Dear visitor, welcome to WesWorld. If this is your first visit here, please read the Help. It explains in detail how this page works. To use all features of this page, you should consider registering. Please use the registration form, to register here or read more information about the registration process. If you are already registered, please login here.
Quoted
Originally posted by Red Admiral
Quoted
Yugoslavia has demonstrated a willingness to discuss and resolve differences through diplomatic processes.
Then we progress a little while, all along whilst Yugoslavia is going on a military spending bonanza, until we hear of the Warsaw Pact. So, why did all these countries with many opposing views and years of hatred between them suddenly come together in one movement? Ordinarily you'd think it was because Russia was on the march again, but there's been nothing on that front (surprisingly little notice of their "intervention" in Lithuania) so Italy is left with the conclusion that the alliance is directed at her. With such an economic block behind Yugoslavia, a long war has become much more winnable for them.
Quoted
Originally posted by TexanCowboy
Guys, chill out. If you really want to "discuss" (argue, cough, cough) about this, do it in private, or contact the mods...this isn't something that the rest of us should have to hear.
Quoted
Originally posted by TheCanadian
As well as I have mentioned before, you people set borders in the Balkans which are most certainly not historical, do not bother to create or assist with a timeline that can explain said borders, and then insist the Balkan nations must follow what you incorrectly perceive to be OTL levels of hatred against each other.
Preposterous!
Quoted
That's the sort of rude and snide comment that I see being constantly directed at Bruce.
Quoted
As well as I have mentioned before, you people set borders in the Balkans which are most certainly not historical, do not bother to create or assist with a timeline that can explain said borders
Quoted
One of reasons behind that would be that we didn't start with anyone in the Balkans besides Greece. We didn't even start with the UK or USA in order to limit the scope. Things have grown a lot from there. Lots of borders aren't historical, mostly from simply using a modern(ish) world map as the starting point. Do I want to come up with a timeline that makes some sort of sense? Not really, my focus of interest isn't in the politics (besides Italy). Coming up with a detailed alternate history to explain the unexplainable doesn't suit me personally. I find it easier to accept things as a fait accompli and move onto matters that are more of interest to me.
Quoted
Preach it, brother Canadian!
This post has been edited 2 times, last edit by "TheCanadian" (Aug 16th 2010, 11:11pm)
Quoted
Originally posted by Red Admiral
Quoted
That's the sort of rude and snide comment that I see being constantly directed at Bruce.
I've been a bit combative of late, but I don't think rude.
Quoted
Originally posted by Red Admiral
Quoted
As well as I have mentioned before, you people set borders in the Balkans which are most certainly not historical, do not bother to create or assist with a timeline that can explain said borders
One of reasons behind that would be that we didn't start with anyone in the Balkans besides Greece. We didn't even start with the UK or USA in order to limit the scope. Things have grown a lot from there. Lots of borders aren't historical, mostly from simply using a modern(ish) world map as the starting point. Do I want to come up with a timeline that makes some sort of sense? Not really, my focus of interest isn't in the politics (besides Italy). Coming up with a detailed alternate history to explain the unexplainable doesn't suit me personally. I find it easier to accept things as a fait accompli and move onto matters that are more of interest to me.
Quoted
Originally posted by ShinRa_Inc
Quoted
Originally posted by Red Admiral
One of reasons behind that would be that we didn't start with anyone in the Balkans besides Greece. We didn't even start with the UK or USA in order to limit the scope. Things have grown a lot from there. Lots of borders aren't historical, mostly from simply using a modern(ish) world map as the starting point. Do I want to come up with a timeline that makes some sort of sense? Not really, my focus of interest isn't in the politics (besides Italy). Coming up with a detailed alternate history to explain the unexplainable doesn't suit me personally. I find it easier to accept things as a fait accompli and move onto matters that are more of interest to me.
From what I understand, Bruce, Brock, and Jason are spending a decent amount of time to write up a somewhat comprehensive backstory for WW's Great War to try and explain how things ended up they way they did, so hopefully that will help everyone in the region. I'd suggest joining them on IRC to discuss it, if you're interested.
Quoted
Originally posted by Red Admiral
Quoted
Yugoslavia has demonstrated a willingness to discuss and resolve differences through diplomatic processes.
This is nonsense.
Yugoslavia has been posturing for an invasion of Italy for the past few years. We've had a recent change in government and what do they do? Massively increase spending on the military, especially buying new and advanced weapons (the rationalisation moves were pretty sound) and starting up localised production as if preparing for a long war.
Quoted
Originally posted by Red Admiral
Diplomatically, the only noises heard are of "Italian occupied Slovenia and Croatia" which are deeply unsettling. It's also rather amusing as Yugoslavia is basically just a Serbian mini-empire ruling over a plethora of ethnic groups.
Quoted
Originally posted by Red Admiral
Italy hasn't had the budget for doing any massive lines of fortifications like the Maginot line so is understandably worried by any talk of a Yugoslavian invasion - why? because they can simply walk to the coast and only have to put up with the police along the way.
Quoted
Originally posted by Red Admiral
So, why did all these countries with many opposing views and years of hatred between them suddenly come together in one movement?
Ordinarily you'd think it was because Russia was on the march again, but there's been nothing on that front (surprisingly little notice of their "intervention" in Lithuania) so Italy is left with the conclusion that the alliance is directed at her.
Quoted
Originally posted by Red Admiral
Why does Italy have little interest in diplomatic relations?
Quoted
Originally posted by Red Admiral
I really don't know how you take this as being rude unless you had no idea of what you were getting yourself in for with WW
Quoted
Originally posted by TexanCowboy
We need Shin to post the off-topic thread sign....
Quoted
Originally posted by TexanCowboy
Ok, Brock, let me rephrase it.....I'd appriciate if ya'll wouldn't argue like this out here. One of the things I appriciate about WW is the friendliness and non-flaming about this forum that's fairly unique on the forum, and I, for one, would like to keep it that way.
Quoted
Originally posted by TexanCowboy
Bruce, there was a mini-war between Russia and Poland in Lithuania, when Poland invaded Lithuania in support of the Wilno rebels. This "mini-war" ended when the peace treaty was signed, which was violated by the rebels, leading to the LoN intervention.
Quoted
Originally posted by TexanCowboy
Ok, Brock, let me rephrase it.....I'd appriciate if ya'll wouldn't argue like this out here. One of the things I appriciate about WW is the friendliness and non-flaming about this forum that's fairly unique on the forum, and I, for one, would like to keep it that way.
Forum Software: Burning Board® Lite 2.1.2 pl 1, developed by WoltLab® GmbH