> On Tue, 1 Dec 1998, John M. Atkinson wrote:
i know, i know. but if you insist on calling your admirable greek fellows
the new roman empire, then there has to be a counteracting force :-).
anyway, what's so great about being roman when you could be greek? i see a
vision of the Panhellenic Congress battlefleet swimming before my eyes
...
> > atrocity. no advanced industrial nation can survive a prolonged
right, because they still have apartheid there in spite of global opinion, i'd
forgotten that. funny, the contrast controls on my tv must have gone. oh well.
anyway, SA, like the USSR, isn't what i'd call advanced or even
all that industrialised. nice defence industry - but then they didn't
have
much choice there - lots of mining (more down to luck than anything) and
an economy once capable of supporting the white minority's westernised way of
life. nothing like a real western nation such as the USA, the EU or
Japan (Nihon is western - even more western than the USA, in fact :-).
> And remember, the NRE has resources of several planets to
well, NRE biomechanikoi (before you get excited, that's greek for factory
- it had me worried the first time i saw that, driving through some
dusty little nowhere town in the pelopponese...) are capable of producing all
the wonders of modern life, i am sure, but exactly who do you intend to
sell them to? good, healthy, wealth-creating capitalism depends on
external trade.
anyway, i mean no insult to the Arch-Warlord Basil or whatever he is
called. please extend my respects to God's Vice-Regent amongst the
Greeks.
Tom
> Thomas Anderson wrote:
> i know, i know. but if you insist on calling your admirable greek
Hrmph. If you have to ask!
> > > atrocity. no advanced industrial nation can survive a prolonged
Yeah, global opinion was the deciding factor. Yup, they went broke during
those 30 years of embargo.
> > And remember, the NRE has resources of several planets to
Really. . . who did those Terrans sell to during the pre-spaceflight
era? I thought they mostly bought and sold among themselves.
> anyway, i mean no insult to the Arch-Warlord Basil or whatever he is
Damn, and I don't have a copy of the Norwich volume that has the exquisite
answer given to the bishop of Rome who had the nerve to address a letter to
the "Emperor of the Greeks".
> On Wed, 2 Dec 1998, John D. Atkinson wrote:
> Really. . . who did those Terrans sell to during the pre-spaceflight
oh, the NRE could trade internally, just as the USA or EU could trade
internally, but the volume and profitability is far less than is available
from galactic / global trading respectively. the USA and EU are not even
good examples, as they are the two largest trading blocs on earth by a long
way. an analogy for the NRE would be, say, Italy trading internally. yes, you
can do it, but if everyone else is trading intergalactically, you are going to
be poor by comparison.
it does seem that the NRE is trying to be totally economically and
industrially autonomous, and to be able to deal with all external problems by
force rather than diplomacy. i suppose this is a valid style choice, but it
strikes me as a little unlikely. countries like that tend to start world wars
and get stamped on. still, perfect background for a wargame (just you wait
until GZG Diplomacy comes out...).
Tom
> Thomas Anderson wrote:
> oh, the NRE could trade internally, just as the USA or EU could trade
Very bad ones--EU _does_ trade internally as a significant percenatage
of their various GNPs.
> it does seem that the NRE is trying to be totally economically and
Not necessarily. It does tend to resort to force rather blatantly when it does
resort to force, but subtly bribing opponents works as
well--it's just not likely to show up in chronologies of major events.
I mean, who will put up in their official histories things like, 2151: Heavy
disbursments of bribes to local senior officers in Islamic Federation prepares
way for next year's offensive onto New Levant. 2103: In coordination with
Imperial offensive onto Garibaldi, the Master of Offices begins paying off
certain senior FSE parlimentarians in order
to permit a cease-fire. Or how about: 2151: Imperial Naval Intelligence
provides munitions and intelligence to Israelis, permitting two Interface
Brigades to mount a raid on a major IF shipyard, distracting IF attention, and
forcing them to pull line squadrons back to guard their rear areas.
Not something you brag about. Ideal way to handle publicity is to let your
opponent spend his budget accusing you of these actions, then blandly neither
confirm nor deny, allowing potential enemies (and potential allies) to draw
their own conclusions.
The NRE does get away with being more forceful in it's responses to it's
various enemies because they aren't the only ones tweaking them. The FSE can't
pull in enough resources to crush them entirely because that would leave them
vulnerable to the NSL ending their rivalry on a permenant basis. The Islamic
Federation also has the New Israelis to
deal with. The Romanovs are locked in a death-struggle with the ESU,
and will be until one or the other prevails. So when the FSE is the victim of
an NRE 'stunt', the NSL leaps to the NRE's defense. When they smash the
Romanovs, the ESU blocks any decisive UN action. The IF has managed to piss
off every single other power, so the NRE could infect 2 year olds with the
bubonic plague and no one would care except maybe the FSE, if they've kept the
traditional French cozy relations with Arab nutcase dictators.
The historical Byzantines were masters of playing off one side against the
other, and making it all look easy. This knack has survived.
As a final note: There have been no less than three superpower conflicts
("Solar Wars") between the NAC and ESU which have dragged in every other major
and most minor powers in the past century. The NRE is just taking advantage of
the chaos to grab all it can any time it can.
> On Wed, 2 Dec 1998, John M. Atkinson wrote:
no, the reason they are very bad examples is that they are very large, unlike
the NRE, and so internal trade is viable. anyway, the EU is still a very big
exporter; it's just those pesky french refuse to admit that
anything exists beyond germany or the english channel :-).
> > it does seem that the NRE is trying to be totally economically and
not exactly what i meant by diplomacy; diplomacy is getting your way
through talking alone - knowledge is power. i believe the new bavarians
are running a course on this. bribery and corruption in this manner is simply
an extension of military force.
> --it's just not likely to show up in chronologies of major events.
fair enough. still, that's why the GuardianPostShimbun investigative team
is one of the most feared units in the foreign office's arsenal :-).
> Not something you brag about. Ideal way to handle publicity is to let
maybe. the best way is not to let your enemy know he is your enemy.
> The NRE does get away with being more forceful in it's responses to
it seems a little convenient that all the powers are constantly locked in
battle with mortal enemies except the NRE. what if the NSL, ESU and the
dutch all managed to pull together and come a-knocking?
Tom
> Thomas Anderson wrote:
> it seems a little convenient that all the powers are constantly locked
Actually, if you check the various materials and timelines, the only
powers not firmly locked up into the NAC/NSL vs ESU/FSE dualist showdown
are:
The Dutch (No material presented) The Swiss (Impartially provide mercs to
everyone) The PAU (No material presented, I tend to think of them in the ESU
bloc, but no data) The Scandanavians (No material presented)
The New Israelis (In long-term war with Islamic Fed)
The OU (See below, and I tend to think of them as at least friendly with NAC)
The Indonesian Commonwealth (How many wars have they fought with OU?
And if OC is pro-NAC, that would make them pro-ESU, and part of the
Dualist Matchup)
And... that's it.
In the Dualist Matchup we have: The NAC The NSL The Japanese The Romanov
Hegemony
vs. The ESU The FSE and The LLAR
The Islamic Federation pisses off all sides impartially.
And notice that ESU and NSL both are powers I mentioned as supporting (at
least tacitly) the NRE when they take potshots at their rivals. What would be
so unusual about playing both sides off the middle? Take
a look at Yugoslavia during early Cold War. Look at Egypt--Soviet
clients when it was useful, American now that we pay more. Many African
nations were fairly blatant about tying whether they espoused Marxist ideology
or Capitalist ideology to the amount they recieved in their respective aid
packages.
> Thomas Anderson wrote:
> Actually, if you check the various materials and timelines, the only
Only mention of Swiss mercs that I recall was working with the NSL in Solar
War III.
> The PAU (No material presented, I tend to think of them in the ESU
Sided with ESU in Solar War II (and maybe I). No mention of them in III.
> The Scandanavians (No material presented)
Hired mercs to NAC in Solar War III.
> The New Israelis (In long-term war with Islamic Fed)
Can't recall any other refs myself.
> The OU (See below, and I tend to think of them as at least friendly
They do use FSE designed APCs and see below...
> the Indonesian Commonwealth (How
I suggested a while back that maybe the IC are hostile to the ESU (rivals in
their mutual rush to conquer South East Asia). Taken with
the, admittedly slim, OU-FSE connection this could put the OU in the
ESU camp and the IC in the NAC camp. More likly they both stay out of the big
fights.
> In the Dualist Matchup we have:
and historically the PAU but maybe not these days?
> The Islamic Federation pisses off all sides impartially.
Oh yes. They do seem to buy some weaponry from the ESU (look at the missile
launcher on the Stargrunt troops). However I bet the IF and ESU
(around about the current Pakistan-India border perhaps) border is
rarely quiet. And the IF-PAU border in Africa may be another on-Earth
hotspot.
> Steve Pugh wrote:
In my thoughts I don't think that the OU and the FSE would be very friendly at
all, especially from the OU side. Just think of how many of those Island
nations were once the last bastions of French colonialism (and the French are
not very nice to the indigenous population) so there would not be much
friendship there. and the FSE APC's could be holdovers from the pre French
colonial times, gear that was left over when the OU took over...
I would definately side the OU with the NAC
and for the IC they would be on whoevers side that they are buying their
material from otherwise they are their own side. Thats just the way the
Indonesians are like.
> I suggested a while back that maybe the IC are hostile to the ESU
> Danm, that put everyone in NAC-ESU Duality. Except the Dutch and the
Free Cal-Tex? The Khalifate? Those Boers? The Free French Republic?
Not exactly super-powers....
And in some cases hiring mercs to someone doesn't might not mean much more
than selling them guns, which as you pointed out, means very little.
> I'm wondering what the border between the IF and PAU is? The IF
My map has a huge blank space at the southern edge of the Sahara. The large
Muslim populations in the ESU and IC may also cause problems...
Of course my map also has a large blank in that corner of the world that
you've customised so well. Sorry, but the NRE just don't fit into my view of
the GZG universe.
My map is at:
http://dspace.dial.pipex.com/town/estate/ax16/grunt/graphics/world.gif
> Steve Pugh wrote:
> Only mention of Swiss mercs that I recall was working with the NSL in
> Sided with ESU in Solar War II (and maybe I). No mention of them in
> Hired mercs to NAC in Solar War III.
Danm, that put everyone in NAC-ESU Duality. Except the Dutch and the
abiguous Aussies.
> > The OU (See below, and I tend to think of them as at least friendly
Not that this means much--as long as they pay the liscencing fees, the
French will sell to anyone. They'd have sold guns to Hitler if he'd asked
them.
> I suggested a while back that maybe the IC are hostile to the ESU
Last is most likely--Maybe there is some sort of connection, but both
are probably to busy slagging eachother to worry that much about big massive
Solar Wars.
> Oh yes.
I'm wondering what the border between the IF and PAU is? The IF likely
has North Africa, but what chunks of sub-Sahara Africa (if any) do they
have? And if not, then the large Muslim populations of some parts of
Africa provide a ready-made excuse for conflict between the two.
John M. Atkinson sez:
***
> Of course my map also has a large blank in that corner of the world
Ain't supposed to fit into anyone's but mine. If someone else likes it, good.
If not, so?***
Exactly right. NRE doesn't fit my world view, either, but by the same token, I
don't expect anyone to appreciate the converted fuel carrier
warships of the Free Texaco States Capitalistic Navy... ;->=
Still haven't found those decals, though.
The_Beast
> On Fri, 4 Dec 1998, John M. Atkinson wrote:
what follows is NOT a poke at john atkinson. it is a defence of diversity.
i'm not sure that splitting all the power up into two blocs is a good idea. in
fact i think it is cryingly daft. the whole point of the gzg background is
that it is a general melee in which *any* conflict is more or less possible.
there are almost no allies, just partners in crime who will turn on one
another in the time it takes to say Tsukada's constant. the corollary of this
is that there are also no impossible alliances. this whole two power bloc
thing is just a replay of the cold war or a world war; been there, done that.
maybe during the solar wars this was the case, but in the hot peaces in
between there will be conflicts on all sides, nac vs nsl vs fse vs nac.
> > Of course my map also has a large blank in that corner of the world
fair enough. that's the beauty of gzg.
Tom
> Danm, that put everyone in NAC-ESU Duality. Except the Dutch and the
To be honest I think that we will go it alone and try and stay out of any
major conflict and avoid taking sides (unless it involves the IC). I don't
know why but I have this recollection of a Confederate commerce raider and a
Federal warship both being in AUS (Melbourne I think) at the same time during
the Civil War. Basically the OU will be nominally neutral, provide
humanitarian aid where possible, allow anyone to visit and kill everyone who
has a fight in our territory.
> I suggested a while back that maybe the IC are hostile to the ESU
At the risk of offeneding someone out there, it is my understanding from
Cambodian, Vietnamese and ABC (Australian Born Chinese) friends that no native
peoples of SE Asia likes the Chinese. Watch the news and see the
race/religous roits occuring in Indonesia right now. The IC won't seek
help
from the European-Colonial powers and will hate the Chinese. They will
probably have connections to the Saeed Khalifate and the IF. Afterall
Indonesia is the worlds most populous Muslim country.
> have? And if not, then the large Muslim populations of some parts of
Too right.
> Steve Pugh wrote:
*whap forehead* Forgot FCT. Anti-NAC, right? The Khalifate is like
the IF, but more so. The Boers... aren't they fighting war against
ESU? And the FFR is anti-FSE, and from the scenario in Full Thrust is
getting help from Dutch AND NAC.
> Of course my map also has a large blank in that corner of the world
Ain't supposed to fit into anyone's but mine. If someone else likes it, good.
If not, so?
> > The New Israelis (In long-term war with Islamic Fed)
Provided mercs to NAC
> Thomas Anderson wrote:
> what follows is NOT a poke at john atkinson. it is a defence of
this
> whole two power bloc thing is just a replay of the cold war or a world
Which is another way of making my point (but from the other direction)
that everyone has some long-standing enemies--the NRE taking shots at
three other nations doesn't make the background any more nor less
chaotic nor war-ridden then it is already.
[quoted original message omitted]
> Tony Wilkinson wrote:
> To be honest I think that we will go it alone and try and stay
Concur. And a much smaller fleet than might be expected, consisting of a small
number of almost unarmed patrol vessels, and a few major ships with far more
firepower and technological sophistication (and cost...) than any ship of that
size has the right to have.
In FT-II terms, only a pair of cruisers where an opponent might have a
BC and a pair of cruisers. But the OU ones have Wave Motion Guns, class III
shields etc... Taking a look at today's Oz navy, we have old, obsolete US
Destroyers, Charles F Adams Class. But our ones have similar electronics
suites to
US Guided Missile Cruisers, plus NULKA and other home-grown cutting edge
anti missile defences (which the USN are just starting to fit on their
ships, one of several pieces of Australian-developed military hi-tech in
US service).
> At the risk of offeneding someone out there, it is my
Mainly due to economic domination. Sorta similar situation to the Jews in
Europe. You "keep them furriners in their place" so they are forced into a
narrow group of despised occupations. They monopolise these occupations,
become successful, and so they go from "filthy worthless tramps" to "bloated
plutocratic exploiters". In Australia we call this the "Tall Poppy Syndrome".
Thus everyone hates Bill Gates.
> From my own observations, Thailand is an exception to the above. They
The only group that everyone in East Asia seems to hate with a passion are the
Japanese. Which is why the poor average Japanese sarariman on a trip to SE
Asia never seems to get served on time, or his shoes shined,