Sigs wrote:No my worry is that ads a member of the League I would have absolutely no protection if I live outside of the 10-20 systems that have wallers. Being able to defend your territory is a fundamental requirement from all members.
See Jonathan's reply.
Either I am not explaining myself or you are misunderstanding me. The League is screwed if they attacked a nation with 80 SD’s and a really good fleet train and stockpile of missiles. They are screwed because the SLN is so powerful that the fleet in question has no chance and if they decide to make the League pay they have their pick at 1,700 League member systems out of 1,750, you are not a real nation if you can only defend 2% of your territory and the people that live in the other 98% of League territory might have a thing or two to say about being left out to dry.
The League is too strong for a nation with 80 wallers to have any hope of surviving but knowing that they are losing either way the League is too weak to defend against 80 wallers who are send on a suicide mission to make the League pay for their victory.
See again Jonathan's reply.
There are also less than half a dozen nations today with 80 SDs in total. Aside from the SLN itself, that was Grayson, the SEM, the Andermani and Haven, period. You can avoid much of the harm by just keeping close attention to those few. After the war, this number is likely to multiply by quite a lot, especially with systems that have seceded from the League. I expect the Republic of Beowulf-Hypatia to easily field 80 SD(P)s within 5 years, maybe even sooner if they decide to absorb the construction from Bolthole that Haven can no longer afford to keep (we heard in UH during a conversation between Truman and Holmon-Sanders that "they are coming").
So surrender? With the SLN’s history of treating protectorates really well I imagine that would be the first option of everyone.
Yes, surrender. It's not the first option (winning would be), but it's not the last one either.
Think that
Massimo Filareta surrendered without firing a shoot (or would have if he hadn't been killed by a spy before the order was sent) when he found himself thoroughly trapped in Second Manticore.
Winston Kingsford surrendered the League without firing a shot during the Battle of Sol. Surrender is an honourable option.
I completely agree the SL and particularly the OFS had not the best track record with those adversaries that did surrender. But my point is that there are much worse things than surrendering your system intact.
Think about it this way: any nation that can field 80 SDs must have a robust economy and is right there with the Core Worlds. Its population is probably made of high-income people on average, who consume a lot of high-value goods. It's not in the SL's best interest to wreck it to the ground. So if you have 80 SDs and can give the SLN a bloody nose,
negotiate your surrender.
This is some backwards Russia thinking. We can attack you and your people as much as we want and destroy your homes and infrastructure and industry but the second you attack OUR territory in retaliation you are the villain in the story.
That's not what I meant. See the discussion below about civilian vs military targets.
Because the League doesn’t have adequate forces to provide protection for them. Its not a question of not being worth as much as a question of not having anywhere near the ships to provide defences. If we make a conservative assumption that the 1750 League members equal to about 300 times the economy and industry of 1905 SKM then we can safely say that the SLN is absolutely pathetic and not a real force. If we assume that they have 300 times the economy and industry of the SKM in 1905 then they could field a force of 90,000 SD’s without breaking a sweat and yet they only field a force that is less than 2.5% of that number.
I am questioning whether that's sufficient justification. Those systems that don't represent a significant enough portion of the League's industrial output and therefore their capability to make war don't make good strategic objectives. When Eighth Fleet attacked second-tier systems in Haven during Sanskrit and Cutworm, the targets were chosen such that they'd bring political pressure on the leaders of Haven, both to dissipate their naval presence in such a way that they couldn't properly defend, but also to get a diplomatic discussion going. That's not going to happen if you attack only small fry in the League.
It’s not attacking systems the League did not deem worth defending, its attacking systems that are left undefended by virtue of a fatal flaw in SLN doctrine. Their doctrine is if we want to attack someone we will attack them and they will kindly wait in their home system to die, if they have wallers and want some revenge the League is screwed because they didn’t invest enough into the military because so much of the money and resources were spend on corruption and the lack of legitimate threat. Either 99.5% of the League member systems are not worth defending or the League doesn’t have enough ships to offer adequate protection to 99.5% of their systems. They either have 25 systems wroth defending and 1725 not worth defending or they have 1725 systems worth defending but no means to do so.
You're correct that the SLN doctrine was deeply flawed in execution. I am not disputing that.
I am however disputing that the theory behind it was. They didn't and still don't need to defend every system with a squadron of wallers. That's not a flaw in the doctrine.
I don't know about 99.5%, but 95% of the League was not and is not worth defending with wallers. And of the 100 systems that are worth defending with wallers, no more than 20 should get a full fleet of more than 6 squadrons.
Except what if they can’t convince any other component to not get involved? Its all nice and fancy making plans to fight a fraction of the enemy alliance but pulling it off is a whole different thing. Maybe in 300 to 500 years sure, but with prolong most of the movers and shakers would be still alive, hell in 200 year many of the movers and shakers might still be alive and so would large % of the population. Its much harder to convince them to abandon allies when they remember that the League is kinda pissed off at the whole lot of them.
If you're fighting everyone in the Settled Galaxy, you should take a good look in the mirror and ask yourself if the fault doesn't lie with you. In the case of the last war, it did thoroughly lie with the League, because the Mandarins (manipulated as they were) were the cause of the troubles and why it continued. The whole thing should have de-escalated after first New Tuscany, with Byng being recalled home and an inquiry between the three parties figure out just what had happened.
The League may have the economic prowess to create a fighting force that could, indeed, fight everyone else. They may even want to do that. But they don't have to; it should suffice to be able to handily outfight the second best.
Making your strategy on the assumption that you have to fight only one portion of the enemy is a terrible idea.
Not one portion of the enemy. One enemy as a whole.
No nation should make plans for the case it goes evil. It should not need to make plans for when everyone else is the enemy.
Haven is probably operating on 10-15% of their max capacity, Grayson is also not operating on maximum capacity either and neither is the vast majority of the SEM and even Manticore after OB. If the GA doesn’t make a plan to grow their economies then they deserve to be conquered by the League. Opening Manticore, Andermani and the thousands of verge and protectorates as markets for Havens goods will promote massive growth. The economy and industry of 1905 Haven is different than that of 1920 Haven and it will be different from that of 1965 Haven. Same goes for the rest of the GA and former protectorates and verge.
I agree with you, but like I said: we don't make the rules. The text says that they are already close to their max capacity, or over it in the case of Haven. Accept it.
What math? You mean to tell me that the League is a super power put only has 20-40 systems that are heavily industrialized while the other 1700 are useless? That means the GA doesn’t have much effort to equal the Leagues economy. Manticore, Grayson Haven, Beowulf, Hypatia, Andermani, Erewhon… That right there is 20% of the Leagues industry. Removing the policies that kept the Republic in poverty will quickly bring the Republic to an economic and industrial power in a decade or two while Manticore and their empire will also grow and leave the Eague in the dust.
In your view apparently the League is only 40 systems and the other 1,700 systems are worth absolutely nothing economically or militarily.
The cliff of the industrial output curve is not going to be
that sharp, but it does exist and is sharp. We got the numbers once, but I don't remember them right now, and they never went into this much detail anyway. The League is composed of about 20-30 very wealthy systems with very large populations. Their economies are similar to the MBS, but only some half of them are actually bigger than Manticore. Then they probably have 200-300 more systems close to the Core and in the inner Inner Shell that are probably like Erewhon: modern economy, nicely-sized population, who could if they wanted to field a battle squadron or two, but no more. Then you start going down to systems that are similar to Zanzibar, then all the way down to newly-admitted members that are still very close to their Verge cousins across the border.
So I am saying that the vast majority is not worth defending
with wallers.
Can you elaborate on this a bit?
Canada's GDP was 1.65 trillion USD, the US's was 21 trillion. By this measurement, the US is 12.7x larger than Canada. The population ratio is only 8.5x.
The League was estimated to have 2 trillion people, but since there was no census, this number was considered a low ballpark. That means the League about 700x bigger in population than Manticore. I did say that the vast majority of the League wasn't anywhere as big as Manticore, but considering it should have 10 systems much bigger in economy than Manticore and another 20 of comparable size, that alone should make the League some 50x-100x the Manticore economy, without including the hundreds of systems that had non-negligible economies.
And? If he is in danger of being taken out do you think he will hesitate to start a war and kill millions out of spite? If it happens here why not 2,000 years from now?
I'm not disputing that. I don't want to get into a discussion about current world politics, but if the situation with the DPRK isn't ideal, at least it's not deteriorating. The same strategy could be employed 2000 years from now with a regime like DPRK's.
Exactly how willing was Hitler when Germany started losing the war? You are talking like everyone always looks at the best for their people rather than doing tings for selfish reasons.
Hitler didn't want to lose, and for himself he knew there was no escape. But Germany surrendered. Japan did too and, in doing so, managed to get better terms than would have otherwise if they had continued the war.
The fact that Japan was the world's second largest economy and Germany the third up until recently is telling.
Again 99.5% of th systems in the League are nothing but symbolic?
Attacking them is symbolic, yes.
What did the RMN destroy in Cutworm? What did the RHN destroy in Zanzibar and Alison in the second war? Only military industrial targets or everything but the habitats?
I have to say I disagree with RFC on the ability to destroy spaceborne industry, particularly with what we've heard about the result of the Battle of Sol.
For the earlier battles (Icarus, Thunderbolt, Cutworm) I could understand that they restricted to the military infrastructure. Particularly Cutworm, because the objective was to have a higher symbolic value than the actual industry loss. They were targetting systems with powerful Senators in Nouveau Paris who would put pressure in the government. But the description of what happened at Sol sounded like an atrocity to me.
I expect a modern system with space-based industry to be extremely dependent on that industry for everything, from food production to energy production to all civilian products that system makes. There's no reason to put a factory on the ground unless if you have artificial gravity and lifting people to their workplaces is cheap (assuming they can't do the work remotely in the first place). So virtually all the system's primary and secondary sectors should be in space; only the tertiary sector (services) would be on the ground because that's where people are.
And no nation in the human history has ever fought to the bitter end even if they had other choices
I don't know if you meant to be ironic here, but your sentence is very correct: you don't fight to the bitter end if you have choices. I'm arguing that there are choices.
I HAVE NEVER SUGGESTED SLAUGHTERING CIVILIANS. You can attack civilian infrastructure and industry as long as you’ve given the civilians an adequate time to leave the target. The allies bombed civilian infrastructure and industry in Germany and Italy during World War 2, civilian infrastructure and industry doesn’t get a pass…
I know you didn't explicitly suggest it.
But I am arguing that 95% of the systems of the League have nothing BUT civilian targets. The pitiful military that they may have would be no more than the orbital station that housed their old-style LACs, shared with the customs service.
Yes, attacking industry is a valid military tactic, because it deprives the enemy of the ability to make war. But I am also arguing that those systems that can be attacked are not contributing to the war effort in the first place.