the exact description of the action is it makes war less likely unless the Cardassians guarantee independence, and if they are supporting someone we are having a shooting war with inside our own borders then we are almost certainly already going to be going to war with them. Basically if the downside comes up, war was likely going to happen anyways.
the only situation where this action hurts us would be if the cardassians made the guarantee and then went back on it, and that's only going to happen if they decide to break character in a rather dramatic way. It is an overall decrease in the odds of war occurring.
My concern is that it "makes the war less likely," but not necessarily by a large enough degree to compensate for the way it ties our hands.
If the Cardassians declare support and try a 'Cuban Missile Crisis' strategy of sending an aid convoy to Celos and daring us to stop them, we've just declared a state of emergency and assumed dictatorial powers... to deal with a single squadron. The Sousa admiralty is discredited and we end up looking stupid and/or tyrannical.
Conversely, if the Cardassians do something we aren't planning for (like massing their fleets in preparation for a rapid strike into our space
before declaring support for Celos), the political situation is thrown into confusion. Our commitment to declare the state of emergency after the Cardassians declare support becomes a leash holding us back, rather than a guide wire leading us forward.
I really don't think it's a good idea, when reading event description text like "more chance of X, less chance of Y," to assume
much more chance of X,
much less chance of Y, and that issues A, B, and Z won't come into the picture..
So, these numbers seem to suggest that the Federation would spank the Cardassians like a red-headed step-child in the event of a war. I mean, to use insanely conservative estimates, if half our total strength gets tied up fighting the Syndicate, and the Cardassians manage to build 50 more combat worth of ships, we'd still have 150 more Combat than them. Member fleets op, plz nerf.
One complicating issue is that we really can't afford to commit ALL our member world forces in any one place.
It'd put us at risk of the Klingons or Romulans trying to render the issue that motivates their plan to fight each other irrelevant by jumping us and wrecking our worlds- and yes they're on good terms with us, but if we bare our throat entirely in a once-per-century opportunity for them to strike, who knows what might happen?
Furthermore, many of our member worlds will object to their fleet taking heavy losses on the other side of Federation space. The Vulcans will not be amused if half their forces are wiped out in an unlucky battle against the Dawiar or Cardassians. The political fallout could cause us to win the battle, but lose the war- or lose the war but win the peace.
So yes, the member world fleets have vast total strength... but our ability to rapidly tap into that strength to force a quick end to a crisis is limited.
The only question I have is if the Kadeshi mothership is still a giant bloody needle.
Their
motherships, which are merely the size of big cruisers or explorers, are.
The
Pride of Kadesh, which is in a weight category all its own that I can only term 'grandmothership,' is shaped like a big space banana. Because of course it is.
Not if we're covering all scenarios including surprise.
I'm not covering the scenario of total surprise that effectively allows them to "push delete" on every single ship they find in a particular star system, a la Pearl Harbor, because I don't consider that a realistic outcome given the level of alert we've been operating at.
When surprise is not total, reinforcing the outposts and positions most likely to be attacked can make a major difference. There's a reason it's one of the things you routinely do in warfare when you expect the enemy to attack.
The Cardassians cannot attack on this front without the ability to defeat the CBZ forces, the Indorian fleet, and the Apiata fleet. Or at least tie up one of the three while hitting the rest. They have to commit enough forces to take on the entire Apinae sector or they fail forever at war. You are vastly underestimating the amount of forces the Cardassians would throw at us if they meant to go to war. Would have to throw at us.
How can the Cardassians tell themselves "yes, GO TIME, war on the Federation!" if they can't even overwhelm the border forces and fortifications? They're not stupid. They know the size of the CBZ, Indorian, and Apiata fleets. They know the Starbase exists. What possible war plan would not account for enough force to defeat the border garrison? You're assuming that the Cardassians are militarily stupid, something we have taken great pains not to assume.
Either we have enough forces to deter the Cardassians, in which case they do not guarantee Celos and do not attack, or we do not, in which case the Cardassians must attack in enough force to break through. Any less is handing them the idiot ball.
If the Cardassians have enough force to break through, but not
vastly more force than they need to break through, concentrating our forces still makes sense.
It makes it more likely that the combined force will avoid near-total destruction, by creating a situation where the Cardassians are forced to choose between taking heavy losses themselves or allowing the combined force to escape.
It makes it much more likely that we can
seriously damage their forces while being pushed back, instead of having scattered forces just get steamrollered and crushed without making a meaningful dent. Two Combat 20 forces fighting separately at different times will not make as much impression on an enemy Combat 60 fleet as a single Combat 40 fleet would.
It makes it more likely that (through luck, exploitation of fixed defenses, creative use of 'terrain,' or a tactical blunder on the part of a Cardassian field commander) we can make an effective stand. One that temporarily stalls their attack or forces them to lick their wounds and wait for reinforcements before proceeding,
A force that is outnumbered 3:1 gets steamrolled immediately.
Two forces, both separately outnumbered 3:1, still get steamrollered; it just takes longer. One combined force outnumbered 3:2 may not be able to win in the long run, but it is much more likely to force caution and delay on the enemy commander.
There is, I repeat, a good reason why "divided his command in the face of the enemy" tends to be the kind of thing that goes in
bad reviews of a military commander's performance, not good ones.
