We all do what we think is best for Japan. The ISO hasn't failed yet. And I did what you too did to the pacifists arguments. If you are still claiming that the rest are willing to Sacrifice six to become gods to four, I'll keep on saying that your options are to vote you or die.
The Isolationists, despite their current failures, still don't think they've failed yet but because they know they will fail, added "yet" to the end of the line. The difference between my statement and yours is that a vote for the Appeasement Government is a vote to losing two children. One will be the child who is killed for no reason other than they were on the border that the government allowed the French to cross while the other child will die in the COUNTERATTACK.
How did you learn of French warmongerism? How can you know that the French will attack us? How can you tell that they won't attack the Iroquois first instead? It looks like we are all going to grow the Japanese Army, so that growth could scare potential invaders like these French you fear so much.
French expansion towards us and the creation of supply lines, coupled with our profiles on French leaders, has led us to come to the conclusion that Lyons is an extension of the French logistic train for the sole purpose of narrowing the neutral zone and providing a jumping point into the rest of the continent.
We are against cultural poisoning from other nations. That's why we want to Isolate ourselves. It's a policy known as Sakoku, and trade was just not explicit. But trade won't affect our culture if it is carried in the pseudo Japanese city of Copenhagen, because resources don't carry culture with them. We won't ally any cultural City-State.
We will ally a cultural city-state. Japanese culture will overwhelm any culture that we come into contact with and the idea of not spreading our culture far and wide is another point against the running tally of failure, neglect, appeasement, and borderline treason of the Isolationist government.
That's true, we failed in giving a plan B to our settler, and French developments should be watched closely.
Agreed.
Our government tried to create a consensus for we were at the beginning of history, and union was then more necessary than ever, so plans were announced so that there could be some feedback. The way that the elected government chose to rule the country was by implying the others in it. If you refused, you can't now blame the government.
The government clearly tried to use the myth of consensus in order to spread the blame for any failures incurred against it but to reap the glory should things go according to plan. Elected governments are elected to lead. They're not elected to run elections of what should be done. So yes, I can very much blame in on our spineless government.
It is dishonourable for a superior nation to attack an inferior nation without notice. it is even more when there is no real reason to do it. First we shall warn the French to stay away. If they refuse to listen, then war will be considered as an option. Not before.
It is dishonorable to allow the blood of the innocent Japanese to be spilled on our soil when we could prevent it. The French are without honor but we have honor. Because of this, they thumb their noses at us. They plan war on us. They laugh at us and prevent our settlers from peacefully settling a region set aside for them. The government failed to compensate the settlers for their wasted time (which our coalition will and then some).
And, as I said, we'd put the army to watch a wide zone before our borders, in order to impede them to reach our borders. If you once again refuse to listen to this proposition that implies a defensive stance with NO civilian losses, you will lose the little respect I still had for your person.
I am not going to listen to a coward and a liar who believes that a border conflict will not result in dead Japanese farmers and miners caught in the crossfire. The safest war is one carried far from our borders, not at our borders. The Isolationists continue to do Japan a great disservice with their lies and French pandering.
I already said why there will be no sacrifice of six. If you are once again insisting on this, I must recognise that you are skilled to mask the very same concepts behind many appearances, as it's more or less everything you have said up to now.
And I already pointed out that it is a lie to believe that a war fought on our border will not result in casualties. Instead of keeping the war contained just within French borders, the war will exist everywhere between our porous (because of the Isolationists SELF-Defense Force) borders and the borders of France. This will be highly damaging to trade which the Isolationists stupidly believes should only be carried out in one city, which highly limits trade and is the reason why the Isolationists fail on both the domestic and international front.
I don't see you providing any alternatives, any other plans besides attack them while they're unprepared.
We will not arrogantly start laying out detailed war plans in public. Only those within our administration will be privied to the war plans. Unlike the Isolationists, we do not believe in the ideas of direct democracy because we see it as a way of spreading the blame but reaping the glory which is highly dishonorable. Furthermore, there are those with ties to the French here and to present a plan in public would be disastrous.
You want to soil Japan's honor by attacking a peaceful nation. Arya wasn't born in this great Japan, she traveled the world, so her word shouldn't be regarded with as much respect as a true Japanese citizen.
France is not peaceful. Their intentions for Japan borders on tainting of our honor at best, destruction of our culture at worst.
It's not about me sacrificing Japanese, as I would not do so, I will simply just not send Japanese sons and fathers and brothers to die in a war that we started with no just cause.
The just cause is that we are protecting Japan's daughters, mothers, and sisters.
Just because we preach of the threat the French pose, doesn't mean the people actually know. They would have to trust their government to take our words for it.
Then how can they trust the Isolationists who in the past have intentionally left Japan weak, allowed France to besmirch our honor, has enacted ruinous trade policy which is crushing the average peasant, and increased the barriers to entry in the market by forcing trade to be carried out by a puppet state? While the Copenhagen get rich, despite being a conquered people, our merchants remain either destitute or, for the few lucky ones who have ties with Copenhagen, rich on the backs of the worker.
Our Japanese soldiers signed up in our great military to defend their homes, not to go pillaging others. The French are not inherently evil, and you will have the Japanese become monsters to prevent a future war. A future war that for all we know will not exist.
Our Japanese soldiers signed up to join a military, not the Self-Defense force. They will be protecting their love ones by quelling the French Threat to the East.
Going on the defensive is not a bad thing. With our armies stalling, we can evacuate regions, bolster manpower, and exterminate the French threat. The Frenchies will be slowed down by our strong cultural presence, allowing our units to outrun them. If we outrun them, we can kill them at will. Our archers will never be touched!
Going onto the defensive is dishonorable! You ask a Japanese soldier would they rather be on the backs fighting for survival or taking the fight to the enemy and I'm sure they'll tell you they would rather take the fight to the enemy. We shouldn't use our armies for STALLING and we shouldn't have to EVACUATE regions that shouldn't have came under threat in the first place. Hit and run tactics? Dishonorable.
If we wait for the French to start the war, not only will we have the defensive advantage, we'll have the moral advantage.
Sacrifice Six to Become a God to Four.
Your slogan "Sacrifice 6 to become a God to 4" is flawed. Because those 6 casualties are speculation. you do not know how many civilian casualties we would suffer, we would be able to evacuate regions.
I do know that, under my plan, we wouldn't need to evacuate a single Japanese region. Not one. Why? Because I"m not a coward who waits to respond to what a foreigner does. I don't wait for him to swing just so I can dodge if I can punch him first.
You say we will sacrifice Japanese people, but you don't know for a fact many will die.
"Oh yes, we both know that Japanese will die but we don't know the exaaacccct number."
I however, can say with absolute certainty, if we start the war, we will lose many good Japanese.
I do believe our soldiers would rather fight winning a war against the monstrous France instead of waiting for the French are within rapier distance of their daughters and sisters.
Allow the French to attack us, weaken them in the neutral regions, defend hills, forests and rivers, block mountain passes and by the time they get close to population centers, we can simply finish them with our town's bombard.
BY THE TIME THEY GET CLOSE TO POPULATION CENTERS? That means the Appeasement crowd not only plans on letting the war hit the border region, they're prepared to let it get close to the cities, allowing untold destruction of the countryside infrastructure such as mines, farms, and more.
Under my plan, Japan will not need to evacuate a single region in the face of invasion. We will not be on the defensive. We will not be doing simple stalling operations. We will not have to wait until our cities are threatened to shout COUNTERATTACK.
:OOC
