Remove ads

Attempting to Fulfill the Plan MNKh Edition

Voted best in category in the Users' Choice awards.
Reader mode
For the record, Ghaddafi might switch sides over this. Kinda depends on how he takes the crisis outbreak itself, how he takes the agreement about shipping (and how long it lasts), and how willing to take him Ashbrook* is.

*Kissinger will sign-off in a heartbeat, but he needs Ashbrook's approval to do so.
 
Last edited:
KingCrimson1081 said:
Well the recent scare of nuclear annihilation will ensure that communism will remain unpopular in the West for at least another generation or two.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

This version of the US has all of the great society programs , welfare, comprehensive civil rights, and probably a 90% top marginal tax rate. It's probably as far left as the 1970s US could get without a revolution.

France just wound up super weird and militaristic in this timeline because of the way ww2 played out, almost to the point of having some kind of death drive, so every single issue with them can escalate to a potential nuclear first strike.

[X]Advocate for Accepting the Terms

I'm only voting this so we don't all die, I still don't think we did anything wrong 😾

,... also free the admiral and give him a parade.
 
obssesednuker said:
For the record, Ghaddafi might switch sides over this. Kinda depends on how he takes the crisis outbreak itself, how he takes the agreement about shipping (and how long it lasts), and how willing to take him Ashbrook* is.

*Kissinger will sign-off in a heartbeat, but he needs Ashbrook's approval to do so.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Wouldn't believe he could last long after showing how willing he is to switch slides anytime he feels the other side will give him something better.
 
Manowl said:
Wouldn't believe he could last long after showing how willing he is to switch slides anytime he feels the other side will give him something better.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

You'd be surprised. Siad Barre in Somalia was a Soviet client until the Soviets tried to force him to make peace with Ethiopia (who had recently also become a Soviet client after a coup) during the Ogaden War, then he subsequently switched sides, botched the war partly as a result, and yet STILL managed to hold onto power for 13 more years. And his regime was much more of a Marxist-Leninist one than Gaddafi's ever was, even AFTER switching sides.
 
Last edited:
Phalfpipe said:
This version of the US has all of the great society programs , welfare, comprehensive civil rights, and probably a 90% top marginal tax rate. It's probably as far left as the 1970s US could get without a revolution.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Still doesn't mean it is a nation that supports or likes communism, and I don't see that changing any time soon. Besides that with the recent election we could see a swing more rightwards from them.
 
obssesednuker said:
You'd be surprised. Siad Barre in Somalia was a Soviet client until the Soviets tried to force him to make peace with Ethiopia (who had recently also become a Soviet client after a coup) during the Ogaden War, then he subsequently switched sides, botched the war partly as a result, and yet STILL managed to hold onto power for 13 more years. And his regime was much more of a Marxist-Leninist one than Gaddafi's ever was, even AFTER switching sides.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I'm meaning that the USA would do it's best to figure out how to kill him and have the guy they like the most and is not flip floppy end up as the new dictator.
 
aja318 said:
It's a good deal, all we are really giving up is shipping weapons by sea. What we get are no US nukes in France for now, no nuclear war, we give win to US administration that was not terrible for us and way less racist than one that is about to replace it. We also don't keep nuclear forces on high alert risking accidents and get less economy disruption.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Agree on all counts. Accepting the terms does give us a win - removal of American nukes from France. Remember, these sites are priority targets in a nuclear war; even if we actually want a war (why????), this is a much easier way to get rid of them.

[X]Advocate for Accepting the Terms

Blackstar said:
Damage to the Druzhny was comparatively mild, with much of her reinforcement for icebreaking scraped along with mild flooding in her frontal compartments from the impact.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Considering how history went in real life, we actually may wish to invest in 1-4 ramming ships. For all that modern war is fought at range, "political incidents" like this are often fought by being physically large (and present).
 
Last edited:
Takareer said:
Considering how history went in real life, we actually may wish to invest in 1-4 ramming ships. For all that modern war is fought at range, "political incidents" like this are often fought by being physically large (and present).
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Its somewhat depressing that we have ships that can move without man or sail, can destroy ships over the horizon, and are clad in steel, and yet we are using them to ram each other like a toddler playing in a bathtub.
 
[X]Advocate for Accepting the Terms

Looking back I must personally apologize to @fasquardon for dismissing his genuine concern as overblown. His anger was quite justified as we were clearly dumb-ass. However, no crying over spill milk, we gambled and we lost, for the love of Lenin, please stop posturing for more concession. This deal is as good as it get, I (as many minister inside the bunker) beg of you to accept the deal, this is it, end of line, I want to get off the ride to certain annihilation. Even if Ashbrook will certainly renege on our deal to remove nuke from France, this is good enough. We desperately need a nuclear treaty yesterday and this might as well be the start of one.
 
Honestly if it wasn't for the fact that the mobilization is definitely going to hit the economy, there is argument to be made that this was one with benefits and mostly acceptable downsides.
 
At this point I don't mind either go calm of risk a little bit now (as long as it not total idiot choice), I'm here just for the ride of 'interesting time' that aren't go 'quest ending' decision
[X] Advocate for Accepting the Terms
[X]Advocate for Biding Time
 
Last edited:
[X]Advocate for Accepting the Terms

We have shown a strong commitment to the international law, freedom of trade and the plight of the colonized countries. Now is the time to show our pursuit of peace, reasonableness and ability to negotiate. Since it's only been a few days, with decisive action, we should be able to preserve most of the economy.
 
Takareer said:
"Loss" is a bit of a misnomer. If we had not chosen to send an escort, we would have been cutting shipments - just like with the peace deal, so we didn't lose that. We have gained American nukes leaving France, though.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
We certainly lost. We are Ministry of Economic Dev, and after this we will lose resources that otherwise we would have due to mobilization and arms race, so that's OUR lost. Not to mention the Algerian will most def be rake over even harder due to tacit American support and our (temp) disruption of supply. We aren't in this for every oppressed ppl in the world, we are in this quest for USSR and to an extent our CMEA allies. My zeal got the better of me, I lost my sight due to a French inducing rage, despite our best intention we just made thing worse, so never again.
Also, no frikking way Ashbrook will not reverse Humphrey decision when he's officially in office, just as we are for sure not going to supply arms to Algeria, on way or the other.
 
Last edited:
5D Antipytamid said:
[X]Advocate for Accepting the Terms

Why is even this option so... Escalating? Continuing the support by other methods? Really? It is too late for that! We'd be lucky if just supporting Subsaharan rebels wouldn't be a reason to go nuclear. COMPLETE. ABANDONMENT. OF. ALGERIA. NOW!
Also , americans are giving concessions for some reason , which they really shouldn't since that encourages such behaviour in the future
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Why though

There was a confrontation, we won, the US made France back down and is likely stripping ig their nuclear capabilities. Now is the time to extract a concession or two and flood the colonies with more guns then they can hold through back channels (since direct shipping will be politically unviable for a year or two most likely)
Ashheap said:
We certainly lost. We are Ministry of Economic Dev, and after this we will lose resources that otherwise we would have due to mobilization and arms race, so that's OUR lost. Not to mention the Algerian will most def be rake over even harder due to tacit American support and our (temp) disruption of supply. We aren't in this for every oppressed ppl in the world, we are in this quest for USSR and to an extent our CMEA allies. My zeal got the better of me, I lost my sight due to a French inducing rage, despite our best intention we just made thing worse, so never again.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I don't think we mobilized? We got the missiles ready and the troops already on the border went on high alert, but from the update it doesn't seem like we've done anything that would have hurt the economy overmuch, at most a bit of a stress test for military readiness. And in exchange we got one over France and weakened the global capitalist position, seems like a good deal

Edit: yeah Ashbrook will probably reverse some stuff, but we are absolutely not ending our support of Algeria, it even says so in the choice, we'll continue the supply just by trickier means until the Americans go back on things
 
Last edited:
Ultrackius said:
Now is the time to extract a concession or two and flood the colonies with more guns then they can hold through back channels (since direct shipping will be politically unviable for a year or two most likely)
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
If we are too blatant about it then the Americans will know we have gone back on our deal and will have the right to retaliate.
Ultrackius said:
likely stripping ig their nuclear capabilities.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
France still has their own nuclear weapons, sure the loss of America's hurts but they still have their own button to push.
Ultrackius said:
And in exchange we got one over France and weakened the global capitalist position, seems like a good deal
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I don't think anyone considers France capitalist anymore they have been sliding down the authoritarian/fascist road for some time now.
 
Takareer said:
"Loss" is a bit of a misnomer. If we had not chosen to send an escort, we would have been cutting shipments - just like with the peace deal, so we didn't lose that. We have gained American nukes leaving France, though.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

We wouldn't have been cutting shipments, as can be seen by the fact that we will still be sending shipments even after we lost the confrontation for shipping through the med
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top