> At 01:19 AM 6/16/98 +0000, you wrote:
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.
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.
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.
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.;)
> On 16 Jun 98 at 10:07, Jeff Lyon wrote:
> At 01:19 AM 6/16/98 +0000, you wrote:
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
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
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.
Shhh, don't mention China, we'll get shouted at for being off theme
;)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Richard spake thusly upon matters weighty:
> Mineral resouces is unlikely. If industry can use up the ores
Maybe some rare minerals that only exist closer in to the suns or something of
the sort?
> Food. Perhaps. I think of the core systems, earth inparticular, as
You'd think that, wouldn't you. That's what the Malthusians have been trying
to tell us about Earth for ever. In principle, it makes sense that earth has
an abiotic carrying capacity like any environment. Only it seems that
consistently the rate of growth of agricultural production has outpaced the
rate of growth of population. Population growth may curb due to environmental
pressures before food production does. And we haven't even begun to harvest
the huge potential of the seas. Or stations in Earth orbit could produce food
too.
But if you like this as a justification, just tailor the universe to
fit - it just doesn't seem to be borne out to date....
> Somewhere to live. If an enemy colony has millions of inhabitants,
One of the interesting books was David Drake's Patriots because it addressed
the problem of a sparsely populated world having colonies
of non-friendly extraplanetary groups (refugees, whatever) just show
up and try to plonk down whole cities in the thinly populated areas -
which is a viable way to start to take over a planet - squatter
style.
> I am in agreement. A lot of the counter discussion has cast the
It boils down to image, PR, and effort. In some wars, threatened populii have
been whipped into a defensive whirlwind by PR. In others, they've just let the
aggressor come in and take over with little resistance. One might say it has a
lot to do with the skills, strategies, and luck of the aggressor, and of the
defender.
/************************************************
Thomas Barclay Software Specialist Police Communications Systems Software
Kinetics Ltd. 66 Iber Road, Stittsville Ontario, Canada, K2S 1E7
Reception: (613) 831-0888
PBX: (613) 831-2018
My Extension: 2036
Fax: (613) 831-8255
Software Kinetics' Web Page:
http://www.sofkin.ca
SKL Daemons Softball Web Page:
http://fox.nstn.ca/~kaladorn/softhp.htm
**************************************************/
> On 19 Jun 98 at 13:30, Thomas Barclay wrote:
> Richard spake thusly upon matters weighty:
Yup, a cheesy reason, but it's good enough for our purposes;)
> > Food. Perhaps. I think of the core systems, earth inparticular, as
Well, what has happened so far is: Humanity had access to waaay more food than
we needed, then improvements in medicine and birth mortality in general has
caused us to get a lot closer to a problem situation, staved off by industrial
farming methods. As a whole, the population gain rate of the world shows no
signs of slowing, other than in developed countries. But I guess that can be
used as an indicator of the rate slowing dramatically for currently third
world countries once they get to the same level of devopment.
Stations in earth orbit producing food for a significant proportion of the
world population? Food growth at that scale needs room, lots of it. The
stations would have to be BIG. If a planet with roughly 50 million square
miles surface area is running out of places to grow food, think of the scale
of orbital station this needs.
> > Somewhere to live. If an enemy colony has millions of inhabitants,
It depends if the attempts at rival colonies are contested strongly. But I can
see political situations meaning that it could go either way.
> > I am in agreement. A lot of the counter discussion has cast the
Agreed.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~