Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

The Presidents: 1836-1936 - An Interactive US AAR

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • 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.
Show only dev responses
I have spent my years on the battlefield sir, as an observer in China and as an artillery battery commander in the Peruvian war. To think that I did not sacrifice just because I did not pay the ultimate price is absurd. Even then, these are not the days of yore where generals would sit safely hundreds of yards behind the line while their men marched forward into cannon fire. These days, artillery can fire shells miles behind the front line, and aircraft can prowl the sky for dozens of miles in any direction. Nowhere on the battlefield, and no person, is safe anymore.

There are those who serve, and those who do not. Those of us who do serve make it so others must not, by allowing us to have a volunteer system instead of compulsory service. If you would not fight the tyrants of Russia or Germany and help liberate their people so that the Russian peasant or the German factory worker would not have to fight for their tyrants, what will you fight for? Would you fight for freedom only when it is in America's interest? Do you believe anything is worth fighting for? I must ask, would you relinquish your office, Governor, and grab a rifle and join the fight, so that a farmer from your state would not have to?

Major General Walter Mandrake
 
It may come to that, Major General; I am within the age of conscription as set down by this act, and may very well have to take up arms or face a prison sentence. Were this a war in defense of America's shores or American citizens, I would gladly lay down my life and require others to do the same. But this is not that war, nor is it, as you claim, a war to free the peasants and serfs of the Tripartite. It is a war being fought over long-held grudges between the monarchs of Europe, a senseless war with no true aim in sight save the destruction of human life. I believe it is my duty, as the elected representative of the people of Illinois, to strive my utmost to keep the people of my state and the people of my country out of harm's way, to avoid needless bloodshed and fattening the profit margins of arms merchants.

As for the risk of being a general on a modern battlefield, I concede to you that there is an element of danger. However, I believe you must admit that the danger faced by a general encamped far behind the front lines, and that of a conscript with the bare minimum of training and equipment, are two very different things. That danger is virtually non-existant to politicians and corporate presidents, many of whom are beyond the age of conscription; they view this as a purely theoretical exercise, as though it were some kind of war game where little figures of men are pushed around a map. Were it so, phrases like "a small price to pay" would seem eminently reasonable, but it is not. The consequences of our argument are very real, and lives hang in the balance.
 
Only a madman, Nightmore included, would be sit in happy contentment when men die under their command. I have served my country in the military good sir, being in the Navy for the greater part of my youth. However now I continue to serve my country in a different way, the call of duty that I'm compelled with makes me seek to improve the lives of the people of the United States, and protect those same people. It is not easy to take a decision like joining a global conflict. However it would be a much weaker President whom did nothing than one who took that tough decision, and I assure you I will work myself to death if need be to protect this nation and win this war.

And I want to ensure that when our men return from the font lines, with the completion of our reform program, they are able to enjoy a better existence than any other men in the world. We shall build a country fit for heroes.
 
And their widows, their orphans, their grieving parents and siblings? We will have plenty of those even without implementing conscription, I assure you; by drafting the working man to fight alongside the professional soldier, the tears of grief and loss will form a terrible river of sorrow. Many of those conscripts will not return at all; those who do will return maimed, unable to provide for their families, and traumatized by the agony of war. If you truly bore the weight of that responsibility, if you truly understood the losses we face by forcing our workers and farmhands to fight in France and Chile, then the Conscription Act would simply not exist; it would be unthinkable. But rather than shoulder the full measure of that burden, your Administration conspires to obscure it behind veils of jingoism and patriotic fervor. I cannot understand why, but I must oppose it nonetheless.
 
etranger01 said:
And their widows, their orphans, their grieving parents and siblings? We will have plenty of those even without implementing conscription, I assure you; by drafting the working man to fight alongside the professional soldier, the tears of grief and loss will form a terrible river of sorrow. Many of those conscripts will not return at all; those who do will return maimed, unable to provide for their families, and traumatized by the agony of war. If you truly bore the weight of that responsibility, if you truly understood the losses we face by forcing our workers and farmhands to fight in France and Chile, then the Conscription Act would simply not exist; it would be unthinkable. But rather than shoulder the full measure of that burden, your Administration conspires to obscure it behind veils of jingoism and patriotic fervor. I cannot understand why, but I must oppose it nonetheless.
Click to expand...
The world is gearing up for war. There will be no shortage of grief no matter what we do, why we do it, or how we do it. To cut off conscription to ease grief would be to simply empty the ocean with a preserves jar. Rather, what we and our allies must due is to put up the most capable, the most prepared, the best taken care of to help hold back the tide of tyranny and arbitrary warfare. Prepared, ready, and cared for soldiers rather than civilians. Prepared and accepting armies of the republics, rather than the future citizens of a darker world. We cannot avoid death and grief from our military actions, but we can hold back further grief from our citizens and future generations of them.
 
In these times of Crisis, I put my full faith in the United States Government. As a 2nd Lieutenant, I do hope that I will be commanding some men on the front lines in France or Russia, it is because of this that I feel qualified to ask our Government for a nationwide conscription programme. It is only through this way that we can gain the needed number of men to overwhelm the enemy with the full might of Uncle Sam and overwhelming power of the American nation.
 
I find it interesting that the nation that reviled former President Carr's intervention in Peru with such a ferocious intensity is now clamoring to send American men to die in some wretched field that means nothing to any of us. What happened to that revilement for imperialism, that revilement for sticking our nose where it doesn't belong and transforming our economy into a state-run business of murder? Did it just mysteriously disappear as soon as Terrance walked into the White House?

By God, this is a horrid flipping of the dime, and a horrid failure to stand by our democratic principles.
 
Seek75 said:
I find it interesting that the nation that reviled former President Carr's intervention in Peru with such a ferocious intensity is now clamoring to send American men to die in some wretched field that means nothing to any of us. What happened to that revilement for imperialism, that revilement for sticking our nose where it doesn't belong and transforming our economy into a state-run business of murder? Did it just mysteriously disappear as soon as Terrance walked into the White House?

By God, this is a horrid flipping of the dime, and a horrid failure to stand by our democratic principles.
Click to expand...

You have to understand, sir, the American people is finally waking up. We are not cowards anymore.
 
Seek75 said:
I find it interesting that the nation that reviled former President Carr's intervention in Peru with such a ferocious intensity is now clamoring to send American men to die in some wretched field that means nothing to any of us. What happened to that revilement for imperialism, that revilement for sticking our nose where it doesn't belong and transforming our economy into a state-run business of murder? Did it just mysteriously disappear as soon as Terrance walked into the White House?

By God, this is a horrid flipping of the dime, and a horrid failure to stand by our democratic principles.
Click to expand...

Indeed, it seems that the spirit of non-interventionism has died; no-one, save for a few, are still willing to criticize the war effort, when fighting with nations, and against nations, that have at various points been our friends and foes.

And Mr. Nightmore, is it bravery to be complicit in the slaughter of millions? Is it bravery to ruin the lives of civilians, as the British will be doing with their crippling blockade? If that is heroism, then I would prefer to be a coward.
 
Riccardo93 said:
And Mr. Nightmore, is it bravery to be complicit in the slaughter of millions? Is it bravery to ruin the lives of civilians, as the British will be doing with their crippling blockade? If that is heroism, then I would prefer to be a coward.
Click to expand...

Is it in America's interests, or in the interests of Freedom, to sit idly by while the tyrants of of the Dark Regimes of Germany and Russia visit destruction on the free peoples of Europe? Freedom is the one thing Americans can agree on. What does it say about our integrity if we stand for it only when it is expedient?

It is a sad fact of life that war visits more destruction and death upon the very people we seek to protect than on those that cause the war. Make no mistake, this war will occur whether we intervene or not. The chance that we can, through our intervention, see a better, more peaceful, and free Europe arise from the ashes should make our intervention a given. Without our presence and guidance in this war and in the following peace, it will only be the first one in a series of many more wars to come.

Major General Walter Mandrake
 
Excerpt from a war rally in Boston by Seamus Écossais, Secretary of Defense

Well, we're in the fight now boys. These if, buts and whens will help us to no purpose. Let us put in a friendly regime in Chile, so that we can guarantee future peace, and fight 'till we can end this.

Many people may think that this isn't our fight, but what they say no longer matters as this is NOW our fight. To argue the theology of people's Freedoms and Rights is not my job. I am here to protect you and your brothers. Your husbands and your daughters.

We should now be honourable to our agreements and fight with our allies. Instill peace in South America, maybe take down a tyrant or two in Europe.

We are Americans, lovers of Freedom and fighter of Tyrants. We are an honourable that aid our allies and instill confidence in the weary and fear in the oppressive. We are here to fight, we are here to WIN!

Let no man keep down the soaring Eagle!
 
Sorry, it's been a hectic week.

I'll call the vote and try to get the update for 1913 to you tomorrow.

The Polls are Closed.

The WEA passes 9/3/2

The ACA passes 6/5/2
 
May we celebrate that common sense has triumphed over selfish isolationism.
 
Had those who chose abstention instead voted their conscience against this shameful bill, thousands of American men and boys would not stand condemned today as future victims of a European war. At least those who voted in its favor can lay claim to some kind of moral position, albeit the wrong one. Regardless, when the butcher's bill comes due for this irresponsible adventurism, the record will lay out, quite clearly, those who voted for bloodshed and those without the courage to take a stand.

It is my considered belief that Article II of the War Economy Act violates the protections laid down in the First Amendment of the US Constitution. Should any worker or union exercise their Constitutional right to strike during this war, I will throw my full support behind those persecuted under this unjust law and endeavor to see their case tried in front of the Supreme Court, so that this heinous anti-labor provision may be struck down.
 
It's a sad day for Peace. In this grim day we will send thousands of young countrymen to die.
 
Sorry Senators and countrymen/women, I have to ask: What has been happening in Washington? I have been here for a few weeks, but I feel that I have entered a debate half over. Could a fellow government guy help inform me as to what has been occurring?
 
zagoroth said:
Sorry Senators and countrymen/women, I have to ask: What has been happening in Washington? I have been here for a few weeks, but I feel that I have entered a debate half over. Could a fellow government guy help inform me as to what has been occurring?
Click to expand...
We're finally going to war. We will invade Chile and Europe for the glory of our nation.
 
The primary focus lately has been on the war against the Triple Alliance and the Santiago Pact. Two acts were passed - the War Economy Act sets up a system for industrial corporations, the government, and workers to coordinate their activities for war production (avoiding poorly timed strikes, encouraging production of necessary goods, etc.), while the American Conscription Act gives the government the authority to call up the draft to fill the ranks of the army for the upcoming struggles.

Opponents of the WEA were mainly concerned about prohibitions of strikes in crucial industries (workers instead take their issues to an agency which mediates between them and corporate leaders, to provide the negotiation powers of a strike without the stop to production) from the debates I heard (also, direct government takeover of unused factories for war production was mentioned as an issue to be considered by some), while many opposed the ACA with a concern for its precedence in politics and a dislike for military policies which would need such a conscription (desiring to have a continental only plan, or at least a much more limited engagement abroad, with only volunteer troops).

Generally the plan militarily seems to be to invade Chile, the closest and weakest of the pact of enemies against us, while shoring up the defenses of our allies in Europe. Landings in the Pacific rim of Russia and later advances in Europe have been suggested as well, although many plans are still being formed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back