The Magnaura

[Privateerkev]

To me that is not acceptable. It is wrong to force people to sack. We need to renew the old edict 3.2.

Edict 4.3: No settlement can be exterminated. No Orthodox settlement can be sacked though sacking of Catholic or Muslim-held settlement is authorized. Crusade targets must be occupied.

Leave the sacking of non-Orthodox settlements to be an option to those who feel it must happen. But do not mandate it.

[Andres]

To me that is not acceptable. It is wrong to force people to sack. We need to renew the old edict 3.2.

Edict 4.3: No settlement can be exterminated. No Orthodox settlement can be sacked though sacking of Catholic or Muslim-held settlement is authorized. Crusade targets must be occupied.

Leave the sacking of non-Orthodox settlements to be an option to those who feel it must happen. But do not mandate it.

Ah, dear Senator, please show me the free armies and the free priests shop...

We need money! Do you want our priests to travel naked and to starve to death before they reach their target? Do you want armies consisting of only starving peasants wearing only some old garments as armor? Do you think structures come for free?

Our economy is in dire need of a financial boost. We need money to invest, which investments can create more profit.

You may be a wonderful general, Makedonios, but you certainly don't understand anything about economy.

We simply cannot afford the luxury of occupying settlements!

[Privateerkev]

I personally find sacking to be reprehensible. I wish it were outlawed. We can find money other ways. Building economic buildings, trimming what isn't being used, raising taxes, and sending out merchants are all fine ways of getting money.

I refuse to set aside my morals and convictions all because they are temporarily inconvenient. We need to stand for something.

[Andres]

I personally find sacking to be reprehensible. I wish it were outlawed. We can find money other ways. Building economic buildings, trimming what isn't being used, raising taxes, and sending out merchants are all fine ways of getting money.

I refuse to set aside my morals and convictions all because they are temporarily inconvenient. We need to stand for something.

Building? Without money? More taxes? For what? To get a few riots which will result in no taxes and having to train an army to reconquer a rebellious settlement?

Merchants? With what money are you going to recruit them?

Morals and convictions?

Don't lecture me about morals and convictions, you butch...

Savvas takes a deep breath, it seems like he wants to say something, but he refrains. He takes another deep breath, sips from his wine and continues.

Think about it on the long term: no sacking of infidel settlements = not enough florins. No florins, no troops, no buildings, no merchants, no priests, nothing...

Rasing taxes? This will result in rebellions. Rebellions mean we'll have to train armies to retake a city that is inhabited by our own citizens.

Your "morals and convictions" will lead us to chaos, will force us to kill our own and will result in armies not meeting opposition, which will result in even more innocent deads.

In the end, we will be forced to sack settlements in order to survive.

So why not sacking them now?

What seems to be an "immoral" choice at first, turns out to be the best solution, even from the "moral" point of view.

Like I said: the Grandmaster lacks the vision and open mind required to run the Empire.

[Privateerkev]

Sorry Methodios but I will refuse to write a law that authorizes the sacking of Crusade targets. If you want it, write one yourself.

And Savvas, say what I know you really want to say. I can see it welling up in you and causing you to tremble with giddy anticipation.

I am confident that we can build the economy without becoming butchers.

If we give up our common values, just to make things easier, then what will become of us?

[Andres]

Not sacking will lead to more innocent deads in the long term.

Why is that so difficult to understand?

Please senators, I do not doubt the noble intentions of this man, but he is not the best choice for Megas. Like I said, the Grandmaster is narrow minded and focused on strict rules. These are not good qualities for a Megas.

On top of that, edict 4.1 is a direct insult to a member of the Royal Family. That edict has been proposed by one of Makedonios' vassals.

Clearly, this shows that the Order also lacks diplomatic skills.

Tell me Methodios, if you would happen to disagree with the Pope on certain issues during your term as Megas, will you also let your Order call him an "idiot" and risk Constantinople to be the target of several Crusades?

Not only are you not understanding the finesses of economics, you also lack the style and self control of a good diplomat.

[Privateerkev]

I find it ironic that you continue to use the sacking of Antioch against me, while also proposing an edict that mandates that we sack.

You might find me morally strict but I find you to be remarkably flexible in your morals.

As for what my vassal has said of the Caesar, he was rebuked. The Emperor has the power to ban Vissa's letters from the chamber. If you are not happy with how the matter has been handled, then take it up with the Emperor.

Your starting to grasp at straws...