These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Intergalactic Summit

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Blue on blue attacks - Diana Kim, Pyre Falcon, The Republic, The Federation

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Anja Suorsa
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#41 - 2013-07-26 22:13:43 UTC
I am accepting no responsibility for the derailment of this thread. I maintain that the blame belongs to Miss Tuulinen. Shameful display.
Pieter Tuulinen
Societas Imperialis Sceptri Coronaeque
Khimi Harar
#42 - 2013-07-27 01:52:02 UTC
Dammit Suorsa...

For the first time since I started the conversation, he looks me dead in the eye. In his gaze are steel jackhammers, quiet vengeance, a hundred thousand orbital bombs frozen in still life.
Katarina Musana
Clan Leshya Offworld Venture Enterprise
#43 - 2013-07-28 23:41:49 UTC
Shintoko Akahoshi wrote:
I can see no indication that they won't do so again should the mood strike them.


Neither have you seen any indication that we would do so again. You are taking one instance and extrapolating a pattern from it. Except, extrapolating is the wrong word. The correct word is fabricating.

Quote:
How is this different from what the Republic did in Colelie? Simple. When I flew with Pyre, I would show up on the overview of all of those pilots as hostile. They knew I was hostile the minute I showed up. I did not try to pretend otherwise. To behave as the Republic behaved, I would have had to join the Gallente (or the Minmatar) militias and then pull the trigger on those very same pilots. I would have had to show up on their metaphorical doorstep, cloaked in the blue raiment of an ally, and then pull the trigger.


So you're saying the Federation Navy pilots present at Colelie had no idea that the Naglfars sitting in front of them were hostile?

I've been on the recieving end of a colelie-like scenario (though on a much smaller scale, only involving cruisers and battlecruisers) in which an allied militia fleet opened fire on our fleet. We were quite aware that the fleet in question was hostile towards us before they ever fired on us, and they did indeed open fire first.


What you describe Colelie being like is if I entered a complex that contained an allied militia pilot and sat there in silence for a while and then suddenly locked on and opened fire on that pilot's ship. That is not even remotely how Colelie went.

The real difference between what you did and what the Republic did at colelie is you fired on your own and your supposed allies purely for profit, for greed, like a common pirate. The Republic did it, right or wrong, because they were standing firm on principle.

Quote:
Let's stay on target, shall we? I don't know how it is in the Republic, but Federation schools teach that ad hominem arguments are fallacious in nature.

Tell me, then, please, how the battle of Colelie was about freedom? Whose freedom? The freedom of the people who were killed in the battle?


First, I think you need to go back and answer the complaints of Ms. Okazon, as they are legitimate points and not the ad hominem you write them off as. You, yourself, stated that you have done these things and that deeds are what matter, yet when someone questions you on your deeds, you write them off as ad hominem? May I then write off your complaints about the Republic and EM as irrelevant and illegitimate because they are simply ad hominem as well?


As for Colelie being about freedom, I could argue that it pertained to the freedom of our people to live according to our own culture, but my past experience with you suggests you would not accept such an argument.

Of course, even if I can convince you that even that fight falls under "fighting for freedom," that still would not mean that colelie was justified or correct. Even when fighting for the right things, that doesn't mean that every battle you fight is right.

And you, Shintoko, you've made it quite clear that you don't care about our intentions or our purposes, only our actions, our deeds. Except, you only seem to care about those deeds that are "bad" and "wrong" in your view and are happy to discount the rest.

Quote:
Perhaps this is merely a difference in culture. Perhaps you simply don't see a problem with one ally attacking another. I do, and I suspect a decent number of my fellow Federation citizens do as well.


You just said that to, and are arguing this with, one of your fellow Federation citizens, one who is even of Gallentean ethnicity...
Repentence Tyrathlion
Tyrathlion Interstellar
#44 - 2013-07-29 00:27:38 UTC
Oh good, a serious attempt to get back to topic. Thank you, Ms Musana.

Katarina Musana wrote:

So you're saying the Federation Navy pilots present at Colelie had no idea that the Naglfars sitting in front of them were hostile?

I've been on the recieving end of a colelie-like scenario (though on a much smaller scale, only involving cruisers and battlecruisers) in which an allied militia fleet opened fire on our fleet. We were quite aware that the fleet in question was hostile towards us before they ever fired on us, and they did indeed open fire first.


Question for you - how did that situation arise? What was the issue that led to fleet-level awoxing? From what I read of Ms Akahoshi's argument, she's not debating the Matari fleet's perceived hostility. You can disregard the sabre-rattling and previous CONCORD-dispersed incursion and just take the basic fact that a dread fleet on your doorstep is a threat. I don't know about you, but if a friend of mine unexpectedly walked onto my property with a squad of armed soldiers, I would seriously question their intentions.

And, as a continued point, whether they were really my friend at all. The question at hand is not whether this could be deemed a surprise attack (which it clearly could not, judging by the rapid response of Federation capitals to intercept), but whether even sending the fleet in the first place is justifiable.

I was not present at Colelie, for obvious reasons, but every report I've seen indicates that there was pretty much only one way it was going to go. Both commanding officers were militant and ignored all pleas to withdraw. The die was cast the moment the order to encroach on the Federation was given. So never mind the actions of those at Colelie. Never mind even the actions of those capsuleers who supported their respective fleets, because that's irrelevant to the political situation. Contrary to what some have argued, there is no evidence at all that this was a rogue operation, and I think very few would be surprised if it didn't come from Shakor himself, or one of his lieutenants.

So here's the facts: someone high up in the Republic, if not Shakor himself, ordered a military strike on the Federation. You can claim that it was just meant to retrieve the terrorist all you wish, but someone chose Olf for the mission, and if they had intended for anything other than gunboat diplomacy and blazing turrets, they'd have picked someone else.

What does that mean for where things go from here?

I stand by my previous conclusion, that the Federation and Republic have already secretly talked about and resolved this issue, but it's still worth discussing from a theoretical standpoint.
Shintoko Akahoshi
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#45 - 2013-07-29 15:42:03 UTC
Katarina Musana wrote:
Shintoko Akahoshi wrote:
I can see no indication that they won't do so again should the mood strike them.


Neither have you seen any indication that we would do so again. You are taking one instance and extrapolating a pattern from it. Except, extrapolating is the wrong word. The correct word is fabricating.


The "neighbor" metaphor is pretty apt here.

You and I are neighbors, and we've always gotten along. We lend each other cups of sugar and go to each others pot lucks. We give each other keys to our houses, so that we can feed each other's Furriers when we're on vacation.

One day I decide I'm going to take something from you, so I burst into your house. Your family is there and we start yelling at each other, then I shoot some of them.

Let's pretend, for the purposes of this metaphor, that I don't end up going to jail for a very long time. I'm not giving any indication that I'm going to come shoot some of your family again, right? So are you going to let me keep your house key?

Bio and writing

(Nothing I say is indicative of corporate policy unless otherwise stated)
Stitcher
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#46 - 2013-07-29 16:09:16 UTC
There's a scale difference involved. To a culture of trillions of people, twenty thousand or so lives is... put it this way, even in the era of modern obstetrics and that rather superb midwife drone that CreoDron make, I'd wager that the daily number of deaths as a result of complications from childbirth in the Federation is somewhere in the same order as the death toll from Colelie.

A tragedy for those involved, to be sure. A statistic that should be known and accounted for, certainly. Needless deaths that shouldn't be ignored, most definitely. But the "neighbor" analogy breaks down here because the damage done in reality isn't equivalent in relative scale to the "walked in and shot the dog" scenario you just described.

Were the RSS fleet in the wrong? I am of that opinion, yes. But the political fallout and the response from outraged Federal citizens is likely to cause more real harm to both nations in the long run than the battle itself did.

It may be that the Federation can do nothing in this case. Colelie, it seems, was an event where the Gallente were purely the victim, and not to blame. If so, then it's all on the Republic to not repeat that indiscretion.

It will be easier for them to be convinced of the need for that moderation if the Federation responds with calm and dignity.

AKA Hambone

Author of The Deathworlders
Shintoko Akahoshi
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#47 - 2013-07-29 19:23:59 UTC
Are the deaths a few tens of thousands of Federation citizens a rounding error in the grand scheme of things? Yeah. Does that make it okay? Not in the least.

From the beginning, I was willing to entertain the possibility that Colelie was some sort of terrible mistake. That things simply got out of hand, and that it would be resolved through, perhaps, an official statement of regret on the part of Shakor followed by some gestures of renewed friendship. None of these things happened.

As time went on, Electus Matari released a few statements clarifying their actions during the attack, while independent pilots within that organization declared their regret for participating in it. When pressed to state if they would do the same thing all over again to support another Republic attack on the Federation, they stated that their actions would be the same.

These were among the more calm and dignified statements made by Republicans in the aftermath of the event. Others were fairly vitriolic in their condemnation of the Federation, their insistence that we should simply let the matter drop as a symbolic gesture, or their crowing statements that we must 'suck it up' because the alternative would be for the Amarr Empire to roll over us all.

At about this time I learned that a very good friend of mine was a crewman on one of the Federation ships destroyed at Colelie, and that he was confirmed killed in action. I made the mistake of trying to talk to a few of the Republicans about this, in hopes that we could perhaps use this simple point of human feeling to arrive at some sort of understanding. One man called me a hypocrite to my face for having the audacity to care about the death of my friend. Eventually I gave up on trying.

Keep in mind that these were the only responses from the Republic. From Shakor or the Tribal leadership? Nothing. While I'll acknowledge the possibility that Shakor communicated in private with President Roden, I can't imagine him offering any sort of olive branch to Roden without Roden then displaying it for the Gallente public. It's an election year, after all, and even the most hard bitten cynic has to admit that this issue will be a big one as we select the next President.

Why am I telling you all of this? I'm not sure. I certainly don't expect to build any bridges at this point. I actually expect more crowing, more attacks. It doesn't really matter. At the end of the day it's obvious to me that I can no longer consider the Republic to be an ally to the Federation, not in any meaning of the word. Considering that those tens of thousands of dead had families and friends throughout the Federation, I suspect I'm not the only one. Especially, ironically, since Matari-identifying Gallente make up a disproportionate percentage of the Federal Navy. I hear those people can be somewhat passionate about family...

Bio and writing

(Nothing I say is indicative of corporate policy unless otherwise stated)
Repentence Tyrathlion
Tyrathlion Interstellar
#48 - 2013-07-29 19:56:28 UTC
Shintoko Akahoshi wrote:
Keep in mind that these were the only responses from the Republic. From Shakor or the Tribal leadership? Nothing. While I'll acknowledge the possibility that Shakor communicated in private with President Roden, I can't imagine him offering any sort of olive branch to Roden without Roden then displaying it for the Gallente public. It's an election year, after all, and even the most hard bitten cynic has to admit that this issue will be a big one as we select the next President.


The lady makes a good point. Such suspicious silence does speak of some secret dealings - but why would Roden keep it quiet unless it didn't reflect well on the Federation? I suppose there is the possibility that some kind of 'operational security' thing is happening, but I struggle to come up with anything of the sort that might be involved here. The Federation's politics is nothing if not a popularity contest.
Pieter Tuulinen
Societas Imperialis Sceptri Coronaeque
Khimi Harar
#49 - 2013-07-29 20:59:02 UTC
Stitcher wrote:
There's a scale difference involved. To a culture of trillions of people, twenty thousand or so lives is... put it this way, even in the era of modern obstetrics and that rather superb midwife drone that CreoDron make, I'd wager that the daily number of deaths as a result of complications from childbirth in the Federation is somewhere in the same order as the death toll from Colelie.

A tragedy for those involved, to be sure. A statistic that should be known and accounted for, certainly. Needless deaths that shouldn't be ignored, most definitely. But the "neighbor" analogy breaks down here because the damage done in reality isn't equivalent in relative scale to the "walked in and shot the dog" scenario you just described.

Were the RSS fleet in the wrong? I am of that opinion, yes. But the political fallout and the response from outraged Federal citizens is likely to cause more real harm to both nations in the long run than the battle itself did.

It may be that the Federation can do nothing in this case. Colelie, it seems, was an event where the Gallente were purely the victim, and not to blame. If so, then it's all on the Republic to not repeat that indiscretion.

It will be easier for them to be convinced of the need for that moderation if the Federation responds with calm and dignity.


Would we respond with calm and dignity to the loss of a handful of Phoenixes?

You're forgetting that the twenty thousand dead crew were not selected randomly from the entire population of the Federation - they came specifically from the Navy and the Navy will feel those casualties more keenly than the majority of the Federation. Next time I think they'll fire sooner.

For the first time since I started the conversation, he looks me dead in the eye. In his gaze are steel jackhammers, quiet vengeance, a hundred thousand orbital bombs frozen in still life.
Katarina Musana
Clan Leshya Offworld Venture Enterprise
#50 - 2013-07-29 21:24:37 UTC
Shintoko Akahoshi wrote:
The "neighbor" metaphor is pretty apt here.

You and I are neighbors, and we've always gotten along. We lend each other cups of sugar and go to each others pot lucks. We give each other keys to our houses, so that we can feed each other's Furriers when we're on vacation.

One day I decide I'm going to take something from you, so I burst into your house. Your family is there and we start yelling at each other, then I shoot some of them.

Let's pretend, for the purposes of this metaphor, that I don't end up going to jail for a very long time. I'm not giving any indication that I'm going to come shoot some of your family again, right? So are you going to let me keep your house key?


I'm afraid your metaphor pretty much breaks down instantly. Your example scenario is on too small a scale to compare to that of nations. The rules, quite frankly, change when you take it to such a level.

And, even if your metaphor didn't break down simply due to a difference in scale, there are so many significant factors you are simply omitting, such as a pattern of condescension and alienation on the part of the "victim" in your metaphor as well as the dubious nature of ownership and jurisdiction over the object to be retrieved.

You also create a scenario in which random, "innocent bystanders" get shot. The crews of the Moroses were not "innocent bystanders." They were soldiers doing their duty aboard the ships upon which they serve, same as the crew lost aboard the Naglfars that were shot down in that engagement.

You are attempting to apply individual-scale civilian law and logic to a nation-scale military situation.

Quote:
From the beginning, I was willing to entertain the possibility that Colelie was some sort of terrible mistake. That things simply got out of hand, and that it would be resolved through, perhaps, an official statement of regret on the part of Shakor followed by some gestures of renewed friendship. None of these things happened.


If Colelie was what I've begun to think it was (something I elaborated on in another thread I'm sure you'll be checking), then there's not really an option of making an official statement of regret, at least not without some very careful choice in wording. This is not fair to the people who died, on either side, but it is how things must go, as the first side to make an official statement of regret for what happened will be the side backing down and showing submission to the other, setting potentially dangerous political precedence.

Quote:
When pressed to state if they would do the same thing all over again to support another Republic attack on the Federation, they stated that their actions would be the same.


Right or wrong, we stand by our loyalties. However, I think you are misunderstanding something. We would fly combat support as required of us, even if it were against the Federation. This is not the same, however, of supporting the idea of launching an attack on the Federation. One does not have to like or agree with an order to follow it.

I am loyal to the Republic and my people and I stand with the Republic and my people, right or wrong. I don't expect you to understand this, however, based on your history.

Quote:
Keep in mind that these were the only responses from the Republic. From Shakor or the Tribal leadership? Nothing.


You mean like the nothing we got from the Federation government about Broteau after the shooting, after the murder of one of the most important people in our society? Yet, we're apparently bad people for expressing our indignation about that, while it's perfectly okay for you to call for the dissolution of the alliance because our own leadership chose to remain quiet?

Apparently if we respond to such an event with anger and hurt, we're being primitive, emotion-driven barbarians; but if you respond to such an event with anger and hurt, you're being civilized and enlightened?

I would also remind you, as I pointed out to you elsewhere, Matari citizens of the Federation were calling for the extradition of Broteau and complaining about the lack of information coming out of the Federation government and complaining about the refusal to extradite Broteau to the Republic as well. I would not be surprised if many of them see any loss of Matari lives aboard the Moroses as a result of the Federation government's refusal to do the right thing rather than a result of the Republic "murdering" them, while also feeling that such individuals should be commended for doing their duty aboard the Moroses and following orders, even though it meant going into battle against their fellow Matari aboard the Republic vessels. Of course, there's also bound to be those who feel otherwise.
Katarina Musana
Clan Leshya Offworld Venture Enterprise
#51 - 2013-07-29 21:37:45 UTC
Quote:
At the end of the day it's obvious to me that I can no longer consider the Republic to be an ally to the Federation, not in any meaning of the word.


And this is why you would make a poor diplomat. You take a single incident and proclaim that the alliance should be completely dissolved. If the Republic were to follow your ideology, we'd have dissolved our alliance with the Federation before Colelie could happen.

You keep attempting to liken this to things like a neighbor walking into your house and killing your family. That's not at all what Colelie is like. You choose these analogies because they hold emotional weight and put emphasis on the lives lost.

The problem is, that when it comes to the nation-scale of these handling these events, the loss of life becomes less significant to the overall outcome. To make your neighbor analogy fit at all, we have to actual remove the loss of life, as the people in the analogy are the nations, not the crews of ships.

Neighbor A goes to take an object from Neighbor B. Neighbor B says no. Neighbor A says he will hit Neighbor B if the object is not relinquished. Neighbor B again says no. Neighbor A punches Neighbor B and a fight begins. Neighbor B wins the fight.

Now, you know what will most likely come from such a scenario? Neighbor A will brood over the situation for a while and eventually things will go back to normal, with Neighbor B being perhaps a bit more cautious and being fully aware that Neighbor A will not back down from a fight, while Neighbor A also recognizes that Neighbor B will not back down from a fight. Both neighbors will be more cautious in how they handle situations with each other that could potentially lead to a fight since neither really wants a fight.

And yes, this version of the analogy leaves out the loss of life, but what you don't seem to understand is that when you're looking at such an event on the scale of nations as entities (which the neighbor analogy forces), the loss of individual lives such as those of crews aboard the ships translates into the analogy as bruises and blood loss, dead cells in the body. The loss of ships translates to cuts and maybe broken bones at most.

You want someone to be held accountable for the lives lost at Colelie, and I understand that, but such a thing has nothing to do with whether or not the Federation and the Republic are allies and how the two nations view each other, because the nation scale is different than the individual scale. Your problem is you can't see any way to hold the person you blame for Colelie accountable, so you're calling for something unrelated to punish an entire people for the actions of one person that you, personally, want to blame because you lost a friend.

At least when we wanted to hold accountable an individual for hurting us, for killing someone dear to us, we didn't try to do so by punishing an entire nation of people. Or do you think we should have called for the dissolution of the alliance when Broteau killed our Ray?
Steffanie Saissore
Tyrathlion Interstellar
#52 - 2013-07-29 21:50:48 UTC
Katarina,
If you are insisting that these events ought to be handled and viewed at the Nation-level, then you and the Republic are just as guilty for bringing it down to an emotional level.

The Ray of Matar, exiled by the Republic, was a single victim in a horrible assassination attempt that also saw the deaths of many more Gallente. From a Nation-level, the Republic, which had forced the Ray out of her own nation, should have simply expressed horror at the the incident and offered support to the Federation in hunting down the criminal.

Instead, the moment the Federation caught the man, the Republic demands that he be turned over for the killing of one person. Sounds rather emotionally charged and not Nation-level diplomacy to me.

The sending of an aggressor fleet into another Nation's sovereign territory also sounds very...emotionally driven, and not Nation-level diplomacy.

I am still of the opinion that neither side handled the situation well. The fact that there have been no statements from either government leads me to agree with Repentence Tyrathlion that things have been said behind closed doors and we will never know.

As far as I am concerned, the incident is in the past and we all need to learn from it and move on with our lives. Harping on the past is not going to change the future. It is only going to keep old wounds fresh and festering. Time to heal and move on.

We travel in the dark of the new moon,

A starry highway traced on the map of the sky
Stitcher
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#53 - 2013-07-29 22:08:13 UTC
Shintoko Akahoshi wrote:
Are the deaths a few tens of thousands of Federation citizens a rounding error in the grand scheme of things? Yeah. Does that make it okay? Not in the least.


Indeed it does not, nor did I suggest that it did. I said that the best and most constructive response was to be calm and measured, and reasonable.

Aggrievance is a reasonable response to Colelie. "All Minmatar are ungrateful savages who'll stab us in the back the second they think it'll benefit them" is not. Not that that's what you're saying, but I hope my point is adequately illustrated.

And Pieter: I'm not suggesting that the Caldari would be so restrained either. I'm suggesting that we should be, and that this particular "look-before-you-leap" moderated response should be the default policy for all of the Empires. I hold our people to a high standard, but if It was inevitable that we would attain that standard every time without fail, then it wouldn't be a high standard.

AKA Hambone

Author of The Deathworlders
Shintoko Akahoshi
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#54 - 2013-07-29 23:33:12 UTC
Katarina Musana wrote:
At least when we wanted to hold accountable an individual for hurting us, for killing someone dear to us, we didn't try to do so by punishing an entire nation of people. Or do you think we should have called for the dissolution of the alliance when Broteau killed our Ray?


I suspect that ultimately you and I will never understand one another. The fact that you state "we didn't try to do so by punishing an entire nation of people" in a discussion of the Republic's attack on the Gallente Federation makes that perfectly clear.

Bio and writing

(Nothing I say is indicative of corporate policy unless otherwise stated)
Gosakumori Noh
Coven of One
#55 - 2013-07-29 23:40:21 UTC
Katarina Musana wrote:
At least when we wanted to hold accountable an individual for hurting us, for killing someone dear to us, we didn't try to do so by punishing an entire nation of people.


That's rather what an invasion entails, you insipid little twit. How is that not clear to even a member of your superficial clique? Tragic development with "your" Ray, though. Really.
Shintoko Akahoshi
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#56 - 2013-07-29 23:48:03 UTC
Stitcher wrote:
Aggrievance is a reasonable response to Colelie. "All Minmatar are ungrateful savages who'll stab us in the back the second they think it'll benefit them" is not. Not that that's what you're saying, but I hope my point is adequately illustrated.


Perfectly. As you say, that's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is "In my opinion, the Republic will stab us in the back the second the think it'll benefit them."

Keep in mind, as well, that this isn't entirely about the dead at Colelie. What if the Federation Navy hadn't been able to stop the Republic invasion force? What would that force have done if the standoff would have occurred over a heavily populated world? What if it hadn't occurred at all? They obviously had a plan to secure Broteau through the threat of violence that those dreadnoughts represented. Where would this happen, and would they follow through? Would they fire first "to prove a point"? Who knows.

Breaking the alliance with the Republic would force the Federation Navy to reevaluate the Federation-Republic border. It would force a reallocation of Naval resources along the border, and it would force a redistribution of tripwire assets. This would maximize the Federation Navy's chances of intercepting a Republic invasion force should another one be sent across the border.

Bio and writing

(Nothing I say is indicative of corporate policy unless otherwise stated)
Stitcher
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#57 - 2013-07-30 09:51:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Stitcher
I'm sure the State wouldn't complain if the Federation did that. It would be to our distinct strategic advantage.

I'm sure I wouldn't complain either. It would help pave the road to my Minmatar/Caldari capsuleer alliance idea, which so far has met more with polite interest than actual support.

The incursion did end at Colelie. The Federation Navy was successful in stopping it from getting any further than that. And remember, the Republic lost the entire fleet. They got burned bad. Whatever systems the Fed have in place are, on the current evidence, equal to the task. It's therefore in the Federation's best military interest to keep going with whatever they're doing right now, and in their diplomatic best interest to effectively let the Republic get away with it... once. Reparations would be appropriate, but for now that's as much response as Colelie really warrants.

These were exceptional circumstances after all. The mortal wounding of a Ray of Matar on foreign soil was, I suspect, an unprecedented event. You have to understand just how intense the emotional response was here in the Republic. Some of my veteran crew members - hardened, jaded, tattooed warrior types - wept openly, or went numb. Matari capsuleers whose wisdom in matters of emotion I seek myself in hard times, came to me in turn.

Having lived through the death of Otro Gariushi, I can sympathize. You should have seen the attack of the shakes I had after I stood down at the Malkalen disaster relief.

So I have to disagree, I don't think that the Republic will stab its allies in the back whenever it suits them. I think they might act unwisely in the grip of grief and impotent anger.

As is true for everyone.

AKA Hambone

Author of The Deathworlders
Shintoko Akahoshi
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#58 - 2013-07-30 15:14:32 UTC
Stitcher wrote:
I'm sure the State wouldn't complain if the Federation did that. It would be to our distinct strategic advantage.


Who knows, it might prompt an end to this ludicrous war.

Stitcher wrote:
I'm sure I wouldn't complain either. It would help pave the road to my Minmatar/Caldari capsuleer alliance idea, which so far has met more with polite interest than actual support.


Seriously, the State can have 'em. They hate us. While I can understand the Republican's grief at Midular's killing, they seem to deny even the idea that we might feel the same about our dead at Colelie.

They're at best fair weather friends. At worst, they're more like an abusive lover. There's a romance advice columnist I read who answers questions about "my lover says we belong together, but the other day they hit me" with "DTMA", or "Dump The Motherf-, Already". The Federation's better off without them.

Bio and writing

(Nothing I say is indicative of corporate policy unless otherwise stated)
Stitcher
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#59 - 2013-07-30 15:15:52 UTC
Well, if that's how you feel, I sha'n't argue further.

AKA Hambone

Author of The Deathworlders
Anja Suorsa
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#60 - 2013-07-30 15:22:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Anja Suorsa
Shintoko Akahoshi wrote:


Seriously, the State can have 'em. They hate us. While I can understand the Republican's grief at Midular's killing, they seem to deny even the idea that we might feel the same about our dead at Colelie.

They're at best fair weather friends. At worst, they're more like an abusive lover. There's a romance advice columnist I read who answers questions about "my lover says we belong together, but the other day they hit me" with "DTMA", or "Dump The Motherf-, Already". The Federation's better off without them.


Thanks, but no thanks. You keep them. Speaking only for myself here, but I don't want them. Temper tantrums and teenage angst on a scale so far gone to be almost beyond parody; I don't think they'll fit into any State alliance.

As an aside:

Quote:

They hate everyone.


I fixed that for you.