patergentium/wellspring
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues 1 Pull Requests Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Update 07-military.md

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
wellspringcp
2020-10-06 19:27:33 +11:00
committed by GitHub
parent 5c3b0551d7
commit 555a9980ea
1 changed files with 12 additions and 0 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

12
07-military/07-military.md
View File

@@ -22,6 +22,8 @@ Any war must be on the basis of a casus belli, and should the enemy actor cease
### Casus belli ### Casus belli
*The `casus belli` mechanism is a separate tool from the `Identified Hostile Political Entity` mechanism, and the two serve different purposes. `WS` may need to retaliate against a non-`IHPE` entity for violation of `casus belli`, and `WS` may need to take subversive action against an `IHPE` even if it has not violated a `casus belli`; although `WS` should ideally be diligent in defining `red line` casus belli to ensure that the reasons for all escalations are as transparent as possible.*
A `WS` polity shall declare and openly publish the exact assets (including diplomatic personnel, etc) which it considers to be `casus belli`, as well as an optional minimum response which any aggressor can expect to face. No maximum response shall be published: `WS` reserves the right to escalate its responses to any extent it deems necessary to preserve the private property of its residents. Should any actor encroach on a `casus belli`, a warning *may* be issued, but `WS` is under no obligation to issue a warning before retaliating - indeed, the casus belli list is itself a warning. Actors seeking to avoid conflict with `WS` should take care to engage the appropriate diplomatic channels before interacting with a casus belli. A `WS` polity shall declare and openly publish the exact assets (including diplomatic personnel, etc) which it considers to be `casus belli`, as well as an optional minimum response which any aggressor can expect to face. No maximum response shall be published: `WS` reserves the right to escalate its responses to any extent it deems necessary to preserve the private property of its residents. Should any actor encroach on a `casus belli`, a warning *may* be issued, but `WS` is under no obligation to issue a warning before retaliating - indeed, the casus belli list is itself a warning. Actors seeking to avoid conflict with `WS` should take care to engage the appropriate diplomatic channels before interacting with a casus belli.
In cases where a `casus belli` is an asset in a foreign polity: In cases where a `casus belli` is an asset in a foreign polity:
@@ -32,6 +34,16 @@ In cases where a `casus belli` is an asset in a foreign polity:
> [Apologia]: If other polities wish to gain an indirect umbrella of protection from `WS`, they are free to strategically contract out access to some valuable asset to the `WS` government, and thereby gain `WS` interest in protecting that particular asset as casus belli. > [Apologia]: If other polities wish to gain an indirect umbrella of protection from `WS`, they are free to strategically contract out access to some valuable asset to the `WS` government, and thereby gain `WS` interest in protecting that particular asset as casus belli.
### Identified Hostile Political Entities:
*The `Identified Hostile Political Entities` mechanism is a separate tool from the `casus belli` mechanism, and the two serve different purposes. `WS` may need to retaliate against a non-`IHPE` entity for violation of `casus belli`, and `WS` may need to take subversive action against an `IHPE` even if it has not violated a `casus belli`; although `WS` should ideally be diligent in defining `red line` casus belli to ensure that the reasons for all escalations are as transparent as possible.*
The legislature shall define a processes both for nominating and declaring foreign or domestic political entities as Identified Hostile Political Entities. No political entity which adheres the following core points of political organization **in practice (not merely on paper)** may be nominated as an `IHPE`:
- Private property law.
- Military isolationism.
Additionally, merely existing as a political entity which does not conform to these **in practice (not merely on paper)** does not suffice for being nominated and/or declared an `IHPE`. Such a political entity must specifically pose either a distant, or a clear and present threat to the persons and private property of `WS` residents.
## War supply routes and logistics ## War supply routes and logistics
> [Apologia]: We argue that military self sufficiency is a nonsensical concept: if there is a war asset which is built from materials that must be purchased from a foreign polity which could be threatened, then you have implicitly acknowledged that *some* portion of the inputs for that asset require foreign trade - I.e, they are not produced locally, even if the natural resources for that asset occur naturally locally. > [Apologia]: We argue that military self sufficiency is a nonsensical concept: if there is a war asset which is built from materials that must be purchased from a foreign polity which could be threatened, then you have implicitly acknowledged that *some* portion of the inputs for that asset require foreign trade - I.e, they are not produced locally, even if the natural resources for that asset occur naturally locally.