Please keep excessive ooc chatter out of the thread, as it just clutters the place up. This shall be the thread to discuss all ooc matters regarding the war.

Also, am I supposed to PM "orders" to the SU player for resolution? Or can I post them in the thread?

I see. Thank you all for the quick and helpful responses.

I hadn't noticed the second half of this post tbh.

Just post them and I'll post results.

You should know that the South African player promised that I will come out on top eventually. I'd also like this to be modded as a sort of low intensity guerrilla warfare type conflict; no massive clashes of armour, no losses of thousands of men in a single battle, etc. If you please. This war is essentially in lieu of a conflict against France/Britain, so that I can have a war without being excessively unrealistic.

Do not worry, besides the rebels lack the means for tactical warfare. What you will be fighting is a full-scale insurgency at its peak. This is not the Greek civil war; there is only one tactical side here, so losses will be low (at least in personnel and material wings; psychological damage can be immense.)

Of course, this always depends on international involvement, but you have my personal pledge.

If the rebels can make a good stand and get a few victories France may indirectly enter the war in their favor. So you better take good care of them. ;)

You'd enter a war you're guaranteed to lose? There's a word for that, it starts with an "s" and ends with "tupidity."

There is no such thing as a guaranteed loss. Mind your international affairs well. You're the little nation of Thailand. I'm not looking to annex you I can throw you back into the stone age by putting you into a nasty war that would cripple your economy and devastate your stance on the international stage. Keep in mind, I have British and I'd assume American support.

Your policies are too radical. They call for war. You will get one if you don't watch out and it will be World War 3. There are reasons why in RL we didn't go to WWIII and your actions aren't the RL actions.

Uh, the South African player, the admin of the entire game, assured me that I would win. So no matter what you do, you cannot win. The most you could do is drag it out by a year or two, which is just a couple of weeks IRL. Particularly with the SU player modding the war, there's no way for you to win. Don't forget the Egyptian situation. The Viet Minh would render you completely impotent in Indochina by tying down all forces there.

Don't forget I have all sorts of shiny new Soviet weapons to play around with.

I'm not going to war with you, but the Viet Min who I control are. In game, we're two separate characters and I'm only controlling them because no one else is. The Viet Minh did go to war with the French, and guess what, they won!

I don't think you realize just how impotent the French were after world war 2. Just four years ago you were occupied by Nazi Germany and had your entire industrial plant plundered. With no aircraft carriers suitable for combat, and a disbanding military, you can't do squat to effect a world war.

I know who the South African player is. If the conflict expands internationally there are not assured victories. About the Viet Minh, well I don't plan on fighting a war I know I'll end up losing. I'm not a retard. However, do note that whatever Thailand might have, they have less than France and the UK. We're still colonial powers and thus can still call upon our colonies to aid us in war. We haven't lost them yet. There are slight problems to your plan when you're demanding things when the colonies haven't yet been lost. Not to mention I believe when it comes to fighting Communism, I'll have blind US support.

I'm not demanding anything from you. The Egyptians and the Viet Minh are. I'll repeat myself: I'm not going to go to war with you.

I don't think you understand. This Thai Civil War is in lieu of a war against you and Britain. The SA player let me have it so I could go to war without it spiralling out of control into an international conflict. He might let you supply some weapons to the rebels in the north, but beyond that I doubt it.

And, with plenty of Soviet weapons on hand (including a navy with cruisers and submarines from WW2 surplus stock), I have plenty of power to affect the regional balance of power. I'm not saying I'm going to turn Paris into a pile of rubble, but I most certainly do have the power to defeat a French war of aggression against Thailand in my own front yard. Remember: Southeast Asia is right in my neighbourhood, but on the other side of the world to you. That makes a crapload of difference.

Once more, with feel, I'M NOT GOING TO GO TO WAR WITH YOU. How may fucking times do I have to say that?

I don't think you understand how international policy works. You made an enemy in France after your stupid remarks on forcing decolonization. I'll work to see the destruction of your nation because you wish to see the destruction of the French Colonial Empire. I don't care if you don't plan to attack me. I'm going to attack you if I feel you are weak. So I simply state, don't lose any important battles otherwise I may feel inclined to support the rebels and give them weaponry, etc.

You are a very emotional player. Annoying to say the least, I don't feel you can keep your emotions and RP in check. Keep your cool, and make sure you represent Ho Chi Minh well. I will complain to the admins if I feel you are working towards the Thai goals in French Indochina rather than Ho Chi Minh's goals.

I'm doing things different there because what France did do there was a failure.

If I'm emotional, you're a high-handed cocky asshole. If the admin didn't let me wage a successful war against you, why would they let you wage a war against me? You're threatening to go to war with me if I don't meet your demands for action in game. If you really want to do that, bring it on. All you'll be doing is forcing the admin's hand. You couldn't attack me if you wanted, your country is so impotent after WW2, and you certainly couldn't defeat a Thai Armed Forces equipped with plenty of Soviet weapons.

Have you checked the thread where the Soviets now have forces stationed within Thai territory?

Are you so stupid that you don't know what the word rhetoric means? Here, I'll use it in a sentence for you: a government's rhetoric rarely matches it's actions.

Do you understand it now? Do I need to put a sign up in 15 different languages before you get it?

I'll admit I'm a cocky-asshole. I'm that way in RL in how I act with my friends. :P
But I'm also light-hearted and really don't like your emo-ness. As it makes the game un-enjoyable. Respect the other players. Now point-being, I don't plan on an full out war with Thailand. As you said, that's dumb. But I believe the tradition of the Cold War was indirect support. Something I would VERY MUCH do.

Also I don't want your emotional bickering to ruin my RP. Not to mention what the admins did to prevent your war was preventing a war with a nation that didn't have a player until... what 3-5 days ago? What you planned on doing was like cheating. That would be like a Brazilian player going... hmm... look South America has no actual players... lets invade Paraguay... and then invade the neighboring colonies, and oh hey Uruguay looks good too. Not cool. Respect the game you play, always acting in self-interests will ruin the game for others.

More or less, I refuse to interact with nations that don't have players. You don't see me attacking anything that doesn't have a player.

Now... cool down, and take everything I said in face value. Note naturally I'm a cocky-bastard, and thus I may come off that way, but I mean good. So RP well, and note rhetoric is okay, but you may get called on your rhetoric if others feel you are bluffing. You'll note France has more power to throw around than Thailand. You may Soviet weaponry, but Soviet Weaponry doesn't just magically appear. Nor does the presence of Soviet troops help you. The Soviet Union would be crazy to fight in a colonial war, they are interested in advancing communism, and currently Korea and China are much more important in that effort, especially since he has you wrapped around his finger already begging for communist support. So take a step back and look at your own situation. If the aggressor nations like myself, don't plan on removing your government, what does he care?

Firstly, if a situation develops with a nation that has no player, the admins take control of the nation.

Secondly, you just said that you will destroy my nation if you want to. Now you're saying you won't. Which is it?

Thirdly, as I said, do what you want but remember that I won't lose this war. I've been promised by the site admin that I will win, and the SU player has agreed. Getting involved in a war you can't possible win is stupid. France does not, repeat, not have more power than I do in Southeast Asia. The Germans raped you of everything useful in World War 2, you have a devastated economy and a pathetic military that isn't capable of projecting power. Need I remind you that the French lost every single colonial war they fought after WW2 IRL?

Soviet weapons didn't magically appear, I negotiated a treaty with the Soviet Union for their delivery more than an in game year ago. I'd like very much for you to point out where I begged for Soviet support. When I asked them to move troops in, well that was just according to the terms of our agreement, no begging there. I asked for some more shipments of small arms, which didn't make a lot of sense since I can't lose this war no matter whether a nation that has perfected the art of surrender gets involved. No begging there either. Hmm, I can't seem to find any instances in which I begged for Soviet support.

Fourthly, you say that acting in self interest only will ruin the game. I don't know if you know this, but real nations of the world tend to only act in their own self interest.

Lastly, I'd like to know how a nation that possesses an all time record of something like 2-24-3 is going to win a war given its present state. Really, I'd love to know.

In short, go to hell.

heh, the day I do, I plan to meet you there.

However, you also overestimate the power of the Thai military. How would Thailand be able to fight against the French? Just having been given weapons doesn't make you great. I'll tell you the United States gives me weapons.

French losses are problem of France. I am not French, nor do I plan on being French, for I would hate such thing. As am I not French, you are dealing with an American who will not make stupid French mistakes. XD

Regardless, lose the attitude, you make the environment shitty to RP in. I was recruited to play France by South Africa cause you guys needed one. From the looks of it, I'm the only Western "Power" with any balls. I put power in quotes because I DO KNOW about how damaged France is. You don't have to tell me every post. I'm a damn history major and I can read your posts.

Now, like I said, I actively roleplay. That means nothing is set in stone. I will not say YOU WILL WIN THIS WAR. What's the purpose in roleplaying it? It's a waste of time. But I can play out losses and lose, any good roleplayer should be able to. So point being, don't just say I AM GOING TO WIN. Roleplay it.

And I didn't say you are begging for Soviet support. READ. Look at this situation from the Soviet point of view. Why does he have to worry about you? You have an easy war on your hands and he has bigger fish to fry. He isn't going to care if I interfere in your civil war especially if I have no plans on winning it, and just causing problems. I can just cause problems can't I? In short, yes I can. So don't think you are high and mighty. You can lose anything, just as much as I can lose anything.

Lastly, once again, lose the attitude. Players with your hostile annoying-ness make games un-fun. I can have a civilized discussion. I'm not running around telling players goto hell. So fix yourself up. It would be in the Admins interest to ensure this to retain players, because I have better things to do than get bogged down in these fights... and other players will too, because this isn't your first fight. I've read other threads, in short, be nice. Don't call people names and rather defeat me in the RP, laugh, have a good time, and counter what I have to say in a productive manner. I'll admit I'm not perfect and can be a cocky-asshole. But you sir, have a problem, and it's not just with me.

The Thai military could win a defensive war against the French. I'm going to repeat that for you. The Thai military could win a defensive war against the French. Keyword: defensive. I again make it clear that I AM NOT GOING TO GO TO WAR AGAINST YOU. If you have plans to attack Thailand, you would lose. It would probably be a long war, and I'd lose a lot, and you're right it would probably be a hollow victory for me. But, in the end, I would win.

That said, I have no plans to attack France nor French holdings. The SA player and I agreed that my civil war was to happen so I could engage in warfare without making war on you or Britain. Essentially, and I'm going to spell it out for you, I find RPing wars fun, and this way I can have a fun war without it affecting the international stage too badly. This war is taking place so that I don't go to war against you and fuck everything up worldwide.

Yes, I'm hostile in game, but you get that in the real world. Every now and again you do get some tinpot dictator with an ideological axe to grind with the West. Hugo Chavez is mind bogglingly hostile to the United States even though he needs them as a place to export oil to. It doesn't mean he's going to war against them. Deal with it.

You and I can be hostile in game, and that's fine. Guess what: some nation's leaders IRL are hostile towards each other, and only deal in rhetorical sabre rattling. As long as we don't explode into war with each other, I don't see the problem. If you have that much of an issue dealing with a nation that's diplomatically hostile to yours, tough shit.

You're free to RP interference in my civil war, but I will win. You might find it boring to RP a war that has a guaranteed outcome, but I don't. Don't like it? Don't interfere. Just don't concern yourself with it if you find it that boring. Even when I win, I'm still not going to make war against you in game. The outcome doesn't affect you.

If you hadn't come in here with an "I can fuck you up because I'm France and you're just little pathetic Thailand" attitude, I wouldn't have so much of a problem with you and we would be dealing with each other in a much more civil manner. I don't want to go to war with you, and I'm not going to. So I might issue threats via diplomatic channels every now and then, big deal. I don't see why we can't be opposed to each other on the world stage as long as we don't go to war. I'd be more than happy to be civil and friendly with you ooc if you dropped the cocky attitude.

I'll stop using expletives when dealing with you. That was a mistake on my part in the first place. But I simply refuse to stop being hostile, because I don't see a problem with heated rhetoric. It takes place IRL. As long as we don't go to war, there is no problem.

Point being, you'll note... we're in 1947. Nobody is in any place to sabre rattle with false words. The world back then didn't function as it does now. MAD did not exist.

You cannot compare today's world to yesterday's world. It was a different time, the cold war is not even in full force.

...and in all honesty, I am France and you are little ol' Thailand. As time continues to pass my budget gets bigger, I grow stronger. You can continue to import all the Soviet weapons you want. I carry veto status in the UN, people grab a cup of coffee when you speak there. CHINA is the real power in your part of the world right now. Soon... Japan will be the economic giant of that area.

In this point in time, when people start threatening war, there will be problems. In all reality you'd have the United States kicking your ass right now, and maintaining the peace... but the USA player is asleep. Regardless, you are speaking to a main ally of the United States... you need to RP realistically. As this point in time, the USA can be like... Thailand is a problem? Civil war with non-commies, let's intervene! So for all I care, live in luxury because right now only the Soviet Union is a force.

MAD doesn't matter. If the United States did decide to invade Thailand, well, the SA player would probably veto it using his admin powers. Even if he didn't, the USA player would lose against a guerrilla force a la Viet Nam.

And in all honesty, I am Thailand and you are the devastated nation of France. Right about now the Viet Minh resistance IRL was starting to gather steam. You were devastated in World War 2, you had your entire industrial plant plundered by the Germans and you're demobilizing a lot of military manpower. Not only which, you have the public opinion to deal with, I don't. One of the main reasons the French lost in Indochina was because the French public was so against the war, much like the American public in Viet Nam 30 years ago and Iraq today.

If anything, rhetoric should be more intense than it is now IRL. The Soviet Union is actively looking to expand its interests, and if it felt a regional front for its interests in Southeast Asia was threatened, it would act, if only diplomatically. You are impotent, on the other hand, and couldn't possibly manage the logistics required to wage a successful war against Thailand, which is in game stronger than Viet Nam was IRL, and the French still lost that war.

But this is pointless, because we're not going to war. I'm free to espouse all the rhetoric I want, but we're not going to war. If you so dislike a nation spouting hostile rhetoric, tough for you.

Err, I'm not threating war. As a matter of fact, let me state this to you...

I AM NOT GOING TO WAR WITH YOU. I OPENLY STATE THIS. I AM NOT THREATENING WAR. I AM STATING THE COMPLETE OPPOSITE.

I used to threaten war with you, but that was a while ago. Me and the SA player talked, and came up with the idea of a Thai civil war as an alternative. What is so hard to understand about that?

Actually this bothers me. As a player. The Admin CANNOT veto anything and if they do then that's changing what is happening in game to whatever shape or form they are desiring. That inhibits the creative freedom of the players and then what's next?

Point being if the USA decided to fund the rebels and actively threaten war with Thailand, by all means realistically Thailand would get into shape quickly. The USA has the nuke. No one else does afaik.

So... point being yes I'm a cripple of a nation, but I get stronger and I have direct US support. I make a threat you have to:

A.) Wonder if the British are part of it?
B.) Wonder if the Americans are part of it?
C.) Notice the UN won't save you.
D.) Realize your economy will be destroyed by any conflict while the rest of the world's doesn't!

Now I know what happened with the public in disapproval of the First Indochinese War, but that's the thing, I'm avoiding it with my plan there will be no war.

Now, for the love of god, when I talk about an invasion it's hypothetical.

Well then you'll be pissed to know that the admin already has used his powers to veto players actions. He did it with the USA when that player tried to do something, but I don't remember the specifics. I suspect a few minutes with the search function would yield you some results.

He alluded to using against me back when I did threaten war against the French before you showed up to control them. I backed down. We agreed to the Thai civil war as an alternative so I could RP a war without screwing everything up for the French and the British.

With Soviet forces on Thai soil, why would the Americans nuke me? Why would they attack me? My economy is growing as I try to industrialise with Soviet assistance.

You might want to read the thread containing the agreement I signed with the Soviet Union. It contains terms specifically aimed at preventing foreign powers such as the USA from making war against me. I'm not threatened by American nukes. The Americans are not going to nuke me just because I allow Soviet forces on my soil and throw some diplomatic mud your way every now and again.

And you know what? There are leaders out there who react to a threat with another threat. It's called bluffing, and it's what you're doing. Every time someone bigger than me threatens me I'm supposed to curl up in the corner and play nice? BS.

The question is how do you know I'm bluffing? You don't.

As for nukes, once again, hypothetical. Point being you aren't in any place to mess around. The USA and Soviet Union often throughout the cold war came close to war. You actions can ruin that is my point.

For example, I'm not bluffing with Egypt, if I can't use that canal I'll force my way through it.

You're right, in game I don't. But I'm calling you on that bluff. There are leaders out there, always have been, who when threatened will react in a hostile manner. There are even leaders out there who would rather fight a devastating war than give in to a threat from an imperial power. I'm such a leader, You're just going to have to deal with that.

I'm not going to bring the Cold War to a head with some heated rhetoric. The Warsaw Pact and NATO are not going to start shooting at each other because I condemn France or Britain through diplomatic channels. We're not going to war, so I don't know where you get the notion that some heated rhetoric can ruin the game. If anything, it makes it more lively.

Truth being, if I truly led a nation and an imperial power threatened me, I'd tell them to bring it on.

Well point in fact, the last time France stood still it ended up occupied. I'm roleplaying in a manner that means woah hey, we didn't mess with you and now you're going to mess with us? This is serious! So I'm going to blast something back at you.

Now, when you make a threat like you have, you have to realize you are aligned with the Soviet Union. You've basically threatened to have the Eastern Bloc attack the Western Allies. So the entire world goes... woah woah... does that mean I'm going to have Soviets running at me across the East German border?

It isn't just an attack in Indochina, this could mean another war on the homefront for France, and the USA would've probably stepped in and said something because they don't want to fight the Russians either. If you were just Thailand, by itself, I can go... meh whatever, and we can poke each other with our e-penis' and laugh, but with your current diplomatic status, that's something that can have a profound effect on the international arena. You've directly involved yourself in a cold war setting. Hell even the Russians would be going... woah hey! You keep that up you'll lose our support!!!

Once again, heated rhetoric is just that: rhetoric. You know for a fact that my threats are empty. Why do you feel the need to act all cocky in response?

This is just a regional issue. I don't think for a second that the entire western bloc, just because Thailand has a diplomatic shouting match with France, is going to seriously wonder whether the Soviet Union is going to attack them.

And if the admin wouldn't let me attack France, I seriously doubt he's going to let France attack me. To do so would be in bad faith, and would betray our earlier agreement.

And now I feel like I've betrayed my allies in Egypt and Indonesia.

We support Thailand all the way.

Why is that?

I don't know, I just feel dirty for having acquiesced (word of the day) to another's demands. Defence pacts still hold meaning, by virtue of the word defence.

Acquiesce by Oasis is a great song if you like British Rock music.

Anyway, how often do you play games like this? Like here as France I try to be annoying on purpose and tough... I figured those traits fit French policy the best. But, in other games I RP differently. For example, I didn't want to be France and wanted to play as something more like Australia or actually I wanted Israel, but they don't entirely exist yet. As those two states I'd act very differently. I'm a pretty diverse roleplayer and can mold my foreign policy to whatever really. I was part of the Model United Nations program and went to the UN in NYC to represent the Republic of Indonesia. It was rather fun because I got to meet the Indonesian delegation at the UN and talk to them for about three hours about all kinds of things dealing with Indonesian foreign policy from the situation in Iraq, to Israel, Iran, sex trade, piracy, US relations, ASEAN, it was good fun.

Then at other MUN meetings such as the conference at UBC, I got to represent Serbia in the WHO. That was fun, I was just got to annoy France and got it so that AIDS relief went to Serbia in equal amounts as it went to Africa. As the U of Washington MUN I got to be Israel and got into long lengthy debates with Iran. I mean changing things up and roleplaying different things can be fun. I don't really mind what position I'm stuck in as long as I can try to react to it.

In your situation while trying to maintain your own sense of pride I might have tried something along the lines of diplomacy with France and tried to get a contract that would have them get out of the Indochina by a certain year. Similar to Britain and Portugal with their possessions in China.

As for the thing in Egypt, I might have promised support but of limited quantities. Medical units or something. You know, show the support and give something, but nothing you REALLY need on your own front.

Wait a minute, you went to UBC? As in, University of British Columbia? I live in Vancouver, well Richmond to be precise. I don't suppose you live there?

And I usually do play these games in a hostile manner, always controlling a minor power that can affect the regional balance of interests. Never as a superpower, because to conduct myself in such a manner as a superpower would lead to world war. In control of a minor nation, I can always be abrasive without plunging the entire world into chaos. I have no problem with sending my minor power into a devastating war, because it's just a game and no one really dies.

Unfortunately ideology doesn't permit me to retain a cordial relationship with either Britain or France. I did find this particular forum through soviet-empire.com, after all.

I goto Vancouver often and I'm an avid Canucks fan. But no, I live in the Seattle area. Although I'm looking to transfer to UBC @ Okanagan.

Yeah, I've done the self-destructive RP before, and the superpower. I came to this game because the South African player was like... ZOMG we need a France... and I was like... damnit! The Frenchies!? Why not something else... and he was like... well you can do that but I'd prefer you didn't. I was like... meh fine.

I met him through another forum of his that was set in the present day. I played as Italy in that forum and apparently he liked my style? I dunno... I just played Italy to a "t". Here it's interesting, cause I wanted to just play it out easy as France, but then if I do that I'm just playing out a bunch of losses... which I cannot handle because I always felt with the right leadership France could've handled the situation so much better.

Anyway, it's 3:30am where we live. To bed I go.

People, do not take USA and USSR as so predictable forces, especially when Moscow asked Washington for Marshall Plan aid and still deploys in the international theatre. I hate being considered a predictable factor for I am not. 'USSR won't give a shit about you' makes as much sense as 'USSR will nuke anyone who intervenes in my country.'

I won't get in your rhetorics about whether I will intervene or leave Thailand, if France is in the position to attack anything or even sustain prolonged warfare in Indochina (including Laos and Cambodia) and stuff like that.

In any case, once the civil war gets all warmed up and stuff, you'll see. But in any case, I want to remind everyone of the 1956 Suez crisis: the USSR did threaten to intervene on behalf of Egypt after the British and the French attacked it. And that was not even under Stalin.