|
|
Post by Eugene V. Debs on Aug 27, 2023 17:14:36 GMT
Only for Eugene V. Debs , and other wto members
Please wto leaders help me to invade west Germany
East Germany's priority is to unify the country first.
For Eugene V. Debs, Alpha, WTO Greetings to our socialist brethren.
Mongolia will of course stand by its allies in any case. But it seems unwise at this time to begin a new conflict.
First, we already have certain military commitments, notably in southeast Asia. It seems more sensible to control the situation there before opening a new front.
Second, the US is already preparing to enter the conflict (any idea when warlord will be back?), but at this point other NATO countries other than Luxembourg aren't involved. It seems undesirable to attack a NATO member, better to deal with powerful enemies separately and outside their territory as much as possible.
Third, France and the UK, are currently moving toward neutrality. Together they represent a fairly powerful force, for now it's better to build relations with them (even at some cost) than to do anything that they might view as aggressive.
In short, while we understand our German friends' desire, and without doubt Germany's day will come, Mongolia counsels patience. Only for WTO That sounds like a wise move. However, it must also be noted that France has already intervened in Burma alongside the Swedish invaders, and although it would be natural for Kliment Jefremovitš Vorošilov to intervene, my intervention could make it escalate to a world war. On the other hand, an appeasement policy might encourage them to escalate the situation on their own. So, what should our response be? Whatever it is, we must hurry, but also be cautious. Both inaction and thoughtless action lead to the worst outcome. As to your question, we know that Warlord won't be back in the near future, I've already talked with him. So, we may ignore the possibility of an American intervention for now (while still taking precautions, of course). |
|
|
|
Post by Kliment Jefremovitš Vorošilov on Aug 27, 2023 17:50:55 GMT
Only for John MarstonI have no intention to meddle in Burmese affairs, but the increasing activity of Sweden there is worrying. I hope you could do something about this. |
|
|
|
Post by Theron of Acragas on Aug 28, 2023 7:50:47 GMT
Only for WTO That sounds like a wise move. However, it must also be noted that France has already intervened in Burma alongside the Swedish invaders, and although it would be natural for Kliment Jefremovitš Vorošilov to intervene, my intervention could make it escalate to a world war. On the other hand, an appeasement policy might encourage them to escalate the situation on their own. So, what should our response be? Whatever it is, we must hurry, but also be cautious. Both inaction and thoughtless action lead to the worst outcome. As to your question, we know that Warlord won't be back in the near future, I've already talked with him. So, we may ignore the possibility of an American intervention for now (while still taking precautions, of course). Only for WTO In that case, I see two courses of action.
1. Go hard into Burma. Smash Sweden, smash France while still being able to say "we've got nothing against you, we want to be friends but don't try to interfere with us". This will likely upset India/Pakistan, but if they're hostile, let's take them on without the US. We already have Iran and Afghanistan so the strategic situation is favorable for us. It's a bit dirty to smash all the US's allies while they're inactive, but love and war, you know?
2. If we're not ready for escalation, respond with measured force. Vietnam intervenes, but we play it as a private quarrel between smaller nations, the Soviet Union limits itself to covert assistance. In that case, Mongolia could probably send an expeditionary force without compromising our position (much like the Cuban intervention in Angola). The concern is how India reacts - we may be forced to escalate in any case. Perhaps the Soviets could conduct large military exercises on their western border as a discouragement. |
|
|
|
Post by Eugene V. Debs on Aug 28, 2023 8:57:34 GMT
Only for WTO That sounds like a wise move. However, it must also be noted that France has already intervened in Burma alongside the Swedish invaders, and although it would be natural for Kliment Jefremovitš Vorošilov to intervene, my intervention could make it escalate to a world war. On the other hand, an appeasement policy might encourage them to escalate the situation on their own. So, what should our response be? Whatever it is, we must hurry, but also be cautious. Both inaction and thoughtless action lead to the worst outcome. As to your question, we know that Warlord won't be back in the near future, I've already talked with him. So, we may ignore the possibility of an American intervention for now (while still taking precautions, of course). Only for WTO In that case, I see two courses of action.
1. Go hard into Burma. Smash Sweden, smash France while still being able to say "we've got nothing against you, we want to be friends but don't try to interfere with us". This will likely upset India/Pakistan, but if they're hostile, let's take them on without the US. We already have Iran and Afghanistan so the strategic situation is favorable for us. It's a bit dirty to smash all the US's allies while they're inactive, but love and war, you know?
2. If we're not ready for escalation, respond with measured force. Vietnam intervenes, but we play it as a private quarrel between smaller nations, the Soviet Union limits itself to covert assistance. In that case, Mongolia could probably send an expeditionary force without compromising our position (much like the Cuban intervention in Angola). The concern is how India reacts - we may be forced to escalate in any case. Perhaps the Soviets could conduct large military exercises on their western border as a discouragement. Only for WTO Both plans sound quite good. Since the war might escalate either way, I'd say the best course of action is staying flexible and then choosing our plan according to their reaction, because we can't know who will intervene or not, can we? In other words, I think Kliment Jefremovitš Vorošilov should start his intervention as soon as possible and try to unite with the Burmese communists while you and me send our expeditionary forces, equipment and funds. The Vietnamese forces can also blockade Burma both via air and sea to prevent further enemy reinforcements. Then we can decide our next step according to the new conditions. For example, if the UK intervenes, then East Germany can take the opportunity to quickly unify Germany with my support. If India or Pakistan intervenes, we'll react accordingly. |
|
|
|
Post by Kliment Jefremovitš Vorošilov on Aug 28, 2023 14:02:24 GMT
Only for WTO In that case, I see two courses of action.
1. Go hard into Burma. Smash Sweden, smash France while still being able to say "we've got nothing against you, we want to be friends but don't try to interfere with us". This will likely upset India/Pakistan, but if they're hostile, let's take them on without the US. We already have Iran and Afghanistan so the strategic situation is favorable for us. It's a bit dirty to smash all the US's allies while they're inactive, but love and war, you know?
2. If we're not ready for escalation, respond with measured force. Vietnam intervenes, but we play it as a private quarrel between smaller nations, the Soviet Union limits itself to covert assistance. In that case, Mongolia could probably send an expeditionary force without compromising our position (much like the Cuban intervention in Angola). The concern is how India reacts - we may be forced to escalate in any case. Perhaps the Soviets could conduct large military exercises on their western border as a discouragement. Only for WTO Both plans sound quite good. Since the war might escalate either way, I'd say the best course of action is staying flexible and then choosing our plan according to their reaction, because we can't know who will intervene or not, can we? In other words, I think Kliment Jefremovitš Vorošilov should start his intervention as soon as possible and try to unite with the Burmese communists while you and me send our expeditionary forces, equipment and funds. The Vietnamese forces can also blockade Burma both via air and sea to prevent further enemy reinforcements. Then we can decide our next step according to the new conditions. For example, if the UK intervenes, then East Germany can take the opportunity to quickly unify Germany with my support. If India or Pakistan intervenes, we'll react accordingly. Only for WTO The thing is India has guaranteed my safety if I don't intervene in Burma. The situation would be a lot easier if we had India active to either condemn or support Sweden, and we could act accordingly. For the time being, however, I would start a naval blockade and bomb the Swedish forces in Burma instead of large-scale land operations. |
|
|
|
Post by Kliment Jefremovitš Vorošilov on Aug 28, 2023 14:05:23 GMT
With the help of newly arrived French troops, we are now able to easily break through the tattered and demoralized defenses of Sittwe. The flags of Sweden, France and Burma are raised together. The capture of such an important border city also means the Burmese government is able to recruit more partisans to fight against the communists. A Vietnamese force of 1,000 bombers and 1,000 fighters begins relentless bombing of Sittwe and the Swedish forces situated there. The bombers work in relays 500 bombing and 500 reloading at a time. Vhy9Ossk |
|
|
|
Post by Kliment Jefremovitš Vorošilov on Aug 28, 2023 14:05:59 GMT
With the help of newly arrived French troops, we are now able to easily break through the tattered and demoralized defenses of Sittwe. The flags of Sweden, France and Burma are raised together. The capture of such an important border city also means the Burmese government is able to recruit more partisans to fight against the communists. A Vietnamese force of 1,000 bombers and 1,000 fighters begins relentless bombing of Sittwe and the Swedish forces situated there. The bombers work in relays 500 bombing and 500 reloading at a time. Vhy9OsskThe raids are a huge success and Swedish casualties very heavy. |
|
|
|
Post by Eugene V. Debs on Aug 28, 2023 14:29:57 GMT
Only for WTO Both plans sound quite good. Since the war might escalate either way, I'd say the best course of action is staying flexible and then choosing our plan according to their reaction, because we can't know who will intervene or not, can we? In other words, I think Kliment Jefremovitš Vorošilov should start his intervention as soon as possible and try to unite with the Burmese communists while you and me send our expeditionary forces, equipment and funds. The Vietnamese forces can also blockade Burma both via air and sea to prevent further enemy reinforcements. Then we can decide our next step according to the new conditions. For example, if the UK intervenes, then East Germany can take the opportunity to quickly unify Germany with my support. If India or Pakistan intervenes, we'll react accordingly. Only for WTO The thing is India has guaranteed my safety if I don't intervene in Burma. The situation would be a lot easier if we had India active to either condemn or support Sweden, and we could act accordingly. For the time being, however, I would start a naval blockade and bomb the Swedish forces in Burma instead of large-scale land operations. Only for WTO Yeah, unfortunately the last time John Marston was active was around a week ago, so everything is uncertain for us, which makes planning in advance hard. In any case, I'll try to send an additional airforce to support you. The more, the merrier after all. |
|
|
|
Post by Ludwig von Mises on Aug 28, 2023 20:36:06 GMT
We respond by going up in the skies with our own fighters and bombers that we were able to salvage. Combined with the French airforce, which is presumably there Caped Baldy ? We are able to prevent further mass attacks on Sittwe. We also bring over Anti-Air guns and set them up around the Sittwe Occupied Zone. |
|
|
|
Post by Theron of Acragas on Aug 29, 2023 4:31:02 GMT
The thing is India has guaranteed my safety if I don't intervene in Burma. The situation would be a lot easier if we had India active to either condemn or support Sweden, and we could act accordingly. For the time being, however, I would start a naval blockade and bomb the Swedish forces in Burma instead of large-scale land operations. Only for WTO Then maybe the solution is after all for me, and East Germany if they want, to send expeditionary forces? It's hard for India to touch me (besides WTO I have a mutual defense treaty with China), the only question is what we do if India enters Burma in force. Perhaps, if India objects, I can propose that we cooperate to expel the Western invaders and promise to withdraw as soon as they are gone. In any case, if you guys agree, I'll start transporting 100,000 men to Vietnam. France and Sweden are using teleporters but I seem to have lost mine.
|
|
|
|
Post by Eugene V. Debs on Aug 29, 2023 6:16:28 GMT
The thing is India has guaranteed my safety if I don't intervene in Burma. The situation would be a lot easier if we had India active to either condemn or support Sweden, and we could act accordingly. For the time being, however, I would start a naval blockade and bomb the Swedish forces in Burma instead of large-scale land operations. Only for WTO Then maybe the solution is after all for me, and East Germany if they want, to send expeditionary forces? It's hard for India to touch me (besides WTO I have a mutual defense treaty with China), the only question is what we do if India enters Burma in force. Perhaps, if India objects, I can propose that we cooperate to expel the Western invaders and promise to withdraw as soon as they are gone. In any case, if you guys agree, I'll start transporting 100,000 men to Vietnam. France and Sweden are using teleporters but I seem to have lost mine.
Only for WTO That's fine by me. I'll also send mine if Vietnam agrees, because literally the only condition of our alliance was that I couldn't send troops to Vietnam without explicit agreement  As for movement, yeah, normally their actions should take a bit more time, but since there would be no activity if they didn't do it, it's no big deal. Plus, this is a Fun RP in the end, as long as it has a reason, doesn't prevent others from enjoying the game, and is still a bit realistic, such things are welcome. |
|
|
|
Post by Ludwig von Mises on Sept 2, 2023 16:52:31 GMT
Through a coded message cast out from Danish and Norwegian pirated radio stations, the Swedish anti-communist guerillas begin an uprising throughout Sweden. They have been secretly practicing and exercising their warring abilities, and are now ready to fight for the homeland’s freedom.  |
|
|
|
Post by Eugene V. Debs on Sept 2, 2023 17:59:04 GMT
Through a coded message cast out from Danish and Norwegian pirated radio stations, the Swedish anti-communist guerillas begin an uprising throughout Sweden. They have been secretly practicing and exercising their warring abilities, and are now ready to fight for the homeland’s freedom. Hey, sorry, but I'm afraid that's not really possible  Secret moves aren't allowed, and I've already had a large force there to suppress any possible guerilla activities anyway, and furthermore, I explicitly mentioned special operations to prevent such guerillas in the future (which would include the present). Moreover, to control such large amounts of territories, you'll need lots of forces, and such an amount would easily be detected by my forces, which are superior in every category. Plus, it's been weeks since you left Sweden with your all surviving forces, so you don't have any control left in Sweden. Like, if you still had a border, that might be reasonable, but you have no connection to mainland Sweden right now, as the land, air and sea are all under my control, you cannot do much from Burma, especially merely as a government in exile. And the current order is already established for a long time. However, since you don't have much to do with your currrent forces and as a government in exile, I'd say maybe you could recruit an anti-communist militia from the Western world to use in Burma (kinda like the capitalist version of the International Brigades)? It wouldn't be too big, like not 5 millions, but I believe it's more than reasonable and fair for you to have another few hundreds of thousand men so that you can continue to play the RP |
|
|
|
Post by Ludwig von Mises on Sept 2, 2023 21:05:36 GMT
Eugene V. Debs, ok, I see your point, its just that Spain, Vietnam and other countries all had widespread guerillas even with professional anti-guerilla efforts to dislodge them. Which is why I find saying "guerilla activities prevented" might be a bit unrealistic. Also, you said you used cordon-and-search, which doesn't work in forests, its for urban guerilla warfare.
|
|
|
|
Post by Eugene V. Debs on Sept 2, 2023 21:33:18 GMT
Eugene V. Debs, ok, I see your point, its just that Spain, Vietnam and other countries all had widespread guerillas even with professional anti-guerilla efforts to dislodge them. Which is why I find saying "guerilla activities prevented" might be a bit unrealistic. Also, you said you used cordon-and-search, which doesn't work in forests, its for urban guerilla warfare. That's fair. However, while these guerillas were directly located in the said countries, your government and all your forces are located in a completely different continent, far away, with no means of organizing such an uprising, especially such a large one. Even if you had the means, it'd be very impractical, and considering the USSR had one of the best foreign intelligence organization and KGB, you'd be easily intercepted before you could do much. In any case, secret moves aren't allowed anyway. Plus, while these guerillas were already organized, yours wasn't, and as this requires a large force, my forces would be able instantly detect it before you could gather it, especially because I already disarmed and ended the previous guerilla attempt, not much potential guerillas are left anyway. As Sweden has a pretty small population, an even smaller one at the time, and not all of them are capable of fighting, and not all of them would want to fight. Not all invasions were met with hostility from the population, and even if it did, more than enough pages have passed for me to stabilize the situation. Therefore, you don't really have any control over mainland Sweden, and no access either as I've explained, the land, air and sea are all controlled by my forces, which are superior in every sense, and I've already been improving the defense of those waters for quite a long time. Especially, considering you're merely a government in exile with all your forces away in a completely different continent with your consequently limited resources already being spent on Burma. Also, all the other points stand, for example, such a large-scaled uprising requires large preperations, which would be easily detected, and which would be impossible considering the size of my forces and how much time has passed to stabilize the country. Which means that, as you have no control over Sweden right now, you have no access or control over the situation either. Again, though, I believe it's only fair that you can recruit more forces from the rest of the world both as a compensation and also for the RP to be able to continue. |
|
Secret moves aren't allowed, and I've already had a large force there to suppress any possible guerilla activities anyway, and furthermore, I explicitly mentioned special operations to prevent such guerillas in the future (which would include the present). Moreover, to control such large amounts of territories, you'll need lots of forces, and such an amount would easily be detected by my forces, which are superior in every category. Plus, it's been weeks since you left Sweden with your all surviving forces, so you don't have any control left in Sweden. Like, if you still had a border, that might be reasonable, but you have no connection to mainland Sweden right now, as the land, air and sea are all under my control, you cannot do much from Burma, especially merely as a government in exile. And the current order is already established for a long time.
