[Ogre] Re: Playing with (nuclear) fire

[Chris French]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <ogre-list-request at sjgames.com>
To: <ogre-list at sjgames.com>
Sent: Friday, September 24, 2004 10:00 AM
Subject: Ogre-list Digest, Vol 4, Issue 11
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2004 13:20:52 -0400
> From: "Herb Diehr" <edcomp at provide.net>
> Subject: [Ogre] OGRE! Politics and More...
> Not just politics of the bomb, but also of terrorism, as we've seen.
Also, of special missions groups and of assassin-ation and manipulation of
the masses and public policies.

The phrase "politics of the bomb" refers to all of the above; it was
the term of choice for describing what are known nowadays as
"radical [x] fundamentalists" in the Victorian period and up to
1945. (Post-Hiroshima, the phrase "the bomb" was co-opted.)

> But, concerning OGRE, their politics is a bit more arcane and we'll never
understand it completely.

Quite simple, really: North America vs. Europe vs. Japan. No one
else bears thinking about. (At least not until after the "Last" War.)

> Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2004 13:11:42 -0500 (CDT)
> From: "Henry J. Cobb" <hcobb at io.com>
> Subject: Re: [Ogre] OGRE! Politics and More...
> The best source for these kinds of details is GURPS OGRE.

About the only productive use for this book.... :)

> Message: 3
> Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2004 11:56:26 -0700 (PDT)
> From: White Rat <whiterat at bastet.org>
> Subject: [Ogre] Re: Ogre-list Digest, Vol 4, Issue 10
> Or not. Twilight:2000 was written by optimists. Bear in mind that nuclear
> short and mid-range artillery has existed off-and-on since the fifties, it
> just hasn't ever been used on the battlefield.

Yeah -- and there's a damned good reason *why*. :)

> Oh, for the days of simple autocannon, when you weren't likely to run into
> someone with a dropped-singularity-generator.

To hell with that -- I knew the guy who used _CW Tanks_ to
build a f***ing OGRE Mk. III.... (Yes, that annoyed me. :) )

> Well, the suggested reason for infantry survival was powered armor of a
> mythical substance which was ridiculously nuke-resistant. If you can
> assume powered armor technology and assume that kind of materials science,
> you can assume the requisite life support and self-contained medical
> systems...

Meanwhile, the radiation shoots right through the armor, steriliz-
ing everyone....

> Re: ANFO vs. Jaegers: The assumption made is that the ANFO still has the
> same political/strategic effectiveness. We already have a society on the
> surface of this earth that doesn't let itself be swayed by terrorist
> bombings. I wouldn't want to live in it, but it exists, and it even has
> quite a few positive aspects that I respect highly.

If it's who I think you're referring to, look how they turn out in the
Ogreverse (_GURPS OGRE_).

And what is ANFO, BTW?

>
> Given the apparent structure/behavior of the NAC and PE in the Ogreverse,
> terrorism is (a) difficult and (b) has greatly reduced social/political
> effect.

Hundreds of dead babies in a marketplace or school has the same
effect in every era: The Civvies s*** themselves and panic.

> Message: 4
> Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2004 15:26:54 -0400
> From: David Morse <svref at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: [Ogre] Re: OGREverse economics
> I'll admit the example is exagerated for effect, but I'm not sure its
> "patently ludicrous".  Revolutions in manufacturing change basic
> assumptions of value.

You'res till looking at "something which has to be processed
through several layers of machinery" versus "something which
either can be used naturally, or requires almost no processing".
Says the man with the US Army Improvised Munitions Handbook.
:)

(Do I hear helicopters?)

> Message: 5
> Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2004 23:21:34 EDT
> From: Sethkimmel at aol.com
> Subject: [Ogre] Re: Ogre-list Digest, Vol 4, Issue 10
> Not true; it's just LIC now,

Sad to say, but it looks like it's a even-money proposition between
the bombers getting what they want, and the SpecWar types
winning that game. When one guy with a garage-door-remote
and access to a gas station and a garden center can slaughter
dozens, if not hundreds, of civvies in one go; while it takes years
and millions to create the Rogue Warriors to find, chase, catch,
kill, tag, and bag the SOB; well, you do the math.

> unless they've been handcuffed by politicians...

Pity the terrorists never attack politicians (shows they do have
some brain cells). And before someone brings it up: No, I don't
believe for a moment that fourth airliner was aimed for the White
House or the Capitol.

> Message: 6
> Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2004 13:55:41 -0700
> From: "John D. Gwinner" <jgwinner at dazsi.com>
> Subject: [Ogre] RE: Killing civies
> I disagree - killing civvies has never, and is not ever, going to stop
> any war.

It hasn't worked *yet*. ATM, it seems to have worked in Spain*,
and is working on at least 50% of the American population.

[*: Tho' it's not as if the Spanish have mattered since 1588 or so.]

I can't say exactly why it didn't work in WW2, tho' I suspect the
general ineffectiveness of the strategy in actually killing people
had something to do with it. Had the USAAF had access to a
"bunker-buster" bomb a la that concrete-filled gun barrel deployed
during '91, who knows how the civvies might have reacted. As
mentioned above, when it is demonstrated to Mr. and Mrs. Home-
body that "yes, you could die at any moment, too", the effective-
ness of terror-bombing increases.

CF