Topic Actions

Topic Search

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Majestic-12 [Bot] and 5 guests

Eridani Edict Violation of the most Dismissive Kind...

Join us in talking discussing all things Honor, including (but not limited to) tactics, favorite characters, and book discussions.
Re: Eridani Edict Violation of the most Dismissive Kind...
Post by Armed Neo-Bob   » Wed Mar 14, 2018 12:28 am

Armed Neo-Bob
Captain of the List

Posts: 468
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2014 6:11 pm

cthia wrote:After the Beowulf fiasco settles, and the galaxy gets back to "normal," who is going to take on the mantle of enforcing the Eridani Edict? Whoever does, should probably put it in writing so the galaxy will be aware of it, so they'll have to get everyone else in the galaxy to sign off on it just like the original enforcers. Or it won't be anything short of vigilante justice. Unless, of course, yours is the planet skrewed.

Which offers up an amusing scenario. The RMN or the GA or some entirely new alliance including the Andermani, approaching the anorexic remnants of the gorilla asking them to sign on for "protection."

I find that very amusing. Very! LOL


I don't really think any star system will violate it, it is too long a part of the general spacefaring culture. In the books, the only times it ever comes up is with the Masadans threatening Grayson, or the Malign trying to snuff Torch. Neither is a "normal" system government.

I think it's in the text, if not the Pearls, but the Eridani Edict was one of the few pieces of meaningful legislation enacted by the Assembly of Stars, ever. Which means ALL the members of the League at the time signed off on it as LAW, because a single veto would have stopped it. These days, those are Core Worlds; but whatever comes out of the League, only rogue states will perform these atrocities.

It has been a part of their culture almost as long as the League existed; and unlike the Cherwell Convention, the planetary systems were prepared to enforce it.

It is very likely that any treaties signed by the League in those early days would include a prohibition of actions covered under the Edict; leaving the Edict itself a standard in interstellar law, whether the League itself remains or not.

Rob
Top
Re: Eridani Edict Violation of the most Dismissive Kind...
Post by kzt   » Wed Mar 14, 2018 1:52 am

kzt
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 9665
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2010 7:18 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM

No, it was not passed by the assembly. It was an amendment to the SL’s constitution, as that was easier to pass than a law. Which suggests how hard it is to pass laws.

This implies there may well be other ways to modify the SL that bypasses the Assembly’s veto. Ignoring, that is, the historically successful approach of arresting and imprisoning the people who vote against your bill and repeating until it passes.
Top
Re: Eridani Edict Violation of the most Dismissive Kind...
Post by munroburton   » Wed Mar 14, 2018 5:24 am

munroburton
Vice Admiral

Posts: 1988
Joined: Sat Jun 15, 2013 9:16 am
Location: Scotland

kzt wrote:No, it was not passed by the assembly. It was an amendment to the SL’s constitution, as that was easier to pass than a law. Which suggests how hard it is to pass laws.

This implies there may well be other ways to modify the SL that bypasses the Assembly’s veto. Ignoring, that is, the historically successful approach of arresting and imprisoning the people who vote against your bill and repeating until it passes.


The veto bypass was to hold a referendum, I think. Wonder how the hell that was organised and counted. Granted, the League was a lot smaller back then.

The EEE was the 97th Amendment too, in 1410. The League was created a little before 1300. We know from textev that it worked quite well for the first few hundred years before the inflated size made the Assembly unmanageable, wormholes were discovered, the bureaucrats gradually picked off powers through statutory instruments(including taxing interstellar shipping) and now they don't even have a complete census of the League population(still counting at ~3 trillion).
Top
Re: Eridani Edict Violation of the most Dismissive Kind...
Post by ldwechsler   » Wed Mar 14, 2018 7:14 am

ldwechsler
Rear Admiral

Posts: 1150
Joined: Sun May 28, 2017 11:15 am

munroburton wrote:
kzt wrote:No, it was not passed by the assembly. It was an amendment to the SL’s constitution, as that was easier to pass than a law. Which suggests how hard it is to pass laws.

This implies there may well be other ways to modify the SL that bypasses the Assembly’s veto. Ignoring, that is, the historically successful approach of arresting and imprisoning the people who vote against your bill and repeating until it passes.


The veto bypass was to hold a referendum, I think. Wonder how the hell that was organised and counted. Granted, the League was a lot smaller back then.

The EEE was the 97th Amendment too, in 1410. The League was created a little before 1300. We know from textev that it worked quite well for the first few hundred years before the inflated size made the Assembly unmanageable, wormholes were discovered, the bureaucrats gradually picked off powers through statutory instruments(including taxing interstellar shipping) and now they don't even have a complete census of the League population(still counting at ~3 trillion).


In the long run these things don't matter. It's not uncommon for these kind of groups to be hypocritical. We've had dozens of UN resolutions where democracies were criticized by dictatorships. There was a resolution condemning US treatment of women, signed on to by Iran and some of its friends.

The same in the League. Remember it's just about impossible to pass laws which means member states have no way to oppose the bureaucracy...sort of what the EU is becoming now here.

So Beowulf should not bear that much shame since there was nothing they could do to stop the horrid imperialism except leave the League.

As for Eridani, the League has created an exception. They can bomb the hell out of the protectorates and the people they are abusing.
Top
Re: Eridani Edict Violation of the most Dismissive Kind...
Post by pappilon   » Wed Mar 14, 2018 6:46 pm

pappilon
Rear Admiral

Posts: 1074
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2017 10:29 pm

ldwechsler wrote: As for Eridani, the League has created an exception. They can bomb the hell out of the protectorates and the people they are abusing.


How can the nuking of Green Pines be an EEE violation. (1) NO warships invading/attacking Mesa.(@0 No defeat of the MSDF with resultant contro of planetary orbit.(3) No missiles or KEWs launched from non-existent warships in lieu of calls for the planetary government to surrender.

Absolutely NONE of the required requisites for the EEE are present.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The imagination has to be trained into foresight and empathy.
Ursula K. LeGuinn

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Top
Re: Eridani Edict Violation of the most Dismissive Kind...
Post by Jonathan_S   » Wed Mar 14, 2018 7:09 pm

Jonathan_S
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 5827
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 1:01 pm
Location: Virginia, USA

pappilon wrote:
ldwechsler wrote: As for Eridani, the League has created an exception. They can bomb the hell out of the protectorates and the people they are abusing.


How can the nuking of Green Pines be an EEE violation. (1) NO warships invading/attacking Mesa.(@0 No defeat of the MSDF with resultant contro of planetary orbit.(3) No missiles or KEWs launched from non-existent warships in lieu of calls for the planetary government to surrender.

Absolutely NONE of the required requisites for the EEE are present.

EE Violations do not require all 3 of those conditions.
What RFC said in this infodump was "What you are responsible for is seeing to it that such weapons are not used (1) indiscriminately, (2) as a weapon of terror, (3) genocidally, or (4) without warning the recipient of the attack that it will be launched unless certain conditions (like surrender) are met."

Indiscriminate WMD usage doesn't have to come from a warship to be an Edict violation. But if it does it's at least as much an Edict violation to bombard the planetary surface from the hyper limit, without every engaging the defenders, as it is from orbit after defeating them but before demanding surrender.
And if Masada somehow slipped nukes into shipments to Grayson and blew up several major cities I'm convinced it would be an Edict Violation even if none of their warships were even in the Yeltsin system - because it would still be an indiscriminate terror/genocidal attack on the planetary population without any warning.


It's possible that an indiscriminate attack, using a construction nuke, might not be considered an Edict Violation. But you can't judge that just from the conditions you listed.
Top
Re: Eridani Edict Violation of the most Dismissive Kind...
Post by cthia   » Wed Mar 14, 2018 7:19 pm

cthia
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 10683
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2014 12:10 pm

pappilon wrote:
ldwechsler wrote: As for Eridani, the League has created an exception. They can bomb the hell out of the protectorates and the people they are abusing.


How can the nuking of Green Pines be an EEE violation. (1) NO warships invading/attacking Mesa.(@0 No defeat of the MSDF with resultant contro of planetary orbit.(3) No missiles or KEWs launched from non-existent warships in lieu of calls for the planetary government to surrender.

Absolutely NONE of the required requisites for the EEE are present.
Jonathan_S wrote:EE Violations do not require all 3 of those conditions.
What RFC said in this infodump was "What you are responsible for is seeing to it that such weapons are not used (1) indiscriminately, (2) as a weapon of terror, (3) genocidally, or (4) without warning the recipient of the attack that it will be launched unless certain conditions (like surrender) are met."

Indiscriminate WMD usage doesn't have to come from a warship to be an Edict violation. But if it does it's at least as much an Edict violation to bombard the planetary surface from the hyper limit, without every engaging the defenders, as it is from orbit after defeating them but before demanding surrender.
And if Masada somehow slipped nukes into shipments to Grayson and blew up several major cities I'm convinced it would be an Edict Violation even if none of their warships were even in the Yeltsin system - because it would still be an indiscriminate terror/genocidal attack on the planetary population without any warning.


It's possible that an indiscriminate attack, using a construction nuke, might not be considered an Edict Violation. But you can't judge that just from the conditions you listed.

I think what ldwechsler is referring to, is in SoV where the SLN uses KEWS to put down terrorist uprisings on one of the planets whose name escapes me along with Harahap's many nomenclatures. As I recall, the officers aboard ship who were simply following orders were none too thrilled about "executing" those orders.

It is a clause in the Edict that says it is okay to use KEWS on your own people who are considered terrorists, essentially those who haven't yet gotten with the program.

IIRC, the planetary governor called the strike in on his own planet.

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: Eridani Edict Violation of the most Dismissive Kind...
Post by kzt   » Wed Mar 14, 2018 8:45 pm

kzt
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 9665
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2010 7:18 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM

pappilon wrote:How can the nuking of Green Pines be an EEE violation. (1) NO warships invading/attacking Mesa.(@0 No defeat of the MSDF with resultant contro of planetary orbit.(3) No missiles or KEWs launched from non-existent warships in lieu of calls for the planetary government to surrender.

Absolutely NONE of the required requisites for the EEE are present.

I have fully quoted at least once and several times linked to what David says constitutes an edict violation. Perhaps you should use David’s definition instead of just making stuff up as part of your straw man construction project?
Top
Re: Eridani Edict Violation of the most Dismissive Kind...
Post by pappilon   » Thu Mar 15, 2018 3:06 am

pappilon
Rear Admiral

Posts: 1074
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2017 10:29 pm

kzt wrote:
pappilon wrote:How can the nuking of Green Pines be an EEE violation. (1) NO warships invading/attacking Mesa.(@0 No defeat of the MSDF with resultant contro of planetary orbit.(3) No missiles or KEWs launched from non-existent warships in lieu of calls for the planetary government to surrender.

Absolutely NONE of the required requisites for the EEE are present.

I have fully quoted at least once and several times linked to what David says constitutes an edict violation. Perhaps you should use David’s definition instead of just making stuff up as part of your straw man construction project?


MAybe you have and maybe you haven"t I just know what I've assumed from the TEXTEV, go flanme someone else.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The imagination has to be trained into foresight and empathy.
Ursula K. LeGuinn

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Top
Re: Eridani Edict Violation of the most Dismissive Kind...
Post by Brigade XO   » Thu Mar 15, 2018 6:51 am

Brigade XO
Admiral

Posts: 2187
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 11:31 am
Location: KY

It is unlikely that the SL would have gotten involved if Masada somehow slipped nukes into shipments to Grayson and blew up several cities or even if the Masadan plan worked with the help of Haven and ended up using even one of their own (not a Haven built) warships to drip a KEW or two on specific points on Grayson after taking the orbitals.

Why? Because even if Manticore was there to notice, the SL wouldn't care. Neither Grayson nor certainly Masada had anything at that point that OFS would have concidered worth streaching out to take. Grayson is a LONG way from the SL. Heck, we don't even see any transtellars sniffing around Grayson. It would have been treated by the SL, if they got word of it in any kind of timelty manner, as little more than a neo-barb civil war driven by two sets of twisted religious fundimantalinsm.

The only reason Manticore was there was the same reason the Peeps were. Grayson occupies a stratigic location relative to Haven and Manticore in the tactical conciderations of Haven's expansion (specificaly taking Manticore) and Manticor'e needing to both deny Haven that position and gain support.
The approch was very different but the basic reasons were the same. You want to go with plot driven approach contrasting Haven vs Manticore, Manticore was perfectly willing to ignor Masada if they left Grayson alone and since they clearly didn't see the Haven involvement except diplomatic presence on Grayson, about the only true concern Masada presented would be possible pirate activity (they have been listening to those paranoid Graysons again) and potentially usefull but very inferior tactical position for Haven vs. Grayson. Manticore shows up with usefull modern equipment (not "glass beads and trinkets" ), offer of trade agreements and military alliance to Grayson. Masada- nada.
Of course, Grayson is not constantly plotting to take over Masada and the upper level of government clearly doesn't trust Haven but dispite the very differnt take and possibly degenerate view on religions from the Grayson point of view, Manticore has a history and tradition of fair dealing.
And so the plot unfolds.

And NONE of those FF KEW attacks on revolts pushed along by Harlap and friends nor the Intervention Battalion deployments would have been considered EE violations since FF was just doing their job at the request of the legitimate (in the eyes of the OFS and SL) governments.
Top

Return to Honorverse