Unrestricted Warfare?

[Ultranobia]

Philosophy of Lao N'Zole

Thoughts of Restricted Warfare:
The Chronicles of Victory are written not by those who find excuses to loose during their campaigns,
it is rather penned by those who explore the many myriad paths to victory that lie before any military commander.

[Fatatatutti]

If my people were extinct, I'd be extinct too.

Ultimately yes, but there would, of course, be period of in which doom was merely inevitable and not yet manifest. During which you would have time to reflect on the choices you've made, and how they led the innocent lives, who were entirely dependant upon you for their defense, to certain slaughter.

I'd sleep peacefully, knowing that I didn't slaughter one group of innocents to protect another.

-- Gen. Castro-Stalina

[Akosha]

If my people were extinct, I'd be extinct too.

Ultimately yes, but there would, of course, be period of in which doom was merely inevitable and not yet manifest. During which you would have time to reflect on the choices you've made, and how they led the innocent lives, who were entirely dependant upon you for their defense, to certain slaughter.

I'd sleep peacefully, knowing that I didn't slaughter one group of innocents to protect another.

-- Gen. Castro-Stalina

Congratulations, all of your holdings shall henceforth belong to someone that will. By not stoping them you have solidified their belief that such brutal tactics work, and encouraged them to conquer others. Alternatively knowledge of terrible and certain retribution has a track record of preventing these sort of weapons from being used in the first place. How many must die for your pacifism?

[Goldsaver]

What is your nation's definition of unrestricted warfare?
When one or more sides have lost all honor so that they stoop to Weapons of Mass Destruction.

Are there any circumstances wherein it is not allowed?
Yes; All circumstances.
Conversely...

Are there any circumstances wherein it is considered appropriate?
No.

[Fatatatutti]

Congratulations, all of your holdings shall henceforth belong to someone that will. By not stoping them you have solidified their belief that such brutal tactics work, and encouraged them to conquer others. Alternatively knowledge of terrible and certain retribution has a track record of preventing these sort of weapons from being used in the first place. How many must die for your pacifism?

On the contrary, Fatatatutti stands as proof that a nation can be free without stooping to thuggery.

-- Gen. Castro-Stalina

[Akosha]

Congratulations, all of your holdings shall henceforth belong to someone that will. By not stoping them you have solidified their belief that such brutal tactics work, and encouraged them to conquer others. Alternatively knowledge of terrible and certain retribution has a track record of preventing these sort of weapons from being used in the first place. How many must die for your pacifism?

On the contrary, Fatatatutti stands as proof that a nation can be free without stooping to thuggery.

-- Gen. Castro-Stalina

Yeah... fantasy is fun.

[Ewa beach]

Unrestricted warfare? Well, there's no such thing as "restricted warfare" in Cervia, so that should answer your question.

~ General Williams Murphy

[Augarundus]

The Augarian policy is; anything goes to achieve victory. Innocents needn't be harmed, but if they're in the way of the objective... then they sacrifice their status as civilians.

There are no restrictions on warfare, so long as it is deemed necessary for the achievement of an objective.

[RoyalSocializ]

anything goes in warfare, if you don't use trickery then the your enemy will.

[Skibereen]

What is your nation's definition of unrestricted warfare?


Are there any circumstances wherein it is not allowed?

Conversely...

Are there any circumstances wherein it is considered appropriate?



For the Commonwealth, unrestricted warfare is defined as:"any warfare utilizing Weapons of Mass Destruction, and/or authorizing the targeting of non-combatants in addition to combatants." (combatants are individuals who are associated directly with a combat force, or who have taken arms for one side or the other)

The Commonwealth generally prohibits it's military from engaging in Unrestricted Warfare. It is considered dishonorable to kill someone who does not intend to harm or kill you. (those who provide service to those who do are fair game, ie. medics/engineers/etc.)

Furthermore, the use of weapons that devastate the environment as well as the OpFor is classified as Unrestricted Warfare, and therefore prohibited. It is best to preserve infrastructure so that, at the very least, you can use it against your enemy.

That said...

If faced with a foe who clearly will fight to the last soldier, and against foes who enlist their entire society in the business of war...unrestricted warfare may be authorized. (classified as "intractable")

For example, if faced by an enemy such as the Zerg of the human game Starcraft...our policy would allow unrestricted warfare. We would target any installation, and utilize maximum force possible. If necessary, we would even be willing to wage nuclear warfare until the dirt was glowing.

Unrestricted Warfare is just that. Absolutely all available hostility is expected to be brought to bear. Skibereen has engaged in a Modern Unrestricted only once. Unrestricted Warfare is always Reciprocal--Skibereen will never initiate such an option. Once engaged in a position where Unrestricted warfare is allowed the goals change for the Military from whatever the primary goal had been, to Genocide and Cultural extermination. The focus will usuall shift to killing as many civilians as quickly as possible, as well as destroying all known culturally significant sites. BCN(Biological/Chemical/Nuclear) options become open and expected to be used in concert.

The idea of unrestricted war is not a popular one given the extensive training in the IFAF for inflicting as few civilian casualties as possible.

[Satirius]

The only restrictions to Satirian warfare are the goals. If we want to conquer a nation, we expect to gain resources, labor, and technology, something that would cease to exist were we to bomb the whole country to the ground. Of course, if the nation was that far behind that it would be more effective to replace everything with Satirian infrastructure, carpet bombings and shelling shall commence unrestricted.

"Unrestricted warfare" in the sense that anything is game under any circumstance is initiated when large-scale NBC warfare commences. Then, we consider anything the enemy gets justified revenge.

[Nativian Islands]

Under no circumstances would any Fatatatutian commander ever use weapons of mass destruction, even if we had any. Anybody with such a lack of honour woulfd never get to a position of command.

-- Gen. Castro-Stalina

Really? So if a nation was invading your people, and destroying everything, literally driving your people to extinction, and you did have WMDs, you still would not use them?

We back up Fatatutti in that weapons of masss destruction are inhumane to be used on anyone, even if they use them on us, we find it abhorrent to use such cruelty on them. Two wrongs do not make a right.

[L3 Communications]

"Unrestricted Warfare"; if it gets the job done, we'll do it. Simple.

^ This.

Also, hi. ^-^

[Person012345]

We are a pacifistic nation and attempt to avoid war as much as possible. If we do happen to get involved in a war, protection of civilians on both sides would be our top priority. We will never engage in unrestricted warfare. We would use WMD's on enemy troops as normal, but we would never deliberately destroy civilian areas. Factories and other buildings that provide supplies are ok targets, but we wouldn't destroy them by tossing a load of bombs over the area and destroy everything. We would only target them if we can be relatively sure we will hit it with minimal destruction to the surrounding area.

To us unrestricted warfare = no restrictions on targeting and no limit to destruction inflicted upon the enemy.

[Lesser fulma]

What is your nation's definition of unrestricted warfare?
the rebulic defintion is we attack all of the nations we are at war with. so if you are there aillies we atttack you. but never non-combatants. there is one more thing, we most be in a state of totel war.

[Ermarian]

We have extremely strict rules of engagement, particularly pertaining to civilians and the environment. Our commanders need to file impact statements before so much as dropping a bomb; as for weapons of mass destruction, they're just not researched. Our defense research focuses on actual defensive capability such as missile shields.