- Joined
- Jul 10, 2017
It's a "Fleet in Being"I was listening to a naval historian who said something along the lines of “if just the threat of launching a battleship is enough to keep the enemy ships away, then save the oil”.
No need to force a battle you don’t have to. I appreciate Null being frugal here.
Probably the clearest example of this in history is the German Battleship Tirpitz during WW2. She was Bismarck's sister. She was almost utterly useless spending most of the war hiding in a fjord in Norway. At least those points when she wasn't being repaired. She had no appreciable combat record whatsoever. BUT She was arguably the most effective Battleship of WW2. Just the threat of her leaving her Fjord and breaking out into the Atlantic forced the Royal Navy and later the American's to commit massive Naval Resources that could be better used elsewhere, to guard against her. Throughout 1941 and '42. The British had to keep several of their newest Battleships on station. The US had to keep it's then brand new State of the Art Fast Battleships in the Atlantic when they were desperately needed in the Pacific. Many of the US's top end ships were commited to the babysitting mission. The USS North Carolina, South Dakota, Iowa, Washington and Massachusetts all took turns. When people ask "Why were there no US Battleships at Midway?" There ya go.
Just by existing the Kiwi Legal Fund changes the equation. It's no longer just angry assholes on the internet. We're now Angry Assholes with Lawyers. And what Epik did really was indefensible.
And no, Null is not going to continue suing Epik. This was clearly a settlement based on a very scary demand letter. Epik's lawyers had enough sense to look at what they said and did and tell them "Issue the retraction he wants NOW!" What we do not know, and what Null is unlikely to say, is what if anything else was included in Epik's settlement? Communications regarding who or where they came up with the claims maybe?