Subversion and Terror

One could argue that Merlin was engaging in Terrorism in his role as Dialydd Mab. His complete action (while justified in most evaluations and worthy of awards in others) was intended to 1st kill every participant in an atrocity and 2nd to put fear in the hearts of a distinct group of people. Not just the driving forces and the unthinking loyalists who actively supported those atrocities but any who may allow such things to occur or be encouraged to instigate such events. In short, to make those who may be put in the situation of supporting any further actions fearful of what might happen.

The difference between the Rakurai’s actions and Dialydd’s of course are one of indiscriminant mayhem as a weapon and very discriminant mayhem as retribution. Mayhem being the common core of either action and fear as the product. The argument for justification or ignoring collateral damage is mute. Merlin has a morality problem in that he suffers anguish from the things he has to do or cannot do - due to his situation. Clyntahn has zero morality problems because he has no morals. Terrorism as weapons of war.

SUBVERSION is another tool that is appropriate and should have Nahrmahn frothing at his holographic teeth. The Harchong Army has a vast majority of serfs (no such thing as an ex-serf to a Harchongese aristocrat) that are being treated much better than they have in their lives. They are in areas that obviously have common folk living a freer life and much better situations than any common folk in Harchong. The broadsheets need to spread rumors, incite anguish and generally instigate dissatisfaction.
We have not been given a lot of info on how the broadsheets have been successful in subversion. We know they are a constant thorn in Clyntahns side, which means they have had some success. But targeting the Serfs serving in the Harchong army, making promises, telling them they are cannon fodder, talking about the defeats and massacres of the Armies attacking Siddermark, sowing the seeds of discontent so

Typically, the definition of terrorism strongly implies actions against civilians, actions against those who cannot defend themselves, and actions against those who are innocent but whom you want to activate. Merlin's actions include none of these. Well except that no matter who he attacks, they really cannot defend themselves against him. But the point is Merlin is in no way engaging in asymmetrical warfare which is central to terrorism.

Basically, targeting enemy generals/political leaders has never come under the rubric of terrorism. It's more under the rubric of special ops.

Merlin is more like the Dirty Dozen if they were invulnerable.

dwileye13 wrote:One could argue that Merlin was engaging in Terrorism in his role as Dialydd Mab. His complete action (while justified in most evaluations and worthy of awards in others) was intended to 1st kill every participant in an atrocity and 2nd to put fear in the hearts of a distinct group of people. Not just the driving forces and the unthinking loyalists who actively supported those atrocities but any who may allow such things to occur or be encouraged to instigate such events. In short, to make those who may be put in the situation of supporting any further actions fearful of what might happen.

The difference between the Rakurai’s actions and Dialydd’s of course are one of indiscriminant mayhem as a weapon and very discriminant mayhem as retribution. Mayhem being the common core of either action and fear as the product. The argument for justification or ignoring collateral damage is mute. Merlin has a morality problem in that he suffers anguish from the things he has to do or cannot do - due to his situation. Clyntahn has zero morality problems because he has no morals. Terrorism as weapons of war.

SUBVERSION is another tool that is appropriate and should have Nahrmahn frothing at his holographic teeth. The Harchong Army has a vast majority of serfs (no such thing as an ex-serf to a Harchongese aristocrat) that are being treated much better than they have in their lives. They are in areas that obviously have common folk living a freer life and much better situations than any common folk in Harchong. The broadsheets need to spread rumors, incite anguish and generally instigate dissatisfaction.
We have not been given a lot of info on how the broadsheets have been successful in subversion. We know they are a constant thorn in Clyntahns side, which means they have had some success. But targeting the Serfs serving in the Harchong army, making promises, telling them they are cannon fodder, talking about the defeats and massacres of the Armies attacking Siddermark, sowing the seeds of discontent so

Terrorism also implies acting outside the law - as there are international laws governing warfare, which terrorists do not abide by.

And so, I can see where Dialydd Mab's actions can be described as terrorism - as he acted to incide terror by his actions (to stop future atrocities), as well as executed people without them being able to have their day in court.


The flip side (and to be honest, this factor out weighs all others), he is a Charisian legally at war with the Temple, and the people he killed were in uniform.

So, legally his actions are legit....


Later,
Matt

jgnfld wrote:Typically, the definition of terrorism strongly implies actions against civilians, actions against those who cannot defend themselves, and actions against those who are innocent but whom you want to activate. Merlin's actions include none of these. Well except that no matter who he attacks, they really cannot defend themselves against him. But the point is Merlin is in no way engaging in asymmetrical warfare which is central to terrorism.

Basically, targeting enemy generals/political leaders has never come under the rubric of terrorism. It's more under the rubric of special ops.

Merlin is more like the Dirty Dozen if they were invulnerable.

dwileye13 wrote:One could argue that Merlin was engaging in Terrorism in his role as Dialydd Mab. His complete action (while justified in most evaluations and worthy of awards in others) was intended to 1st kill every participant in an atrocity and 2nd to put fear in the hearts of a distinct group of people. Not just the driving forces and the unthinking loyalists who actively supported those atrocities but any who may allow such things to occur or be encouraged to instigate such events. In short, to make those who may be put in the situation of supporting any further actions fearful of what might happen.

The difference between the Rakurai’s actions and Dialydd’s of course are one of indiscriminant mayhem as a weapon and very discriminant mayhem as retribution. Mayhem being the common core of either action and fear as the product. The argument for justification or ignoring collateral damage is mute. Merlin has a morality problem in that he suffers anguish from the things he has to do or cannot do - due to his situation. Clyntahn has zero morality problems because he has no morals. Terrorism as weapons of war.

SUBVERSION is another tool that is appropriate and should have Nahrmahn frothing at his holographic teeth. The Harchong Army has a vast majority of serfs (no such thing as an ex-serf to a Harchongese aristocrat) that are being treated much better than they have in their lives. They are in areas that obviously have common folk living a freer life and much better situations than any common folk in Harchong. The broadsheets need to spread rumors, incite anguish and generally instigate dissatisfaction.
We have not been given a lot of info on how the broadsheets have been successful in subversion. We know they are a constant thorn in Clyntahns side, which means they have had some success. But targeting the Serfs serving in the Harchong army, making promises, telling them they are cannon fodder, talking about the defeats and massacres of the Armies attacking Siddermark, sowing the seeds of discontent so

I think that the river barge comes closer to reprisal than terrorism. However, Terror is the point. Tom Kratman wrote a very interesting piece in A Desert Called Peace:

"You see, there are three kinds of terrorism. The first is what you have suffered, random acts of senseless violence. This kind almost never works," Sada sneered. "Witness the Federated States of Columbia. When their people were randomly killed, they merely went to war to exact vengeance and destroy the terrorists. Two regimes, here and in Pashtia, which formerly were great supporters of terrorism around the world, have fallen. More than that, as boys in school you all read- at least those of you who had the chance to attend school did- of the great terror bombings of the Great Global War. That was all random terror; it targeted nobody in particular. Note that no one ever knuckled under to them until nuclear weapons were used. So much for random terror.
"The other kind of terror is specific. With this kind, punishment is inflicted on particular persons, either on themselves or on those whom they love. To be the target of specific terror is a fearsome and terrible thing. Specific terror works. If it didn't, would the dictator have lasted a week?"...
"The third kind of terror is genocidal. With this an entire people and even civilization is threatened with destruction. Thus, it includes specific terror because, if all are killed, then all whom you love are killed as well. Anyone who does not believe that this kind of terror works is a fool. Genocidal terror was all that kept the Federated States and the Volgan Empire from destroying each other and, incidentally, probably us as well. Genocidal terror is probably all taht keeps the United Earth Peace Fleet and the Federated States from using nuclear weapons on each other now.
"So there are your three types. The kind that was used on you and brought you here and the other two, which are teh kinds you will use to retaliate. Are there any questions?"

MWadwell wrote:Terrorism also implies acting outside the law - as there are international laws governing warfare, which terrorists do not abide by.

And so, I can see where Dialydd Mab's actions can be described as terrorism - as he acted to incide terror by his actions (to stop future atrocities), as well as executed people without them being able to have their day in court.


The flip side (and to be honest, this factor out weighs all others), he is a Charisian legally at war with the Temple, and the people he killed were in uniform.

So, legally his actions are legit....


Later,
Matt

The Church (and not Charis) declared holy war, so all rules have been suspended.

Dialydd Mab's actions have been exclusively against people that declared themselves at war with his nation of adoption and it was retaliation because those same people just comitted atrocities. There is no way that you can construct that as terrorism outside of some kind of big lie propaganda.

That is special forces operation territory, but there is little that is out of bounds in this case as long as you refrain your wrath to uniformed personnels and dont hit random civilians (which is the definition of terrorism). Assassinating the ennemy general is as legitimate as beating his regiments into pulp.