Originally posted by Deaghaidh
A question, why would the conspirators want to arm the very people they hired mercenaries to attack? It defies common sense.
Mr. Deaghaidh ,
Until Lt. Gen. Hartwell is questioned, we can only speculate, and even then there is no guarantee he will answer truthfully.
One theory is that this action was not the end-goal, but rather one step in a larger plan.
If the conspirators wanted to justify the use of large-scale military action, they would need the excuse of armed violence on a major scale. That requires arms on both sides. By providing arms to private militias in the WET, then attempting to assassinate WET leaders, this could be used as the flashpoint for igniting revolts and violence throughout the island, requiring intervention from the armed forces.
Or, if the end-goal was just to promote armed insurgency by the Topa against the government, the Topa would first need to have weapons, then they would need to be angered to the point of using them against the government. If this conspiracy had been successful, you tell me, would the Topa have seen our current government as unable or unwilling to protect them? Could they have been incited to violence or perhaps declaring their own autonomy and backing it up with armed resistance?
If you will note what has been revealed by the Mercenaries, that they were to "pretend" to be slain by the military officers, this poses an interesting scenario as well. Perhaps the goal was to arm the Topa, and others in the WET, to have some attack launched against them, then to have "heroic military officers" come in and save them by killing the attackers in order to secure WET loyalty to them.
It is clear that the assassination was staged, but whether the goal was simply to throw the WET into chaos and anti-government outrage or if it was to secure the loyalty of WET militias for a coup d'etat, is unknown.
Please notice, as well, Hartwell's statements trying to link the mercenaries to the Topa. You correctly identified that as ludicrous when he made that statement. His involvement in this affair is clear and documented. Now the question to ask is why he did this? And why would he try to place the blame back on the Topa?
I would welcome your thoughts on this.