in the THREE LARGEST ORBITAL HABITATS around Beowulf to "blame" the SLN and kill tens of millions of hated Beowulfers.

So what is and isn't a ligitimate target? It depends. Do you want to crush the spirt and moral of your enemy (who doesn't actualy you know you exist) you destroy almost every orbital instilation in the Manticore Binary System with your new "invisible" and stealth weapons knowing that not only are a massive number of civilians are going to be killed but you don't care that the debris from a number of those facilites are going to impact on inhabited plants since it's "only debris and not a direct attack" and the League isn't going to respond like it's an EE violation . Actually, the League did respond but not with any humanitarinan aid, the sent Fillerta under Raging Justice to attack and conquer the system so the OFS and League Buracracies could both loot it and make it their personal cash cow.

Rules....sure there are rules. And if you make your own Rules of Engagement incompatible with the objective of the engagement/campaign/war, then both you and your rules suck. You will get a lot more of your own people killed, you find yourself not winning/prevailing/suceeding (pick a word, it doesn't really matter because if you don't win you do lose) and then everybody uses you as a piñata in places like the UN and the "world" press.

And, if you lose, the other side is going to extractd as much blood and treasure as they can or want after having slaughtered your people and frustrating your designes. So either way, your going to be "Bad People" or inhumand unbelievers or whaterver the slur of the moment will be.
It's a no win argument. Do the job and come home. Either way they will hate you for a hundred or more years anyway. The Cynical Quotient is very high today.
Top
Re: Did the MBS corner the market on trade?
Post by cthia   » Thu Oct 29, 2020 10:02 pm

cthia
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 12968
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2014 12:10 pm

tlb wrote:Retribution is not a deterrence to war, but it is a deterrence to the wholesale breaking of the rules of war. It is normally only when asymmetric warfare lapses into terrorism that the rules are set aside.


Retribution is not a deterrence to war. And war is not an excuse for civility. There is no such thing as a "civil" war.

"If we lose the war, what more can you do to us that will exceed the reasons we are already "prepared to die for."

Son, your mother says I have to hang you. Personally I don't think this is a capital offense. But if I don't hang you, she's gonna hang me and frankly, I'm not the one in trouble. —cthia's father. Incident in ? Axiom of Common Sense
Top
Re: Did the MBS corner the market on trade?
Post by Jonathan_S   » Thu Oct 29, 2020 11:30 pm

Jonathan_S
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 6776
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 1:01 pm
Location: Virginia, USA

cthia wrote:
tlb wrote:Retribution is not a deterrence to war, but it is a deterrence to the wholesale breaking of the rules of war. It is normally only when asymmetric warfare lapses into terrorism that the rules are set aside.


Retribution is not a deterrence to war. And war is not an excuse for civility. There is no such thing as a "civil" war.

"If we lose the war, what more can you do to us that will exceed the reasons we are already "prepared to die for."

Agreed that retribution, or fear of retribution, rarely seems to prevent wars.

But it does seem to be far more effective at preventing specific possible methods of waging those wars.
Prisoners are expensive in terms of money, supplies, guards, and a risk that they might cause issues if they escape. Yet most of the time in most wars prisoners are taken and usually not later killed arbitrarily. And that's in part because if you kill your prisoners then your enemy is likely to start retaliating by killing your captured troops. (Though also, if soldiers know that being prisoner isn't signing up for torture and death they'll be more likely actually surrender rather than always fighting to the death - and its beneficial to your army if the opponent isn't determined to fight intelligently to the death rather than surrendering. You end up taking far longer to advance while taking more casualties)

But also in theory it might be effective to sneak undercover forces far behind enemy lines (possibly through a neutral 3rd country) to target the families of soldiers or officers. It wouldn't take very many of those to cause major disruptions. But if you adopt that tactic then it might be your family that suffers when your enemy responds in kind.
Top

Return to Honorverse