Confederate States of America

[unmerged(36311)]

Why did Britain get the Phillipines? Because she could and because it makes sense. Britain effectively blocks Japanese designs and strengthens her position in the pacific.



Why is yours (or is it Turtledove's ) a more realistic scenario?

Cthulu has no credible argument over ownership of the phillipines!

Cthulu's scenario is all washed up and unlikely!

Cthulu disgraces the south's peaceful nature by dumping the western wastes on us!

Cthulu thinks utah and california make a cute couple!

Haul out the tar'n feathers!
Muzzle Cthulu! discredit his ideas!
gogogo!

 

[unmerged(39265)]

Preach on, oh Southern zealot! I believe this mod is complete fiction, and that whatever historical reasonings behind any changes made in it should be looked at with as little seriousness as possible. The scenario in general is just plain silly (so the south COULD have continued to exist and win the civil war... but for the south to become what this mod would have it... that's absurd). Still, I don't mind so much. It's a game, afterall. But it does kind of rub me the wrong way to see the CSA portrayed in such a manner. Even the British hold on the Phillipines seems like bunk. I'd prefer to have the CSA start as it *SHOULD* be, and capable of a drastic change through events. However, that is simply an opinion of my own, and the mod will still be fun regardless.

 

[unmerged(28432)]

I'm sorry, I was at school when I posted earlier so I did not have enough time to finish what I was going to say.

Let's begin with your history.

"In our version, the South is indeed not as populous as the North but the industrial gap is
not that big by 1914. The South industrialized fast in the years after the post CW
recession. The CSA has been allied with Deseret since the civil war and both the US and CS
are guaranteeing California’s independence."

The South, had they successfully broken up from the North after the Civil War, could not in any way have as much industry as the North by 1914. The South's culture in the 19th century was plantations and farming. They didn't have the industry of the North. Their mindset was not on having large industrial works but rather having plantations. How can you possibly see the South having as much industry as the U.S? Even had the South wanted to make as much industry as the North, they could not have done so what with their low population.

"The CSA intervenes in the failed French intervention in Mexico and saves the Emperor. We
haven’t decided if the Habsburg’s are still on the throne by 1936 but Mexico has been allied
to the CSA since then and was also fighting alongside the CSA and allies in the Great War."

Agreed. Mexico and the CSA is like butter and bread, they go together well.

" The opening of the
GW in 1914 saw a series of spectacular confederate victories which led to the fall of
Washington and New England where the confederates joined hands with the Canadians and
British."

Excuse me but this is pure bullshit in and out. How on earth could the Confederacy blitz all the way through New England? D.C would be incredibly easy (fired upon the hills in Virginia and invaded in the opening months of the war) but New England?! Do you honestly think that the Northern soldiers would sit idly with their thumbs in their mouths while the Confederacy takes their massive industry? If there would ever be Northern soldiers in the U.S in 1914 it would be in New England. Here's the only plausible way that I can see New England being taken by the Confederacy: 1914- Confederacy forces march onto the city of D.C and take it, from there they continue north when.. Suddenly aliens come from the sky and an alliance is made between the aliens and the southern soldiers! Together both of them march onto the poor Yankees sitting in their trenches.

See what I mean? Now on to other subjects.

"The South had opened the war with what looked like a
mortal blow but the war dragged on and although the US showed troubling signs of unrest
and war fatigue in the end of 1917, it came as a complete surprise when the US
government in Chicago sued for peace in the spring of 1918."

So.. What you're saying is that the Confederacy, the Confederacy who has a 1:3 ratio with the United States mind you.. Somehow won a war of attrition with the United States after 5 years of fighting? By the way, the population of the Confederacy would be.. what? 2x smaller than France? If France was on the verge of breaking down in under 4 years.. What do you think the Confederacy would be doing after 6 years?

"The CSA wanted peace but it still had obligations to her European allies. Consequently a
large expeditionary force was sent to northern France to fight the Germans."

..Right. After a gruelling 6 year war which they couldn't even have sustained anyway, the battered CSA decides to "send a large expeditionary force" half across the world to fight another Nation? Uhhuh..

Now, I can understand that you're trying to come up with a backround that can be hard to do, but there are ways to do such things. You spend time researching and come up with plausible outcomes.

"Why did Britain get the Phillipines? Because she could and because it makes sense. Britain
effectively blocks Japanese designs and strengthens her position in the pacific.

Spanish - American war: "- On February 15, 1898, the confederate battleship CSS Virginia
in Havana harbor suffered an explosion and quickly sank with a loss of 260 men."

Why is yours (or is it Turtledove's ) a more realistic scenario?"

Simple. After the Meiji Restoration, Japan became a major imperial power, the only problem was that all of its neighbors had gobbled up basically everything that there was to take. Japan simply wouldn't have allowed Britain to take Philippines. During the time Britain did not have much manpower in the far east and could not have effectively kept the Philippines out of Japan's hands.

To answer your question, Turtledove's scenario is more realistic because he is a scholared historian. You are not.

 

[cthulhu]

Cthulu has no credible argument over ownership of the phillipines!

Cthulu's scenario is all washed up and unlikely!

Cthulu disgraces the south's peaceful nature by dumping the western wastes on us!

Cthulu thinks utah and california make a cute couple!

Haul out the tar'n feathers!
Muzzle Cthulu! discredit his ideas!
gogogo!

Could you at least motivate your opinions. It's the third time I write this: why is New Mexico so unthinkable? Give me a reference to a source. Also, I guess that the last statement is a joke and if it is you should use a smiley. If it's not...then that's a different mattter...

 

[cthulhu]

The scenario in general is just plain silly (so the south COULD have continued to exist and win the civil war... but for the south to become what this mod would have it... that's absurd).

Why would you want to work on a this with that attitude? I think it would be great if you and Lettow77 + others created your own scenario. If it becomes better than this one I'll be sure to play your scenario.

 

[cthulhu]

The South, had they successfully broken up from the North after the Civil War, could not in any way have as much industry as the North by 1914. The South's culture in the 19th century was plantations and farming. They didn't have the industry of the North. Their mindset was not on having large industrial works but rather having plantations. How can you possibly see the South having as much industry as the U.S? Even had the South wanted to make as much industry as the North, they could not have done so what with their low population.

I'm convinced that the postwar depression would have made or breaked the young state. I think the plantation system was doomed by the development by the world market and Industrialization regradless. The south would have to adapt or be a piss poor backwater. Still, I'm preared to discuss the IC level but i'd like to see it at 2/3 of US IC.

Excuse me but this is pure bullshit in and out. How on earth could the Confederacy blitz all the way through New England? D.C would be incredibly easy (fired upon the hills in Virginia and invaded in the opening months of the war) but New England?! Do you honestly think that the Northern soldiers would sit idly with their thumbs in their mouths while the Confederacy takes their massive industry? If there would ever be Northern soldiers in the U.S in 1914 it would be in New England. Here's the only plausible way that I can see New England being taken by the Confederacy: 1914- Confederacy forces march onto the city of D.C and take it, from there they continue north when.. Suddenly aliens come from the sky and an alliance is made between the aliens and the southern soldiers! Together both of them march onto the poor Yankees sitting in their trenches.

See what I mean? Now on to other subjects.

Who talks about sitting idly? They got soundly beaten by the initial offensives. Just like the Belgians and French were in Europe. Why would this be so impossible? This leads to the fall of New England.

So.. What you're saying is that the Confederacy, the Confederacy who has a 1:3 ratio with the United States mind you.. Somehow won a war of attrition with the United States after 5 years of fighting? By the way, the population of the Confederacy would be.. what? 2x smaller than France? If France was on the verge of breaking down in under 4 years.. What do you think the Confederacy would be doing after 6 years?

Your argument is based on a moronic General Staff that throws waves after waves at the enemy in futile attempts to captured a few yards of muddy land. I envisioned the CSA staying defensive in the east after 1915 and trying to win in the west while the USA has the moronic General Staff.

..Right. After a gruelling 6 year war which they couldn't even have sustained anyway, the battered CSA decides to "send a large expeditionary force" half across the world to fight another Nation? Uhhuh..

So what, the CSA should be a dishonorable nation that doesn't live up to it's commitments to her allies?

Simple. After the Meiji Restoration, Japan became a major imperial power, the only problem was that all of its neighbors had gobbled up basically everything that there was to take. Japan simply wouldn't have allowed Britain to take Philippines. During the time Britain did not have much manpower in the far east and could not have effectively kept the Philippines out of Japan's hands.

Japan wouldn't allow it? Do you think the allies would have allowed Japan to go the way you suggest?

To answer your question, Turtledove's scenario is more realistic because he is a scholared historian. You are not.

Thanks for clearing that up.

 

[unmerged(11928)]

HoChiMinh

The ARTIC League was just a "symbolic" sort of name, complete fiction, a good dose of northern unity would cause (in HOI2 terms) these countries to be something other than victims. The only way in HOI2 to make minors anything other than a pushover (especially later in the game, 45ish) IMHO is to ally them into regional bands. Could have happened in any number of wars previous to the big one. I figured since we were starting from just before the civil war I had a few decades to play with.

"The south did not accept blacks in their army. The north did, though, but when the south caught these blacks a PoWs they were executed on spot without trial".

Come on man...
Actually the south DID allow blacks in their army and blacks themselves even formed several all black regiments. There were numerous blacks present in "official" signed capacities in CSA units and indeed they fought heroicly, not to mention the blacks present to provide logistical support for the confederate army. Too late in the war, Robert E Lee himself proposed granted freedom to all blacks who would fight. It was declined as a moot point by then. BTW, the north did not allow blacks into their army until 1863 in their sudden quest for moral high-ground in a failing military operation.

Certainly there were atrocities commited against POWs.... on both sides!
But, if you want to talk about atrocities, how about the organized robbery, rape, and murder commited on a national scale by the Union Army against black and white southerners, who were admitted "their" own citizens? Everyone in the south was starving, so the loss of federal prisoners at Andersonville were attrocious but there was a reason... no food. However, it was not the worst prison camp of the civil war... You have to look at Palmyra, Illinois for that war crime...

Anti-southern bias in the media is nothing new, so your understanding may be excused by the public education system. However, your (and most peoples) misconceptions are certainly not backed up by the historical record. "To the victor, go the spoils" the sweetest of which is getting to put your slant on the history books!

 

[unmerged(26209)]

What educational system? Schools in Sweden don't teach this information, my source is mainly encyclopedias, wikipedia and others like that.
And I don't pretend to know much about the CSA anyway. I will take a passive role in these debates anyway.

Isn't Scandinavian League a better name? ^^

 

[unmerged(37807)]

First off, I'd like to say Cheers to cthulhu for taking commentary (even some immature commentary) with alot of class.

I am also of the opinion that the Turtledove Scenario is probably more historic in nature. But Cthulhu isn't exactly trying to rewrite history, hes just making an amusing scenario which he hopes we can all enjoy. I look forward to it.

I do however find it hard to believe that New England could be taken early in any war. Maybe i'm biased from reading Turtledove, but I think it more likely to blitz through the midwest, than to blitz up the coast.

But for 80 years of altered history, I can't be one to judge. if cthulhu says in his alternate universe, the CSA became almost as powerful and big as the USA in its 80 year existence, then I'll just believe him and have fun playing the game.

 

[unmerged(37839)]

Black soldiers did fight for the CSA but as free men. There were a number of black plantation owners in Louisiana, about 6% of the black population, who fought for the South. I cant imagin the South arming the slaves before it was to late for it to be useful. However, if they had, that may have changed history and won the war for them. So many areas were one choice could have changed the world...

 

[unmerged(39265)]

Why would you want to work on a this with that attitude? I think it would be great if you and Lettow77 + others created your own scenario. If it becomes better than this one I'll be sure to play your scenario.

I'm only saying that your history is silly and implausible. I also stated that I don't particularly care, as it's of no consequence to me. The mod you are making will be fun, and that is all I care about. Therefore I am anxious to aid its production in any way I can. Once it is completed, I'd love to make a mod based on your completed CSA mod... one that is historically realistic. The overwhelming majority of your work is very good so far, no sense in all of that research being done twice on 2 different mods with the same basic goals.

In short, you're producing what will be a very, very fun mod for Hearts of Iron 2. Probably more fun than a historically plausible scenario would be. Anyone against it for reasons of "historical impossibility" is a victim of their own ego, and takes themself far too seriously to be of use to the development process.

If I were you, I'd outline what every country will be at the beginning of your mod. Government, policies, territories, etc... and THEN make up a history that supports those regulations. As it stands, most people seem to be creating their own historical outcomes that differ greatly on the key point of the beginning of the game. Just set up the world how you want, maximizing the fun factor. Afterwards, you can put those who dislike your history to the task of creating one that supports the world's set up. Heh, that way no one can argue with you .

Oh, and by the by. You seem to show a formidable resilience to frustration with opponents of your ideas. Not exactly a common trait, so congratulations on not being a prick. I believe I would be more of an asshole in such a situation. Good luck with finishing the history in a timely fashion. I want to begin scripting as soon as possible.

 

[unmerged(37839)]

The CSA winning the war isnt unlikely and everything after that is speculation. I dont see the problem with it...

 

[cthulhu]

First off, I'd like to say Cheers to cthulhu for taking commentary (even some immature commentary) with alot of class.

Oh, and by the by. You seem to show a formidable resilience to frustration with opponents of your idea.

I just find it sad that people put so much energy into being negative, rude and tearing down each others ideas. That time and effort would be better spent contributing to the leaders, ministers, OOB and tech threads. The fact is that this project is going nowhere in these crucial areas and without them there can be no scenario.

The CSA winning the war isnt unlikely and everything after that is speculation. I dont see the problem with it...

Agreed.

 

[unmerged(37807)]

Uhm, Cthulhu, your putting words in my mouth, lol.

I never said what you quoted me as saying. That was Surly.

*edit* and you quoted Surly as saying something I said

 

[unmerged(36311)]

Could you at least motivate your opinions. It's the third time I write this: why is New Mexico so unthinkable? Give me a reference to a source. Also, I guess that the last statement is a joke and if it is you should use a smiley. If it's not...then that's a different mattter...

Why do i think this? Yes.

The south was never expansionistic, and the new mexico territories yielded little fortune, and a long extended border with the yankees.
The south wanted the new mexico states earlier, as part of the race with the yankees to get more states to prevent yankees from pushing laws down their throat. with the south seceded, this point, a point they lost regardless, becomes irrelevent and void.

Also. its alot easier to supply the new mexico territories from the north then across the texas desert..

And, getting the north to hand these areas over in a peace is hard to imagine. the north immigration to the west completely dwarfed southern, even discounting the already small southern population in relation to the north. The south could never militarily dominate the north, and even with foreign aid this would be a lengthy and painful undertaking. would southerners really bleed and die in a war ON YANKEE SOIL for the new mexico territories? in gettysburg and antietam both the AoNV lost a goodly portion of its manpower as troops refused to go north, saying they'd wait until the war came back to home. Southerners wanted no part of a foreign war excepting for their indipendance.

You say an isolationist, conservative CSA would fight an expansionist war on northern soil to gain two worthless, barren tracks of land with yankee majority populations that are very difficult to defend and have no real value?

As for why i didint state my opinions earlier..i assume they have little weight. i can say why your wrong, but that has less effect then pulling my support for the bastardized version of history you have..concocted.

 

[unmerged(26209)]

Lettow: in our scenario, the state of Deseret is north of New Mexico, not the US. With Deseret controlling the northern border and California the western one, the Yankees can't possibly have that area, unless they want land they have no way of reaching. Either it would go to CSA or Mexico (Deseret and California are probably too weak to control the area) or, perhaps, it would be an independent nation, which would be pretty cool anyway... The Republic of New Mexico/Arizona. ^^

 

[unmerged(36311)]

Lettow: in our scenario, the state of Deseret is north of New Mexico, not the US. With Deseret controlling the northern border and California the western one, the Yankees can't possibly have that area, unless they want land they have no way of reaching. Either it would go to CSA or Mexico (Deseret and California are probably too weak to control the area) or, perhaps, it would be an independent nation, which would be pretty cool anyway... The Republic of New Mexico/Arizona. ^^

But then we have to look into why california and utah are indipendent, which is a bit of a crock in any case. i said california's existance was hard to justify, and advocated giving it to the mormons. the british wouldve gotten hawaii under my thinking, and japan the phillipines. Deseret and California, even if they have a legitimate reason for freedom (and both of them...dubious? especially when california's getting pacific land. nobody wants a new colonial power, and isnt it a bit odd CALIFORNIA has colonies and the USA doesent?)

the USA having the new mexico territories would, regardless, make deseret more intriguing, as it would be isolated and forced to fight the yankees with little hope of aid. Mo'mun fanatics!

But...mormons being free, is something i will swallow while openly telling you it smells kind of fishy. California too breaks the back of how far reality will go, and then when you give the CSA new mexico/arizona it stops being reality.

But why stop! we should add colombia too, for another western revolter courtesy of vicky. all of the USA has turned into a manhattan commune, so maybe you want to play with new england breakaway states too? Theres nothing wrong with silly fantasy, it can be fun, but it bothers me that silly fantasy is being passed off as "The CSA mod." gives the CSA and its indipendance a bad name.

 

[unmerged(37839)]

under normal sercumstances California wouldnt be independent, they wanted to be part of the US but, assuming there is a CSA and a USA that have frequent border disputes it makes sense that California would be set free to prevent a struggle over her Pacific ports. CSA agrees not to touch it as does the USA. The Mormans originally went to that area to be free, thier own nation makes sense, and if New mexico is cut off from the US then it must go to one of the neighboring nations, CSA being the most sensable, that or Mexico.

 

[cthulhu]

...i can say why your wrong, but that has less effect then pulling my support for the bastardized version of history you have..concocted.

Why this hostile and smug attitude Lettow77? Why are you still posting in this thread if you hate this scenario so much?

 

[unmerged(26209)]

If people think this scenario is too unhistorical, then go off and make your own Turtledove scenario instead.

This scenario is still a fantasy one. Instead of looking at a historical event, changing it, and looking at the consequences, we make the conquences, and then look at historical events, trying to explain it all by, in many cases, dubious facts and uncreditable history.
Now, that's just fine with me. I don't care it if is historical or realistic. It will be cool and fun to play, and that's it. If you have a problem with that, then make your own mod, and stop flaming to makers of this one!