Does anyone out there play a variant of the Full Thrust universe fluff which
eliminates the collapse of the United States in favor of the US's continued
existance in the universe? Presumably the US would be equivalent to the other
big four navies.
Or barring that, does anyone out there play a reformed United States out among
the stars with a United States Navy making frequent appearances?
I don't buy the US collapse history and would like to revise it. I'd like to
get some guidance from the rest of you to determine what consequences it would
have and how best to do it. Thanks.
Check out Stray Cat's Full Thrust page
http://members.nbci.com/bstraycat/ft/fthome.htm
I think that the Free Cal-Tex is to placate those of us Americans that
have trouble with the US collapse.
-----
Brian Bell
-----
> -----Original Message-----
In a message dated 4/26/01 11:46:24 AM Central Daylight Time,
> carbon_dragon@yahoo.com writes:
> I don't buy the US collapse history and would
I always liked the "Twilight War" approach from Twilight: 2000 and 2300 AD.
We addressed this issue in our games by coming up with the FSR (Free
Seperatist Republic) whish was a loose grouping of rebels formed from
unsatisified NAC citizens and troops. The majority were die-hard US
patriots and remaining Irish/Scottish seperatists.
This also allows for some nifty NAC vs FSR guerillas battles in SG2 though
we've never gone that way.
Eli
> From: "Bell, Brian K (Contractor)" <Brian.Bell@dscc.dla.mil>
***
...FSR (Free Seperatist Republic)...
The majority were die-hard US patriots and remaining Irish/Scottish
seperatists.
***
*sigh* Never the Welsh...
Funny, I can't find an entry in the GZG Encyclopedia Galactica. *nudge nudge*
http://www.warpfish.com/jhan/ft/gzgpedia/nation-index.shtml
Ack,
How could I have forgotten. The Welsh of course, but face it, nobody in
America really ever hears about Welsh seperatists. At least I never really
did.
Eli
> Subject: RE: The United States in Full Thrust
The United Star Union
David,
I use a variation on Stray Cat's USA information only mine is a brake a way
group of colony worlds and asteroid mining colonies. Found primarily by US and
other NAC separatists. Since these colonies were developed and had a well
trained territorial guard and ship repair facilities, the expansion of the USU
was both rapid and sustainable. Do to the fact that the separation was largely
a peaceful process by referendum with the immediate recognition by the UN,
relations with the NAC are very good. Mutual defense and trade treaties were
signed and ratified by congress, as well as Cooperative training exercises of
both USU and NAC forces. In resent years trade and mutual defense overture
have been made by the NSL as well.Relations with the FSE are as always
STRAINED. The relationship with the ESU and Islamic Federation are down right
ugly.
As for the ships I use, well I had played Star Fleet Battles for years and as
a consequence I have all these UFP ships laying about so had to give them a
home. The USU Navy is made up of all the old and some of the new Federation
figures.
Now if only I can find a home for the Klingons.............
Don
> Does anyone out there play a variant of the
Well, we're probably all lucky that Mr.Atkinson is temporarily absent, given
his habit of coming down on
'yet-another-breakaway-NAC-colony/American-Revolution-redone' like a ton
of rectangular building thingies.
Personally, I'm rather amused by the GZGverse's NAC. Britian and Canada
coming to the aid of a collapsing US & helping re-establish sane
government sounds pretty cool... Of course, I'm notoriously Canadian...
I'll reserve my comments on homegrown breakaway NAC colonies to merely: Why
does only the NAC appear to have massive numbers of breakaway colonies? Why
are all these colonies mostly American? Should all these revolts be taking
place in 2176?
And why hasn't anyone written about the infamous Andromedan Tea Party yet?
Tongue in cheek,
Brian said
> Well, we're probably all lucky that Mr. Atkinson is temporarily
I have his rant on that subject, I just can't find the folder/zip
archive/disk ...so I'll improvise:
> I'll reserve my comments on homegrown breakaway NAC colonies to
Why, in fact, is probably one of the more easy-going governments the
one with the most breakaways? It can't be because you don't have sufficient
imagination, because it doesn't take more than a sixteenth of a thimbleful of
imagination to come up with a faction. Look up "languages" or "ethnic groups"
on the web. Pick 1d6 of them (randomly: Sinhala, Khakas, and Mon). Okay, where
do they come
from? (In this case all of them come from ESU areas--Sri Lanka,
Siberia, and Indochina). Now, here's the tough step: learn something about
them! Then decide why they'd be revolting against the ESU.
Money -- they found an iridium deposit and don't want to pay 55% taxes
on it?? Religion -- a prophet has appeared from the wasteland to
preach agaiinst the heathens/infidels/oppressors/etc? Shipping lines
were cut by NAC for a while and they had to live without central
direction -- and decided that was a good thing? Okay, now why would
they think they can get away with it? Did the FSE promise aid (and if so, did
they provide it, fully or partially)? Or were they just so stung by ESU
offenses against their religion or other rights that they just decided that
death is better than serfdom? Or has the ESU decided that they'd be more
useful as a nominally independent puppet? Or has the place been sucking up
resources and the ESU has just stopped supporting them? Maybe the IF has been
sending in
missionaries/agitators, the NSL wants to buy mining rights and the
Phalons have offered to make them a semiautonomous province.
On Thu, 26 Apr 2001 14:49:21 -0700 (PDT) Brian Burger
> <yh728@victoria.tc.ca> writes:
<snip>
> I'll reserve my comments on homegrown breakaway NAC colonies to
Irish/Scots/Welsh agitators?
Only the NAC peacefully lets therm go? A tradition based on the 1776
experience?
Wasn't there a split/division between the islamic groups on earth that
extended into space in the Tuffleyverse? Guess not, can't find it in
FT...
The FSE/NSL kept all their break-aways on Earth? (2101 itself (EC into
FSE/NSL), 2102 (Netherlands), 2124 (Poland and Czechoslovakia ["together
again"? grin])
The Liberte' scenario in MT? (Thanks, John, give me an address and the check
is out bound for these rules.)
> And why hasn't anyone written about the infamous Andromedan Tea Party
NAC censorship.
> Tongue in cheek,
I'd suggest that there is plenty of room for
racial/ethnic/political/religious/class ESU splits (with enough backing
from a third party,) some possible Sunni/Shiitte type split of the IF,
LLAR right/left revolutions, PAU ethnic factionalism, inherited Eastern
Europeans dislikes, and IC splits... a fact of life?
Maybe we haven't been using our imaginations enough? <grin>
Maybe we a lot of Cotu's? <my campaign start - The People's Holy
Republic
- vaguely Pan-Asians without the alien strain...> only bigger and
better?
I am inspired to redo this and blended it more fuilly in the DS2/FT
model...
> On Thu, 26 Apr 2001, Brian Burger wrote:
> Well, we're probably all lucky that Mr. Atkinson is temporarily
I was waiting for SOMEone to mention that. ;-)
> Personally, I'm rather amused by the GZGverse's NAC. Britian and
I'm guessing because 95% of all the people who propose these NAC breakaway
colonies (that are primarily of American origin) are Americans who have a
difficult time dealing with or identifying with the NAC as Jon wrote
it up? ;-) I haven't taken a formal poll on the matter, but that's
my guess.
> And why hasn't anyone written about the infamous Andromedan Tea Party
PC issues? :-/
I wanna know why there aren't any/as many ESU/FSE/NSL seperatist
movements. But then again, if I think about it real hard (hurts the
brain these days, unfortunately), see above guess/comment. All the
seperatist proposers (90% or more of 'em, anyway) are 'Mericans
and can't identify very well with the ESU/FSE/NSL powers. So no one
comes up with them (there are a few, but there are *very* few when compared to
the NAC splits).
Ya know, if you take all the NAC seperatist movements and lump them together,
the NAC would no longer be a Power worthy of notice by even the LLAR.
Oh well. I'm an American of NSL/FSE descent. I like the NAC just as
they are now. I just prefer to support the UNSC. :-)
> Tongue in cheek,
Tongue in other cheek,
> --- Laserlight <laserlight@quixnet.net> wrote:
> Why, in fact, is probably one of the more
Dunno. The Brits had one of the more "easy-going"
governments circa 1776 AD, and the US of A certainly qualified for that
category circa 1861 AD, and yet...
Glenn said:
> Wasn't there a split/division between the islamic groups on earth
the Islamic Federation (the followers of the true faith and the sword of
Allah), plus the heretical Sayeed "Khalifate"
[snipped everything]
I think what might have been the original intention of this (I could be
wrong), is "What if the US civil war never happened?"
In that light, I think the question might be: how would the history have
unfolded had that never happened. Obviously, the US would be a major power,
probably still on somewhat good terms with the NAC. I'd say neutral to the FSE
& NSL (though possibly friendly to NSL). Then hostile to the "traditional"
enemies, IF, SK, ESU. But I'm only guessing, and I'd love to hear other ideas!
> Well, we're probably all lucky that Mr. Atkinson is temporarily
Haha, he is here at FT Hood TX with me, rant to follow! Once he stops by and
see this that is, brace your selves!
> I wanna know why there aren't any/as many ESU/FSE/NSL seperatist
Mark, Says who lol already done one, the Mongols are up to thier old tricks
hehe.....
Don
> Ya know, if you take all the NAC seperatist movements and lump them
In Defense of some of the Americans on here (mainly myself though), my
original idea was only for Irish/Scots/Welsh seperatists. It wasn't
until after a bunch of ravening patriots I hang out with got on my case (and
made some good cases too) that I included American seperatists.
It's not a lack of imagination that spawns these, it's a feel/need for
familiar patterns and a desire to 'what-if' them into our favorite
games.
I actually abandoned my FSR project a while ago for the very reasons mentioned
in this thread. Instead I'm working on an NSL splinter faction of Austrian
background wanting to bring back a sort of
neo-aristocracy. This one was spawned by the fact that NSL fleet seemed
to be pretty popular when I was buying mine.
Only trouble is comign up with a good name for the faction.
Eli
In message <200104270012.RAA20968@mail1.bigmailbox.com>, "Eli Arndt" writes:
> It's not a lack of imagination that spawns these, it's a feel/need
Combined with the fact that for some people, it's never quite right
OK, OK...[Fires up the GZG Unofficial History]...
FSE Breakaways: 2101 NSL (everyone groan actually breaks from UFE, but
still...) 2169 NFR New French Republic
ESU Breakaways: 2047 RH Romanoff Hegonomy 2047 (OK, it happens before the ESU
is founded). 2164 Neu Transvaal colony and claim its mineral resources; the
Boer settlers withdraw to the jungle areas and embark on a guerilla war
against the occupying ESU.
NSL Breakaways: 2124 Poland, the Czech Republic and Slovakia
IF Breakaways: 2130 SK Saeed Khalifate
NAC Breakaways:
2162 FCT Free Cal-Tex
By the way, I just spotted the only (AFAIK) official mention of Turkey in the
official GZG history: 2129 Royal Dutch Commonwealth mercenaries of the Van
Koost Armoured Legion, working for the IC, recapture the Commonwealth's
settlement of Easter, defeating LLAR regular forces and a Turkish mercenary
unit in the process. Is Turkey independent like the Netherlands and Japan?
---
Brian Bell bbell1@insight.rr.com ICQ: 12848051 AIM: Rlyehable Expanded GZG
Universe Future History:
http://www.ftsr.org/gzg/gzghist.asp
---
[quoted original message omitted]
> On Thu, 26 Apr 2001, Brian Bell wrote:
> OK, OK...[Fires up the GZG Unofficial History]...
Thanks, Brian! :-)
> Is Turkey independent like the Netherlands and Japan?
A Turkish coworker said he couldn't visualize going with IF or FSE. Of course,
I have a hard time imagining the UK subduing an unruly US.
On 27-Apr-01 at 06:00, Robert W. Hofrichter (RobHofrich@peoplepc.com)
wrote:
> They aren't ALL breakaway NACs. The FSU is from the NSL, while Nova
Wow, I knew St.Bobby was powerful, but I didn't realize his influence caused
Florida State University to take over the US Navy and Marine Corps.
> --- Don M <madd@vvm.com> wrote:
I'm already using my Fed figures as the new federation, a mildly waco group
who adopted the Federation constitution for real and build their ships to look
like the 20th century TV show.
I'm either going to use the Kallistra Terran figures for the USN or I have
some scratch builds in mind for he job. I built a scratch carrier with a CVN
looking flight deck and a dome on top and below and some CIWS mount looking
things for PDSs.
> --- Eli Arndt <emu2020@wattosjunkyard.com> wrote:
Just doesn't have the ring of "United States Navy" Besides would such an
organization field capital warships? Would they be painted in navy colors in
shapes reminiscent of USN ships today?
I have to admit my secondary motivation to bring this up is that I don't buy
the fluff. I don't see the US collapsing, or US generals taking control and
asking for UN intervention, or us becoming a part of the NAC. I'm not a
stickler for plausibility (I watch Star Trek), but that strains even my
suspension of disbelief. Come on, we're better than that. This was written by
a (admittedly very bright) guy from Great Britain, so SURPRISE England has a
major role in world affairs again.
Can't you see how appealing it would be for a Brit to have England be a major
player again instead of this breakaway colony who's now back where it
"belonged." Hey I like England as much as the next American, but we didn't
want to be an English colony back in 1776 and I don't see it happening in the
future. Maybe I'm wrong, but if it happens like the GZG fluff I'll eat my hat.
> On 27-Apr-01 at 09:36, David Griffin (carbon_dragon@yahoo.com) wrote:
I can't see it either, although I can see the chaos. Of course my resolution
wouldn't involve the UK. It would involve the US splintering into multiple
small, weak countries. I could see the CSA arrise again. California and Texas
becoming their own countries, possibly grabbing off a few neighboring states,
and the Northeast inheriting the name USA.
I really have no clue what would happen in the midwest though.
> On 27 Apr 2001, at 6:34, David Griffin wrote:
> I have to admit my secondary motivation to bring this up is that I
Why? Are the US politicians and economists somehow better than all the others
throughout history?
> or US generals taking control and asking for UN intervention,
Why? Are the US generals too indecisive to try and rectify a bad situation?
Are they too proud to help for outside help?
> or us becoming a part of the NAC.
Becoming a founder member of a global super-power that makes the
current USA look lightweight, how terrible would that be?
> I'm not a stickler for plausibility (I watch Star Trek), but that
I'm sure that a Roman would have said similar things if you'd predicted a
collapse of his empire.
> Can't you see how appealing it would be
Now I don't get this. Where does it say that the USA becomes a British (not
English) colony? The background states that the UK, the USA and Canada unite
under the crown. The Queen is head of state in Canada today. Doesn't make
Canada a british colony though.
I see the NAC as a confederation of all three founder members, with a single
government (with the monarch as titular head of state) but with distinct
regional differences. The USA would make up the bulk of
the AC's population when first founded - there's no way that all
those people could be treated as second class citizens. The former USA
provided the nascent NAC with the bulk of its resources and
population - in many ways the former USA was the very core of the
NAC.
If you want to talk about the downtrodden colonial population, then what about
the inhabitants of the former LLAR?
> On 27-Apr-01 at 10:02, steve@pugh.net (steve@pugh.net) wrote:
> Now I don't get this. Where does it say that the USA becomes a
You've just hit on the big problem, "under the crown". US Americans are
trained since birth to abhor the thought of a "crown". If "The Crown" was
abolished and we were brought in as equals I bet nobody would
have a problem. It would give exactly the same result but those
in the USA wouldn't kick.
Because I live in Los Angeles I must admit the idea of this part of the US
going "British" rather then with the League of Latin American Republics or
other Latino based power block is somewhat hard to believe. If the US where to
break apart (Not an idea I have a problem with) then I think it would truly
balkanize and the south west would be more likely to become
part of a Mexico/Central American/South American type power block.
I liked Jon's ideas about the break up of the US because sometimes I
get tired of the egocentric American view found in a lot of Sci-Fi.
Daniel
> -----Original Message-----
I'd say this discussion is starting to get repetitive, so I'd like to try a
new point.
Please remember this was written from the perspective of the British, who seem
to have had little trouble asking for a uniting royalty imported(sort of) from
the Netherlands. Didn't work out, but they were prepared to give 'em a try,
and for less reason than one shire nuking another.
Then, of course, the monarchs directly preceding Victoria were also, one could
say imported from, kings of Hannover.
There are many parts of the original time line I have to do some suspending of
disbelief; the NAC is not the furthest. Heck, I've no doubt a large number of
USA folks would support joinning, assuming that they'd end up
running the thing. ;->=
Vain glorious, of course. Not with the Bavarian Illuminati around...
Damn, I'm on their hit list AGAIN!
The other day on Space channel, they showed Star Command, a really goofy
movies that has one interesting plot twist. The evil people in the movie
(who wear black uniforms and black gloves, and speak in funny accents) are the
breakaway colonists, and the united Earth people are the nominal good guys. In
an American movie no less.
[quoted original message omitted]
> In message <005c01c0cf2e$fac91020$e5ae61ce@madd>, "Don M" writes:
Of course, nobody in the history of the world would *dream* of violating a
sworn oath.:) Well, at least no *American*.;)
> Of course, nobody in the history of the world would *dream* of
> --- steve@pugh.net wrote:
England's government has been around for 1000's of years. Ours has only had
200. Don't we get a little time to evolve?
> Why? Are the US generals too indecisive to try and
Having been in the military, having come from a military family, son of a
former marine and an Air force officer for 30 years, and having met a fair
number of military officers and talked to them a great deal, most military in
the US are unlikely to stage a government coup or stand for one to be staged.
Just my opinion, but it's not completely uninformed.
...
> Becoming a founder member of a global super-power
A collapse terrible enough to take the US down would cause a world economic
collapse that would take GB with it (and Japan, and maybe Europe). Also, the
terrorist activity seemed contrived without sufficient reason. The whole
history seems to me to be designed to put the UK in control and the US in the
background. If I were British, I'd do the same thing for my game. I don't
blame GZG.
> I'm sure that a Roman would have said similar things
Maybe but the "fall" of the Roman empire took a LONG LONG LONG time in which
the Roman empire was still damn powerful.
...
> I see the NAC as a confederation of all three
When reading the fluff, I see the US as a very junior partner the UK was "nice
enough" to include. Not as an equal partner. Tuffley's fluff had us too
disadvantaged to be an equal partner.
I really have no problem with the events that bring about the NAC. But I also
realise that any time you have one proud nation "forced" to combine with
another you are going to have splinter groups.
This is especially true with a nation that is educated from birth that the
people we would be combining with are the guys we fought long and hard,
spilled blood and money to "free" ourselves from. Add to this a constant
indoctrination stating that we are on top and that nobody meets up to our
standards.
At least in my case, the FSR wasn't about some deep seated patriotism that
made the NAC stick in my craw, it was just a realisation of what elements
would have already been in place when the NAC formed.
I mean come on people. We still have movements in the UK and even America
can't rid itself of "Legitimate Militias". These guys don't even like the
American government. How are they going to react when someone says that they
have to bow to a crown, even a pretty much symbolic one.
Eli
> --- Roger Books <books@mail.state.fl.us> wrote:
...
> I can't see it either, although I can see the chaos.
That is more plausible to me too, but I'd like to think we would last longer
than a few hundred years. Is our "great experiment" so short lived a thing?
> That is more plausible to me too, but I'd like
I am still trying to figure how their 5 divisions could quell 300 million
people, when our 22 divisions could not................it is a bit of a hard
sell. But again it is but a game and the ship and tank minis are neat as can
be.
Dave Griffin said:
> That <ie the US breaking up into regional factions> is more plausible
Most likely. Most empires don't last more than 200-300 years, and the
US in the last few years certainly has the same symptoms of a "declining
empire" so I wouldn't bet on it lasting (as a major power) for more than
another 20-75 years (depending on what happens with the next big war).
See Sir John Glubb's "The Fate of Empire"--I can synopsize off list or
on if there's the demand for it.
Well, here's hoping you're wrong, and it it does happen, I may have to live
through it in real life, but I don't have to do so in my liesure time
activity.
--- "laserlight@quixnet.net" <laserlight@quixnet.net>
wrote:
> Dave Griffin said:
Hi, Folks, It always been my opinion that NAC is "new" USA The Americans just
let the Brits think they are in charge. Let the Flaming begin. The last person
in the country please turn off the light. Rick Norman
[quoted original message omitted]
I predicted that the US will collapse as an empire within 20-75
years--
Dave Griffin replied:
> Well, here's hoping you're wrong, and it it
Well, "collapse" doesn't necessarily mean "complete chaos". Parts of the
British Empire seceded quite gracefully; other parts were a bit less
successful but could have done better if they'd had a tradition of decent
native government (rather than "my tribe is bigger than your tribe") to begin
with. Of course, that was a sea based empire and it wasn't too hard to
determine which bits were attached and which bits
weren't. I can't recall an example of a land-based empire collapsing
without having at the same time a serious threat on the border--it'll
be interesting to see what happens. I suspect the US will break up into
smaller nations, de facto independent although perhaps nominally under the
suzerainty of the Federal government. I can easily visualize the Lone Star
Republic and the CSA and the Republic of California (and maybe the Peoples
Democratic Socialist Republic of New England), and they might well have some,
um, disagreements over whether details like who gets Louisiana or Maryland.
Or, of course, we may be on the receiving end of PRC bio or nuclear weapons,
which would rather speed things up. Given that I work in Norfolk (primo
target, as I've mentioned), this train of thought
I'm not going to worry about it any more. I'll just play my miniatures and let
everyone else worry about the fluff.
G'day,
I was trying to resist this thread...;)
First up I think Steve's take on things is a sound one, there's enough
leeway in the GZG-FH that you can see the US being more than some uppity
province in the greater AC.... maybe the bias we see in the records we've got
is down to the historian writing it...not the first time I'd bet.
What if it read this way instead (this probably still won't satisfy the
USAians amongst us, but I'm fighting my own Aussie biases here):
2014 The USA supports Britain's withdrawal from the EC (European power block)
and entry in the Atlantic trading block (as the Americas trade group had
become known). The Atlantic trading block immediate instituted some trade and
military sanctions against Spain in response to their invasion of Gibraltar.
2049 Late in the year, in a state of national emergency General Parham is
thrust into power in the US when unknown terrorist forces (probably of foreign
origin) set off a chain of biochemical explosions in Washington DC and state
capitals, killing the President, Vice President, the Speakers of both houses,
the entire Cabinet, the majority of the State Governors and
almost the entire membership of both houses of Parliament. The state
governments can not agree on a speedy power sharing position and as the most
senior surviving member of the White House staff and the armed forces General
Parham has no choice but to temporarily fill the void and quell the wide
spread panic which threatens the fabric of America as well as the world
economy. Further there is evidence that the remaining members of the State
legislatures are under threat from renewed attacks from the foreign foe. With
no other means of protecting the country he loves above all else Parham
chooses to ignore parts of the constitution, as Lincoln* had before him, and
he forms a military government. The three states (California, Texas and
Florida) which had been the most unable to settle their position in the
original power sharing propositions oppose this move and announce
that they will put their own state forces against any federal ones that enter
their lands. Spurred on by rhetoric by these states others ignore
Parham's calls for short-term cohesion while the crisis is ended.
Looting, distrust and ethnic violence are stronger now than ever before.
Shootings are widespread as individual take to defending their homes
personally from any perceived threat.
2050 With the beginning of the new year the world and the US teeters in the
balance and with no other options left General Parham requests UN military
involvement to restore order in the US. The request is refused, vettoed by
the Beijing-Moscow alliance on the security council (which has been slow
to keep pace with change and so the Eurasion Union holds two seats during this
time). Parham is desperate for help, his intelligence officers indicate that
the foreign foe really does plan more strife, but the actions of individual
States are hindering efforts to stop them and other home grown violence
(claiming that the "supposed future attacks "are in Parham's power hungry
imagination"). Parham puts out requests directly to the heads of long time
allies, such as Australia, Canada and the UK. Australia has its own problems,
but the Canadians and the British send in forces to help end the threat from
foreign terrorists and to act as monitors in the reintroduction of civilian
rule. Terrorist cells are apprehended in the US and due to a chain of lucky
events and grand detective work similar bodies are found in the Canada and the
UK before they can repeat the chaos there. Foiled by these combined actions
the foreign power stirs up the "imperalist overlord fears" of the LLAR and
ethnic groups within Canada trying to wreck the US progress via directing the
attentions of Canada and the UK elsewhere. But intelligent use of the arts of
diplomacy and politics short circuits the problems.
2057 Due to a number of further attacks on the governments of the US, Canada
and the UK, mutual protection and cooperation have become an accepted part of
daily life in these nations. The terrorist acts have been traced back to
within the Eurasian Union (EU). The nations try to form a
NATO based power block, but the EC is not making integration of the North
Americas, the UK and Europe smooth or likely and early agreements to that end
crumble. Then in August the obvious is inacted and the three nations
make their own power block, the AC. Dewsbury, MacIntosh (Canadian PM) and
Tilsbury (UK PM) are sworn in as the founding Lord Governors of the
Triumvirate Council. And they begin the long road to a common constitution for
the AC, a mix of the US and UK systems of government. Concessions flow both
ways, including the retention of a titular head of state who would represent
the entire AC, but each "territory" (Canada, UK and US) each have a directly
elected Lord Governor who sits on the Triumvirate Council, which has veto
rights over bills put forward in the two houses of AC parliament. These are
the real heads of state, with all the associated power. The EU is very
threatened by these events and steps up its funding and encouragement of the
LLAR which declares that the AC has no mandate to rule over California, New
Mexico and Texas. The LLAR proclaims these areas its own and under foreign
occupation and launches an invasion. This begins the fifteen year War of the
Americas.
And so on, but that's just a start off the top of my head. Like I said a
lot of leeway for any slant you like.
> All of us military types swear to support
You know I'm pretty sure members of the Israeli army (for example) felt the
same way when the Aussie and other peace keeping forces were sent in to try
and calm the Middle east down back when I was in high school.
> It isn't matter that we slip from the
Of all the choices which one are you more likely to "be part of"??? The ESU?
Based on the image of the USA culture that we are fed here its still very
Anglified, the US and UK are the major powers of NATO, two of the strongest
members of the G7 (or G8 or whatever it is these days), according to the
tabloids the US is "apparently" obcessed with the British Royal family, the
two countries still share a lot of history, interests, an official language
and many ways of doing things.
> I'm sure that a Roman would have said similar things if you'd
Sometimes not even the strongest ideas can stop the roll of history. I'm
not saying the GZGverse is likely, its a bit of fun, but there are many falls
from power that were unimagineable in anything but hindsight;)
> To we in the USA it is hard to see that,
Well like I said according to those dastardly tabloids you've never really let
go..... and then there's the Kennedy's;P
You know I'm pretty sure members of the Israeli army (for example) felt the
same way when the Aussie and other peace keeping forces were sent in to try
and calm the Middle east down back when I was in high school.
And I'm sure they did when I did peace keeping in the Sinai in 79 but I think
the circumstances are some what different...........
Of all the choices which one are you more likely to "be part of"??? The ESU?
Based on the image of the USA culture that we are fed here its still very
Anglified, the US and UK are the major powers of NATO, two of the strongest
members of the G7 (or G8 or whatever it is these days), according to the
tabloids the US is "apparently" obcessed with the British Royal family, the
two countries still share a lot of history, interests, an official language
and many ways of doing things.
None of the above, historically Americans are and to this day basically
isolationists. I as a solider talking to US civilians have been asked time and
again about some place I have just returned from or that I was heading to if
indeed we had troops in that location. the thing is most of our citizens are
blissfully unaware. And many times I was asked by these same people why are we
here our there and that we shouldn't be.
Sometimes not even the strongest ideas can stop the roll of history. I'm not
saying the GZGverse is likely, its a bit of fun, but there are many falls from
power that were unimagineable in anything but hindsight
;)
Well the natural human tendency is to believe that these are the worse times,
i.e. Socrates quote about the youth of his day lol. I think if the UK, USA and
the rest survived the great depression and W.W.II we all should make it
through most anything.
> To we in the USA it is hard to see that,
Well like I said according to those dastardly tabloids you've never really let
go..... and then there's the Kennedy's;P <Beth heads for the bunker before she
really gets shelled>
Ok you got me lol! ( I say this as an artillerymen you are safe from me lol)
As an [OFFICIAL] response to this thread as a whole, rather than individual
comments.....
The bottom line is that if you don't like the background, use your own!
:-)
That said, I think most people on the list realise that that there is more
than a little tongue-in-cheek humour underlying the background as
written, and a certain amount of rattling of some nationalistic cages is only
to be expected. Yes, parts of it were deliberately an antidote to the crop of
"America rules the Stars" game backgrounds that were around (especially in the
early 90s, when it was written); another reason was that we wanted a
strong "Royal Navy" in the game based at least partly on UK practice -
this is far from uncommon in space opera novels, as anyone who has read the
Honor Harrington books will be well aware....
At the end of the day, it is just a slightly unconventional twist in order to
get to the situation that we wanted for the group of major powers in the
game - after all, the background isn't there for it's own sake but
simply to provide some coherency to your tabletop battles. Oddly enough, I've
not heard anyone complain about the inclusion of the almost total destruction
of Israel, the crushing of the LLAR, the Chinese invasion of Russia or the
apparent domination of the FSE by the French....... guess it kind of
depends how close to home it feels! ;-)
I sometimes find it quite amusing that a few players find certain aspects of
the background so unacceptable, while at the same time quite happily
accepting postulations like the discovery of FTL and Anti-Grav - which
to my mind are far more unlikely than all the political events in the
background put together.....!! ;-)
I'll end this as I started it - once you've bought it, it's your game -
play it the way YOU want to...!
> thurvin wrote:
My painting scheme for my NAC fleet reflects my philosophy on the union of the
various national identities that comprise the NAC. I use three unique base
colors of red, blue, and white for major fleet units. So I can field NAC
forces and squadrons in three color schemes. I'm sure that some of the
national rivalries emerge in fleet and unit competitions, but when they're
need for a common defense, they work as a team.
> As an [OFFICIAL] response to this thread as a whole, rather than
That's too easy--there's more challenge in trying to work out how this
or that improbable-but-canonical event came about. :-)
> On Fri, 27 Apr 2001 15:02:30 +0100 steve@pugh.net writes:
<snip>
> If you want to talk about the downtrodden colonial population, then
Yanqui, go home!
Seriously, I think the result, while *currently* unlikely, is **a** model. I
tend to gloss over that part (burt I have an 'alternate sector' model i use in
designing games so it's no big deal) and 'play on.' The big change I would
make is a the idea that all of South America was essentially 'evicted' from
Earth. Sound wrong?
Page 42 of FT:
look at 2050 (LLAR war threat), 2057(War of the Americas start), 2072
(War of Americas ends - Central America lost), 2075 (First LLAR FTL
ships), 2098 (Border clashes become war and in two years "...the LLAR
loses al possessions on Earth..."), Yet the LLAr colony worlds supply
reasonable to large numbers of mercs in wars (2128, 2165, 2166) later
(Implicit - see 2128 "...both sides employing large contingents
of...volunteer forces...")!
Okay, did the LLAR move the majority of the population to space colonies? They
had the tech and resources and will power to do that but they couldn't hold
South America?? The Homeland? While it plays well into my setting, it doesn't
hold water to me in a logical sense. Yes, I *too* am nitpicking here... Seems
to be the thing to do today.
Why did I know you had the 'true' answer? <grin>
On Thu, 26 Apr 2001 18:35:52 -0400 "Laserlight" <laserlight@quixnet.net>
writes:
> Glenn said:
On Fri, 27 Apr 2001 09:41:26 -0400 (EDT) Roger Books
> <books@mail.state.fl.us> writes:
> I really have no clue what would happen in the midwest
All died from eating "Saint Louis Style" Pizza - paper thin cardboard
crust with NO mozzarella (or at most 50%) cheese and cut in square pieces.
On Sat, 28 Apr 2001 10:14:09 +0100 Ground Zero Games <jon@gzg.com>
writes:
> As an [OFFICIAL] response to this thread as a whole, rather than
<snip>
> I'll end this as I started it - once you've bought it, it's your game
Enlightened attitude. <grin>
Always have, always will, but is nice the game designer built it into the game
just for me! <grin>
It's been an interesting thread - but trying to bring 'future reality'
into Science Fiction (like bringing weather statistics reality into Global
Warming...) only results in pulling someone's chain. <grin>
[Diving into my bunker before Beth the Biologist puts the 'red dot of
death' on me for denying the reality of the other "GW".]
> [Diving into my bunker before Beth the Biologist puts the 'red dot of
Glenn, If it did warm would that bring back the dinosaurs???LOL The people who
do follow the GW theory should have a look at the 5000 years of recorded human
history, I think they would
be mildly surprised...........
Oh S***!!! IN COMING!!
Actually, in my game universe, I have the United States still intact (less
Texas, and rumblings of secession in other locations), and have neither FTL
nor grav. Indeed, massive power blocs are formed mostly around various small
nations, and justified by a bit of fluff that forbids nations to maintain
navies larger than a certain tonnage. However, having them flagged under other
nations, but crewed and built by your own is a perfectly legal loophole...
(hence the UK "gifting" its remaining commonwealths and colonies with their
own space fleets)... But I still happily use the GZG rules system for
battles...
If there's any interest in my future history (which I'll admit isn't any more
likely than the GZGverse's), I'll be happy to expound on it. Heck, I'd be
interested in hearing about other folks who use the rules but not the
GZGVerse...
Best,
Heh heh heh, well, I've held off commenting on this string. I am fairly bias
as I spent 8 years in the USMC.
To be honest, even though I'm a pretty darn patriotic fellow...I have no
problem with the Tuffeyverse. I rather get a kick out of it. Sure, it might be
a bit unrealistic, but who knows what the future holds??
Living right here in Texas (yes, I'm a Texan) There are all sorts of weirdo
militia in the backwater who don't like being under the thumb of an American
government, and would NEVER go for being under the thumb of the Brittish.
Thankfully, they stay out in huge ranches in west Texas, and no one really
listens to them. Texans have a bit of pride being the only state in the union
to once be it's own country, but most of us are quite fine with being a part
of the USA.
There have been quite a few cases in our short history when other countries
have underestimated us. Common example is Pearl Harbor. The Japanese really
didn't think we'd get off our fat lazy butts to fight a war over an island so
far from the continent. Heh heh heh, boy were they wrong. But in most cases,
Americans have a live and let live attitude, as long as we make money. Heh heh
heh big hint here for those not living in America.....the best way to piss us
off is to hit us in our wallets.
All that said, the Tuffeyverse is fun. I have no problem with it. Besides, if
this is what it takes to make the Brittish feel better about themselves, then
fine by me. (heh heh heh I can't wait for the responses on this comment) And
I'm sure there are
thousands of wanna-be Nepoleans that love the fact
that France actually matters to anyone but themselves again. Like I said
earlier, who knows what could happen down the road......studying the past
often surprises me, so the future is even more of a hit and miss patchwork of
guesses.
I solve this problem by creating my own universe. Me and my buddies wanted to
make things fun, so we created the Nebula Conflict. Heh heh heh it's a long
written history I'll not go into right now, but to give you an example....the
race I made up is called the Fungarians. Yes, a race of sentient mushrooms. My
buddy's race is the Aloi, a race of lovable lizards who really don't mean any
harm, they just want more planets with warm rocks to sun themselves on (the
Aloi also seem to have an almost fanatical love of mushroom soup). It's all a
bunch of fun!!!
> --- Christopher T Pipinou <cpip@juno.com> wrote:
I don't play it that way yet, but my scratch fleet is going to be US Navy,
with the NAC being more of the Commonwealth fleets.
George
> Does anyone out there play a variant of the
> > All of us military types swear to support and defend the
You know, I think this kind of posting goes way beyond discussion of the game
and game issues. I for one, do not subscribe to this list, or any other, so
that people can fill my mailbox with nationalistic (or
anti-name-your-nation) sentimentalities. I want to discuss and read
about Full Thrust, and other things Miniature Wargame related. If you don't
agree with something someone has said, then feel free to disagree in terms of
GAME issues. If you can't, then the reply probably doesn't belong getting
posted. I'm not picking on this particular reply, but I've seen a few of these
go by now, and I'm just getting tired of it. This is an international
list, and I don't subscribe so I can be reading American-bashing, or
Brit-bashing, or any other person bashing. I'm sure there are lots of
lists that do that sort of thing, but this isn't one of them.
I do not expect, and in fact, discourage reply's in the mail list to my rant.
I welcome mail sent directly, if anyone has something to say.
Well said! I was trying to resist this thread...;)
And so on, but that's just a start off the top of my head. Like I said a lot
of leeway for any slant you like.
> On Sat, 28 Apr 2001 10:08:01 -0500 "Don M" <madd@vvm.com> writes:
Is THAT where the Starguard Ralnai came from? It explains a great
deal...
> The people who do follow the GW theory should have a look
Don, I seem to have lost your signaL. say again....
Bzzt crackle Bzzz
Don?
[shrieking sounds followed by explosions!]
> David Griffin wrote:
> I don't buy the US collapse history and would
> Laserlight wrote:
> > Is Turkey independent like the Netherlands and Japan?
[quoted original message omitted]
> Don M wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
Rome did have a body of law that suited many of the same purposes as a
constitution, based on the "Twelve Tables". If we restrict ourselves to the
western roman empire, there were only three periods of civil war after the
establishment of the principate (Augutus' rule), and only three episodes of
civil war before that (excluding the "Conflict of the Orders" which was really
a civil rights movement). As I can easily name more than six emperors
(Augustus, Claudius, Nerva, Trajan, Hadrian, Antoninus, Marcus Aurelius,
Septimus Severus), your statement is patently false. In fact, there were only
two occassions when 4 to 6 roman generals marched on Rome after the death of
the Emperor: After the revolt that drove Nero to suicide, 68 AD became the
"Year of Four Emperors" when
[quoted original message omitted]
> On Fri, 27 Apr 2001 15:02:30 +0100 steve@pugh.net writes:
No, they didn't move the population en masse - probably just the leaders
and most of the high-ranking military, along with whoever else had the
money to go (ie industrialists, business leaders etc).... I think this would
leave the general populace and the remains of the armed forces in enough
disarray that the NAC could complete the "subdueing" of the masses left
behind.
[quoted original message omitted]
Jon, it's your timeline **but** where did the masses of the LLAR merc's come
from? Unless this was a very elite group led by the child of Falkenberg's son
and Hammer's daughter there are a big bunch of 'mothers of warriors' (to use a
Cherokee term) out on the colonies breeding these soldiers. What did the LLAR
do? Convert to LDS and practice polygamy?
(Relax, all you LDS types out there, I know you don't do that now -
after
all, I am Ex-LDS and know more about church history then the average LDS
church attending member does. Unless you have gotten better about teaching the
adult converts about that...)
Seriously, to have a lot of troops running around, there has to be a big
enough population base (many moms) or one big birth rate... like 4:1 or
more... I can understand this in Starguard's timeline but I never got
the impression the FT/SG2/DS2 timeline has mass exodus' occurring...
Glenn/Triphibious
This is my Science Fiction Alter Ego E-mail address.
On Sat, 28 Apr 2001 23:24:28 +0100 Ground Zero Games <jon@gzg.com>
writes:
> On Fri, 27 Apr 2001 15:02:30 +0100 steve@pugh.net writes:
Hi John, See the long range artillery is working! <grin>
Have a snail mail address yet? Contact me off list (Don'd address will
do.)
Glenn/Triphibious
This is my Science Fiction Alter Ego E-mail address.
> On Sat, 28 Apr 2001 15:28:47 -0500 "Don M" <madd@vvm.com> writes:
Even in the future you need lot's of soldiers to protect/run an
interstellar 'empire' (whatever you call it) plus provide mercenaries for all
the wars that LLAR merc's are *explicitly* mentioned...
Glenn/Triphibious
This is my Science Fiction Alter Ego E-mail address.
> On Sat, 28 Apr 2001 17:49:44 -0500 "Don M" <madd@vvm.com> writes:
> > Up until the early eighth century, a townsman anywhere in the
John vehemently denies this:
> In the first place, 476 is the year of the deposition of the last
Sorry John, you're mistaken. Oh, the people actually living in Rome undoubted
figured it out earlier (when all the Germanic lads kept marching through), but
there were people in the western Empire who would have denied that the empire
had fallen. IIRC Charlemagne was
crowned as Roman emperor on Christmas Day in 800 -- it was the idea
that was important, perhaps, rather than the strict line of succession. (and
it may have been helped by the fact that people aren't very observant of mere
facts that fly in the face of Truth). Later on, the Byzantines claimed to be
Romans, the German head honcho of the moment was in charge of the Holy Roman
Empire, and the Russians
decided to call their leader "Czar"--I don't know the derivation but I
[quoted original message omitted]
G'day Don,
> And I'm sure they did when I did peace keeping in the
Quite possibly, like I said its a bit of fun, but the possibility is still
there;)
> None of the above,
OK put that down to made media representation of you guys;)
> historically Americans
The media did give that impression, but I thought they'd over stated it.
I have had my go at this one, but all I was trying to say is that history is
an unpredictable thing (my history past 1 AD is shakey, but I'd reckon that
anyone 200 odd yrs back foretelling a British Empire restricted to the UK and
a handful of small islands dotted around the world would have been written
off) and accounting is always skewed so given what we have got if you're
willing to throw in a bit of imagination (and a hell of a lot of tongue in
cheek on occasion) you can twist it to regions you find more palatable;)
Cheers
G'day Chris,
> If there's any interest in my future history
I'd be interested.
G'day,
Glenn said:
> It's been an interesting thread - but trying to bring 'future reality'
Don said:
> If it did warm would that bring back the dinosaurs???LOL
Actually you're not going to get an argument from me. There is global weather
change, there has been from day dot on Earth. Some of its natural some of it
is being helped by man, what is what is still fairly hard to tell. A lot of
the problem stems from the fact "recorded history" has been in a very calm and
stable geological and climatic period so we have to stretch to see what it was
like in other periods and how its changed and
how fast etc. I mean I find it very freaky that our cosmological position in
the galaxy (which changes very slowly I guess), plus our current
tilt/wobble (which changes on geological timescales) has such a big
effect on the weather. Not to mention the magnetic poles (which geologically
speaking are due for a flip), seismic activity etc. If you can separate
science from the media long enough to get an honest discussion scientists will
be the first to admit that yes things are heating up compared to the 1900 etc,
but whether that would've happened anyway is debatable and
whether there will be a giant spike 200-400 yrs down the track when the
deep ocean currents start returning CO2 (from the time of the Industrial
Revolution to now) back to the atmosphere is still anybody's guess. In fact
back in the 70s the prevailing wisdom was: "that there will be a cooling of
the globe brought on by pollution induced cooling is as sure as the tax men
cometh" No wonder weathermen can't get it right;)
Does beg the question of whether the Island nations joined the OU because they
were going underwater at a rate of knots.
Cheers
OK, off topic, but I'd be interested in what Beth thinks on this bit of
trivia. They say a herd of cattle produces more greenhouse gases in a year
then 100 automobiles. That's a lot of cow farts if you ask me........now
taking this a step farther.......I bet the dinosaurs had some serious gas as
well.....you think that dino farts could have been the cause for thier
extinction?
> --- Beth Fulton <beth.fulton@marine.csiro.au> wrote:
G'day Shawn,
> They say a herd of cattle produces
Off the top of my head I can't remember how many vehicles it is exactly,
but its a lot yes.
> That's a lot of cow farts if you ask me........
Yep, but that's what you get for being a vegetarian unfortunately. While
there was an awful lot of activity by the major fossil fuel companies to
cut UK omissions there was sizeable help from the BSE scare, the culling of
the herds and planting of cow pasture with food crops (removed methane
produces and replaced them with CO2 consumers).
> now taking this a step farther.......I bet
Well no one knows for sure, it may well have contributed, though compared
to the major out-gassing from the massive seismic activity of the period
(and the KT boundary impact object) dino farts were probably only a minor
contributor;)
The dinos had it stacked against them, some were naturally in decline by
this time (like the winged reptiles and some of the oceanic ones), others
suffered from the increasingly acidic atmosphere (didn't do much for egg
success), others were probably effected by associated changed in climate, I'm
not sure but IIRC continental drift had got the major landmasses in the right
places to start allowing for new current systems and so other radical changes
in weather patterns, there had been a fairly recent switch in the magnetic
poles. Then there was the impact, which would've created massive tsunami's,
massive fire fronts (on the scale of continents), reduced rainfall (cloud
cover preventing precipitation), changes in temperature,
reduced photosynthesis, low light, further changes in atmospheric composition.
Even in the short term these would've had massive effects and in the long term
were probably enough to push the "giants" over the edge. Ecological flow on
would've ended the lives of others. I have always been intrigued though that
none of the little guys made it through to modern
times - all the theories about why birds/other reptiles/mammals etc did
could hold for the smaller dinos too, but there's obviously other factors too
subtle for the geologic record to pick up that may have been major factors.
Cheers
> Shawn M Mininger wrote:
> All that said, the Tuffeyverse is fun. I have no
[quoted original message omitted]
I'd say it's about time to kill this thread.
From - Thu May 03 16:29:36 2001
Return-Path: <owner-gzg-l@scotch.csua.berkeley.edu>
Received: from scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (scotch.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.51])
by lilac.propagation.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id AAA16193;
Sun, 29 Apr 2001 00:16:23 -0500
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)
by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id
f3T59xi12513;
Sat, 28 Apr 2001 22:09:59 -0700 (PDT)
(envelope-from owner-gzg-l)
Received: by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (bulk_mailer v1.12); Sat, 28 Apr
2001 22:09:55 -0700
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.1/8.11.1) id f3T59sJ12492
for gzg-l-outgoing; Sat, 28 Apr 2001 22:09:54 -0700 (PDT)
(envelope-from owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU)
Received: from soda.csua.berkeley.edu
(IDENT:ZHkMwqmiSCKPFViMuIJk9QHML2OpJmZ7@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.52] (may be forged))
by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id
f3T59q912487
for <gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>; Sat, 28 Apr 2001 22:09:52
-0700 (PDT)
(envelope-from owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU)
Received: from swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net (swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net
[207.217.120.123])
by soda.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id
f3T59p249080
for <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>; Sat, 28 Apr 2001 22:09:51 -0700
(PDT)
(envelope-from ahab42@earthlink.net)
Received: from earthlink.net (1Cust113.tnt1.gary.in.da.uu.net
[63.38.146.113])
by swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3) with SMTP id
WAA19370;
Sat, 28 Apr 2001 22:09:52 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <412001402951241480@earthlink.net>
X-EM-Version: 5, 0, 0, 0
X-EM-Registration: #3003520714B31D032830
X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 5.05.11 (Windows)
From: " ahab42@earthlink.net" <ahab42@earthlink.net>
To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu, gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Subject: Re: The United States in Full Thrust
Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2001 0:12:41 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8"
Sender: owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
Reply-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Delivered-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
X-UIDL: 39d245de000025a0
Status: RO
Content-Length: 1822
Lines: 58
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
[quoted original message omitted]
re: Unreconstructed Yanks migrating to the OU:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
> On Sat, 28 Apr 2001, Laserlight wrote:
> > > Up until the early eighth century, a townsman anywhere in the
I'll have to agree here. The fall of the roman empire was a very gradual
thing, and nowhere near the 'oh, it's 476, so the empire is gone'. It was much
morea replacement of old leaders with new, but with most of the intermediate
layers of control and communication pretty much the same.
Cheers,
On Sun, 29 Apr 2001 00:42:34 -0400 "Laserlight" <laserlight@quixnet.net>
writes:
> I'd say it's about time to kill this thread.
Effective immediately.
On Sun, 29 Apr 2001 00:14:49 -0400 Richard and Emily Bell
> <rlbell@sympatico.ca> writes:
<snip>
> The USA would not exist, at all, if the british had not defeated the
As an American I think living in the 'Pink House' might have chopped down
a few Presidential egos - never a bad thing. <grin>
> I'd say it's about time to kill this thread.
Someone already did, it's continuing to lurch around like a Romero
film...
"Brains... Neeed Brraaaiiins."
It's certainly sucking *mine* right out my eyeballs.
In article <20010427133452.93357.qmail@web9607.mail.yahoo.com>, David
Griffin <carbon_dragon@yahoo.com> writes
> Can't you see how appealing it would be
Well I'm British and I see it as ludicrously implausible as well. Cheers
Hi,
> Living right here in Texas (yes, I'm a Texan) There
Um, what about Hawaii? Was it not once it's own country?
> There have been quite a few cases in our short history
Second best way is to ignore you. Especially if you are a waiter in a French
restaurant.;)
Cheers,
> >Living right here in Texas (yes, I'm a Texan) There
You know, I was just thinking about the deep south. They were French, not
British, and pretty damn proud of the fact also. Louisiana even has it's state
criminal code based on Napoleonic Law, not British Common Law. Wasn't
California and some of the rest of the southwestern states Spanish before it
was American? Not talked much about among the white population... <g>
White population? Um, correct me if I'm wrong but wouldn't that include both
the Spanish and French population (And I will whack anyone who doesn't know
the difference between a Spaniard and a Mexican).
Eli
> You know, I was just thinking about the deep south. They were French,
Wasn't
> California and some of the rest of the southwestern states Spanish
<g>
> [quoted text omitted]
Gaaahhh...
Sent the response inbetween macroeconomic chapters...
I was mostly speaking of the western states BTW.
David
> -----Original Message-----
<g>
> >
> On 28-Apr-01 at 23:20, Shawn M Mininger (smininger@yahoo.com) wrote:
Anti-beef propoganda. If you look far enough you'll find the
illuminati^H^H^H^H^H^H^H poultry industry and vegatarian groups funding the
studies.:)
On Sun, 29 Apr 2001 19:22:09 -0700 "Eli Arndt"
> <emu2020@wattosjunkyard.com> writes:
According to the US Census (and they got it right) Hispanic is an ethnic
designation that includes "white" Europeans (like Spanish), Native Americans
(Amerindians), Blacks (Brazil is famous for having significant numbers of all
'3' races (and that number is debatable) in Brazilian
culture, and mixed bloods (such as Mexico's mestizo - which many
Mexicans
are - but I don't know what Portuguese/Brazilian word covers the
category of mestizo...)
Since I count Hispanic/Anglo from my mother's side and Cherokee/Anglo
from my Father's side I can safely say that French (paternal side) and Spanish
(maternal side) are 'white'.
Conquistador - Spanish explorer; Modern Mexican (majority, not all) are
Indian-Spanish descendants.
Since I count Hispanic/Anglo from my mother's side and Cherokee/Anglo
from my Father's side I can safely say that French (paternal side) and Spanish
(maternal side) are 'white'.
Glenn,
LOL almost the same, Cherokee/ Welsh on Father's side and Dutch/
Irish on mother's side. My kids are all that plus half Korean, and I have told
them to each marry a Hispanic and an African so there is someone for everyone
to fight at family reunions ( I want no one slighted). So as you can see we
are happily contributing to the ever changing face of the USA.
Maybe they'll live next door to my daughters from India. Man are the war games
of that generation gonna' be a sight to see!
Glenn/Triphibious
This is my Science Fiction Alter Ego E-mail address.
> On Mon, 30 Apr 2001 17:35:32 -0500 "Don M" <madd@vvm.com> writes: