StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Stuart Mackey wrote: Then what of G.J Ceasar running things in Hell? is he to be 'retired'? I think demonstrated ability or adaptability would be a better gauge, but to be honest a lot is going to come down to 'command what?'.

Caesar holds no rank in any current armed forces. His former positions were in a political entity that was extinguished in 1453. His position in Hell is more or less self appointed (or perhaps appointed by some other non-terrestrial authority that Stuart will announce later). I'm speaking of officers who might claim to still have legal authority over modern troops: Napoleon Bonaparte, for instance, could claim to still be an general officer in the French Army.

MKSheppard wrote: Won't work. By Public Law; no officer may outrank George Washington; he's there by dint of seniority.

What Congress has granted by law, they can also revoke. If they want Petreaus, or anyone else, to outrank Washington, they can do it. Nor does do they have jurisdiction over foreign governments., If Putin wants Zhukov or whoever is the current top officer in the Russian forces to outrank Washington, he will make it so.

In practice, deceased officers of that vintage will likely be deemed "retired". Their rank will be of purely social importance and they won't have authority unless specifically given such on a case by case basis. Bradley and the like will have to show why they should be reinstated to active service and get a command over living officers currently in line for them.

I wonder what GEN Petraeus would think of the proposal to have him outrank Washington, seniority be damned...

(My assumption is that Stuart's depictions of real-world VIPs is based on his personal interactions with/knowledge of them, extrapolated to account for The Message and its aftermath.)

Legally, Caesar doesn't have any rank, since like you said, the Roman Empire's last vestiges were eliminated in 1453. However. It's Julius Caesar. You can bet that Italy would immediately pass a law appointing him Generale.

MKSheppard wrote:Legally, Caesar doesn't have any rank, since like you said, the Roman Empire's last vestiges were eliminated in 1453. However. It's Julius Caesar. You can bet that Italy would immediately pass a law appointing him Generale.

Knowing Italy, they wouldn't take long to appoint him President for life.

Adrian Laguna wrote:

MKSheppard wrote:Legally, Caesar doesn't have any rank, since like you said, the Roman Empire's last vestiges were eliminated in 1453. However. It's Julius Caesar. You can bet that Italy would immediately pass a law appointing him Generale.

Knowing Italy, they wouldn't take long to appoint him President for life.

And why not? Italy's pretty much been going downhill since Augustus.

The question is, why would anyone want those ages-old deceased people in command of anything?

Barring the question of their psychological state after hundreds of years of intense torment in Hell, why would their obsolete knowledge even count for anything?

Sure, they'd become celebrities allright, but who would give them any managerial authority. That's silly. "Oh, we have here written that an ancient dude rules us, he died, but he's back so he will".

Zhukov, Patton and some higher World War II authority like Roosevelt, Stalin, Churchill might be of some use due to them being the last coordinators of supermassive-scale warfare, at least. Some deceased creative scientists like Korolev, Bartini, Chelomei, Alexeev, Tupolev etc. their counterparts from other nations might also be of use.

But Washingtn and Caesar? This would devolve into stupidity were they given any authority whatsoever.

Stas Bush wrote:

Perhaps this story is not for you

Are you saying I can't read and state a negative opinion on a forum fanfic? I used to like the premise but as I said the story lost it's potential. I never said this story is "for me".

At the suggestion of someone here I read your short story "Hive" and thoroughly enjoyed it. VERY different to Armageddon!!! but there was mega-violence at the end, though those that started the conflagration ended up hoisted on their own petard. I asked a guy at work who grew up in Russia and he said ( its been 30 years since he left ) that modern Russian was not the same as what he learnt, so grammatical protocols are up to you! I found it very easy to read.

Stuart Mackey, from the list of WW1 Generals I must express an ANZAC preference for Monash, probably the best general officer to come out of our part of the globe. In a sense, Haig did the hard yards allowing Monash to "run free" in 1918.

Stas Bush wrote:The question is, why would anyone want those ages-old deceased people in command of anything?

Barring the question of their psychological state after hundreds of years of intense torment in Hell, why would their obsolete knowledge even count for anything?

Sure, they'd become celebrities allright, but who would give them any managerial authority. That's silly. "Oh, we have here written that an ancient dude rules us, he died, but he's back so he will".

Zhukov, Patton and some higher World War II authority like Roosevelt, Stalin, Churchill might be of some use due to them being the last coordinators of supermassive-scale warfare, at least. Some deceased creative scientists like Korolev, Bartini, Chelomei, Alexeev, Tupolev etc. their counterparts from other nations might also be of use.

But Washingtn and Caesar? This would devolve into stupidity were they given any authority whatsoever.

I think you are right. There is no shortage of more recently deceased talented officers etc and their use should be preferred, the others being advisory or, in the case of the old generals etc, placed on the "retired ( deceased )" list. Their counsel can be sought but our world has changed too much for them to have too much hands on involvement in the upcoming battles, though some principles of warfare or politics seem eternal!

Why are we talking as if these old generals would be considered for command of modern forces? Wouldn't they attempt to exert authority over those deceased souls who they once commanded in life?

This begs the question of how much aid we intend to give allies in Hell. Right now, almost everyone in Hell is on a level playing field with each other, ie- the best weapons humans can muster are stolen baldrick tridents. Do we intend to start picking and choosing favourites, giving weapons, etc? Does Caesar hold some special position which makes him a logical choice to command large tracts of land in Hell? If we thought he wasn't, would we declare war on him to prevent him from seizing such control?

Russia can dump conserved tons of old equipment to a huge 10 million army of deceased Great Patriotic War soldiers. Other than that, anyone amassing a huge army in Hell seems unlikely. As far as I know, holding very old weapon dumps was not a practice in post-war NATO nations, and WWII German weaponry - the only other army to die on a considerable scale - is very much gone. The US could dump old WWII weapons, but there's not nearly enough WWII soldiers dead there.

Also, people in Hell are there for many many years. Have they not lost, um, combat experience? Really, do they just have the memories and skills at death time permanently conserved?

Stas Bush wrote:But Washingtn and Caesar? This would devolve into stupidity were they given any authority whatsoever.

Which is why we don't give them any real authority. I mean, their best value is as Propaganda assets and also in mobilizing the dead armies of hell; who will be more inclined to join if they can talk to someone they know; rather than "random person from the future".

Likewise; it should be a relatively quick way to reform the Grand Army of the Republic under Grant and Sherman Let's however, not tell them that many US Army Forts are named after Confederates.

Stas Bush wrote:Russia can dump conserved tons of old equipment to a huge 10 million army of deceased Great Patriotic War soldiers. Other than that, anyone amassing a huge army in Hell seems unlikely. As far as I know, holding very old weapon dumps was not a practice in post-war NATO nations, and WWII German weaponry - the only other army to die on a considerable scale - is very much gone. The US could dump old WWII weapons, but there's not nearly enough WWII soldiers dead there.

Also, people in Hell are there for many many years. Have they not lost, um, combat experience? Really, do they just have the memories and skills at death time permanently conserved?

Even random African tribesmen will be a serious threat to Baldricks when armed with AK-47s by the tens of millions.

Its hard to say, really, I look at the WW2 generation, my grandparents, they adapted from an era of what was still horse and cart, few cars, primitive radio and limited electricity to the modern era with great ease.

Compare though the armies of 1914 with 1918. There was one hell of a change there.

I did not know that! one learns something new every day. Not surprising, I guess, I look at NZ's own General Freyburg..man was a walking sieve by 1918.

A good book, 'Bloody Red Tabs', lists all the casualties; IIRC there was something like 180 in total. The most senior was, of course, Field Marshal Kitchener.

You forgot Wilson.

He was about as popular with the rest of the army as a fart in a spacesuit; unless you mean Jumbo Wilson?

Actually, IIRC, Dowding got somewhat gypped - he never made MRAF, just Air Chief Marshal. Made 1st Baron Dowding, though.

Yup, that's right, I'd forgotten about that. Time for a promotion then.
A lot of people in the Air Ministry were dissatisfied with his failure to stop the Blitz and used that to ease him out. Air Marshal Sholto Douglas seems to have been in involved in the plot to oust him, as does Douglas Bader, at least on the periphery.
I think he probably deserved more than a barony as well.

Stas Bush wrote:Russia can dump conserved tons of old equipment to a huge 10 million army of deceased Great Patriotic War soldiers. Other than that, anyone amassing a huge army in Hell seems unlikely. As far as I know, holding very old weapon dumps was not a practice in post-war NATO nations, and WWII German weaponry - the only other army to die on a considerable scale - is very much gone. The US could dump old WWII weapons, but there's not nearly enough WWII soldiers dead there.

You're forgetting that the majority of those that served in WWII have since passed away. If anything, they'll be more useful than those that died in WWII because they've been tortured for less time and had more life to pick up useful skills. Oh, and they're the ones lucky/good enough to have survived. Especially if they're restored to ideal health by the transition, as seems to happen.

As for the German soldiers of WWII, there'd be a number of right bastards such as the SS we wouldn't want to haul out of their torment, but most of them weren't Nazis. The average doughboy wasn't as bad sort. If Germany doesn't want to arm them, I'm sure somebody will.

Also, people in Hell are there for many many years. Have they not lost, um, combat experience? Really, do they just have the memories and skills at death time permanently conserved?

The samurai and spartan seem to have retained their skills; it shouldn't be a problem for more recent arrivals.

Which is why we don't give them any real authority. I mean, their best value is as Propaganda assets and also in mobilizing the dead armies of hell

Yes, their main usefulness is a-la Paulus. A propaganda talking head who can rally the people to his cause.

As for those deceased who survived WWII - as I understand, those people are conserved at age of death, meaning dead RKKA troops are all 18-22 youngsters full of energy, but the veterans are, well, 70-80-90 year old elderly.

Also, the NMT has plenty of work to do, there's a gigantic legion of dead SS-men who can now be trialled and, well, say, imprisoned for life.

Nobody would take a commander from a century ago (and that pretty much includes the First World War) and place them in command of modern troops. The whole how-and-why of how a modern army works is simply beyond their comprehension. A simple example, take an infantry division from World War One. It's basically a large group of riflemen. It's supply and logistic demands are minimal compared with its modern equivalent. I agree with the comments on Haig (who I always regard as being a most ill-treated and wrongly-maligned individual) but he's no more or less out of his depth handling a modern army that Gaius Julius Caesar. The only point running for him would be that he is at least familiar with the Industrial Revolution. There's been a pointer to this already (one included deliberately), the Samurai Ori and the Greek Aeneas. They were useful enough in Hell where their talents were comparable with those of the baldricks but as soon as the unit they were in was armed to modern standards, they became useless dead weight (in every sense of the phrase). Their only real value to us was to correct our history books and bring a sense of terror to lousy film directors.

However, behind the overt question of great leaders from the past brought forward is a covert and much more significant one. What exactly is going to be the relationship between the living and the dead? Once Hell has fallen, what will be the relationship between Earth and Hades? (We'll have to rename Hell because the place it was won't be the place it will be once there's been a regime change). Are living humans going to rule Hades? Or are the dead going to rule the place? How is all this going to impact upon our society (which was the original question that kicked this whole story off)? A simple example that Jade King hit on immediately. She's dead but still serving in the US Army. Who gets her pay? What happens to her pension? What about promotion and seniority? If she gets paid and promoted as a serving (if deceased) Army officer, why shouldn't Haig or any of the others. What about the burden this represents on living human society?

This leads to another question; at the moment, the majority of humans have united around the slogan "save our dead". But what happens when they're saved? The mobilization that's going on is wrecking the world economy and the post-war economic depression is going to be appalling. The shortage of equipment (the numbers of people who can be recruited isn't really that significant except for the Home Guard/USV type organizations; its the equipment for them that's critical) is already causing museums and storage depots to be looted. Remember it was the costs of defending the American colonies during the Seven Years War and attempts to recoup that cost that lead to the American Revolution. Will that happen again? Will living humans look at the price (in purely economic terms) they've paid for the liberation of Hell and turn around to demand that the dead pay their share of that cost. And how will the dead pay it?

Another interesting point, a moral one. How does all this change the philosophical distinction between being alive and being dead? After all, once Hell has fallen and become Hades (and is, presumably an acceptable place to exist - we'll forget about the fate of Heaven for the moment) hasn't this just kicked the props out from under opposition to euthanasia/assisted suicide/suicide whatever? After all, if life here is unbearable (say from pain resulting from disease), doesn't it make sense to die and go to Hades? In fact, couldn't death simply become another form of medical treatment?

Here's my first post on here, and it is about George Washington. He was a charismatic and capable leader and manager. He did lose 6 of the 9 battles he fought, but then one must consider what he often had to work with. On July 13, 1798, Washington was appointed by President John Adams to be Lieutenant General and Commander-in-chief of all armies raised or to be raised for service in a prospective war with France. He served as the senior officer of the United States Army between July 13, 1798 and December 14, 1799. He participated in the planning for a Provisional Army to meet any emergency that might arise, but did not take the field. He died on December 14, 1799 while still on duty as seniot officer of the US Army. He is the only former president to return to military service. And his time in rank as General of the Armies of the United States is dated from July 4 , 1976. So he has seniority in rank, as was mentioned, of 32 years right now. However, I also agree, why put these revived humans in command of anything? Propaganda and historical value, great. Now in the future of Hell/hades we will just have to see where Stuart takes us....

Death as medical treatment is just too funny.....

Death as medical treatment is just too funny.....

So long as you wake up somewhere painful!
I guess the disadvantage of being permanently stuck in Hades/Hell is another downside, but perhaps one that might in time be overcome.

Welcome to the site, Tom.

And not growing old is going to be tempting for quite a few.

After all, if life here is unbearable (say from pain resulting from disease), doesn't it make sense to die and go to Hades?

I've just realised that death may no longer be a way of escaping the taxman.

JN1 wrote:

After all, if life here is unbearable (say from pain resulting from disease), doesn't it make sense to die and go to Hades?

I've just realised that death may no longer be a way of escaping the taxman.

It still is. After all, death in Hell/Hades is forever. It's just slightly harder to pull off.

Another thought; Presumably, Yahweh was decididng who could come to heaven and who couldn't. What if he flips the switch, and our dead start going to heaven, only to be second-killed immediately upon arrival? No more 'second-chance' soldiers.

Stas Bush wrote:

As for those deceased who survived WWII - as I understand, those people are conserved at age of death, meaning dead RKKA troops are all 18-22 youngsters full of energy, but the veterans are, well, 70-80-90 year old elderly.

Given that we haven't seen any elderly people in Hell, I got other possibilities:
1) people are reborn in new bodies as they were at the point in life where they had the most "life energy," that is, as middle aged or young adults, or children in the case of those who died young.
2) or maybe the regeneration removes problems that come up in old age:weak bones, sagging flesh, failing organs, etc.; thus those who died in old age would have eternally young bodies.

One solution to the problem of humans committing suicide so they can escape Earthly problems in Hell is to simply have Hell descend into a monstrous war between various human factions once it's liberated, so that it remains an undesirable destination.

That's not at all unlikely, with 90 billion humans squeezed onto a land mass only slightly larger than Earth's present land mass. And with those sheer numbers, even if we arm certain factions with modern weapons, they can't necessarily keep a lid on it. Hell, with the human lack of fatigue, super-survivability, and healing factor in Hell, human wave attacks might be fairly effective even against machine-guns.

Darmalus wrote:

JN1 wrote:

After all, if life here is unbearable (say from pain resulting from disease), doesn't it make sense to die and go to Hades?

I've just realised that death may no longer be a way of escaping the taxman. :!:

It still is. After all, death in Hell/Hades is forever. It's just slightly harder to pull off.

I imagine it would eventually lead to the undead getting letters like this:

Dear John,

Our records indicate you owed $260,000 in back taxes at the time of your death. The total value of your assets and estates was $110,000 and was levied against your tax bill. As you died in 1992, you owe $381,052 in back taxes. Please make the check out to:

IRS Post-Mortem Tax Collection Division
Former Palace of Satan
City of Dis, 666

If unable to pay, you will be sent to THE MINES OF TARTARUS.

Sincerely,

The IRS