• 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.
Whilst I am glad my Secretary of State is keenly backing my proposals for a United Nations, I disagree about the initial inclusion of axis members. It is my belief that we should display to the world the benefits of international participation and open up the organisation to all sovereign states applications, we should use membership as, in effect, a bargaining chip to reward those states that transition to peaceful and cooperative nations and are fully accepting of the goals of the organisation, chief among which should be the prevention of conflict and the preservation of human rights and liberties. Only when we see states that are making great leaps towards these aims should we accept them into the UN, and until that time, we must use membership as a carrot to encourage them to become responsible global citizens.

As for the inevitable stick; a united occupation of their countries by all of our allies, both in and out of NATO, will not only aid their stability, but allow us to directly mould how they reform after the war.
 
Whilst I am glad my Secretary of State is keenly backing my proposals for a United Nations, I disagree about the initial inclusion of axis members. It is my belief that we should display to the world the benefits of international participation and open up the organisation to all sovereign states applications, we should use membership as, in effect, a bargaining chip to reward those states that transition to peaceful and cooperative nations and are fully accepting of the goals of the organisation, chief among which should be the prevention of conflict and the preservation of human rights and liberties. Only when we see states that are making great leaps towards these aims should we accept them into the UN, and until that time, we must use membership as a carrot to encourage them to become responsible global citizens.

As for the inevitable stick; a united occupation of their countries by all of our allies, both in and out of NATO, will not only aid their stability, but allow us to directly mould how they reform after the war.
I believe Mr. Nightmore was imagining the development of this united nations concept after the war was won - in which case the current Axis members will have transitioned to peaceful states by the termination of fascist regimes. Indeed, they will be the great experiment for the nations in peace and liberty - even more so since the devastation of their wars and police states may make peace a more close and pressing desire in their new generations.
 
Indeed, there will be an occupation of the Axis members, but we must also allow the creation of new peaceful states there, and these states must be allowed into this United Nations from their very birth, otherwise we just risk creating another Axis as soon as we leave.

I actually think the more tricky part is to convince the USSR to join. They don't exactly trust in International Cooperation much.
 
While you wait for me to get the next update done, why don't you read the newest AARlander?

 
The Second World War
1944: Armageddon


In the Presidency of Phillip McCahill, and in the history of the United States in the 20th Century, there are few dates that can hold claim to being as important as January 29th, 1944. The final day of the Crete Conference, it began with President McCahill frustrated by the demands of the Soviet Union that the reconstruction of areas liberated by the USSR be administered solely by the Soviets, in return for Soviet membership in the proposed United Nations.
For a man who had survived his presidency with a refusal to compromise, the leaving Eastern Europe and an as yet undetermined section of Central Europe to assured existence as a Soviet satellite was very near unthinkable. Having consulted with his cabinet, McCahill was indeed close to giving up on Soviet membership in the UN. That was, until a conversation between himself, Prime Minister Churchill, and Secretaries Jarvis and Nightmore convinced him that Soviet administration in areas liberated by the Red Army was a de facto inevitability; Stalin was simply posturing as to avoid looking weak in Moscow by giving McCahill the membership, and the only way to minimize Soviet influence was to minimize Soviet-liberated territory.

mccahillcrete.jpg

1. President Phillip McCahill and First Lady Marlene McCahill attend the closing dinner of the Crete Conference.​

The immediate consequence of January 29th was an order by President McCahill authorizing “the execution of all planned military action against the Empires of Japan and Nazi Germany, so as to bring a swift and decisive end to the war.” The more long-running consequences included the formation of the United Nations [1], and the division of Germany into three zones of occupation [2], to be defined more completely after the surrender of Germany. The unstated consequence of these three decisions was in the implication that the United States would not only be participating in the post-war world, but actively exercising its power and influence on it.
That power and influence would be greatly enhanced by another event of January 29th, half a world away New Mexico. The culmination of four years of work by a small army of scientists and engineers, “The Gadget”, known colloquially by its creators as “The SOB”, detonated 100 feet above White Sands Proving Ground, creating an explosion equivalent to 21 Kilotons of TNT. The “Manhattan Project” had created the world’s first nuclear weapon.

trinitya.jpg

2. The mushroom cloud from the Trinity Test begins to form.​

News of the experiment’s success reached McCahill early on February 4th. Unsure of what to do with this new weapon, unwilling as he was to use it, the President decided to keep the information secret from all but his most trusted cabinet members [3]. Compounding McCahill’s doubts about the necessity of the weapon was the rapidity of NATO and Soviet progress into Germany, which had only increased in the West after the President’s “all-clear” led to a decisive breakthrough and rout south of the Main River. Between February 3rd and March 12th, General Harrison’s US Third Army had advanced from the outskirts of Mainz to being halfway from Nuremberg, intending to strike further south and capture Munich.
North of this however, a crueler, more desperate collapse was taking place, as German units, undersupplied and underfed, were annihilated by both NATO and Soviet forces as they refused to surrender, even in the face of certain defeat. On the Eastern Front especially, where Soviet thirst for vengeance against the enemy who had burned so much of their nation fueled the destruction, entire cities were leveled in as little as two weeks by artillery, bombing, looting and the general destruction wrought by an advancing army. Author Konrad Werner would write in his 1947 semi-autobiographical novel, “The Downfall,” that “[Northern] Germany was that spring a place more inhospitable and unsuited for life than hell itself.”

breslau1944.jpg

3. Soviet troops in Breslau, March 1944.​

On April 6th, at the head of a massive offensive of more than 3 million men, units of the Soviet Belarusian Front reached the outskirts of Berlin. The next three weeks, the remains of Nazi Germany died as the city was gutted inside out by the raging combat while Soviet armies enveloped Berlin and NATO forces rushed to close the gap between the two armies. This finally happened at Tangermunde, on the banks of the Elbe, 4 miles from Stendal, on April 25th 1944.
Two days later, surrounded under the Reichstag, trapped in his bunker, Adolf Hitler committed suicide. The German announcement of unconditional surrender arrived at NATO and Soviet HQs later that day. For Europe, the Second World War was finally over.
The announcement was met with an explosion of celebrations across the NATO nations, and in Moscow “there was no vodka left on earth by the time [the celebration] was over.” In New York, crowds flooded Times Square. In London, Piccadilly and Leicester were emptied of all traffic by the crowd. In Paris, the Arc de Triomphe was “soaked in Champagne.” Of the capitals of Europe, none were silent, not even Berlin.

nycveday.jpg

4. New York City on VE Day, April 27th 1944.​

In the Pacific however, the war was far from over, and even on the same day as the world celebrated victory over Germany, the US Marine Corps landed on the tiny island of Iwo Jima in the second bloodiest amphibious landing of the entire war. It was the latest of a series of battles for such small islands that had been fought since January 29th, battles that had so far cost the lives of nearly 35,000 marines. And on the same day as marines came ashore on Iwo Jima, they came ashore in Luzon, their invasion supported by a coordinated uprising of the Philippine resistance movement [4].
For a month, the battles of Iwo Jima and the Philippines were the sole major engagements happening in the world. Then they were over, and NATO launched a new round of offensives in Burma, the Communist Chinese People’s Republic, in an uneasy alliance with the tattered remnants of the Republic of China, moved en masse to recapture territory still fiercely defended by the Japanese army, and the US Marine Corps launched its final “stepping stone” invasion before the Japanese Home Islands by landing at Okinawa.
In May 1944, the escalation of brutality and death in the Pacific theater since January 29th picked up even more speed. At Okinawa, US forces suffered nearly 16,000 dead in one month of combat, while in China and Burma, at least 400,000 people were killed by the sudden resumption of hostilities. The reward was progress into Japanese-occupied China, and a launching pad for the invasion of Kyushu.
Now the question of the three nuclear weapons in the US arsenal came up again. Secretary of State Nightmore suggested that they should be used on Japan, forcing them to surrender through shock and awe before a costly invasion of the Home Islands had to be launched. The President however, refused to use the bombs unless absolutely necessary, and since the Vice-President and Secretary of Defense Jarvis were still on the fence about the use of these new, horrifically destructive weapons, he ordered Operation Ocean Waves.

kyushu1944.jpg

5. US Marines on the beach at Shibushi.​

The battle for Kyushu began on June 19th, with the bloodiest landing of the entire war at Shibushi Beach. In three days of continuous fighting, 4,500 marines were killed before a breakout was achieved. By then, US bombing and strafing runs had been running 24 hours straight without stop from carriers out at sea in an attempt to soften the Japanese defenses. And Shibushi would prove to be an omen of things to come.
The Japanese fought back at every point of the invasion. This was not like the final assault on Germany, where progress was bloody, but quick and rather one-sided. In Kyushu, every mile was won with days of fighting and thousands of dead. Over a month after the initial invasion, on July 27th, with US deaths at an estimated 87,000, and Japanese military and civilian deaths over ten times that number, Secretary of Defense Jarvis came to the President and recommended taking Secretary Nightmore’s suggestion.
The city on earth to experience nuclear warfare was Hiroshima. In a split second on July 28th, between 80,000 and 130,000 people were incinerated by the detonation of “Slim Jim.” The next day, President McCahill reiterated his offer to the Japanese leadership of unconditional surrender. When no answer was received in two days, Japanese High Command and the Emperor being in the middle of debate over whether Hiroshima truly was a bomb, and if it was, if the US even had more than one, “Fat Man”, also known as “Fat Bastard” was dropped on Osaka. The next day, High Command buckled and allowed the Emperor to announce the surrender of Imperial Japan.

vjday.jpg

6. VJ Day celebrations, August 2nd 1944.​

VJ Day was greeted with the same enthusiasm in the United States as was VE Day, if not more. The Second World War was well and truly over. The conflict that had lasted more than five years and claimed the lives of more than 500,000 Americans was over. In a broader sense, it was the end of the great crisis that the United States had been mired in since the stock market crash in 1929. During McCahill’s two terms, only one year had not seen America engaged in some sort of armed conflict. For the entire nation, the months between the end of the war in August and presidential primary season in December 1944 were time to simply enjoy the silence.

[1] – The UN would not officially be formed until the signing of the United Nations Charter on May 1st 1945, but that Charter was largely laid out at Crete, and the organization itself considers February 3rd to be its date of founding.

[2] – Churchill had initially proposed a French occupation zone, but objections from Stalin and a lack of support by McCahill, stemming from unwillingness to form another “European scheming circle” akin to the League of European States, led to the idea being buried.

[3] – McCahill did however, on the advice of Secretary of State Nightmore and Secretary of Defense Jarvis, approve the creation of at least three more bombs, to be used as a deterrent or last resort.

[4] – The efforts of SAS Colonel Reginald Faulkner and Marine Corps Special Operator William Conners would be adapted into the movie “The Manila Express”, which won 8 Oscars in 1958, including Best Picture, Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Actor for Alec Guinness as Faulkner, and Best Supporting Actor for James Dean as Conners.

----------------------------

Exceptional Situation(s):

And that’s the Second World War wrapped up.

I’m willing to give more info on the situation on the world stage in December 1944 upon request.

Primary time.

Parties are: Liberal, Progressive, Republican.
 
Though I am terribly saddened by the use of such a destructive weapon was used, I am delighted with the end of fascism and the war. Our soldiers fought with great honor, pride and bravery and I would like to congratulate them on their victories in Europe and the Pacific. I also would like to send my condolences to the American families who lost their loved ones in the war, your sons, brothers, fathers and husbands fought with such valor and you should be proud. May we rejoice with the end of fascism and the war and continue to focus on the rebuilding of our nation. Forever may peace and democracy prevail!

I may consider running for leader of the Liberal party in this primary but for right now I will not.

~ Christina J. Blancharde-Fredrick, Speaker of the House of Representatives
 
While I understand that my duties on the front have been limited lately and have not been in the news, I can assure the American people that I have been working to my fullest to see this come under control. While - yes, I am still a commanding General, I would like to announce, that I shall be standing for the Republican nomination for President of the United States of America. This may come as surprising, and to do so - I will be looking to resign from my position in the United States Military. I do this, not out of abandoning our commitment to Europe - but to strengthen out commitment there. The things I have learned, and the skills should prove handy should I become President of the United States - as I will see through our reconstruction efforts.

Freedom and Democracy will never perish!

General Henry G. Bradley
 
A statement made by Vice President William Gallatin during VJ celebrations in Philadelphia. While he disappointed the expectations of reporters in the crowd by not announcing it then, he would declare quietly the same day that he was running for the Republican nomination for President.

The world is at peace, after so many years. The struggle with fascism is over, decided once and for all on the battlefields of the world. Now we look on to a new world, with new hopes and new dangers. It is my hope, and indeed the earnest hope of all mankind, that a better world shall emerge out of the blood and carnage of the past - a world dedicated to the dignity of man and the fulfillment of his most cherished wish for freedom, tolerance and justice.

But this will not happen on its own. We have seen many wars and many horrors through history - of which this is simply the culmination. No, to build up a true and lasting peace we must stand strong in peace as we stood in war.

In war, we stood strong with free and willing cooperation. While the extremists mocked, trusting only in the control of the state and the power of lies and repression, we built a model of a free people working together with greater unity and greater purpose. In war, we built the foundations of peace with just dealings, wishing to profit only peace and safety from the blood spilled, and constructively working together with an alliance for peace.

Now we must continue our work, or the light of democracy will be hidden. We must continue to work together freely in peace, cooperating to reach out to our neighbors politically, socially, and diplomatically. We must continue to deal justly with each other, with good laws and honest interactions. We must continue constructive discourse and negotiations to deal with issues before they become conflicts at home or abroad. With such efforts, I believe a better world shall emerge, and the horrors of this war can be the last such suffering the world must go through.
 
This great and terrible war is over; it is up to the next president of this nation to lead the United States, and the world, into the future. In 1905, when I graduated from West Point and served as an aid to the invasion force in Peru, I saw the horrors of war; in 1915,fighting under some of our brightest commanders, I saw more of the same; in 1937, I coordinated the efforts to liberate our nation’s capital from the clutches of those who would destroy our liberty; and this year, I made one of the most difficult choices in my life: the power of this atom bomb is great, and terrible, and my advocacy for its use was only to prevent more grievous loss of life. Now, however, is a new day, a new era, one which may usher in a period of peace and tranquility.

That said, I have one further statement; I, Secretary of Defence Richard Jarvis, announce my candidacy for President of the United States as a Republican; if I am elected, I will work with the British and Soviet leaders to bring about the dream of world peace.

((Also, info about the world stage would be lovely))
 
Last edited:
(( Finally some good ol' updates !, and guess who are back, the much loved Horshington's))
Dr. Robert Horshington is running as president under the Progressive Party.
Platform and speech tomorrow.
 
((Since nobody has announced their candidacy for the Liberal Party:))

I, Calvin Emerson, announce my candidacy for President of the United States, running under the banner of the Liberal Party.

Candidacy announcements are over.

Primary Update coming in the next two days.
 
In these trying times, the American people need strong leadership; a man with both political experience, and a military record; of the three Republican candidates running, only one meets that qualification. I’ve spent over thirty years in the army, and have a wealth of experience from my days of fighting in World War I, and my peacetime stations thereafter. Under this past administration, I’ve had the distinct honour of leading our forces to victory in Europe and France, coordinating our efforts with the British and Soviets, and directing resources in multiple theatres: no other candidate can make such a claim and back it!

General Bradley, a man who I deeply respect, and have had the privilege of commanding these many years, is a superb commander, and a man of integrity and pragmatic disposition; however, despite these many great qualities, he has never held a political position, and has not had to make due with budgets set by Congress, and the many issues that a Defence Secretary must contend with.

I can make no such statement against Vice President Gallatin; there are few men in the country today with the wealth of political experience and know-how that he possesses. An amicable man, one known for his ability to work with both sides, he too is a strong choice from my party, on political matters; however, in the foreign arena, he is largely untested, and does not know the horrors of war as thoroughly as Bradley and I do.

Under a Jarvis Administration, this country will know peace! It will know renewed prosperity! It will know progress! This is a new age for America and humanity, a chance to forever make the world a better place: if elected your president, I will do everything in my power to promote the ideals of liberty and democracy to the world, and to refute the outdated notions of war and despotism!
 
Secretary Jarvis is an honorable and wise man, a strong candidate for the nomination. However, I must disagree with him on some points. Military coordination - which the Secretary did worthily, and showed his great experience in - is not the only way to gain experience with foreign policy, nor is the battlefield the only horror of war. We at home have seen the horrors of the fathers and mothers who sent their son to the front and never got them back, the horrors of children whose daddy never returned, the horrors of the brave soldiers who returned to us with wounds that will never leave them. The battlefields are fortunately in the past - but these horrors still continue as we enter into peace and consider our new peacetime paths.
 
In the past eight years, I have worked with politicians from the Progressive Party, the Republican Party and my own Liberal Party; all those who stand today have served in one of my governments in one form or another and so, at this early stage, I believe it would be both derogatory and churlish to endorse one party over another, let alone a single man. I would, however, stress the need for the political classes to learn the lessons that caused this country to fall into conflict for the vast majority of the last decade. America can never again stand isolated from the world around it. America never was, and never will be, an island.

As such, and with all the modest my title can bestow, I petition to each of the three main parties to support my candidacy to become the Ambassador of the United States to the United Nations after stepping down from office.
 
While I respect the opinions of my opponents, I'd like to return and say to the Honorable Secretary of Defense that frankly, I don't give a damn if I've never held a political position. Quiet frankly, it isn't necessary to have Political Experience. Take a look at General Washington, the finest of all men in American History, who was nothing more than a General in the Army, and before that a simple delegate to the Continental Congresses. He held no position in an "Administration" nor did he hold any type of "Secretary" job. And frankly, I do respect your office, Mr. Secretary, but I'll be damned if I hear you talk about leading our men to victory. I did not see you in Anzio, I did not see your in Normandy, and I did not see you in Rome! You have been sitting back, on the Chair in Washington, while I was leading America's Sons into the fire and death that burned across Europe. I will say, no other Candidate can claim to be an Armchair General as yourself!

While I may not be the best man for the job, but I feel I am the best man of the lot. The pain and suffering felt at home, as well as the pain and suffering felt on the Battlefields are both experiences I have been through. I've been the camps of soldiers who have had their legs blown off, their arms removed, and wounds that they will never recover from. I have seen the horrors of this war, and I know for a fact - I will do whats in my power to prevent another war like this, if it's the last thing I do. A Bradley Administration would be focused on Peace at Home, and Peace Abroad. Never again shall these horrors plague this Earth! I have seen this, with my own eyes! I've seen men I've known and come to think of as sons laying in ditches! I know that Peacetime negotiations will be tough and painful, but the knowledge and the know-how of what a wounded nation, a wounded continent, nay - a wounded Planet, lies within the mind of a General who has been there and seen that, not in the hands of a Secretary in his office in Washington! It comes from the man who stayed up countless nights, hearing the Artillery roar, the gunfire rattling in the distance, and the screams of death.

Only a General can ensure Peace in the World.
 
Sir, if you believe that I have not experienced the horrors of way, you are truly mistaken; I was a junior officer in the Siberian front in the First World War, and what I saw there was nothing but utter brutality and the worst in human nature. I saw Vladivostok under siege, and I saw the horrendous aftermath of the campaign firsthand, not as a general miles away from the front, but there, leading troops directly into the fray. To say that I am only an armchair general with no experience in combat is nothing but a grave insult to my honour and an outright lie! To insinuate that I have never seen the horrors of war, when I fought in the fields of Siberia, hiding in the trenches with my men, fearing that every cannon fired would land on us, and listening to the sounds of death around me, is the most despicable thing a man has ever said to me.

You've already decided to show your viciousness to a member of your own party, who had done nothing but heap praise on your command; what will you do with the British government, or the Soviet Premier?

A Jarvis Administration will work with the Soviets and British, work towards compromise, and will, at every possible juncture, strive to American boys safe from war; to best ensure that, I would back President McCahill, who's already shown his deft talent for working with all sides, as American Ambassador to the UN, and would work to ensure that Soviet-American relations are warm and beneficial.
 
The First World War was a far different affair than this one. Sure, your experience gives you first-hand accounts, but it does nothing to compare to the true horrors we have experienced in this war. Both of them are horrible, but if we keep having inept Leadership, someone who doesn't understand the horrors of THIS war, the world we currently live in, then we will be doomed to slip back into it! You have yet to prove that you understand the terrible cost of the War we are in! I just walked out of the War Zone, while your experience is laid back, tucked in your head. It is far too easy, as we have seen in Europe, of the ability to become complacent and forgetful. As all good Politicians of the world, where have they gotten us? We have gotten the First World War, we have gotten the Second World War. I say it's enough!

That's right! It's enough with these damned Politicians! This country needed a General, a man who has served with America's Sons, has been alongside them as they fought, and as they died. To insist I have been miles away from the front is nothing more than slander! I have been right there, on the front, commanding divisions, and making sure we pushed the German War Machine back. Now I must ask you - you seem to vehement on making sure American Boys do not go off to war, but what about German Boys? Russian Boys? British Boys? Any attempts to say "It isn't our Problem" has been proven wrong! We have paid the Price for sitting back and it "Not being our problem!" We have seen death and destruction, and a so-called "Jarvis Administration" would do nothing but turn back the clock to this dangerous idea!

This Country needed a People's President. I have led soldiers into Battle, working to make the World Safe for Democracy, and I feel now, using the experience of dealing with NATO and other Nations' forces, that I am uniquely qualified to lead this Nation to a better, and brighter, future, where we shall not hesitate, ever, to make the world a safer, better place.
 
I may have yet to endorse any candidate, but I do state that I believe it is extremely dangerous for this country to elect a soldier to the office of President at this time; we have just gone near enough a decade of war during which, we have been led impeccably by a civilian (and I dare you to contradict me). Military Presidents are neither needed nor wanted. What we need now is someone who can lead this nation in peace, and for all the rhetoric I hear from the right, making a member of the armed forces our President would not be conducive to a firm and lasting peace.
 
Are you implying I am out of touch? That the man who coordinated the military strategy of this war was locked in some sort of Great War mentality? To make that argument, one must have a very specific breed of illogic to justify it; however, it is entirely plausible to say that a man as bellicose and pseudo-populist as you would likely lead us into conflict with the Soviet Union, which this nation, and the world as a whole, could ill-afford; furthermore, I have made no statement that could even be construed as backward thinking; and no one thus far in the campaign has said anything akin to "it isn't our problem."

You seem to forget that I am a general; I've been one since the Sherman administration, and I do not take your ridiculous critique of my experience lightly. I have led troops into battle; I saw the foolish charges against the trenches, the bombs falling down over cities; and I saw the bloodbaths in France in the final months of the war. To say that this war is so much more horrible than than the last is doing a great dishonour and disservice to those who witnessed the fury and terror of the Great War; those who lost a friend or family member; those who lost a limb; and certainly those who lost their lives. War is war, and it is the most horrible experience, in all its forms.

I don't want American servicemen to die in foolish, petty wars, that is true; I don't want any man, woman, or child, of any nationality, to so either. I strive for peace, and I plan to work through the United Nations and through negotiations with the leading powers to ensure that a war of this magnitude never happens again. Your assault on my policies begs the question, though; what is your plan to prevent war? How will you ensure the world is a safer, better place? And how far are you willing to go to achieve that end?

In any case, your aggressiveness and arrogance are most unbecoming; that you act as though only you have this unique knowledge of the horrors of war, and that I, simply by being in a different war, am absolutely aloof of the horrors of this war, when I am Secretary of Defence, is utterly ridiculous! I fear how your attitude would affect Soviet policy.