|
|
Post by Warlord247 on Nov 20, 2022 20:15:24 GMT
Said Chancellor stepped down from power, and is no longer in control of what was once Germany. We have been working on removing all his fascist henchmen from any offices. As for the fortifications I was unaware it was away from the border, however the way you phrased it was a direct insinuation of aggression on behalf of the empire. And as for Romania, it matters not that you have removed your armies. The territory you occupy is not historically yours. I have no issue with you incorporating it, but to paint me as the aggressive one while I'm simply reclaiming past lands of Austro-Hungaria is absurd. Of course, Poland does not have nearly the amount of troops necessary to launch an invasion of Germany, not that we would want to do one anyway. The fortifications are simply a consequence of us being invaded multiple times in the past century. I still have misgivings over the situation. The language used by both you and your French allies seemed purposefully confrontational. |
|
|
|
Post by Warlord247 on Nov 20, 2022 20:33:49 GMT
I switch one factory off of bombers and research paratroopers. This will take 10 turns, and allows the air drop of specially trained infantry (takes 1 page to turn infantry into paratroopers) up to 3 regions behind enemy lines (assuming mapchart regions. If you want me to work out something in Kilometers I can do that as well). The paratroopers have a -.5 debuff on all battles.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kliment Jefremovitš Vorošilov on Nov 20, 2022 20:41:01 GMT
I switch one factory off of bombers and research paratroopers. This will take 10 turns, and allows the air drop of specially trained infantry (takes 1 page to turn infantry into paratroopers) up to 3 regions behind enemy lines (assuming mapchart regions. If you want me to work out something in Kilometers I can do that as well). The paratroopers have a -.5 debuff on all battles. I think there should be a maximum amount of paratroopers you can possibly have. I'd say maybe 1% of your total army. |
|
|
|
Post by Darth Nihilus on Nov 20, 2022 20:47:54 GMT
I still have misgivings over the situation. The language used by both you and your French allies seemed purposefully confrontational. Neither Poland nor France are war mongers. We both know all too well what a history of warfare does to a nation. But your threat of militarizing the German (and in this case I'm talking Germany proper) - Polish border was particularly concerning. |
|
|
|
Post by Warlord247 on Nov 20, 2022 20:49:49 GMT
I still have misgivings over the situation. The language used by both you and your French allies seemed purposefully confrontational. Neither Poland nor France are war mongers. We both know all too well what a history of warfare does to a nation. But your threat of militarizing the German (and in this case I'm talking Germany proper) - Polish border was particularly concerning. My reaction was due to the harsh wording of your statement, as well as a misunderstanding on my behalf. However the issue would not have arised in the first place were you to use a different wording. |
|
|
|
Post by Kliment Jefremovitš Vorošilov on Nov 21, 2022 18:48:08 GMT
Glorious triumph! The Portuguese armed forces have surrendered today 8:00 AM to the French liberators! Due to failure to respond to the French ultimatum, France declares war on Turkey. 200,000 infantry and 200 tanks immediately attack from the border Kilis to Jarabulus. 100,000 attack Akbez. The Turkish have 500,000 soldiers, 900 tanks and 1800 guns. I'd say it's fair to say that about half of them are in the south. For the first attack the opposing army for Turkey probably 150,000 infantry, 350 tanks and 650 guns. Which means it's 455,000 against 300,000, which means 9 to win. ep3vn|3cFor the second attack, the remaining forces are defending, that is 100,000 infantry, 100 tanks and 250 guns, which equals 200,000, so 9 to win. 4000 guns and 1500 tanks are transported to Portugal. 2000 guns, 200 bombers and 300 fighters are transported to Syria. 1500 guns and 1000 tanks are transported to Pau. Only for Eugene V. Debs You can attack now. Also, after we defeat Turkey, I think it would be fair that you get Istanbul and its factory and I get Ankara and its. The fight for liberation of the Iberian Peninsula from Fascism is not yet over. We still have to help democracy and freedom prevail in Spain. I remember Antony Beevor describing in detail the locations of Spanish armies in 1938, although I can't accurately remember them I think it was probably like 50,000 in the North East, 300,000 near Madrid and 250,000 in the south + 50,000 in Morocco. Guns (~1500) and tanks (~650) should be divided similarily. 300 bombers escorted by 600 fighters make a surprise air raid on Nationalist positions near San Sebastián. 10 bombers are lost. With the artillery support of 1500 guns, the 10th and 11th army cross the border river Bidasoa to Irun. I have a -3 numerical advantage, but the Spanish are defending a narrow pass and a river, which gives them +2, so I need 7 to win. L3qbEnVsIn Morocco, the 30th army attacks Ketama and it's 25,000 defenders and 35 guns. It's so close to being under 3:1, so I'll have it 6 to win. In eastern Morocco 50,000 soldiers and 100 tanks attack Zeluán. Here too I need a 6 to win. Ketama Zeluán In Portugal, 50,000 infantry eliminate remaining resistance and are stationed in Vila Real. 100,000 infantry, 800 guns and 500 tanks move to Idanha a Nova. All the rest of the forces in Portugal move to Elvas. In Turkey, our forces have been forced to retreat.  The point total of the Turkish army in the region is 655,000 minus casualties. For us it was previously 400,000 minus casualties, but now it is 800,000 minus casualties after 2000 guns have arrived. We attack on the whole front. It is an equal battle and 8 is needed to win. (All attacks are medium risk) Bidasoa is crossed succesfully and Irun is the first city to be liberated by the French army. 18,063 Spanish dead. I'll divide that to 12,063 soldiers and 8 tanks. 7526 French dead. 30,000 Spanish reinforcements (recruits) reach San Sebastián, but the French army continues the attack. 7 to win again. 3o1CsQC8We haven't done any operation codenames in this RP so far, and since we're in Spain and this operation will probably look a bit like a churro on the map, this operation is codenamed Churro. Operation Churro100,000 soldiers, 800 guns and 500 tanks cross the Tajo river after an intense bombing of Cáceres by 400 bombers and attack the city through Brozas. Countering this attack with 70,000 infantry, 250 guns and 100 tanks would leave my bonus to -2, so I need 6 to win.
Now the focal point of attack. From Evola 550,000 soldiers, 1500 tanks and 3000 guns thrust towards Don Benito via Badajoz, Montijo and Mérida. I obviously need only a 5 to win. Facing me are 210,000 infantry, 250 guns and 100 tanks.
····· |
|
|
|
Post by Kliment Jefremovitš Vorošilov on Nov 21, 2022 18:51:19 GMT
The fight for liberation of the Iberian Peninsula from Fascism is not yet over. We still have to help democracy and freedom prevail in Spain. I remember Antony Beevor describing in detail the locations of Spanish armies in 1938, although I can't accurately remember them I think it was probably like 50,000 in the North East, 300,000 near Madrid and 250,000 in the south + 50,000 in Morocco. Guns (~1500) and tanks (~650) should be divided similarily. 300 bombers escorted by 600 fighters make a surprise air raid on Nationalist positions near San Sebastián. 10 bombers are lost. With the artillery support of 1500 guns, the 10th and 11th army cross the border river Bidasoa to Irun. I have a -3 numerical advantage, but the Spanish are defending a narrow pass and a river, which gives them +2, so I need 7 to win. L3qbEnVsIn Morocco, the 30th army attacks Ketama and it's 25,000 defenders and 35 guns. It's so close to being under 3:1, so I'll have it 6 to win. In eastern Morocco 50,000 soldiers and 100 tanks attack Zeluán. Here too I need a 6 to win. Ketama Zeluán In Portugal, 50,000 infantry eliminate remaining resistance and are stationed in Vila Real. 100,000 infantry, 800 guns and 500 tanks move to Idanha a Nova. All the rest of the forces in Portugal move to Elvas. In Turkey, our forces have been forced to retreat. The point total of the Turkish army in the region is 655,000 minus casualties. For us it was previously 400,000 minus casualties, but now it is 800,000 minus casualties after 2000 guns have arrived. We attack on the whole front. It is an equal battle and 8 is needed to win. (All attacks are medium risk) Bidasoa is crossed succesfully and Irun is the first city to be liberated by the French army. 18,063 Spanish dead. I'll divide that to 12,063 soldiers and 8 tanks. 7526 French dead. 30,000 Spanish reinforcements (recruits) reach San Sebastián, but the French army continues the attack. 7 to win again. 3o1CsQC8We haven't done any operation codenames in this RP so far, and since we're in Spain and this operation will probably look a bit like a churro on the map, this operation is codenamed Churro. Operation Churro100,000 soldiers, 800 guns and 500 tanks cross the Tajo river after an intense bombing of Cáceres by 400 bombers and attack the city through Brozas. Countering this attack with 70,000 infantry, 250 guns and 100 tanks would leave my bonus to -2, so I need 6 to win.
Now the focal point of attack. From Evola 550,000 soldiers, 1500 tanks and 3000 guns thrust towards Don Benito via Badajoz, Montijo and Mérida. I obviously need only a 5 to win. Facing me are 210,000 infantry, 250 guns and 100 tanks.
The French army faces terrible defeat in all three places, but they are ordered to regroup and attack again. 4415_yyRHere I need a 7 to win because I have been pushed beyond the river. ····· |
|
|
|
Post by Warlord247 on Nov 22, 2022 10:00:28 GMT
Eugene V. Debs only I would like to engage in diplomatic negotiations which could be majorly beneficial to both of our nations. However I want your guarantee that said information is not relayed to your allies. During the duration of the negotiations I would need you to not send any private messages to your compatriots. If tagged simply respond publicly with "due to current negotiations I cannot answer this message at the moment."
If you are unwilling to do that I understand, simply respond to this diplomatic envoy with a simple no.
Sincerely,
Sir Kent, King of Austria-Hungary
|
|
|
|
Post by Warlord247 on Nov 22, 2022 11:02:44 GMT
A current map Europe is shown below: (I don't know how things were split in the Baltics, or what's going on in España and Portugal, so if yall let me know I can fill out the rest. Also, the land listed as USSR and Poland isn't contested, map chart just doesn't provide provinces for Ukraine and Belarus, so I wasn't able to divide then properly)  To ensure our borders are secured, armies Berta and Cäsar are placed along the German-Polish border, while armies Charlotte and Dora are placed along the Transylvanian-Polish border. They both begin construction on .1 fortifications which will finish in 2 pages. These armies are their simply to secure the border, and are not intended as an act of aggression. Only one army will be fully guarding the border, with the other's main focus being the construction of the fort line. 
 The armies under Gerd von Rundstedt's control, as well as Ida, will be stationed in Berlin. In addition, Panzer armies I-III, along with artillery armies 1 and 2, will be stationed in Berlin. Armies Julius and Kaufmann, as well as Panzer armies IV-VI, and artillery armies 3 and 4, will be stationed in Budapest. |
|
|
|
Post by Eugene V. Debs on Nov 22, 2022 15:17:00 GMT
Eugene V. Debs only I would like to engage in diplomatic negotiations which could be majorly beneficial to both of our nations. However I want your guarantee that said information is not relayed to your allies. During the duration of the negotiations I would need you to not send any private messages to your compatriots. If tagged simply respond publicly with "due to current negotiations I cannot answer this message at the moment."
If you are unwilling to do that I understand, simply respond to this diplomatic envoy with a simple no.
Sincerely,
Sir Kent, King of Austria-Hungary Only for Warlord247Well, before I can say anything, I'd like to learn what these negotiations would be about, before I agree to start or not to start. Because, this is most unexpected that one would want something stay secret from their allies unless the subject includes really serious information or action, like an alliance or agreement. If you want me to betray my allies, then I reject. Let's not even start, because you shall not get the thing you want, if that's the situation.
But if the situation is different, and if you say the true reasons right now, and I repeat, if it's not about something like that, I may consider starting the negotiations, although I cannot guarantee the result. Nevertheless, I can guarantee that no information will be revealed and we will respect the privacy of this talk. The only conditions of mine are that you say the subjects of the talk clearly and beforehand, and that I can stop and leave the talks any time I want on the condition that I won't reveal anything. It is equal, isn't it? You won't lose anything while maybe winning something.
As you can see, I am not against talking, talks are an effective form of solving problems, whilst I am against dishonourable and ignominious things like betrayal and the like, unless there are very, very special and rare occasions, which is not our situation. Anyway, I will be waiting for your reply, and accordingly declare my decision. As you will probably understand and appreciate this fact as well, one cannot decide on such a question without knowing anything.
Sincerely, |
|
|
|
Post by Warlord247 on Nov 22, 2022 16:38:34 GMT
Eugene V. Debs only I would like to engage in diplomatic negotiations which could be majorly beneficial to both of our nations. However I want your guarantee that said information is not relayed to your allies. During the duration of the negotiations I would need you to not send any private messages to your compatriots. If tagged simply respond publicly with "due to current negotiations I cannot answer this message at the moment."
If you are unwilling to do that I understand, simply respond to this diplomatic envoy with a simple no.
Sincerely,
Sir Kent, King of Austria-Hungary Only for Warlord247 Well, before I can say anything, I'd like to learn what these negotiations would be about, before I agree to start or not to start. Because, this is most unexpected that one would want something stay secret from their allies unless the subject includes really serious information or action, like an alliance or agreement. If you want me to betray my allies, then I reject. Let's not even start, because you shall not get the thing you want, if that's the situation.
But if the situation is different, and if you say the true reasons right now, and I repeat, if it's not about something like that, I may consider starting the negotiations, although I cannot guarantee the result. Nevertheless, I can guarantee that no information will be revealed and we will respect the privacy of this talk. The only conditions of mine are that you say the subjects of the talk clearly and beforehand, and that I can stop and leave the talks any time I want on the condition that I won't reveal anything. It is equal, isn't it? You won't lose anything while maybe winning something.
As you can see, I am not against talking, talks are an effective form of solving problems, whilst I am against dishonourable and ignominious things like betrayal and the like, unless there are very, very special and rare occasions, which is not our situation. Anyway, I will be waiting for your reply, and accordingly declare my decision. As you will probably understand and appreciate this fact as well, one cannot decide on such a question without knowing anything.
Sincerely, only You're concerns of completely understandable, and I accept them. However, I am afraid to inform you that what I would have been asking for is betrayal. Don't panic and sound the alarms, there's no way I could face all 3 of you on my own, especially on 2 fronts.
Before this diplomatic channel closes, I have some questions for you, that I hope you'll still answer in good faith due to my honesty.
Do you think you will ever be able to reclaim the motherland, return it how it was before the ugly scars of the great war? Considering that your ally now owns part of the Baltics, and the fact that the Eastern part of their country is yours, I doubt you would ever be able to rebuild your country through a diplomatic channel.
What happens if they decide to turn on you? It won't happen soon I'm sure, but once I'm taken care of... there's a good chance they move onto you. They may call themselves democracies, but if you look at their actions, they're empires in all but name. They use the shield of democracy to justify their imperialism, or use others to do their dirty work like Poland did in Romania.
And this brings me to my final question: How will you remedy such major gaps in your ideologies? France let's it's people die in it's African colonies, and even it's own country, while the rich live it up in Paris. Poland, a country that did not exist before they Great War, are expanding their territory into lands they should not own, while using bigger countries to do all the heavy lifting for them.
They will never understand the global revolution. They will never understand the idea of spreading the means of production to everyone, insuring everyone is well fed, housed, clothed, and cared for. You're literally allied with the country whose past monarch said "then let them eat cake" when hearing that the poor had no bread.
I am willing to help you achieve your global revolution. We can expand communism all around the world, through peace or through force if necessary. We split the world in half, my empire to the west and your communist utopia to the east. I will give you any supplies and commodities you need, and will build up heavy infostructure on my side. Then upon my death, the empire shall be disbanded, and the world will live in truly stateless peace. Just as Marx and Engles would have wanted.
If none of these questions matter to you or concern you then I bid you good day. I regret the time we face each other in combat, which I fear will be sooner rather than later. I believe that even if I do not give France a reason to declare war upon my nation, they will find one.
Sincerely,
Sir Kent, King of Austria-Hungary |
|
|
|
Post by Eugene V. Debs on Nov 22, 2022 17:34:34 GMT
Only for Warlord247 Well, before I can say anything, I'd like to learn what these negotiations would be about, before I agree to start or not to start. Because, this is most unexpected that one would want something stay secret from their allies unless the subject includes really serious information or action, like an alliance or agreement. If you want me to betray my allies, then I reject. Let's not even start, because you shall not get the thing you want, if that's the situation.
But if the situation is different, and if you say the true reasons right now, and I repeat, if it's not about something like that, I may consider starting the negotiations, although I cannot guarantee the result. Nevertheless, I can guarantee that no information will be revealed and we will respect the privacy of this talk. The only conditions of mine are that you say the subjects of the talk clearly and beforehand, and that I can stop and leave the talks any time I want on the condition that I won't reveal anything. It is equal, isn't it? You won't lose anything while maybe winning something.
As you can see, I am not against talking, talks are an effective form of solving problems, whilst I am against dishonourable and ignominious things like betrayal and the like, unless there are very, very special and rare occasions, which is not our situation. Anyway, I will be waiting for your reply, and accordingly declare my decision. As you will probably understand and appreciate this fact as well, one cannot decide on such a question without knowing anything.
Sincerely, only You're concerns of completely understandable, and I accept them. However, I am afraid to inform you that what I would have been asking for is betrayal. Don't panic and sound the alarms, there's no way I could face all 3 of you on my own, especially on 2 fronts.
Before this diplomatic channel closes, I have some questions for you, that I hope you'll still answer in good faith due to my honesty.
Do you think you will ever be able to reclaim the motherland, return it how it was before the ugly scars of the great war? Considering that your ally now owns part of the Baltics, and the fact that the Eastern part of their country is yours, I doubt you would ever be able to rebuild your country through a diplomatic channel.
What happens if they decide to turn on you? It won't happen soon I'm sure, but once I'm taken care of... there's a good chance they move onto you. They may call themselves democracies, but if you look at their actions, they're empires in all but name. They use the shield of democracy to justify their imperialism, or use others to do their dirty work like Poland did in Romania.
And this brings me to my final question: How will you remedy such major gaps in your ideologies? France let's it's people die in it's African colonies, and even it's own country, while the rich live it up in Paris. Poland, a country that did not exist before they Great War, are expanding their territory into lands they should not own, while using bigger countries to do all the heavy lifting for them.
They will never understand the global revolution. They will never understand the idea of spreading the means of production to everyone, insuring everyone is well fed, housed, clothed, and cared for. You're literally allied with the country whose past monarch said "then let them eat cake" when hearing that the poor had no bread.
I am willing to help you achieve your global revolution. We can expand communism all around the world, through peace or through force if necessary. We split the world in half, my empire to the west and your communist utopia to the east. I will give you any supplies and commodities you need, and will build up heavy infostructure on my side. Then upon my death, the empire shall be disbanded, and the world will live in truly stateless peace. Just as Marx and Engles would have wanted.
If none of these questions matter to you or concern you then I bid you good day. I regret the time we face each other in combat, which I fear will be sooner rather than later. I believe that even if I do not give France a reason to declare war upon my nation, they will find one.
Sincerely,
Sir Kent, King of Austria-Hungary Only for Warlord247I first want to thank you for your honesty, no matter whether I agree to your points or not. I will answer your questions, and I have questions too, as I believe communication is important, whether it yields results or not.
Let's assume that your first two points are correct in order to pass to the last question, which I really have high suspicions. Though this doesn't mean that I agree, I will just base my answer on your claims. You say thay you will help me spread the revolution. Why would you do this? If you really defended communism, then you can pretty well easily have declared yourself something like "People's Union of Austria and Hungary" and you would have been a communist state. But you chose to revive the Austria-Hungary, and you declare yourself the king, and you control your country with monarchy. What is your difference from any monarchy in the history? What is your difference from Greece, Italy, Albania? What is your difference from the Bourbones or Bonapartes? Or Habsburgs, your empire's original leaders in the past? Nothing. If you truly wanted to be communist, then there would have been written "Comrade Kent" in the end of your telegraph, not "Sir" or "King". You may say that you wouldn't have been let to survive as an communist state in the middle of Europe by the capitalists and monarchists, but you could have got our, the Soviet Union's support right away in this way. Also, you looked really enthusiastic in reviving Austria-Hungary, if your aim was just not to attract the attack of the right (like the Russian civil war) you could have basically formed a normal republic. And you say that Austria-Hungary would remain a monarchy until the death of its monarch. If you were a real and enthusiastic communist, now you would have already declared the official communism. But you say that Austria-Hungary will continue as its current form, although not forever. Why would you do that while you could have been a communist at first? Because being communism is not your aim, and your aim is just to gain my trust? With all the evidence and these points, I do not see any reason why you would do this or whether your real plan is what you claim. So, I assume we can pass to the next point.
Then, let's say that you've newly realised the facts about the world order and communism now. Please put yourself in my point of view. Doesn't it look suspicious that one wants your support immediately after they faced a diplomatic crisis? Why not yesterday or why not tomorrow? Or why not the first day you rose to power?
Why would I believe that you aren't just trying to get my support by using the word "communism"? Why would I prefer a monarchy to a democracy? Why would I trust you in such a critical subject? What is your difference? I agree, your management has been fair so far, but all those who rises to power acts so at first to gain public support, as the whole history shows us. And then their mask falls off their head, and their real self, corrupt with numeruous unjust actions on the way to the power, reveals itself... How can you assure me that wouldn't be your case too?
And our ideologic gap is much bigger with you, continuing from the previous points. There's no one that all my interests totally concur with in Europe, specifically in terms of ideology. But there are some that I can find a middle ground and agree on some common principles, one way or another.
And France and Poland are really close to me, and I trust them. And they trust me. Trust cannot be sacrificed for dishonoured political intentions. There's no war but class war in the end, to bring the humanity into its eternal peace. But now, we are countries, and we should defend our interests too. And we, the USSR, will defend the humanity until the victory of us all, which is the ultimate aim of the Comintern and ours, as well as our own motherland. And then the world shall be the motherland of the fellowship of the united humanity and all the lives in the world, without exception, all of us, to whom we, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, shall be leading to the eternal victory of us all, gloriously and victoriously.
Therefore, even if some of your points can be correct per se, they are not enough to prove your intentions or to convince me and they have some serious gaps about some serious matters, which I've mentioned above. I'd really like to hear your reply to them, and I'll be waiting for your response. As I've said at the beginning too, I can't and won't guarantee anything, but I believe in communication, because even if it doesn't yield fruits in diplomatic relations and doesn't result in anything, it should be tried until there are no other choices possible and all the sides have said everything they wanted, before the diplomatic channel is closed. And I genuinely believe that you will appreciate this fact as well.
Sincerely, |
|
|
|
Post by Warlord247 on Nov 23, 2022 5:12:49 GMT
Eugene V. Debs only You're concerns of completely understandable, and I accept them. However, I am afraid to inform you that what I would have been asking for is betrayal. Don't panic and sound the alarms, there's no way I could face all 3 of you on my own, especially on 2 fronts.
Before this diplomatic channel closes, I have some questions for you, that I hope you'll still answer in good faith due to my honesty.
Do you think you will ever be able to reclaim the motherland, return it how it was before the ugly scars of the great war? Considering that your ally now owns part of the Baltics, and the fact that the Eastern part of their country is yours, I doubt you would ever be able to rebuild your country through a diplomatic channel.
What happens if they decide to turn on you? It won't happen soon I'm sure, but once I'm taken care of... there's a good chance they move onto you. They may call themselves democracies, but if you look at their actions, they're empires in all but name. They use the shield of democracy to justify their imperialism, or use others to do their dirty work like Poland did in Romania.
And this brings me to my final question: How will you remedy such major gaps in your ideologies? France let's it's people die in it's African colonies, and even it's own country, while the rich live it up in Paris. Poland, a country that did not exist before they Great War, are expanding their territory into lands they should not own, while using bigger countries to do all the heavy lifting for them.
They will never understand the global revolution. They will never understand the idea of spreading the means of production to everyone, insuring everyone is well fed, housed, clothed, and cared for. You're literally allied with the country whose past monarch said "then let them eat cake" when hearing that the poor had no bread.
I am willing to help you achieve your global revolution. We can expand communism all around the world, through peace or through force if necessary. We split the world in half, my empire to the west and your communist utopia to the east. I will give you any supplies and commodities you need, and will build up heavy infostructure on my side. Then upon my death, the empire shall be disbanded, and the world will live in truly stateless peace. Just as Marx and Engles would have wanted.
If none of these questions matter to you or concern you then I bid you good day. I regret the time we face each other in combat, which I fear will be sooner rather than later. I believe that even if I do not give France a reason to declare war upon my nation, they will find one.
Sincerely,
Sir Kent, King of Austria-Hungary Only for Warlord247 I first want to thank you for your honesty, no matter whether I agree to your points or not. I will answer your questions, and I have questions too, as I believe communication is important, whether it yields results or not.
Let's assume that your first two points are correct in order to pass to the last question, which I really have high suspicions. Though this doesn't mean that I agree, I will just base my answer on your claims. You say thay you will help me spread the revolution. Why would you do this? If you really defended communism, then you can pretty well easily have declared yourself something like "People's Union of Austria and Hungary" and you would have been a communist state. But you chose to revive the Austria-Hungary, and you declare yourself the king, and you control your country with monarchy. What is your difference from any monarchy in the history? What is your difference from Greece, Italy, Albania? What is your difference from the Bourbones or Bonapartes? Or Habsburgs, your empire's original leaders in the past? Nothing. If you truly wanted to be communist, then there would have been written "Comrade Kent" in the end of your telegraph, not "Sir" or "King". You may say that you wouldn't have been let to survive as an communist state in the middle of Europe by the capitalists and monarchists, but you could have got our, the Soviet Union's support right away in this way. Also, you looked really enthusiastic in reviving Austria-Hungary, if your aim was just not to attract the attack of the right (like the Russian civil war) you could have basically formed a normal republic. And you say that Austria-Hungary would remain a monarchy until the death of its monarch. If you were a real and enthusiastic communist, now you would have already declared the official communism. But you say that Austria-Hungary will continue as its current form, although not forever. Why would you do that while you could have been a communist at first? Because being communism is not your aim, and your aim is just to gain my trust? With all the evidence and these points, I do not see any reason why you would do this or whether your real plan is what you claim. So, I assume we can pass to the next point.
Then, let's say that you've newly realised the facts about the world order and communism now. Please put yourself in my point of view. Doesn't it look suspicious that one wants your support immediately after they faced a diplomatic crisis? Why not yesterday or why not tomorrow? Or why not the first day you rose to power?
Why would I believe that you aren't just trying to get my support by using the word "communism"? Why would I prefer a monarchy to a democracy? Why would I trust you in such a critical subject? What is your difference? I agree, your management has been fair so far, but all those who rises to power acts so at first to gain public support, as the whole history shows us. And then their mask falls off their head, and their real self, corrupt with numeruous unjust actions on the way to the power, reveals itself... How can you assure me that wouldn't be your case too?
And our ideologic gap is much bigger with you, continuing from the previous points. There's no one that all my interests totally concur with in Europe, specifically in terms of ideology. But there are some that I can find a middle ground and agree on some common principles, one way or another.
And France and Poland are really close to me, and I trust them. And they trust me. Trust cannot be sacrificed for dishonoured political intentions. There's no war but class war in the end, to bring the humanity into its eternal peace. But now, we are countries, and we should defend our interests too. And we, the USSR, will defend the humanity until the victory of us all, which is the ultimate aim of the Comintern and ours, as well as our own motherland. And then the world shall be the motherland of the fellowship of the united humanity and all the lives in the world, without exception, all of us, to whom we, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, shall be leading to the eternal victory of us all, gloriously and victoriously.
Therefore, even if some of your points can be correct per se, they are not enough to prove your intentions or to convince me and they have some serious gaps about some serious matters, which I've mentioned above. I'd really like to hear your reply to them, and I'll be waiting for your response. As I've said at the beginning too, I can't and won't guarantee anything, but I believe in communication, because even if it doesn't yield fruits in diplomatic relations and doesn't result in anything, it should be tried until there are no other choices possible and all the sides have said everything they wanted, before the diplomatic channel is closed. And I genuinely believe that you will appreciate this fact as well.
Sincerely, only I thank you for your willingness to continue diplomatic discussions even with your justifiable concerns. I will first address your question of why I have decided to contact you now. I've wanted to attempt negotiations with you a since a short period before the Romanian war, however I was not sure what your reaction would be, whether you would immediately go to your allies or hear me out as you have now. As such I was hesitant initially to open this channel. However the current diplomatic situation has left me with no other choice. It is either I attempt to reach you now, or your allies initiate war and my country is left in ruins.
As for your question about how I am different from other monarchies I have one answer: my empire will not survive. Once I am dead it will break into embattled factions. People who were once brothers would now be murdering each other in the streets. I know my Monarchy has no future, and as such I believe the best course of action upon my death is the switch to communism. It is the most likely way to keep my people from being at each others' throats, because they will be equal, not just amongst themselves, but amongst all of humanity.
As for why I did not begin as a communist, at first I sought the power. However, as the world has progressed, I see that said lust for power has kept humanity trapped in a cycle of war and deceit since our creation. Now I carry on the empire for two reasons:
1. I wish to return the land in which I was born back to the map. It is of course a simple act of folly, caused by my pride, but something I wish to see none the less.
2. The second reason, and the one more important to our conversation, is that I believe communism needs a push.
At the moment most of the world sees communists as radical revolutionaries. They may be willing to work with you when it benefits them, but they will never truly allow you to impact the world in a meaningful way which they can't immediately take from you. Considering you're the only communist power, they would be able to outnumber you if they feel threatened, and the revolution would be lost, the cycle continued. I feel that with my help, we could break the cycle. It may require one of the last acts of deceit and war, but that is a small price for the union of Humanity.
I also believe communism is currently facing a technological issue. No offense towards your country, but you have not developed nearly as much as the rest of the world since the end of the great war. This could lead to disaster for the cause. If a harvest were to be especially poor due to a lack of proper farming materials, it would be a huge blow to the reputation of communism, and result in the world at large writing it off as a fringe ideology. As such, I plan on researching technology that could help the cause. Things such improved irrigation and harvesting equipment. Because I currently deal not with the restrictions of communism, and because my country is well unified, I have the opportunity to advance these systems enough to ensure there is no failure of the new communist utopia.
I understand your mistrust of me. It is very reasonable. And unfortunately there is not much I can do to prove my honesty. All I can do is hope that the genuinity of my statements reaches you. If you have any concerns about what I have said, feel free to respond. I hope that at the end of all this, we can see eye to eye, and form a better world.
Sincerely,
Sir Kent, The last King of Austria-Hungary (one way or the other) |
|
|
|
Post by Warlord247 on Nov 23, 2022 22:17:31 GMT
I just realized, I meant to feel in the whole of Poland on the maps but I forgot (nervous chuckle) let's just pretend it's filled in lol
|
|
|
|
Post by Warlord247 on Nov 23, 2022 22:19:45 GMT
I move army group Ida to the Hasburg line as well, and begin reinforcing it by .1 every two pages. The situation is the same as the Polish border, with only one army truly guarding the border, while the other focuses on fortifying it.
|
|
