Posts made by MrMalachiCrunch

I enjoy reviewing the play by forum games, its a great way to learn and see how others implement strategies and deal with bad dice rolls.  I am still somewhat unfamiliar with this site and its sometimes not easy to deduce what game and version of the rules are being used.  Could there by a seperate forum or sub-forum for each of the games which would then link to the legacy games or provide a new home for play by forum games.  I guess a better question is, is it worth the work I ask?  Thanks in advance!

Some interesting points Kurt and some key words and citations to search on in order to broaden my knowledge for which I thank you.

Hoover did state that and although he had a fair bit of experience with the German economy that statement was an opinion with some slanting, Hoover (Republican) did lose his presidency to FDR (Democrat) and also did preside over the initiation of the great depression (questions about economic policy prowess and predictive accuracy).  Stating FDR as being pro-communist and Hoover as uberHero I think treads closely on the avoidance of political talk and that of factual accuracy.

The initial Morgenthau Plan had been modified with the influence of Winston Churchill who was against it and was considered 'The real Morgenthau Plan".  Still nasty and stupid in my humble opinion but not as….  It can be found here: http://digicoll.library.wisc.edu/cgi-bin/FRUS/FRUS-idx?id=FRUS.FRUS1944

After FDR died, the Morgenthau Plan died, granted, aspects did influence allied planning.  Stating Germans were starving due to allied planning is indeed correct and a travisty.  Stating it was done under the “Morgenthau Plan” is factucally inaccurate.  The intimation in the form of the socractic path from FDR to Morgenthau Plan to Genocide ergo one political spectrum being better than the other I hope is merely a phantom of my paranoid mind.  But just because I am paranoid does not mean they are not out to get me…

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/yankee

I don’t see anything about Cuba, Brazil or Canada in this:

Yan·kee   /ˈyæŋki/  Show Spelled[yang-kee]  Show IPA
–noun
1. a native or inhabitant of the United States.
2. a native or inhabitant of New England.
3. a native or inhabitant of a northern U.S. state, esp. of one of the northeastern states that sided with the Union in the American Civil War.
4. a federal or northern soldier in the American Civil War.
5. a word used in communications to represent the letter Y.
6. Military . the NATO name for a class of Soviet ballistic missile submarine, nuclear powered, with up to 16 missile launchers.
–adjective
7. of, pertaining to, or characteristic of a Yankee or Yankees: Yankee ingenuity.

Obviously that random post by immundLig was SPAM.  Notice the links in the body of the message, no doubt the attempt is to have people open said links, I suggest you don’t.

I should google this to get exact details but I have to run for now.  There was a US proponent of the idea of turning Germany into basically an agrarian based economy and de-industrialize it to prevent it ever from having the means to threaten it’s neighbours.  The threat of the USSR prevented this, Germany’s industrial prowess was required to balanced the Warsaw Pact nations.

Ahhhhh, a rather interesting sub-story.  Thanks!

I would have to go with the ME-262.  When the allies concentrated on bombing german fuel supplies in mid-44 the Germans had more airforce/navy/mechanized army then they had fuel to deploy, so whatever super weapons they then had, no fuel, no use, no use.

I think the best super weapon for Germany would have been Albert Speer in charge of war production earlier and Hitler’s crazy commands not issued.  By early 42 the German economy was not even on a war footing!  The Nazis didn’t want women working in the factories, and the factories only ran on one shift!  This well over a year after they lost the battle of Britain and they easy successes on the eastern front were all but over.

The allies had air domination by mid 43, yet German war production actually increased until mid-44.  It was only until they began to lose France and the economies of the eastern territories that their war production went down.  By then they had no fuel so it didn’t matter what they made.

By May 43 the ME-262 was ready for full production, Hitler didn’t trust the air generals at the time so he blocked production.

ugh, why does my screen jump all over now that I am one line below the text box……

http://www.2worldwar2.com/me-262.htm for a time line

The allies would have used WW I mustard gas to Germany’s high-tech nerve agents….I think the axis would have had the advantage as well as less morality in which to offer a free hand in usage.

The main reason the atom bomb was used was to halt the Russian offensive against Japan.  The russians would have had no problem using up a million or two russian soldiers and the near total destruction of Japan as they did with Berlin in order to conqour that nation.  If anything, it can be argued the atom bomb saved lives.

Sun Tse said, if you fight war, make it total war.  Better to slaughter 10,000 in one day and end the war as the enemy fears your barbarism so greatly the capitulate rather than a long drawn out campaign that kills a 1000 per day for months.  Well, to that effect in any event.

Google using these 4 words: british persian oil company

You should get about 932,000 results

If you go to advance search and use the exact phrase

“british-persian oil company”

You do get less results but over a 4000, albietly, many seem to be repeats.  Hmmm, I did a repeat of the search and now its only a few 100, strange.  It seems it was Anglo-Persian and some have changed it to British-Persian and its been repeated often enough to be almost right.  In any event, it was British and Iranian, then the brits got the CIA to overthrow a democratically elected government and replace it with the much hated shaw……  And now there ain’t much Perisan in BP anymore.  I don’t think this version of ‘America’ is much like that one, still, there are some echos from the past we must all be watchful for.

So I am not sure what version of Google we are using, must be the dot uh oh version, I hear its really buggy.  Never get version dot uh oh, wait until at least dot oh one…

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Persian_Oil_Company

http://www.oilcompanies.net/oil1.htm

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/80326/BP-PLC

Now as far as smaller nations wanting to sort it out.  What about treaties?  In any event, its probably not cheaper to have a nuclear arms race between 20 asian pacific countries if North Korea where given the green light to invade the south.  The only reason Japan has not gone nuclear (which they could in about 2 weeks or less) is the protection of the US.  The only reason China has only about 100 nukes that can hit the US is because nobody else is an existential threat to them.  Now if Japan and other nearby nations went nuclear how many nukes would China feel it would require for proper deterence?  I don’t see how allowing war to occur which would result in a nuclear arms race is cheaper in the long run.

I thought that’s what I said…that the citizens of the USA have taken over the term ‘American’ to refer to themselves.  A noteworthy missing country was Iran 1953.  http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB28/

Besides, this is entirely different.

In this case, the original attack was on a UN protectorate and the answer was relief by the UN.  My uncle saw action in Korea and came back with only 1 ear drum, luckily that is all he lost, I assure you he was not American or United Statesian as they should be called :-)  Technically, N. Korea violated a UN ceasefire and the response will be from the UN.  If N. Korea starts a war, the UN will respond and of course the US of A being the big dawg with the big bite will be at the forefront of the UN response.

Perhaps in those cases you cited the world should have said something, but more often than not, its the rest of the worlds corporate elites that benefit from many of the military actions of the few so they sit back and profit as in BP and Iran 1953.  Lots of people think BP had its roots as British Petroleum but no, it was British Persian.

It’s a different world now, repeating past mistakes is no way to move forwards.  Doing nothing means over a dozen countries going nuclear to defend themselves.  Great discussion so far by the way!

Canadians are North Americans.  No slight against my cousins to the south in the US of A, but they seem to have appropriated the name ‘American’.  I don’t know any Canadian who calls themselves an American, though some are called that…but I digress.

The first Korean war occured because of a policy speach which excluded S. Korea from the domain of interest of the US.  Kim Il Krazybastard took that as a green light.  Sounds similiar to the first Gulf War, again, an intimation was made that the US didn’t care about the fate of Kuwait.

The civilized world didn’t seem to care when a certain leader annexed Austria, then demanded the Sudentenland (sp?) of chechoslovokia (damn spelling and time constraints!).  That certain leader didn’t think anything would then happen when he invaded Poland.

Telling a bully to go ahead and have at it with your acquiescence against an innocent victim is no way to pevent a nasty ending for the victim or to prevent further bullying.  If Japan could not count on the US for defense then they would go nuclear, so would Taiwan and half a dozen other nations, at least!  I for one would not feel safer with 20+ nuclear states hostile to one another.

Thanks, I was being facetious however.  Technically they attack on a map no?  :-)

North Koreans as paper tigers?  No doubt, in an all out war, the south combined with US firepower would roll up the North in about 6 weeks.  I would imagine in the world of AAA it would be a good stack of chips and pieces lost on both sides.  In the real world it would result in a few million deaths.  The north is a backward state about to collapse.  It can also rain down 1/2 million artillery shells per HOUR!!! on a Seoul a of city of 10 million and allied forces and sustain this for hours.  The artillery pieces have been dug into mountains for half a century.  The north knows their logistics would be toast in hours so they have weeks worth of food an ammunition for each artillery piece.

I think this article is the do all and end all of how the North would fight the war

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/oplan-5027-1.htm

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2009/06/04/is_north_korea_a_paper_tiger

FYFM?

Could somebody tell what a fighter attacks on?

You can actually find all kinds of information from almost any war.  Try their search facilities, its sometimes hit and miss but a search for “the battle of midway” finds all kinds of information.  Under military sytems you can also find historical information:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/old.htm

One can get lost for hours there browsing from one link to the next!  A cool example is this page which graphically shows who is who in the world of aircraft carriers, mere numbers often don’t express the true story as this page shows!

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/carriers.htm

Clyde you make a good points/examples, those forces were heroic in the epic sense.  But when I think of an army, I am thinking of a force of multiple divisions including logistical and combined arms support.

I’m not in favour of letting 2 nations ‘do what they want’ when one nation wants peace and prosparity for it’s people and the other nation has nukes and wants to conquer the other peaceful nation.  I’m not sure what the answer is but it can’t be “Let the bully win”.

The South now has full command and control of their integrated military force, that was just a recent accomplishment I think.  They have a duely elected government and can ask the US to leave anytime they want.  The fact a democratic government wants the US to stay, and the US is willing to help defend a friend should not be viewed in a negative.  I think in this case, peace is best achieved through a show of strength.

I think Bluecoat1861 hit the nail on the head.  Hitler had suffered a gas attack during WWI and was temporarily blinded.  Churchill had warned Hitler that if he used them against Russia then Germany would be attacked in kind.  The US had the largest stockpile of chemical weapons by far though the German nerve gas was far superiour.

If anyone wanted to use gas attacks it was Churchill……

http://www.fpp.co.uk/bookchapters/WSC/gaswar.html

http://www.americanheritage.com/articles/magazine/ah/1985/5/1985_5_40.shtml

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v06/v06p501b_Weber.html

This coming from a guy who shares Winston’s last name…

I agree with Emperor_Taiki.  If you are going to ask a question, one of the options should be answer for the question asked.  How do you vote in favour of the idea the global integration is the number one reason preventing another world war.

One of the main reasons holding S. Korea back from acting too aggresively in response to an act of war by the North in the recent ship sinking is economic.  A few wrong words could tank their stock market and damage their economy greatly.  And that is just some poorly choosen words……

Of course nukes, biological/chemical nasties and tens of thousands of artillary pieces dug into mountains sides over 50 years all aiming at Soeul is also something to think about.

China is going to be an interesting case in point.  Their economy has averaged at least 10% growth per year on average.  Has since the late 70s probably.  GDP doubles every 7 years based on compounding.  Now they have the #2 GDP albietly, spread over a whole whack of people but still…  Doubling every 7 years could see their GDP become the world’s largest in 2 decades or so.  Let’s hope their citizens worry about their version of the 401K and not urge their leaders to get all hoped up on the drug called nationalism.