Pro Aris et Pro Focis (P&S: New York City)

Honestly I don't know why -- there's not a particular thing I can put my finger on that makes me cheer against them.

I am kinda weirded out by the implication that being military or police means a character is sympathetic or likeable, it's true.

In any case, I don't mind -- like I say, I'm really enjoying this leg of the P&S millipede!


I don't know why you would find such a thing weird at all. The military and the police help defend us. I give them the benefit of the doubt.
 
I also think that a lot of the general disdain is how these characters get off relatively-lightly without any suffering (minus the dead Lieutenant). I want to see them suffering the same way the UK characters suffered. :p

None of the stereotypical "white americans survive and are awesome survivalists and shit" type bullshit. That you see from A. LOT. OF. THESE. TYPES. OF. STORIES.

Think im lying? read this book - it's CHOCK FULL of that "rar! survivalist!" type thing. I admit they do post examples of deconstructions of the theme.

Maybe that's it. (some of) the Characters being too sue-ish.

http://andromeda.rutgers.edu/~hbf/Books/WarStars.html
http://www.amazon.com/War-Stars-Superweapon-American-Imagination/dp/0195066928

Not in general in the West though.

Define "the west". as even in Europe, say Greece has a different history with its' military than Turkey. Same with Spain vs. France. Not to mention "Anglo" american countries' relations with their militaries as compared to "Latin" american countries.

Cops and soldiers are people like you and me except they have volunteered to put their lives at risk for others.

In an ideal world, yes. In our world, that may be true. That doesn't change certain cultural differences ("thin blue line" for example).

You want lots of dangerous people running around free in a world where law and order may not be effective? Imagine what would happen if these now heavily armed fellons were to rock up in a small town with maybe 3, or 4 cops at most. It's not a pleasant thought.
Would you like to have them running about in a world where you can't summon help on the phone?

Did I not just mention that a lot of those people were (in a LOT of cases) simply people placed in holding and not hardcore felons? And how I could personally end up in that sort of situation (not in New York, but say Chicago).

here, from wiki:

The Rikers Island complex, which consists of ten jails, holds local offenders who are awaiting trial and cannot afford or cannot obtain bail or were not given bail from a judge, those serving sentences of one year or less and those temporarily placed there pending transfer to another facility.[citation needed] Rikers Island is therefore a jail and not a prison, which typically holds offenders serving longer-term sentences.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rikers_Island#The_complex_and_its_facilities

Yeah. These seem like some real dangerous felons, people who didn't pay their traffic tickets, graffitti artists and those caught smoking weed ;)

Please excuse me for not wanting to be detained by a military governent and left to be nuked to kingdom-come if I fuck up on something and get jailed for an unpaid ticket or whatever.

Well to be frank 'boo hoo for you'. The world works by smaller numbers of people telling larger numbers of people what to do. In democratic societies the larger number get to chose who the small number are and the smaller number has to listen to their views.

Ahh, an appeal to tradition. Boo hoo for you, that isn't a good counter for my inborn desire to see the main characters suffer the same way other characters suffer in nuclear holocausts.

Hating a character because she shows a bit of backbone and strong leadership in an extreme situation does not IMVHO anyway make logical sense.

Well, look up some tvtroped articles. And how people react to some wrestling characters. Or character response in general, they tend to also be based off how the individuals respond to the characters - and that often comes from their inborn tendencies or experiences - experiences which I mentioned earlier on.

I take it you don't like my Vulcan pilot then? He's spent that entire spin-off telling his crew what to do (and he's military). :p

I dont think i got that far yet. Was this AFTER he and his friends shot those robbers and made it to the rump HQ of the remains of the US federal government?

I don't know why you would find such a thing weird at all. The military and the police help defend us. I give them the benefit of the doubt.

History suggests a good reason to be wary. In related news, I am pro Amendment II - that helps to decrease the need for military and police for 'defense'.
 
Last edited:

Tovarich

Banned
Not in general in the West though. Cops and soldiers are people like you and me except they have volunteered to put their lives at risk for others.
They haven't done a very good job in P&S-World though, have they?
Not considering the whole planet's just been blown up.
Rather, I think there's a case for saying the entire military had risked everybody else's lives, by gambling on building up their own strength and importance in a game of brinkmanship and dick-waving, and that ITTL they lost that bet....and so did everybody else!

JN1 said:
You want lots of dangerous people running around free in a world where law and order may not be effective? Imagine what would happen if these now heavily armed fellons were to rock up in a small town with maybe 3, or 4 cops at most. It's not a pleasant thought.
Would you like to have them running about in a world where you can't summon help on the phone?
It's wrong to demonise everybody who's been in prison to the point where it's suggested it's best to leave them locked-up to die.
Especially in the US, where the number of convicts is a whole 1% of the entire population, overwhelmingly black, where they've effectively used the judicial system to reintroduce racial slavery.
 
Last edited:
They haven't done a very good job in P&S-World though, have they?
Not considering the whole planet's just been blown up.
Rather, I think there's a case for saying the entire military had risked everybody else's lives, by gambling on building up their own strength and importance in a game of brinkmanship and dick-waving, and that ITTL they lost that bet....and so did everybody else!

It's wrong to demonise everybody who's been in prison to the point where it's suggested it's best to leave them locked-up to die.
Especially in the US, where the number of convicts is a whole 1% of the entire population, overwhelmingly black, where they've effectively used the judicial system to reintroduce racial slavery.

The civilian leadership starts the wars. The military just fights them in accordance with the directions and commands of civilian leadership. This war was started by the Soviet civilian leadership.

Your comment about our judicial system is terribly naive. "Judicial slavery"? Most people who are in prison are there for serious offenses, such as murder, rape, kidnapping, armed robbery, etc. Many of these convicts are career criminals, with multiple stints in prison behind them, not to mention time in jail, on probation, or suspended sentences. If you don't do the crime, you won't do the time. And I'd rather live in a country where violent criminals are locked up, than a country where, if you are attacked and try to defend yourself, you may go to prison, where your attacker merely receives a caution. Or if someone breaks into your house and you try to defend yourself, you may go to prison, and the home invader gets off with a slap on the wrist. Yes, we're talking the United Kingdom here, folks. No, thanks. I prefer our system and our Bill of Rights, especially our Second Amendment.
 
I dont think i got that far yet. Was this AFTER he and his friends shot those robbers and made it to the rump HQ of the remains of the US federal government?

Wrong aircraft crew. You're thinking of the Victor tanker Jack sent to America. I'm talking about the Vulcan crew with upwards of 900,000 to a million deaths on their consciences. ;)
 
Vulcan Crew

The Vulcan crew are an extension of the states power teo execute the states will. The crew on;y prosecuted a state sanctioned position in just the same way a police officer or indeed a nurse prospect a state sanctioned action.

The question is who is the state? Is it a democratically elected moral position or a politically defined historical stance?

Either way the crew are only an extension of a state sanctioned activity and as such they have no ownership of the death they have dispensed....And if you believe that to be a a morally justifiable position then perhaps Feb 21st 1984 was a good idea,

Personally I am just so pleased do be here to type these words
 

Tovarich

Banned
The civilian leadership starts the wars. The military just fights them in accordance with the directions and commands of civilian leadership. This war was started by the Soviet civilian leadership.
And I maintain that the underlying cause of this war was 40 years of NATO constantly poking the USSR in the chest and chanting "Come and have a go if you think you're hard enough!" like a drunk football hoolie!
Indeed, as the USSR we're talking about here was still run by the WWII generation (and "run by" does not just mean the Supreme Soviet), people so brutalised that it makes the North Africa & Italy experiences of my Granddad look like a picnic, it's like NATO was behaving as a stalker to a rape victim.

That said, however, I am happy to reassure you that my applying 'Class-Analysis' (as I think Revolutionincyberspace was doing too) to the positions of both the Police & Military as institutions in Western society is in no way meant to be an attack on soldiers and coppers as people doing a job (and predominantly working-class people at that!)
And when, for example, my then-toddler daughters went missing, the Police were the first people whose assistance I sought, and jolly grateful I was for it too!

I do think part of the difficulty we are all having here, is that we are trying to discuss events in a fiction and events that really happened as if they are one-and-the-same-thing, which of course they are not.

Otis R. Needleman said:
Your comment about our judicial system is terribly naive. "Judicial slavery"? Most people who are in prison are there for serious offenses, such as murder, rape, kidnapping, armed robbery, etc. Many of these convicts are career criminals, with multiple stints in prison behind them, not to mention time in jail, on probation, or suspended sentences. If you don't do the crime, you won't do the time. And I'd rather live in a country where violent criminals are locked up, than a country where, if you are attacked and try to defend yourself, you may go to prison, where your attacker merely receives a caution. Or if someone breaks into your house and you try to defend yourself, you may go to prison, and the home invader gets off with a slap on the wrist. Yes, we're talking the United Kingdom here, folks. No, thanks. I prefer our system and our Bill of Rights, especially our Second Amendment.

I'm not going to jump down your throat for accusing me of naivity here, because you've misread what I wrote (which is easily done, and I've done it myself many times.)
I didn't say "Judicial slavery", I said "Racial slavery".
Of course, the US Judiciary are major actors in this, so you may choose to come back at me again there.
If you do, maybe you will teach me something about reality in the US, it won't be the first time - I've written before how a post from Beauhooligan made me realise that imposing UK-style control of guns on the US is simply unfeasible, although the fact that Beau' also decried the idea that introducing US-style gun availability on the UK was in any way desirable made me much more receptive to what he was saying.
Unless you do came back here, though, I am still of the view that a hideous number of people are in prison for life in the US, overwhelmingly Black, and that they are there for things like having some drugs on them or a bit of shoplifting, because of the '3 strikes' rule.
US industry the gets a lifetime of their labour for free, which whilst I doubt is what Clinton had in mind (I think he was just being a populist arsehole) it is remains the real result.

Now with the above waffle in mind, I hope you'll not be upset by me explaining you're mistaken about the myth us Brits are unable to legally defend ourselves.
This is a creation of the UK print media, who are awful; every bit as populist and politically-biased as, eg, Fox News are renowned for being in the US.
You absolutely can defend yourself against intruders here, but what you cannot do is be a professional criminal yourself baiting a trap for people you owe money to and lay in wait before shooting a minor in the back whilst he's running away crying "No, no, please don't shoot!" (the Tony Martin case, where UK press deemed the professional criminal a hero because the kid he shot was a 'gypsy')
Nor can you catch a genuine burglar (however shitty, and this guy was! It's the Hussain case) after chasing him down the street, then send your brother back home to collect cricket bats before punishment-beating him into a coma and disabling him for life).
I know these would be equally illegal acts in the US!

If I were ever to injure somebody whilst defending myself, I wouldn't just expect to be arrested, I would want to be, because only then would I be awarded my legal rights (not to speak, have a lawyer, etc) whilst the police officers investigate - are they supposed to just take my word why the injury happened? What if I'm lying?
I think I have far more respect and understanding for police than the reactionary Right!
 
I am indeed regretting having mentioned my lack of enthusiasm for the protagonists in this P&S timeline. Sorry, everyone (who isn't actually into the current derailment).
 
And I maintain that the underlying cause of this war was 40 years of NATO constantly poking the USSR in the chest and chanting "Come and have a go if you think you're hard enough!" like a drunk football hoolie!
Indeed, as the USSR we're talking about here was still run by the WWII generation (and "run by" does not just mean the Supreme Soviet), people so brutalised that it makes the North Africa & Italy experiences of my Granddad look like a picnic, it's like NATO was behaving as a stalker to a rape victim.

That said, however, I am happy to reassure you that my applying 'Class-Analysis' (as I think Revolutionincyberspace was doing too) to the positions of both the Police & Military as institutions in Western society is in no way meant to be an attack on soldiers and coppers as people doing a job (and predominantly working-class people at that!)
And when, for example, my then-toddler daughters went missing, the Police were the first people whose assistance I sought, and jolly grateful I was for it too!

I do think part of the difficulty we are all having here, is that we are trying to discuss events in a fiction and events that really happened as if they are one-and-the-same-thing, which of course they are not.



I'm not going to jump down your throat for accusing me of naivity here, because you've misread what I wrote (which is easily done, and I've done it myself many times.)
I didn't say "Judicial slavery", I said "Racial slavery".
Of course, the US Judiciary are major actors in this, so you may choose to come back at me again there.
If you do, maybe you will teach me something about reality in the US, it won't be the first time - I've written before how a post from Beauhooligan made me realise that imposing UK-style control of guns on the US is simply unfeasible, although the fact that Beau' also decried the idea that introducing US-style gun availability on the UK was in any way desirable made me much more receptive to what he was saying.
Unless you do came back here, though, I am still of the view that a hideous number of people are in prison for life in the US, overwhelmingly Black, and that they are there for things like having some drugs on them or a bit of shoplifting, because of the '3 strikes' rule.
US industry the gets a lifetime of their labour for free, which whilst I doubt is what Clinton had in mind (I think he was just being a populist arsehole) it is remains the real result.

Now with the above waffle in mind, I hope you'll not be upset by me explaining you're mistaken about the myth us Brits are unable to legally defend ourselves.
This is a creation of the UK print media, who are awful; every bit as populist and politically-biased as, eg, Fox News are renowned for being in the US.
You absolutely can defend yourself against intruders here, but what you cannot do is be a professional criminal yourself baiting a trap for people you owe money to and lay in wait before shooting a minor in the back whilst he's running away crying "No, no, please don't shoot!" (the Tony Martin case, where UK press deemed the professional criminal a hero because the kid he shot was a 'gypsy')
Nor can you catch a genuine burglar (however shitty, and this guy was! It's the Hussain case) after chasing him down the street, then send your brother back home to collect cricket bats before punishment-beating him into a coma and disabling him for life).
I know these would be equally illegal acts in the US!

If I were ever to injure somebody whilst defending myself, I wouldn't just expect to be arrested, I would want to be, because only then would I be awarded my legal rights (not to speak, have a lawyer, etc) whilst the police officers investigate - are they supposed to just take my word why the injury happened? What if I'm lying?
I think I have far more respect and understanding for police than the reactionary Right!

Maintain what you will. NATO was a defensive alliance. If the Soviets, as you seem to say, were always being pushed around by NATO, what explains the NATO non-reaction to the Soviet crushing of the Hungarian rebellion in 1956, or the Soviet/Warsaw Pact crushing of the Czech moves toward liberalization in 1968?

Yes, the Soviet leadership at that time had been through WWII. They wanted to maintain a buffer zone against the West, at the expense of the captive nations. Going a bit further, it was always interesting to see the Soviets touting "Peace". To the Soviets, "Peace" meant the absence of opposition to Communism. Learned that during a summer's graduate course on the Communist Party many years ago, taught by a gentleman who'd been head of Czech TV until his defection.

Made a mistake and misread the term regarding slavery. While many are serving life sentences due to some states' three-strikes laws, American industry gets little, if any real benefit from those who actually work. In many states prisoners produce license plates. Prisoners will also work in the prison, and on farms that belong to the prison (in some states), doing farm work and certain maintenance activities. There is also UNICOR, run by the Federal prison system, where Federal inmates produce certain basic and low-tech items, such as calendars, furniture, etc., for government and military use. Nevertheless, most incarcerated have been through the justice system on multiple occasions - they keep committing crimes.

I hear you re the crime situation in the UK. I see certain stories from various UK news sources. The impression these stories give is that the UK is soft on crime and the police care more about the criminals than the victims. However, you live there and have told me that isn't correct. I can live with that, Heck, you can see the same types of stories from certain US media outlets.
 

Tovarich

Banned
Otis, I have to go and grab some food then do my nightshift now (it's just gone 10pm in the UK), but I think there's interesting discussions to be had here, so when I get home (and have had a snooze!) I'll set up a couple of threads in polchat so we can continue.
I'll repost our respective quotes from here to kick things off, then after that other members can join in too, and we won't be derailing this fiction.

Would that be ok with you?
I'll check here first before doing anything, just to be on the safe side.
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
Otis, I have to go and grab some food then do my nightshift now (it's just gone 10pm in the UK), but I think there's interesting discussions to be had here, so when I get home (and have had a snooze!) I'll set up a couple of threads in polchat so we can continue.
I'll repost our respective quotes from here to kick things off, then after that other members can join in too, and we won't be derailing this fiction.

Would that be ok with you?
I'll check here first before doing anything, just to be on the safe side.


This is an excellent idea.

Please do not further derail this thread.
 
(Trying to stay at least somewhat on-topic here; I'll only address the story-specific parts of the post - JQ)

I also think that a lot of the general disdain is how these characters get off relatively-lightly without any suffering (minus the dead Lieutenant). I want to see them suffering the same way the UK characters suffered. :p

Eh...the attack's just happened. Give it time.

This is a criticism that attends in the "The Day After vs. Threads" debate, too. What the debate fails to recognize is that a nuclear holocaust in the USA and UK are two different animals, not the least reason for which is the immense disparity in size between the two. On a landmass the size of the continental U.S., there are likely to be areas that, other than the initial fallout, don't suffer huge, immediate, crippling impact from the war. On the Isle of Britain, a similar scenario is Not Bloody Likely.

None of the stereotypical "white americans survive and are awesome survivalists and shit" type bullshit. That you see from A. LOT. OF. THESE. TYPES. OF. STORIES.

I think we do well to take the story (any story really, not just this one) as it's offered, and not criticize it because it didn't go how we wish it had went.

If you want to critique it that's fine, but it's silly to expect an author to conform his/her story to your expectations. Also, there really isn't much indication of what the race or ethnicity of most of the participants is.

Did I not just mention that a lot of those people were (in a LOT of cases) simply people placed in holding and not hardcore felons? And how I could personally end up in that sort of situation (not in New York, but say Chicago).

(...)

Yeah. These seem like some real dangerous felons, people who didn't pay their traffic tickets, graffitti artists and those caught smoking weed ;)

The story follows a guy who's rightfully in for his role in a carjacking (though not convicted yet, thanks to the Omniscient Narrator we know he's guilty). He also murdered people to get out of Rikers. He also had just been released after a two-year stint for assault. Again, not a nice guy. Not even close.

The Latin Kings and Gangster Disciples are also explicitly mentioned in one of the Rikers scenes. These are also not nice people. Sympathy supplies are...limited.

Did they, or the others at Rikers "deserve" what happened to them? Probably not. That's a big horrific part of a general nuclear war. Most of those who die would be utterly innocent (or not-so-innocent) non-combatants.
 
Otis, I have to go and grab some food then do my nightshift now (it's just gone 10pm in the UK), but I think there's interesting discussions to be had here, so when I get home (and have had a snooze!) I'll set up a couple of threads in polchat so we can continue.
I'll repost our respective quotes from here to kick things off, then after that other members can join in too, and we won't be derailing this fiction.

Would that be ok with you?
I'll check here first before doing anything, just to be on the safe side.

Okay. Can do that.
 
This TL is missing...Lennie Briscoe from Law and Order.

Seriously, how could you not have an appearance by Briscoe?!?
 
Top