I submit this memorandum for the consideration of my commanding officer, @Heika_Torigo, and the esteemed Chief Executive Officers of our Megacorporations, in light of recent developments concerning Conquest Engines and the subsequent ban imposed by CONCORD.
After some thought, it is my belief that abiding by these restrictions would be a colossal mistake. The Federation’s failure to secure a Drifter hive through which they may develop this technology on our level presents an unprecedented opportunity for the State to bring a swift, decisive end to this conflict on our unconditional terms, and delaying it could cost us dearly.
Whether it can be attributed to CONCORD’s failure to uphold international order or the Federation’s repeated flagrant breaches of international law, this ‘ban’ serves only to buy the Federation time to not just shore up their defenses, but undoubtedly breach this agreement themselves the moment they have the capability to do so.
Already they illegally invaded and occupied a number of systems that were legally held by the Caldari State throughout the CEMWPA warzone, systems that are still under illegal Federal occupation while CONCORD toothlessly watches. Even recently, we established a definitive paper trail linking the Syndicate’s terrorist strike against our stargate network to Federal benefactors using the very same hyperspace technology.
So tell me, why are we sitting around while this belligerent terror-state prepares? Why are we bowing down to unenforceable bans from a regulatory body that has not only failed to punish, but has tacitly endorsed Federal war crimes by elevating Intaki’s security status upon their request? Why are we clipping our wings when victory is within our grasp?
To embrace inaction now is to allow our enemies to strike first. Even without a hive under their control, they have demonstrated their ability and willingness to utilize hyperspace technology in illegal strikes against our civilian infrastructure. The question is no longer whether the Federation will eventually acquire the capability to field Conquest Engines, but whether we intend to meet that inevitability from a position of strength or weakness.
I respectfully urge you to take all this into consideration as you determine our next course of action.
For the State.
3 Likes
To attack a foe from a position which they have no reasonable capability to defend, after what was arguably an accidental effect of the cybercrime committed in April, represents a dangerous escalation. Can it truly be considered just, particularly when this technology isn’t just unknown, but unproven in terms of its efficacy and attack accuracy?
If a response is warranted, respond in kind. Attack verified military targets with proven technologies. Do not use an unproven class of weapon. And should a single civilian be harmed or killed by way of unforeseen collateral damage, if this Engine is used after your call-to-arms… I will hold you responsible by instigation.
You know, I posted once, about the morality of deploying man-made horrors beyond comprehension for trite political purposes, and the resultant proliferation that would inevitably ensue.
And your response was: “There’s yet to be a man-made horror I could not comprehend”. And I said “Hubris” in reply.
To now advocate for deploying this Conquest Engine, whatever it is, before it proliferates to the eternal enemy of the Caldari State, feels like asking for trouble.
Hubris indeed.
4 Likes
Big puter that turns off the bad guys war. Who wouldn’t want to use that? Easy, next.
I still haven’t seen any real disclosure about what happened to Jita. Now someone wants to push dangerous technology onto an adversary that is itself researching other dangerous technology. This does not bode well, and of course it will be the baseliners who pay the blood toll, in the millions
2 Likes
At this point it seems like the collateral damage from this technology is pretty well foreseen, hence the ban.
More to the point, though, pilot? Ah, so-- first, you do get that combat eggers tend to be responsible for an awful lot more than single civilian casualties? It’s pretty easy for us to end up killing more people than we’re likely to ever actually meet. So while I get that this is rhetorical it’s kind of like threatening a cook with dire consequences should they dare stir a pot (or, I guess, instigate pot-stirring).
Secondly-- are there some actual, you know, consequences you can bring about? Or is this more of a social threat or something?
I have yet to hear a single objection to this proposal that stems from anything other than malice or ignorance. Our enemies, unsurprisingly, have no desire to see us strengthen our negotiating position and bring this war to an end.
Setting aside the fact that fears regarding the effects of gravity wells on the Engines’ targeting systems amount to little more than conjecture, I strongly advise those who so proudly profess their moral superiority and concern for civilian well-being to visit an actual warzone. Take a trip past a location devastated by conventional warfare, the debris field left in the wake of even the most minor of complex captures, a surface colony caught in a frontline, and tell me about the virtues of continuing this war as a stalemate. Tell me how the potential of minor technical difficulties in civilian grids should be condemned as some unforgivable crime when nuclear warheads and antimatter munitions rain down over people’s heads in the current status quo.
Ridiculous. The truth is that even if the most pessimistic of catastrophizing surrounding these Conquest Engines proves to be true and intrinsic to this technology, the number of death and suffering prevented for the same strategic objective would be staggering.
I advise you all to reassess your ‘concerns’ before continuing to spout any foolish opinions. Educate yourselves on what war actually looks like, and tell me if your blind servility to a criminal government or crippling fear of martial innovation is worth the price in blood.
1 Like
There’s a difference between controlling a military network and controlling a fleet. Deploying a conquest engine could plausibly disrupt warships in the immediate area, but a responding fleet could still jump in to contest the action. A wide State deployment of Engines could plausibly disrupt the situation enough that the President feels forced to deploy the navy in force, which would amplify the bloodshed significantly. Is that a fire the State wants to play with? Moreau isn’t Roden, but I expect she would still take decisive action, she really has no other choice in this scenario.
I desire peace between our peoples every bit as much as you do, Remi, but I don’t think this is the way to do it.
Valid points, but a rhetorical statement was all that was needed at the time.
You corpo boot licking psycho.
You don’t give a crap about civillian and innocent lives. And it shows since the Intaki Syndicate refugees fleeing syndicate space.
You’ve got blood on your hands and I can’t wait to see you dragged in front of a court to name you the war criminal you are Malitia.