-
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.
1. Senator Sharpe, you seem to be a bit late, the Bill is already law.
2. Senator Sinclair your bill is never agreeable.
Outlawing a Party means to limit the peoples political brlief to that point, where they can only vote for the Ruling Party maling our nation the 2-party system, it has long been. Furthermore i cannot agree, if this bill is signed, you might as well try to outlaw all anti-democratic and even the differently democratic parties.
This Bill is utterly unacceptable, limiting the equal rights of each towards the bigger rights of the capitalist driven - democratic elites.
As for Guranteeing the Independence of Poland, i have to agree with mr.sarigis, this will lead to WAR with US in the war, we do not have the abilities yet, that would allowbus to fight a trans-atlantic War and as such, we would only be a dog, that not does bark but not bite, but a dog that cannot bite.
- Senator Franz Vormüler (I-WA)
2. Senator Sinclair your bill is never agreeable.
Outlawing a Party means to limit the peoples political brlief to that point, where they can only vote for the Ruling Party maling our nation the 2-party system, it has long been. Furthermore i cannot agree, if this bill is signed, you might as well try to outlaw all anti-democratic and even the differently democratic parties.
This Bill is utterly unacceptable, limiting the equal rights of each towards the bigger rights of the capitalist driven - democratic elites.
As for Guranteeing the Independence of Poland, i have to agree with mr.sarigis, this will lead to WAR with US in the war, we do not have the abilities yet, that would allowbus to fight a trans-atlantic War and as such, we would only be a dog, that not does bark but not bite, but a dog that cannot bite.
- Senator Franz Vormüler (I-WA)
Senator. May I suggest a little light reading for you? It is a minor document that perhaps your teachers skipped over. It is called the Constitution, more specifically, the Bill of Rights. The first amendment guarantees free speech. Your bill guts the first and most important amendment the founding fathers saw fit to guarantee. Senator, for the good of our nation, withdraw this bill.
Regarding the Guarantee of Poland. Our people do not wish to be dragged into another European war. Preparing for defense is all well and good. This is casting our neutrality aside and joining a fray that has nothing to do with us.
Richard Newman (R) Georgia.
Senator Sinclair, I agree with your point on guaranteeing Poland's independence, but outlawing political parties won't help us one bit. Sure, many people will come up with unsound viewpoints, but forcing them out will only strengthen them and weaken us. Instead, we should debate against radicals. Since democracy is more effective and humane, we will win against them each them if we take a more civil and constitutional path. If you take away the 1st Amendment, what would stop you from taking away the rest of them?
- Senator Elexis Sinclaire (R - MA)
- Senator Elexis Sinclaire (R - MA)
Ladies and Gentlemen,
World events have been moving quickly these past six months but I see no reason to change our foreign policy. However, I support the President's plan to end the New Deal in return for increased military spending. For almost a decade now Congress has engaged in a multitude of social engineering schemes designed to bring us out of this Great Depression, and all have failed miserably. We have spent billions of dollars yet unemployment still remains and the stock market has yet to recover. I do not wish to discuss economic philosophy here, just to simply state my position. If increased military expenditures are the price we must pay to remove this odious series of programs and allow the economy to recover I am willing to pay that price. Therefore, I vote yes on gearing up for war.
The increasing militarization of Europe and Asia is concerning but I see no reason to meddle in foreign affairs. Germany has only attempted to unite the Germanic peoples under her banner and has done so through peaceable means. As for Danzig, it has been German territory for over a hundred years and separates their heartland from East Prussia. Surely a peaceable solution can be found. If war does break out, the balance of power seems to favor France and Britain. Their combined armies, navies and air forces are larger than the German's who are still re-arming. Do we really want to involve ourselves in another bloodbath over issues which are of no concern to us? Look at Senator Sinclair's recent unconstitutional proposal to ban political parties to see the future. During the Great War a cabal of commissars appointed by Wilson controlled almost the entire economy and thousands of German - American citizens were illegally detained without habeas corpus on suspicions of espionage. I fear that allowing this militarism to grow unchecked will result in a loss of our precious liberties and growth of government as happened in the Civil War and the Great War, turning us into the very thing we despise.
On a final note I endorse Senator Newman for Republican party leader. As one of the most active of our caucus I think that he will be an excellent force for representing our ideals.
-Sen. Thomas Rudolf, [R-OH]
World events have been moving quickly these past six months but I see no reason to change our foreign policy. However, I support the President's plan to end the New Deal in return for increased military spending. For almost a decade now Congress has engaged in a multitude of social engineering schemes designed to bring us out of this Great Depression, and all have failed miserably. We have spent billions of dollars yet unemployment still remains and the stock market has yet to recover. I do not wish to discuss economic philosophy here, just to simply state my position. If increased military expenditures are the price we must pay to remove this odious series of programs and allow the economy to recover I am willing to pay that price. Therefore, I vote yes on gearing up for war.
The increasing militarization of Europe and Asia is concerning but I see no reason to meddle in foreign affairs. Germany has only attempted to unite the Germanic peoples under her banner and has done so through peaceable means. As for Danzig, it has been German territory for over a hundred years and separates their heartland from East Prussia. Surely a peaceable solution can be found. If war does break out, the balance of power seems to favor France and Britain. Their combined armies, navies and air forces are larger than the German's who are still re-arming. Do we really want to involve ourselves in another bloodbath over issues which are of no concern to us? Look at Senator Sinclair's recent unconstitutional proposal to ban political parties to see the future. During the Great War a cabal of commissars appointed by Wilson controlled almost the entire economy and thousands of German - American citizens were illegally detained without habeas corpus on suspicions of espionage. I fear that allowing this militarism to grow unchecked will result in a loss of our precious liberties and growth of government as happened in the Civil War and the Great War, turning us into the very thing we despise.
On a final note I endorse Senator Newman for Republican party leader. As one of the most active of our caucus I think that he will be an excellent force for representing our ideals.
-Sen. Thomas Rudolf, [R-OH]
Hey folks, just as a reminder -- Gearing for War is already passed 
I'm surprised how few of you are putting yourselves up for Commander spots; we have one candidate for Pacific Theater Commander and one candidate for Chief of the Army. I'm giving people until Monday at 10 PM CST (-6 GMT) to nominate themselves. All that's required is a copy of at least HOI3 and some working knowledge of the game. Don't think you have to be some kind of HOI genius like loki100 or mnplastic, as I would certainly fall far short of those luminaries.
One final note: the Senate MAY vote to recommend the removal of a commander or Chief after he holds the office for six months. If you think one of the commanders or chiefs is doing an awful job, that's a tool you've got. That person, of course, may continue to hold a Senator's position and would be eligible to hold the post again. Voluntary resignations are acceptable as well.
Also, if you're a lurker, shame on you. This is interactive! Make a Senator and join the action! ::glares at the lurkers::
I'm surprised how few of you are putting yourselves up for Commander spots; we have one candidate for Pacific Theater Commander and one candidate for Chief of the Army. I'm giving people until Monday at 10 PM CST (-6 GMT) to nominate themselves. All that's required is a copy of at least HOI3 and some working knowledge of the game. Don't think you have to be some kind of HOI genius like loki100 or mnplastic, as I would certainly fall far short of those luminaries.
One final note: the Senate MAY vote to recommend the removal of a commander or Chief after he holds the office for six months. If you think one of the commanders or chiefs is doing an awful job, that's a tool you've got. That person, of course, may continue to hold a Senator's position and would be eligible to hold the post again. Voluntary resignations are acceptable as well.
Also, if you're a lurker, shame on you. This is interactive! Make a Senator and join the action! ::glares at the lurkers::
Senators,
We must be very careful with our next actions, do we guarantee the independence of Poland and increases the tensions between the governments of Germany and The United States and possibly cause Poland to become brash in her diplomatic dealings with Germany if she believes she has our protection, while we all know that in the event of war we would not be able to support Poland in her efforts to resist the invasion? Could our efforts as a neutral party and nation not be better spent on the diplomatic front, by supporting the peaceful and amicable transfer of those lands which Germany has traditional and cultural claims on. I think I can speak for many of our citizens when I say we do not want a war, we cannot afford a war.
Regards
Senator Peter Dawson, Silver Legion, MD
We must be very careful with our next actions, do we guarantee the independence of Poland and increases the tensions between the governments of Germany and The United States and possibly cause Poland to become brash in her diplomatic dealings with Germany if she believes she has our protection, while we all know that in the event of war we would not be able to support Poland in her efforts to resist the invasion? Could our efforts as a neutral party and nation not be better spent on the diplomatic front, by supporting the peaceful and amicable transfer of those lands which Germany has traditional and cultural claims on. I think I can speak for many of our citizens when I say we do not want a war, we cannot afford a war.
Regards
Senator Peter Dawson, Silver Legion, MD
Mr. President,
concerning a posting for commander and chief of the Pacific Forces:
concerning a posting for commander and chief of the Pacific Forces:
((Did you get cut off here? You can edit a post to add what you had on there. Also, glad we've had your first post!
))A reminder: if you intend to run for one of the open spots (Pacific, Atlantic, and Chief of the Army), please note that by 10 PM CST (-6 GMT). Also, Senator Sinclair, if you do not rewrite your bill by then, I will consider it dead.
To generate some interest in at least the Pacific spot, I have it on good authority that Saithis only wants the spot if nobody else does.
EDIT: Also, son of liberty (Senator Newman) has been officially confirmed as Republican Party Leader with Rudolf's endorsement.
I would like to thank my fellow Republicans for their trust, I will do all I can to assure America remains great. Special thanks to outgoing party leader Sen. Thomas Rudolf, [R-OH].
I have mentioned a couple of times my desire that we focus all our efforts to recruiting top notch leaders for our troops just as soon as we repeal the new deal. I propose that we shift all leadership points to officer recruitment as soon as the repeal goes into effect, and that we remain in that stance until officer levels equal 100% of need. Then we continue to recruit at a slower pace while resuming our research and intelligence missions. I am seeking a second for this proposal. Thank you for your attention to this important matter.
Richard Newman (R) Georgia.
I have mentioned a couple of times my desire that we focus all our efforts to recruiting top notch leaders for our troops just as soon as we repeal the new deal. I propose that we shift all leadership points to officer recruitment as soon as the repeal goes into effect, and that we remain in that stance until officer levels equal 100% of need. Then we continue to recruit at a slower pace while resuming our research and intelligence missions. I am seeking a second for this proposal. Thank you for your attention to this important matter.
Richard Newman (R) Georgia.
Mr President
I would like to apply for the position as Commander in Chief of the Pacific forces.
((I only have brief knowledge of the game, and so I might be not so detailed leadership))
I would like to apply for the position as Commander in Chief of the Pacific forces.
((I only have brief knowledge of the game, and so I might be not so detailed leadership))
You have my support Senator Newman, I second this proposal, we must be prepared for the future which is looking increasingly more dangerous to our national security.
Senator Peter Dawson, Silver Legion, MD
Last edited:
I will add you to the list, Senator.
An hour and a half longer to toss your hat into the ring, so to speak, should you wish to apply for any of the open positions -- Atlantic, Pacific, Chief of the Army.
Senators Newman and Dawson, if one of you would care to write up the bill formally, we can begin voting on it shortly.
Okay. The time period to introduce new bills/new candidates is over. ((This does not include the Newman-Dawson bill; it beat the deadline, so it's fair game once it's in a finished format.))
Here are the potential candidates:
Pacific Theater
Saithis
Vrael_1492
LoftenHenderson (??)
Atlantic Theater
TankofMidgets
Greek HOI3
Chief of the Army
Chimina* -- Chief of the Army will only open if Tom gets the Atlantic Command spot he wants
So, here's the next step. I'd like all the candidates for the Theater Commander spots to briefly share with the Senators their plans for their particular theaters, should they be appointed to the post. The Chiefs and Secretary of War will each cast their ballots. This will leave us with three voters in each case -- Tom can't vote on Atlantic and Saithis can't vote on Pacific. Once the preferred commanders are indicated, we hold confirmation hearings, in which any Senator can ask the nominee for either post any question he likes. It will not go to a formal vote unless there is serious resistance to the nominee.
I'd like to have the process done according to the following timetable:
Step 1: Candidates present platforms. Done by Wednesday at 10 PM CST (-6 GMT).
Step 2: Chiefs choose the candidate. Done by Thursday at 10 PM CST (-6 GMT).
Step 3: Hearings. Done by Friday at 10 PM CST (-6 GMT).
If it looks like it'll work itself out earlier, then we'll adjust the times as necessary.
Here are the potential candidates:
Pacific Theater
Saithis
Vrael_1492
LoftenHenderson (??)
Atlantic Theater
TankofMidgets
Greek HOI3
Chief of the Army
Chimina* -- Chief of the Army will only open if Tom gets the Atlantic Command spot he wants
So, here's the next step. I'd like all the candidates for the Theater Commander spots to briefly share with the Senators their plans for their particular theaters, should they be appointed to the post. The Chiefs and Secretary of War will each cast their ballots. This will leave us with three voters in each case -- Tom can't vote on Atlantic and Saithis can't vote on Pacific. Once the preferred commanders are indicated, we hold confirmation hearings, in which any Senator can ask the nominee for either post any question he likes. It will not go to a formal vote unless there is serious resistance to the nominee.
I'd like to have the process done according to the following timetable:
Step 1: Candidates present platforms. Done by Wednesday at 10 PM CST (-6 GMT).
Step 2: Chiefs choose the candidate. Done by Thursday at 10 PM CST (-6 GMT).
Step 3: Hearings. Done by Friday at 10 PM CST (-6 GMT).
If it looks like it'll work itself out earlier, then we'll adjust the times as necessary.
Mr President and Senators,
I have faithfully and proudly served in our nations army for 25 years. I distinguished myself commanding the 7th Infantry Brigade in France, 1918; leading successful attacks at both Meuse-Argonne and St. Mihiel. Since then i breifly took command of first the 6th Infantry Division until it's deactivation in 1921, and then the 2nd Army Corps in 1928. For the past 12 years i have served as a staff officer for General Marshall assigned to work on plans for the defense of our Pacific Island Bases. I always will put our nations goals ahead of my own personal goals, but i feel at some point so much hard work should pay off. After 12 years of no command i feel i deserve one, and i have general Marshall's recomendation.
If i am selected I will first ask that all main carrier task forces be sent to the Pacific. Intelligence and War games have shown that there will be an importance for thses units in the Pacific theater. I also want an Infantry Corps and the Pacific Submarine force sent to the Philipines, a marine brigade sent to help Garrison Guam and Wake, and radar stations on theose Islands. I would like that the president give me a list of forces currnetly in the Pacific, and a summary from congress about how much of our military strength they are willing to divert to the theater. War is coming gentlemen, and even if it doesnt it's better to be safe than sorry.
Plans for offensives in the Pacific will be dicided later depending on events that lead up to war.
thank you for listening and i hope I am chosen. If i am not i would like to be posted on ComPac's logistical or intelligence staff so that i may continue to serve our country where i am most needed.
Author's note: im not really sure how much role playing you want for this (i went all out, all the infor about brigades and divisions is historical), and also im not sure if im allowed to give myself general marshall's reccomendation. this seems like it would be quite fun so im very interested, have a good day.
I have faithfully and proudly served in our nations army for 25 years. I distinguished myself commanding the 7th Infantry Brigade in France, 1918; leading successful attacks at both Meuse-Argonne and St. Mihiel. Since then i breifly took command of first the 6th Infantry Division until it's deactivation in 1921, and then the 2nd Army Corps in 1928. For the past 12 years i have served as a staff officer for General Marshall assigned to work on plans for the defense of our Pacific Island Bases. I always will put our nations goals ahead of my own personal goals, but i feel at some point so much hard work should pay off. After 12 years of no command i feel i deserve one, and i have general Marshall's recomendation.
If i am selected I will first ask that all main carrier task forces be sent to the Pacific. Intelligence and War games have shown that there will be an importance for thses units in the Pacific theater. I also want an Infantry Corps and the Pacific Submarine force sent to the Philipines, a marine brigade sent to help Garrison Guam and Wake, and radar stations on theose Islands. I would like that the president give me a list of forces currnetly in the Pacific, and a summary from congress about how much of our military strength they are willing to divert to the theater. War is coming gentlemen, and even if it doesnt it's better to be safe than sorry.
Plans for offensives in the Pacific will be dicided later depending on events that lead up to war.
thank you for listening and i hope I am chosen. If i am not i would like to be posted on ComPac's logistical or intelligence staff so that i may continue to serve our country where i am most needed.
Author's note: im not really sure how much role playing you want for this (i went all out, all the infor about brigades and divisions is historical), and also im not sure if im allowed to give myself general marshall's reccomendation
. this seems like it would be quite fun so im very interested, have a good day.
Mr President and Senators,
I have faithfully and proudly served in our nations army for 25 years. I distinguished myself commanding the 7th Infantry Brigade in France, 1918; leading successful attacks at both Meuse-Argonne and St. Mihiel. Since then i breifly took command of first the 6th Infantry Division until it's deactivation in 1921, and then the 2nd Army Corps in 1928. For the past 12 years i have served as a staff officer for General Marshall assigned to work on plans for the defense of our Pacific Island Bases. I always will put our nations goals ahead of my own personal goals, but i feel at some point so much hard work should pay off. After 12 years of no command i feel i deserve one, and i have general Marshall's recomendation.
If i am selected I will first ask that all main carrier task forces be sent to the Pacific. Intelligence and War games have shown that there will be an importance for thses units in the Pacific theater. I also want an Infantry Corps and the Pacific Submarine force sent to the Philipines, a marine brigade sent to help Garrison Guam and Wake, and radar stations on theose Islands. I would like that the president give me a list of forces currnetly in the Pacific, and a summary from congress about how much of our military strength they are willing to divert to the theater. War is coming gentlemen, and even if it doesnt it's better to be safe than sorry.
Plans for offensives in the Pacific will be dicided later depending on events that lead up to war.
thank you for listening and i hope I am chosen. If i am not i would like to be posted on ComPac's logistical or intelligence staff so that i may continue to serve our country where i am most needed.
Author's note: im not really sure how much role playing you want for this (i went all out, all the infor about brigades and divisions is historical), and also im not sure if im allowed to give myself general marshall's reccomendation
In July 1939 (which is where we're at), Marshall isn't Army Chief of Staff yet. In this timeline, in fact, MacArthur has been Chief of Staff from day one.
You can RP as much as you like, some do it more than others. I would advise you take a look at the ToC and read through my updates; it'll give you a sense of where we've been and where we're going. Other than that, glad to have you aboard!
I have sifted through reports dating back as far as 1936, and i agree (although not a senator, possibly a strictly military opinion could be useful) that we should not seek war, especially in Europe, but we should be prepared for it. Becuase of our large number of fairly advance carriers, i would ask for 70% of carriers, and 50-60% of our surface forces, all marine divisions and enough Army troops (obviously supperior to any other branch) to defend our coasts and islands if the nvay fails us. Japan should come first as they pose the largest threat to humanity, already proven through attrocities at in Shanxi and Manchuria.
Honorable Admiral Standley, General Westover, and Secretary Wagner,
As all three of you know me well from years of service together, I will omit my introduction and proceed directly to the issue at hand: how I intend to conduct a war in the Atlantic theater.
Ground Encirclement Tactics: Where possible, I will endeavor to encircle and destroy the enemy, turning each individual battle into an island and preventing the enemy from responding effectively. The individual American soldier is, man-for-man, the finest in the world; our enemy will attempt to nullify this advantage with superior numbers, aiming to force a brutal and bloody war of attrition that stalls our advance. Therefore, we must separate his forces using any means at our disposal, isolate them from their supply train and reinforcement, and force them to surrender. Judicious use of strategic and infrastructural bombing, carefully coordinated naval landings, and the use of our armored forces in both assault and flanking roles will all be critical to our victory.
Fleet Support Role: America has the largest and best-armed navy on earth, and I intend to put it to full use in both protecting our shores and destroying our enemies. Our battleship fleets will be responsible for trapping or destroying hostile fleets, as well as bombarding enemy shore defenses to clear a path for our ground forces; meanwhile, our transport flotillas will see heavy use, as they move troops into position for swift and powerful amphibious assaults. In the event of hostile submarine warfare, I intend to deploy our escorts to safeguard America's crucial convoys, and send out mixed cruiser-destroyer hunting parties to annihilate the raiders. That said, given the limited amount of coastline relative to the Pacific theater, I believe that our carrier fleets are best deployed elsewhere; I will use carriers if assigned them, but believe that they are best deployed to the Pacific, with its large number of islands and relatively few airbases.
Air Support Doctrine: As stated above, the primary mission of our air force is to support ground operations, and I plan to maximize the contribution of our air units to the war effort. Our interceptor squadrons will be trained to annihilate hostile aircraft and support our tactical bombers in destroying hostile air bases and air forces as necessary; once the skies are clear, we will engage ground units in critical provinces. Our strategic bombers, meanwhile, will focus on destroying enemy infrastructure, isolating their units and enabling us to surround them. Where possible, we will attempt to avoid civilian casualties by attacking cities; though doing so may be inevitable, we intend to minimize the destruction levied on noncombatants.
Should you have any further inquiries about my proposed strategies, or wish to discuss a hypothetical war plan, feel free to contact me. As ever, I wish you all the best, and hope you will nominate me to defend America against any threat from the Atlantic.
Sincerely,
General Douglas A. MacArthur,
Chief of Staff of the United States Army
As all three of you know me well from years of service together, I will omit my introduction and proceed directly to the issue at hand: how I intend to conduct a war in the Atlantic theater.
Ground Encirclement Tactics: Where possible, I will endeavor to encircle and destroy the enemy, turning each individual battle into an island and preventing the enemy from responding effectively. The individual American soldier is, man-for-man, the finest in the world; our enemy will attempt to nullify this advantage with superior numbers, aiming to force a brutal and bloody war of attrition that stalls our advance. Therefore, we must separate his forces using any means at our disposal, isolate them from their supply train and reinforcement, and force them to surrender. Judicious use of strategic and infrastructural bombing, carefully coordinated naval landings, and the use of our armored forces in both assault and flanking roles will all be critical to our victory.
Fleet Support Role: America has the largest and best-armed navy on earth, and I intend to put it to full use in both protecting our shores and destroying our enemies. Our battleship fleets will be responsible for trapping or destroying hostile fleets, as well as bombarding enemy shore defenses to clear a path for our ground forces; meanwhile, our transport flotillas will see heavy use, as they move troops into position for swift and powerful amphibious assaults. In the event of hostile submarine warfare, I intend to deploy our escorts to safeguard America's crucial convoys, and send out mixed cruiser-destroyer hunting parties to annihilate the raiders. That said, given the limited amount of coastline relative to the Pacific theater, I believe that our carrier fleets are best deployed elsewhere; I will use carriers if assigned them, but believe that they are best deployed to the Pacific, with its large number of islands and relatively few airbases.
Air Support Doctrine: As stated above, the primary mission of our air force is to support ground operations, and I plan to maximize the contribution of our air units to the war effort. Our interceptor squadrons will be trained to annihilate hostile aircraft and support our tactical bombers in destroying hostile air bases and air forces as necessary; once the skies are clear, we will engage ground units in critical provinces. Our strategic bombers, meanwhile, will focus on destroying enemy infrastructure, isolating their units and enabling us to surround them. Where possible, we will attempt to avoid civilian casualties by attacking cities; though doing so may be inevitable, we intend to minimize the destruction levied on noncombatants.
Should you have any further inquiries about my proposed strategies, or wish to discuss a hypothetical war plan, feel free to contact me. As ever, I wish you all the best, and hope you will nominate me to defend America against any threat from the Atlantic.
Sincerely,
General Douglas A. MacArthur,
Chief of Staff of the United States Army
Name: Paul Jaeger. Senator for Tennessee.
Born: 1855 (age 82)
Party: Democrat
Policy ideas:
-- Foreign policy plans: Intervention only when America herself is threatened.
-- Budgets for IC: Huge investment in Battleships and Heavy Cruisers. Large increase in industrial capacity of the South, and large naval dockyard facilities. No planes or tanks as these new-fangled gizmos will never replace sabres, bayonets and explosive shells.
-- Budgets for Leadership: Agrarian, increasing all production levels to be able to fund any erstwhile US allies. A heavy emphasis on Battleships, artillery and a strong cavalry arm. Opposed to modern war methods in favour of a WW1 approach to war.
-- Declaring war/signing peace treaties: War is a neccessary part of being a great power and should be prosecuted with the full might of the US. Peace treaties are acceptable following neccessary concessions from the enemy.
-- Which faction we align ourselves to, if any: Anything that isnt red.
-- If one of the Big Four needs to be fired/replaced: Hire the best candidate available. However its a Presidential decision.
-- Input on our general deployments overseas: All US overseas territories should be defended, however following the loss of an oversea territory it must be taken back ASAP.
-- All decisions and law changes: Any that increase the productivity of the US, manpower, leadership and industrial or on the unity of the nation as a whole.
-- Nukes: Like tanks and planes they're just a fad, they'll never take off. That cash could be used on more artillery and saddles.
Born: 1855 (age 82)
Party: Democrat
Policy ideas:
-- Foreign policy plans: Intervention only when America herself is threatened.
-- Budgets for IC: Huge investment in Battleships and Heavy Cruisers. Large increase in industrial capacity of the South, and large naval dockyard facilities. No planes or tanks as these new-fangled gizmos will never replace sabres, bayonets and explosive shells.
-- Budgets for Leadership: Agrarian, increasing all production levels to be able to fund any erstwhile US allies. A heavy emphasis on Battleships, artillery and a strong cavalry arm. Opposed to modern war methods in favour of a WW1 approach to war.
-- Declaring war/signing peace treaties: War is a neccessary part of being a great power and should be prosecuted with the full might of the US. Peace treaties are acceptable following neccessary concessions from the enemy.
-- Which faction we align ourselves to, if any: Anything that isnt red.
-- If one of the Big Four needs to be fired/replaced: Hire the best candidate available. However its a Presidential decision.
-- Input on our general deployments overseas: All US overseas territories should be defended, however following the loss of an oversea territory it must be taken back ASAP.
-- All decisions and law changes: Any that increase the productivity of the US, manpower, leadership and industrial or on the unity of the nation as a whole.
-- Nukes: Like tanks and planes they're just a fad, they'll never take off. That cash could be used on more artillery and saddles.