As A Leader What Would You Do?
 

As a leader of a mighty space empire, would you tollorate a smaller religiously zealot lead empire who has sworn to destroy one of your allies, and openly opposes and supports terrorism against your empire, from developing sun destroying weapons?

In other words, what would you do if you were facing an Iran situation in one of your games?

Re: As A Leader What Would You Do?
 

Wipe 'em out. Leave nothing but a pile of radioactive, glowing glass.

Yes, I'm a little violent! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...ies/tongue.gif

Re: As A Leader What Would You Do?
 

I'd try to reason with them, but I'd ready my Special Forces at the same time, in case the talks go wrong. Steal all their research and the resources necessary to make (solar) nukes, abduct or kill the scientists (I'd prefer abduct, but if that's impossible, well shucks then, snipe 'em) and put pressure on the leader(s). But only if I'd run out of other options.

Re: As A Leader What Would You Do?
 

Impractical.

Stealing research in this day and age is impossible. There would be so many back-ups and copies you'd never get all of them. No point even trying that. Steal a bunch of highly refined uranium from a hostile country? Good luck. Abduct or kill the scientists? Sure, why not stoop to the level of a terrorist, which is what you'd be if you went in and started blowing people away for the sole reason that you think you're the only one with the right to have nukes.

Put pressure on a religious zealot that hates you? How? Not when they have you by the short hairs with regards to a resource you don't have enough of...

Only options; Flatten the nation. And I don't mean go in there with troops, that's doomed to failure. I mean flatten literally. As in, carpet bombing. Or stay out of it. Only practical solutions in this day and age.

Re: As A Leader What Would You Do?
 

So, steal any research we can, destroy the rest, and if they try and do it again just send in military forces before they can finish research again.

Steal it, destroy it, meh. Bomb the refining plants. Boom bada boom, and you might not have destroyed all the uranium but you can also put back their research if you bomb the right plants.

I said (though maybe not clearly) that abduction would be my preferred method of "elimination"; I'd kill them ONLY if we'd run out of options. Abducting them does not mean "put them in Guantanamo", at least to me; to me, it means "keep them alive but have them locked up safely where you can keep an eye on them until they can no longer do harm".

Once (if) we've taken/killed their scientists, disabled their refining plants, set back their research programme by years, possibly decades, they'll be at least slightly more..... agreeable. Agreed, religious zealots won't; but putting pressure on them is easier. Even if "putting pressure on them" means "stationing troops just outside their border ready to invade at any time". That's pressure too, you know.

Ooh, now that's a bad idea. Flattening the research and production facilities, OK, but flattening the nation? And how do you think the rest of your allies would react?

Touché.

I was only talking from a fictional standpoint, not the current situation. IF I were a superpower (cough,cough) and IF a nation of religious zealots..... et cetera.

Re: As A Leader What Would You Do?
 

Personally I would leave them alone. Let them develop whatever they want. They have the right to do so as a nation of this planet. Who are we to say "NO!" Until they use said weapons against another country or are linked to the use of a nuke they have the right to research, manufacture, and posess said weapons.

However if they ever use them, or are linked to the use of one of them, then yes, let the holly war of retribution begin.

Re: As A Leader What Would You Do?
 

Agreed, you could set them back. But you couldn't get rid of the research that is already completed, I think.

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...ies/tongue.gif Bomb a uranium refining plant? That'd spread enough radioactive dust around that you might as well just carbet bomb!
Actually, I just missed the part about abducting as a first measure! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...ies/tongue.gif But either way, the point is the same. Abducting and possibly killing people...reminds me of modern-day terrorists!
Agreed, that's quite a bit of pressure! The problem would be executing all of the above without already starting a war you couldn't really win...
It may sound cold, but I'd be in favor of it. What else can you do? You can't send in troops, we all know where that'd get you. You can't make idle threats, that's kinda useless as well. Leave you with two options in a religiously fanatical country; either kill them all, or leave them alone.
Of course, this is a totally hypothetical conversation! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...ies/tongue.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/laugh.gif

Re: As A Leader What Would You Do?
 

This is my thinking as well. Why should some people have the right to have as many nukes as they want, while others don't? What give anyone the right to determine that?

Re: As A Leader What Would You Do?
 

In context I would say no one. I don't fear the crazy religious zealot lead nation that has nukes, I fear the crazy assed religious zealot with one nuke.

I want Iran to develop nukes, I want them to use them so that we will have an excuse [censored]. My belief is simple, give them enough rope and let them do it to themselves.

I would hope that they would not ever use such a weapon and I believe that it is fundamentally their choice to do so, as it is ours to retalate upon its use if deployed against us or an ally.

Re: As A Leader What Would You Do?
 

And how many people have to die in order to justify going after Iran in that matter Atrocities? In the case of nuclear weapons, preventative action is neccassary action. I think going into Iraq was a stupid idea because Iran is the bigger threat. Should've gone real WMD's in Iran instead of chasing phantom WMD's in Iraq.

Re: As A Leader What Would You Do?
 

There is one more option that doesn't appear in your poll, and I think this will be the 'real world' solution:

Secretly give your 'ally' whatever help they need to sabotage this country's research program (whether by airstrike or covert agent operations) and let them take the political heat for doing so.

Re: As A Leader What Would You Do?
 

And how many people have to die in a pre-emptive action, just because the States is too afraid of not having their big club with which to menace the smaller nations of the world? Or too afraid to let someone who isn't an ally have weapons of mass destruction? Who says the US should have weapons of mass destruction? I'd say you have as much a maniac leading you down there as a lot of these "religious fundamentalist" countries. After all, with all the religious stuff Bush spouts off, he could be classified as a religious fundamentalist!!

Now don't get me wrong, I think Iran and all those other nations like them are scary sh**. I also think they need taken out, and taken out hard. But not because of the paltry excuse that they're developing nukes. No.

Re: As A Leader What Would You Do?
 

What country has the US menaced with nukes?
I'm sure North Korea FEELS menaced, but KJI is likely menaced by scary bedtime stories.

Ummmm yes. You're fine with your enemies having nukes pointed at you?

Seeing as we were the first to invent the "bomb", it's a pandora's box kinda thing. Once you got them, they themselves say you can have WMDs... until someone bigger gets brave and tries to take them from you.

Re: As A Leader What Would You Do?
 

One of the current Iranian president's big policies is:
"Isreal should be wiped off the map."

I think that's a good enough reason to keep him from getting nukes..

Re: As A Leader What Would You Do?
 

Iran, for one.

It's a parity thing. You have nukes, they have nukes, no one will use them. You have nukes, they don't have nukes, you might just decide to use them.

My point was that the US has them and trys to keep others from getting them. Your leader's stated reason for trying to stop these nations from acquiring nukes is to protect US interests...but in reality it's so the US has the biggest club whenever they want to go somewhere and do something in someone else's backyard... The threat of use is used as an offensive weapon, not defensive which is the only way nukes should be used.

I wonder what the US would do if Canada suddenly decided we wanted to maintain a stockpile of nuclear weapons. Would you start threatening us to? Can you see how the rest of the world views it, when one nation trys to create nuclear weapons and the US starts making threats and throwing it's weight around? The rest of the world begins to worry a little bit, since everyone can posit that some day, the US might try to go after their country...

Many other countries have nuclear weapons, besides the US. Mostly US allies. Do you see them threatening other nations with their nuclear weapons like the US has recently threatened Iran? No. We respect the sovreignty of other nations, the right for them to determine their own destiny. We don't try to force others into our way of thinking. Of course, if they take offensive action against another sovreign nation, the rest of the world, not just the US, would put a stop to it. That's all well and good. But don't interfere when someone hasn't done anything.

It'll never happen. If Iran was stupid enough to nuke Israel, Iran would be turned into a glowing piece of glass. They know this as well as anyone. Their "big policy" is nothing more than propaganda to appease the portion of their populace that is violent.

Lets just say that they were allowed to develop nuclear weapons. Lets also say they nuked Israel. Israel would nuke them right back, and Iran would no longer exist after Israel and the rest of the world was done with them. Even the violent Iranians aren't so stupid that they can't see that.

NOTE: I'm not saying that I don't think action against Iran is necessary. Personally, I think they should be bombed back to the stone age, where they'd still be if it wasn't for the "infidel" West.

What I have stated above is what a lot of people will think, and what represents the other side of the arguement. In other words, I'm curious what you think is the justification for taking out Iran. Essentially, I'm playing the devils advocate.

What I do not support is sending troops in, that'd be doomed to failure from the get-go. Systematic and severe bombing...that'd work. When an entire religion is dedicated to destroying your culture, race and religion, you must wipe them out. It may sound extreme, but it'd work and probably, after a while, make for a more peaceful world.

I know, I have some scary opinions. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/shock.gif

Re: As A Leader What Would You Do?
 

I would hope that we would never have to go after Iran. And this is not a topic about Iraq or the mistakes made there.


As for the comment about Bush being a religious fanatic, well if you believe that then I have a small moon on the far side of Hellion to sell you.

Re: As A Leader What Would You Do?
 

I've no friendship for those fundamentalist freaks, but I'm rather thrown off by the whole thread subject http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/frown.gif
And so the totally faulty idea of "preventive action" is resurfacing, whoosh, some never learn ... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/rolleyes.gif
Also just remembered that normally everyone gang up against the MEGA EVIL EMPIRE ! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/evil.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...ies/stupid.gif

Re: As A Leader What Would You Do?
 

And what makes a mega evil empire? In our case, the US would be that empire because we have the most points, not because of any leadership style or military might issue.

Running our own empires gives us a unique point of view that many arm chair warriors never get. We have run an empire so wee do know what a threat can and cannot be. As imperial leaders we have faced such challenges before and know that diplomacy is only one tool in our arsenal, a rather weak tool, and sometimes the best tool is simply to leave a threat alone to burn itself out.

Real world issues such as Iran do worry me, but like I said, I do not believe we have the right to tell them that they cannot have nukes when we have aloud North Korea and other nations that were once considered third world countries to have them. Now look at them.. Pakastand, India, and China are all economic power houses on the verge of super powers in their own neck of the world.

I hope that the leaders of Iran understand that there is more to life then killing.

Re: As A Leader What Would You Do?
 

This issue with Iran and their potential for Nukes is such a completely moronic debate.

Some points to consider here, to back this statement, are as follows:

1) The United States was the first nation to develop and use such weapons, admittedly. And the first to realize the real HORROR that using them unleashes. Don't kid yourself into believing that we as a nation would ever really use them again, despite all the noise about doing so over the past 6 decades. Despite our flaws as a nation ( and I challenge you to show me a nation that doesn't have any flaws ), we're actually a mature enough people to not use, and try to restrict the use of, Nuclear Weapons.

2) Does anyone truly believe that a nation like Iran, with it's long and repeated history of religious fanaticism and socio-political violence, should have Nuclear Weapons ??? A nation who threatens to destroy another nation simply because they worship something/someone different ??? A nation that has proven time and again it's capacity to act impulsively and capriciously ???

3) Iran is acting like a tantrumental small child, who may just have figured out a way to get it's hands on a high-powered gun just like some of the older kids have. A child that is quite willing and eager to shoot said gun just to prove, if only to the other small kids, it's one of the big kids now.

4) Honestly, I believe that NO ONE should have Nuclear Weapons !!! To me their tantamount to having a barrel of dynamite next to the fireplace in a log cabin. One stray spark and their goes the old home and hearth. That said there are, realistically speaking, some nations in particular who just don't have the moral or ethical responsibility to posses such weapons. If Switzerland were developing them, few if any people would fuss. Why ??? Because they've proven themselves to be a mature nation politically. The same could also be said of Canada, or Belgium, or Australia, or a number of other nations. Not because of their size or age or capabilities, but because they're smart enough and mature enough to NOT use them. Who can honestly compare the behavior of Iran to any of these nations and say that Iran is ready to posses Nuclear Weapons ???

5) One constant argument I hear is that Iran would never really use them, because if they did other nations would bomb them back to the stone-age in response. How blindly naive is that logic ??? Assuming they would even consider the responses of the nations of the world, once the Nuclear Weapons have been used it's really too late to do much more than gasp in horror and get mad. The damage is done, and not just to the intended target, but the world as a whole. It doesn't matter if it's US interests, or Middle East interests, or whoever's interst - we as a species are threatened at that point. Why do you think, even during the tumultuous height of the Cold War, nobody anywhere ever pushed that button ??? They knew it'd hurt them as much as anyone else. Add religious fanaticism to the mix, with a belief that dying for your cause will get you into heaven, and the story reads quite a bit differently. Getting hurt back or as a result of your own actions simply makes you a martyr to your cause !!! Thus, cautionary thought goes out the window. Take a deep and honset look at the history of the Middle East if you doubt this in any way.

Re: As A Leader What Would You Do?
 

To be honest, a single nuke would not damage the world as a whole very much, if at all. The Middle East wouldn't be a good place to be, and wherever the prevailing winds drag the fallout also wouldn't be a nice place to be. But over here in North America, I don't think we'd see any measurable effect.

Look at all the nuclear testing that has been done. Atmospheric testing, underground testing, ground level testing, underwater testing...

You say the US was the first to know the horror of the weapons. Probably true. Also understood the effects, besides the immediate "ka-boom" effect of nukes, fallout, etc. And yet...the US continued testing nukes for decades! This doesn't seem horribly mature, given what nuclear fallout can do...

That said, with the number of tests that have been done in over the past 60 years (Think Bikini Atoll), another single nuke will not damage the rest of the world significantly, especially since it's guaranteed to not be a monster.

Re: As A Leader What Would You Do?
 

Renegade 13,

I can't believe you are even going to venture into the realm of comparing the relative effects on the planet from nuclear tests to that of a nuclear strike. Where are you getting a SINGLE nuke from?

Iran tosses ONE nuke at Israel.
Israel tosses X nukes at Iran.


Now if you're Iran, would you really only use ONE nuke?


So really it's Y nukes at Israel.


Y + X = A lot of nukes

ASSUMING that Pakistan isn't going to sit idly by.

W nukes at India
Z nukes at Pakistan

Then we have 3 NUKES at the US from North Korea...... OH [censored] now it's on!!!

US Nukes North Kora
US Nukes China for safe measure

China Nukes the US

US Nukes China
UK Nukes China
France Nukes itself


Chain reaction....



The ONLY way MAD works is if EVERYONE at the table knows that EVERYONE dies..... AND THEY ALL HAVE TO CARE.


Does Iran care? Will they always care?

Re: As A Leader What Would You Do?
 

I agree here......but this almost seems like a non-sequitur. I can't think of any reason at all that Iran vs. Israel would cause Pakistan to hit India.Only if Israel doesn't have enough nukes to glass Iran, we decide to finish the job, and N. Korea decides it's coming next anyway.This would be suicidal; why would we nuke such a large trade partner?

I personally don't believe we would attack China even it it forcibly retook Taiwan.The general fear that Iran doesn't care is what's spawning this debate.

I find it ironic that this thread came up on the very same day that I, for the first time, encountered a solo game situation where sun-busters look like my best option.

Re: As A Leader What Would You Do?
 

In other words, once again, Atrocities accepts the right-wing US political position which reduces a complex situation to a tribal black-and-white us-versus-them fear-based mantra.

Which is to say, I think that the situation with Iran is really one which the intelligent knowledgeable people are telling us is ripe for negotiation - Iran seems to probably really want us to acknowledge them and promise not to invade them - they don't really want to be at war with the West. Failing to understand that seems to me like plain pandering conceit and/or stupidity on the part of certain Western leaders.

Ideally though, I'd like to see a complete ban on nuclear weapons, and action taken to remove them all from the planet. However the current US administration has been sounding at least as frightening as Al Qaeda recently in terms of threatening to develop new weapons and consider actually using them. People like that ought not to be allowed into positions of power, IMO...

PvK

Re: As A Leader What Would You Do?
 

According to some research I did, the total number of nuclear detonations that have taken place since the development of nuclear weapons has numbered over 2000!

See Wikipedia link

Except from the above link:

Many of the above tests, before the Partial Test-ban Treaty, were even atmospheric tests (the US has done at least 331 atmospheric nuclear tests), each producing as much fallout and general radioactivity of any bomb that Iran could build. Even considering that you're right, and Israel would bomb Iran right back again. Ok, lets say Iran actually built nukes, and actually lobbed them at Israel. Lets say they built 10 and threw them at Israel, then that Israel threw 30 back. That's 40 nukes in all. 40 nukes would be enough that one country or the other would be a glowing pile of radioactive glass.

You're telling me that 40 nukes would be worse for the world than the over 2000 tests conducted over the past 60 years? Come now, be reasonable.

As for the rest of your arguement, I don't think Pakistan/India, US/NK would get involved. Highly unlikely.

Re: As A Leader What Would You Do?
 

When nukes start flying we can only hope for cool heads to rule.

The Pakistani and Indian militaries are barking dogs, much like Soviet and NATO militaries back in the day. The slightest thing could set those dogs free. A little nuke induced anarchy is just the right thing.


The US can't nuke North Korea without taking on China. If NK nukes us, think the US would sit idly by and not retaliate? Think there wouldn't be thought that NK wouldn't have struck without China's approval? Or even we allow for the HINT of approval to exist.

Anyway... if we nuke NK, I wouldn't be surprised that we'd nuke China.

Hell that was the rule of the day back during the Soviets vs NATO. You nuke one of us, we nuke all of you.

If nukes are getting tossed back and forth..... you think US would want China to come out unscathed? I'd place them at fault for their lack of control over their part of the world. They need to snap the leash on NK. It's their dog, if it bites anyone, they're to blame.

Re: As A Leader What Would You Do?
 

I think your back handed slap at me is inapproprate and insinidary. It is designed to provoke me in a debate over US politics. PvK, your entitled to your opinion, but please leave me out of your degrading patranizing comments. Thank you.

If you would have skipped the chance to attack me and would have read my other posts, you would have known that I favor just leaving them alone.

Re: As A Leader What Would You Do?
 

I find this attitude almost as scary as Iran. "Control over their part of the world"!! You're saying a few countries should have harsh military control over the rest of the world, and that it's their fault if something goes wrong!? This tells me that you think that I, living in Canada, are subject to American control...and this scares me, if this is a prevalent attitude down there...

Re: As A Leader What Would You Do?
 

Actually, I think I'm going to bow out of this conversation. I don't want people getting offended, and since I'm probably responsible for some of it I'll leave now, and forever keep my peace! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...ies/tongue.gif

Re: As A Leader What Would You Do?
 

YA, might be a good idea to sht this thread down now before it gets turned in to something it was never intended to.