<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #1371</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	11/21/99 11:50:11 AM Pacific Standard Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest     Sunday, November 21 1999     Volume 1999 : Number 1371<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: Traveller Navigation and Gunnery<BR>
Re: No longer totally OT( was Re: Totally OT but ...)<BR>
Re: MTU Imperial Justice (was: IMoJ)<BR>
Re: Traveller PBEM <BR>
Re: The naming of things<BR>
Re: Droyne partial "Lexicon" on-line.<BR>
Re: The naming of things<BR>
Re: Traveller Navigation and Gunnery<BR>
Re: Traveller Navigation and Gunnery<BR>
Re: rocks<BR>
Re: Traveller Navigation and Gunnery<BR>
Re: dampers and reactors<BR>
Travshorts III<BR>
Re: Traveller Navigation and Gunnery<BR>
Re: Traveller Navigation and Gunnery<BR>
Re: Traveller Navigation and Gunnery<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 08:04:06 -0500<BR>
From: "Jory Earl" <j-man@iname.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller Navigation and Gunnery<BR>
<BR>
>But there *are* some problems. You aren't going to get nuke level<BR>
>strikes from a spinal mass driver. The impact energy is a function of<BR>
>.the mass of the projectile, and the launch velocity. The launch<BR>
>velocity is dependent on the length of the driver and the acceleration<BR>
>it can provide (I can dig up the formula). You won't get anywhere<BR>
>*near* lightspeed with a ship mounted weapon (I once did the figures<BR>
>for a 1000 km longer mass driver and it only got a few percent of c)<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
What if you had a huge cyclotron that accelerated the mass to near C then<BR>
expelled it?<BR>
<BR>
___________________________________________________________<BR>
 J-Man<BR>
 ICQ# 2843475<BR>
 New Hampshire - U.S.A.<BR>
 Email : j-man@iname.com<BR>
 Home Page : http://www.geocities.com/~jman037/<BR>
___________________________________________________________<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 1999 17:53:27 -0500<BR>
From: Robert Prior <robert_prior@sympatico.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: No longer totally OT( was Re: Totally OT but ...)<BR>
<BR>
><sigh> The USPS delivers millions of pieces of mail quickly and<BR>
>safely, but once in a while they fail.  It's the failures we all<BR>
>remember.  Here's my USPS failure story...my Mom sent my sister's<BR>
>family their Christmas presents via USPS three years ago.  The box<BR>
>never arrived, but in mid March a *piece* of the box with the<BR>
>address on it was delivered to her with a "Sorry, but this is all<BR>
>that's left" message.  Since than she sends only through UPS.  It<BR>
>happens with the private carriers too, but it seems to happen less<BR>
>often.<BR>
<BR>
I suspect a lot of this has to do with frequency. How many of us use a<BR>
private courier company to send a letter or postcard?<BR>
<BR>
My own experiences indicate that Canada Post has a far better record than<BR>
UPS. Out of thousands of letters I've sent/received, less than a dozen have<BR>
been lost or significantly delayed.  OTOH, UPS has managed to lose one<BR>
parcel entirely (no record of it in their system at all), help another "in<BR>
transit" for a week (on an overnight delivery), and forced me drive 1.5<BR>
hours to their depot to pick up another only to discover that they had left<BR>
it with a neighbour (whom I didn't know) who had just gone on holiday!  One<BR>
parcel was delivered on time.<BR>
<BR>
Canada Post: 99.9% success.<BR>
<BR>
UPS: 25% success.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 1999 17:57:19 -0500<BR>
From: Robert Prior <robert_prior@sympatico.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: MTU Imperial Justice (was: IMoJ)<BR>
<BR>
>> Said severing consisting of a ceremony. Nothing major, but enough that<BR>
>> saying "I quit, now b****r off." isn't enough.<BR>
><BR>
>Actually, it should "merely" take a public (published?) formal<BR>
>declaration, complete with a notice being sent to the liege.<BR>
><BR>
>The reason I'd go for this rather than a ceremony is that if you are<BR>
>terminating the contract because your liege has been playing fast and<BR>
>loose with the rules, it may not be *safe* to arrange for a ceremony<BR>
>that has both of you present.<BR>
<BR>
Well, I haven't needed this one yet, but I figured that the ceremony would<BR>
take place either with both parties in attendance, or with one party and a<BR>
herald (who would then convey the news to the other, and return to the<BR>
first to inform them that they were free of obligation).<BR>
<BR>
>With a formal declaration, you just can't (honorably) act against him<BR>
>until you are sure he's received his copy.<BR>
<BR>
That's what the herald's for.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
>> That's why it makes for great gaming. And if you're playing GT, that's why<BR>
>> it's a disadvantage (although a _reputation_ for being honourable would be<BR>
>> an advantage, too).<BR>
><BR>
>And a reputation for being dishonorable is a disadvantage of a rather<BR>
>different sort. :-)<BR>
<BR>
Yep. But not one either of us has to worry about, eh?  :-)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 09:40:31 -0500<BR>
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@accesstoledo.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller PBEM <BR>
<BR>
> Someone was asking about this?<BR>
> <BR>
> The site for a Traveller PBEM is at:<BR>
> http://www.ssgfx.com/traveller/<BR>
> I haven't used it so I can't recommend it, but it's<BR>
> the only one I know of.<BR>
<BR>
That's for the TML-PBEM.  As of a year and a half ago (last time I heard from <BR>
anybody who was involved concerning it), they weren't accepting any new <BR>
players.  Doesn't look like they've posted anything in a year & a half either.<BR>
<BR>
<shrug><BR>
<BR>
Interesting ideas in the archives, though.  Can't quite figger out *what* the <BR>
symbiotic lifeform is.<BR>
<BR>
Keven<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
tc++ tm+ tn+ t4- to ru++ ge+ 3i c+ jt au st- ls pi+ ta+ he+ so- vi zh sy<BR>
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure<BR>
                                                     In Reavers' Deep<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 10:22:54 -0500 (EST)<BR>
From: Kenji Schwarz <schwarz@fas.harvard.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: The naming of things<BR>
<BR>
On Sat, 20 Nov 1999, cos 90 wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> >> >ObTrav: What kind of name is Alkhalikoi anyway?<BR>
> >> <BR>
> >> Sounds Hawaiian/Polynesian<BR>
> ><BR>
> >I don't think ~/kh/ exists in the Polynesian languages, but it does in<BR>
> >some of the other Austronesian languages.  It ain't Vilani. <BR>
> <BR>
> I always thought it was Sylean...<BR>
<BR>
Doh!  I'll bet you're right.  <BR>
<BR>
To ignite another canon war (with any luck at all), what are opinions on<BR>
the Syleans as an Ancient-transplanted minor race (per T4) vs. "Sylean" as<BR>
the folks descended from Ziru Sirka/Rule of Man settlers?<BR>
<BR>
 Kenji<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 10:31:06 -0500 (EST)<BR>
From: Kenji Schwarz <schwarz@fas.harvard.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Droyne partial "Lexicon" on-line.<BR>
<BR>
Rob --<BR>
<BR>
While I like the vocabulary (and the numeral system), I have to say I<BR>
really don't agree with your choice of using Mayan script for Oynprith.  <BR>
It's far too recognizable (IMO), even if there's only a few Travelleristas<BR>
who can actually read glyphic Mayan.<BR>
<BR>
Kenji<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
On Thu, 18 Nov 1999, Robert Eaglestone wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> Folks,<BR>
> <BR>
> Prince's University on Corlano (Foreven/Corlano 2309 C866888-9)<BR>
> has on-line its partial Oynprith Glyph Lexicon (probably a misnomer),<BR>
> which contains a partial word-list and glyph-map of Oynprith, plus some<BR>
> examples that indicate orthography.<BR>
> <BR>
> http://members.home.net/eaglestone/oynprith/Dictionary.html<BR>
> <BR>
> Corlano's root page is<BR>
> <BR>
> http://members.home.net/eaglestone/index.html<BR>
> <BR>
> "Share and enjoy".<BR>
> <BR>
> -Rob<BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 10:57:21 -0600<BR>
From: "Joseph R. Dietrich" <yikes@evansville.net><BR>
Subject: Re: The naming of things<BR>
<BR>
> To ignite another canon war (with any luck at all), what are opinions on<BR>
> the Syleans as an Ancient-transplanted minor race (per T4) vs. "Sylean" as<BR>
> the folks descended from Ziru Sirka/Rule of Man settlers?<BR>
<BR>
The Ancient-transplanted Syleans were overthrown by gothic Ziru Sirka/Rule<BR>
of Man knights templar disguisd as pirates and using near-c rocks. They<BR>
captured the hearts and minds of the surviving population using battle pod<BR>
equipped infantry. All while wearing sensible shoes. Amen.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 12:38:40 -0500<BR>
From: "Chris Seamans" <semo@pil.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller Navigation and Gunnery<BR>
<BR>
From: Leonard Erickson <shadow@krypton.rain.com><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
>I think you need to look into the actual "mechanics" involved in rock<BR>
>dropping. *Nobody* "haul[s] big rocks into orbit". It takes an unreal<BR>
>amount of power, even by Traveller standards, to shift the orbit of a<BR>
>"big rock" so that it'll hit a planet *months* later.<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
>If you want something to hit before there's time for a courier to leave<BR>
>and bring back reinforcements, the situation is rather different. You<BR>
>are talking about "small" rocks (ship sized) and it winds up being<BR>
>easier to threaten to drop a "junker" ship on them under autopilot.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
I'll admit your logic is sound here, but that's why earlier on in the thread<BR>
on this top I qualified the concept by including variations on the theme.<BR>
I've never assumed that one has to *literally* drop big rocks. Any number of<BR>
"big dumb objects" will suffice.<BR>
<BR>
>You need *enormous* (and expensive!) drives to shift rocks.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Fair enough.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 09:51:40 -0800<BR>
From: "Bruce Macintosh" <bruce.macintosh@worldnet.att.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller Navigation and Gunnery<BR>
<BR>
>I'm surprised the Imperium doesn't utilize mass-driver technology on<BR>
>warships when they need to do pin-point bombardment. It CAN be done, the<BR>
>physics prove this. Besides, you don't have to mess with that nasty Pu<BR>
>(plutonium).<BR>
<BR>
With Traveller starship technology there's nothing special about mass<BR>
drivers; using the ship's own engine for "deadfall" ordinance makes much<BR>
more sense for bombarding city-sized targets, and smaller targets need<BR>
guided ordinance, which might as well have its own engine.<BR>
(A typical Traveller missile has ~200 km/s of delta-V, much higher than<BR>
you could ever get out of a mass driver; and of course a starship can provide<BR>
several km/s with a few minutes burn of its engines before dropping the<BR>
rocks.)<BR>
<BR>
The high performance of Traveller engines somewhat negates the advantages<BR>
of being in orbit - you can get that same 200 km/s (or something close to it)<BR>
with a missile launched from the ground on a suitable trajectory, though<BR>
of course that's easier to shoot down. Only in societies with chemical rockets<BR>
does the energy advantage of being in orbit (10 km/s) make a significant<BR>
difference. The positional advantage does remain (it's easier to protect<BR>
your own troops from orbit.)<BR>
<BR>
Bruce<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 09:54:32 -0800<BR>
From: "Bruce Macintosh" <bruce.macintosh@worldnet.att.net><BR>
Subject: Re: rocks<BR>
<BR>
>But basicly, you have to supply *all* the energy that goes into the<BR>
>explosion, plus extra for losses in the mass driver. A nuke doesn't<BR>
>cost anywhere *near* as much energy as it releases.<BR>
<BR>
Life is easier for missiles in Traveller, where thruster plates don't<BR>
conserve energy, or HEPlaR is as efficient as a nuclear bomb...<BR>
<BR>
Bruce<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 12:52:30 -0500<BR>
From: "Chris Seamans" <semo@pil.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller Navigation and Gunnery<BR>
<BR>
From: Leonard Erickson <shadow@krypton.rain.com><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
>In this situation "big rocks" have a decided advantage. You can nudge a<BR>
>rock into a collision orbit, and anybody on world with much of a<BR>
>telescope can *see* you do it. Doesn't take but a few observations and<BR>
>a calculator to determine the new orbit. And you've got *months* to<BR>
>watch it come at you.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Ouch.<BR>
<BR>
>And as long as the Imperium holds the "high ground" you can *see* it<BR>
>come at you, and not be able to do a damn thing about it. And there's a<BR>
>definite deadline as *nobody* is going to be able to stop or deflect it<BR>
>once it gets within a few days of impact.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
It almost goes without saying that the Imperium can hold the high ground<BR>
when it wants to, at least when it's dealing with internal problems. *Now* I<BR>
can see why nobody leaves the Imperium under their own will. ;)<BR>
<BR>
Still, it would also seem that the first thing a country wishing to rebel<BR>
*must* do if its rebellion is to have any chance of succeeding is to manage<BR>
to create one, but preferably more, deep meson cannon sites. Of course, this<BR>
will frequently have to be done in secret.<BR>
<BR>
It's not so much for nailing the big rocks but for making such a scenario as<BR>
expensive as possible for the Imperium.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 09:57:54 -0800<BR>
From: "Bruce Macintosh" <bruce.macintosh@worldnet.att.net><BR>
Subject: Re: dampers and reactors<BR>
<BR>
Some people (me among them) note that Traveller reactors seem to be<BR>
able to fuse pure H1, rather than the deuterium or tritium that more<BR>
realistic reactors require. From this I infer that Traveller reactors contain<BR>
a<BR>
nuclear damper running in reverse, as it were, to increase the fusion<BR>
probabilities for H+H=>D (note: this requires tweaking the electroweak<BR>
force too, but we'll ignore that.)<BR>
<BR>
In that case, the reactors own damper might protect it from external<BR>
interference<BR>
at anything but the shortest ranges.<BR>
<BR>
Bruce<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 18:23:40 -0000<BR>
From: "MJ Dougherty" <martinjd@globalnet.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Travshorts III<BR>
<BR>
The door is still open for submissions to the Travshorts collection(s). Any<BR>
Canon Traveller setting, 3-7000 words. That's 3 *thousand* to 7 *thousand*<BR>
(wry chuckle. They all died indeed. Sounds like one of my scenarios)<BR>
<BR>
But I digress.<BR>
<BR>
Thus far we have numerous statements of interest - submission date is end of<BR>
December, so get some drafts in at least - and some acceptances. Contents<BR>
will definitely include "Skirmish" by Terry McInness, "Against the Coming of<BR>
Night" and "Absent Friends" by myself and the excellent "Treason" by Carlos<BR>
Alos-Ferrer.<BR>
<BR>
There's room for more quality Traveller fiction, so query me for submission<BR>
details.<BR>
<BR>
MJD<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 13:26:03 -0500<BR>
From: "DaveShayne" <daveshayne@email.msn.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller Navigation and Gunnery<BR>
<BR>
>From: "Chris Seamans" <semo@pil.net><BR>
<BR>
>>  You actually gain possession of something usefull instead of a<BR>
>>bunch of glowing craters<BR>
><BR>
>Okay, that is if you assume that the Imperium is going to bombard a planet<BR>
>back into the stone age and erase all life on the surface of a planet. I<BR>
>made no indication that this might even be the case.<BR>
<BR>
I'm sorry if I misconstrued your argument. I thought you were refering<BR>
to the Centauri treatment of the Narn. Whish as I recall was prety close<BR>
to bombing the planet back to the stoneage. And yet the Narn didn't<BR>
really give up, they just went underground.<BR>
<BR>
>Let's put the scenario in another way. Say you've got worlds which don't<BR>
>want to be part of the Imperium, or who are currently part of the Imperium<BR>
>and wish to regain their independence.<BR>
><BR>
>What's going to stop them from doing so? What's to stop them from, I don't<BR>
>know, sabotaging their own industrial capacity to the extent that they<BR>
>*can't* pay Imperial taxes?<BR>
<BR>
And can't support their own people who begin to think maybe being a part of<BR>
the<BR>
Imperium, "arna sa bad afta all." The peasants revolt and prety soon the<BR>
same<BR>
shmos who wanted the imperium off their backs are begging for a marine<BR>
detachment for protection against their own people.<BR>
<BR>
>What do you do then, do you drop Imperial<BR>
>Marines to force them to work at gun point? Do you drop Imperial Marine<BR>
>Engineers onto the planet, build new industrial centers, and then force the<BR>
>populace to work at gunpoint?<BR>
>At some point, if you're the Imperium, and you're as hardnosed as is<BR>
claimed<BR>
>in canon, you're going to have to deal with the pontentiality of hitting<BR>
>civilian populations to make it known that you're not going to tolerate<BR>
such<BR>
>slacking.<BR>
<BR>
I supose it's posible if everybody on the planet is mortally opposed to<BR>
imperial rule this might have to be done but I don't see any planet with a<BR>
pop<BR>
greater than 2 where this could posibly be the case. And with populations<BR>
that low<BR>
any old machinegun is a weapon of mass destruction. Ie in that case "wipe em<BR>
out<BR>
who's gonna notice." In all other situations enough people will be found who<BR>
are willing to accept Imperial rule to keep things going on a more or less<BR>
reasonably profitable level.<BR>
<BR>
<my silly joke snipped><BR>
<BR>
>1.) If you want to control a city / country / planet in a traditional<BR>
sense,<BR>
>somebody's got to be there. The Imperium doesn't *want* to control cities /<BR>
>countries / planets in the traditional sense. They simply want them to pay<BR>
>taxes.<BR>
<BR>
In which case they're going to choose the least damaging way of convincing<BR>
them to accept imperial rule that they can.<BR>
<BR>
>2.) Yes, and how would you convince the populace not to fight? Propaganda<BR>
>campaigns might work, but they can also fail miserably. Perhaps a<BR>
sufficient<BR>
>show of force might be in order, like, I dunno, hauling in big rocks and<BR>
>dropping them on select population centers.<BR>
<BR>
Or try bribing the local leaders. If a planets power structure is left<BR>
intact The<BR>
local leaders may well decide that the Imperium is, "okaybyme."<BR>
<BR>
>>>How am I to be convinced that the Imperium (or other major interstellar<BR>
>>>power) won't see value in dropping big, cheap rocks on major cities in<BR>
>>>order<BR>
>>>to get their way?<BR>
>><BR>
>>Because craters don't pay taxes.<BR>
><BR>
>Neither does a determined populace. So, we're back at square one.<BR>
<BR>
I supose. But just how determined is the populace? If the Impies come<BR>
in with a batron and a few regiments of marines, bribes in the right places,<BR>
and some cosmetic reforms (say renaming the taxes negative income<BR>
enhancements or some such) would the peasants still revolt?<BR>
In most cases I doubt it.<BR>
<BR>
>>Countries go to war mostly to impose their will on others.<BR>
><BR>
>Well, sometimes it is to do more than simply impose their will on other<BR>
>countries. It's been relatively common for a country to go to war to annex<BR>
>territory. That's not an anal distinction, it is far more than a mere<BR>
>imposition of will.<BR>
<BR>
Yes I was being inelequent. Some other reasons countries go to war<BR>
are: "Glorious Leaders" huge ego needs a stroke, religious disputes (These<BR>
wars<BR>
are among the dirtiest wars), to avoid being anexed by another country.<BR>
(Yes it actually does take two countries to fight a war)<BR>
<BR>
And no doubt many other reasons/justifications. Wars still boil down to a<BR>
violent dispute over who gets to call the shots.<BR>
<BR>
>>Unless a countries aim is genocide less drastic measures will<BR>
>>usually suffice.<BR>
><BR>
>It doesn't have to be genocide. Let me state again that total destruction<BR>
>does not have to follow from rock dropping.<BR>
<BR>
Depends on how big the rock is.<BR>
<BR>
>>Having to rebuild a conquered teritory and deal with enemies<BR>
>>seeking revenge for attrocities commited is a real drag on the<BR>
>>economy and way of life.<BR>
><BR>
>This would be different from the situation in what way after a land war in<BR>
>what way precisely?<BR>
<BR>
In general in a land war you only shoot at things that are in your imediate<BR>
way and/or shooting back. As opposed to the rock that's going to get<BR>
everybody it lands on whether their fighting back or not. Killing people<BR>
who aren't otherwise involved usually results in fence sitters joining the<BR>
foe more often than convincing your enemy to give up.<BR>
<BR>
>>It's so much easier to convince your enemy that you might enhance<BR>
>>their radiant luminosity if they don't accept your reasonable offer of<BR>
>>protectorate status, and quickly get about the business of<BR>
>>import/export, than it is to actually wipe them out, wait for the ground<BR>
>>to cool, plant a fresh colony, and then start up the import/export<BR>
>>business.<BR>
<BR>
>Ah, okay. So now you're saying the mere threat of rock dropping will be<BR>
>enough to bring a world around. The only problem is that from time to time<BR>
a<BR>
>world's going to say, "Hey! You're not *really* gonna whack us with rocks!"<BR>
><BR>
>Then what happens exactly... start a land war? Or follow through on the use<BR>
>of cheap and brutal "terror weapons"?<BR>
<BR>
Um yea I guess that last paragraph of mine does tend to support your thesis<BR>
more than mine. But if you nuke say a convenient uninhabited moon that<BR>
hapens to be nearby.... Well maybe convinced fanatics would doubt your<BR>
willingness but nobody can doubt your capability.<BR>
<BR>
>>This is just the way I see things not holy writ or anything. But it fits<BR>
my<BR>
>>conception of the 3I (and must other empires/kingdoms/nations I've<BR>
>>experienced.)<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
>Where do things such as the firebombing of Dresden, the atomic bombing of<BR>
>Hiroshima and (tongue planted firmly in cheek) the God smiting of Sodom and<BR>
>Gommorah fit into those conceptions?<BR>
<BR>
Dresden was more or less irellevent to the outcome of the war. In fact the<BR>
only<BR>
big contribution to the outcome of the war that strategic bombing made was<BR>
in<BR>
the interdiction of the Ploesti oilfields. Pity it took the army air corps<BR>
as long as<BR>
it did to concentarte on them.<BR>
<BR>
Japan was already beaten in every sense except the actuall occupation by the<BR>
time<BR>
the bombs were dropped. The japanese knew this and were attempting to<BR>
negotiate surender terms at the time. The bomb merely pointed out that we<BR>
were<BR>
willing to kill all of them in order to get unconditional surrender.<BR>
<BR>
In both cases large occupying armies were required to control the conquered<BR>
teritories and we wound up spending a large sum of money rebuilding their<BR>
destroyed infrastructure. If both of the previous were not true we would<BR>
probably<BR>
have had another world war sometime in the sixties.<BR>
<BR>
David Shayne<BR>
<BR>
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++<BR>
Old version - Build a better mousetrap and<BR>
the world will beat a path to your door.<BR>
New version - Build a better mousetrap and<BR>
some @$*% will build a better mouse.<BR>
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 11:37:59 -0700 (MST)<BR>
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller Navigation and Gunnery<BR>
<BR>
On Sun, 21 Nov 1999, Chris Seamans wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> From: DaveShayne <daveshayne@email.msn.com><BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> >  You actually gain possession of something usefull instead of a<BR>
> >bunch of glowing craters.  If you target the population: anybody left<BR>
> >over is probably going to be less than thrilled with you.  If you target<BR>
> >only the centers of government/military: you run the risk of killing the<BR>
> >people that can agree to whatever it is you want from them.  If you<BR>
> >target the whole planet: you get a glowing lifeless ball. Which is<BR>
> >perfect if your goal is to litter the galaxy with glowing lifeless balls -<BR>
> >less perfect if you actually want usefull planets to tax and stuff.<BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> Okay, that is if you assume that the Imperium is going to bombard a planet<BR>
> back into the stone age and erase all life on the surface of a planet. I<BR>
> made no indication that this might even be the case.<BR>
> <BR>
> Let's put the scenario in another way. Say you've got worlds which don't<BR>
> want to be part of the Imperium, or who are currently part of the Imperium<BR>
> and wish to regain their independence.<BR>
> <BR>
> What's going to stop them from doing so? What's to stop them from, I don't<BR>
> know, sabotaging their own industrial capacity to the extent that they<BR>
> *can't* pay Imperial taxes? What do you do then, do you drop Imperial<BR>
> Marines to force them to work at gun point? Do you drop Imperial Marine<BR>
> Engineers onto the planet, build new industrial centers, and then force the<BR>
> populace to work at gunpoint?<BR>
<BR>
Well, if they're stupid enough to shoot themselves in the head like that,<BR>
all you do is interdict them. No problem. If they want to isolate<BR>
themselves, and live as poor dirt farmers, the Imperium isn't going to<BR>
stop 'em. Any offworld holdings they have will be attached to satisfy<BR>
external claims. But they're not getting off their world and going<BR>
anywhere. <BR>
<BR>
Hell, if offworld money isn't involved, the Imperium doesn't<BR>
_care_ whether they live in caves starving to death, or large<BR>
industrialized megalopolises...once they all starve, someone willing to be<BR>
part of the Imperium will come in and rebuild, if there's anything of<BR>
value there.<BR>
 <BR>
> At some point, if you're the Imperium, and you're as hardnosed as is claimed<BR>
> in canon, you're going to have to deal with the pontentiality of hitting<BR>
> civilian populations to make it known that you're not going to tolerate such<BR>
> slacking.<BR>
<BR>
The Imperium doesn't give a flying fig about what it is that people do on<BR>
their own planets. They control 'the space between the stars'. If you're<BR>
harboring p*rates, expect those facilities to get bombed. <BR>
<BR>
If your leaders are plotting treason, they'll get whacked. If the<BR>
everybody on the planet says: "We don't wanna play Imperium anymore!<BR>
We're quitting!", the Imperium says, 'Fine', and starts charging an<BR>
Imperial duty on all goods flowing to and from the planet in question.<BR>
That will probably far more than make up for any losses in taxes.<BR>
<BR>
Also, if some, ohhh, say nearby polity or Megacorp wishes to reintegrate<BR>
the planet in question back into the Imperium...who's gonna stop 'em? The<BR>
planet's on their own.<BR>
<BR>
> 1.) If you want to control a city / country / planet in a traditional sense,<BR>
> somebody's got to be there. The Imperium doesn't *want* to control cities /<BR>
> countries / planets in the traditional sense. They simply want them to pay<BR>
> taxes.<BR>
<BR>
Which said taxes are actually quite low, and _probably_ paid by taxing<BR>
traffic through the starports, not directly taxing the inhabitants of the<BR>
planet. I think we figured out one time that the average Imperial resident<BR>
pays something like, what, less than ten Cr. a year in Imperial taxes? At<BR>
the population level of the Imperium that's quite a few teracredits...<BR>
 <BR>
The Imperium isn't going to even threaten rock-tossing over mere taxes...<BR>
<BR>
Finally, in the end, since the Imperial model of growth was to co-opt the<BR>
local leaders into the Imperial nobility, there are very few places that<BR>
have any incentive at all to quit the club.<BR>
<BR>
If your imperium is a Star Wars type evil empire, then they'll do this<BR>
sort of thing, but as I see it, the Imperium is more like the Empire in<BR>
the Flandry stories, a distant thing that asks everyone for a few pennies<BR>
a year and that's about the extent of the Imperium's impact on the average<BR>
sophont. Who the dog catcher is in this years election cycle is far more<BR>
important.<BR>
<BR>
Bruce Johnson<BR>
University of Arizona<BR>
College of Pharmacy<BR>
Information Technology Group<BR>
<BR>
Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 14:46:55 -0500<BR>
From: "Chris Seamans" <semo@pil.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller Navigation and Gunnery<BR>
<BR>
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
>Well, if they're stupid enough to shoot themselves in the head like that,<BR>
>all you do is interdict them. No problem. If they want to isolate<BR>
>themselves, and live as poor dirt farmers, the Imperium isn't going to<BR>
>stop 'em. Any offworld holdings they have will be attached to satisfy<BR>
>external claims. But they're not getting off their world and going<BR>
>anywhere.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Ah, now it's all so clear to me. Perhaps this is the way that the Imperium<BR>
might play it in some other game, but remember... this is *Traveller* and<BR>
the Imperium is willing to step in when two powers wage war to the point<BR>
that their industrial capacity is threatened. Remember, this is the Imperium<BR>
that waged the Pacification Campaigns when there were significant cultural<BR>
regions who resisted integration into the Imperium.<BR>
<BR>
>Hell, if offworld money isn't involved, the Imperium doesn't<BR>
>_care_ whether they live in caves starving to death, or large<BR>
>industrialized megalopolises...once they all starve, someone willing to be<BR>
>part of the Imperium will come in and rebuild, if there's anything of<BR>
>value there.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Really? One wonders if this extends to worlds like those within a few<BR>
parsecs of Capital. How about those worlds with some degree of political<BR>
importance or symbolic importance, like... Terra?<BR>
<BR>
>The Imperium doesn't give a flying fig about what it is that people do on<BR>
>their own planets. They control 'the space between the stars'. If you're<BR>
>harboring p*rates, expect those facilities to get bombed.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Does anybody *really* believe that the Imperium really controls "the space<BR>
between the stars"? They may buy that line in the Imperium universe, but I<BR>
must say you're insulting my intelligence if you expect me to buy it in real<BR>
life.<BR>
<BR>
This is the same Imperium that expanded by touching off surface wars on<BR>
worlds that it wished to integrate. This is the same Imperium that waged the<BR>
Pacification campaigns. This is the same Imperium that steps in when a<BR>
worlds' industrial capacity is threatened by warfare.<BR>
<BR>
>If your leaders are plotting treason, they'll get whacked.<BR>
<BR>
Strange behavior for an Imperium which "doesn't give a flying fig" about<BR>
what folks do on their own worlds.<BR>
<BR>
>If the everybody on the planet says: "We don't wanna play Imperium<BR>
>anymore! We're quitting!", the Imperium says, 'Fine', and starts<BR>
>charging an Imperial duty on all goods flowing to and from the planet<BR>
>in question. That will probably far more than make up for any losses<BR>
>in taxes.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Ah, so the Imperium *is* interested in taxing worlds by whatever means is<BR>
necessary in the situation.<BR>
<BR>
>Also, if some, ohhh, say nearby polity or Megacorp wishes to reintegrate<BR>
>the planet in question back into the Imperium...who's gonna stop 'em? The<BR>
>planet's on their own.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Oh, but wait, doesn't the Imperium have laws against multiworld polities?<BR>
There's a bit of sarcasm in my voice there. It's difficult to disentangle<BR>
what the Imperium really does from what their "spin machine" says they do.<BR>
<BR>
>Which said taxes are actually quite low, and _probably_ paid by taxing<BR>
>traffic through the starports, not directly taxing the inhabitants of the<BR>
>planet. I think we figured out one time that the average Imperial resident<BR>
>pays something like, what, less than ten Cr. a year in Imperial taxes? At<BR>
>the population level of the Imperium that's quite a few teracredits...<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
But wait, didn't you just say that taxing traffic through the starports is a<BR>
"last resort" when a world's not willing to cooperate? Still, I thought that<BR>
there was a different figure in trillion credit squadron. I could be wrong<BR>
though, as I don't have it nearby.<BR>
<BR>
>The Imperium isn't going to even threaten rock-tossing over mere taxes...<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Yet taxes, are in the end, all they're really interested in... even though<BR>
they've been fully willing to do other nasty things in integrating worlds<BR>
that don't want to cooperate.<BR>
<BR>
>Finally, in the end, since the Imperial model of growth was to co-opt the<BR>
>local leaders into the Imperial nobility, there are very few places that<BR>
>have any incentive at all to quit the club.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Huh? Surely this is a IYTU scenario. There is no evidence that this is the<BR>
case as individual worlds have *many* different styles of government that<BR>
are at odds with Imperial quasi-feudalism.<BR>
<BR>
>If your imperium is a Star Wars type evil empire, then they'll do this<BR>
>sort of thing, but as I see it, the Imperium is more like the Empire in<BR>
>the Flandry stories, a distant thing that asks everyone for a few pennies<BR>
>a year and that's about the extent of the Imperium's impact on the average<BR>
>sophont. Who the dog catcher is in this years election cycle is far more<BR>
>important.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
On the contrary, I do not think that the Imperium is "evil" nor do I think<BR>
that it's "distant". It's utterly obvious that the Imperium has a real stake<BR>
in keeping worlds under its control. After all, if the hands-off policy you<BR>
mention were to be in effect, there's no reason not to leave the Imperium.<BR>
What? The Imperium is completely willing to give our world complete self<BR>
determination? Sure, the Imperium doesn't have to worry about its core<BR>
worlds splitting, because their mineral resources have likely been depleted<BR>
after long millenia... but that's also exactly the reason why not letting<BR>
worlds leave is so damn important.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #1371<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-yd01.mx.aol.com (rly-yd01.mail.aol.com [172.18.150.1]) by air-yd02.mail.aol.com (vx) with ESMTP; Sun, 21 Nov 1999 14:50:11 -0500<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yd01.mx.aol.com (v65.4) with ESMTP; Sun, 21 Nov 1999 14:50:04 -0500<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id OAA25703;<BR>
	Sun, 21 Nov 1999 14:49:06 -0500 (EST)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Sun, 21 Nov 1999 14:48:42 -0500<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id OAA25663<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Sun, 21 Nov 1999 14:48:41 -0500 (EST)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 14:48:41 -0500 (EST)<BR>
Message-Id: <199911211948.OAA25663@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #1371<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
