Right-Wing Discussion Thread XVIII: Hyena Central Command 憶ラ

[Xuloqoia]

Out of curiosity, how would you describe a girl "you can settle down with"? Not a gotcha or anything. I'm genuinely curious.

The kind you can train at the town center and then work together to acquire enough resources to advance to the next age while praying that the Goths don't ally with the Mayans to take down your ally the Koreans.

... This is a reference to something but I can't tell what the reference is for. Civ, perhaps?

[Fahran]

Pious, virtuous, knowledgeable in woman’s work, good with kids, traditional, wants to get married.

You can say Lumi.

How would you describe a woman's work and a woman's virtue?

The kind you can train at the town center and then work together to acquire enough resources to advance to the next age while praying that the Goths don't ally with the Mayans to take down your ally the Koreans.

I'm intrigued and mortified.

[Napkizemlja]

The kind you can train at the town center and then work together to acquire enough resources to advance to the next age while praying that the Goths don't ally with the Mayans to take down your ally the Koreans.

... This is a reference to something but I can't tell what the reference is for. Civ, perhaps?

Civ is for baby boys, Age of Empires is for real men.

[Xuloqoia]

... This is a reference to something but I can't tell what the reference is for. Civ, perhaps?

Civ is for baby boys, Age of Empires is for real men.

Ah. I haven't played Age of Empires yet. Which game in the series do you recommend for when I have the time?

[Fahran]

... This is a reference to something but I can't tell what the reference is for. Civ, perhaps?

Civ is for baby boys, Age of Empires is for real men.

Mortified.

[Napkizemlja]

Civ is for baby boys, Age of Empires is for real men.

Ah. I haven't played Age of Empires yet. Which game in the series do you recommend for when I have the time?

AoE2.

[Torrocca]

"Lol just have Imperial Japan do the exact opposite of its intended goals and beliefs and have them fight a multi-faceted war with China, the United States of America, and thousands of miles of Siberian wilderness for an ez pz Axis victory"

In absolute awe at how absurdly easily people can trick themselves into believing that the Axis had any possibility whatsoever of defeating the Allies after 1941

First, I think it's utterly adorable how you keep saying you're going to block me and then you just keep coming back; it's almost like you can't get me out of your head.

As if this website doesn't have the shittiest system for blocking people in existence that doesn't actually hide bullshit being spewed lmao

As for the matter I hand, I refer you to Hunger and War: Food Provisioning in the Soviet Union During World War II -

(Image)
(Image)

If the Japanese had cut off Lend Lease, the Soviets would've collapsed. From there, the Axis could sufficiently wear down the Allies to achieve a compromise peace.

Unconditional Surrender, Demobilization, and the Atomic Bomb

Leahy admitted however, that there was "little prospect of obtaining unconditional surrender" in 1945, Admiral Ernest J. King, Chief of Naval Operations, would write that the Navy "in the course of time would have starved the Japanese into submission" (Italics mine). Time, however, was a waning asset, especially to Marshall, who would later say that American "political and economic institutions melted out from under us [the U.S. military]". The Office of War Mobilization and Reconversion told the JCS what magazines and newspapers had been printing since late 1944: there was overwhelming public pressure to increase production of consumer goods. I am "afraid of unrest in the country," said Director Fred Vinson. I have never seen "the people in their present frame of mind." Aside from reports about the "national end-of-the-war psychology among [the] citizens" of the United States, the JCS heard from its own military intelligence community. Their best estimate was that total victory through encirclement, blockade, and bombardment might well take "a great many years."5

Persian Corridor: *Exists as the most important and major of all Lend-Lease supply routes into the USSR as the only viable all-weather route*
Imperial Japan: *Gets fucking crushed a year or two earlier into the war after the USSR easily stabilizes the situation against the Nazis and their shitshow of a """strategy""" just like it did IRL because they somehow decided against all logic and reason pertaining to any IRL goals, fears, and strategies of their own regarding the USSR that had appeared during the Second Sino-Japanese War to instead suddenly invade Vladivostok*

Also imagine unironically thinking an """alliance""" of three shit countries and a few others, whose economies were basically all built on continuous war, could actually somehow wear down the rest of the world including a full-fledged atomic power that could just nuke them into submission lmao

[Kowani]

And the following government was sincerely restorative to religious practice, right?

I wouldn't say the post-soviet government is very sincere when it comes to Orthodoxy.

America and the English-speaking World is full-steam ahead into Sodomy, Secularism, and Moral Decadence.

This claim and others like it have been made by people before you. They lost. It will be made by people after you. They won’t win either.

[Nea Byzantia]

America and the English-speaking World is full-steam ahead into Sodomy, Secularism, and Moral Decadence.

This claim and others like it have been made by people before you. They lost. It will be made by people after you. They won’t win either.

That's some nice rhetorical flourish, with no substance...

[Kowani]

This claim and others like it have been made by people before you. They lost. It will be made by people after you. They won’t win either.

That's some nice rhetorical flourish, with no substance...

I mean, I don’t really need to cite sources to point out that social change was not a unanimous thing, and people were complaining. This is basic psychology.

Or did you mean the point about the future?

[Diopolis]

America and the English-speaking World is full-steam ahead into Sodomy, Secularism, and Moral Decadence.

This claim and others like it have been made by people before you. They lost. It will be made by people after you. They won’t win either.

They were right.

[Kowani]

This claim and others like it have been made by people before you. They lost. It will be made by people after you. They won’t win either.

They were right.

Even if we just stick to the history of your own country, the largest social change was the end of slavery. People were crying about degeneracy back then too.

They were still fucking wrong.

[Napkizemlja]

If the Japanese had struck at the USSR, they probably wouldn't have even gotten into a war with the US and really only would have had to contend with the British Empire (I'm assuming they go to war with Japan to support the Soviets in this situation). In the event of the US having to remain neutral, it's hard to say how much support for significant amount of Lend-Lease support would be given to the USSR. This doesn't factor into the Persian Corridor not being fully operational until mid 1942. This isn't getting into the troops and material that the USSR would have to keep in the far east. Not saying that the Axis' would have definitively won, but it the odds would have been much more in their favor.

[Torrocca]

If the Japanese had struck at the USSR, they probably wouldn't have even gotten into a war with the US and really only would have had to contend with the British Empire (I'm assuming they go to war with Japan to support the Soviets in this situation). In the event of the US having to remain neutral, it's hard to say how much support for significant amount of Lend-Lease support would be given to the USSR. This doesn't factor into the Persian Corridor not being fully operational until mid 1942. This isn't getting into the troops and material that the USSR would have to keep in the far east. Not saying that the Axis' would have definitively won, but it the odds would have been much more in their favor.

Problem here is that OEP specified an attack on the USSR by Japan in 1942, well after American involvement in the war had been completely guaranteed by Pearl Harbor:

the only way i could see it working is if Hitler convinced the Japanese not to attack us by trying to entice them with a steady supply of oil from the Caucausus.

after all, part of the reason they attacked us was because we cut off their oil. if they did that then they definitely could have knocked out the USSR.

A Japan that attacks in, say, 1942 cuts off Lend Lease to the Soviets and thus ensures their collapse. With the USSR out, the Germans and Japanese can wear down the American political willpower to continue the conflict via mass casualties.

Which is, y'know, problematic for the simple fact of the matter that Japan attacked the USA in 1941 because its supply of oil had been cut off by America. Starting shit with the USSR after that would've more than likely led to Japan being knocked out of the war perhaps a year or two earlier than it had IRL thanks to locking itself in combat with every major Allied power, which also would've at least had the benefit of sparing China from a number of atrocities and also would've likely led to an even earlier defeat of Nazi Germany because of the numerous resources that the Allies could've reallocated from the Pacific.

So, actually, yeah, now that I think about it, I adore this alt-history scenario, because it very likely would've led to far fewer people dying over the course of World War Two.

[Napkizemlja]

If the Japanese had struck at the USSR, they probably wouldn't have even gotten into a war with the US and really only would have had to contend with the British Empire (I'm assuming they go to war with Japan to support the Soviets in this situation). In the event of the US having to remain neutral, it's hard to say how much support for significant amount of Lend-Lease support would be given to the USSR. This doesn't factor into the Persian Corridor not being fully operational until mid 1942. This isn't getting into the troops and material that the USSR would have to keep in the far east. Not saying that the Axis' would have definitively won, but it the odds would have been much more in their favor.

Problem here is that OEP specified an attack on the USSR by Japan in 1942, well after American involvement in the war had been completely guaranteed by Pearl Harbor:

A Japan that attacks in, say, 1942 cuts off Lend Lease to the Soviets and thus ensures their collapse. With the USSR out, the Germans and Japanese can wear down the American political willpower to continue the conflict via mass casualties.

Which is, y'know, problematic for the simple fact of the matter that Japan attacked the USA in 1941 because its supply of oil had been cut off by America. Starting shit with the USSR after that would've more than likely led to Japan being knocked out of the war perhaps a year or two earlier than it had IRL thanks to locking itself in combat with every major Allied power, which also would've at least had the benefit of sparing China from a number of atrocities and also would've likely led to an even earlier defeat of Nazi Germany because of the numerous resources that the Allies could've reallocated from the Pacific.

So, actually, yeah, now that I think about it, I adore this alt-history scenario, because it very likely would've led to far fewer people dying over the course of World War Two.

Tbf even a 1942 assault would have tilted the odds. The Soviets weren't really able to fully get their shit together until 1943 for example and that was without having to contend with two fronts. It would have actually been really bad considering that the Soviet's left their far eastern commands pretty defenseless after Barbarossa.

[Bolivarian Amerikwa]

Problem here is that OEP specified an attack on the USSR by Japan in 1942, well after American involvement in the war had been completely guaranteed by Pearl Harbor:



Which is, y'know, problematic for the simple fact of the matter that Japan attacked the USA in 1941 because its supply of oil had been cut off by America. Starting shit with the USSR after that would've more than likely led to Japan being knocked out of the war perhaps a year or two earlier than it had IRL thanks to locking itself in combat with every major Allied power, which also would've at least had the benefit of sparing China from a number of atrocities and also would've likely led to an even earlier defeat of Nazi Germany because of the numerous resources that the Allies could've reallocated from the Pacific.

So, actually, yeah, now that I think about it, I adore this alt-history scenario, because it very likely would've led to far fewer people dying over the course of World War Two.

Tbf even a 1942 assault would have tilted the odds. The Soviets weren't really able to fully get their shit together until 1943 for example and that was with having to contend with two fronts. It would have actually been really bad considering that the Soviet's left their far eastern commands pretty defenseless after Barbarossa.

YOLO, If I was Tojo I would have gone balls to the wall and pushed for Lake Baikal like in my hoi4 games

[Hanafuridake]

Daily reminder capitalists hate Communism... unless they can make a buck from it.

[Kowani]

Daily reminder capitalists hate Communism... unless they can make a buck from it.

China’s not communist.

That said, the sheer number of Che Guevara shirts proves your point anyway.

[Napkizemlja]

Daily reminder capitalists hate Communism... unless they can make a buck from it.

Eh both sides like undermining their ideals to make a dollar. The Bulgarian secret police during the Cold War was one of the largest drug trafficking organizations in the world.

[Torrocca]

Problem here is that OEP specified an attack on the USSR by Japan in 1942, well after American involvement in the war had been completely guaranteed by Pearl Harbor:



Which is, y'know, problematic for the simple fact of the matter that Japan attacked the USA in 1941 because its supply of oil had been cut off by America. Starting shit with the USSR after that would've more than likely led to Japan being knocked out of the war perhaps a year or two earlier than it had IRL thanks to locking itself in combat with every major Allied power, which also would've at least had the benefit of sparing China from a number of atrocities and also would've likely led to an even earlier defeat of Nazi Germany because of the numerous resources that the Allies could've reallocated from the Pacific.

So, actually, yeah, now that I think about it, I adore this alt-history scenario, because it very likely would've led to far fewer people dying over the course of World War Two.

Tbf even a 1942 assault would have tilted the odds. The Soviets weren't really able to fully get their shit together until 1943 for example and that was with having to contend with two fronts. It would have actually been really bad considering that the Soviet's left their far eastern commands pretty defenseless after Barbarossa.

The thing here is that there wasn't much to seize in Eastern Russia in the first place; yes, Vladivostok, in particular, would've been a blow against the Allied war effort, at least for a little bit, but it's not like it would've been impossible to immediately retake the city. Something like Operation Uranus may have been delayed, but FDR and the rest of the Allies weren't going to just magically throw their hands up and say, "welp, we lost" because Japan decided to do this cool trick that 1 out of every 8 Soviet leaders hates. America could've easily mounted an amphibious landing in Eastern Russia - in turn temporarily delaying its island-hopping campaign across the Pacific - which is one that'd likely be uncontested from Japan spreading its forces thin trying to occupy huge swathes of China and Siberia. From there, it'd really only be a matter of time in regards to the fighting.

[Nea Byzantia]

Tbf even a 1942 assault would have tilted the odds. The Soviets weren't really able to fully get their shit together until 1943 for example and that was with having to contend with two fronts. It would have actually been really bad considering that the Soviet's left their far eastern commands pretty defenseless after Barbarossa.

The thing here is that there wasn't much to seize in Eastern Russia in the first place; yes, Vladivostok, in particular, would've been a blow against the Allied war effort, at least for a little bit, but it's not like it would've been impossible to immediately retake the city. Something like Operation Uranus may have been delayed, but FDR and the rest of the Allies weren't going to just magically throw their hands up and say, "welp, we lost" because Japan decided to do this cool trick that 1 out of every 8 Soviet leaders hates. America could've easily mounted an amphibious landing in Eastern Russia - in turn temporarily delaying its island-hopping campaign across the Pacific - which is one that'd likely be uncontested from Japan spreading its forces thin trying to occupy huge swathes of China and Siberia. From there, it'd really only be a matter of time in regards to the fighting.

Such a scenario would've left the Soviet Union much weaker, though.

[Hanafuridake]

Daily reminder capitalists hate Communism... unless they can make a buck from it.

China’s not communist.

That said, the sheer number of Che Guevara shirts proves your point anyway.

Don't be obtuse, you know what I meant. It's a Marxist-Leninist one party state.

[Torrocca]

The thing here is that there wasn't much to seize in Eastern Russia in the first place; yes, Vladivostok, in particular, would've been a blow against the Allied war effort, at least for a little bit, but it's not like it would've been impossible to immediately retake the city. Something like Operation Uranus may have been delayed, but FDR and the rest of the Allies weren't going to just magically throw their hands up and say, "welp, we lost" because Japan decided to do this cool trick that 1 out of every 8 Soviet leaders hates. America could've easily mounted an amphibious landing in Eastern Russia - in turn temporarily delaying its island-hopping campaign across the Pacific - which is one that'd likely be uncontested from Japan spreading its forces thin trying to occupy huge swathes of China and Siberia. From there, it'd really only be a matter of time in regards to the fighting.

Such a scenario would've left the Soviet Union much weaker, though.

It would've been little more than a temporary setback for the USSR's war effort in particular, at worst, unless Stalin or FDR went balls-to-the-wall stupid about it. Both Stalin and FDR wanted the Axis defeated ASAP, especially considering how fucking genocidal the Axis in general was. There's very few scenarios here wherein there wouldn't be an immediate seaborne Allied invasion of Eastern Russia to speedily retake it from Japan.

[Nea Byzantia]

Such a scenario would've left the Soviet Union much weaker, though.

It would've been little more than a temporary setback for the USSR's war effort in particular, at worst, unless Stalin or FDR went balls-to-the-wall stupid about it. Both Stalin and FDR wanted the Axis defeated ASAP, especially considering how fucking genocidal the Axis in general was. There's very few scenarios here wherein there wouldn't be an immediate seaborne Allied invasion of Eastern Russia to speedily retake it from Japan.

No, the problem isn't defeating the Axis. The problem is afterwards; who's holding what. If the Americans got a nice chunk of the territory after liberating it from the Japanese; they may not give it back to the Soviet Union; leaving them weaker.

[Torrocca]

It would've been little more than a temporary setback for the USSR's war effort in particular, at worst, unless Stalin or FDR went balls-to-the-wall stupid about it. Both Stalin and FDR wanted the Axis defeated ASAP, especially considering how fucking genocidal the Axis in general was. There's very few scenarios here wherein there wouldn't be an immediate seaborne Allied invasion of Eastern Russia to speedily retake it from Japan.

No, the problem isn't defeating the Axis. The problem is afterwards; who's holding what. If the Americans got a nice chunk of the territory after liberating it from the Japanese; they may not give it back to the Soviet Union; leaving them weaker.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯ That'd be a post-war problem, then.