Will of the Senate - Senate Deliberations II

**GeneralHankerchief** · 08-17-2006, 02:30

I do believe you have your priorities in the wrong place, Senator Aureolus. You say that we "could cut through the Iberians as easily as we did the Gauls"; is that not the idea, Senator?

Conscript Fathers, you know my stance on attacking the Seleucids or Ptolemy. Imagine all the losses we went through in attacking Greece and Macedon -Pleminius and Coruncanius spring to mind- and multiply that number by five. It would stretch our resources to the point of breaking, especially when there is a fat target much closer to Roma that clearly is afraid of us.

Motion 10.13: Debeltos is to be raided - sacked, then abandoned.

Motion 10.14: This motion authorizes the Consul to start actively conquering Iberian lands. This motion authorises a declaration of war on Iberia.

I also second Motions 10.10, 10.11, and 10.12.

**econ21** · 08-17-2006, 09:11

SENATE SPEAKER: Senator Marcellus Aemilius, the scribes have ammended your motion 10.14 to make explicit that it authorises a declaration of war, as is required by convention. If authorising a declaration of war is not your intent, you are free to edit the motion back to its original state but then its execution would have to wait for the Iberians to declare war on us.

**Braden** · 08-17-2006, 11:22

Senator Aureolus,

I was not going to support a venture to Byzantium but your words have swayed me, not only because of what that city could become in revenue to the Republic but also as a foothold to stifle the Selucids and Egypt.

I have to agree, we must strike fast and take it from the Greeks before we are beaten there. I have no illusion that this will be an easy task or that we will keep it uncontested for a great length of time but we can hope.

Hereby I support motions:

10.1, 10.2, 10.3, 10.7, 10.9, 10.10, 10.11 & 10.12

Thus far. For obvious reasons, unlike yourself, I have no compulsion on using Assassins to put Argeos of Pharsalus to death.

I also believe there is an error in the Consuls report where he states “The Kingdom of Macedon is allied with the Germans and the Greek cities and is at war with the Republic of Rome and the Greek cities.”

–Macedon cannot both be at war with AND allied to the Greek City states?

Unfortunately, at this time due to my undertaking in our recent military tribunal I have not had time to review our tactical situation. I may be able to propose fresh motions later but at this time those already proposed are sufficient.

**Mount Suribachi** · 08-17-2006, 11:34

Senator Verginius, might I suggest that you re-word motion 10.8 for it does not take into account Rome being attacked by any other nation. The fortunes of war are variable and fleeting, who knows who will be on our borders and at war with us in 2 years time.

May I also suggest you reword Motion 10.9 to "The Consul must attempt to return all Legions to full strength by the end of his term".

I would not want to be impeached in 2.5 years time if Ptolomy and Iberia declare war on us and our Legions are thus depleted.

Finally, I second Motions 10.1, 10.3, 10.6, 10.10, 10.11, 10.12, 10.13

Motion 10.14 is sheer madness. I hope for a quiet and battle free couple of years, and so should you senators. We need time to rest and re-group.

**Dooz** · 08-17-2006, 11:49

{Galerius Vatinius}

Quiet and battle-free years are for women and cripples Senator Pansa. I second Motion 10.14 and volunteer to lead a legion into the barbarian's lands.

**TinCow** · 08-17-2006, 14:51

Senator Publius Pansa, your words have wisdom I have amended the terms of both motions.

Senator Numerius Aureolus states that wars can only end in one way, with the utter destruction of our enemies. Yet I have not heard either him nor Senator Tiberius Coruncanius call for an attack on the last remaining Gallic settlement. They state that we must finish these wars, but they do not wish to finish all wars, only those where they will lead men in battle and earn personal glory and great wealth. Aureolus and Coruncanius, you will have your wars in due time. The conflict in the east will draw us in inevitably whether we like it or not. Are you so eager for blood that you cannot wait for a few short years to prepare yourselves?

They say that Byzantium is properous and would bring us much wealth. Yet it will also likely bring about war with both Selucia and Ptolemy at the same time. The entire eastern sea will be closed to our merchants and the Republic will suffer from this greatly. There are certainly strategic and financial benefits to Byzantium, but not now and not for us. Perhaps in two and half years the situation will have changed, but for now there is one thing that is absolutely clear:

Taking Byzantium, Debeltos and Nicomedia will mean war with Ptolemy or Seleucia and likely both! No man can say we are ready for such a war and retain respect in this house. Yet these two aggitate for actions which will surely provoke it and they receive support.

**econ21** · 08-17-2006, 15:04

[NUMERIUS AUREOLUS]: I do not see how Legio V's expedition will provoke war with Seleucia, so long as we do not try to hold Nicomedia. There would be no land border with Seleucia.

War with Egypt is likely, but I believe that is due to our existing land border with her, not because of the expedition. Taking and holding Byzantion will not make war any more likely and will strengthen our position should war break out.

Moreover, we are ready for a war with Egypt. We have three field armies able to strike her European possessions and a strong fleet that can guard our coasts after she is expelled from Europe. Indeed, I believe that if war happens quickly with Egypt, it will make the inevitable contest with Iberia go better. We will be able to secure the East, anchoring our Danube frontier at Byzantion, and only have to guard it against a few Thracian raiders.

The last Gallic province is a different matter, because it cannot be reached without transgressing on the land of our neighbour. Furthermore, the news that Iberia is now at war with Gaul makes any discussion of the fate of that settlement in this house irrelevant.

**TinCow** · 08-17-2006, 15:08

Yet Macedonia is at war with Ptolemy and Greece is at war with Seleucia and you clearly do not think discussion of their holdings is irrelevant. You make inconsistent choices Aureolus. You do not wish to anger the Iberians, yet you have no qualms about potentially angering the two eastern powers. What have those nations done to so enrage you?

**GeneralHankerchief** · 08-17-2006, 15:09

Iberia will finish up the idiotic Gauls, then fix their attention on us. Surely the 506 denarii was only to buy time. I do not want to be caught as far away as Alexandria when we will be fighting in the Alps.