Cold War RP III (Closed.)

[Mathuvan Union]

Needles to say:

No major history changes after 1900. Unless your country was colonised after 1900

I'd say this is a major change. But I'll let the OP decide.

Technically Venezuela was colonized in 1900. If it's not, I'll just roll back the date all the way to 1890

By your own nation. That doesn’t really count.
1) how did you colonise Venezuela
2) this is denied if above question doesn’t make sense.

[Slaver Pirates of Vaas]

Because Puerto Rico was a Spanish territory taken in the Spanish-American war, while Domincan Republic applied for statehood to Ulysses S. Grant. Eventually they'll become a state as well, just like the Mexican territories that the US gained.

Perhaps I wasn't being very clear. The question I was asking is why Puerto Rico is not a state irl. It is almost solely because of the ethnic and cultural makeup of the territory. With this in mind, why would a 1950s United States admit territories with vastly different ethic makeup into the Union as states when the current United States can't so much as even do the same with Puerto Rico?

[Sarderia]

Technically Venezuela was colonized in 1900. If it's not, I'll just roll back the date all the way to 1890

The US Army was a joke in 1890. Trapdoor rifles where still standard issue when smokeless powder bolt-action rifles where being adopted by most major powers.

My point is, the US Army would be unable to conqueror Venezuela in 1890. And would likely be unable to until after the Spanish-American War.

At least you could have the initiative to check out the facts. They used 1885 Remington-Lee and Krag-Jorgensen rifles, which were both bolt actions comparable to the Lee-Enfield rifle the British Empire has. Venezuela's Army would more than likely be in an even sorrier state than the US Army.

Also, the US didn't outright invade Venezuela, if you check out my lore, they supported a coup and a brief civil war, and the Dictator installed himself as the President of Venezuela.

Technically Venezuela was colonized in 1900. If it's not, I'll just roll back the date all the way to 1890

By your own nation. That doesn’t really count.
1) how did you colonise Venezuela
2) this is denied if above question doesn’t make sense.

"That doesn't really count". Yeah, great. I followed your rules and now you toss it over like it doesn't matter. Next time try to write down additional words in the end of that sentence, something like "If you release a puppet that was part of your nation before I don't like it and you can't do it".

On 1895, with the Venezuela Crisis of 1895 over Guyana with Great Britain flaring up, President Grover Cleveland did not want to see another American nation partitioned again by Great Britain, because it would be a hard violation of the Monroe Doctrine. While the United States intervention in 1898 failed to gain Venezuela the claimed territory, as both the US and Venezuela did not want to risk war against Britain, they did secure the rights of Venezuelans to remain there and colonize the land, as well as Britain giving Venezuela US$5 million to settle the matter down. The next year would see President Joaquin Crespo killed, and a series of civil conflicts followed his departure, with numerous caudillos fighting for the Presidency. Naturally, the US intervened to prevent any other European nation from placing Venezuela in its sphere of interest. The US backed Cipriano Castro, a caudillo from the Andean regions, and smuggled him weapons from both Maracaibo and Colombia, as well as placing the US Navy to blockade Venezuela's coastal cities. Eventually in 1900, Castro became President courtesy of US support, and he aligned Venezuela more with the US. Castro reached Washington when the Venezuelan Crisis of 1902-3 (that was caused by Venezuela's inability to pay its debt) and the US subsequently paid most Venezuelan debt, and placed US Navy warships in Venezuelan ports to enforce Castro's rule. When Castro was sick, the US propelled Juan Vicente Gomez to the President's seat, and the US Army helped reform the Venezuelan Army - which at that time composed of mostly Castro's Andean supporters. Over time, the combination of US help, military dictatorship, and the succession of leaders from the Andean clique (hand-picked by the oligarchy and the US Ambassador) such as Lopez Contreras and Medina Angarita ensured that Venezuela remained an US puppet in all but name. Angarita did not legalize political parties, therefore Romulo Betancourt never rose into power, and Angarita's dictatorship continued to the present day. Recently, however, Angarita retired because of bad health and passed the Presidency to Anton Castillo, the only non-Andean President from the dictatorship.

Is that enough?

[Mathuvan Union]

The US Army was a joke in 1890. Trapdoor rifles where still standard issue when smokeless powder bolt-action rifles where being adopted by most major powers.

My point is, the US Army would be unable to conqueror Venezuela in 1890. And would likely be unable to until after the Spanish-American War.

At least you could have the initiative to check out the facts. They used 1885 Remington-Lee and Krag-Jorgensen rifles, which were both bolt actions comparable to the Lee-Enfield rifle the British Empire has. Venezuela's Army would more than likely be in an even sorrier state than the US Army.

Also, the US didn't outright invade Venezuela, if you check out my lore, they supported a coup and a brief civil war, and the Dictator installed himself as the President of Venezuela.

By your own nation. That doesn’t really count.
1) how did you colonise Venezuela
2) this is denied if above question doesn’t make sense.

"That doesn't really count". Yeah, great. I followed your rules and now you toss it over like it doesn't matter. Next time try to write down additional words in the end of that sentence, something like "If you release a puppet that was part of your nation before I don't like it and you can't do it".

On 1895, with the Venezuela Crisis of 1895 over Guyana with Great Britain flaring up, President Grover Cleveland did not want to see another American nation partitioned again by Great Britain, because it would be a hard violation of the Monroe Doctrine. While the United States intervention in 1898 failed to gain Venezuela the claimed territory, as both the US and Venezuela did not want to risk war against Britain, they did secure the rights of Venezuelans to remain there and colonize the land, as well as Britain giving Venezuela US$5 million to settle the matter down. The next year would see President Joaquin Crespo killed, and a series of civil conflicts followed his departure, with numerous caudillos fighting for the Presidency. Naturally, the US intervened to prevent any other European nation from placing Venezuela in its sphere of interest. The US backed Cipriano Castro, a caudillo from the Andean regions, and smuggled him weapons from both Maracaibo and Colombia, as well as placing the US Navy to blockade Venezuela's coastal cities. Eventually in 1900, Castro became President courtesy of US support, and he aligned Venezuela more with the US. Castro reached Washington when the Venezuelan Crisis of 1902-3 (that was caused by Venezuela's inability to pay its debt) and the US subsequently paid most Venezuelan debt, and placed US Navy warships in Venezuelan ports to enforce Castro's rule. When Castro was sick, the US propelled Juan Vicente Gomez to the President's seat, and the US Army helped reform the Venezuelan Army - which at that time composed of mostly Castro's Andean supporters. Over time, the combination of US help, military dictatorship, and the succession of leaders from the Andean clique (hand-picked by the oligarchy and the US Ambassador) such as Lopez Contreras and Medina Angarita ensured that Venezuela remained an US puppet in all but name. Angarita did not legalize political parties, therefore Romulo Betancourt never rose into power, and Angarita's dictatorship continued to the present day. Recently, however, Angarita retired because of bad health and passed the Presidency to Anton Castillo, the only non-Andean President from the dictatorship.

Is that enough?

For one, the rules are clearly stipulated. It’s just not seeming all to right to alter history on a country you somehow conquered, implausible in the first place, considering the size of the American Military at that time, and the feeling for Venezuelan Nationalism and Independence.
The nation wasn’t colonised after 1900 according to what I see.

Fine, that history is fine.

[Sarderia]

Because Puerto Rico was a Spanish territory taken in the Spanish-American war, while Domincan Republic applied for statehood to Ulysses S. Grant. Eventually they'll become a state as well, just like the Mexican territories that the US gained.

Perhaps I wasn't being very clear. The question I was asking is why Puerto Rico is not a state irl. It is almost solely because of the ethnic and cultural makeup of the territory. With this in mind, why would a 1950s United States admit territories with vastly different ethic makeup into the Union as states when the current United States can't so much as even do the same with Puerto Rico?

No, it wasn't because of the ethnic and cultural makeup - if that is the case, they wouldn't allow New Mexico to be a state as well. Puerto Rico had statehood referendums in 1967 and 1998, but the residents voted to remain a Commonwealth. The Dominican Republic became a US state because they applied for statehood to President Grant, who then passed it to Congress, who approved the agreement and start the DR's process of joining the Union - while Puerto Rico was taken from Spain in a war. It's purely legal matters.

At least you could have the initiative to check out the facts. They used 1885 Remington-Lee and Krag-Jorgensen rifles, which were both bolt actions comparable to the Lee-Enfield rifle the British Empire has. Venezuela's Army would more than likely be in an even sorrier state than the US Army.

Also, the US didn't outright invade Venezuela, if you check out my lore, they supported a coup and a brief civil war, and the Dictator installed himself as the President of Venezuela.

"That doesn't really count". Yeah, great. I followed your rules and now you toss it over like it doesn't matter. Next time try to write down additional words in the end of that sentence, something like "If you release a puppet that was part of your nation before I don't like it and you can't do it".

On 1895, with the Venezuela Crisis of 1895 over Guyana with Great Britain flaring up, President Grover Cleveland did not want to see another American nation partitioned again by Great Britain, because it would be a hard violation of the Monroe Doctrine. While the United States intervention in 1898 failed to gain Venezuela the claimed territory, as both the US and Venezuela did not want to risk war against Britain, they did secure the rights of Venezuelans to remain there and colonize the land, as well as Britain giving Venezuela US$5 million to settle the matter down. The next year would see President Joaquin Crespo killed, and a series of civil conflicts followed his departure, with numerous caudillos fighting for the Presidency. Naturally, the US intervened to prevent any other European nation from placing Venezuela in its sphere of interest. The US backed Cipriano Castro, a caudillo from the Andean regions, and smuggled him weapons from both Maracaibo and Colombia, as well as placing the US Navy to blockade Venezuela's coastal cities. Eventually in 1900, Castro became President courtesy of US support, and he aligned Venezuela more with the US. Castro reached Washington when the Venezuelan Crisis of 1902-3 (that was caused by Venezuela's inability to pay its debt) and the US subsequently paid most Venezuelan debt, and placed US Navy warships in Venezuelan ports to enforce Castro's rule. When Castro was sick, the US propelled Juan Vicente Gomez to the President's seat, and the US Army helped reform the Venezuelan Army - which at that time composed of mostly Castro's Andean supporters. Over time, the combination of US help, military dictatorship, and the succession of leaders from the Andean clique (hand-picked by the oligarchy and the US Ambassador) such as Lopez Contreras and Medina Angarita ensured that Venezuela remained an US puppet in all but name. Angarita did not legalize political parties, therefore Romulo Betancourt never rose into power, and Angarita's dictatorship continued to the present day. Recently, however, Angarita retired because of bad health and passed the Presidency to Anton Castillo, the only non-Andean President from the dictatorship.

Is that enough?

For one, the rules are clearly stipulated. It’s just not seeming all to right to alter history on a country you somehow conquered, implausible in the first place, considering the size of the American Military at that time, and the feeling for Venezuelan Nationalism and Independence.
The nation wasn’t colonised after 1900 according to what I see.

Fine, that history is fine.

The US never colonized Venezuela, nor conquered it. It clearly states that an US-backed caudillo became a dictator in Venezuela the way Soviets backed Kim Il-Sung, but this time they had an even closer relationship because the US paid nearly all of Venezuelan debt, subsidized their projects, and US officials became slightly involved in the dictatorship regime. Venezuela was independent the whole time, albeit effectively a proxy of the US foreign policy.

[Mathuvan Union]

Perhaps I wasn't being very clear. The question I was asking is why Puerto Rico is not a state irl. It is almost solely because of the ethnic and cultural makeup of the territory. With this in mind, why would a 1950s United States admit territories with vastly different ethic makeup into the Union as states when the current United States can't so much as even do the same with Puerto Rico?

No, it wasn't because of the ethnic and cultural makeup - if that is the case, they wouldn't allow New Mexico to be a state as well. Puerto Rico had statehood referendums in 1967 and 1998, but the residents voted to remain a Commonwealth. The Dominican Republic became a US state because they applied for statehood to President Grant, who then passed it to Congress, who approved the agreement and start the DR's process of joining the Union - while Puerto Rico was taken from Spain in a war. It's purely legal matters.

For one, the rules are clearly stipulated. It’s just not seeming all to right to alter history on a country you somehow conquered, implausible in the first place, considering the size of the American Military at that time, and the feeling for Venezuelan Nationalism and Independence.
The nation wasn’t colonised after 1900 according to what I see.

Fine, that history is fine.

The US never colonized Venezuela, nor conquered it. It clearly states that an US-backed caudillo became a dictator in Venezuela the way Soviets backed Kim Il-Sung, but this time they had an even closer relationship because the US paid nearly all of Venezuelan debt, subsidized their projects, and US officials became slightly involved in the dictatorship regime. Venezuela was independent the whole time, albeit effectively a proxy of the US foreign policy.

They certainly satellited Venezuela. Why do you keep italising Caudillo?
I don’t get that.
Basically, what you’re saying, they just North Korea’d This regime, and basically taken it over with US officials, US finding stuff willy-nilly, and strengthening relations.

Though what I don’t understand is how the dictator got to power. The US by no means had the funds to support a despot take over in Venezuela, the Secret Service wasn’t even a thing in name yet.
Nor the CIA. or any special ops teams of any kind.

[Sarderia]

No, it wasn't because of the ethnic and cultural makeup - if that is the case, they wouldn't allow New Mexico to be a state as well. Puerto Rico had statehood referendums in 1967 and 1998, but the residents voted to remain a Commonwealth. The Dominican Republic became a US state because they applied for statehood to President Grant, who then passed it to Congress, who approved the agreement and start the DR's process of joining the Union - while Puerto Rico was taken from Spain in a war. It's purely legal matters.

The US never colonized Venezuela, nor conquered it. It clearly states that an US-backed caudillo became a dictator in Venezuela the way Soviets backed Kim Il-Sung, but this time they had an even closer relationship because the US paid nearly all of Venezuelan debt, subsidized their projects, and US officials became slightly involved in the dictatorship regime. Venezuela was independent the whole time, albeit effectively a proxy of the US foreign policy.

They certainly satellited Venezuela. Why do you keep italising Caudillo?
I don’t get that.
Basically, what you’re saying, they just North Korea’d This regime, and basically taken it over.

Yeah, the US satellited Venezuela and installed a series of dictators. The figures I stated are all Venezuelan Presidents IRL (except for Anton Castillo), but for the sake of alternate lore, they were all US-backed leaders.

Caudillo is a Spanish language term for strongman.

[Mathuvan Union]

They certainly satellited Venezuela. Why do you keep italising Caudillo?
I don’t get that.
Basically, what you’re saying, they just North Korea’d This regime, and basically taken it over.

Yeah, the US satellited Venezuela and installed a series of dictators. The figures I stated are all Venezuelan Presidents IRL (except for Anton Castillo), but for the sake of alternate lore, they were all US-backed leaders.

Caudillo is a Spanish language term for strongman.

1) I understand what caudillo means, but why are you italicising it?
2) see my edits to the post. There a few more things up there.

Honestly, how did you even get this to happen? I need an answer to this.

[Mathuvan Union]

April-May

Also I’ll be posting starting tomorrow. Expect me as a regular on the IC

[Monsone]

The US Army was a joke in 1890. Trapdoor rifles where still standard issue when smokeless powder bolt-action rifles where being adopted by most major powers.

My point is, the US Army would be unable to conqueror Venezuela in 1890. And would likely be unable to until after the Spanish-American War.

At least you could have the initiative to check out the facts. They used 1885 Remington-Lee and Krag-Jorgensen rifles, which were both bolt actions comparable to the Lee-Enfield rifle the British Empire has. Venezuela's Army would more than likely be in an even sorrier state than the US Army.

Also, the US didn't outright invade Venezuela, if you check out my lore, they supported a coup and a brief civil war, and the Dictator installed himself as the President of Venezuela.

The Krag-Jorgensen is the Springfield M1892 in US Army nomenclature. It was a rifle adopted in 1892, not 1890. And the 1885 Remington-Lee was never used by the US Army, just the Navy (and even then it was a pretty average rifle). In reality, the US Army's service rifles where the Springfield M1888, M1873, and M1884. All black powder trapdoor rifles. In comparison, the Venezuelans had the bolt-action repeating Mauser M1871/84 (though it was still a black powder rifle) gives the Venezuelans the advantage in terms of the rate of fire.

And maybe don't insult people when you yourself didn't get the facts straight.

[Mathuvan Union]

At least you could have the initiative to check out the facts. They used 1885 Remington-Lee and Krag-Jorgensen rifles, which were both bolt actions comparable to the Lee-Enfield rifle the British Empire has. Venezuela's Army would more than likely be in an even sorrier state than the US Army.

Also, the US didn't outright invade Venezuela, if you check out my lore, they supported a coup and a brief civil war, and the Dictator installed himself as the President of Venezuela.

The Krag-Jorgensen is the Springfield M1892 in US Army nomenclature. It was a rifle adopted in 1892, not 1890. And the 1885 Remington-Lee was never used by the US Army, just the Navy (and even then it was a pretty average rifle). In reality, the US Army's service rifles where the Springfield M1888, M1873, and M1884. All black powder trapdoor rifles. In comparison, the Venezuelans had the bolt-action repeating Mauser M1871/84 (though it was still a black powder rifle) gives the Venezuelans the advantage in terms of the rate of fire.

And maybe don't insult people when you yourself didn't get the facts straight.

Not only that, but the issue of supply chain comes into play. If the Venezuelans played their cards right, the Americans wouldn’t be able to get supplies considering they’d have to ship it from America.

[Sarderia]

No, it wasn't because of the ethnic and cultural makeup - if that is the case, they wouldn't allow New Mexico to be a state as well. Puerto Rico had statehood referendums in 1967 and 1998, but the residents voted to remain a Commonwealth. The Dominican Republic became a US state because they applied for statehood to President Grant, who then passed it to Congress, who approved the agreement and start the DR's process of joining the Union - while Puerto Rico was taken from Spain in a war. It's purely legal matters.

The US never colonized Venezuela, nor conquered it. It clearly states that an US-backed caudillo became a dictator in Venezuela the way Soviets backed Kim Il-Sung, but this time they had an even closer relationship because the US paid nearly all of Venezuelan debt, subsidized their projects, and US officials became slightly involved in the dictatorship regime. Venezuela was independent the whole time, albeit effectively a proxy of the US foreign policy.

They certainly satellited Venezuela. Why do you keep italising Caudillo?
I don’t get that.
Basically, what you’re saying, they just North Korea’d This regime, and basically taken it over with US officials, US finding stuff willy-nilly, and strengthening relations.

Though what I don’t understand is how the dictator got to power. The US by no means had the funds to support a despot take over in Venezuela, the Secret Service wasn’t even a thing in name yet.
Nor the CIA. or any special ops teams of any kind.

With or without US support, Cipriano Castro would have been President anyway, because he did in real life. The US basically just accelerated his campaign, by providing funds (the US was one of the world's largest economies at that time), and weapons (from Colombia). They also used the US Navy, which while certainly lackluster compared to the European powers, was very effective against the meager Venezuelan Navy, to enfore Castro's rule. In addition to that, the US solved two Venezuelan debt crises using US funds, thus making Venezuela heavily indebted to the US. Since Washington is more interested in having a satellite in South America, they did not pursue Venezuela to return their debts and blockade the coasts - which happened IRL - but instead basically making Castro and his successors proxies of the US government. It's a win-win situation for both Castro and the US; the caudillo get to rule Venezuela as he wish, and the US get to have an important ally and backer in South America.

At least you could have the initiative to check out the facts. They used 1885 Remington-Lee and Krag-Jorgensen rifles, which were both bolt actions comparable to the Lee-Enfield rifle the British Empire has. Venezuela's Army would more than likely be in an even sorrier state than the US Army.

Also, the US didn't outright invade Venezuela, if you check out my lore, they supported a coup and a brief civil war, and the Dictator installed himself as the President of Venezuela.

The Krag-Jorgensen is the Springfield M1892 in US Army nomenclature. It was a rifle adopted in 1892, not 1890. And the 1885 Remington-Lee was never used by the US Army, just the Navy (and even then it was a pretty average rifle). In reality, the US Army's service rifles where the Springfield M1888, M1873, and M1884. All black powder trapdoor rifles. In comparison, the Venezuelans had the bolt-action repeating Mauser M1871/84 (though it was still a black powder rifle) gives the Venezuelans the advantage in terms of the rate of fire.

And maybe don't insult people when you yourself didn't get the facts straight.

It did saw limited action with the US Navy, and the US Navy was the principal component in the US intervention. By 1895, the US military standard rifle was the Krag-Jorgensen and it's already been in production by Springfield for 3 years. Additionally, the US military never fought Venezuelans directly; they just supplied weapons and funds to the strongest caudillo at that time (including the Krag-Jorgensen rifles, which would put Castro's forces at an advantage compared to other Venezuelan caudillos).

The Krag-Jorgensen is the Springfield M1892 in US Army nomenclature. It was a rifle adopted in 1892, not 1890. And the 1885 Remington-Lee was never used by the US Army, just the Navy (and even then it was a pretty average rifle). In reality, the US Army's service rifles where the Springfield M1888, M1873, and M1884. All black powder trapdoor rifles. In comparison, the Venezuelans had the bolt-action repeating Mauser M1871/84 (though it was still a black powder rifle) gives the Venezuelans the advantage in terms of the rate of fire.

And maybe don't insult people when you yourself didn't get the facts straight.

Not only that, but the issue of supply chain comes into play. If the Venezuelans played their cards right, the Americans wouldn’t be able to get supplies considering they’d have to ship it from America.

Why would the US military need supply chains when they never fought Venezuelans directly on land, and basically were the ones who supplied materials to Castro all the time?

[Mathuvan Union]

They certainly satellited Venezuela. Why do you keep italising Caudillo?
I don’t get that.
Basically, what you’re saying, they just North Korea’d This regime, and basically taken it over with US officials, US finding stuff willy-nilly, and strengthening relations.

Though what I don’t understand is how the dictator got to power. The US by no means had the funds to support a despot take over in Venezuela, the Secret Service wasn’t even a thing in name yet.
Nor the CIA. or any special ops teams of any kind.

With or without US support, Cipriano Castro would have been President anyway, because he did in real life. The US basically just accelerated his campaign, by providing funds (the US was one of the world's largest economies at that time), and weapons (from Colombia). They also used the US Navy, which while certainly lackluster compared to the European powers, was very effective against the meager Venezuelan Navy, to enfore Castro's rule. In addition to that, the US solved two Venezuelan debt crises using US funds, thus making Venezuela heavily indebted to the US. Since Washington is more interested in having a satellite in South America, they did not pursue Venezuela to return their debts and blockade the coasts - which happened IRL - but instead basically making Castro and his successors proxies of the US government. It's a win-win situation for both Castro and the US; the caudillo get to rule Venezuela as he wish, and the US get to have an important ally and backer in South America.

The Krag-Jorgensen is the Springfield M1892 in US Army nomenclature. It was a rifle adopted in 1892, not 1890. And the 1885 Remington-Lee was never used by the US Army, just the Navy (and even then it was a pretty average rifle). In reality, the US Army's service rifles where the Springfield M1888, M1873, and M1884. All black powder trapdoor rifles. In comparison, the Venezuelans had the bolt-action repeating Mauser M1871/84 (though it was still a black powder rifle) gives the Venezuelans the advantage in terms of the rate of fire.

And maybe don't insult people when you yourself didn't get the facts straight.

It did saw limited action with the US Navy, and the US Navy was the principal component in the US intervention. By 1895, the US military standard rifle was the Krag-Jorgensen and it's already been in production by Springfield for 3 years. Additionally, the US military never fought Venezuelans directly; they just supplied weapons and funds to the strongest caudillo at that time (including the Krag-Jorgensen rifles, which would put Castro's forces at an advantage compared to other Venezuelan caudillos).

Not only that, but the issue of supply chain comes into play. If the Venezuelans played their cards right, the Americans wouldn’t be able to get supplies considering they’d have to ship it from America.

Why would the US military need supply chains when they never fought Venezuelans directly on land, and basically were the ones who supplied materials to Castro all the time?

Supply chains to supply whatever the hell you were doing there.
The Krags Jorgensen, I think it’s called, was never major in the US military.
It may have been produced, but the army, never really used it.

Just because Venezuela is indebted to you, doesn’t mean your good and cracking on.
It doesn’t make presidents proxies of your government, and considering this happened a long time ago, how can we be sure it’s the same here in 1950? There have been elections 12 times. Anything could have happened.

[Sarderia]

I expect everyone to say no in the vote, because no-one wants US expansion, even when it's completely plausible in real life.

With or without US support, Cipriano Castro would have been President anyway, because he did in real life. The US basically just accelerated his campaign, by providing funds (the US was one of the world's largest economies at that time), and weapons (from Colombia). They also used the US Navy, which while certainly lackluster compared to the European powers, was very effective against the meager Venezuelan Navy, to enfore Castro's rule. In addition to that, the US solved two Venezuelan debt crises using US funds, thus making Venezuela heavily indebted to the US. Since Washington is more interested in having a satellite in South America, they did not pursue Venezuela to return their debts and blockade the coasts - which happened IRL - but instead basically making Castro and his successors proxies of the US government. It's a win-win situation for both Castro and the US; the caudillo get to rule Venezuela as he wish, and the US get to have an important ally and backer in South America.

It did saw limited action with the US Navy, and the US Navy was the principal component in the US intervention. By 1895, the US military standard rifle was the Krag-Jorgensen and it's already been in production by Springfield for 3 years. Additionally, the US military never fought Venezuelans directly; they just supplied weapons and funds to the strongest caudillo at that time (including the Krag-Jorgensen rifles, which would put Castro's forces at an advantage compared to other Venezuelan caudillos).

Why would the US military need supply chains when they never fought Venezuelans directly on land, and basically were the ones who supplied materials to Castro all the time?

Supply chains to supply whatever the hell you were doing there.
The Krags Jorgensen, I think it’s called, was never major in the US military.
It may have been produced, but the army, never really used it.

Just because Venezuela is indebted to you, doesn’t mean your good and cracking on.
It doesn’t make presidents proxies of your government, and considering this happened a long time ago, how can we be sure it’s the same here in 1950? There have been elections 12 times. Anything could have happened.

oh God. Do a quick google search and you'll see that it's the main armament of the US Army between 1892 and 1903. Venezuela is not only indebted, the US propelled their dictator into power, paid their debts, and granted them concessions from Britain in exchange for Guyana, and additionally the successive Presidents from Castro, Contreras, and Angarite (there are only 3 rulers in Venezuela irl at that time), they were all backed by the US, so a North Korea situation is in effect here.

[Mathuvan Union]

I expect everyone to say no in the vote, because no-one wants US expansion, even when it's completely plausible in real life.

Supply chains to supply whatever the hell you were doing there.
The Krags Jorgensen, I think it’s called, was never major in the US military.
It may have been produced, but the army, never really used it.

Just because Venezuela is indebted to you, doesn’t mean your good and cracking on.
It doesn’t make presidents proxies of your government, and considering this happened a long time ago, how can we be sure it’s the same here in 1950? There have been elections 12 times. Anything could have happened.

oh God. Do a quick google search and you'll see that it's the main armament of the US Army between 1892 and 1903. Venezuela is not only indebted, the US propelled their dictator into power, paid their debts, and granted them concessions from Britain in exchange for Guyana, and additionally the successive Presidents from Castro, Contreras, and Angarite (there are only 3 rulers in Venezuela irl at that time), they were all backed by the US, so a North Korea situation is in effect here.

Let the people speak, bro

No where in that article did it say it was the main weapon of the US Army.
So this is a banana republic now?

[Sarderia]

Anything could happen, but they didn't happen; the dictators maintained their power and enjoy US investment; the US supplied Castro with US rifles starting from Krag-Jorgensen, period. I really don't want to do a tu quoque here, but Korea remains united, Mozambique got Zambia in Africa I think, the Soviets somehow managed to conquer Mongolia and Inner Mongolia (which was prime Chinese heartland at that time), France still retains Lebanon, and even Australia got Indonesia (Indonesia was fighting like hell to keep the Dutch and British out of them from 1945 to 1949).

Yeah, I don't think realism matters really much in this RP. Especially when you have the above scenarios, but an US-founded coup in Venezuela was impossible.

I expect everyone to say no in the vote, because no-one wants US expansion, even when it's completely plausible in real life.

oh God. Do a quick google search and you'll see that it's the main armament of the US Army between 1892 and 1903. Venezuela is not only indebted, the US propelled their dictator into power, paid their debts, and granted them concessions from Britain in exchange for Guyana, and additionally the successive Presidents from Castro, Contreras, and Angarite (there are only 3 rulers in Venezuela irl at that time), they were all backed by the US, so a North Korea situation is in effect here.

Let the people speak, bro

No where in that article did it say it was the main weapon of the US Army.
So this is a banana republic now?

No, it isn't a Banana republic. It's Cuba, but a capitalist dictatorship.
"Let the people speak"? Are you serious? Then all the arguments I've pointed out are F*CKING USELESS because France and Soviet players who seems to have beef with me from the previous RPs would certainly vote against me, and so do the cadre of others.

And I quote the article, The Springfield Model 1892–99 Krag–Jørgensen rifle is a Norwegian-designed bolt-action rifle that was adopted in 1892 as the standard United States Army military longarm, chambered in U.S. caliber .30-40 Krag.

[Monsone]

I expect everyone to say no in the vote, because no-one wants US expansion, even when it's completely plausible in real life.

Supply chains to supply whatever the hell you were doing there.
The Krags Jorgensen, I think it’s called, was never major in the US military.
It may have been produced, but the army, never really used it.

Just because Venezuela is indebted to you, doesn’t mean your good and cracking on.
It doesn’t make presidents proxies of your government, and considering this happened a long time ago, how can we be sure it’s the same here in 1950? There have been elections 12 times. Anything could have happened.

oh God. Do a quick google search and you'll see that it's the main armament of the US Army between 1892 and 1903. Venezuela is not only indebted, the US propelled their dictator into power, paid their debts, and granted them concessions from Britain in exchange for Guyana, and additionally the successive Presidents from Castro, Contreras, and Angarite (there are only 3 rulers in Venezuela irl at that time), they were all backed by the US, so a North Korea situation is in effect here.

Unfortunately, Spain could and would have dented US expansion in Venezuela. The Spanish-American War would tie up forces and aid from Venezuela to support the American war effort, while after 1898, the Spanish would likely supply the anti-American Venezuelan side M1893 Mauser rifles (which the Spanish had plenty of) IRL did beat the Krag-Jorgensen in just about every aspect.

[Sarderia]

I expect everyone to say no in the vote, because no-one wants US expansion, even when it's completely plausible in real life.

oh God. Do a quick google search and you'll see that it's the main armament of the US Army between 1892 and 1903. Venezuela is not only indebted, the US propelled their dictator into power, paid their debts, and granted them concessions from Britain in exchange for Guyana, and additionally the successive Presidents from Castro, Contreras, and Angarite (there are only 3 rulers in Venezuela irl at that time), they were all backed by the US, so a North Korea situation is in effect here.

Unfortunately, Spain could and would have dented US expansion in Venezuela. The Spanish-American War would tie up forces and aid from Venezuela to support the American war effort, while after 1898, the Spanish would likely supply the anti-American Venezuelan side M1893 Mauser rifles (which the Spanish had plenty off) IRL did beat the Krag-Jorgensen in just about every aspect.

Spain didn't. They could only barely keep their colonies in line during the Spanish-American war, and they suddenly want to defend a former colony in the Americas where they have no business at. Pretty much every European country knows what Monroe Doctrine is at that time, and I don't think venezuela is worth it for Spain.

Additionally, Spain never got involved in Venezuela during the era; the US did IRL. What's next, New Zealand opposing the US illicit deal?

[Monsone]

Unfortunately, Spain could and would have dented US expansion in Venezuela. The Spanish-American War would tie up forces and aid from Venezuela to support the American war effort, while after 1898, the Spanish would likely supply the anti-American Venezuelan side M1893 Mauser rifles (which the Spanish had plenty off) IRL did beat the Krag-Jorgensen in just about every aspect.

Spain didn't. They could only barely keep their colonies in line during the Spanish-American war, and they suddenly want to defend a former colony in the Americas where they have no business at. Pretty much every European country knows what Monroe Doctrine is at that time, and I don't think venezuela is worth it for Spain.

Additionally, Spain never got involved in Venezuela during the era; the US did IRL. What's next, New Zealand opposing the US illicit deal?

My point is that going to war with Spain diverts assets away from Venezuela. Assets that would have gone to the pro-American rebels. So it may not have been Spain's intention to aid Venezuela, but by fighting the USA, Spain indirectly helped Venezuela. But after 1898, Spain would be more than happy to aid the forces fighting the pro-American rebels as payback for 1898. And I know IRL Spain didn't get involved. But in this RP, it would be reason enough that they got beaten in a war, so to give the USA black eye, they support the legitimate Venezuelan government. Seems like a pretty smart move to me if I where the King of Spain.

[Sarderia]

At this point, you're throwing every scenario, however impossible (such as Spain helping Venezuela when they can't afford maintaining the Spanish-American war and suddenly decided to recruit Venezuelans who resented Spain in the first place against the US in a Spanish War) to inhibit the US from installing a US-aligned regime in Venezuela, however plausible it is. You even apparently set up a vote on this case.

Spain didn't. They could only barely keep their colonies in line during the Spanish-American war, and they suddenly want to defend a former colony in the Americas where they have no business at. Pretty much every European country knows what Monroe Doctrine is at that time, and I don't think venezuela is worth it for Spain.

Additionally, Spain never got involved in Venezuela during the era; the US did IRL. What's next, New Zealand opposing the US illicit deal?

My point is that going to war with Spain diverts assets away from Venezuela. Assets that would have gone to the pro-American rebels. So it may not have been Spain's intention to aid Venezuela, but by fighting the USA, Spain indirectly helped Venezuela. But after 1898, Spain would be more than happy to aid the forces fighting the pro-American rebels as payback for 1898. And I know IRL Spain didn't get involved. But in this RP, it would be reason enough that they got beaten in a war, so to give the USA black eye, they support the legitimate Venezuelan government.
Seems like a pretty smart move to me if I where the King of Spain.

Well, the King of Spain didn't in this timeline. Spain was a rump state whose prime colonial asset was just wrenched by the US, they're in a not so good position to back Venezuelan rebels. Additionally, it wasn't a rebellion; it was a full blown Civil War, and in real life, Castro did became the Venezuelan President even without US help - so he would still be President here, but more quickly, because of US help.

[Sarderia]

Funny that you need Spain as a justification here. We don't even have a Spanish player. Next you're gonna say the Qing Dynasty supplied the other caudillos as well. Or maybe Afghanistan did it.

Either way, Venezuela is still an US satellite regime. It's completely plausible, and I don't need to bring bizzare things like Spain or probably a British help to create the scenario.

[Monsone]

Funny that you need Spain as a justification here. We don't even have a Spanish player. Next you're gonna say the Qing Dynasty supplied the other caudillos as well. Or maybe Afghanistan did it.

Either way, Venezuela is still an US satellite regime. It's completely plausible, and I don't need to bring bizzare things like Spain or probably a British help to create the scenario.

You've really overestimated the power of the USA in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Either you fought Spain successfully in 1898 and won, or brought a dictator to power in Venezuela in 1900. Remember, the US was also fighting a rebelion in the Philippines, barely keeping Cuba under US occupation, and also participation in the crushing of the Boxer Rebellion in the period of 1899-1900. And the USA wasn't quite the global power it would later be. US forces would be stretched too thin to help Venezuela. Sure you might help Venezuela up until 1898. But after that, the USA is going to be too busy fighting Spain and doing everything else I listed, and hence, Venezuela would be a pretty low priority on the US's list.

[Sarderia]

Funny that you need Spain as a justification here. We don't even have a Spanish player. Next you're gonna say the Qing Dynasty supplied the other caudillos as well. Or maybe Afghanistan did it.

Either way, Venezuela is still an US satellite regime. It's completely plausible, and I don't need to bring bizzare things like Spain or probably a British help to create the scenario.

You've really overestimated the power of the USA in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Either you fought Spain successfully in 1898 and won, or brought a dictator to power in Venezuela in 1900. Remember, the US was also fighting a rebelion in the Philippines, barely keeping Cuba under US occupation, and also participation in the crushing of the Boxer Rebellion in the period of 1899-1900. And the USA wasn't quite the global power it would later be. US forces would be stretched too thin to help Venezuela. Sure you might help Venezuela up until 1898. But after that, the USA is going to be too busy fighting Spain and doing everything else I listed, and hence, Venezuela would be a pretty low priority on the US's list.

As I said, Castro would have been President even without US help. What the US is doing is basically giving Castro weapons and funds to accelerate his takeover, and did a small blockade off the coast of Maracaibo and other coastal cities, not deploying full military force like in the Philippines to fight Aguinaldo's Republic, or participating in the Boxer Rebellion (even then, the most important parties in crushing the Boxer rebellion was Japan, Russia, and Britain, not the United States). So I'd say supplying a Venezuelan caudillo in his quest to take control of the divided nation doesn't stretch the US really thin - the US Navy was present in the Caribbean Sea to guard Cuba and Puerto Rico, and they could have been easily dispatched to do a brief blockade over a Venezuelan city. Moreso, the US had arbitrated Venezuela and British Guyana's border dispute just a mere 3 years earlier, so they indeed have connections in Venezuela to supply Castro.

[Greater Liverpool]

Can we just all calm down and stop with the arguing. Sarderia you can have Venezuela as your puppet state but more than likely they are not going to have a load of public support in the country itself similar to how nations like this worked at the time period. Now you can just accept that which I think is completely reasonable and will allow us to have a decent RP and allow other nations the opportunity to get themselves involved in the issue ICly. Can we all agree that this is fair, Venezuela is a US puppet but does not have a huge level of public support similar to the likes of Vietnam. Also please don't come at with the whole Drug cartels and all that it is the 1950s the drug trade has still not been established.

edit: One final remark Sarderia please for the love of god do not try and god mod it so that you try and kill my leaders or that no matter how much I can not turncoat local forces over to my side

[Sarderia]

Can we just all calm down and stop with the arguing. Sarderia you can have Venezuela as your puppet state but more than likely they are not going to have a load of public support in the country itself similar to how nations like this worked at the time period. Now you can just accept that which I think is completely reasonable and will allow us to have a decent RP and allow other nations the opportunity to get themselves involved in the issue ICly. Can we all agree that this is fair, Venezuela is a US puppet but does not have a huge level of public support similar to the likes of Vietnam. Also please don't come at with the whole Drug cartels and all that it is the 1950s the drug trade has still not been established.

edit: One final remark Sarderia please for the love of god do not try and god mod it so that you try and kill my leaders or that no matter how much I can not turncoat local forces over to my side

Venezuela is more an US satellite than a puppet, with the lore changes I've made. It was never part of the US now, but instead was ruled by a series of caudillos whose foreign policy is closely related to, and influenced by, American politics. Venezuela and America is separate.

There is dissent against Castillo, yes, but Castillo would have tried to crush that out. The current Venezuelan dictator Antón Castillo saw himself as the second iteration of Simon Bolivar, and he's different than the other Venezuelan dictators in the sense he wanted to apply a cult of personality on him, like hanging the potraits of Castillo alongside the Cross in many churches, or outright erecting a statue of Castillo in front of many buildings - think Fidel Castro with all the murals of him, statues, and pieces of art estabilished in his honor. Venezuela itself is capitalist, but much of the energy sector is controlled by the government in addition to foreign corporations (mostly American and British, with little Brazillian influences as well). The people of Venezuela is rather indifferent when it comes to America (they don't like it, but they don't outrightly hate it either), but a majority of them is loyal to Castillo (with all the mass propaganda and Soviet-type brainwashing happening). You can start as a socialist movement in opposition to Castillo's rule, but remember that you would have a very, very long way ahead to gain trust of the Venezuelan people, because while Castillo implemented a polic state, surprisingly the GDPpc of Venezuela has been constantly rising under his rule.

Edit: Basically, Anton Castillo is a harsher version of Mobutu Sese Seko/Ferdinand Marcos/Soeharto, but he is only overly harsh or oppressive towards those who dissented against his rule. Regular citizens enjoy a normal and rather prosperous life, and the middle class is growing at a faster rate. Basically, they're free to do anything, as long as they don't speak out against Castillo or the National Bolivarian Party of Venezuela.