Cold War RP III (Closed.)

[Sarderia]

Nope, and I'm going to put it IC-ly.

yeah, Trump and Reagan and Nixon wasn't there in 1950. So no.

trump was around then. he ws born in 1949.
reagan was alive.
so was nixon.
do you want to be banned?

I found it very convenient that you made Republicans in the USA racist while they're pretty much liberal in 1950. And I found it also very convenient to have all of Venezuela rising up against USA so easily.

Do you have any personal issues with me, Math? Because the way I look it you're deliberately rigging the USA so f*cked up.

[The Baton Rouge Free State]

Yo Brazil, the first Nuclear plant wasn't built until 1951, so i'd remove that one from the list bruv.

[Mathuvan Union]

trump was around then. he ws born in 1949.
reagan was alive.
so was nixon.
do you want to be banned?

I found it very convenient that you made Republicans in the USA racist while they're pretty much liberal in 1950. And I found it also very convenient to have all of Venezuela rising up against USA so easily.

Do you have any personal issues with me, Math? Because the way I look it you're deliberately rigging the USA so f*cked up.

wrong republicans i was thinking about.
I'm not.
but venezuela liking you is totally unrealistic.

[Romextly]

which ones?

spitfires huricanes and jets.

Each hurricane will cost 8,500 pounds each

[Monsone]

1) I would not change significant historical events because that would just end horribly to my role. The Republicans did take a harder stance against racism and segregation in this timeline, primarily done by sponsoring organizations such as the NAACP and pushing for Plessy v. Ferguson laws to be implemented across all states, inlcuding the Deep South states. The Republicans basically held more influence in Congress than they had IRL, but they fail to turn over several important events such as the implementation of Jim Crow laws - but they are still pretty much seen as the liberal and anti-segregationist people. Republicans made most of the governors in US territories, where the population is mostly Hispanic.

2) Venezuela was made an exemption from the Jones Act in this timeline, so in a sense they enjoyed the freedom of trade as well as the benefits being an US territory such as greater US investment, job growth and expansion, and an overall increase in GDP per Capita throughout the years - since there is no maritime laws that inhibit its growth. Since Venezuela has already a native government (similar to a US Territory, but with the exemption that only the Venezuelan Congress could pass significant laws concerning Venezuela), their citizens has US citizenship, and the only Washington influence being in foreign affairs and the military, they are already independent, of sorts. I'd argue that the benefits Venezuela has being a quasi-US territory reached all classes of society, not just the white citizens (which constitutes about 49% of the population). The remainder, which is of Mestizo descent, do hold significant positions in the Venezuelan government and economy as well - because they has historically been so, and Washington did not interfere at all on how Venezuelans are treated by their government - all they cared about was to gain a foothold, an internationally recognized US dominion present in South America, so that the other South American nations could look at Venezuela's success and align themselves more with the United States than the other superpowers of the region (British Empire, Brazillian Empire, Germany, and now the Soviet Union).

The US already has a welfare program since 1935, and the Red Scare, while it certainly had a great effect to the population, did not erase that system entirely. In fact, we would see the increase of more left-leaning policies of America during the administrations of Eisenhower, Kennedy, and LBJ (Medicare for example), and while McCarthy was certainly a very influential and profound figure in American politics, the line of social safety nets that FDR put into place wouldn't simply disappear because of him.

1) Mute point. You can claim all you want, but the oppressed will want actions and not lip service. The Republicans can claim whatever they want, but of they don't act on it, they are really not much better than Democrats.

2) Thanks for the fuel to start a revolution and restore democracy in the world.

3) I'd hardly call Social Security a welfare system. To this day, the USA lacks a lot in terms of a welfare net. In 1950, the "rich" USA has no socialized medical system, while war-torn France and Germany have had said systems since the 19th century. The USA hardly has a welfare system at the moment, let alone in the 1950s. Sure you have Social Security, but in reality that is pretty much the extent of it. You barely have a welfare system (as the USA), so don't act like it's such a great system because it is pretty bad compared to what the rest of the world has.

[Arvenia]

I'm going to post on the IC soon, so I wonder which one of your countries would want to send a message to my country.

do you have jets?
i want them.
give them
i want them.

I got the Breda-Pittoni BP.471 (which is basically transport) and the Fiat G.80 (a fighter aircraft that first flew in 1951).

[Sarderia]

I found it very convenient that you made Republicans in the USA racist while they're pretty much liberal in 1950. And I found it also very convenient to have all of Venezuela rising up against USA so easily.

Do you have any personal issues with me, Math? Because the way I look it you're deliberately rigging the USA so f*cked up.

wrong republicans i was thinking about.
I'm not.
but venezuela liking you is totally unrealistic.

Yeah, but the majority certainly don't want sudden independence as well. My reasoning's up there. Venezuela didn't like the US, not in the slightest, but they don't hate the US either. You made this look like you're giving it freely to the other player.

[Monsone]

I asked the USA for money for tanks and military equipment and I offered a good deal in return. And I got no response. Time to see if the USSR is willing to sell some tanks and give aid. Or I'll just build my own tanks, even if they cost more.

What you asked is basically US$426 Million worth of tanks, and that would need another year or two at minimum to produce, not to mention America is stockpiling tanks as well. I'll respond it in a while (I did not notice it at first, sorry).

Edit: Also, a side note regarding my previous replies. If the rebels are more right-wing and willing to adopt a Capitalist, NATO-aligned government, the US would probably start a swift transition process to hand them over principal government positions. If not, I think I will release Venezuela gradually from US control, culminating in 1953 when Eisenhower would finally sign the Constitution of Venezuela.

No problem. It is not an urgent order, but a necessary order.

[Monsone]

wrong republicans i was thinking about.
I'm not.
but venezuela liking you is totally unrealistic.

Yeah, but the majority certainly don't want sudden independence as well. My reasoning's up there. Venezuela didn't like the US, not in the slightest, but they don't hate the US either. You made this look like you're giving it freely to the other player.

Venezuela only hates the USA because of Chavez and Maduro. Before that, they where very pro-USA.

[Sarderia]

1) I would not change significant historical events because that would just end horribly to my role. The Republicans did take a harder stance against racism and segregation in this timeline, primarily done by sponsoring organizations such as the NAACP and pushing for Plessy v. Ferguson laws to be implemented across all states, inlcuding the Deep South states. The Republicans basically held more influence in Congress than they had IRL, but they fail to turn over several important events such as the implementation of Jim Crow laws - but they are still pretty much seen as the liberal and anti-segregationist people. Republicans made most of the governors in US territories, where the population is mostly Hispanic.

2) Venezuela was made an exemption from the Jones Act in this timeline, so in a sense they enjoyed the freedom of trade as well as the benefits being an US territory such as greater US investment, job growth and expansion, and an overall increase in GDP per Capita throughout the years - since there is no maritime laws that inhibit its growth. Since Venezuela has already a native government (similar to a US Territory, but with the exemption that only the Venezuelan Congress could pass significant laws concerning Venezuela), their citizens has US citizenship, and the only Washington influence being in foreign affairs and the military, they are already independent, of sorts. I'd argue that the benefits Venezuela has being a quasi-US territory reached all classes of society, not just the white citizens (which constitutes about 49% of the population). The remainder, which is of Mestizo descent, do hold significant positions in the Venezuelan government and economy as well - because they has historically been so, and Washington did not interfere at all on how Venezuelans are treated by their government - all they cared about was to gain a foothold, an internationally recognized US dominion present in South America, so that the other South American nations could look at Venezuela's success and align themselves more with the United States than the other superpowers of the region (British Empire, Brazillian Empire, Germany, and now the Soviet Union).

The US already has a welfare program since 1935, and the Red Scare, while it certainly had a great effect to the population, did not erase that system entirely. In fact, we would see the increase of more left-leaning policies of America during the administrations of Eisenhower, Kennedy, and LBJ (Medicare for example), and while McCarthy was certainly a very influential and profound figure in American politics, the line of social safety nets that FDR put into place wouldn't simply disappear because of him.

1) Mute point. You can claim all you want, but the oppressed will want actions and not lip service. The Republicans can claim whatever they want, but of they don't act on it, they are really not much better than Democrats.

2) Thanks for the fuel to start a revolution and restore democracy in the world.

3) I'd hardly call Social Security a welfare system. To this day, the USA lacks a lot in terms of a welfare net. In 1950, the "rich" USA has no socialized medical system, while war-torn France and Germany have had said systems since the 19th century. The USA hardly has a welfare system at the moment, let alone in the 1950s. Sure you have Social Security, but in reality that is pretty much the extent of it. You barely have a welfare system (as the USA), so don't act like it's such a great system because it is pretty bad compared to what the rest of the world has.

1) That's because only Democrat Deep South states implement Jim Crow in this time. There's little to no segregation happening massively in say, New York and New England, where Republicans has the control.

2) Eh, whatever. A large portion of them are content with the status quo.

3) It's a very, very lacking system, but there are several, albeit small benefits of it compared to the previous Venezuela before US rule, where it's pretty much survival of the fittest.

Yeah, but the majority certainly don't want sudden independence as well. My reasoning's up there. Venezuela didn't like the US, not in the slightest, but they don't hate the US either. You made this look like you're giving it freely to the other player.

Venezuela only hates the USA because of Chavez and Maduro. Before that, they where very pro-USA.

Anyway, I'm planning to release Venezuela gradually as a pro NATO state as well.

[Greater Liverpool]

wrong republicans i was thinking about.
I'm not.
but venezuela liking you is totally unrealistic.

Yeah, but the majority certainly don't want sudden independence as well. My reasoning's up there. Venezuela didn't like the US, not in the slightest, but they don't hate the US either. You made this look like you're giving it freely to the other player.

You are the single biggest economy in the world you can maintain such a long war as America. Yes Venezuelans would want independence it is the 1950s the height of Anti-imperialist thought and when you have Venezuela the home of one of the most important revolutions in Latin America you can bet your bottom dollar that they want the independence that or you have sunk massive amounts of money into the region at the best of Americans who I pretty sure would vote anyone out that would do such a thing.

[Sarderia]

Yeah, but the majority certainly don't want sudden independence as well. My reasoning's up there. Venezuela didn't like the US, not in the slightest, but they don't hate the US either. You made this look like you're giving it freely to the other player.

You are the single biggest economy in the world you can maintain such a long war as America. Yes Venezuelans would want independence it is the 1950s the height of Anti-imperialist thought and when you have Venezuela the home of one of the most important revolutions in Latin America you can bet your bottom dollar that they want the independence that or you have sunk massive amounts of money into the region at the best of Americans who I pretty sure would vote anyone out that would do such a thing.

Some of them, of course. But not all of them.

It's really not too important anyways to Washington, because they're going to release Venezuela and keep a dictator on the President's seat as an US puppet.

[Greater Liverpool]

You are the single biggest economy in the world you can maintain such a long war as America. Yes Venezuelans would want independence it is the 1950s the height of Anti-imperialist thought and when you have Venezuela the home of one of the most important revolutions in Latin America you can bet your bottom dollar that they want the independence that or you have sunk massive amounts of money into the region at the best of Americans who I pretty sure would vote anyone out that would do such a thing.

Some of them, of course. But not all of them.

It's really not too important anyways to Washington, because they're going to release Venezuela and keep a dictator on the President's seat as an US puppet.

And they are just going to accept a dictator as an US puppet after you spent the better part of years building them up to a regard that it would be incredibly hard for them to maintain such a thing

[Wasi State]

I don't see why any of this should be an issue, conflict drives RPs (in the IC), why not fight out a conflict in the IC instead of trying to prevent it from even happening here in the OOC? It's basically a cop out to be frank, this IC tension with the US and South America should be allowed to play out.

[The Baton Rouge Free State]

I don't see why any of this should be an issue, conflict drives RPs (in the IC), why not fight out a conflict in the IC instead of trying to prevent it from even happening here in the OOC? It's basically a cop out to be frank, this IC tension with the US and South America should be allowed to play out.

From my understanding the argument isn't about whether the situation could continue, but whether its even plausible to have gotten to this point in the first place.

[Wasi State]

I don't see why any of this should be an issue, conflict drives RPs (in the IC), why not fight out a conflict in the IC instead of trying to prevent it from even happening here in the OOC? It's basically a cop out to be frank, this IC tension with the US and South America should be allowed to play out.

From my understanding the argument isn't about whether the situation could continue, but whether its even plausible to have gotten to this point in the first place.

See now that's just inconsistency to keep complaining about it, there's already plenty of implausible things that have happened in this RP, why are we deciding to pick and choose now what is deemed 'plausible?'

[Mathuvan Union]

I don't see why any of this should be an issue, conflict drives RPs (in the IC), why not fight out a conflict in the IC instead of trying to prevent it from even happening here in the OOC? It's basically a cop out to be frank, this IC tension with the US and South America should be allowed to play out.

From my understanding the argument isn't about whether the situation could continue, but whether its even plausible to have gotten to this point in the first place.

I had issues with the history of the US from the get go, having a succesful nicuagran revo in 1913 isn't really plausible.
the american military was tiny then.

[Greater Liverpool]

I don't see why any of this should be an issue, conflict drives RPs (in the IC), why not fight out a conflict in the IC instead of trying to prevent it from even happening here in the OOC? It's basically a cop out to be frank, this IC tension with the US and South America should be allowed to play out.

From my understanding the argument isn't about whether the situation could continue, but whether its even plausible to have gotten to this point in the first place.

the issue lies in what America is saying. He is making the argument that he would win completely out on the fact that he is stronger and has most of the public support in the country and as such my movement would never gain any real traction and as a result will never be a real threat to them or their control.

[Greater Liverpool]

pretty much he godmodding the situation as to have complete control over Venezuela

[Mathuvan Union]

From my understanding the argument isn't about whether the situation could continue, but whether its even plausible to have gotten to this point in the first place.

the issue lies in what America is saying. He is making the argument that he would win completely out on the fact that he is stronger and has most of the public support in the country and as such my movement would never gain any real traction and as a result will never be a real threat to them or their control.

they may be stronger, but as we learned IRL in Vietnam, that doesn't matter much when the opposition has tonnes of motivated forces

[Sarderia]

Some of them, of course. But not all of them.

It's really not too important anyways to Washington, because they're going to release Venezuela and keep a dictator on the President's seat as an US puppet.

And they are just going to accept a dictator as an US puppet after you spent the better part of years building them up to a regard that it would be incredibly hard for them to maintain such a thing

I don't understand your words. US rule in Venezuela has been marked with consistent economic growth and relative stability. Now they have a swift, quick, and relatively peaceful independence process, they have a strongman, benevolent yet authoritarian ruler (that is in no way a caudillo) as the new leader, and they would stay in great terms with the US. Why would they want another regime to take its place?

From my understanding the argument isn't about whether the situation could continue, but whether its even plausible to have gott
en to this point in the first place.

the issue lies in what America is saying. He is making the argument that he would win completely out on the fact that he is stronger and has most of the public support in the country and as such my movement would never gain any real traction and as a result will never be a real threat to them or their control.

When did I say Venezuela completely love and be subservient to the US? I condone your rebellion, there's even a chance of about 20 to 30 or even 40% of the population that want full independence, but certainly not all.

After all, the US is going to give them independence soon enough.

[Mathuvan Union]

And they are just going to accept a dictator as an US puppet after you spent the better part of years building them up to a regard that it would be incredibly hard for them to maintain such a thing

I don't understand your words. US rule in Venezuela has been marked with consistent economic growth and relative stability. Now they have a swift, quick, and relatively peaceful independence process, they have a strongman, benevolent yet authoritarian ruler (that is in no way a caudillo) as the new leader, and they would stay in great terms with the US. Why would they want another regime to take its place?

the issue lies in what America is saying. He is making the argument that he would win completely out on the fact that he is stronger and has most of the public support in the country and as such my movement would never gain any real traction and as a result will never be a real threat to them or their control.

When did I say Venezuela completely love and be subservient to the US? I condone your rebellion, there's even a chance of about 20 to 30 or even 40% of the population that want full independence, but certainly not all.

After all, the US is going to give them independence soon enough.

your independence is equivalent to Australia's independence in 1901.
not really independence.

[Greater Liverpool]

the issue lies in what America is saying. He is making the argument that he would win completely out on the fact that he is stronger and has most of the public support in the country and as such my movement would never gain any real traction and as a result will never be a real threat to them or their control.

they may be stronger, but as we learned IRL in Vietnam, that doesn't matter much when the opposition has tonnes of motivated forces

That is pretty much I wanna go with a Vietnam situation. But in South America and I feel it would be a lot closer since it is right on America doorstep and I would think that would still be sympathies for the Americans

[Wasi State]

the issue lies in what America is saying. He is making the argument that he would win completely out on the fact that he is stronger and has most of the public support in the country and as such my movement would never gain any real traction and as a result will never be a real threat to them or their control.

they may be stronger, but as we learned IRL in Vietnam, that doesn't matter much when the opposition has tonnes of motivated forces

And foreign aid on top of it.

Like obviously this isn't going to be a conventional war, this is all building up to be this world's asymmetrical 50s war. Like the French's Indochina war in OTL.

[Sarderia]

I don't understand your words. US rule in Venezuela has been marked with consistent economic growth and relative stability. Now they have a swift, quick, and relatively peaceful independence process, they have a strongman, benevolent yet authoritarian ruler (that is in no way a caudillo) as the new leader, and they would stay in great terms with the US. Why would they want another regime to take its place?



When did I say Venezuela completely love and be subservient to the US? I condone your rebellion, there's even a chance of about 20 to 30 or even 40% of the population that want full independence, but certainly not all.

After all, the US is going to give them independence soon enough.

your independence is equivalent to Australia's independence in 1901.
not really independence.

More on Australia Act 1986 than 1901. After all, you haven't saw the IC post yet, so don't make assumptions.