Curia Hostilia - Consulate of Crassus/Pictor

[Junius]

If we were to undertake such an expedition, I would require to see a complete strategic plan on how the Consuls hope to proceed during their campaign. Unlike the last time both Consuls were in the field, this would be an offensive war, and as such, we can dictate where we strike, where we do battle and when we do it. For now, I propose the following law.

1. A Spy shall be sent to Cisalpine Gaul to discover the strength of the Gallic tribes in that area.

2. Based on the spy's report, a Senator shall be appointed alongside the Consuls to draw up a plan of action.

My reasons for proposing a Senator to draw up a plan would be to act as a balancing act between the two Consuls. The Consuls would wish to win glory for themselves, as it should be, but that must be balanced with the prudence that only a third, neutral voice can deliver.

[Xavier Dragnesi]

"Your proposal is well thought out and reasonable. I support it."

[Lord Kal]

Crassus leapt up in a fit of agitation.

No, no, no, that is nonsense! The Gauls can still react to our plans, they will not sit idly by and let us carry out any plan! The two consuls must devise a strategy, and be prepared to deviate from it if the situation demands! Senators, this intrusion into what are entirely military matters is nothing but paranoia!

Suddenly calming, Crassus sunk down into his seat. It was obvious to any observer that his mind was working and concocting something, as he continued to stare coldly into space, oblivious to the bickering around him.

[Junius]

Consul, I do not wish to descend to petty slandering, but I find it odd that a Consul, who would most likely lead this expedition, would refuse to allow the Senate to have a say in how it would operate. I must insist that we have a neutral third party voice to help devise a plan of attack, for the reason I have stipulated. I understand that we should have no say in tactical, battlefield matters, and that is entirely correct, but I feel we should have, at the very least, a say in coming up with a plan to bring to the Senate floor to enable this operation to proceed. Can you voice any objection to the Senate wanting to protect her soldiers, her people, and allow her to broaden her borders in an entirely agreeable fashion?

[chaplain118]

This sounds to me, like sending a spy to report on a consul's allegiance to Rome while in the field of battle. Do we not trust our generals at all?

ooc: Soviet political commissar system anyone?

[Gaius Julius Civilis]

'Tis as always unwise to come between Crassus and his prey. In that respect he is not unlike an Eagle, proud and unstoppable! I think I might start calling you Aquila.

However, Macerinus has a point. You are both talented and highly ambitious. You will both want to fight the decisive battle in the campaign and gain the glory that comes with it. The campaign plan must be approved by an impartial party.

[Raglan]

ah but who in Rome is impartial?

Senators it seems to me that we have all argreed upon the action, to first look at the area and then, if not to heavily defended, take the area swiftly.

perhaps in this case it would be of use to appoint a tribune as the third person. He would after all be of lesser rank than the consuls, but with the tribunes priveledge of veto, perhaps a suitable solution....

Primus Marcellinus sits down watching the assembled senators think his suggestion over.

[stormer]

I oppose that, why does it have to be a tribune? I say it should be a privatus.

OOC:- Shall we change the law on Pontifex maximus? because in reality, whoever was pontif, stayed pontiff until he died.

[chaplain118]

I still find it an uncomfortable notion, sending a spy after our own consuls. The reasonings will have to be good.

[Junius]

There is impartiality in the fact of deciding who gets which command, or how we should approach a campaign. One Consul, looking to claim the glory for himself, would advocate that he would lead the main attack, and the other would of course object, putting himself forward. if we had a Senator, one who would not benefit from either action, but would only gain a benefit as a citizen of Rome, would look to minimise casualities and have both armies work in the interests of the Republic first and foremost. The Senator would act as an arbiter between the two Consuls. If both Consuls want to work in the interests of the Republic, why should they have any grounds for objection?

This is no spy. This is an honoured Senator, appointed by the Senate, to act as a balancing influence over the Consuls, possibly too hasty to attack, so that may gain the greater part of the glory. How is that a spy?

[Gaius Julius Civilis]

"The Tribune is not allowed to leave Rome, so he would be among the poorest choices to lead our armies in the field. I say we let our two consuls lead the invasion and have the Praetor Urbanus or the Censor (or perhaps a Princeps Senatus) take over the day to day leadership of the Senate."

OOC for the Dutch/Belgian senators *childish alert*: hehe, Urbanus

[stormer]

EWdit:- don't mind this

[Junius]

I want to make clear that this position would not be one of tactical command. It would only be a strategic planner, giving a third voice, one which would have no glory to claim from any action, therefore he would advocate the must prudent, logical and best option for Rome, and not for his personal glory.

[chaplain118]

Regardless of tactical command, it adds an element of distrust within the army. It is as if the Senate doesn't believe the consuls can do the jobs they were elected to do and feels the need to send someone else to direct them.

[stormer]

mto direct them, but help them to not lose unnessecary lives

[Ozy]

Senators, I only wish to say that I had already made a report on the enemy's forces, positions and possible intentions, based on scouts I sent when I was in the border. If any of you wish to read it, ask the scribe and he shall let you see (ooc: its on post 29 of this thread, that is, unless we have advanced the turn now, then it will be obsolete...).

As for your concern, Macerinus, I had already proposed that Consul Crassus took the main force, being the most experience commander, and advanced to Arretium to stop the main Gallic army, a plan I stick with today. The Gaul settlements in the border have a practically negligible garrison, so once their field armies are destroyed, the conquest of Cisalpine Gauls should be swift and easy. However, I should accept my colleague's invitation and make the plan for the campaign. If we are to present our plan to the senate, I have no objections, but I cannot speak for my Coconsul, or any other members of the senate who would oppose.

[Lord Kal]

I have no problems about presenting our plan to the Senate, but to send two experienced generals into the field and then hand over the strategic planning to a mere scribe is absolute lunacy. We had agreed in the past that Consuls were given objectives and boundaries and were given freedom to achieve them, and it has brought us results. No tactical interference? Why, as if we generals were mere tactical tools you bring out to fight one battle! Strategy allows us to win a battle before the first stone is thrown, and to hand this entire branch of military operation over to a man who knows nothing of military matters is just insanity.

Of course, if you want to bring someone out as a consultant, I am sure that though the great Ahenobarbus has retired, he would be happy to consult with us over our plan of attack. He was always of sound judgement, and he has a military mind to boot, of that we can be assured.

[Snowball]

Marcus rose, this bickering was too much.

To interfere with the consuls in war is not the way we have done things in the past.

We must give them objectives, resources to achieve those objectives. And then leave them well enough alone, so they can do their job and achieve the objectives!

For us to sit here in Rome and dictate the detail planning of the campaign is foolish. Let the Consuls do their jobs!

[Raglan]

Senators, the tribune speaks sense. The issue we seem to have is NOT that the consuls will do there job, but a what if they superinced their authority or disagree on the methods to achieve this goal.

i argued before for the third person,but i feel now that it is creating more problems than it is solving, if we do not trust the consuls to do their job then why did we elect them?

senators the consuls are grown men, instead of arguing like children we should place pur faith in them and allow them to prove it right. They are well aware of the price of any exceding of the imperium granted them, as well as the political price of failure.

Neither of which i feel are likely IF we grant them our trust.

SO senators let us stop this bickering and begin to plan the conquest, i'm sure the consuls have some ideas concerning this.

[Xavier Dragnesi]

OOC: I'm quite sure Snowball is Praetor, he just hasn't changed his sig.

"It is not that we cannot trust the Consuls with their job. It is merely that this is the first ever fully offensive war that Rome has fought against a foreign enemy. In previous wars, nations had sent armies into our lands, threatened our cities, and we had to defend against them, and to take away their ability to fight us by conquering their cities. However, here, the Gauls had merely posted a raiding party on the border. They had not truly started aggression.

Since our incursion into Cisalpine Gaul is to result in a fully fledged invasion of those lands, we must plan and make sure that the Consuls know what they are doing every step of the way, and should one plan fail, then they have another to fall back upon."