The Will of the Senate - Senate Deliberations

[Death the destroyer of worlds]

I most strongly protest against the suggestions to abandon our brothers of the Latin Confederation. Yes, they may be rebellious now, but they are still our kinsfolk. What will our citizens think ? If we attack immediately, we can beat Pyrrhus to Corfinium, his obvious next target on his vile conquest. With the city occupied and all our forces concentrated next to it, Pyrrhus will not dare attack us and while he stands confused we can send a single legion to occupy Paestum. Then we can start to build up enough strengh to bring the warlord to his knees. I only regret that we will be unable to save our kinsmen in Rhegium by my battle strategy outlined earlier.

[Dutch_guy]

I, my fellow countryman, am not in favour of abandoning our Corfinian Kinsfolk.

I suggest to launch a ...what's the word...ah .. Pre-emptive strike on Pyrrus, before he can harm our Latin Brothers.

We must intervene now we have the chance, I - and I'm sure our consul agrees - couldn't live with myself knowing that my latin brothers are in danger of being slaughtered and oppressed !

A fate that is set for them with Pyrrus at their gates !

[GeneralHankerchief]

What good will saving our Latin brothers be if we cannot protect them forever? Surely it is not better that they suffer under tyrant rule and then be under our benevolent arm for the rest of the world than under our rule for a few years until taken over by Pyrrhus?

And what will there be to farm if we don't raise a third legion? If we want to kick Pyrrhus out, surely we must do it right. If we do not, then how will one legion be able to finish this false king off if two could not? For the safety of Rome, we must send all three legions in defense of the southern half of the Peninsula. Our core territories matter the most. Everything else- the Latin states in the South, the Gauls in the north- is secondary.

And Senator Tiberius, isn't what you're proposing overkill? Surely the Greeks will be disenchanted with the prospect of conquering after their best general in fifty years is dead? No, once Pyrrhus is eliminated we should pursue good relations with them. They are a civilized people, after all. Once Italia is ours, we can concentrate on our true expansion direction- into Europe.

[Avicenna]

Europe? No, they are merely lands of barbarians. The stinking, dense forests of Europe will open few trade routes, and the lack of resources will do us no good. The Mediterranean is the key to success. The state that controls the Mediterranean, can buy off any potential enemies. Our primary goal should be establishment of trade routes when my plan of Roman hegemony in Italia has been executed, and then raise a fourth Legion to strike at Carthage. Four simeltaneous attacks at Messene, Agrigento, Corsica and Sardinia will without doubt make the Carthaginians lose their financial advantage, while filling up our coffers. The sea is the road to power, fellow Romans.

Goodnight.

[Dutch_guy]

Senator Hankerchief,

That is why we must destroy Pyrrus now, so the Corfinians, and all the other threatenend latin brothers will be save forever. Dethroning the current rebel leaders of those cities would cause losses on our side, good soldiers who could have fought the tyrant Pyrrus. After Pyrrus is dead, his head sent to Rome, we will concentrate on bringing South Italia under our benevolent rule.

To achieve that, Pyrrus has to go.

I deem our starting legions fir for that task, with Mars backing our every move Pyrrus won't stand a chance.

Again, so it seems, I agree with senator Tiberius.

Now this senator needs his sleep, and shall call it a day.

[Death the destroyer of worlds]

I am glad I misinterpreted my noble collegae. We only seem to disagree in whether we should attack Pyrrhus' army or try to fend him off without bloodshed but with intimidation.
While I completely agree the Greek colonies must submit to our preordained rule an immediate battle with that mighty army might leaven us weakened and prey to our other neighbours. Altough I am confident that Quintus martial prowess would give us victory, it might cost us the war. Where will the troops come from to continue the campaign against the Greeks ? The Greeks have a powerful confederation and might easily send another army from their mainland within a year which we would be unable to oppose with the remnants of our own army. Dare we gamble with our nation's existence like that ? I'll give you the floor to reflect on this, my lords.

[shifty157]

It is unbelievably unwise to assault Corfinium. It is too powerful and will require too many troops and leave us too weakened. Let Pyrrhus instead knock at its gates and give us the upper hand with two fresh legions in position to flank his army.

[Glaucus]

Fellow Senators, think!

We have 4 options on how to deal with the Greeks

1) We can sit and do nothing. Very unRoman and cowardly. Thats out

2) We can give Pyrrhus battle in the field before he has time to react. We can send both legions.

3) We can allow Pyrrhus to let his men die on the walls of our Latin brothers. Where is our honor then? We must help them and give them good Roman rule, not allow them to be terrorized by Greeks.

4) We can go quickly and attack the Rebel towns, then wait while Pyrrhus attacks our walls.

We must decide on one of these, I think the forth option is best, since our Roman legions will surely win against any opponent in the concentrated street fighting.

ab cedo ab area
I yield the floor

[Mount Suribachi]

Conscript fathers, what is all this talk of far-away conquests??? Do my ears deceive me? Wars of expansion, wars of aggression, talk of "pre-emptive strikes" from Europa to Africa! What is this madness? Since when was this the Roman way?

We should concentrate on defending our own homelands, on defeating those who would start wars of aggression against us, defeating Pyrrhus and his army will bring death and glory enough for all of us.

Defeating foreign aggressors and taming our rebellious cousins next door is one thing, but it seems some of my noble brothers within this august house are already planning foreign conquests in far-away lands, perhaps they woud like to set themselves up as some self-styled Pyrrhus of Rome!!!

I tell you conscript Fathers, I want no part of it!! No part of it!!

I bid you goodnight.

[Death the destroyer of worlds]

While I appreciate my collegae Glaucus strength of feeling for our latin brothers, I would think it most unwise to fight phalanxes and elephants in the narrow streets of corfinium. Our army's strength lies in mobility and tactics on open terrain. So I say we occupy corfinium and then meet Pyrrhus in the field where our men can fight to their best effect. With this final tought I will leave this noble house for this evening.

[flyd]

What many of my fellow senators fail to realize is that Pyrrhus, by his presence, insults our great republic. How do you suppose this situation appears to other nations? It appears as if any fool, even from an insignificant country such as Epirus, can come to Italy, take what he wants, and threaten Rome. Is that the message we want to send? If Epirus can do it, what's to stop Carthage? We appear weak!

To even have heated debate about this Pyrrhus is dishonorable! The course of action is obvious. We must, immediately, with no delay, attack and defeat the army that threatens Rome, and even more importantly, we must kill Pyrrhus on the field of battle. This would send a warning to anyone else who may have interests in Italy, and would ensure that we would not be bothered by this Pyrrhus again. After that, we may debate about what to do, but our first action is clear.

[econ21]

SENATE SPEAKER: Gentlemen! Gentlemen! These deliberations do you great credit! The range and depth of your wisdom is, in fact, quite overwhelming to a humble person such as myself. By all means, continue with these stirring speeches. But I would, if I may, point out one or two mundane procedural matters.

In this session, you have two great tasks. The first is to elect the First Consul who will lead Rome through the current crisis and for the next five years. As yet, we have three candidates - econ21, DDW and flydude - although their precise identities will only be revealed on Tuesday 6pm UK time. In due course, they will present manifestoes posted here, on the Senate floor. These manifestoes will draw - no doubt - on the wisdom revealed through your deliberations. At that time, I would advise you to take the opportunity provided by this floor to question them and demand satisfaction on the matters that most concern you. Based on their responses, you may then make an informed decision when you cast your vote.

The other great task is less straightforward. You have in you the power to pass motions that will bind the First Consul to whatever acts you direct. Now, granted when in office, he may seek to escape whatever binds you place upon him. But if so, there may be reckoning when he returns here in his third year to account for his progress. On this issue of motions, I have three points to make.

The first is cautionary. Do you need to bind our leader? To deprive him of his freedom to react to events? Think carefully on this. Your speeches may guide him. But your motions will constrain him.

The second point concerns the subject of such motions. We can broadly distinguish three key areas: diplomatic; economic; and military. On diplomacy, the First Consul must come to the Senate first to seek approval for declarations of war, ceasefires and alliances (trade rights he may seek as he wishes). It may be a benefit to our diplomats if you give advance authorisation to specific diplomatic actions, so the ground can be prepared well in advance. On the economy, it may be useful to set broad priorities - what does the Republic need: more troops or more investment in our trade, ports and road? On military motions, we may propose campaigns in specific sectors.

My third and final point is purely procedural. Your words are so powerful that I fear on occasion, they may overwhelm me. May I request that you present motions in writing, using the following format:

MOTION: This house proposes X,Y and Z

Following the format of this script - the emboldening, the italics etc - will greatly assist the scribes in arranging the relevant votes. Keeping the motions simple - ideally one sentence long - will assist them in drawing up composite motions and amalgamating related proposals.

From the debate so far, I can identify two motions that have been explicitly seconded:

MOTION 1: This house proposes that Quintus be given command of an army to unite southern Italy, by destroying Pyrrhus's army and then assuming control of the towns in the south.
Proposer: Tiberius
Seconders: Glaucus, DDW

MOTION 2: This house proposes raising a Third Legion.
Proposer: Tiberius
Seconder: Dutch_guy

I apologise if my scribes have reduce the beauty and subtlety of your fine words into such simple motions. If their form of words is unacceptable, proposers may withdraw the motions and substitute more carefully drafted ones.

The heated debates on wider issues than these two motions may in due course be distilled into further motions. There is no urgency in presenting such motions. Let the free debate continue in the hope of reaching consensus. The final deadline for motions to be floored is Wednesday 6pm UK time. And again remember - much of your wise advice may best be presented as guidance for our First Consul, rather than binding motions.

[Avicenna]

To save yourself from these needless worries, just destroy Pyrrhus in one swift stroke. Then, we can worry about the liberation of rebel cities and the Greek holdings in Croton and Tarentum. Our deliberate, decisive destruction of Pyrrhus will surely set an example to other powers, proving ourselves worthy as being descendants of Mars himself. We will also be the undeniable masters of Italia once his body is fed to the dogs, and the rest of the Greeks in Italia eradicated. Once the Greek military presence is no more, the city of Rhegion will be safe from their vile influence.