Will of the Senate - Senate Deliberations II

**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.

**econ21** · 08-17-2006, 15:30

[NUMERIUS AUREOLUS]: Senator Verginius, I do not wish to transgress the lands of our neighbours - that makes it possible for us to finish off Macedon and Greece, but not Gaul. There is no inconsistency there.

As for letting Seleucia and Egypt defeat our enemies, as of late, they have made little progress there. I believe Greece is taking the offensive against Seleucia in Asia Minor and its city of Byzantion is protected by sea from her enemy. The Macedonian general was able to retreat to Debeltos unmolested through supposedly hostile Egyptian lands. By contrast, I believe a powerful Iberia will make short work of the last pitiful Gallish outpost.

But the key issue to my mind is Byzantion. That is a prized fruit ready for the taking - we should not leave it to fall to Seleucia or Egypt. If the last Gaulish settlement were a great city like Byzantion, rather than some wretched village you have already enslaved and plundered, Senator Verginius, I might think differently.

Moreover, Byzantion has a key strategic location not unlike that of Massilia in the west in days gone past. It is a natural anchor to our Republic. By contrast, the last Gallic settlement could be no more than a stepping stone in a wider contest with Iberia for Gaul.

**Dooz** · 08-17-2006, 15:32

{Galerius Vatinius}

Noone is going to Alexandria Marcellus. The aims of taking Byzantion and not moving further into potential enemy territory have been made clear. There is all but one legion tasked with taking it, we won't be caught off guard as long as enough troops stay where they need to. Senator Aureolus makes excellent points as to our border situation and possible conflicts of interest with the Ptolemies and Seleucids, namely that we risk nothing more than we already have by taking Byzantion, and instead have something great to gain with its capture.

**Braden** · 08-17-2006, 15:54

I find myself constantly changing my views on this subject of Byzantion. Whilst I agree that such a region will bring the Republic much profit I also believe taking it and holding it will present us in direct opposition to the two powers of the East.

The prospect of War with Seleucia AND Ptolemy feels me with dread at this time, we could not hope to stand against these powers when surrounded.

The issue of Iberia and Gaul is much firmer in my mind. Iberia WILL finish Gaul AND they will also turn against us once they have secured that last Gallic settlement.

The Co-Consuls must ensure we are prepared for this.

IF, it is decided to take Byzantion then the Co-Consuls must be prepared for a huge war! I believe the main issue is that such a war is far from certain…..we could take Byzantion and no provoke either into a response, or we could just provoke one OR both.

If we can be sure we have secured our Eastern boarders on the former Macedonian and Greek City regions then I would be inclined to err on the side of us taking Byzantion and seeing what happens.

The main drawback is that we not only stand to loose which ever Legion ventures forth but have the prospect of our Eastern legions being decimated in a long term struggle.

IF, we are confident that our Legions in the East……..as they are NOW……can resist such a situation, IF, the Senate is happy for us to endanger a whole Legion on such an expedition…..remember we did take such a risk when landing in Illyria as I recall……….THEN, I will support such a venture.

If the Co-Consuls and the Tribunes are not so confident then I am inclined to say “nay” to such a proposal in the Vote.

**TinCow** · 08-17-2006, 16:03

Senator Aureolus if you are so sure that Greece will continue to survive and that their dominion over Byzantium will hold, then surely we can take the city from them in two years time when we are properly prepared for a full war. The same stands true of Debeltos. Clearly you believe that Ptolemy and Selucia will not destroy our enemies, so how does a short delay to prepare for a potentially massive war injure us?

Senator Vatinius, we most certainly do risk more. Taking Byzantium will give us a border with Selucia, something we would not otherwise have. Seleucia is in a life-or-death struggle with Ptolemy. Do you really think that they will be glad that we have blocked the main access route to their enemy's holdings in the West?

I am not advocating pacifism by any means. I simply think that we should take advantage of this unprecedented decrease in hostilities to prepare the Republic for the trying times ahead.

**econ21** · 08-17-2006, 16:35

[NUMERIUS AUREOLUS]: Senator Verginius, Legio V is already embarked and about to sail through the Bosphorous. It can destroy the Macedonians at Debeltos, dispose of the settlement and then conquer Byzantion. I do not see what we have to gain from ordering the ships back to port and telling them to wait for the next First Consul (you, perhaps, Senator Verginius?).

We have the manpower to do the job. Legio V can handle itself. Furthermore, our forces are concentrated in what was Macedonia - they are more than sufficient to win a war with Egypt in Europe if she starts one.

Letting the expedition complete its mission would not prevent us preparing ourselves for renewed struggles. Indeed, getting it over with may well free up some of our armies there for duties elsewhere. Furthermore, the income from Byzantion would not go amiss.

**Mount Suribachi** · 08-17-2006, 16:38

Augustus Verginius speaks with wisdom. Taking Byzantion gives Ptolomy and Seleucia an isolated Roman city between them. One, or both, of them will be unable to resist attacking it.

And what if Carthage decides to renew hostilities now that Numidia are no more? What if Iberia decides to turn her armies against us. We MUST consolidate, re-group and re-equip. We cannot afford any actions that would cause more wars, as that would undo all the blood and treasure that has been spent to finish the 2 wars that are now drawing to a conclusion.

If we are to take Byzantion, truth be known, I would rather launch a surprise attack on the Ptolomite holdings in Europe and do away with them in one fell swoop. Rather that than wait for them to declare war on us and catch us on the hop.