((I'd offer to make my senator a McCarthyist voice for this AAR, but she is too competent, honest, and intelligent to make up fake numbers and spout gibberish.
)-
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.
((I'd offer to make my senator a McCarthyist voice for this AAR, but she is too competent, honest, and intelligent to make up fake numbers and spout gibberish.
)
Although I give Moonstruck 500 points for invoking Cthulhu (Note: points cannot be used for any good or service and have no cash value), as far as the Redness of the US, I can actually live with that. There's still a lot of fear in the US about the Great Depression at this point, and the Soviet Union is kind of a shining beacon for how to avoid the Depression in the 30s. Granted, it's not because of anything the Soviets did, but Lenin's decision to rip up all of the Russian Empire's debts when he took over, but still, at that time, not many people knew that. Remember, too, Greek HOI3 doesn't say he's a Socialist, but a Left Wing Radical -- he could very easily be a Populist and in a heavily agricultural state like South Carolina, that's entirely plausible.
I don't see any reference to annexing British Columbia in his post; is that hyperbole on your part, Moonstruck, or did he edit something?
Want to hear something REALLY ahistorical? When I thought about doing this AAR as a single player one, I wanted to annex the entire Western Hemisphere, just to see if it was possible
Want to hear something REALLY ahistorical? When I thought about doing this AAR as a single player one, I wanted to annex the entire Western Hemisphere, just to see if it was possible
1. USA
2. Max Tech
3. Nukes
4. ???
5. Profit
((Very nice
We have nine hours until the deadline! Will Beckendorf's bill win, or will Rudolph-Danner make up the 2 vote gap? It's still
Beckendorf 7
Rudolph-Danner 5.))
((Very nice
We have nine hours until the deadline! Will Beckendorf's bill win, or will Rudolph-Danner make up the 2 vote gap? It's still
Beckendorf 7
Rudolph-Danner 5.))
((9?! jesus thats the morning over here
))
(( He does say that he wants to be aligned with the USSR. As far as Left-Wing Radicals go, I'm reasonably sure only the socialists would want that. Also, concerning the popularity of socialism in the US, as far as I know, there's only been a single Senator openly identifying as a socialist, ever - And he's still there, so he wouldn't have at the time. I don't have any problems with a bit of AH, obviously, or I wouldn't be in this AAR forum, but being openly socialist - and yes, I'm willing to claim that this is what his Senator is, at least ideologically - as well as supporting the annexation of part of Canada is just a wee bit overboard. He doesn't even bother RPing the least, but skips straight to in-game terms.
It's still right there, plain as day, in the same post as his vote:
))
((Now ima be a little annoying, it says he wants British Columbia from the Canadias, but never mentions the word annexing.))
If I can join may I be:
Senator Cornelius Fredrickson of Virginia
Poltical Party: (Southern) Democrat.
Foreign Policy: Isolationism.
Millitary Policy: Thinks the millitary should be built up for defensive purposes and to deter aggression
Also thinks millitary should invest in armored/mechnized troops and secret weapons such as nukes and rockets.
Senator Cornelius Fredrickson of Virginia
Poltical Party: (Southern) Democrat.
Foreign Policy: Isolationism.
Millitary Policy: Thinks the millitary should be built up for defensive purposes and to deter aggression
Also thinks millitary should invest in armored/mechnized troops and secret weapons such as nukes and rockets.
((Welcome to the game fellow Senator
although i dont decide, i'm certain you are allowed to join))
Dear Senate
Now that I am back in action I would like to make a few comments on the situation.
Firstly I would like to thank all of my supporters for the bill. I am grateful that you share my visions for America and believe that we together can make America even greater. I also send my thanks to Senator Kenzington, who has kept up defending our bill in my absence. I am very grateful for it.
Secondly I would like to address everyone critical of my bill. I am aware that my bill might be assumed to be militaristic. However I believe we need to modernize our army, since it is heavily outdated. As for industry, I do believe it is a good idea to have industry in the south as well. My thoughts about putting a large part of the new industry in Minnesota, Illinois and Missouri is that these areas are the ones furthest away from any enemies. I do see Canada as a friend, and therefore the area as safe.
Lastly I would ask all Senators, but especially Senator Danner, to hold a more civil tone, and not personally attack their political enemies. This might turn out negatively for the Senators in the future.
Best Regards, Senator Charles Beckendorf, MA
Mr. MacArthur
I have gotten a comment from Senator Rudolph on my first draft of the bill, saying that we should first research the 1934 equipment before modernizing our army. This will be more efficient, as we would then not need to upgrade some troops to 1918 equipment first.
Senator Charles Beckendorf
Now that I am back in action I would like to make a few comments on the situation.
Firstly I would like to thank all of my supporters for the bill. I am grateful that you share my visions for America and believe that we together can make America even greater. I also send my thanks to Senator Kenzington, who has kept up defending our bill in my absence. I am very grateful for it.
Secondly I would like to address everyone critical of my bill. I am aware that my bill might be assumed to be militaristic. However I believe we need to modernize our army, since it is heavily outdated. As for industry, I do believe it is a good idea to have industry in the south as well. My thoughts about putting a large part of the new industry in Minnesota, Illinois and Missouri is that these areas are the ones furthest away from any enemies. I do see Canada as a friend, and therefore the area as safe.
Lastly I would ask all Senators, but especially Senator Danner, to hold a more civil tone, and not personally attack their political enemies. This might turn out negatively for the Senators in the future.
Best Regards, Senator Charles Beckendorf, MA
Mr. MacArthur
I have gotten a comment from Senator Rudolph on my first draft of the bill, saying that we should first research the 1934 equipment before modernizing our army. This will be more efficient, as we would then not need to upgrade some troops to 1918 equipment first.
Senator Charles Beckendorf
There have been no personal attacks; merely conclusions based on Senator Kenzington's previous statements. I have already further clarified my exact meaning regarding those statements which might be construed as offensive, and, as Senator Beckendorf would note, had he not a political reason to engage in this political browbeating of anyone who dare call out companion on his misdeeds, Senator Kenzington has since neglected to comment on any of these clarifications, proving, to my eyes as well as those of any reasonable American citizen who might take interest in these debates, that he is, indeed, guilty, and thus incapable of defending himself.
Moreover, I am ashamed of any American Senator who has voted for the Beckendorf Bill. No reason what-so-ever has been found to vote for it over the Rudolph-Danner; and I personally challenge anyone who claims otherwise to prove this to me.
My apologies to my fellow American citizens for this disgrace,
- Senator Elizabeth Helen Danner, R-PA.
No offense to Senator Danner, but I feel no shame in supporting Beckendorf. My state and I feel it is the best path for the nation, and party lines can not sway me away from that. This is especially not the time to cater to partisanship. Besides, there may be a bill set by Rudolf or Danner that I fancy. Time will tell.
- Senator Elexis Sinclaire
- Senator Elexis Sinclaire
Senator Beckendorf,
I apologize for my unclear language, as it appears I have given you an inaccurate picture of my intentions. When I stated that we would have to delay our modernization programs for our infantry and artillery, I was referring to our research and development of updated weaponry, rather than our production and distribution of that weaponry to regular Army formations.
In order to prevent such miscommunications in the future, I will hereafter refer to the research process of creating new weapons, doctrines, and units as development, the process of producing these new discoveries and distributing them to actual field formations as upgrading, and the combination of both of these processes as modernization.
I share your views on the efficiency of delaying the upgrade process until we have developed more advanced weaponry; as the Army's production budget will demonstrate (as soon as the President authorizes its release), all of our assigned industrial capacity will be fully devoted to producing new units, rather than re-equipping old ones.
With apologies,
General Douglas MacArthur,
Chief of Staff of the United States Army
My fellow Americans,
I have signed the Beckendorf bill into law. I would like to thank every Senator for their passion and energy.
The Army, Navy, and Air Force may all spend 46 IC each; the Armaments Minister ((I'd really like to have a better name for that, given his role in our AAR. Maybe Secretary of the Treasury? The Interior?)) may spent 18 IC.
I am devoting most of our leadership to our scientists. The Army must choose 9 technologies, the Navy and Air Force 5 technologies each, and our armaments minister 6 technologies. Of the remaining leadership, 5 shall be spent on espionage, 2 on officers, and 1 on diplomacy. I shall pass along Senator Beckendorf's suggestions to Mr. Friedman, our head of intelligence, but as always, I trust his judgment and shall defer to his expertise.
Thank you all, and good night.
((A few final things: Saithis, the bill specifically mentions Carrier Doctrines and IC efficiency techs, as well as IC buildup in Minneapolis, St. Louis, and Chicago. It does not mention whether or not we ought to include existing construction, so I'll leave that at your discretion. To all ministers, please send your detailed builds and techs to me via PM, including any commanders units might require. If any units are finished, please tell me where they'd fit in the OOB and where you'd like them deployed.
After the update, which will cover January 1 through June 30 (if I'm quick enough on the pause key), we'll reevaluate foreign policy, consider new ministers if necessary, and address any decisions, laws, or other situations that may arise. I'll include the complete build queue, techs, economy, and other relevant screens so everybody is better informed, as well as a save. If you have specific requests, please let me know.
Oh, and Moonstruck, thank you for pointing out the British Columbia thing; I missed it the first time. Any Senator is free to recommend specific foreign policy goals, but apart from aligning to one faction or another, I'll use my best judgment.))
EDIT: ((Welcome, Imperator1993! I've added you to the roster))
I have signed the Beckendorf bill into law. I would like to thank every Senator for their passion and energy.
The Army, Navy, and Air Force may all spend 46 IC each; the Armaments Minister ((I'd really like to have a better name for that, given his role in our AAR. Maybe Secretary of the Treasury? The Interior?)) may spent 18 IC.
I am devoting most of our leadership to our scientists. The Army must choose 9 technologies, the Navy and Air Force 5 technologies each, and our armaments minister 6 technologies. Of the remaining leadership, 5 shall be spent on espionage, 2 on officers, and 1 on diplomacy. I shall pass along Senator Beckendorf's suggestions to Mr. Friedman, our head of intelligence, but as always, I trust his judgment and shall defer to his expertise.
Thank you all, and good night.
((A few final things: Saithis, the bill specifically mentions Carrier Doctrines and IC efficiency techs, as well as IC buildup in Minneapolis, St. Louis, and Chicago. It does not mention whether or not we ought to include existing construction, so I'll leave that at your discretion. To all ministers, please send your detailed builds and techs to me via PM, including any commanders units might require. If any units are finished, please tell me where they'd fit in the OOB and where you'd like them deployed.
After the update, which will cover January 1 through June 30 (if I'm quick enough on the pause key), we'll reevaluate foreign policy, consider new ministers if necessary, and address any decisions, laws, or other situations that may arise. I'll include the complete build queue, techs, economy, and other relevant screens so everybody is better informed, as well as a save. If you have specific requests, please let me know.
Oh, and Moonstruck, thank you for pointing out the British Columbia thing; I missed it the first time. Any Senator is free to recommend specific foreign policy goals, but apart from aligning to one faction or another, I'll use my best judgment.))
EDIT: ((Welcome, Imperator1993! I've added you to the roster
))
The United States Army Air Corps has sent in its request for spending-allocation, compliant to the restrictions laid upon it by the Beckendorf bill.
-Oscar Westover, Chief of the Army Air Corps
-Oscar Westover, Chief of the Army Air Corps
The United States Army has submitted its funding request according to the requirements of the Beckendorf bill.
- Army Chief of Staff Douglas MacArthur
- Army Chief of Staff Douglas MacArthur
I have indeed read all comments to get to know the conflict, and I have noted that Senator Kenzington merely stated his opinions on the matter. He did not, to my eyes, say anything offensive towards you or the Rudolph-Danner bill. He might have a different point of view than you have. However, with all due respect, it seems to me that you are the one escalating this conflict. Therefore I have simply asked everyone to keep more civil in debates in the future.
I am sorry to hear that you are ashamed of the ones who put their trust in my bill. This is however their own choice and you cannot force them to change their opinions. I have looked closely at our bills, and find that they are similar, however with discord amongst the Industrial spending. Therefore you cannot say that they are very far out in comparison to my bill. I have also not found any evidence or reason to vote for the Rudolph-Danner bill over my own bill.
Thank you Mr. MacArthur, for your clarification in this matter. I now see more clearly what you meant with your post.
Best Regards to all,
Senator Charles Beckendorf, D-MA
((Still waiting on Saithis to respond so I can do the update. Speaking of updates, they will come in two parts in peace time. One will be a general timeline of events, with lots of screenshots and detail, but not much in the way of narrative. The second part will be my State of the Union, in which I'll mention what we're to vote on for that six month period. Senators are free to introduce their own legislation without my prompting, with one exception: let's save the budget stuff for January of each year, just to keep things running smoothly. If we get some kind of windfall through events, I'll go ahead and ask you to create an amendment to the bill to spend the extra cash. It also has to be something I can model in game, obviously. If you aren't sure, send me a PM.
I've also decided to name Mr. Wagner the Secretary of War, since that seems to be the closest analog to what the game represents as an Armament Minister.
In the matter of our last budget bill, I'm going to call the debate closed. Let's move forward.))
I've also decided to name Mr. Wagner the Secretary of War, since that seems to be the closest analog to what the game represents as an Armament Minister.
In the matter of our last budget bill, I'm going to call the debate closed. Let's move forward.))