Voting is open
No mercy to the commies! Serves them right.
Please don't. You're talking about the show trial and execution of several dozen people, I get that this might be a meme, but not here. This thread is a bit too sensitive a topic for me to be comfortable with that.
E: Like, argue from the quest and pragmetism and so on perspectives, but memes about it are tasteless.
 
So would appeasing the leftists that revolted give them a chance to stir up stuff if we have a say... Soviet Puppet at our border?

Or am I just imagining the worst-case scenario?
We don't have a Soviet puppet at our border, the Polish survived by one vote.
The Army will come for its own concessions, but we'll have to see what we can do about them later. I do not want to risk letting far-right war criminals walk free and join with the paramilitaries mentioned earlier.
Letting the military trial the KPD doesn't let the rightists go free though, fair trials would make the Triad go through civilian courts anyway. The two options are not mutually exclusive. And letting the KPD martyr themselves will backfire on us if we're unlucky.
As for the right-wingers... I really want to say screw them, but we are alienating several militia's that could cause us great trouble.
Besides appeasing, it's the least risky option for us. They will be quietly executed and won't be able to make a show in the courts.
 
Appeasing the army here means we might not need to do that later. Who knows what else they will ask for return after this? Potentially something worse for German democracy.
 
Letting the military trial the KPD doesn't let the rightists go free though, fair trials would make the Triad go through civilian courts anyway.
That statement expressed my opinion on letting the Army try its own people, which is a suboptimal decision, in my opinion. Even if trying their buddies for treason upsets them, that's one beehive that we must kick over right now. Before some other officers with more tactical acumen than common sense recover enough stamina to coup us again.
 
That statement expressed my opinion on letting the Army try its own people, which is a suboptimal decision, in my opinion. Even if trying their buddies for treason upsets them, that's one beehive that we must kick over right now. Before some other officers with more tactical acumen than common sense recover enough stamina to coup us again.
I think that if you said that to Hindenburg and co. they'd be deeply offended. This is the KPD we're talking about, letting the military try them is the easiest way to get the harshest judgments, and it won't let them propagandize the trials.

You're conflating the options, Gericht only applies to the KPD, the Fair Trials is us trying to nail the Triad as much as possible. The two things are separate. Can you clarify this @mouli? Would choosing Gericht mean the Triad would be judged by their peers as opposed to the other options? Or are the two set of trials isolated from each other.
 
You're conflating the options, Gericht only applies to the KPD, the Fair Trials is us trying to nail the Triad as much as possible. The two things are separate. Can you clarify this @mouli? Would choosing Gericht mean the Triad would be judged by their peers as opposed to the other options? Or are the two set of trials isolated from each other.
The two sets are isolated. Gericht passes KPD high command through military tribunals, which is concerning for the reasons given in the option.
 
[X] Plan: Everyone Goes to Court!

I'm aware that the other plan is more pragmatic, but this is not a case of pragmatism.

In 1945, the Allies could have shot the Nazis in a grungy alleyway, and most people wouldn't care. But they gave them, on principle, fair elections. The army will probably be incensed. Okay then, because we didn't win a war for democracy only to let the strongest win by force.
 
[X] Plan: Everyone Goes to Court!

This is probably not a wise vote. But it's a vote based on my principles.
 
Last edited:
[X] Plan: Everyone Goes to Court!

I'm aware that the other plan is more pragmatic, but this is not a case of pragmatism.

In 1945, the Allies could have shot the Nazis in a grungy alleyway, and most people wouldn't care. But they gave them, on principle, fair elections. The army will probably be incensed. Okay then, because we didn't win a war for democracy only to let the strongest win by force.
This is a totally different situation. Having a public trial damages our democracy because the KPD commanders are charismatic agitators aiming to undermine it and cause violence. The Allies didn't have to deal with a bunch of Nazis in their home territory being egged on by the people on trial, and this would not be the solemn affair of the Nuremberg trials, it will probably turn into a circus.

Besides, do we really want to do both of the options that piss off the Army when most of them don't even believe in the legitimacy of the government? Military courts are also present in every democracy. Our government is on very thin ice, we need to be careful of what we do unless we want a military government or a monarchy.
 
Last edited:
This is a totally different situation. Having a public trial damages our democracy because the KPD commanders are charismatic agitators aiming to undermine it and cause violence.
So? Just because they have slick tongues doesn't mean the law applies differently. I don't want to set a standard of circumventing the law for convenience.
The Allies didn't have to deal with a bunch of Nazis in their home territory being egged on by the people on trial, and this would not be the solemn affair of the Nuremberg trials, it will probably turn into a circus. Besides, do we really want to do both of the options that piss off the Army when most of them don't even believe in the legitimacy of the government?
Yes, I'll admit that its a better decision to do your plan. I admitted as such.

I do not care. I am interested in following through on how these individuals ought to be treated. The government may be worse off this way, sure, but I am not willing to do such a thing after what we've already done to ensure that we shouldn't have to. This is not a decision from a metagame perspective, but rather a moral one.
 
Besides, do we really want to do both of the options that piss off the Army when most of them don't even believe in the legitimacy of the government? Military courts are also present in every democracy.
The thing with the Army is that, to survive as a government, we will have to bring them to heel and assert the civilian government's authority over them. And, honestly, now is the best time to do this: the entire country is exhausted from six years of total war, Ebert is still riding high on his string of political victories (beating back the Parliamentary Challenge, talking down the crowd in front of the Reichstag) and the Army still has a grudging respect for us.

If my rhetoric towards the Army sounds aggressive, that's because I am of the opinion that we should be handling the Army aggressively to begin with. Likewise, we must patch up our relationship with the Zentrum. This is a good start.

EDIT
On a more jovial note, aeiou earlier referred to the German Army as Ork-like in their thinking. What better way to make them listen to Warboss Ebert than continuing to krump and stomp? Da Republikk iz made fer Foightin an' Winnin'! Dun matta if itz on da field of battle or in da courtz!
WAAAGH!
 
Last edited:
I do not care. I am interested in following through on how these individuals ought to be treated. The government may be worse off this way, sure, but I am not willing to do such a thing after what we've already done to ensure that we shouldn't have to. This is not a decision from a metagame perspective, but rather a moral one.
Ok, here's a moral quandary: is it better to do one kind of ethically dubious thing or let an authoritarian government install itself and fo a whole lot worse? Do you understand why I'm saying this? It is like blowing off a candle when your house is on fire. We have bigger priorities if we want to keep a democracy. This is a minor compromise, military courts are a thing and none of those people are innocent in the first place.
If my rhetoric towards the Army sounds aggressive, that's because I am of the opinion that we should be handling the Army aggressively to begin with. Likewise, we must patch up our relationship with the Zentrum. This is a good start.
It's wayyy too risky. We need to wean off the army off extremists slowly, they are a much more powerful institution than the Republic. We need to work with them, not around them if we don't want them to walk around us. Up to a point where we can stand up to them and say they are overstepping without being couped. This would blow off all the good will we built during the war. My plan would hopefully remove some of the worst elements while appeasing them somewhat.
 
Last edited:
It's wayyy too risky.
Agreed, but it is also, in my opinion, a necessary risk. Simply because now is the time to strike, because Germany is much too exhausted to launch another coup. The military can only fume at this point in time, which will give us time to mend these bridges later.

Also, letting them try the KPD officers has its own significant drawbacks: upsetting the Zentrum.
The Zentrum will not like it much and will view it as capitulating to the army and the far-right, though, and they have a point.
They are our partners in government, make up the minority leadership and represent the Catholic segment of Germany, which means the South and, crucially, Bavaria. It is in our interest to work with, rather than against, them if we've any hope of building a robust government and mollifying Bavaria.
 
Last edited:
Ok, here's a moral quandary: is it better to do one kind of ethically dubious thing or let an authoritarian government install itself and fo a whole lot worse? Do you understand why I'm saying this? It is like blowing off a candle when your house is on fire. We have bigger priorities if we want to keep a democracy. This is a minor compromise, military courts are a thing and none of those people are innocent in the first place.
The chances of this alone making the military turn on us is really quite slim, and traitors are not tried in military courts.

There's no real point in having this argument. I have my priorities, and you have yours. You've got good reasons for yours, and I've got the same for mine, and we're not going to change each other's mind anytime soon, so I say we agree to disagree.
 
Ok, here's a moral quandary: is it better to do one kind of ethically dubious thing or let an authoritarian government install itself and fo a whole lot worse? Do you understand why I'm saying this? It is like blowing off a candle when your house is on fire. We have bigger priorities if we want to keep a democracy. This is a minor compromise, military courts are a thing and none of those people are innocent in the first place.

It's wayyy too risky. We need to wean off the army off extremists slowly, they are a much more powerful institution than the Republic. We need to work with them, not around them if we don't want them to walk around us. Up to a point where we can stand up to them and say they are overstepping without being couped. This would blow off all the good will we built during the war. My plan would hopefully remove some of the worst elements while appeasing them somewhat.

What are the potential downsides of your plan, and how would we mitigate them later on?
 
Agreed, but it is also, in my opinion, a necessary risk. Simply because now is the time to strike, because Germany is much too exhausted to launch another coup. The military can only fume at this point in time, which will give us time to mend these bridges later.
The only reason we weren't stomped during the Civil War was because we managed to convince some of the army to stay onboard. A coup right now is very possible considering there is no KDP to force us to work together and could even be bloodless, since we don't control anything but a few militias. Ebert won't be able to pull the trick he did OTL imo.
The chances of this alone making the military turn on us is really quite slim, and traitors are not tried in military courts.
If we want to do stuff later, we'll need to piss off the military eventually. Intensity matters though, if we go too far at first, they'll assume we'll continue to sideline them further, which is dangerous. We'll inevitably have to throw them a few bones, and this is pretty harmless as a far as they can go. We don't have that much goodwill with them, so let's not throw it away for now.
What are the potential downsides of your plan, and how would we mitigate them later on?
Mainly pissing off the Zentrum, the military trying its own is nothing new, and would only be a problem if we need to put even more of them on trial, which I think is unlikely unless we piss them off majorly. I would worry if this meant they would be in charge of overseeing the judgent of Triad officers, but that's not the case fortunately. The Zentrum are important, and losing some of their support is not ideal, but we do have ways to remedy that, especially trying to replace the Prussian officers by the Bavarians, which would be a win-win and make them very happy.
 
Last edited:
Voting is open
Back
Top