Intergalactic Summit

I would also politely request that any third party who would observe this debate retain a sense of patience, calmness, and reason, no matter how heated it may turn-out or appear. For adding fuel to a fire makes an inferno, not embers.

This is the thing, Mr. Nomistrav. I measure not the intent, but their actions. They've brought destruction and sorrow. But amount of destruction they caused is not comparable to destruction caused by Federals and Republicans. We could start comparing most notable events, like murder of Empress Jamyl, murder of Otro Gairushi, attack of Elder Fleet, invasion to Caldari Prime with assault on CN Shiigeru. But my point was comparing just daily losses.


I have repeated several times that I do acknowledge Drifters as a threat and an open enemy of Caldari State.

Now imagine, if you have two enemies. One has attacked a research facility. Another one murders millions of colonists daily and keeps trillions of resources locked under occupation. And now tell me, against whom you will send main forces?

We are capsuleer pilots, and we workd of State Protectorate, which is an umbrella corporation of Caldari Navy of Caldari State. We are doing the job that Caldari State assigns us, and it's not just me, who thinks that the Federation or Republic are the main threat, but the Caldari State thinks so. Caldari Navy fights with Drifters indeed. But they don't tell us, pilots of State Protectorate, to go and pursuit Drifters instead of fighting Federation and Republic.

The State needs help against these two way more than it needs help against Drifters, and it shall be obvious at the moment. And I believe it will be wise to let Caldari Navy decide where they want us, capsuleers, more - in fights against drifters or federals.

There will be time and we will make drifters pay for our research facility. But for now, we need to liberate all oppressed systems from gallente occupation. Drifters can wait, our colonists might not have such a commodity.

A fair assertion, though I would argue that the daily losses are something that we cannot readily find hard evidence for. It ultimately depends on a varied strata of criteria as to what defines a State and Federation citizen. I believe that we both would abstain from assuming that mere blood would denote one's affiliation, as this is no more than petty racism and xenophobia, but to that end, are the crewman - a greater majority Intaki - aboard my vessel State or Federation citizens? While the greater whole subscribe to similar beliefs as myself, that neither the State nor the Federation are in any way entitled to Intaki and her people, there are a few who believe that we Intaki should look to the Federation for safety. Just as well, there are a few who believe the State, namely the Ishukone Corporation, provide the best opportunity.

My point is that even on my homely vessel, there is a broad range of beliefs, and that the conflict between the State and the Federation is a complex one. I'm sure there are a multitude of Federation citizens who are sympathetic to the State and her plight, just as there are State citizens who would be sympathetic toward the Federation. As you may know, we Intaki were arguably the most disenfranchised. How then, can we segregate the daily losses from both sides? I would argue that the daily losses of both the State and Federation are despicable, and without warrant or justification, as there are likely just as many who would seek peace as there are who desire war.



While I find your loyalty and dedication admirable - even inspirational - I worry that you may be victim to a noble desire to rely on the authority of the State. It is not wrong to seek the guidance of military leaders, but what guidance can a General offer in terms of peace? If a man knows only bloodshed and war, than by all means, seek him for advice on matters in kind, but we cannot be blinded by an assumption that they are experts in a field they are not specialists or laymen of. That a General would imply that they are right by nature of a profession that is unrelated to terms of diplomacy and peace, or worse yet enforce their opinion on those that value them as a mentor out of fear of repercussion, is perhaps not a wise man to follow.

At some point we must lay down our arms, if but a moment, and listen. The war continues for both sides, and while we cannot ignore the losses incurred, it certainly cannot help if we continue to inflict them. Restitution can be made between the State and the Federation, as well as the fledgling peoples disenfranchised by them, but only if we seek compromise as a valuable alternative. To that end, we all share a common enemy in the face of a force that does not speak and does not listen. The Drifters, to date, have shown no capacity for diplomacy and no regard for life if it interferes with their interest.

When I said "Kim we get some more information on this?', this isn't what I meant...

Well, for us dropping guns now is not an option. Tell me, would you lay down arms if you will see a burglar breaking into your home and starting killing your family? Tell me, would you drop your gun?...

You are telling that drifters don't have capacity for diplomacy. But do Gallente have? In YC110 after liberating Caldari Prime Tibus Heth has signed a peace treaty with the Federation and our home was finally returned to Caldari State. Yes, gallente signed the paper, but did they follow it? Their signature and word laster only for five years, because in YC115 FDU started secretly pouring mercenaries into Caldari Prime to launch another occupation. It erupted into infamous Operation Highlander, when in addition to ground assault Gallente launched space attack and downed the titan on our planet.

I was there. And I heard what gallente were saying when they were attacking. I haven't heard anything more unappealable, fanatical and zealotous than calls of Gallente commanders of attacking capital fleet. It was almost scary, how fanatical they were, when they were attacking to occupy our homeworld wide eyed, going to commit murders and atrocities in the name of their democracies and freedoms. You should have seen this. You should have heard them...

These aren't the peoples whom you can do diplomacy or negotiations with. At that moment I even doubted if they had at least something humane left in them.

In my opinion the diplomatic resolution of the conflict with Drifters is way more probable than the diplomatic resolution of the conflict with Gallente.

Madam Kim, you may regard your crewmembers as expendable piecemeal to warrant them as 'collateral damage', but I implore you that you do not regard mine in such a light. Each of them is as important to me as my own blood, and for that reason alone I fly craft of Gallentean make; to reduce unnecessary loss of life. That said, while I applaud your diligence in the hypothetical comparison of numbers, I'd advise that you carefully consider that, to date, there is little concrete evidence of intentional malice on behalf of the Federation in the way of a word so strong as genocide, especially not since the removal of the warmongering Ultra-Nationalists.

Just as well, I politely request sources for this continued claim of a 'colossal number of genocided colonists', especially one in the range of millions, as you previously argued. You argue that there is no such information available for the impact of Drifters, but I argue that the claims of such losses may be hyperbole, and reinforce the notion that repeated claims of such does not make them any more valid on their own. The isolated incident of the prisons in Black Rise does not statistically provide a significant case for compelling evidence of the claim that 'millions' are dying.

On the notion of the difference between Peacekeepers and Generals, I'd like to thank you for clarifying what you thought I said, as I must not have been clear. What I intended to say is that in the vie for peace talks, we cannot simply dismiss the other side as automatons without free will or critical thinking. To assume that the free peoples of the Federation are not without their own means of war and Generals to follow is foolish, but it is perhaps even more foolish to assume that they like animals or robots. The Federation, just like the State, should not be so simply defined by its most perverse, less we paint all of mankind in such a broad stroke of the primal state of the few. To assume that the Federation Citizens are as fiendish as Sansha's monstrosities, and without free will, is directly contrary to the work of President Elabon just a hundred years ago.

President Elabon originally took on a defensive posture in YC1, with Federation forces only engaging State forces if they entered the space CONCORD defined as belonging to the Federation. Furthermore, President Elabon withdrew all Gallente forces occupying State worlds and colonies. I'd remind you that this was the criteria in your list of demands for peace, previously. To that end, President Elabon made a vie for peace, but was prevented from doing so by the Federation Senate, but it should be noted that the Chief Executive Panel made no attempt at peace either. Those who follow the legacy of President Elabon, despite his short five years term and subsequent death, are routinely awarded by the Elabon Foundation for pursuing a vision of peace and prosperity.

My premise? President Elabon was not a General. He was not a soldier or a military man, and yet despite this he swayed the Federation's armed forces to turn the other cheek and provided the foundation for the first iterations of peace between the State and the Federation, allowing trade to prosper later on. Thus, reinforcing my previous statement: Generals make war, not peace. To accept the smallest facete of peace we must first learn to listen to men who are not paid by blood.

On the subject of Caldari Prime, I fear that you may have been misled in your perspective of what occurred there, dreadful as the event may be to remember. Though what you say may be true in part, you forget that the State accepted the ceding of Caldari Prime to the Federation as a prior agreement of peace treaty. To present Tibus Heth's forced treaty by threat of gun barrel as valid, and dismiss the validity of a treaty made on prior, more peaceful terms, is concerning. To elaborate, I'm concerned that you are not aware of the state of things on Caldari Prime prior the start of Operation Highlander, or perhaps simply do not recall.

The exact same reasons you explain as the basis for the continuation of the war were used by the Joint Resistance Movement: invasion of home, concern of reprisal, etc. You claim that one does not simply lay down their arms in the event of a burgular, but this would imply that the citizens on Caldari Prime should not have either, and they didn't; resulting in a boiling over of tensions between the Resistance and the Provists, ultimately ending in Operation Highlander. It is as you say: One does not share ground under threat of violence. The Resistance knew this, and even Shaileen Ramnev, who was both of Caldari and Gallente heritage saw the greater good when Martial Law was declared.

You may not readily know this, but I was at Operation Highlander as well. I heard what was said, and I hear what is being said now. I did not differentiate the two then, and I do not differentiate the two now. Both sides fanned the flames, the State is not innocent in that regard. The intention to commit violence and hatred in any capacity is unacceptable on either front, regardless of who spoke it first. I fought alongside the Federation because I saw the atrocities being committed against the peoples of Caldari Prime under the Provists, and I made motion to act in their defense in what ways I could. Were it the other way around, my decision would not have differed.

In regard to the promises of 'efficiency' and 'self-improvement', I'll remind you that it was not Tibus Heth and his ilk that brought Intaki out of the fold, but Ishukone, whom he later chastized. I'm not so easily bought by so thin a veil. What Ishukone did for us was good, yes, but I'll not believe the actions of Ishukone were representative of the State as a whole, and you would do well not to so easily believe the actions of Ultra-Nationalists and the deniable ops of tyrants are representative of the Federation.

I wondered where I left that can of worms.... It seems Nomistrav found and opened it.

A valid, and well-spoken argument. In addendum, I would add that it is largely up to the soldier to decide for themselves if their respective military leaders are warmongering for warmongering's sake, and am a staunch believer that it is more becoming of a soldier to know when to deny an order that they know in their heart to be morally wrong. While we could debate as to what criteria determines what it morally wrong, I believe we're in all agreement that a universal truth exists in that violence is rarely the only answer. In conclusion, I believe it would be up to Madam Diana Kim to decide for herself whether or not her Generals would accept peace, or perpetuate the drawn out hostilities ad infinitum.

EDIT: To clarify, however, it is important that we not listen to our leaders blindly.

If violence wasn’t your last resort, you failed to resort to enough of it.

Don't be afraid to be the first to resort to violence

That was both disrespectful about my crew and ignorant about me.
[/quote]