# Urban Warfare Doctrine **URL:** \ **Category:** General\ **Tags:** military, war\ **Created:** [October 17, 2023, 6:36pm UTC](https://eldraeverse.discourse.group/t/urban-warfare-doctrine/639 "2023-10-17T18:36:45Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 9\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![avatar](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/free1/user_avatar/eldraeverse.discourse.group/avatar/32/2_2.png) [@avatar](https://eldraeverse.discourse.group/u/avatar)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2023, 6:36pm UTC](https://eldraeverse.discourse.group/t/urban-warfare-doctrine/639/1 "2023-10-17T18:36:45Z")
So, as is perhaps inevitable at the moment, I’ve been thinking about Imperial doctrine for _military operations on urban terrain_, which at the moment is a rather undetailed spot. Except for the part that simply reads _don’t do military operations on urban terrain; it fucking sucks_. But while that works fine for _teirhain_, in which gentlesophs can come to an agreement to fight elsewhere with less collateral, and while the question rarely even comes up in _seredhain_ insofar as playing by those rules offers you any number of ways to short-circuit the issue, that does leave _zakhrehain_, when the barbarians are going to _make_ you engage in city-fighting and the “only way to be sure” is off the table. The Legions are going to need a doctrine for that, however much they might prefer not to. I’m still thinking about this (and welcome your thoughts), but I have a terrible suspicion that it may end up looking uncomfortably like turian doctrine for this scenario. For those not familiar with more obscure points of _Mass Effect_ lore, it goes like this: > Turian wars are often marked by citizen resistance. Most turian families keep small arms in > their homes and take basic training courses that include instruction on how to create simple > anti-vehicle explosive devices. To suppress citizen militias, the Turian Hierarchy makes use of > execution squads known as hastatim. First, “safe camps” are established in cities to incentivize > surrender. Next, hastatim soldiers are deployed door-to-door; anyone who refuses to be transported to a safe camp or demonstrates hostile intent will be shot. Hastatim burial units then > retrieve and cremate the bodies. This approach is necessary because without the safe camps, > no turian would ever surrender, and without the hastatim, it would take years for a population > to be pacified. If you have to separate the sheep from the goats hiding among them, are you really doing anyone any favors by not doing it by the most effective and efficient route? As we’ve all learned painfully over many years, if you half-ass this job, the end result can be prolonging the whole mess for years and more. ---
**Author:** ![Maximilian\_Crichton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e8c25b/32.png) [@Maximilian\_Crichton](https://eldraeverse.discourse.group/u/Maximilian_Crichton)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2023, 2:22am UTC](https://eldraeverse.discourse.group/t/urban-warfare-doctrine/639/2 "2023-10-18T02:22:27Z")
Depends. How much smart dust are you willing to throw into said urban area? The answer may look less like legions going door to door and shooting, and more like a swarm of locusts daring anyone to twitch a finger. ---
**Author:** ![avatar](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/free1/user_avatar/eldraeverse.discourse.group/avatar/32/2_2.png) [@avatar](https://eldraeverse.discourse.group/u/avatar)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2023, 7:54pm UTC](https://eldraeverse.discourse.group/t/urban-warfare-doctrine/639/3 "2023-10-18T19:54:11Z")
This I had considered. But the problem with surveillance dust, as with all free-range nanosystems and microsystems, is that they’re appallingly vulnerable to antinanitic phlegm, and simple heat in sufficient quantity, both available to the mid and in the case of the latter, even low-tech. [Which is to say, a special case of the reason that all military technology has not been replaced by “Send in the goo!”] Which is not to say that it isn’t useful in some related scenarios - as has been related, their [occupation/peacekeeping doctrine](https://eldraeverse.com/2018/08/28/pacem-appellant/) goes heavy on surveillance dust as the sharp eye behind the big stick. But that’s in an area that’s already been cleared out, cleaned up, and pacified. You flood your generic Suspicious Enemy-Occupied Urban Area with it without benefit of that, you’re going to get back a map all raggedy with false positives and negatives both, which since you aren’t doing _seredhain_ you can’t simply KEW to a comfortable level of certainty. * * * Also, I’m thinking of this in terms of doctrine that would have started evolving a long time before that tech existed, even if I failed to mention that point. 😅 ---
**Author:** ![JHPrime](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/free1/user_avatar/eldraeverse.discourse.group/jhprime/32/54_2.png) [@JHPrime](https://eldraeverse.discourse.group/u/JHPrime)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2023, 1:30am UTC](https://eldraeverse.discourse.group/t/urban-warfare-doctrine/639/4 "2023-10-19T01:30:35Z")
Well, one of the urban doctrine problems I can see is the distinction between “civilian who declines to cooperate with foreign military” and “ex-civilian, now combatant, who has decided to participate in asymmetric warfare” and the problem of the two not being distinguishable. Hiding within the population is, in-universe, an allowed tactic under the Ley accords (spies, assassins, and saboteurs being granted protection as combatants). So I think there’s a good argument that even in a teirhain you’d still need to develop doctrine to conduct some manner of military operations (or military policing operations) to find said spies, assassins, and saboteurs. ---
**Author:** ![JHPrime](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/free1/user_avatar/eldraeverse.discourse.group/jhprime/32/54_2.png) [@JHPrime](https://eldraeverse.discourse.group/u/JHPrime)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2023, 1:36am UTC](https://eldraeverse.discourse.group/t/urban-warfare-doctrine/639/5 "2023-10-19T01:36:18Z")
Ethics-wise, I think the main objection in-universe to the Turian doctrine would be the removal of civilians from their homes - spontaneous resistance movements are military forces and are legitimate targets. So, given that this is a zakhrehain, what are the exact rules in play? Would the Empire believe the civilians in soon-to-be occupied territories are sufficiently threatening that the right to defend self and others trumps their right to property? ---
**Author:** ![Scott\_Kenny](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/free1/user_avatar/eldraeverse.discourse.group/scott_kenny/32/226_2.png) [@Scott\_Kenny](https://eldraeverse.discourse.group/u/Scott_Kenny)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2023, 5:32pm UTC](https://eldraeverse.discourse.group/t/urban-warfare-doctrine/639/6 "2023-10-19T17:32:13Z")
I suspect that it would look a lot like Imperial peacekeeping efforts. Lots of smart dust (and larger recon drones), many many combat drones, and probably a bunch of those special ops disposable soldier-shells for the actual sentients needed to wrangle the drones. ---
**Author:** ![avatar](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/free1/user_avatar/eldraeverse.discourse.group/avatar/32/2_2.png) [@avatar](https://eldraeverse.discourse.group/u/avatar)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2023, 5:57pm UTC](https://eldraeverse.discourse.group/t/urban-warfare-doctrine/639/7 "2023-10-19T17:57:54Z")
> [@JHPrime](#): > > So, given that this is a zakhrehain, what are the exact rules in play? Hrm. It gets rather difficult to generalize because a _zakhrehain_ is probably the least defined of the types of war. Leaving aside flower wars and pest control, the defining characteristic of a _zakhrehain_ is simply that it’s not a _teirhain_. To be specific, the universally applicable part of the Ley Accords is only chapter one, on forbidden instruments of regrettable necessity. Chapters II-XVI, the Conventions of Galactic Warfare, are a purely reciprocal treaty (and one which in any case binds only those who are signatories to it, or who make a point of announcing at the opening of hostilities that they intend to abide by it). Those chapters are essentially identical to the Empire’s Conventions of Civilized Warfare, which are what define a _teirhain_. [Summary here](https://eldraeverse.com/2012/07/25/trope-a-day-the-laws-and-customs-of-war/), for anyone who might need one; there are certain other customs and attachments that Imperial generals, in particular, attach to it such as offering the opportunity to avoid city fighting altogether, as in [Civilized Warfare | The Associated Worlds (eldraeverse.com)](https://eldraeverse.com/2014/04/06/civilized-warfare/), to avoid “any unnecessary effusion of blood”. _Technically_, if you aren’t fighting according to the Conventions of Civilized Warfare, you’ve left just about everything on the table for your opponent, from fighting by the conventions _anyway_ through to total war. But while that’s permissible, the Empire has its own Conventions of Uncivilized Warfare, which it tends to stick to even if a lot of the details are left up to “Warmain’s discretion”. Most of the variations from the CCW fall into the categories of “obviously we can’t trust the enemy to keep their word” (so, not going to see the above type of gentlesoph’s agreements, and parole is off the table, for example) and “ungentlesophly but expedient” (performing static analysis on prisoners’ mind-states - which doesn’t actually harm them, note - is allowed, for example, as are strategic strikes to induce surrender in extreme cases). In terms of reciprocity and where it gets ugly to our sensibilities, on the other hand, is largely a matter of quarter. Some of this is fairly direct: if you’re in the habit of booby-trapping corpses and/or of having your wounded attack the medicos, you needn’t expect medical courtesies. Less directly, under _zakhrehain_ rules, when fighting people whose practices involve the routine abuse of prisoners of war, for example, it is considered appropriate reciprocity simply not to _take_ any. Likewise, when dealing with the atrocity-as-policy mob, the IL officially considers it rather pointless to offer quarter to people whom it will only have to go to the time and trouble of formally court-martialing and executing later on. [This last policy is often applied at the unit level, when appropriate.] (Of course, it might also be argued that this isn’t a change in the rules, technically. The Empire’s legal interpretation of the Conventions of Civilized Warfare is clear; _soldiers_ [including partisans] are entitled to quarter and honorable surrender. _Brigands_ are not. Anyone who abuses prisoners, commits atrocities against civilians, etc., is _ipso facto_, a brigand subject to summary execution.) * * * > [@JHPrime](#): > > spies, assassins, and saboteurs being granted protection as combatants Taking a brief note here to clarify that said spies, assassins and saboteurs are only protected as long as they’re operating against legitimate military targets, and while hiding among the population is protected insofar as it’s the means of the profession, taking hostages, using civilians as shields, etc. is _not_. tl;dr Legitimizing these is acknowledging that, well, everybody does it even if they officially pretend not to, but civilized standards must be upheld even in ungentlemanly warfare. * * * A thing worth noting at this point, considering [Civilized Warfare | The Associated Worlds (eldraeverse.com)](https://eldraeverse.com/2014/04/06/civilized-warfare/) again, is just how much these policies depend on **reputation**. The Empire has spent a lot of time establishing its reputation in various areas, and most specifically that it **always** keeps its word. Even when it’s difficult or expensive, even when it’s not expedient, and yes, even when it **really** doesn’t want to. Even if you’re at war with them, you can still take that promise to the bank. The Lannisters only _wish_ they had this much of a rep for always paying their debts. I mention this as a preeamble, because it’s relevant to the ethics here: > [@JHPrime](#): > > Would the Empire believe the civilians in soon-to-be occupied territories are sufficiently threatening that the right to defend self and others trumps their right to property? When they say “[Your personal freedoms and property rights will be respected](https://eldraeverse.com/2012/07/01/we-hope-you-enjoy-your-conquest/),” they mean every word. In hypothetically executing on this doctrine, your property absolutely will be protected and returned to you and you will be entirely safe [from them] in the course of transit to and a hopefully brief stay in the designated safe camp, followed by a return to your home. And their reputation absolutely backs that up, even when they’re dealing with people they really, really loathe. It’s not intended to be a displacement, it’s intended to be an expedient way of sorting through the categories of “brigand” (who become ingloriously dead), “partisan” (who achieve either death in battle or the opportunity to surrender honorably and become prisoners of war), and “civilian” (who get an admittedly imperfectly comfortable vacation at Imperial expense) without turning it into an impossibly prolonged urban shitfest that’s going to turn a lot of the third category (and their homes) into collateral damage, which no-one should want. The pitch to those in the category of > [@JHPrime](#): > > “civilian who declines to cooperate with foreign military” is along the lines of “Look, you know us, or you ought to. You know our reputation. You know that we would be, within the strictures of the Ley Accords, permitted to clean up this mess by turning the entire goddamn city into a lechatelierite puddle. But we’re trying, Ringo. We’re trying _real hard_ to be the shepherd.” ---
**Author:** ![avatar](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/free1/user_avatar/eldraeverse.discourse.group/avatar/32/2_2.png) [@avatar](https://eldraeverse.discourse.group/u/avatar)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2023, 5:19pm UTC](https://eldraeverse.discourse.group/t/urban-warfare-doctrine/639/8 "2023-10-20T17:19:48Z")
(Of course, all that said, a large part of _any_ IL force is the many many combat drones.) ---
**Author:** ![zakueins](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/free1/user_avatar/eldraeverse.discourse.group/zakueins/32/65_2.png) [@zakueins](https://eldraeverse.discourse.group/u/zakueins)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2023, 3:04pm UTC](https://eldraeverse.discourse.group/t/urban-warfare-doctrine/639/9 "2023-10-28T15:04:34Z")
I can see a _form_ of leniency from absolute summarily execution in some circumstances. This leniency is on the basis of the same Imperial honor that causes them to pay all debts. “You thought that our kindness and mercy would be shields against your most heinous acts. You didn’t realize that they were the hangman’s noose for you. You’re going to face a trial. Be allowed to defend yourself. And march up the scaffold all the same, because there is _no_ way you can prove otherwise.” > [@avatar](#): > > In terms of reciprocity and where it gets ugly to our sensibilities, on the other hand, is largely a matter of quarter. Some of this is fairly direct: if you’re in the habit of booby-trapping corpses and/or of having your wounded attack the medicos, you needn’t expect medical courtesies. Less directly, under _zakhrehain_ rules, when fighting people whose practices involve the routine abuse of prisoners of war, for example, it is considered appropriate reciprocity simply not to _take_ any. Likewise, when dealing with the atrocity-as-policy mob, the IL officially considers it rather pointless to offer quarter to people whom it will only have to go to the time and trouble of formally court-martialing and executing later on. [This last policy is often applied at the unit level, when appropriate.] > > (Of course, it might also be argued that this isn’t a change in the rules, technically. The Empire’s legal interpretation of the Conventions of Civilized Warfare is clear; _soldiers_ [including partisans] are entitled to quarter and honorable surrender. _Brigands_ are not. Anyone who abuses prisoners, commits atrocities against civilians, etc., is _ipso facto_, a brigand subject to summary execution.)