Andrew Boulton
The Adminator
Oi, that's my line!
Anyone know the name of the Terran starship that jumped to Barnards Star in 2096?
- Thread starter Michael Taylor
- Start date
jchurchill
SOC-12
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Whatever happens, we have got
The Meson gun, and they have not."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oi, that's my line!
============================================
Andrew,
Were he alive Hillaire Belloc might say the same thing. Maxim -- Meson --what's the difference?
"Whatever happens, we have got
The Meson gun, and they have not."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oi, that's my line!
============================================
Andrew,
Were he alive Hillaire Belloc might say the same thing. Maxim -- Meson --what's the difference?
Andrew Boulton
The Adminator
Well, yeah, that's who I stole it from.
BetterThanLife
SOC-14 1K
Those who fail to study history are doomed to repeat it. I see, the Grand Empire of the Stars wasn't expanding or expansionist? It didn't pose a threat to the independence of Terra and its possesions? I thought the First Imperium was slowly expanding. Kind of like a glacier. But we know they had no designs on Earth because of what? Because they said so? You may not see historical parallels, and I am not saying they are direct parallels. But there are some definite parallels.
Remember, perception is reality as far as the perceiver is concerned. If Terra perceived a threat, then there was a threat. If Terra perceived a vast interstellar empire had designs on them then as far as they were concerned there was one. Perhaps if Terra hadn't acted in the way they had then the Vilani would have eventually taken one planet at a time. Perhaps not. They weren't given the chance. (At least in the official line.) When looked at from the perspective of Terra the Viliani posed a Clear and Present Danger to the independence of Terra, and the Terran way of life. Under those circumstances there are very few choices. And the best defense has always been and still is a good offense.
But Terra did act so there was no appeasement. If The International powers had acted when Hitler wanted to take the Czech Republic or the Slovak Republic later, Hitler might have been stopped sooner. With less loss of life and a shorter war. Germany wasn't truly ready in 1937. They weren't even truly ready in 1939. Unfortunately the Great European Powers of the time allowed Hitler to gain and maintain the initiative.
Playing Monday morning quarterback after the game is played, after watching the results is easy. Making decisions without all the facts, with conjecture and scouting reports is another matter and why the people that make those kind of decisions make more money than those of us using 20/20 hindsight. They earn it.
. </font>[/QUOTE]
Remember, perception is reality as far as the perceiver is concerned. If Terra perceived a threat, then there was a threat. If Terra perceived a vast interstellar empire had designs on them then as far as they were concerned there was one. Perhaps if Terra hadn't acted in the way they had then the Vilani would have eventually taken one planet at a time. Perhaps not. They weren't given the chance. (At least in the official line.) When looked at from the perspective of Terra the Viliani posed a Clear and Present Danger to the independence of Terra, and the Terran way of life. Under those circumstances there are very few choices. And the best defense has always been and still is a good offense.
But Terra did act so there was no appeasement. If The International powers had acted when Hitler wanted to take the Czech Republic or the Slovak Republic later, Hitler might have been stopped sooner. With less loss of life and a shorter war. Germany wasn't truly ready in 1937. They weren't even truly ready in 1939. Unfortunately the Great European Powers of the time allowed Hitler to gain and maintain the initiative.
Playing Monday morning quarterback after the game is played, after watching the results is easy. Making decisions without all the facts, with conjecture and scouting reports is another matter and why the people that make those kind of decisions make more money than those of us using 20/20 hindsight. They earn it.
No, I do think people should stop using historical analogies that are completely irrelevant here though
. </font>[/QUOTE]
M
Malenfant
Guest
Even if they had been expanding slowly, there was plenty of time to find other solutions that wouldn't involve all out war. The First Imperium had probably expanded to rimward about as far as it could get anyway.
There's one teensy problem with that statement though - the Vilani were in no way, shape or form a "Clear and Present Danger" to Terra, or the Terran way of life before the First IW. There was no evidence whatsoever (as far as we know) that the Vilani had plans to conquer, invade, or attack the Terrans.
The Terrans, for some completely irrational reason, saw the Vilani as a threat when they presented none whatsoever. Might they have been a threat later on? Maybe, but being paranoid doesn't justify striking first when the other side is doing nothing to harm or threaten you at all. The Terrans charged in and started the wars because they were gung-ho, scared, paranoid, insecure, and/or damn stupid.
(Hrm. This sequence of events sounds strangely familiar, doesn't it... what was that you were saying about "Those who fail to study history are doomed to repeat it."?
For all you don't like Appeasement, you have to think of it as someone from that era. Just over 20 years earlier Europe was embroiled in the biggest and most brutal war the world had ever seen. None of the other European leaders wanted to see a repeat of that, and they'd have done (and indeed did) anything to avoid it. Eventually they realised that Hitler wasn't going to be happy with anything but all of Europe, and that's when they realised that they'd have to go to war.
Sometimes two sides can meet and both can come out without no conflict. Sometimes one side or the other (or both) is hellbent on starting one, and war results. In the case of the IWs, it seems to me that the Vilani weren't interested in starting a war, but the Terrans - for some bizarre reason - were. Others might call it "pre-emptively striking" or "getting breathing room" or "good offense", but I call it insanity - especially considering they struck at a vastly more powerful interstellar empire.
BetterThanLife
SOC-14 1K
And the evidence of this is what, exactly? And how did the Terrans know this evidence existed?
There's one teensy problem with that statement though - the Vilani were in no way, shape or form a "Clear and Present Danger" to Terra, or the Terran way of life before the First IW. There was no evidence whatsoever (as far as we know) that the Vilani had plans to conquer, invade, or attack the Terrans.
The Terrans, for some completely irrational reason, saw the Vilani as a threat when they presented none whatsoever. Might they have been a threat later on? Maybe, but being paranoid doesn't justify striking first when the other side is doing nothing to harm or threaten you at all. The Terrans charged in and started the wars because they were gung-ho, scared, paranoid, insecure, and/or damn stupid.
(Hrm. This sequence of events sounds strangely familiar, doesn't it... what was that you were saying about "Those who fail to study history are doomed to repeat it."?
</font>[/QUOTE]Aaaah but the gung-ho, scared, paranoid, insecure and/or damn stupid Terrans did one thing right. They won!
But you know what, perhaps you are right. I am sure, with the benefit of hindsight, that US intervention caused WWII. After all if we had just kept our noses out and not sent troops to defend France and England in 1918, there would have been no reason for WWII because Germany would have controlled all of Europe, or at least continental Europe, Europe would have been united, Germany wouldn't have been economically bankrupted, and Hitler couldn't have come to power in the first place. All the US would have had to deal with in the 1940s would have been Japan. It would have saved countless lives. Isn't clear hindsight wonderful?
Again where is your proof that the Grand Empire wasn't expanding Rimward. (Especially once they realized that a Technologically advanced civilization was on their border.) The History of the 1st Imperium shows a pattern of not wanting people with Jump Drives on their borders and curing that "problem" with conquest. The Lurani and Sydites are both examples of this type of action. If the Terrans should have known enough that the Imperium wasn't expanding, then they also should have known enough of its history to know what similar situations in the past became.
Yes two governments that can reasonably negotiate in good faith can come to a solution. That is true. As is the fact that there is nothing forcing either side to negotiate in good faith or be reasonable. Naively sitting around hoping for peace without force to back it up is the surest route to war. Peace is not simply the absence of war. Peace is obtained only through force and either the application of it or, sufficeint force to force the other side to accept your terms without the application of it. In the case of Terra vs. the Vilani, the only option, as far as Terra is concerned is to apply force in hopes of securing peace because they certainly don't have enough force to secure peace without application of force, and there is no evidence that the Vilani would be reasonable.
That, unfortunately or fortunately depending on your point of view, is a lesson of Earth History. Regardless of which century you choose, the only route to real peace is victory. And the only justification for war, after the fact, is victory.
M
Malenfant
Guest
There's no evidence that they would be unreasonable either. Or do you usually walk up to people in the street and punch them in the face because they might attack you at some point in the future?
Getting a bit topical, I think this discussion kinda highlights the massive differences between European and current American thinking. I mean, everyone's opinions on war in this discussion is guided to an extent by their cultures' view on the matter, and it seems clear to me that you think it's fine to strike pre-emptively out of paranoia and lack of knowledge at a perceived (not confirmed) threat before the other side can do anything. Which is a view that half of America at least believes at the moment (and I presume you're in that half).
I on the other hand think it's better to learn about the other culture, find out exactly what their motivations are, and go to war only as a last resort, if they are actively hostile towards you and all other avenues have been exhausted. That approach is wiser, and causes less problems in the long run. And despite what some people would have you believe, it's neither cowardly nor weak to do that.
And at the end of the day, realistically, the Terrans could never have won the IWs. For all your talk of showing strength, the Vilani could bring much more strength to bear on the upstarts and would crush them. The only reason they didn't was because the authors of the game didn't want them to. Using historical analogies can only go so far because in this case one side had "God" very much on their side - and that doesn't happen in the real world.
But I think any further discussion of this is going to veer into politics, and there's a board for that.
BetterThanLife
SOC-14 1K
There's no evidence that they would be unreasonable either. Or do you usually walk up to people in the street and punch them in the face because they might attack you at some point in the future?
</font>[/QUOTE]If the guy on the street is carrying a gun, has a history of violent crime, all I have is my bare hands or a knife and I feel threatened or feel that my daughter is threatened based on circumstances at the time, damn straight I might hit him first. But in that case I wouldn't just hit him in the face. I would take him down to the point that he is no longer a threat.If, on the other hand he isn't a threat, if he doesn't appear to pose a threat to me or mine, and without knowledge of his history or background, as most people on the street fall into this category, then I probably won't act in a provocative manner.
I didn't bring up current politics into this discussion. Nor do I intend to. However we don't have to go back all that far to find problems with your argument that the little guy always loses. Both World Wars, the little guy almost won. Especially in the second World War. Germany was a defeated country, they were economically ruined, had a small army and a smaller Navy. They weren't allowed to build Aircraft, or Battleships or Tanks. They did. In 1939 a bold offensive policy by the French and British after the invasion of Poland would have ended the threat, and crushed the German Army. Not giving in to the demands of Germany that they be allowed to have Austria, the Czech Republic, Slovakia would have stopped or at least delayed Germany. Instead Germany was allowed to pick the time and place of offensive operations. Take the forces it had used in Poland moved them back to the West and attack and roll right over Holland, Belgium and France. How did this happen? Because Europe let a force with superior tactics, if not superior weapon systems, and inferior numbers dictate the course of events. It took 4 years to kick the Germans back out of France and it was only accomplished in that time frame because, even though the Japanese attacked the US directly, the US put the primary emphasis on defeating Germany. Even though Germany did not directly threaten the US. Everything I have seen on the subject showed that the French actually had more and better tanks, in 1939. Yet they, even with the help of the British, fell, rather quickly.
Unlike WWII there is no large government that is isolated geographically from the Solomani that can come in and help/save the First Imperium. Superior tactics, getting and maintaining the initiative, attacking at points of your choosing instead of points where the enemy wants you to attack, can and historically has caused, cause an inferior force to beat a superior force.
Or as another example, the North Vietnamese, maintaining the initiative, attacking a vastly superior force, over a period of 20 years, defeating not one but two world powers.
The Afgans, backwards and seriously technologically inferior, defeated one of the worlds Super Powers. (Twice in their history.)
One more example from history, remember a little thing called the Spanish Armada?
Can you categorically state that only Deus Ex Machina caused the defeat of the Grand Empire of the Stars? Absolutely not. After all if that were the case we would all be speaking Latin, or Egyptian, possibly Sumerian or Farsi.
As far as the OTU is concerned it happened and there are adequate historic parallels to show that it could happen. THe political soapbox is not required here. And I am not going to pull it out.
Andrew Boulton
The Adminator
"I am sure, with the benefit of hindsight, that US intervention caused WWII. After all if we had just kept our noses out and not sent troops to defend France and England in 1918, there would have been no reason for WWII because Germany would have controlled all of Europe"
Actually, by the time the USA arrived Germany was pretty much beaten. There is a good argument that they did cause WW2, though, by making Germany's defeat even greater.
Back on topic, the Terrans didn't really have a choice. The Ziru Sirka had been slowly expanding for millenia, absorbing everything in their path (by force if necessary). They *would* have taken Terra eventually (although it would probably have taken generations). The Vilani didn't negotiate, and they wouldn't tolerate a potentially hostile state forming on their border.
Actually, by the time the USA arrived Germany was pretty much beaten. There is a good argument that they did cause WW2, though, by making Germany's defeat even greater.
Back on topic, the Terrans didn't really have a choice. The Ziru Sirka had been slowly expanding for millenia, absorbing everything in their path (by force if necessary). They *would* have taken Terra eventually (although it would probably have taken generations). The Vilani didn't negotiate, and they wouldn't tolerate a potentially hostile state forming on their border.
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
Being only one planet (a high pop TL9 planet) probably saved Earth from the full wrath of the Vilani Imperium.
If, a few years down the line, they had come across a small pocket empire they would have offered the same choises they always did, join or die.
The other thing that saved Earth was the Vargr attacking the coreward border of the Imperium, which would have been viewed as a much greater threat considering the size of the Vargr extents.
If, a few years down the line, they had come across a small pocket empire they would have offered the same choises they always did, join or die.
The other thing that saved Earth was the Vargr attacking the coreward border of the Imperium, which would have been viewed as a much greater threat considering the size of the Vargr extents.
jchurchill
SOC-12
Getting a bit topical, I think this discussion kinda highlights the massive differences between European and current American thinking. I mean, everyone's opinions on war in this discussion is guided to an extent by their cultures' view on the matter, and it seems clear to me that you think it's fine to strike pre-emptively out of paranoia and lack of knowledge at a perceived (not confirmed) threat before the other side can do anything. Which is a view that half of America at least believes at the moment (and I presume you're in that half).
=================================================
Clearly you have not seen the stirring patriotic adventure movie "Team America, World Police."
The Team's theme song says it all: "America...F*$K Yeah!"
=================================================
Clearly you have not seen the stirring patriotic adventure movie "Team America, World Police."
The Team's theme song says it all: "America...F*$K Yeah!"
BetterThanLife
SOC-14 1K
I am not so sure of that. The Russians had recently left the war. The Germans were transferring assets from the Eastern Front to the Western Front and the Germans discovered the key to breaking the deadlock of Trench Warfare. The tactics employed in a late offensive proved extremely effective and became the basis for modern infantry tactics as used today. Small unit tactics, establishing fire bases, disrupting enemy lines with fire and maneuver. Funny, the same lesson was learned 50 years before during the American Civil War, but apparently it took a few years for the lessons to take. (For some longer than others.) Without the US intervention the issue may have gone either way. I think that the Germans would eventually have lost anyway, but it was definitely not decided.
But I definitely agree that the Terrans didn't have a choice. And not just a hostile state, but they tended toward preemption of governemnts that were technicologically (sp) advanced whether they were hostile or not.
But I definitely agree that the Terrans didn't have a choice. And not just a hostile state, but they tended toward preemption of governemnts that were technicologically (sp) advanced whether they were hostile or not.
M
Malenfant
Guest
Quick ones here:
First, I never said "the little guy always loses". But he usually does.
Second, good luck to ya if you fancy punching a gun-toting guy with a history of violent crime just because you feel threatened by him. I'll be laughing from the sidewalk as you get shot.
Third, well, you think the Terrans were justified in starting the wars. I don't. Had the Vilani actually made some threatening moves and tried to invade Earth's interests, then I'd say it was justified. But they didn't. I do think a lot of this comes down to differing opinion on what makes these sorts of things justified, and I do think that's cultural to an extent. But we'll just have to agree to disagree, I think.
First, I never said "the little guy always loses". But he usually does.
Second, good luck to ya if you fancy punching a gun-toting guy with a history of violent crime just because you feel threatened by him. I'll be laughing from the sidewalk as you get shot.
Third, well, you think the Terrans were justified in starting the wars. I don't. Had the Vilani actually made some threatening moves and tried to invade Earth's interests, then I'd say it was justified. But they didn't. I do think a lot of this comes down to differing opinion on what makes these sorts of things justified, and I do think that's cultural to an extent. But we'll just have to agree to disagree, I think.
jchurchill
SOC-12
"First, I never said "the little guy always loses". But he usually does."
Yes the little guy usually does lose historically but sometimes not. Also as pointed out before, the Terrans were apparently not facing the full strength of the Vilani and the Vilani empire was decaying. Perhaps a rough analogy is the Balkans Wars of 1911-1913 where a handful of smaller countries -- Serbia, Greece, Bulgaria etc -- defeated and drove the Ottoman Empire almost back into Asia Minor. [Rough analogy but more applicable than the 2nd World War.]
"well, you think the Terrans were justified in starting the wars. I don't. Had the Vilani actually made some threatening moves and tried to invade Earth's interests, then I'd say it was justified. But they didn't."
People are just as territorial as the next animal and the Terrans may have been overly hasty in attacking the Vilani empire. But what were Vilani intentions toward the Terrans. because we ar discussing fiction and a game we only have game materials to read to second guess what "really" happened. [nothing really happened of course. it's all made up]
The Terrans and Vilani did not publish books of collected diplomatic documents the way that the great powers did to justify the 1s World War so who knows. [now there is a way to waste time -- I can write fake white papers for the Terran-Vilani- 3rc Imp. justifying the various wars of all 3 via diplomatic documents and memoranda --
should I call it Supplement 15 "Attack of the Bureaucrats"? or "1001 Diplomats"]
Yes the little guy usually does lose historically but sometimes not. Also as pointed out before, the Terrans were apparently not facing the full strength of the Vilani and the Vilani empire was decaying. Perhaps a rough analogy is the Balkans Wars of 1911-1913 where a handful of smaller countries -- Serbia, Greece, Bulgaria etc -- defeated and drove the Ottoman Empire almost back into Asia Minor. [Rough analogy but more applicable than the 2nd World War.]
"well, you think the Terrans were justified in starting the wars. I don't. Had the Vilani actually made some threatening moves and tried to invade Earth's interests, then I'd say it was justified. But they didn't."
People are just as territorial as the next animal and the Terrans may have been overly hasty in attacking the Vilani empire. But what were Vilani intentions toward the Terrans. because we ar discussing fiction and a game we only have game materials to read to second guess what "really" happened. [nothing really happened of course. it's all made up]
The Terrans and Vilani did not publish books of collected diplomatic documents the way that the great powers did to justify the 1s World War so who knows. [now there is a way to waste time -- I can write fake white papers for the Terran-Vilani- 3rc Imp. justifying the various wars of all 3 via diplomatic documents and memoranda --
should I call it Supplement 15 "Attack of the Bureaucrats"? or "1001 Diplomats"]
ranger2261
SOC-12
i think i found your answer here.
http://www.downport.com/amv/Promrise/Barnard.htm
i think this might solve your very long debate on this subject.
http://www.downport.com/amv/Promrise/Barnard.htm
i think this might solve your very long debate on this subject.
ranger2261
SOC-12
sorry that was for the start of the intersteller war.
this is for the fgirst starship to barnards star
http://www.downport.com/amv/Promrise/Origins.htm
once again i hope this helps out.
this is for the fgirst starship to barnards star
http://www.downport.com/amv/Promrise/Origins.htm
once again i hope this helps out.
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
GURPS Interstellar Wars will explain all...
Has anyone on the playtest for GURPS Interstellar Wars been given any idea when it might be release date?
Also, I would be interested to know is this a one time supplement or are they planning an entire new line to supplement GT? If they are planning other past History sourcebooks can we make suggestions?
Also, I would be interested to know is this a one time supplement or are they planning an entire new line to supplement GT? If they are planning other past History sourcebooks can we make suggestions?
Has anyone on the playtest for GURPS Interstellar Wars been given any idea when it might be release date?
Also, I would be interested to know is this a one time supplement or are they planning an entire new line to supplement GT? If they are planning other past History sourcebooks can we make suggestions?
Also, I would be interested to know is this a one time supplement or are they planning an entire new line to supplement GT? If they are planning other past History sourcebooks can we make suggestions?
Andrew Boulton
The Adminator
Re. America in WWI: Churchill apparently said:
"If you hadn't entered the war the Allies would have made peace with Germany in the Spring of 1917. Had we made peace then there would have been no collapse in Russia followed by Communism, no breakdown in Italy followed by Fascism, and Germany would not have signed the Versailles Treaty, which has enthroned Nazism in Germany. If America had stayed out of the war, all these 'isms' wouldn't today be sweeping the continent of Europe and breaking down parliamentary government - and if England had made peace early in 1917, it would have saved over one million British, French, American, and other lives."
http://www.geocities.com/~worldwar1/default-churchill.html
"If you hadn't entered the war the Allies would have made peace with Germany in the Spring of 1917. Had we made peace then there would have been no collapse in Russia followed by Communism, no breakdown in Italy followed by Fascism, and Germany would not have signed the Versailles Treaty, which has enthroned Nazism in Germany. If America had stayed out of the war, all these 'isms' wouldn't today be sweeping the continent of Europe and breaking down parliamentary government - and if England had made peace early in 1917, it would have saved over one million British, French, American, and other lives."
http://www.geocities.com/~worldwar1/default-churchill.html
