Re: Occupation forces

On 16 Jun 98 at 10:07, Jeff Lyon wrote:

> At 01:19 AM 6/16/98 +0000, you wrote:
> >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.
> 
> Ack!	If there is concern about resistance forces, the last thing I
> would do is bring in soft targets for them to attack.  Bringing in
> your people will enrage the local populous, and stirring up more
> people than the occupation forces will by giving them a focal point
> for long term hostility.  Then you'll have gang beatings, riots,
> fire bombings and endless rounds of retaliation by both sides. 
> Hell, half the time your troops will be forced to keep your own
> people in line.

I was working along the lines of why you invaded the habitable world 
in the first place. If not to colonize itm then why? To give yourself 
an internal security problem, a place to tie up expensive naval 
assets, somewhere to extend your already vulnerable borders?

Mineral resouces is unlikely. If industry can use up the ores 
available in asteroid belts in their home systems then I would be 
very suprised, there is an astouding amount out there.

Food. Perhaps. I think of the core systems, earth inparticular, as 
not self sufficient in food anymore due to high population, and 
reliant on imported food.

Somewhere to live. If an enemy colony has millions of inhabitants, 
they are probably not spread out all over the whole surface. Put your 
colonists somewhere else. Or, try and ship enough to massively 
outnumber them. As a side thought, if you are shipping that many 
people there, use the empty ships return journey to deport the 
locals. (OK, diplomatic can of worms here.)

> 
> Look at some of the real-world examples of where this has been done
> and you will see how it has led to generations of needless
> bloodshed.

Real world examples only go to show that this of the sort of thing 
that is tried. People don't always do the smart thing. 

> No, if you really want to take and keep a world, you have to do it
> in such a way that it has minimal impact on the citizen's day-to-day
> lives. Quietly replace the govenment with collaborators.  Treat the
> populous nice, they're taxpayers now.  Keep the troops on a short
> leash.  Be fair and just and in the long term, apathy will work on
> your side.

I am in agreement. A lot of the counter discussion has cast the 
colonists in the 'fanatic resistance' mould. People do have a 
tendency to 'accept their lot' unless they are severely mistreated.

> In a generation or two only college activists will even give a damn.
>  And as long as you don't run over them with tanks, no one will
> listen to them.  ;)

Shhh, don't mention China, we'll get shouted at for being off theme 
;)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Richard Slattery	     richard@mgkc.demon.co.uk
We've got to pause and ask ourselves: How much clean air do we need? 
     Lee Iacocca
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~