- Location
- United States
[X] Military Observer in the Russian Civil War (Army)
[X] Military Attaché to the United States (English speaker)
[X] Military Attaché to the United States (English speaker)
(Alternate History) The Second Sino-Japanese War
- Thread starter KlinkerKing
- Start date
- Alt. History
[X] Military Attaché to the United States (English speaker)
[X] Military Attaché to the British Empire (English speaker, Connections)
Don't know if this is allowed but I vote for these two. First, because I'd rather not get dragged into another adventure somewhere. And second, by the discussion that I have seen both of these has the capacity to threaten our interests in the pacific and not pissing them off is a rather good idea.
[X] Military Attaché to the British Empire (English speaker, Connections)
Don't know if this is allowed but I vote for these two. First, because I'd rather not get dragged into another adventure somewhere. And second, by the discussion that I have seen both of these has the capacity to threaten our interests in the pacific and not pissing them off is a rather good idea.
KlinkerKing
Man bites dog?
- Location
- The Lion's Den
Alright, let's go back to basics and remember how this discussion started, because it's getting out of hand. You said:
In other words, with the context of the post you were replying to: an Anglo-Japanese alliance wouldn't be an effective deterrent against U.S. invasion. We can disagree on the specifics of how the war turns out, but I'm not going to sit here and pretend that the U.S. of 1915 could beat Britain and Japan without breaking a sweat. It would very certainly give the U.S. pause. In any hypothetical scenario like this, I'm naturally going to roll dice so we'll never know for sure how it would go unless it actually kicks off.
There, now let's move on from this topic.
- Location
- United States
Seeing as we're currently voting on what is effectively a major part of Japan's future foreign policy, I'm afraid I'm going to have to insist the subject receive a decisive answer.
The major issue in contention is whether we should attempt to strengthen the Anglo-Japanese alliance in an explicit attempt to check American "Pacific Ambitions," try and cool relations with the US, or involve ourself with the Russians. The point of my argument is not, in fact, to insist that the Americans are invincible and could effortlessly beat two major naval powers at once. While 'curbstomp' may have been a poor choice in words, the overall point is that (even assuming the British actually declare war on the US for Japan, which is the fundemental absurdity at the heart of this alliance) an American victory would be inevitable. Leaving aside fantasy scenarios where the east coast is completely blockaded and naval production facilities destroyed through coastal bombardment, the two nations lack the ability to inflict decisive victories and to sustain a total war tempo, both due to economic, military, and diplomatic issues.
On multiple fundamental levels, the logic behind pursing ties with the British Empire as a counter to the United States is flawed, and I am arguing that people should vote differently, and irritated you've come off as so blatantly partisan over the issue.
ShyPerson
Guardian of the dead’s final rest.
- Location
- Sweden
- Pronouns
- Him/He
If the op wants this conversation to end, then it's over. Respect the ops wish and don't continue this line of discussion.
KlinkerKing
Man bites dog?
- Location
- The Lion's Den
Your opinion on the exact outcome of an AA v U.S. war is perfectly fine to hold, I won't stop you.
My only real objection was that you described it as an inefficient deterrent *because America would curbstomp both nations*. There are many reasons why you could describe it as an inefficient deterrent, but the idea that America could effortlessly defeat a combined naval force more than three times its own in size, was just factually incorrect. I wanted to make that clear, as I've done before in similar situations, to make sure people without a good familiarity with the period can keep up.
By all means, continue to gather support for your vote, that's what the thread is for.
- Location
- Kansas
I'd like to put my hat into the disscussion by saying such a war with Japan and Brtitian will be hotly contested in public and in Congress. I feel that the average American will not be too keen on starting a war after France and Russia blew up into civil war. The chances of the US declaring war on Japan are about as slim as a metor hitting Tokyo. So I'll back up Klinker and say that it just ain't happening.
Satar
Xetares, Third Redeemer; World Drinker
- Location
- Sesh
Honestly @LonelyWolf999 I think you're letting your irl nationality and race confound your judgement. You've been sneering at the idea that the US has Pacific Ambitions in this time period but frankly, it does. And whenever the shortcomings of 1915 America get pointed out you resort to whataboutism. Now you're insisting that no way an Anglo power like Britain defends an Asian power like Japan in the face of American aggression. Maybe that stance makes sense from a position of race solidarity, but most countries look to geopolitics and not something so asinine.
- Location
- United States
To be frank, I honestly expected people to just accuse me of being racist sooner. At least you had the testicular fortitude to say it out loud, man.
For what it's worth - no, I have not, in fact, been looking at this from a racial perspective. Leaving aside the fact that countries in this time period absolutely did factor cultural prejudices into their decision making (leaders are people, after all) at no point did I raise that argument or state it was the reason Britain would prioritize cordial relations with the US over Japan. To be frank, I think it speaks ill of you to automatically assume the worst motivation of anybody who disagrees with you, and hope this isn't how you usually conduct yourself, as it is - how did you put it? - asinine.
Information: Just passing by nothing to see here , yet.
Astra Myst
Do you want a wish?
- Location
- Milky Way Galaxy
- Pronouns
- Femhon/Boymoder
[X] Military Attaché to the United States (English speaker)
KlinkerKing
Man bites dog?
- Location
- The Lion's Den
VOTES WILL CLOSE IN 24 HOURS
- Location
- USA
[X] Military Attaché to the United States (English speaker)
[X] Military Attaché to the United States (English speaker)
- Location
- Toronto, Canada
You know, for a moment there, I thought this was some naval treaty restriction ratio and was about to search which number was assigned to each country when I realized it was the vote ratio.
[X] Military Attaché to the British Empire (English speaker, Connections)
What do people expect to get out of a military attache to USA? A single attache isn't going to fundamentally alter USA's anti Japanese foreign policy and We'll be losing a possible Anglo-Jap alliance which has served us well so far.
My opinion is that one in the hand is worth 2 in the bush ,We have a UK alliance and we shouldn't throw it away for a potential US one which may or may not happen.
What do people expect to get out of a military attache to USA? A single attache isn't going to fundamentally alter USA's anti Japanese foreign policy and We'll be losing a possible Anglo-Jap alliance which has served us well so far.
My opinion is that one in the hand is worth 2 in the bush ,We have a UK alliance and we shouldn't throw it away for a potential US one which may or may not happen.
Last edited:
KlinkerKing
Man bites dog?
- Location
- The Lion's Den
Voting closed.
- Location
- ferreries
Considering that OTL there were about 40 million casualties in WW1 I say europe got of lightly this timeline.