[X] The US would not allow its sovereignty to be trampled on nor be a beggar power, it would win the war and defend its overseas territories on its own.
The Second Reconstruction-A Post-Civil War Kaiserreich USA Quest
- Thread starter Jeeshadow
- Start date
My opposition is more about how such a radical shift towards the Brits will make an obvious PR coup for our enemies. Long and Reed will absolutely wreck our ground game with the average citizen if we - the Federal Government - invite foreign troops onto US soil to kill American citizens - rebels and insurrectionists, yes, but American rebels and insurrectionists. I understand the need for realpolitik, for picking a side, but this move with Britain is too extreme for comfort. If we must be involved with the Entente, I can only ask that we accept Hull's offer as it is.
nachtingale
20. On that "honk, mimimi" type beat everyday.
- Location
- Malaysia
- Pronouns
- He/They
[X] The US would not allow its sovereignty to be trampled on nor be a beggar power, it would win the war and defend its overseas territories on its own.
No Gods, No Kings. Only Men, and the Republic.
No Gods, No Kings. Only Men, and the Republic.
- Location
- Watchung,New Jersey
Well, I'd argue our counteroffer is actually better for propaganda than just allowing them to take New England. Instead of a vulture proving the US cannot defend itself, they're noble Allies against Red Revolution and Longist Usurpation. Sure, the Reds and Longists will cry foul, but to be blunt, they don't have a pot to piss in legitimacy wise. They lost the election, fair and square, their response? Murderous insurrection. The support they have for their revolution is mainly drawn on those who are already disaffected with the Government so much that a radical reordering is desired and there is a definite cap to the people who are thinking along those lines, and their rapidly approaching said cap.
- Location
- United States
I hardly see how any of the other factions have room to crow about foreign interference when they're be propped up by America's enemies abroad. And frankly speaking, I think Hull's offer would offer even worse optics - with the third option Canada's coming in as an ally to defend America, while with the second we're engaging in diplomatic chicanery to obfuscate our own obvious weakness.
ThatGuyWithIdeas
Treize died for our sins
- Location
- Romania
We've made efforts to appease the Left, but they weren't enough to satisfy them, so they resorted to opposing the will of the people. The Internationale butting in here is no better than the Entente's imperialism, which makes me suspect that the Internationale in this quest is nothing more than an alliance of Totalist powers. I would be willing to go for taking the original offer, but as of now, it's between refusing the deal (which is a bad idea and benefits the syndicalist forces) or the counteroffer, which is significantly more preferable than no deal. America and its democracy will know no peace so long as the syndicalist and monarchist forces will try to topple the American Center, and the best way to make them back off from their attempts is to show them their actions have consequences.
nachtingale
20. On that "honk, mimimi" type beat everyday.
- Location
- Malaysia
- Pronouns
- He/They
So you're suggesting we... ally the monarchists to own the monarchists? Forgive me if I'm not following here, but I do believe that the Republic need not cow to any others. Washington's flag flies alone in it's quest for true democracy, we need not involve the genocidal British monarchy or the colonizing French.
And to say that because one side commits imperialism, that it is therefor justified that we ally with other imperialist powers is to be the greatest betrayal of our most sacred tenants, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. For what cause do we have to claim for our own, when we guarantee such rights for our own citizens, but allow the allies you seek to court murder and oppress millions?
Madness, tis what I believe, for the Republic can only stand alone as the bastion of democracy in this world of darkness. The torch of liberty will not be snuffed out, and certainly not for pragmatism.
Last edited:
- Location
- Watchung,New Jersey
If you'll remember, Washington and the Continental Congress gladly took the aid of the Absolutist Catholic Monarchies of France and Spain, nations far more culturally and idealogically opposed to the US (theoretically, the lines are very fuzzy for France) than the current exile government, who are still a constitutional monarchy. We didn't get this letter from Eddy, but from King, the democratically elected prime minister. Yes, the Entente are revanchists who want to see Syndies hang from lamp posts, a description which more than adequately describes a large part of our base of support right now. I see no reason to be squeamish at that.
As you so eloquently hinted at earlier and as I previously mentioned, Long and Reed are already in the process of inviting foreign troops onto US soil to kill Americans. We're not gonna look any worse off PR-wise than the others, and defections to Long and Reed are occurring despite said persons kowtowing to foreign interests-if anything, it's telling that people are defecting from an unbacked federal government to foreign-sponsored parties. I'd also question how radical this shift really is; much of our sabre-rattling was aimed at Germany and Japan and we were in the process of normalizing trade ties with the Entente. I'm not sure how much our waving the flag will galvanize our base, or even if it will galvanize our base to fight instead of making leadership look internationally isolated, delusional and (among powerbrokers) unwilling to do what it takes to win the war-something poisonous when powers of similar culture and a desire to intervene are right across the border, drafting protection plans that could trivially turn into unsanctioned occupation, and frankly terrifying when there's no recent history of decisive domestic triumph-by for example, being the victorious party in a world war-to echo in the face of decades worth of setbacks.
I'd also like to call into attention the total inexperience of US forces in large-scale, modern warfare. As dubious as operating on WW1 doctrine is, KR-verse United States hasn't fought beyond police actions since the 1898 Spanish-American War, and hasn't waged this sort of fighting since the first Civil War-with said experiences and lessons learned historically atrophying the moment the war ended. It's also uncertain if the US even entertained any sort of Preparedness Movement-the most concrete stuff we have are limited, indigenous modernization efforts pre-war. Diplomatically we'll be standing alone or with token support against foreign powers that not only have fought a large-scale, modern war, but have continuously maintained high military readiness and iterative doctrinal improvements. The Entente lost the first Great War in Kaiserreich...but IRL so did the Germans, and for all their faults, infighting, ideological insanity and enemies stacked against them what they managed to do in WW2 speaks for itself.
As direct military force they can further accelerate the growing sense of defeat by inflicting further military victories and economic support for secessionist elements against us. As force multipliers in a more drawn-out civil war...It's not advisable to lose civil wars, it's not advisable to have foreign powers further encroach on territories during civil wars and it's not advisable to prolong them. And with the USN's oil reserves gone, any chance of successfully interdicting said foreign support relies on Entente warships operating with what warships we can muster and whatever oil they can scrounge up.
Last edited:
nachtingale
20. On that "honk, mimimi" type beat everyday.
- Location
- Malaysia
- Pronouns
- He/They
Bah, Washington lived in more desperate times, to claim that we exist in such times of peril is to be disingenuous. And even then, so what? The acts of Washington do not define our acts of today, we have a simple choice gentlemen, to stand as the last beacon of hope for democracy in this world, or siding with one side of the coin of tyranny.
I see no reason why we should support either the Entente nor the Internationale, which we both agree are one in the same of imperialist desires, one simply coating itself in red paint to justify itself. We should hang both sides of tyranny from the lampposts, something that would not happen were we to promise the congenially deformed former monarch so much as a single railcar to his deranged ambitions of revenge. He sends King in his stead as but a mere puppet, for might I remind you that it is the inbred Briton who sits and stews in his castle in Ottowa who picks the PM of his choosing, not the people who elect him directly.
DkArthas
CAPITAL IS TO BLAME
- Location
- Earth
- Pronouns
- They
[X] The US would not allow its sovereignty to be trampled on nor be a beggar power, it would win the war and defend its overseas territories on its own.
We can not and will not allow inbred Europeans and their stooges to kill American people. If they do so, once we are done with our current problems, we will simply have to bomb everyone of them to the stone age. America will stand alone and do so proudly.
We can not and will not allow inbred Europeans and their stooges to kill American people. If they do so, once we are done with our current problems, we will simply have to bomb everyone of them to the stone age. America will stand alone and do so proudly.
Last edited:
- Location
- Watchung,New Jersey
1. Washington totally needed that support, without it, the US would not of been able to win the war.
2. Yes we do live in times of such peril. Reds are marching through the streets of New York, Long is crowing in the Deep South, both with the desire and ability to crush the Republic if we don't play this right. In fact, we are in more peril than the first civil war, where the South just wanted to leave, not overthrow the Government.
3. No, if it was up to Eddy, he would not of selected Mackenzie King, a populist who has doubts on the "Reclaim the Birthright" stuff as a practical piece of the agenda. He was democratically elected, in an election where millions of Canadians voted, competively, against a man who was in fact, more receptive to Eddys demands.
4. This is not a French Revolution or 19th century Liberal quest, this is a 1930s USA quest. A 1930s Federalist politican would not really be thinking along these lines, especially not in this moment of crisis.
[X] The US would not allow its sovereignty to be trampled on nor be a beggar power, it would win the war and defend its overseas territories on its own.
People are talking abstract ideology, but let's talk realpolitik for a moment (itself an ideology but details).
Joining the Entente means committing to invading Europe, occupying Britain and France, and forgiving Britain (and likely France) for their WW1 debts. That's unacceptable. The Entente is a joke. They need American help to pull off any sort of invasion of Europe across the Atlantic Ocean. Maybe from North Africa if we're lucky and Nat France doesn't get invaded or collapse from revolts by the time we're in any shape to invade. We're writing a cheque we have no ability to cash in this decade, at least until the late 40s, by which point the war in Europe is over and Germany's won or Syndies did, and neither is an appealing prospect.
Forgiving the war debts is also a major issue. Canada technically doesn't owe us war debts, the United Kingdom does. The King's simply running Canada as his personal fiefdom until he can retake Britain, which means he's acting against its interests and thinking about Britain. America wants that money back. Debt is how you control other countries. It'd also make us look really bad to Americans that after a civil war, we need to rebuild so we can immediately send millions of men to die fighting a war against Britain and France to put the Entente back into power with literally negative benefit to us. We don't get access to their markets. They aren't in debt to us financially. They need American manpower to occupy the country because they're overthrowing a popular government that's ruled for 30+ years by that point.
Millions will die. American firepower is necessary to raze Europe if Germany doesn't do it for them. If Germany does occupy France or even Britain, then what? If the Entente and Pakt don't reach a deal, does Ottawa expect us to fight Germany for them next? And what if they do reach a deal? They'll jump ship and ditch us to cozy up with Germany to rebuild the European dominated imperial order. Then we're left holding the bag with nothing to show for it.
Also if Canada wants to invade America, I want them to be forced to fight the Feds and CSA to do it. They aren't getting free territory, manpower, or industry without a fight. Collapse Canada and drag it into the mess if possible.
It's a joke. This is literally what they tried to do in WW1, spend American blood to pay for their empires. Literally the exact same thing.
People are talking abstract ideology, but let's talk realpolitik for a moment (itself an ideology but details).
Joining the Entente means committing to invading Europe, occupying Britain and France, and forgiving Britain (and likely France) for their WW1 debts. That's unacceptable. The Entente is a joke. They need American help to pull off any sort of invasion of Europe across the Atlantic Ocean. Maybe from North Africa if we're lucky and Nat France doesn't get invaded or collapse from revolts by the time we're in any shape to invade. We're writing a cheque we have no ability to cash in this decade, at least until the late 40s, by which point the war in Europe is over and Germany's won or Syndies did, and neither is an appealing prospect.
Forgiving the war debts is also a major issue. Canada technically doesn't owe us war debts, the United Kingdom does. The King's simply running Canada as his personal fiefdom until he can retake Britain, which means he's acting against its interests and thinking about Britain. America wants that money back. Debt is how you control other countries. It'd also make us look really bad to Americans that after a civil war, we need to rebuild so we can immediately send millions of men to die fighting a war against Britain and France to put the Entente back into power with literally negative benefit to us. We don't get access to their markets. They aren't in debt to us financially. They need American manpower to occupy the country because they're overthrowing a popular government that's ruled for 30+ years by that point.
Millions will die. American firepower is necessary to raze Europe if Germany doesn't do it for them. If Germany does occupy France or even Britain, then what? If the Entente and Pakt don't reach a deal, does Ottawa expect us to fight Germany for them next? And what if they do reach a deal? They'll jump ship and ditch us to cozy up with Germany to rebuild the European dominated imperial order. Then we're left holding the bag with nothing to show for it.
Also if Canada wants to invade America, I want them to be forced to fight the Feds and CSA to do it. They aren't getting free territory, manpower, or industry without a fight. Collapse Canada and drag it into the mess if possible.
It's a joke. This is literally what they tried to do in WW1, spend American blood to pay for their empires. Literally the exact same thing.
Last edited:
People say that we will make a deal with the Devil if we ally with Canada of all people. We already make such deals already and its called Congress. We need a new shining light of International Order under American guidance and the first step is to win this civil war. We need international cooperation to march on the streets of Chicago and New Orleans because America's been infested by radicals that need to see reason at the end of a barrel. Once this is all over they will know the rage of an America ready for war.
An international order of allies doesn't mean forgiving Entente war debt or publicly declaring "we've got this bro" to retake Europe for them. Nothing will depress the American public more than fighting a drawn out civil war to follow it up by single handed launching an invasion of Continental Europe with no nearby footholds. That's not really appealing. We're going to have to raze the Steel Belt to win if we can't bring the CSA to the negotiating table. The centers of industry and manpower we'd use to launch said conquest of Europe. They're going to be on fire and destroyed over the course of the fighting. It'll take years to recover.
At which point all American soldiers are is warm bodies in a uniform for Ottawa to throw against Syndie/Pakt fortifications.
My basic assumptions are as follows: that the loyalties of the average American are not yet decided, that our actions here can split our Federal coalition further still, and that the optics of us handling this situation are the most important consideration here.
Let me know if I'm not coming off coherently, as I'm in the middle of travel and ill-rested.
In other words, I fear that inviting the British Crown onto US soil will enable Long and Reed to whatabout their way into equivocating their cause with ours. Those Americans whose loyalties are with the AFL laborites and Southern Democrats still have time to join Reed and Long. I do not want to give our adversaries the propaganda to help the AFL and Southern Democrats make that crossing.
Now, there is a flipside to this coin as well: if we choose to wave our flag, we have a concrete standing from which to attack Long's and Reed's own tacit supporters and peel off their political flanks. The message for the Federals can then be something like this: "Reed says 'yes' to Paris, Long says 'yes' to Berlin. What do YOU say, AMERICA!" And the point would be to wreck the cohesion of their controlled territories, cause rebellions on their turf, and so on.
So, yeah, I this is why I think that bellicose nationalism is better than a peacekeeper force, and both are superior to inviting the British Crown onto our soil to kill the citizens whose loyalties we are still fighting for.
Let me know if I'm not coming off coherently, as I'm in the middle of travel and ill-rested.
My concern is the hearts and minds of the average American. If I'm Reed, I want an easy march through New England; if I'm Long, I want the South and Midwest to fall in line with me. What I'm most concerned about is how well the average American will react to me firing the first shot and using foreign volunteers and allies kill Americans on American soil in the name of my cause. If US government itself invites a foreign ally onto US soil to kill American citizens, that worry goes out the window: the lawfully elected Federals are doing it, so I can do it too!
In other words, I fear that inviting the British Crown onto US soil will enable Long and Reed to whatabout their way into equivocating their cause with ours. Those Americans whose loyalties are with the AFL laborites and Southern Democrats still have time to join Reed and Long. I do not want to give our adversaries the propaganda to help the AFL and Southern Democrats make that crossing.
Now, there is a flipside to this coin as well: if we choose to wave our flag, we have a concrete standing from which to attack Long's and Reed's own tacit supporters and peel off their political flanks. The message for the Federals can then be something like this: "Reed says 'yes' to Paris, Long says 'yes' to Berlin. What do YOU say, AMERICA!" And the point would be to wreck the cohesion of their controlled territories, cause rebellions on their turf, and so on.
I want to come back to the 'coups succeed on momentum' truism. Currently, the Feds seem to be folding in many places, and people may elect to just go along with Longists or the Red Army for the sake of not getting murked. In this way, inviting the Brits as peacekeepers is sufficient in that it will show that we are not as fragile as the recent string of misfortunes would show; a 'dominos stop falling' moment. I already described how bad the optics of inviting them as an offensive force will be in my opinion.
So, yeah, I this is why I think that bellicose nationalism is better than a peacekeeper force, and both are superior to inviting the British Crown onto our soil to kill the citizens whose loyalties we are still fighting for.
dex10awesome
Anarcho-Determinist
- Location
- Australia
- Pronouns
- He/Him
[X] The US would not allow its sovereignty to be trampled on nor be a beggar power, it would win the war and defend its overseas territories on its own.
Theaxofwar
Definitely not a Bunny Cat in disguise.
- Location
- Standing right behind you
[ ] The US would not allow its sovereignty to be trampled on nor be a beggar power, it would win the war and defend its overseas territories on its own.
The Entente are a joke and I want nothing to do with them. Agreeing to this deal is a humiliation, and agreeing to help them retake Europe is promising a pipe dream. We don't need the support of the last decrepit remnants of fallen empires to win this war.
The Entente are a joke and I want nothing to do with them. Agreeing to this deal is a humiliation, and agreeing to help them retake Europe is promising a pipe dream. We don't need the support of the last decrepit remnants of fallen empires to win this war.
Last edited:
- Location
- Watchung,New Jersey
You say as the Reds consolidate the steel belt and New England unopposed and are able to use the industry and military might to crush the Republic. Would be nice to force the Reds onto the back foot right now, to reenforce New England, advance into Michigan and to fly attack sorties against Chicago and the like, right now. All this talk of Propaganda and optics, and future promises is all well and good, but at the end of the day, we need cold hard force. Canada can deliver that force, and keep the Reds pinned in the North East while we build up and advance from the West. If they are a joke as you say, well, then the Reds will take Ottowa and we don't have to deal with them any more.
Rood, people are talking about backstabbing Canada when we emerge a great power, I'm effortposting and you imply we're not dealing in the realest of politik?
As many people have noted, we kinda don't like what the Europeans are doing to the US what with their funding of seditious elements and sending foreign troops to kill Americans-this also makes it a hell of a lot easier to press the revanchism button against them. The counter-offer doesn't make note of any debt-forgiveness and doesn't stipulate running occupation duty for them-as far as I can tell our job would just be to go in and smash the syndicalists, with what follows after TBD. I have no idea where you're getting the notion that we won't get access to their markets or that they won't be in debt to us-they'll also need American industry to properly rebuild, and as other people have pointed out once the dust settles we'll be in a position to alter the deal with the Entente praying we don't alter it further, or capitalizing on a percieved sense of co-dependency with the advantage towards the US. I know it's entirely possible for France to bail if Germany wins hard enough, but it's not guaranteed and the entente aren't liable to forgive Germany for that total a defeat, especially if it means forsaking a proven ally with stakes in reconstruction. It's in their best interest to remain friends with us. Said realpolitik analysis also utterly neglects Russia: it's entirely possible that Germany gets partitioned between the Syndicalist and an irredentist, ultranationalist Russia that will also pose a geopolitical rival as a matter of great power competition. Debt is a powerful tool, but is not the only measure of dependence-and as you pointed out the Entente will be heavily depended on US force of arms and economic power.
I also don't know how you're positing there's gonna be some negotiated settlement with the CSA that doesn't involve severe damage to it. The CSA isn't liable to surrender if they hold said centers of industry and manpower and I'm not sure if the conditions will arise that it will be tactically feasible to concentrate purely on the AUS, as it leaves the CSA free to leverage its macro-scale advantages and couple it with foreign military expertise.
Last edited:
- Location
- Watchung,New Jersey
I'd also add: it's not like we can't make them accrue new debt. We'll build their ships on the cheap, but I don't think anyone is suggesting we do it for free…