The Presidents: 1836-1936 - An Interactive US AAR

[Mikeboy]

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.))

[Spectre17]

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!

[Mikeboy]

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?

[King50000]

((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.))

((I was thinking the same thing, though to fight for Germany, rather than Britain.))

[Mikeboy]

((It'll be like the civil-war all over again.))

[King50000]

((It'll be like the civil-war all over again.))

((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 ))

[Spectre17]

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.

[Mikeboy]

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.

[Spectre17]

You may not believe that we should force change on Germany but the French and British both do and will force change.

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 along drawn out war or a peace surrendering France to the Triple Alliance.

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.

[Rogov]

(( 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. ))

[Syriana]

It is essential in the realm of foreign affairs that we never allow our personal feelings or animosities to dictate the foreign policy of a nation. As such, I am disturbed to detect an undercurrent of Anglophobia in our current conversations on European tensions. We are told that there exists no difference between the Great Britain of 1775 and the Great Britain of 1909. Yet the former was an oppressive monarchy that ignored its own public opinion to wage a bloody war of conquest to retain the lost colonies; the latter is a democratic nation, with near-universal suffrage and popular representation, which has granted autonomy to its greatest colonies without a shot being fired in their defence. It is only because we were an English colony - invested with the English ideals of liberty, personal freedom and parliamentary representation - that these United States were able to develop into a prosperous democratic republic. Compare the fate of the Spanish colonies, which have devolved into despotates and are presently consumed by civil war.

Leaving aside sentiment, there is the matter of integrity. The British Empire has long been a friend and ally of these United States. Did not British warships join us in lifting the blockade of the Panama Canal? Did not the British adhere, albeit reluctantly, to our demands for autonomy in Canada and Australia? Through the mechanism of the Commonwealth, we have made demands of Great Britain that any other nation would declare intolerable, yet she has acquiesced peaceably and without the necessity of force. The British have served American interests, not vice-versa. To propose to invade the British Empire in its hour of existential crisis, after she has loyally served American interests for decades and has fully complied with all our demands of the Commonwealth, would be to sanction the greatest act of treachery and perfidy since that of Benedict Arnold.

It is said that we should become party to the Triple Alliance because we are most capable of doing damage against the British Empire. Yet it naturally follows from this preposition that the British Empire is the most capable of doing damage against us. If the Triple Alliance should declare war upon these United States, what need we fear? Europe is a thousand miles away, separated by the oceanic gulfs of the Atlantic and the Pacific, patrolled and encircled by the United States Navy. Even should the Triple Alliance prevail, what indemnity could they enforce upon us? They have no significant naval assets with which to threaten us. In Europe, they are a force to be feared; in North America, they are isolated and ineffectual.

Conversely, should we enter into a state of war with the Liberal Entente, the British Empire stands in an excellent position to undermine the United States. The British naval bases in Bermuda and Barbados are knives pressed against the underbelly of North America. Though smaller than our own, the Royal Navy is still the second-largest maritime force in existence and more than capable of causing chaos for shipping and trade. Canada will remain loyal to the Empire, and so a war against Great Britain will entail either an invasion of American territory or a bloody border war with the north. In short, whereas the hostility of the Triple Alliance would cost the United States nothing but lost trade, an Anglo-American conflict would produce the first direct invasion of American territory since the War of 1812. That is not a price I am willing to pay, not least for the sake of the Triple Alliance. Against the Alliance, we face only a war in Europe; against the Entente, we would should have to fight a war of existence.

There may soon come a time when events force our hand, and the United States must act. Until such a time, I am a firm believer in benevolent neutrality. We should uphold the Commonwealth, enabling the British to concentrate their resources in Europe without having to worry about their flank. We should not chain ourselves to the Triple Alliance, who will embroil us in a war of conquest that will gain them possession of Europe and incur nothing for the United States except death, destruction and mayhem. The United States of America shall not become a slave of German foreign policy. This is not a war of America's making, nor does it serve American interests. We should stand aloof from the anarchy, not embroil ourselves in it for the sake of another nation's aggressive expansionism.

- Marinus van Mayer

[Mikeboy]

As they would say in the British Parliament; hear, hear.

[yourworstnightm]

We have ripe targets for conquest here in America. No need to enter the European game yet. Chile and the USCA must b brought down. And when we are the masters of the South American Continent, hopefully Britain is preoccupied with Europe, and we can go on a Glorious Crusade to conquer Canada and the British Caribbean.

[Spectre17]

Mr Nightmore's plan seems like a good one and I am in no way opposed to joining the Entente I just believe it would be better for the US to join the Central Powers as if they do take all of France they will become effectively masters of Europe and be able to build ships at an extremely quick rate. Also the German Navy isn't all that small.

[yourworstnightm]

Mr Nightmore's plan seems like a good one and I am in no way opposed to joining the Entente I just believe it would be better for the US to join the Central Powers as if they do take all of France they will become effectively masters of Europe and be able to build ships at an extremely quick rate. Also the German Navy isn't all that small.

Of course, at some point we need to conquer Europe too, to solidify our rightful place as the World Hegemon.

[Syriana]

Why then, Mister Kidwell, should we aid and abet Germany in her war of conquest? Why should we undermine the Entente, which stands as the sole barrier against German mastery of Europe? In return for poaching a few colonies from Great Britain, we would hand the German Empire the keys to the continent. We should not strengthen an opponent of these United States, not least when she offers so few concessions. If there ever comes a point where we must confront the Triple Alliance, we should do so at such a time when it has not yet achieved Eurasian supremacy, and not after. If we wish to avoid embroiling ourselves in war, then we should lend our passive support to the passive nations, not give carte blanche to the aggressors.

- Marinus van Mayer

[Spectre17]

Even if we join against them there is a fair chance that the German army will still overrun France and that we would result in anti-American Europe which to have a chance against we would have to control a large portion of the Americas. I do believe that we could omit taking Canada and take all of South America instead. This is a battle of Juggernauts Mr van Mayer and in the end the largest Juggernaut will win.

[Rogov]

Britain must not have the sanctity of her isles violated and France must keep her independence. Those are the obligations of a democratic people. Furthermore our Commonwealth ties mean we must recognize the Dominions, recognize Britain's right to her colonies in Africa, and also recognize that by the principles of the Commonwealth we have both obligations and freedoms in Asia to take up previously British influence - where I believe we can do more good than by trodding all over the reasonably well developed democracies of Latin America.

I believe that with a strong navy as T.H. Terrance proposes, we can keep world trade flowing and in the event of war can cripple the efforts of the Triple Alliance, allowing the British and French to concentrate on the ground war in Europe - and more importantly freeing up the British fleet for European waters as we defend their colonies. By the terms of the Commonwealth we are bound to respect and defend their rights in Africa, but by that same treaty we have the right to expand our influence in Asia and seek our own way - different from British colonialism - of uplifting the underdeveloped nations there.

[thekinguter]

I am completly against any intervention in Europe. But IF a vote passed allowing such war, I would like to see the US siding with Germany. Germany will steamroll France and the UK will be stuck in the home islands. We could take advantage of said alliance to liberate Canada from it's overlords and turn it into one of our allies as we have an strategic interest in the area. And we could remove the UK's holdings in America (mosquito, guyana) and occupy it ourselves for trade and for military bases to ensure we are safe. Germany would take over europe and if we aided them, we could become good trading partners.

However, I do not encourage war whatsoever and I am an isolationist.

[Riccardo93]

I do not want war, nor do I want to t even consider siding with any force of imperialism in a conflict that is simply not our concern. We will not go to war unless we are attacked. Britain's policies in Africa and India have been atrocious, France is a tyrant in North Africa, Germany is still an authoritarian state, Russia is a despotic Czardom, and Austria is teetering on collapse from nationalism; none of those sound like good allies, and a war with wither side would likely cost thousands of lives, millions of dollars, and would otherwise be a waste of humanity and resources.

Instead, we should be the diplomatic force in Europe, and attain power through creating and maintaining peace; if we show ourselves to be unbiased, then we will be better able to craft peace deals, and to promote American ideals through those treaties.