Portuguese ambassador apologises for being so late, but feels he must clarify some issues…
Originally posted by Owen
In fact, the opposite is true. Algiers was given the Azores in 1422 despite never having controlled the islands, and the inability of Portugal and Spain to recapture the Azores proves that sufficient naval technology is not yet in place to ensure capture.
Again, and that became a regular habit now, I completely agree with Saxony. We are both right
. France never had lover naval tech than Algiers, but Algiers didn’t get Azores because of her naval superiority, but because of pitiful diplomatic performance of deceased King of Portugal. He, in his Royal foolishness, God may forgive him for that because I never will, thought a colony on some far away islands isn’t worth trouble and simply gave it to Algiers.
As for the matter of sufficient naval technology for return of Azores to her rightful owners, Duke of Lisboa invites the court of Saxony on a sailing vacation on Azores. There you will see for yourself Azores are controlled by Portugal and just how skilful our sailors are. As our friend Spain tried to explain before, it was never the question of gaining control over our occupied provinces but the question of stubbornness of Algiers, which made it necessary to fight on his terms in Sahara desert.
Originally posted by Owen
I did not give my input here because I wished to serve my interests in any way, but because it seemed that Portugal had misrepresented the motives of France and, more importantly, had misrepresented previous statements of mine. It now seems that we are closer in opinion than I thought, for which I am grateful.
It may seem that way and it is true in that particular issue, but don't believe everything Portuguese diplomats say. Because only interests they serve are Portuguese interests
.
I want to be clear here because I am now talking about how I understand this game and how I play it. First of all, it’s only a game, and nothing I say is with intention to offend players personally. That is probably self evident and everyone of us is playing according to that rule so I could have just not mentioned it, but as I said I wanted to be clear. I don’t like armies in RL, so I took Portugal not to be tempted to become a military superpower. I don’t like diplomats in RL neither, but I have to use at least something if I want to participate in game
. My diplomats are mean, sneaky, ready to bend the truth as much as possible, use every means necessary, flattery, bribe, treats, … in order to achieve my goals. They like secret deals (if there were award for that I would have more chances than for official diplomacy), spreading doubts and mistrust between allies, … That’s the way I see diplomats. But I must give them some credit too: they use, in my opinion, for one and only purpose – to prevent wars. They are here to talk and talk and talk… And don’t worry, when there is an agreement reached and signed on behalf of Portugal or Duke of Lisboa than such an agreement will be obeyed to the last letter. Perhaps more, but never less. My diplomats do have some good qualities and honour is one of them
. And they do play according to certain rules in diplomacy, for example there has to be a reason for everything, diplomats can’t just be stubborn and demand unreasonable things. There has to be some logic, perhaps inventively turned upside down logic, but still logic. And I expect to get the same meaningful and “logic” answers from the other side of the table.
In fact, France and her ally Saxony are the only countries in which my ambassadors were using all those skills. I enjoyed very much in exchange of diplomatic notes with Saxony. Diplomats send to some other countries were offering clear deals without some secret sneaky paragraphs which would be drawn for excuses when other party fulfil her part of an agreement. Hopefully the ones that applies to understand what I am talking about
Saying that, I must say Portugal will honour “Maps for Algiers occupied provinces” agreement with France. There is no question about that.
The price, you ask? You don’t agree with my “city is a city” argument? That is an example of certain “logic”. And everything I said is true. True is also I didn’t mentioned something, which my friend diplomat from Saxony corrected. And added some more. And tried to missinterprete me
. I said I offer as many cities as needed so that income from them is equal to income from Algrave. In that argument (that’s what it was, not an official offer, certainly not an agreement
). I meant Dakar and if needed some other build city. And sea routes to them for possible France losses in the war with Algiers. It my be low, but do you suppose I should offer too much? Think again, you are talking with by far the best merchant on the world. Due to long and difficult trip I “forgot” to mention manpower Portugal gets. I also “forgot” to mention France would get provinces with Iberian culture.
On your argument that I get manpower I answer Portugal doesn’t care about manpower. We are a peace loving country! (meaning it isn’t that important, it will only mean something like 10 instead of 8 – both pitiful values).
Originally posted by Owen
-----------
Barnius. I won't say that your English is better than my Portugese, though it is true. I will say that your English is about as good as my English, especially given the number of typing mistakes I make. If I don't understand something, I will say, but I don't it expect it to happen often.
My remark about my language was meant only for diplomatic purposes, so that I could say I misinterpreted something (I don’t remember exactly what I meant), as you probably guessed. But, don’t diplomats do such things?
Hopefully I managed to say all that clear enough. The summary is I enjoy the game, I enjoy my diplomatic duels with Saxony (or is it with France, for who her vassal Saxony is doing great job as her attorney – I just couldn’t resist the temptation, if king of Saxony is offended this particular diplomat will be severely punished – exile to a villa on Azores
), I want to be awarded “The best diplomat of the decade”…
Barnius, Duke of Lisboa
