Re: Communication and Travel

On 15 Jun 98 at 9:01, Jeff Lyon wrote:

> The whole trick of being an army of occupation is scaleable
> response. Ortillery is not.  If you pull into orbit with your
> uberbattlewagon and threaten to nuke the civvies, they will
> surrender.

Grav tanks, class one beams, something smaller than ortillery in the 
first place...

> 
> Great.  Okay.  Now what?
> 
> Well, obviously you wanted this planet for a reason.	Presumably, it
> was so you could force the populous to work for you.	What sort of
> scaleable response can you get out of ortillery when the whole
> planet calls in sick? "I'm sorry we can't meet the production quotas
> El Supremo, but we've got a nasty case of the flu going around down
> here.  Cough, cough."

Well, you probably start sending your own colonists too. My feeling 
has always been that there are probably serious population pressures 
on earth, and more living space is just as important as grain 
production, or mining raw materials.

> 
> ;)
> 
> So you send a bunch of guys with guns down.  Not so much to shoot
> people, but to grab them by the scruff of the neck and shove them
> into line.  Most humans (unfortunately) respond well to
> intimidation.  They may fume about it in the safety of their homes,
> might even curse the invaders at a local pub with a few stiff drinks
> in them, but by and large very few will actively resist without an
> example, a leader or a lot of assurance that it is safe.

Agreed.

> Well, one of these mornings, as your goons are going down the street
> rounding up workers, a sniper is gonna open up on them or a kid with
> a grenade is gonna run up to them or your nice pretty grav tank is
> gonna catch a homemade satchel charge or a guy is going to drive a
> truck load of explosives into your troops' barracks.

Also agreed.

> Boom.  It's over.  Okay, where is your ortillery now?  And would you
> do with it if you could?  You can't take out an entire city block
> (and you troops with it) to kill a sniper or kid or a carbomber or
> housewife with a satchel charge.

What did the americans do in Beruit or was it the Lebanon when they 
were sniped at. Used the New Jersey for fire support on at least one 
occasion.
What did they do when they got a truck bomb in a barracks? They kept 
doing their job until they were told not to.
As a note, there is little reason why you can't use smaller ship 
mounted 'ortillery' for pinpoint attacks, or use some sort other sort 
of fire support platform. You use the weapon that does the right job.

> >Bring your whorehouse with you and keep it in orbit. 
> >or, be like the saudi example, don't base your troops near enough 
> >whorehouses that they wil visit them.
> 
> Sensible.  There a Hammer's Slammers story where they do this (more
> or less).

It's... sort of sensible, but the troops complain bitterly.

> >Also, if you take anything other than very infequent stabbings and 
> >killings while on local r&r, even the most hormone driven squaddies 
> >won't go there any more. (or if they do, it will be with a
flamethrower).
> 
> It wasn't the fault of the working girls.  It was a random attack
> (possibly even an opportunity hit) by the resistance.  Toast the
> whorehouse and the resistance will get a whole batch of new recruits
> by nightfall due to the outrage.  The trick is telling the good
> civilians from the bad ones.

Squaddies aren't always rational when a few of their mates got 
killed. History shows that usually the occupying force reacts 
indescrimenantly and brutaly, and yes, more recruits to the other 
side by nightfall.

My aim here is to think of ways that there is a point to invading a 
planet, and that it is feasible to hold it, and that it is possible 
to play substantial parts of the conflict with the rulesets 
available.

FT allows pretty darned big fleet actions, so that base is covered.
Dirtside and Stargrunt however, are relatively small scale. So how 
to integrate them into the picture while allowing the actions that 
you can portray in them to be of significant scale to the whole 
planetside action. Or do we need an 'operational' level ruleset for 
ground warfare?

> >If the civil/guerilla disobedience is so bad that the planet is an 
> >overall liability, *and* if the political climate allows it, you kill

> >or drive off everyone and resettle. Perhaps a bit unrealistic, 
> >I'll admit, but hey, look at ethnic cleansing today.
> 
> That "political climate" qualifier is the trick.  Given a domestic
> goverment anywhere to the left of Vlad the Impaler, this is a quick
> way to get the local Commandante reassigned.

Well, I did qualify it with "Perhaps a bit unrealistic". But then 
again, ethnic cleansing is alive and well at this very moment.

> Given a bipolar balance of galactic power, this a good way to
> experience the adage "what goes around comes around."  So, what? 
> There are no friendly planets elsewhere occupied by the enemy?  And
> think of how they can use it to whip up the folks back home. 
> Atrocities have a way of ending apathy about a conflict.

Agreed.
 
> Given a non-bipolar galactic political situation, such actions are
> more likely to bring in neutral powers on the side of the enemy.  

Depends on trade agreements, and a whole myriad of political 
backstabbing/manuevering.

> Besides, the logistics of exterminating an entire population really
> are formidable.  (As the Nazis discovered.)  Replacing them with
> your people make it doubly so.
> 
> Jeff

Well, I tend to agree with John on the "I don't want to play 
auschwitz" comment.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Richard Slattery	     richard@mgkc.demon.co.uk
Never judge a book by its movie. 
     J.W. Eagan
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~