1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hemos actualizado nuestra PolĂ­tica de Privacidad acorde con la nueva RGPD. +Info // We've updated our Privacy Policy to comply with the GDPR. +Info
    Dismiss Notice

So why exactly PanO isn't armed up to the teeth ?

Discussion in 'PanOceania' started by eciu, Jul 20, 2018.

  1. Skoll

    Skoll Well-Known Member
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2017
    Messages:
    947
    Likes Received:
    1,156
    International intervention into anything deemed a humanitarian crisis is not unprecedented.

    If anything i see haqq and nomads opposing yu jing on fear that it would set a precedent that such human right violations on claimed territory would be overlooked.

    A legitimate fear that all it would take is for pano to claim that the prison ships were formerly their property and now they could fully mobilize their entire army to deal with nomads once and for all.

    That is at least how i can justify nomad intervention, they are really just future proofing themselves.

    Mind you im assigning qualities not portrayed in the writing to the factions, which shouldnt be my job, rhe writing itself should have ingrained believable motivations
     
  2. Section9

    Section9 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2017
    Messages:
    6,146
    Likes Received:
    9,651
     
  3. AdmiralJCJF

    AdmiralJCJF Heart of the Hyperpower
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2017
    Messages:
    3,485
    Likes Received:
    4,544
    That's the best example in the whole book, and even that requires you to make assumptions about where those air assets launched from.

    Noting especially that anything which launches in space and fights in the atmosphere is still referred to as "aircraft" in the setting.
     
  4. Section9

    Section9 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2017
    Messages:
    6,146
    Likes Received:
    9,651
    Not required to make assumptions on where stuff was launched from.

    Locking a targeting system onto another nation's military craft (including shining a laser on it, see laser-guided missiles) is the act of war, firing a weapon not required. Worse, this act of war was not something out in international waters. This was attacking YJ military craft in YJ territory.

    What do you think would happen if the US locked onto (heaven forbid shot down) Russian military aircraft flying over St Petersburg, or Russian military ships 20km off the coast of Russia? Conversely, if the Russians locked onto American military aircraft flying over Alaska? If the first thought in your head isn't "nuclear exchange" (even if it's "oh, fuck, I hope it doesn't come to a nuclear exchange"), you are woefully unaware of geopolitics and realpolitik.
     
    Stiopa and inane.imp like this.
  5. AdmiralJCJF

    AdmiralJCJF Heart of the Hyperpower
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2017
    Messages:
    3,485
    Likes Received:
    4,544
    Again, based on your assumptions about where this takes place.

    Because you are assuming that those air assets start, travel through and then attack all inside Yu Jing exclusive territory.

    That is an assumption.

    My opinion on your political analysis notwithstanding.
     
  6. Teslarod

    Teslarod The Squeeze has not been Sqouze

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    2,123
    Likes Received:
    4,309
    Gonna be a bit blunt here, bear with me.
    Isn't it a bit a bit bigot to yell murder over your favourite metal dudesmen faction being treated unfairly in a fictional future, when no one actually gives a fuck about those rules in our times?

    This shit happens all the time. There are dozens of incidents that could have triggered the Cold War but didn't. Sunk ships, downed civil and military aircraft etc. And that's on top of everything that never came to light. Then there is ofc everything the CIA had their hands in for the last century, including a couple pet dictators that got out of control and had to be dealt with in a military operation.
    The US in particular has a long history of made up justifications to wage war and circumvent international law to do so. That's not an accusation, just a fact.

    Someone as big as PanO can commit warcrimes and go "what are you gonna do about it?" up to a certain degree. If you are big enough and have public opinion behind you the law doesn't mean much.
    YJ isn't going to declare war and get their ass kicked over a couple planes. The Human Sphere is in favour of a Japanese seccession and PanO is clearly involved in this and way better prepared. Letting them get away with and to cut your losses is the smart thing to here for YJ.
     
    chromedog likes this.
  7. Section9

    Section9 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2017
    Messages:
    6,146
    Likes Received:
    9,651
    And again, it doesn't matter that we're over YJ territory (or Russian/American territory to use my current-day example), it's just a massive aggravating factor.

    The act of war is locking on to the other nation's warcraft.

    It would be just as much an act of war to lock on to a YJ military craft flying in 'international waters'.

    Did you read about the Russian bombers (probably electronic-intelligence planes built on bomber airframes, not carrying actual bombs) with a fighter escort that were intercepted on 9/11/18? No lock-ons, just an abrupt F22 wingman 'appearing out of nowhere'. In international airspace, but there's not much distance between US/Canadian airspace and Russian airspace up there. "Excuse me, comrades, you're not going to be stupid are you? It's a nice day for flying, I'd hate to have to shoot you." No comment on what happened when the F22s showed up on someone's wing (probably loosened some bowels, though!).

    It *can* be an act of war for warcraft to enter another nation's territory (ie, it's an invasion), if it's done without permission. Yes, this includes the US in Syria, though I think we're skating around that one by saying we're only after DAESH (which falls under a UN Resolution, IIRC) and not attempting regime change on Syria. The US and Russians are very careful to 'deconflict' when both are flying on the same day.
    US: "Hey, Ivan, we're flying air support in the following areas [ list ], anyone dropping bombs onto the guys we're supporting is going to get splashed."
    Russians: "Fair enough, Joe. We're flying air support in the following areas [ list, no overlap with US areas ], anyone dropping bombs onto the guys we're supporting is going to get splashed."
    Syrians: "Hey, what about us!"
    US and Russians, in unison: "We'll splash you if you drop bombs on the guys we're supporting!"​

    And I strongly suspect that the PanO 'Steel Wall' over the Japanese home islands was without YJ permission.



    Not going to argue that. Iraq 2003 was a poorly-chosen target (or at least very poorly-communicated. No nukes, but lots of chemical weapons found). Vietnam was a poorly-chosen target, but the paranoia about Communist revolutions then is probably unimaginable to us now. Panama was definitely a fucked-up ur-example.

    Korea, Grenada, Iraq 1991, and Afghanistan (being the hiding place of the asshole who, in his own words, declared war on the US) are legitimate. Korea was and still is a standing UN Resolution. Grenada was a non-combatant evacuation that went a little ugly, though Grenada was in the middle of a Cuban-backed revolution. Iraq 1991 was a UN Resolution. And chasing Bin Laden stands as a response to a declaration of war.


    That's the smell of burning "reputational capital".

    The US works really damn hard to police our own in that.

    It certainly doesn't help that YJ/Imperial SS/Yuandun Division burned massive amounts of reputational capital with that fucking PsychoCrane.


    The US or Russia or China or any other modern nation would declare war over military craft shot down while responding to an internal uprising, without there being a UN Resolution first, and they'd fight the UN Resolution tooth and nail.

    And that's the problem. The Steel Wall went up before getting O12 approval.

    Modern example would be what would have happened if the Soviets tried to shoot down the planes doing the Berlin Airlift. There's no doubt that would have kicked off WW3. Not in the Russians minds, not in the American's minds.

    Had there been an O12 resolution first, and then the Steel Wall, I wouldn't have an issue. (Examples would be Korea or Iraq 1991 and the no-fly zones after). I'm pretty sure what CB was going for was the No-Fly Zones over Iraq. But they apparently forgot that there was a UN Resolution authorizing them.
     
    DFW Ike, Zsolt and Stiopa like this.
  8. Teslarod

    Teslarod The Squeeze has not been Sqouze

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    2,123
    Likes Received:
    4,309
    Sorry but you're just wrong most of the time.

    There are two current examples that show pretty much the same development.
    Crimean secession went down with a lot of outcry, but no one actually wanted to do anything about it.

    And I can't remember Turkey and Russia waging war over the 2015 Sukhoi SU-24 shootdown.

    That's how transgressions work these days. Both sides blame the other, the media has something to get busy with and then both sides declare themselves the winner.
    When was the last time UN members actively fought in a war against each other? War on your home turf isn't a desireable thing in the 21st century, bad for the economy. Doesn't matter if you lose face or whatever, you just don't let it happen.
     
    Zsolt likes this.
  9. inane.imp

    inane.imp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2018
    Messages:
    5,529
    Likes Received:
    6,496
    Even then the power difference between US and Iraq is stark. It's a super-power imposing it's will on minor power.

    YJ was a great power. It could fight a war with PanO and hold its own.

    There is no comparable example of "international intervention" against a great power. The closest is the Allied intervention in Russia in 1918-1920: such a comparison does not square with the argument that the loss of the Japanese was only a minor loss of power and prestige.

    Either YJ remains a great power and PanO's actions are unprecedented, or the loss of the Japanese was crippling and YJ was forced to acquiesce to PanO's will.

    This is why I think the fluff doesn't work well.
     
    Section9 likes this.
  10. eciu

    eciu Easter worshiper

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    3,817
    Likes Received:
    4,440
    Proxy wars are nice.

    Unless you happened to live in a "proxy country", then it sucks.

    Good job Australia!
     
  11. Section9

    Section9 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2017
    Messages:
    6,146
    Likes Received:
    9,651
    Go take an international relations class. Intro, college level. Mine was PoliSci 231, technically a sophomore-level class. Actually, no, I'm not going to send you my textbook, I like it even if it is ~10 years old now.

    I also served in the Nuclear Deterrence field for 5 years, so I got an extra helping of Rules of War before college.



    Because the alternative was nuclear war. Big Powers going at it directly.

    The Crimea thing demonstrated that the only way to avoid having someone with nukes from stealing your stuff is to have nukes of your own. You see, the Ukraine used to have a lot of the old Soviet nukes (several hundred to a thousand missiles, each with lots o warheads). During/after the breakup of the USSR, the Ukraine agreed to give them back to the Russians in exchange for territorial guarantees by both the Russians and US.

    The US really screwed the pooch on that one, we should have been yelling and pointing at the nuclear weapons return treaty. Saying "Russia's word is no longer reliable" would destroy their economy, they wouldn't be able to get foreign currency or investment.


    Again, that's getting into Big Powers throwing down with nukes. You don't want to go there. Turkey is part of NATO, Article 5 ("an attack on one is an attack on all") would apply if that Su24 was in Turkish Airspace at the time.

    Things were pretty damn hot there, though, it took the US deploying Aegis ships into the freaking Black Sea (which Russia regards as their own pond, but is International Waters) to calm things down. And even then there was a lot of bumper boats for about 6 months.


    The Steel Wall is a lot bigger than a single shootdown. It's PanO saying, "we're taking your stuff and there's not a damn thing you can do about it" and the alternative is someone dropping a 25kton rock at orbital speeds on shared planets.


    Iraq. From about 1980 till present, starting against Iran. Then the entire rest of the damn planet in 1991, followed by no-fly zones up until 2003 when the US went in again.
    Lots of fighting between Israel and neighbors, from 1948 on, though the Egyptians learned their lesson after 1973 and actually have "hot pursuit" agreements with the Israelis when chasing terrorists one direction or the other.
    Most of Africa, 1950s to present.

    Do you want me to keep going?
     
    Stiopa likes this.
  12. eciu

    eciu Easter worshiper

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    3,817
    Likes Received:
    4,440
    Silly Ukraininas surrendering their nukes for some piece of paper ^^
     
    Disko King and AdmiralJCJF like this.
  13. Stiopa

    Stiopa Trust The Fuckhead
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2017
    Messages:
    3,774
    Likes Received:
    8,071
    It didn't work out great for the Ukrainians, but was probably better for the world at large.

    As Section9 pointed out, the crisis was handled badly by US (and I'd include EU as well).
     
  14. eciu

    eciu Easter worshiper

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    3,817
    Likes Received:
    4,440
    That would only be if you actually attribute any international power to EU (except of power to limit light bulbs, vacuum cleaners and memes).
     
  15. Stiopa

    Stiopa Trust The Fuckhead
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2017
    Messages:
    3,774
    Likes Received:
    8,071
    Most of the attacks on the EU are born not of actual EU faults, but of ignorance about the issues being discussed combined with people pouring fuel into the fire for their own political gain.

    But I think this discussion is getting really off-topic and should be in a separate thread.
     
  16. eciu

    eciu Easter worshiper

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    3,817
    Likes Received:
    4,440
    It is already going 20 posts strong, plus the initial premise of this thread seems to be exhausted on top of being yet another "salty PanO" thread.
     
  17. andre61

    andre61 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2017
    Messages:
    735
    Likes Received:
    441
    I Agree
     
  18. Teslarod

    Teslarod The Squeeze has not been Sqouze

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    2,123
    Likes Received:
    4,309
    @Section9 that's a lot of words and all, but I fail to see how the JSA secession is fundamentally different from the Crimea incident.
    That might have some parallels, no?

    What I'm saying is that this isn't some far fetched scenario that doesn't make any sense. It's just real life in projected at the space opera we call Infinity.

    Also gonna take a raincheck on another trip to university. From my experience all you really get there is a lot of data, a good part of it outdated and useless. I can do that from my chair here just fine. The US systems seems even worse than the one I had the pleasure with, so really no thanks.

    If they didn't tell you how the US is responsible for pretty much everything happening in the Iraq since the 80s, I don't know what to tell you. They brokered the deals that gave the Iraq access to WMD provided intel in the Iraq Iran war where to point the warheads at. They directly supplied funds and know how to gear up the country with disregard to it's population to have a buffer protecting their oil fields in the far east from Soviet influence.
    After the Cold War ended, there was a Dictator in power the people didn't want, but too powerful to remove. So the US just more or less abandoned the region, which soon led to a self made problem and resulted in the Gulf War.
    Ironic as the world tends to be, the Taliban are another self made problem from the same timespan.


    Nations have a long history in screwing up badly, that's kinda most of history to begin with. Thing is you actually don't have insights on the matter, just the benefit of hindsight backing claims easy to make after the fact.
    Sitting here and yelling "muh space dollies can't be this dumb - this would have went down like this, this and this because I say so" is hillarious to me, because real people are this dumb, why wouldn't our space dollies be?
     
    AdmiralJCJF likes this.
  19. Solar

    Solar Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2017
    Messages:
    2,827
    Likes Received:
    4,929
    YJ was not in a position to remotely declare war on PanO as they were dealing with a massive uprising involving an element of their armed forces.

    This is not a case of the US shooting down a Russian jet now. This is arguably most similar to the support given to the Whites against the Reds in the Russian Civil War by the UK etc, a situation where an internal conflict results in intervention without consequence by another power. PanO could do that during the Uprising due to YJ being paralysed by exactly that, with the JSA causing intense combat across multiple theatres.

    Yes, PanO aircraft shooting down YJ aircraft is something that is absolutely an act of war, but that does not mean that YJ us required to declare war as a result if they feel like this is a strategically poor decision due to a temporary massive vulnerability in their ability to win said war. You don't fight wars you can't win. PanO were confident a limited air defence campaign of JSA positions would not result in another Neo-Colonial War due to YJs temporary weakness keeping them from reacting as they usually would, and they were correct.
     
    saint, Teslarod, eciu and 1 other person like this.
  20. inane.imp

    inane.imp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2018
    Messages:
    5,529
    Likes Received:
    6,496
    Hungary '56 or Czechoslovakia in '68 provide other parallels. You know what they and Crimea have in common?

    The US didn't risk war over a "humanitarian crisis" within Russia's sphere of influence.

    Crimea is a perfect example of how great powers react when peace is a higher priority than non-core interests. The US response is how I would have expected PanO to respond: perhaps with more covert military assistance as befits the setting.

    If instead you're comparing PanO and Russian behaviour, then the comparison for YJ is the Ukraine. While Ukraine didn't escalate the war more generally, they fought the Russians in Ukraine.

    However, reason I find that comparison unconvincing is because the power disparities between Russia and Ukraine are much more stark than those between PanO and YJ.

    @Solar. You're explanation is plausible: and it's one I largely agree with. The issue I have with it is if Japan breaking away was so crippling then why did the Nomads and Haqq participate in crippling YJ?

    Either the loss of Japan is crippling and fundamentally upsets the balance of power or it's a temporary set back and PanO's actions are intolerable.
     
    #100 inane.imp, Sep 17, 2018
    Last edited: Sep 17, 2018
    eciu likes this.