I uh, can't support that interpretation. The Chrystovians don't deserve what's coming. No one does. We simply can't save them.
I'm not saying they do. I'm saying the Cardassian casus belli is de facto reasonable, as we've used almost exactly the same rationale for our own interventions in the past. Given that most of the votes to intervene come down to morality rather than practicality, ignoring the facts on that point is foolhardy.
 
There is a simple question being asked, in this, do we intervene or do we not intervene. It is both something that of a simple question, but also one that is incredibly complicated and represents the binary choice that it is at. It is a question over if we choose to intervene to save the Confederacy from an invasion, and likely wind up into a major conflagration, or if we choose to stand by, and to let them be absorbed. We only need to look at what has happened with Bajor for what Chrystovian will face. This was something that was a difficult choice for myself, and one that was significantly contested between my head and my heart on this, but I went with my heart in terms of what to do. There is a quote I found from Haile Selassie that probably best describes why I voted the way I did:


Thing is, opting out of a military intervention is not the same as choosing indifference, it is choosing not to act militarily at this stage, no more, no less. we can still act in other ways, because as it stands, we aren't well positioned for a war on that front.

We act now and we might end up in a costly war wile the HOH profits from our actions and given it will be at the edge of our logistics tail, we are going to risk all the assets we send there.

As cruel as it sounds, the Cardies will need to expend resources, manpower and time digesting the Chrystovians and we can use that, we should use that.
 
Something I'd like to highlight:
This means that if we send a deterrent force, they will be relying on spare parts and ammunition sent with them; and that communication with the task force will likely be cut off entirely in the event hostilities begin.
Emphasis mine.
If let's face it: when this escalates, we may not even know what's happening with the task force.

(Edit: it's in one of the spoilers, for anyone who wants to find the quote themselves)
 
Last edited:
No, a few people have been arguing that since the Cardie justification has some basis in the truth, the Chrystovians have earned what is done to them.
Yes, that has been argued. I think that this interpretation is horribly incorrect. There is a clear justification for not intervening, one that I support (a general war now will cripple us in the future), but blaming the people being invaded is not it.
 
As cruel as it sounds, the Cardies will need to expend resources, manpower and time digesting the Chrystovians and we can use that, we should use that.

That's literally unironically channelling Chamberlain, only he was more justified, as his country was not ready for war.

Eh.

So be it. I want to see the Federation become the liars Romulans always thought they were. Let's begin by losing reputation with ISC, the only other non-genocidal Great Power.

Peace in our time.
[X] We should not intervene in the Chrystovian invasion.
 
Last edited:
That's literally unironically channelling Chamberlain, only he was more justified, as his country was not ready for war.

Eh.

So be it. I want to see the Federation become the cowarda Romulans always thought they were.

Peace in our time.
[X] We should not intervene in the Chrystovian invasion.

Remember, the members closest to the Cardassians are straight up saying they are not ready for a general war yet. The Indorians are still modernizing and the STO is in the middle of a fleet reorg. The biggest supporters are literally on the other side of the warzone.
 
Here's another quote: "The road to hell is paved with good intentions."

Stopping one wrong at the cost of letting many more occur is not what I would call the moral or strategic choice.

Let's not forget that, just because the Cardassians are worse, the Chrystovians are not innocent here. We know they've done at least some of what the Cardassians are accusing them of here.
So we should just stand idly by and let the Chrystovians basically 'get what they deserve'? That is in essence the message you seem to be saying from that post, and something I disagree with harshly to say the least on.

As a question to those who are saying to not intervene, what exactly would you push for in terms of as a non-intervention based response along with other associated pushes in both our intelligence and diplomatic agendas?
 
That's literally unironically channelling Chamberlain, only he was more justified, as his country was not ready for war.

Eh.

So be it. I want to see the Federation become the cowarda Romulans always thought they were.

Peace in our time.
[X] We should not intervene in the Chrystovian invasion.

Actually I was thinking more like the US and Japan, where the USN was trying to avoid to go to war in the Philippines in one go.
Also, unlike Chamberlain we seem to have a better grasp on the Cardassian numbers (iirc, the UK had overestimated the size of the Luftwaffe by a considerable degree) and we do seem to have a tech edge over the cardies and logsitics as well... just look a the map, the Chrystovians are to the south of the Cardassian territories, and close too and the most direct route is either thru cardassia or around thru Imelak territories, a campaign to defend Chrystovia sounds risky by itself. nevermind we will probably arrive too late, transit times mean our operatiosn are going to be... complicated... we'd need a very, very powerful reason to go for it.

So, yes, unironically chamberlain, if you must.
 
[X] We should not intervene in the Chrystovian invasion.

Or I can flip back and forth a couple times, that works too.
 
Last edited:
I want to note - if it will come to shooting war (and it likely will) to actually save them we need total war with mobilization of all of Fed resources. And as was already pointed Fed is not supporting this war. No as whole and not even in majority.

And if we fail total war then it's likely to end in status quo and then all those deaths would be pointless. Not that much pointless if we'll free Bajor (which is more realistic outcome of non-total war than saving polity on other side of Pact) but if outcome is freeing Bajor then maybe we should wage war to free Bajor and not one that we can't win.
 
As a question to those who are saying to not intervene, what exactly would you push for in terms of as a non-intervention based response along with other associated pushes in both our intelligence and diplomatic agendas?

Refocus on the Cardassians. Try to identify their future targets and move in task forces for every one that we can to affiliate them and build mutual defense. The issue with the Chrystovians is isolation and relative military weakness-a network of defensive alliances between Cardassian-menaced polities will solve both. Once we have enclosed the Pact, we build a case for a general war to dismantle it entirely with a sane casus belli, while simultaneously applying diplomatic and economic pressure to break apart its component nations and bring them into the fold.
 
Last edited:
Yes, that has been argued. I think that this interpretation is horribly incorrect. There is a clear justification for not intervening, one that I support (a general war now will cripple us in the future), but blaming the people being invaded is not it.

I missed your post. When you said that no one deserved to get invaded by Space Nazis, I thought you were saying no one in the thread was arguing the Chrystovians deserve what the Cardies do to them, of which I can name four posters who argued along the those lines.
 
So we should just stand idly by and let the Chrystovians basically 'get what they deserve'? That is in essence the message you seem to be saying from that post, and something I disagree with harshly to say the least on.

As a question to those who are saying to not intervene, what exactly would you push for in terms of as a non-intervention based response along with other associated pushes in both our intelligence and diplomatic agendas?


Look where the Christovians are in the map, how will we get a fleet there in a reasonable amount of time? charge though Cardassia itself? Also note that the post by @laggplagueduke, neither Iridoria nor the STO is ready for war.

I'd love to intervene, but it just isn't the time
 
So we should just stand idly by and let the Chrystovians basically 'get what they deserve'? That is in essence the message you seem to be saying from that post, and something I disagree with harshly to say the least on.

As a question to those who are saying to not intervene, what exactly would you push for in terms of as a non-intervention based response along with other associated pushes in both our intelligence and diplomatic agendas?
Hardly, and I'd thank you not to strawman. We can't save the Chrystovians in any reasonable fashion that doesn't sacrifice more than it gains.

No, the Chrystovians do not deserve what the Cardassians will do to them. However, we can't change that realistically. Furthermore, the Cardassians have a prima facie casus belli (whether you agree with it or not) that we ourselves have used in the past to justify military intervention, which means the diplomatic rationale is murkier for us than it otherwise would be from an external perspective. The conquest is different, which is the part to which we object but cannot alter. The precedent created by interfering here serves no one except our enemies, by antagonizing other diplomatic targets. Unfortunately, the Chrystovians are just beyond our reach and will pay the price for that.

Hopefully, we can attempt some other non-military tactic that will at least blunt the abuses, but we can only do so much at a distance.
 
Last edited:
[ ] We should not intervene in the Chrystovian invasion.

@OneirosTheWriter, is there an option for a future military solution? As in, recognize that we not currently ready for war and do not have the ability to prevent the Chrystovians being conquered, but that we can spend the next one to three years improving our position and shoring up our internal support via evidence of the treatment of the Chrystovians and Bajorans and refugees asking for help?
Worded differently, is the Federation capable of declaring an offensive war of liberation if the ones who are being oppressed ask us to?
 
Last edited:
So we should just stand idly by and let the Chrystovians basically 'get what they deserve'? That is in essence the message you seem to be saying from that post, and something I disagree with harshly to say the least on.

As a question to those who are saying to not intervene, what exactly would you push for in terms of as a non-intervention based response along with other associated pushes in both our intelligence and diplomatic agendas?

A non-intervention response would be sophonitarian, advisory, and observational in nature. To keep the Cardassians more or less honest without putting guns in their face.

In greater detail:
-Put the FDS on a hospital ship or two and render aid to civilians in the war zone.
-Pursue international treaty negotiations for the protection of prewarp civilizations.
-Pursue international treaty negotiations for scientific ethics.
-Divert FDS resources to negotiate an end to the war as soon as possible.
-Use the resources we would have spent on a distant campaign to shore up our border with the Cardassians so that we do not face such vulnerabilities as we do the next time they try to push our buttons.
 
[] We should not intervene in the Chrystovian invasion.

Well this is a decision I have given quite a bit of thought. As it currently stands, the Chrystovians are currently undefendable. If we send a battlegroup (and it is a battlegroup, not a task force) they would be cut off from Federation logistic with no data on the area. If it was massing up forces on border of Bajor and making a threat on some key Cardassian positions (and actually going through with it), I would be all for it, but as it currently stands that must be paired with sending a battlegroup into its likely doom. As such, I can't in good faith vote for intervention.

Edit:
With latest clarification, I'm changing my vote.
[X] We should intervene in the Chrystovian invasion.
 
Last edited:
Just as a reminder everyone, our members bordering the warzone are not in favor of starting a general war.

Sarquel Treaty Organization and Indorians
The councilors who represent the worlds of the STO and the Indorian Congress are strongly opposed to intervention. Their fleet is still building up, and they believe they are not yet ready to fully defend Rethelia in a general war. In the event an intervention mission is launched, they will not make any ships available for any task force.

Apiata
The Apiata are generally undecided on intervention. Along with the Indorians and the STO, they are on the frontlines of any conflict with the Cardassians. In the event of an intervention, they will have to be vigilant on the border, and will not be able to contribute any ships to external task forces, forcing the recall of the queenship teams already deployed on the other side of the Federation.

Ashidi
The Ashidi are hesitant. One part of them would like to end the ceaseless fear of Cardassian invasion by striking back. The others fear what could be lost in a war that doesn't, strictly speaking, need to be fought. They will focus on home defense and will not contribute any ships to a task force nor to a United Fleet.

2/3 are just straight up NOPE on starting a war and the third is neutral at best. That's not what I'd call a united front.
 
So. Uh. Egg on my face about not going to war with Cardassia. Bad timing there.
Anyway!
I don't think we have the forces for a stand up fight. We are out of position and Starfleet really isn't equipped for a two front war to the knife.
But.
We all know the true way out of this.
Omake.
Pick your viewpoint and warm up your word processors.
Argue for ferrying clone mercenaries from the Unbound Gaeni to take an interest.
Pick at options for Allupi looking for martial glory and more gross physical treasures who may be poking about.
Have some Yrillians ask for fast transport to head over and just build fortifications that also shout propaganda for equal rights on every frequency they can broadcast on.
 
If we do go to general war, and then total mobilization, it's not really a question of do we win, but of how hard we win and at what nonmilitary cost. The Pact is powerful, but not against a fully committed Federation.

[X] We should not intervene in the Chrystovian invasion.

Well this is a decision I have given quite a bit of thought. As it currently stands, the Chrystovians are currently undefendable. If we send a battlegroup (and it is a battlegroup, not a task force) they would be cut off from Federation logistic with no data on the area. If it was massing up forces on border of Bajor and making a threat on some key Cardassian positions (and actually going through with it), I would be all for it, but as it currently stands that must be paired with sending a battlegroup into its likely doom. As such, I can't in good faith vote for intervention.
Massing forces against key Cardassian positions and delivering what would essentially be an ultimatum is in the intervention vote. I don't know why you get the idea it isn't.
 
As pointed out by @Briefvoice in the discord chat, we have the option of choosing a new Starfleet ambition this year. With this mess of a situation on our hands, it's likely acceptable to push for a more military ambition than usual. This should be along the lines of "contain the Ashalla Pact" or "establish a defensive alliance and fortify against the fascist menace", with more detail. This will help us to put resources towards the above goal, such as Alupii and (additional) Gorn task forces, and keep us on track for that goal.

In addition, this will be a good year to push for fortifications, combat frigates, scout/skirmish monstrosities, and everything else we need to prevent this situation from happening again. We didn't act preemptively this time, but we can next time. Let's make sure we're ready to.
 
Back
Top