Right-Wing Discussion Thread XVIII: Hyena Central Command 憶ラ

[Xuloqoia]

Can I just mention how utterly insufferable ancaps can be in a debate?

Yeah. With anime girls like me you have more fun.

Are you even a girl, though? How can I tell that you're not just a Russian Bot^TM?

[Kowani]

Can I just mention how utterly insufferable ancaps can be in a debate?

Yeah. With anime girls like me you have more fun.

Okay, that’s true.

Can I just mention how utterly insufferable ancaps can be in a debate?

Are you referring to the events of last night? I mean, I viewed the whole debacle as a source of entertainment, tbh. It's fun to watch internet arguments, ngl.

A microcosm of the whole thing, yeah, but it extends beyond that.

[Proctopeo]

I think one of the syndicalist factions does, too.
Which is less cursed only on the grounds that Pelley is... Pelley.

Yeah, Pelley is basically the Satan of Kaiserreich.

Somehow he's more crazy than the Iron Guard.

[Nakena]

Yeah. With anime girls like me you have more fun.

Are you even a girl, though? How can I tell that you're not just a Russian Bot^TM? :p

Check my sig and you'll know.

[Napkizemlja]

I hope you two both realize what Germany's plans were for Eastern Europe if they won WW1. Hint: not that far off from Nazi Germany's.

Nazi Germany desired the extermination of Slavs, the complete eradication of Poles as a nation, and the formation of a Reich spanning from Belgium to the Ural Mountains.

at most the German Empire wanted a vast network of puppet states who, besides providing a buffer with Russia, would also be captive customers of the German economy.

there are degrees to bad and the Nazis were far, far worse.

Yeah man ethnically cleansing Poles, Ukrainians, Belorussians, and Balts is just piffle really.

[Genivaria]

I hope you two both realize what Germany's plans were for Eastern Europe if they won WW1. Hint: not that far off from Nazi Germany's.

Nazi Germany desired the extermination of Slavs, the complete eradication of Poles as a nation, and the formation of a Reich spanning from Belgium to the Ural Mountains.

at most the German Empire wanted a vast network of puppet states who, besides providing a buffer with Russia, would also be captive customers of the German economy.

there are degrees to bad and the Nazis were far, far worse.

What I'm concerned with is once the Germans had there new order could they have actually maintained it?
The Entente were gutless in not trying to consolidate more, but that's what happens when THEIR alliance is made up of such opposed nations like Britain, France and RUSSIA.
Germany knew what it wanted and planned on enforcing its wants, it was only a matter of if it could pull it off, if they could've done so then the Imperial Germans would've prevented the Cold War I reckon.

[Nakena]

Yeah, Pelley is basically the Satan of Kaiserreich.

Somehow he's more crazy than the Iron Guard.

My homeboi is Ungern-Sternberg.

[Xuloqoia]

Are you even a girl, though? How can I tell that you're not just a Russian Bot^TM?

Check my sig and you'll know.

Yeah, but what does "₴Ø₦₳₭ Ø₴" mean?

[Genivaria]

Nazi Germany desired the extermination of Slavs, the complete eradication of Poles as a nation, and the formation of a Reich spanning from Belgium to the Ural Mountains.

at most the German Empire wanted a vast network of puppet states who, besides providing a buffer with Russia, would also be captive customers of the German economy.

there are degrees to bad and the Nazis were far, far worse.

Yeah man ethnically cleansing Poles, Ukrainians, Belorussians, and Balts is just piffle really.

Reading is clearly difficult for some people.

[Salus Maior]

Tbh, the best WWI scenario is one where it doesn't happen at all.

[Salus Maior]

Tbh, the best WWI scenario is one where it doesn't happen at all.

there's also that

Russia and Austria-Hungary would have been much better off, for certain.

As well as most of the male generation at the time.

[Hanafuridake]

Self-absorbed question, but I wondered what posters thought of my beliefs and how they fit on the political spectrum?

This might horrify you for me to say this, but I think you and me are similar in a monarcho-spiritual-cultural trad mindset, but with distinction given by the difference in our faiths.

So, probably center-right? Tbh I haven't given much thought to where I fit on the spectrum.

Personally I like to think that my mindset has more in common with OT. Especially because I'm more of an Anglophile than a Latinophile.

[Salus Maior]

This might horrify you for me to say this, but I think you and me are similar in a monarcho-spiritual-cultural trad mindset, but with distinction given by the difference in our faiths.

So, probably center-right? Tbh I haven't given much thought to where I fit on the spectrum.

Personally I like to think that my mindset has more in common with OT. Especially because I'm more of an Anglophile than a Latinophile.

Tbh, I would say the same about me and OT as I just said about you.

We're aligned insofar as our belief in Monarchy, Spirituality, and Cultural Traditionalism are concerned. What makes us different is our faith tradition.

Does that make sense?

[Napkizemlja]

This might horrify you for me to say this, but I think you and me are similar in a monarcho-spiritual-cultural trad mindset, but with distinction given by the difference in our faiths.

So, probably center-right? Tbh I haven't given much thought to where I fit on the spectrum.

Personally I like to think that my mindset has more in common with OT. Especially because I'm more of an Anglophile than a Latinophile.

Why not be both?

Hispanglo gang gang.

[Hanafuridake]

Personally I like to think that my mindset has more in common with OT. Especially because I'm more of an Anglophile than a Latinophile.

Tbh, I would say the same about me and OT as I just said about you.

We're aligned insofar as our belief in Monarchy, Spirituality, and Cultural Traditionalism are concerned. What makes us different is our faith tradition.

Does that make sense?

I feel like there are much more differences, especially in regards to philosophy (I lean more towards hedonism than you do), but that would probably result in a lot of hairsplitting on my part.

[Torrocca]

Y'know what, OEP? You're absolutely, positively, undeniably right here. There's no way the Allied powers, who all went from being roped into a war they didn't want to accomplish the titular task of winning the deadliest war in human history, who built the largest navies, air forces, and armies the world ever saw, who managed to successfully conduct numerous seaborne invasions against heavily-defended lands, who created the strongest and largest worldwide network of logistics the world ever saw, simply never could have overcome this insurmountable odd of the Japanese Empire conducting a plan which included committing the majority of its forces against a single city and causing a complete collapse of its frontlines against China. There's simply no way some of the greatest military and political minds of the world at the time, who successfully defeated the Axis powers wholesale, could have ever hoped to do something as crazy as create new supply lines, or remodel their supply network to ensure the USSR didn't starve to death. There's no possible way the Allies could've successfully mounted a seaborne counterattack into FER from the United States. There's no possible way they could've done anything but shrug their shoulders and go, "welp, war's lost it looks like. No way we can come back from this situation at all. We might have millions of soldiers and billions or trillions of materiel to fight with, but nah we definitely can't fix this situation at all."

Y'know, your bullshit fantasies might have some debatable merit to them if you bothered to acknowledge the Allies as more than nondescript, passive punching bags that crumble like a pile of sawdust at the slightest inconvenience. I mean, it's not like you're talking about the worldwide alliance that managed to win a multi-continent world war against genocidal odds or anything.



Yeah, it's almost like wars have multiple factors or something and accounting any one singular thing (particularly a fantastically stupid military plan) to one side's victory is fucking stupid.

The Japanese recognized their own limitations, which is why they would have limited it to the Eastern and Northern Fronts.

They had plans in mind for a much grander offensive as well, which, to my knowledge, had some favorability among the high command.

As impressive as this appeared on paper, however, the Japanese were forced to acknowledge several harsh realities blocking the implementation of Hachi-Go in the near future. Specifically with regard to Concept B, the railway network in Manchuria had not been sufficiently expanded to facilitate such a far-reaching offensive and supply stocks on hand in the country were seriously below the required levels. Furthermore, the ongoing war in China precluded the concentration of the planned 50 divisions without fatally weakening the Japanese effort there. Additionally, Imperial General Headquarters concluded that in order to sustain a drive out to Lake Baikal, a fleet of some 200,000 trucks would be necessary,[24] a number more than twice as great as anything the entire Japanese military possessed at any given time.[25] Popular support for Concept B in IJA circles dissipated in 1939 after the Battle of Khalkhin Gol demonstrated the extensive challenges of supplying a sustained military commitment on even a relatively limited scale so far away from the nearest rail heads. From that point forward, Japanese offensive planning vis-a vis the USSR was chiefly focused on the Northern and Eastern fronts, with any advances in the West being limited to relatively modest gains on the far slope of the Great Khingan range.[26]

It's also really hard to get access to genuinely good logistics routes, Torra. There is a reason why despite all of the planning, the Allies in France still had to focus on preexisting port cities if they wanted to adequately supply their forces in 1944 and 1945. It's why retaking Antwerp was the primary goal of the Battle of the Bulge. It's why Vladivostok was so important. All of the equipment that would have been needed to beef up the Persian route (there is no way the Northern Route could have made up for the loss of Vladivostok) would be less equipment going to the Soviets and those resources having to take an even longer time to reach them. It wasn't just food, but critical industrial supplies that was being shipped into Vladivostok, things the Soviets desperately needed if they wanted to keep churning out equipment for the Red Army. You're right in disputing that it would have been a guaranteed Axis victory had they taken Vladivostok, but you acting like it wouldn't have made a difference is no better. It would have put the Soviets in a bind that would have tilted things further against the Soviets and there is no denying that. When your army has its rations cut in half, that doesn't bode well for fighting capabilities, morale, etc. Not to mention how the Central Asian troops (who were increasingly making up more and more of the Red Army as casualties mounted) would have felt with the Japanese right next door to where their families were and, given a situation where the Soviets decide to just leave the Japanese be, thinking that your own country is just leaving the door right open to your family. If they hadn't left them be, that's still quite a number of troops and equipment being diverted away from the front against the Germans.

The thing is, Nap, I'm not acting like or denying that it wouldn't've made a difference to the Allied war effort. My point is, though, that, if Vladivostok happened to fall into IJA hands, while it would've been disruptive to the Soviet war effort, perhaps harshly so against them (but not fatally so), there's more than plenty that the Allies could've done to fix that situation and turn things back around. The United States could've relatively easily launched a seaborne operation to retake Vladivostok, or more simply deployed troops behind Soviet lines in FER and mounted an offensive from there. The Kwantung Army simply wouldn't've been able to hold out against that; the planners themselves knew that an operation to take Vladivostok would require the reallocation of divisions from both the home islands and China, which they knew would be a fatal blow to their own war efforts in China and thus open up the serious possibility of a Chinese counterattack into Manchuria being coordinated with the USSR and possibly the USA and other Allied powers if they were involved - assuming Vladivostok had fallen - which would likely mean total destruction of the Kwantung Army. In the meantime, the other, active supply routes could've been reformed to focus predominantly if not entirely on food, industrial supplies, and oil for the Soviets, rather than those three things plus vehicles, weapons, etc. It would've hurt the Soviets, but it wouldn't've ended them; Nazi momentum was lost by the winter of 1941 and the frontlines were heavily overextended, and they only made piecemeal gains afterward. In all likelihood, the USSR would've been able to hold the line as it did in OTL - just at a greater cost because of the reduction in supplies - because of that and the fact that the Nazis were severely struggling to fix their own supply issues that included trains constantly being blown up and rear echelons being attacked and killed by partisans. Maybe the USSR wouldn't've been able to conduct counteroffensives, certainly not on the timetables it did IRL, but they'd certainly be able to hold the line while the situation in and around Vladivostok was unfucked.

Basically, suggesting the Axis could've won all of World War Two by doing this one cool trick that every 1 out of 8 Soviet leaders hates by taking over one singular city is absolutely ridiculous fantasy of the highest degree. And, funnily enough, it's what a lot of OEP's "muh superior Axis victory" scenarios hinge on.

[Salus Maior]

Personally I like to think that my mindset has more in common with OT. Especially because I'm more of an Anglophile than a Latinophile.

Why not be both?

Hispanglo gang gang.

Isn't that basically Belize?

[Salus Maior]

Tbh, I would say the same about me and OT as I just said about you.

We're aligned insofar as our belief in Monarchy, Spirituality, and Cultural Traditionalism are concerned. What makes us different is our faith tradition.

Does that make sense?

I feel like there are much more differences, especially in regards to philosophy (I lean more towards hedonism than you do), but that would probably result in a lot of hairsplitting on my part.

What do you mean by "hedonism"?

[Hanafuridake]

I feel like there are much more differences, especially in regards to philosophy (I lean more towards hedonism than you do), but that would probably result in a lot of hairsplitting on my part.

What do you mean by "hedonism"?

Mostly Epicurean, but also seeing emotions and their expression as ultimately good.

[Luminesa]

So basically centrism but with a pair of cool shades, then?

No that would be further up.

And in the end, we are all anime.

[Salus Maior]

What do you mean by "hedonism"?

Mostly Epicurean, but also seeing emotions and their expression as ultimately good.

I'm not entirely opposed to that, but admittedly I lean more into stoicism as an ideal.

[Salus Maior]

So basically centrism but with a pair of cool shades, then?

No that would be further up.

Is "long dead philosopher" interchangeable with long dead beatified monarch?

Cause if so I feel called out.

[Hanafuridake]

No that would be further up.

And in the end, we are all anime.

Maybe the real anime was the friends we made along the way.

[Napkizemlja]

If you want feels.

[Salus Maior]

If you want feels.

Is the common theme the failure of the modern state to ensure its own security in the face of a new age of terrorism and a-symmetrical warfare?