Vive la République! - An Interactive French AAR

[Cybvep]

If you divide Germany, the first natural goal of political leaders of the divided states will be to unite again. You know as well as I do that this will happen sooner or later and the German population would eagerly support the unification, which they believe is one of their crowning historical achievements. That would also destroy German-French relations forever and I won't even mention the fact that Russians would become a bigger threat... Therefore, I think that dividing Germany into several states would be a reckless action which in the end would do us more harm than good.

[Emperor Ike]

We need to be careful with the bolsheviks. I may be, and sincerely hope that I am wrong, but the bolsheviks and some of their ideas cause a certain uneasiness in me. As fellow socialists, they most certainly deserve a chance, but they must be constantly observed.

Well Trotsky has some good view points. But just like in every party or group there are those with rather extremist views who must be treated with care. But I for one will volunteer to support our socialist comrades where ever they try to over throw the tyrants and capitalist.

[Ticket Cookie]

If you divide Germany, the first natural goal of political leaders of the divided states will be to unite again. You know as well as I do that this will happen sooner or later and the German population would eagerly support the unification, which they believe is one of their crowning historical achievements.

German reunification has less than 50 years. If you give a local identity, they will eventually take ownership in the long run. Think of the Austrian post-World War II in OTL, since the sixties they mostly do not want a re-unification.

That would also destroy German-French relations forever and I won't even mention the fact that Russians would become a bigger threat... Therefore, I think that dividing Germany into several states would be a reckless action which in the end would do us more harm than good.

The Germans must understand that what they can think holds no interest for the French. Moreover the two states that I propose will form two strongs buffer states, but not strong enough to jeopardize our supremacy.
And the Eastern Front and the Revolution are proof that Russia is not such imminent danger.

[Cybvep]

German reunification has less than 50 years. If you give a local identity, they will eventually take ownership in the long run. Think of the Austrian post-World War II in OTL, since the sixties they mostly do not want a re-unification.

What kind of argument is that? Visions from the future? LOL.

The Germans must understand that what they can think holds no interest for the French. Moreover the two states that I propose will form two strongs buffer states, but not strong enough to jeopardize our supremacy.

We do not want to become the bad guys of Europe. Rationality comes first before overambitious plots. Treating our enemies honourably works better in the long term.

And the Eastern Front and the Revolution are proof that Russia is not such imminent danger.

We must think ahead. When the revolutionaries deal with internal opposition and create a strong, unified, militarised and centralised state, they will definitely become a big threat to Europe.

[Tommy4ever]

Well Trotsky has some good view points. But just like in every party or group there are those with rather extremist views who must be treated with care. But I for one will volunteer to support our socialist comrades where ever they try to over throw the tyrants and capitalist.

Trotsky is amongst the most radical and extreme of all the Bolsheviks.

Seems people enjoye the Great War updates. I made the decision to rush a bit over the last year or so of the war, just so I could get it finished in that update.

I'm going to wait until tomorrow to put up the election, mostly so there is a bit more time for people to catch up with the War updates - the outcomes of which are going to utterly dominate the election.

[Emperor Ike]

Trotsky is amongst the most radical and extreme of all the Bolsheviks.

Shhhh...don't tell that out loud. You will ruin everything.

[KotoR45]

What kind of argument is that? Visions from the future? LOL.


We do not want to become the bad guys of Europe. Rationality comes first before overambitious plots. Treating our enemies honourably works better in the long run


We must think ahead. When the revolutionaries deal with internal opposition and create a strong, unified, militarised and centralised state, they will definitely become a big threat to Europe.

Hear, Hear! I fully agree with you. If the Germans see us as helping and not impeding, they will surely become great allies! Also looking forward to the elections.

[Ticket Cookie]

What kind of argument is that? Visions from the future? LOL.

Are you roleplaying? I doubt, or you certainly don't you use "lol". So I think my argument is acceptable.
If you want an other exemple, (again in our timeline) think of the macedonians of FYROM, wich think of themselves as bulgarians in the first half of the XX century and have now, after years of Serbian propaganda (during Yugoslavia), their own national identity.

We do not want to become the bad guys of Europe. Rationality comes first before overambitious plots. Treating our enemies honourably works better in the long term.

We are frenchs, and we have a capital of sympathy as democrat and liberators, particulary in Eastern Europe. A part the Germans themselves and the British for the "balance of power", nobody will care of the "imperialists Germans war-mongers" which threw Europe into war.

We must think ahead. When the revolutionaries deal with internal opposition and create a strong, unified, militarised and centralised state, they will definitely become a big threat to Europe.

By the time they achieved this (if even they do), we will have unite Europe under French's protection. And will have wonderfuls puppets everywhere. Moreover, we need the industrial powerbase of the Rhine to face this hypotetical ennemy.

[Aetherius]

In our timeline, the french government wanted to be raisonable in 1919 ... Well, we all know what happened next.

[Cybvep]

Are you roleplaying? I doubt, or you certainly don't you use "lol". So I think my argument is acceptable.

Yes, but if you bring arguments from the future, then my reaction is... LOL.

Let's annex Saudi Arabia, because oil will be discovered there in 1940s! Also, we shouldn't worry about Algeria and our colonies, because we may lose them in 1950s or 1960s, anyway. That happened IRL, right?

In our timeline, the french government wanted to be raisonable in 1919 ... Well, we all know what happened next.

I've heard different interpretations of the Versailles Treaty... However, do we want to turn the thread into history discussions with 20/20 hindsight?

By the time they achieved this (if even they do), we will have unite Europe under French's protection. And will have wonderfuls puppets everywhere. Moreover, we need the industrial powerbase of the Rhine to face this hypotetical ennemy.

This statement just proves me suspicions. You have delusions of creating a massive empire, as in the old days and want to act as a conqueror, not as a liberator. It's also a sure road to an another major conflict and if we choose to follow it, we will become warmongers ourselves.

[gll25]

This is my proposal for the division of Europe and the Middle East, based on my previous thoughts applied to the reality of Europe and French politics right now.

I had serious doubts about three issues:
-The annexation of Bulgaria by Serbia(Yugoslavia). I was skeptical about it, but since they share an ethnic background (south slavs) and it would create another strong ally for France in the Balkans, I considered it the right path to follow;
-The annexation of Finland by Sweden, because of the same reasons I had with Bulgaria;
-The partition of Belgium, and here are my biggest doubts. Belgium indeed was our ally in the war, but partitioning it along ethnic lines would strengthen France and grant us a powerful ally in a stronger Netherlands.

Three notes:
-The purple country in the middle east is the Hashemite Kingdom
-Russia is green because right now it is in civil war. It does not reflect my political ideas about the civil war and the sides fighting it.
-This map by all means does not reflect my real life opinion about the issue.

[Emperor Ike]

This is my proposal for the division of Europe and the Middle East, based on my previous thoughts applied to the reality of Europe and French politics right now.

I had serious doubts about three issues:
-The annexation of Bulgaria by Serbia(Yugoslavia). I was skeptical about it, but since they share an ethnic background (south slavs) and it would create another strong ally for France in the Balkans, I considered it the right path to follow;
-The annexation of Finland by Sweden, because of the same reasons I had with Bulgaria;
-The partition of Belgium, and here are my biggest doubts. Belgium indeed was our ally in the war, but partitioning it along ethnic lines would strengthen France and grant us a powerful ally in a stronger Netherlands.

Three notes:
-The purple country in the middle east is the Hashemite Kingdom
-Russia is green because right now it is in civil war. It does not reflect my political ideas about the civil war and the sides fighting it.
-This map by all means does not reflect my real life opinion about the issue.

I am against giving the freedom of Finns and Bulgarians away. Also Finns and Swedes doesn't share ethnic background.

[Tommy4ever]

Finland, the Congress of Poland, Bessarabia, the Baltics, the Caucuses and the far North-East of Turkey (Kars, and the Pontic region - what the Russians get when you beat Turkey) are controlled by Soviet Russia. So unless we want to invade Revolutionary Russia those regions are out of our hands. But why would you want to give Finland to a country that remained neutral?

As for Belgium, it seems impossible for France to betray its ally. Side by side France and Belgium have fought through 4 years of hell - to turn around and tell them the country they sacrificed so much for alongside their French comrades no longer exists would be too much. Your other proposals are of interest however.

[hoi2geek]

Finland, the Congress of Poland, Bessarabia, the Baltics, the Caucuses and the far North-East of Turkey (Kars, and the Pontic region - what the Russians get when you beat Turkey) are controlled by Soviet Russia. So unless we want to invade Revolutionary Russia those regions are out of our hands. But why would you want to give Finland to a country that remained neutral?

As for Belgium, it seems impossible for France to betray its ally. Side by side France and Belgium have fought through 4 years of hell - to turn around and tell them the country they sacrificed so much for alongside their French comrades no longer exists would be too much. Your other proposals are of interest however.

Then let's invade the Soviets. they're Communist anyway.

[Ticket Cookie]

Yes, but if you bring arguments from the future, then my reaction is... LOL.

Let's annex Saudi Arabia, because oil will be discovered there in 1940s! Also, we shouldn't worry about Algeria and our colonies, because we may lose them in 1950s or 1960s, anyway. That happened IRL, right?

It's pretty stupid. My point is that it's possible, even in 20th century, to "create" nationals identities based on a local (and religious if possible) background. And I try to develop something plausible to a french of 1918, it's you who based on "the future" to say that will we need strong Germany to counter a state that is, in 1918, a backwater state with it's industrial powerbase (Poland and Ukraine) with ethnics tensions and a civil war on it's hands. And whose army lost the two last major wars it fought (with Japan in 1905 and now with Germany).

This statement just proves me suspicions. You have delusions of creating a massive empire, as in the old days and want to act as a conqueror, not as a liberator. It's also a sure road to an another major conflict and if we choose to follow it, we will become warmongers ourselves.

It's more creating an European Alliance, i'm not talking of an Napoleonic Empire. And the best way to avoid a new war is to be the more powerful, and keeps our potentials ennemy divided.

[Terraferma]

Oh lookie here, my french voter card arrived in the mail with my subscription!(Of the thread) Just in time too.

[gll25]

Finland, the Congress of Poland, Bessarabia, the Baltics, the Caucuses and the far North-East of Turkey (Kars, and the Pontic region - what the Russians get when you beat Turkey) are controlled by Soviet Russia. So unless we want to invade Revolutionary Russia those regions are out of our hands. But why would you want to give Finland to a country that remained neutral?

As for Belgium, it seems impossible for France to betray its ally. Side by side France and Belgium have fought through 4 years of hell - to turn around and tell them the country they sacrificed so much for alongside their French comrades no longer exists would be too much. Your other proposals are of interest however.

Well, the Soviets are suffering with severe internal problems. Going against France and Italy (who have their armies still fully mobilized) would be catastrophic to the Bolshevik effort of taking Russia, so I believe they could be brought to the negotiation table and give into, if not all, some of the demands (Poland deserves priority IMO) of the Entente. I agree on Belgium, it would be the utmost betrayal, even though we could profit from it. Giving Finland to Sweden seems reasonable because it would create a strong and grateful ally there, plus finland has a sizeable Swedish population.

I am against giving the freedom of Finns and Bulgarians away. Also Finns and Swedes doesn't share ethnic background.

Yep, Finns and Swedes dont share a background, sorry 'bout that. Giving Finland to Sweden is debatable, but integrating Bulgaria into Yugoslavia is probably the best solution for the Balkans. An independent and obviously reduced Bulgaria will always be bitter and revanchist towards France and its three Balkan neighbours that snatched their territory. Bulgarians, as Serbs, Croats and Slovenes, are South Slavs, justifying this integration.

[Tommy4ever]

Keeping the army fully mobilised, marching into another great war across the other side of the continent and against Soviet Russia no less? My good sir, you'd provoke revolution!

Even the most anti-Bolshevik faction (AF) wont propose something quite so spectacular. But will obviously do everything it realistically can to ensure the Bolshevik regimes dies a swift death (big time assistance to the Whites, perhaps some sort of Intervention - but much more limited than 200 divisions crossing over from Silesia ).

[Emperor Ike]

Well, the Soviets are suffering with severe internal problems. Going against France and Italy (who have their armies still fully mobilized) would be catastrophic to the Bolshevik effort of taking Russia, so I believe they could be brought to the negotiation table and give into, if not all, some of the demands (Poland deserves priority IMO) of the Entente. I agree on Belgium, it would be the utmost betrayal, even though we could profit from it. Giving Finland to Sweden seems reasonable because it would create a strong and grateful ally there, plus finland has a sizeable Swedish population.

Giving Finland to Sweden would create another possible place of rebellion and would show that France thinks people are toys to play with. Also 13% is really not that sizable. I would also argue that the Finns wouldn't gain as much as autonomy under Sweden as they did under Russia. Finnish would lose the status as state language which would render all their hard work useless. Thus I support independent Finland or Soviet Finland.

I do not support any kind of aggression towards Russia.

[gll25]

Keeping the army fully mobilised, marching into another great war across the other side of the continent and against Soviet Russia no less? My good sir, you'd provoke revolution!

Even the most anti-Bolshevik faction (AF) wont propose something quite so spectacular. But will obviously do everything it realistically can to ensure the Bolshevik regimes dies a swift death (big time assistance to the Whites, perhaps some sort of Intervention - but much more limited than 200 divisions crossing over from Silesia ).

I'm not saying we will do this , I'm just saying that the Russians would probably prefer to give into a demand or two of the victorious Entente than taking the risk of going to war. Also, Lenin is a strong supporter of the right to self-determination, if it helps

And I have abandoned the idea of a Finnish Sweden. Giving the Finns independence would be indeed better