1) I am referring to politically danger, rather than physically danger to whatever ruling party is running the particular area of the Vargr expanse.
So am I, assuming for purposes of argument that there's a difference.
Coupled with "Church of the Chosen" ideology, failure to support a charismatic leader who wants to conquer those darn pinkies, and exert the Vargr's rightful place can be a bigger political risk than him turning on you with the fleet you so generously gave him.
Killing a popular political rival might not be the best option.
If the alternative is giving him an invasion fleet it very likely is.
2) Who said anything about giving him enough of a fleet to conquer all of Corridor?
When you talk about conquering one Imperial world you're talking about conquering a whole lot more than that. Historically, the smallest chunk of the Imperium that has had a chance to stand up to its full might is somewhat over a full sector (Two examples, Julian League and Ilelish, one won, the other lost). So to talk about conquering just one or two worlds is highly unrealistic, because you'd have to be an imbecile to think that you would be allowed to keep it.
Give him enough to take a few systems. Let him harass and challenge the Imperium. Let him see what it is like trying to rule conquered pinkies. Let him get killed by the Imperials. While he is doing that, he is not causing you problems at home, which is one primary concern above and beyond what he accomplishes.
Same problem as with Aslan
ihatei. Once the admiral has his invasion fleet, there are far easier nuts to crack than the Imperium. He'd be far likelier to conquer a nice little pocket empire if he goes somewhere else in the Vargr Extents.
Also, if the purpose is to get rid of the admiral, it's cheaper to give him a much smaller fleet and send him against a single world somewhere in the Extents than to give him a fleet that has a realistic chance against the Imperium. Come to that, there is no Vargr state that could afford to outfit a fleet with a realistic chance against the Imperium.
If he fails, he dies a hero to the cause, a hero you tried to support and help, putting you on the side of angels. Politically, dead heroes are less problematic than live ones. If he succeeds, he may pay you back for the fleet, but even if he doesn't he is going to have his hands full hanging on to his new conquests.
And if he takes his fleet and conquers a Vargr pocket empire somewhere, you're a moron. Not good for your charisma.
3) Sophants are not rational animals, they are animals with the ability to use reason and logic. The use of reason and logic is a choice, just as the use of emotion or religious teachings as a means of determining one's actions is a choice. Even if you don't see the rationale for attacking Corridor, does not mean it won't be done. The sanity of a plan is irrelevant if one has the means and determination to implement.
Does Argentine have the strength to conquer Rhode Island? I think it does. I also think that there's no chance that they'll ever try and no chance that the other 49 states would let it. I don't see the rationale for Argentine attacking Rhode Island, and I'm pretty sure it won't be done. And it's not just the sanity of a Vargr attack on Corridor that I question, it's the means and the determination to do so.
*4) the spelling checker on this site does not recognize the words Vargr or Sophants. Is there a way to fix that?
The correct spelling is 'sophont'. (Unless T5 has established a variant spelling).
Hans