The End of NES2 V.

[Disenfrancised]

EDIT: NK posted while I was writing. So I am primarily disagreeing with Dis, although most of my argument still aplies to NK's post.

Heh. I wasn't saying that china couldn't have become an advanced power, but rather saying that a technological advantage is rather more flexible and useful than a manpower advantage.

 

[North King]

India looks decidedly Mughalish to me.

 

[stalin006]

Krakow and its Junker Rule

 

[Insane_Panda]

You'll have to compete with Israelite, whom seems to want the Junkers out of power.

 

[stalin006]

lol, and i want to lead w/ the Junkers. well see

 

[Israelite9191]

That's just me and my Magyar nationalist sentements (my father's mother's side of the family is Hungarian). I will let the Junkers have their place, possibly ahead of the Poles, but the Magyars shall rule if I have my way with it!

 

[stalin006]

we can divide the nation between German-Austrians and Polish-Hungarians.

save ourselfs a civil war and live ok

 

[Kozmos]

It seems its to make for another <<insert cause>> terrorist group.MWhahahah back to my terrorist roots.

Which territory will I attach to like a parasite and suck all life out of it?

 

[North King]

It seems its to make for another <<insert cause>> terrorist group.MWhahahah back to my terrorist roots.

Which territory will I attach to like a parasite and suck all life out of it?

None?

Terrorist groups are easy to defeat, if you follow the right strategy and have the will to carry it through.

 

[Israelite9191]

@Cleric- Why not a nationalist uprising that uses terrorist tactics in one of the colonies. Harder to supress but still fun to manage.

@ Stalin- That could possibly be aranged. I will work on a map dividing the two.

 

[jalapeno_dude]

Why are the Netherlands French?

 

[Insane_Panda]

France owning the netherlands is not an impossible thing. It almost happened during the reign of Louis XV in our OTL, yet Louis instead decided to give the netherlands back to Austria.

This anti-Habsburg coalition triumphed in the end. Henri IV, despite his death a few years before the war's end, strenghthened France considerably, preparing the ground for the future conquest of the United Provinces and the intervention in England's civil wars. All this and the continued cooperation of the French government and the Huguenots, and other wealthy religious minorities, firmly set France on a mercantile path of development, which, in turn, allowed it to found a great colonial empire, especially after the failure of a late 17th century military adventure in Germany.

 

[jalapeno_dude]

I'm sure it could happen, just didn't find it in skimming... wasn't looking for United Provinces, but Holland or the Netherlands.

 

[ThomAnder]

Guess this means we will have a civil war in China, Alex

About the ongoing arguments in China:

Some points to make:
-China did not have its period of isolationism under Kangxi OTL. It was only in Yong Zheng's reign (i'm preeeeetty sure this isn't how you spell it, but i forgot so i'll let it slip ) that the ports were all closed to european powers and they let themselves stagnate and fall behind.
-The Opium Wars had LOTS to do with the following taiping and boxer rebellion. The populace thought Qing lost the mandate of heaven due to the damn war, and also the opium ruined china's economy which led to unhappiness among the peasants.
-I don't see why a China that is open to westerners can't keep up in technology. AFAIK, they were considered very civilized by the 17th century Europe. Furthermore, from a military standpoint, their armies aren't that behind in technology. Military technology at that time didn't really advance that much anyway. The cannon didn't improve for a long time (China had european imported cannons too), and muskets were still sort of impractical back then. Battles usually consisted of Cannon fires, then a cavalry charge (in china anyway). China also modeled its navy after the europeans (somewhat, they still looked like junks ) in subduing Taiwan/Ming remnants, so naval wise they were on par as well.
-Sino-Japanese War: The general consensus/propaganda in China is that they had boats with more firepower, but due to corruption in bureaucratic decision making, didn't have the ammo for those battleship/dreadnoughts. Of course personally i think the higher mobility and torpedoe boats that Japan employed was the key reason for Chinese failure (See russo-japanese war).

 

[Insane_Panda]

The Chinese navy was not on par with European navies. Chinese ships had guns, but not too many. No Chinese ship of the 18th century came close to the European Ships of the Line with their 100 naval cannons.

 

[North King]

Wow... you're utterly wrong on the military technology part, sorry to tell you. At this time period, cannons and guns were getting more and more sophisticated, with a major advance coming along every few decades in Europe. China had little access to these advances, and so the development of various types of more advanced muskets and field artillery were not availible to them.

 

[Insane_Panda]

Yes, just because China has muskets and Cannons, doesn't mean they are the same muskets and cannons as being used in Europe

 

[ThomAnder]

Wow... you're utterly wrong on the military technology part, sorry to tell you. At this time period, cannons and guns were getting more and more sophisticated, with a major advance coming along every few decades in Europe.

From Wikipedia:

The 17th century book by Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth inventor Kazimierz Siemienowicz "Artis Magnae Artilleriae pars prima"... For over two centuries this work was used in Europe as a basic artillery manual.

Oddly the development of cannon almost halted until the 19th-century, improvements in metallurgy, chemistry, manufacturing, and so on, did not alter the basic design and operation of a cannon.

Generally what i'm saying is that the technology has not evolved to the point when small arms is more important on the battlefield than artillery fire.

China had little access to these advances, and so the development of various types of more advanced muskets and field artillery were not availible to them.

Why would they have little access assuming they kept their port opened? There are no european union that restricts weapon selling to China as there is today . China has the money. If there is a market as well, why wouldn't they buy it?

BTW, i was wrong, Yongzheng wasn't the isolationist one, it ws his son Qianlong.

 

[North King]

From Wikipedia:

The 17th century book by Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth inventor Kazimierz Siemienowicz "Artis Magnae Artilleriae pars prima"... For over two centuries this work was used in Europe as a basic artillery manual.

Oddly the development of cannon almost halted until the 19th-century, improvements in metallurgy, chemistry, manufacturing, and so on, did not alter the basic design and operation of a cannon.

Generally what i'm saying is that the technology has not evolved to the point when small arms is more important on the battlefield than artillery fire.

...O_o

Yes, small arms fire was more important than artillery. Far more important... And it was very variable, as well...

Furthermore, the tactics of artillery changed far more than their technology, and in this, China was woefully behind as well...

Why would they have little access assuming they kept their port opened? There are no european union that restricts weapon selling to China as there is today . China has the money. If there is a market as well, why wouldn't they buy it?

That Indian Ocean can be a barrier to huge arms shipments.

 

[ThomAnder]

Furthermore, the tactics of artillery changed far more than their technology, and in this, China was woefully behind as well...

How were they woefully behind? They continued to import cannons from Europe, we even call the cannons red devil/barbarian cannons to reflect their origin. And we're talking about from when they imported into 1700ish. Your telling me China fell woefully behind in a span of about 20-30 odd years? AFAIK, it wasn't until Napoleon era that artillery tactic was really defined.

That Indian Ocean can be a barrier to huge arms shipments.

Then how did we get our cannons in the first place I think what happened in OTL was that we bought an initial amount, but then eventually we learned how to make it ourselves. The knowledge isn't that uncommon/monopolized anyway.

@Panda, i concede that Chinese navy isn't on par in gun power OTL. We had a false sense of security due to a lack of competition and enemies so the navy was discarded as an after thought OTL. Though there's nothing stopping us from continuing to model our navy after the europeans in this timeline... In this timeline Das said we were eyeing Siam, and that's France's, and they have a strong navy. Competitioin=urge to improve/arms race.