We're in agreement here, no? I can't quite tell these examples are so wacky.
Therefore Lon to Bel might be illegal because of other units.
Lon-Bel is valid even if you have your own army in Bel, cuz you could be ordering Bel-Ruh. If Bel-Ruh fails, then Lon-Bel will fail. But it was still a move order, and so an order of Wal S Lon would fail.
The manual does go to the extent to say that ordering a unit into another unit of yours does NOT cut the support. Therefore it is clearly legal to order a move that you absolutely know is impossible to succeed. (Bel-Ruh and Ruh S Mun) Bel-Ruh is still a move order, and Ruh support of Mun is not cut because of the "cannot cut your own support rule". It doesn't say you can't order the movment, just that the support is not cut.
Point is, ordering moves that are "impossible to have the movement succeed" are definitely not disallowed, therefore the impossibility of actual movement resulting from a move order does not rule the order invalid and revert it to Unordered / Hold.
If you order a unit to move, from one province to another, then you have ordered it to move.
If you order Par-Neptune, The GM should look and see if Neptune is a space in this variant. Maybe it is in the "Milky Way" variant. If he can't find a space by that name that is unambiguous (to the GM) then the entire order is ruled invalid and the unit is treated as if unordered.
If that's the case, when would an order ever be invalid or illegal?
Per above. Par-Neptune would be an invalid order. There is no province named Neptune.
I suppose attempting to move a unit that is not one's own, or ordering a unit that does not exist is invalid
Not sure why this example. A GM will skip over
flavor text in analyzing orders, including things like "dear GM please accept these orders" - that is not an order in the game sense, it is normal discussion. Orders for anything other than your own units are ignored.
Therefore, it oughtn't depend on even where even the single unit is.
In determining if AN order is valid, sure, it doesn't matter. We can look and say "Is an order of F Con-Bul/ec" a valid way to order Con to the east coast of Bul. Yes it is. But we're talking about the more specific scenario of "what are valid orders for this unit" (which does happen to be somewhere). So IF I have an army in London, what are valid orders for it. That is what we're discussing.
The rest of your post is discussing semantics / word games, and we're not really concerned w the concept of GM trickery here. Like "Yesterday I took my Bell to London for a cleaning." and later alleging to the GM you intended Bel to Lon and the presence of other words before and after it were irrelevant. That's another discussion.
The question of this topic, is "Is A Lon-Bel" a move order in all cases, and I still (I think, agree w you) that it is. So be it that if there is no fleet nearby to convoy it, it is very likely to fail.
The order is fine, it just may not work, whether for that turn (Bel to Lon but no convoy) or forever (Bel to Par).
I think we're in agreement here.