Marching on Moscow in support of the revolution would be a bad idea. If the revolution does well enough that there's actual fighting, then there are a dozen ways we could support them covertly - foreign guns and money would be huge, and we have probably a few million PoWs who might've realized that they got treated better in our camps than they did at home and probably have a bone to pick with the Tsar. If the revolution in Russia is just a Paris Commune type thing in Moscow, then it's sad, but we accept that nothing meaningful can be done to save it and we wait for the next one.And what, keep marching for Moscow when that revolution need saving? Because letting them die if they pick a fight they're not ready for would be grossly irresponsible.
We have one army on our border with France. Ending Russia is an Entente red line. We aren't ready for this.
Bulgaria, yeah, but leaving them alone is beneficial because it's a crisis point in the Balkans that we don't have to get involved in. Letting them off with minimal punishment will distract the Entente for a while.[X] Plan for Domestic Consumption
Mostly switching because I've been convinced that dealing with the Bulgarian-Romanian mess is gonna be a headache that we're better staying out off.
Marching on Moscow in support of the revolution would be a bad idea. If the revolution does well enough that there's actual fighting, then there are a dozen ways we could support them covertly - foreign guns and money would be huge, and we have probably a few million PoWs who might've realized that they got treated better in our camps than they did at home and probably have a bone to pick with the Tsar. If the revolution in Russia is just a Paris Commune type thing in Moscow, then it's sad, but we accept that nothing meaningful can be done to save it and we wait for the next one.
The unrest in Russia isn't the end goal itself but a means to it. Michael will be wary of sending troops to the front if we just broke through and there are protests at home. Taking the Baltics guts Russian industrial capabilities for decades, and that makes the next war easier for us.
No? Our response will depend on the scale of what occurs. If it's something like the 1905 revolution, I do not think we should march into St. Petersburg to relieve 50 thousand killed/captured; we would kill more simply through the voyage let alone any fighting. If it's something on the scale of the civil war, then I think we should supply the large numbers of red troops with weapons and volunteers, which will be far more useful than a foreign invasion that the white analogues could really around. If it's just anti-war protests, great, it gives an opportunity for the Russian left to do recruiting and get their message out.So basically you're willing to sacrifice untold amounts of Russian revolutionaries with no German support on the ground for a situation you caused... For a marginally better peace deal?
No? Our response will depend on the scale of what occurs. If it's something like the 1905 revolution, I do not think we should march into St. Petersburg to relieve 50 thousand killed/captured; we would kill more simply through the voyage let alone any fighting. If it's something on the scale of the civil war, then I think we should supply the large numbers of red troops with weapons and volunteers, which will be far more useful than a foreign invasion that the white analogues could really around. If it's just anti-war protests, great, it gives an opportunity for the Russian left to do recruiting and get their message out.
I don't think Russia will collapse. I think Russia might have some protests and strikes, which will have a minor impact on the ongoing negotiations. We don't need to march into every country undergoing minor civil disturbances.Our army is already at war with Russia, if the country collapses into revolution, retreating from it is grossly irresponsible. The Russian civil war has plenty of data for what will happen in the vacuum until socialists won, and we can't even guarantee they do.
You're basically pushing to collapse Russia without being willing to commit to fixing it.
I respect ultra militarists who want to march on Moscow even if I think it's unreasonable in light of both domestic and international concerns. But if you're not ready to take that, we have a perfectly good peace conference where we're getting pretty much everything we said we wanted before mission creep set in.
I don't think Russia will collapse. I think Russia might have some protests and strikes, which will have a minor impact on the ongoing negotiations. We don't need to march into every country undergoing minor civil disturbances.
That said, the leading "end the war" plan would abandon ongoing anti-monarchist protests in Romania; if that's something you feel we cannot abandon, then you shouldn't be voting for the -2 plan.
That's the same low level unrest I anticipate in Russia. I think, in Romania's case, it can be used as the foundation for a postwar government that will be an amenable outcome both to us and the Entente.There's no active Romanian revolution for us to abandon, just low level unrest. We're not leaving anyone to dry after giving them hope of German intervention.
Again, we're back to going through another round of murderous industrial war for a minutely better peace deal, if you're not hoping to end Russia with this.
That's the same low level unrest I anticipate in Russia. I think, in Romania's case, it can be used as the foundation for a postwar government that will be an amenable outcome both to us and the Entente.
I guess it comes down to if you think it'd be minutely better. I think it'd be a significant advantage for us to have almost completely split Russia off from the rest of the Entente and having taken more of their industry. If you don't, that's fair, but this isn't going to be an "untold numbers of revolutionary deaths" thing.
I don't think we are fully aiming to collapse russia with the pink plan. Instead 1 more turn of war should allow us to take the baltics whilst also securing the universal republic in Austria hungary
Yes, but it'll be as bloody as every turn of the war so far. This'll arguably be one of the offensives that's most in our favour, we've finally reduced them to numerical parity and will have the advantages of stockpiled artillery and attacking in the summer.Even if you don't assume there will be a collapse of Russia over another round of war, it's still going to be very bloody, especially since we'll have to reduce the Austrian remnants and Balkans instead of having them surrender.
I wish we could take Romania without Bulgaria but it's just not an option in the peace conference.
We aren't taking the whole Baltics in one war turn, it's at least one for Riga and one for Estonia, I expect. Reducing the rest of the Balkans is also not going to be short.
We are looking forward to a multi-year conflict where Russia gets Western support we can't cut off with manpower reserves that will still be a problem and a whole lot of space to trade to bleed us. Decisive and crucial points we have to conquer to decisively change the strategic calculus will require extensive campaigns that will cause long-term demographic damage to us.Yes, but it'll be as bloody as every turn of the war so far. This'll arguably be one of the offensives that's most in our favour, we've finally reduced them to numerical parity and will have the advantages of stockpiled artillery and attacking in the summer.
We can probably "take" Romania without Bulgaria if we vote to partition the other powers, which will result in a post-war conference to discuss the fate of Eastern Europe. In that conference, we can hopefully vote to do nothing with Bulgaria, which will probably buy us a bit of leverage to do things elsewhere (like making the partitions of Austria-Hungary and Romania more favourable to our long-term aims).