(( The alternative plural besides Federals was back int he Western oriented days of the party Federales, but in more recent years Federalists has been used more. ))
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
((Hope there is an update soon.))
So president Hensdale, despite not wanting to flex America's military might, will you maintain our armed forces at it's current level, and will you continue to enforce American's power in the Western hemisphere.
So president Hensdale, despite not wanting to flex America's military might, will you maintain our armed forces at it's current level, and will you continue to enforce American's power in the Western hemisphere.
It turned out to be an especially fiddly session, and I was ambushed by a Biology Lab Report, so the update will have to wait till Thursday.
PS. I have been reconsidering the Nationalist Party. Considering that in-story the entire nation is supposed to be in varying degrees of isolation, it seems odd to have a pro-involvement party in 1913.
((What if every single player decided to be pro-war with someone? (It's a "what if" question guys to don't jump on it saying you aren't/won't) Would you allow it then?))
((Well once we get a casus Belli against the Central power's I imagine anti-german/russian/austrian sentiment will allow a pro-war movement to flourish. That and maybe because ingame there are quite a few people who are pro-war there populace could be feeling good about Peru.))It turned out to be an especially fiddly session, and I was ambushed by a Biology Lab Report, so the update will have to wait till Thursday.
PS. I have been reconsidering the Nationalist Party. Considering that in-story the entire nation is supposed to be in varying degrees of isolation, it seems odd to have a pro-involvement party in 1913.
You seem to be under the dangerous illusion that Americans will gravitate toward a restrictive monarchy that is increasingly seen as a "repressive monster that took advantage of American fiscal irresponsibility in the previous century to run its wars", and that the Tripartite Pact will accept the alliance offer of the very threat they formed the Tripartite to counter. Americans may not like the Commonwealth or the French, but they dislike the Tripartite just a little more.
I have three points to help our politicians choose sides if we do intervene in Europe. Firstly we should join the side on which we can make a difference. The US army is simply not large or advanced enough to be able to defeat the German and Russian army's. However our Navy is powerful enough to be able to defeat the Royal Navy. Secondly if we do not intervene there is still a large possibility that the Triple Alliance will win and if we are on there side we would be able to influence them to take less land from the French and British. Thirdly if, despite my points, we still join the British and French then the Triple alliance may still overrun all of France and be able to defeat any landing attempt ((there is no way we could pull off a D-Day)) which would either result in a long drawn out war or a peace in which France is surrendered to the Triple alliance. Therefore I must conclude that joining the Triple alliance is a far better option then joining the Anglo-French alliance (( Can we call them the Entente?)). I also support a nationalist party.
((All I'm saying is that we are pretty much just making stuff up right now based on OTL feelings. There is no real reason for the alliance being formed other than you trying to stear us towards being pro-British and French. I don't like to have my decisions made for me, so I'm just going to do the same thing and claim just as many people are pro-German as anti-German.))
(( Given the Von Ritter position of joining up with the Triples doesn't seem likely, I imagine the pro-war party is going to attract many Federalists, as they are the ones who - by Terrance's platform - don't actually want to fight for Britain but want to use the Commonwealth as an excuse to gain America colonies in Asia and elsewhere. I think that's probably going to be the interventionist position - using a European War as an opportunity for American expansion in the colonial world. ))
Supporting the oppressors of the absolute monarchist regimes would be an insult to our founding fathers and disgrace our nation. Indeed if we were to do so we may as well spit upon our own flag.
((Rogov that's inaccurate. My platform is we should ally with Britain and France to establish two alliances capable of keeping the world at peace through deterrence. And if it fails to do so then we'll honour the alliance and protect European democracy. Also if war in Europe does break out and the US doesn't join I intend to form a Rough-Rider style volunteer group.))
((Rogov that's inaccurate. My platform is we should ally with Britain and France to establish two alliances capable of keeping the world at peace through deterrence. And if it fails to do so then we'll honour the alliance and protect European democracy. Also if war in Europe does break out and the US doesn't join I intend to form a Rough-Rider style volunteer group.))
Last edited:
Even If we do join the British and French we could still lose. Do you think the Founding Fathers would prefer our flag torn up by Germans or being held high by Americans. You propose that we ally with those they fought against! The British are still the same as they were in 1776. Do you think that If the leaders of Britain nowadays were leading Britain then they would make different choices as the ones the leaders then did? Because they would not!
If the British are so similar to what they were 130 years ago why does Canada, Quebec and Australia currently enjoy dominionship and other colonies autonomy? The British have been our allies in the Commonwealth for nearly half a century now. France similarly stood by us in the war for independence, and again in 1812.
What has Germany ever done for us?
What has Germany ever done for us?
((I was thinking the same thing, though to fight for Germany, rather than Britain.))
((I was thinking it would be more like the OTL Spanish Civil war in the 1930s. Fascists and Democracies both send troops to fight each other. If a Civil War does happen again, the borders are going to be insane :wacko
)
Dominionship The British Crown is still there Head of State and they will only do whatever the British Government tells them to. They are still part of the British Empire and the British only gave them Dominionship so they could look good Could you please tell me which Colonies enjoy autonomy. As for France them supporting us was merely an attempt to get there revenge on Britain during the war of Independence and they had been at war with Britain for 10 years during the war of 1812. They attempted revolution from Autocratic rule instead they killed millions of people and Germany will transition to Democratic rule and personally I would prefer that they do that peacefully rather then under the Pressure of outside occupation that could lead to massive revengist sentiment in Germany and lead to them declaring another war far more devastating then this one.
The people of the dominions wish to be under the British crown. Keep in mind that it was us who wanted dominionship in our own revolution, and it was only when that request was refused did we seek independence. I'm not arguing we should force anything on Germany. I'm saying we cannot allow Germany to force anything upon others.
Also keep in mind democracies are far less likely to declare war than an absolute monarchy. For the first person to declare a war is the last person to fight in it.
Also keep in mind democracies are far less likely to declare war than an absolute monarchy. For the first person to declare a war is the last person to fight in it.
You may not believe that we should force change on Germany but the French and British both do and will force change.
Is that what you want then a long drawn out war?
The only reason they aren't still under complete British authority is because the British realized that they had to grant certain concessions to the Dominions or lose them completely.
Is that what you want then a long drawn out war?
The only reason they aren't still under complete British authority is because the British realized that they had to grant certain concessions to the Dominions or lose them completely.
(( Staying out of the Entente but keeping the Commonwealth, genuinely relieving Britain's need to defend its colonies and allowing it to do the European landfighting would be a honorable alternative.
Alternatively, those seeking a different alliance and not against war, could always consider that after a given European War the Triple Alliance might fall apart and we can pick Russia away from Germany for instance.
Alternatively alternatively, we could seek to eventually abolish our Commonwealth ties while sticking up close with France and fighting for it in a European war, creating an alternative bloc to the British empire so we can assert ourselves as the no.1 great power in its place. ))
Alternatively, those seeking a different alliance and not against war, could always consider that after a given European War the Triple Alliance might fall apart and we can pick Russia away from Germany for instance.
Alternatively alternatively, we could seek to eventually abolish our Commonwealth ties while sticking up close with France and fighting for it in a European war, creating an alternative bloc to the British empire so we can assert ourselves as the no.1 great power in its place. ))