Congress and votes for war

[Wimpola]

If you know your history you will know that Jeanette Rankins was the only person who denied the US to go to war after December 7th, 1941. In order for the US to go into any kind of war I think that they should need to get congress to accept the Declaration of War before you go to war itself. However as world tension increases more votes can easily get secured and when it reaches 100% you will have the highest chance to roll enough votes to go to war. However if the US is attacked you will have a 100% chance to go to war unless you have 98 Jeanette Rankins in your Senate.

 

[Invictus5966]

In the WWWs tension was at 100% way earlier then 41 and the USA was historically still mostly anti-war. It should not be easy for the USA to get into the war.

 

[von-pasquier]

when you start with USA, you have undisturbed isolation that represent this "98 Jeanette Rankins in your Senate". X)

 

[gamedude]

A system that could be fun in a future patch, but not something to be suddenly added in the Beta... it would be unbalanced and generally break before it was polished to be any good.

Even so... It would have to be incorporated into EVERY country except those who are run by dictatorship.

 

[kviiri]

This is what World Tension is supposed to determine, I guess.

 

[potski]

If you know your history you will know that Jeanette Rankins was the only person who denied the US to go to war after December 7th, 1941. In order for the US to go into any kind of war I think that they should need to get congress to accept the Declaration of War before you go to war itself. However as world tension increases more votes can easily get secured and when it reaches 100% you will have the highest chance to roll enough votes to go to war. However if the US is attacked you will have a 100% chance to go to war unless you have 98 Jeanette Rankins in your Senate.

If you know your constitution the President doesn't need 100% of the votes. Nor was Rankin a senator - she was in the House of Representatives, which voted 388-1. The Senate voted 82-0 (members must have been missing because of the short notice for the vote).

Nor is there a "roll" like some random lottery result. As WT increases, opinion in Congress moves towards the 50% votes required to allow the President to prosecute the war, as the public increasingly accept the need to confront Germany and Japan. He certainly doesn't need to convince any Rankin's (she was a pacifist). In 1941 there was hardly likely to be a 100 pacifists elected by the US people.

Plus IMO the vote in Congress was a formality. Japan had already declared war. The President as the Supreme Commander had sufficient powers to fight the war. The vote is part of a PR exercise to show the world that the USA was overwhelmingly united in their will to defeat Japan, and especially that the President had the support of both political parties.

 

[Invictus5966]

Even with Pearl Harbor the USA did not declare war on Germany.

 

[potski]

They did actually. Two days later, after Germany and Italy declared against the US, Congress had a similar vote.

That time Rankin abstained.

 

[Wimpola]

If you know your constitution the President doesn't need 100% of the votes. Nor was Rankin a senator - she was in the House of Representatives, which voted 388-1. The Senate voted 82-0 (members must have been missing because of the short notice for the vote).

Nor is there a "roll" like some random lottery result. As WT increases, opinion in Congress moves towards the 50% votes required to allow the President to prosecute the war, as the public increasingly accept the need to confront Germany and Japan. He certainly doesn't need to convince any Rankin's (she was a pacifist). In 1941 there was hardly likely to be a 100 pacifists elected by the US people.

Plus IMO the vote in Congress was a formality. Japan had already declared war. The President as the Supreme Commander had sufficient powers to fight the war. The vote is part of a PR exercise to show the world that the USA was overwhelmingly united in their will to defeat Japan, and especially that the President had the support of both political parties.

I know that you don't need 100% of the vote but Senators are limited to two per state so they are (should be) more experienced. Therefore I put senators instead of House of Representatives because usually people think of Senators instead of the house. But you only need majority to go to war.

 

[PK_AZ]

Already abstracted in national focuses.

They did actually. Two days later, after Germany and Italy declared against the US, Congress had a similar vote.

"You are declaring war on me? Are you declaring war on me?! No, I declare war ON YOU!"

 

[Invictus5966]

They did actually. Two days later, after Germany and Italy declared against the US, Congress had a similar vote.

That time Rankin abstained.

I was talking abt Dec 8th when the USA declared on Japan

 

[lordmichael95]

The concept of World Tension is suppose to account for this.

 

[xtfoster]

They did actually. Two days later, after Germany and Italy declared against the US, Congress had a similar vote.

That time Rankin abstained.

Actually, that depends on how you define 'Declaration of War'. The actual votes were an acknowledgement that a state of war already existed and gave the President, in his persona as Commander in Chief, the authority to prosecute that war.