steffen
Ensign
Posts: 300
Likes: 18
|
Post by steffen on Mar 20, 2018 18:51:37 GMT
You mean a constitutional monarchy under Napoléon, Prince Imperial son of Emperor Napoleon III. That might be the best option given the circumstances. It gives a French a degree of continuity and avoids the massive loss of face in being occupied and forced into what many will view as revolutionary changes, which would be doubly objectionable if enforced by an external source. I don't think that the EU can simply invade and annex France, which is effectively what it would be. Even if their bringing major social change I think it would be see as simply a power/land grab and also sets a dangerous example for the future. You misunderstood - really. It will be the french outside france that move in. You do not need much "force"... some helicopters, propably french ones based in Baden, some armored forces (again - french or the mixed brigade), thats it. You do not need much force, just some force of strenght, some special forces taking out Nappy in paris - who could stop em? Nobody... then the newspapers get informations (and some upset people). But no - repeat -no real war. Maybe 50-500 casulties at max, these are french politicans, french officers and french lead forces who enters france., it is no occupation. The people get the offer to come into 2018, but not the political leadership. They have to retire or leave, no other conditions are possible (oh, that would be true if germany of 1870 (in the FRG-borders) switches, italy, uk, what ever country you choose in europe. It is not meant as "invasion of foreign forces"... they are needed to remove the "heads" of opposition of a non-democratic warmoronger country (1870-france ruled by Napoleon).. there is no face-saving by the fact that you are 148 years back in time. The EU will not accept a monarchy... also the french outside france will not accept it. Period. If you would switch germany of 1900 with the one of 2018, the same. Remove the Kaiser, the monarchs (for crimes and things they had done in history, but for these people it will be in the future). Remove the military leadership. Bring in "foreign-germans" who explain the political and economical world to the second row, offer huge help (money, education, protection), start to modernize in combination with democratisation. Then, say 25 years in the future, give the country the choice to choose, but have carefully (before) connect the country with its neighbours, to avoid wars. the main problem with this kind of "teleportation" cause problems. IF you have person A - say a 11year old Adolf Hitler (in 1900), an innocent kid, in the same time he is "the" evil of the 20th century... we (the 2018ers) knows that. There is no mistake. So what do we do with young Adolf? Kill him - period. That may be cruel, but the risk that this certain evil person could gain power is way to big. If we talk about "time-travelling" with loss of knowledge, the whole world would be changed if france of 1870 vanishes for 148 years. What was at this spot for the rest of the world? So the better way is - the surrounding areas have the OTL history, OTL connections. Basically you could leave the border region, look for Madame X that later married your grand-grand-father, but you are 50, she is 19. So, the world knows witch persons in france of 1870 ruled, what they tried to do, what evil they did (or will do (say in 1880)). And that is the point why such countries (doesn´t matter witch) will be forced to accept te rule of people from the same country from modern times for quite some time. IN the other ASB that is maybe 10-15 years to really understand the situation (UK), in a timeline in that you move a whole country 150 years in time, you need at last one, better three generations (50-60 years)... because basically you need to remove all adults from power, or you face many more problems. If you switch the stuff... move modern france into 1870, so all others are backyarded, it is less problematic. You have a modern, democratic country that would for sure rule the world (who could stop modern france? Nobody.. nukes, tanks, modern infrastructure.. bingo), personally i see them act wise and help all others. No world wars, no 1871-war, but a peacefull unification. Some certain later evil persons die quickly by accidents (risk management), overall the french would try to dominate everything. So no dictatorship but cooperation, but for sure the french would "own" places that are rich in uranium, ore, oil, gas etc ... but no brutal dicatorship supressing the rest of the world. But the second you move ONE backyarded country into modern times, this country is doomed. Exception: USA after 1955, because they are to big, to strong and have to many nukes. But even the USA from 1945 would have no chances in the 2018er-world, if certain states (Russia, china) react quickly I hope i could define my position and why some things wouldn´t happen here - we really should avoid the Brexit in political discussion, but its existence would influence the reactions of the acting countries/EU.
|
|
steffen
Ensign
Posts: 300
Likes: 18
|
Post by steffen on Mar 20, 2018 18:56:28 GMT
Hi, naturally, the french wouldn´t see him as brutal dictator, the french of 1870! But i speak from the "others world opinion" from 2018... measured in the actual time it qualifies for that term.
Nappy would try to start wars, because he think it is a good possibility... belgium, the germans, spain... italy. Or Algeria... for him it is a part of france, the algerians will see it slightly different. And the algerian armed forces could wipe out anything Nappy want to send.
For that time Nappy was a bad politican who started a war he shouldn´t had started, in consequence he lost his influence, his power and france the war. I think the france of 1818 would be less problematic as the one of 1870... but no government of 2018 - with the knowledge about Napoleon the III would accept him or anybody related or connected to him as partner. That was my point about "they all have leave power/influence" - with no delay.
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Member is Online
Posts: 64,935
Likes: 46,076
|
Post by lordroel on Mar 20, 2018 19:12:59 GMT
Hi, naturally, the french wouldn´t see him as brutal dictator, the french of 1870! But i speak from the "others world opinion" from 2018... measured in the actual time it qualifies for that term. Nappy would try to start wars, because he think it is a good possibility... belgium, the germans, spain... italy. Or Algeria... for him it is a part of france, the algerians will see it slightly different. And the algerian armed forces could wipe out anything Nappy want to send. For that time Nappy was a bad politican who started a war he shouldn´t had started, in consequence he lost his influence, his power and france the war. I think the france of 1818 would be less problematic as the one of 1870... but no government of 2018 - with the knowledge about Napoleon the III would accept him or anybody related or connected to him as partner. That was my point about "they all have leave power/influence" - with no delay. Nappy would be very stupid to do that, he lost against the Prussians, he would loss against Luxembourg if he invaded them.
|
|
steffen
Ensign
Posts: 300
Likes: 18
|
Post by steffen on Mar 20, 2018 19:37:54 GMT
Hi, naturally, the french wouldn´t see him as brutal dictator, the french of 1870! But i speak from the "others world opinion" from 2018... measured in the actual time it qualifies for that term. Nappy would try to start wars, because he think it is a good possibility... belgium, the germans, spain... italy. Or Algeria... for him it is a part of france, the algerians will see it slightly different. And the algerian armed forces could wipe out anything Nappy want to send. For that time Nappy was a bad politican who started a war he shouldn´t had started, in consequence he lost his influence, his power and france the war. I think the france of 1818 would be less problematic as the one of 1870... but no government of 2018 - with the knowledge about Napoleon the III would accept him or anybody related or connected to him as partner. That was my point about "they all have leave power/influence" - with no delay. Nappy would be very stupid to do that, he lost against the Prussians, he would loss against Luxembourg if he invaded them. Yes, but the main problem is this: THese people (all nations of that time) are fully imperialistic war morongers... for them war is something usefull and their "right". So some weak democratic states (like Belgium, germany (eek... evil prussians, wait - they are gone, whats that history book? EEEEEEEEEEEEEK...), spain or italy) with basically nil army at the borders? People like Napoleon "see" a chance. yes, his army could be exterminated by Luxemburg. But he can´t understand this. That was the point why every senior officer, every senior politican and the ruling class need to get either arrested or "killed". By french liberation forces who bring the people wealth, supplies, medical support and education. Sorry, no way you could leave em in power or influence. Maybe UK would try something, because of the political situation actual ongoing (Brexit and the negotiations that are not like the british want em (hope that this is okay, it is part of the situation)), but i doubt they really support this. Personally i see the british understanding that these people need to get removed and really i can´t see UK having any interest in investing 500-1000 billion EUR per year (american billion, german Milliarde) to build up that last least developted country. It would be easier to burn down paris and rebuild it - but that can´t be done (just one example for the huge problem the EU will face) No other country in the world would be interested in a rebuild france the way the EU would do... and here a lot people from the more extremist areas (as usual you have 5-15% of such people) would have "interesting" suggestions... from the extreme left to the extreme right. the old french would hate it, but with some time they will understand that the imperialistic times are gone. Give em a book about ww1, ww2, the horror of modern warfare - and the fact that this france not even has the fighting power of the vatican state (okay, that isn´t true, but nearly) could settle down that stuff a bit.
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 23,482
Likes: 12,080
|
Post by stevep on Mar 21, 2018 9:46:07 GMT
How many modern French are there? Since the colonies have come along from 1870 other than expats in the rest of the world and the French 'occupation force' in Germany as you term them . Against a still overwhelmingly popular ruler. The 1870 French will go down in a straight fight with modern forces, especially when the small number of French are backed by forces from other nations - or at least supplies from them as that brigade isn't going to have enough to last for long. Then the guerilla resistance comes. How many French resistance or simply protesters will the up-timers be willing to kill as they won't be able to imprison them all? Similarly yes the 1870 French are pretty backwards and barbarian compared to modern western Europe but then so is a lot of the modern world. There are far more brutal and repressive regimes scattered around the world. There is a basis for removing the French control of their colonies, especially in Africa and SE Asia but unless the French themselves attack anywhere, which is going to be pretty unlikely, there are going to be legal and morale problems about basically arranging a military invasion, even if supported/headed by a small number of up-time expats. Nappy III was rather eager to go to war in the 1850-60s in part because France was one of the great powers of the period, really 2nd only to Britain and with a more powerful army, plus as you say it was a lot more common then. However even by 1870 he was more cautious and aware of his own age and ill-health. Also once they realise how weak they are - and that won't take long - its very unlikely that France will threaten anyone, other than with bitter resistance to any attack. As I say the EU can enforce a military occupation and there will be those who want to, but it will significantly increase the costs of putting France back together again and at least some people will realise that. Also what will it do to its wider world view that its willing to launch unprovoked invasions of countries? As I say its a different matter if France does something stupid but the reports from the borders will make the government realise that something very strange has happened and make them pause and look for reasons. A little communication and demonstration of modern technology and as long as the French government doesn't feel threatened it will be concerned with hunkering down and seeking to understand what's happened and how to catch up.
|
|
steffen
Ensign
Posts: 300
Likes: 18
|
Post by steffen on Mar 21, 2018 17:58:50 GMT
How many modern French are there? Since the colonies have come along from 1870 other than expats in the rest of the world and the French 'occupation force' in Germany as you term them . Against a still overwhelmingly popular ruler. The 1870 French will go down in a straight fight with modern forces, especially when the small number of French are backed by forces from other nations - or at least supplies from them as that brigade isn't going to have enough to last for long. Then the guerilla resistance comes. How many French resistance or simply protesters will the up-timers be willing to kill as they won't be able to imprison them all? Similarly yes the 1870 French are pretty backwards and barbarian compared to modern western Europe but then so is a lot of the modern world. There are far more brutal and repressive regimes scattered around the world. There is a basis for removing the French control of their colonies, especially in Africa and SE Asia but unless the French themselves attack anywhere, which is going to be pretty unlikely, there are going to be legal and morale problems about basically arranging a military invasion, even if supported/headed by a small number of up-time expats. Nappy III was rather eager to go to war in the 1850-60s in part because France was one of the great powers of the period, really 2nd only to Britain and with a more powerful army, plus as you say it was a lot more common then. However even by 1870 he was more cautious and aware of his own age and ill-health. Also once they realise how weak they are - and that won't take long - its very unlikely that France will threaten anyone, other than with bitter resistance to any attack. As I say the EU can enforce a military occupation and there will be those who want to, but it will significantly increase the costs of putting France back together again and at least some people will realise that. Also what will it do to its wider world view that its willing to launch unprovoked invasions of countries? As I say its a different matter if France does something stupid but the reports from the borders will make the government realise that something very strange has happened and make them pause and look for reasons. A little communication and demonstration of modern technology and as long as the French government doesn't feel threatened it will be concerned with hunkering down and seeking to understand what's happened and how to catch up. Stevep, i allways tried to explain what i meant with my words. Nobody, at last i can see nobody - would work with Napoleon the 3rd, esp. if the foreign-french would remove him. Maybe Donald T would try something, but i can´t see him trying this. My personal opinion about him is, that he is loud, but still smart. You may see it different, but i can´t see him supporting that person. And no, the EU will not wage war with france. You really seem to misunderstood what i wrote. It will be the foreign-french (as far as i understood the scenario, the whole 1870-stuff that removes modern france leave the french who are outside the french borders in our time) who bring democracy to the french people. It is an invasion of its own, because as i wrote, even albania (or modern germany, even if the Bundeswehr propably need help by switzerland, denmark and , well albania to achive it) could "conquer 1870-france. 1 tank, 2 helicopters and propably 1 airbus A380 at 1000m are enough to conquer france1870 (or germany1870, UK1870, italy1870... i hope you get my point about that) Also, because the 1870er-french could read, they just need some modern history books to understand that these french speaking guys from outside do not mean something hostile... but Nappy and co need to go... they themself would propably see it this way, after learning about the last 148 years of history... Maybe luxembourg, Belgium, Monaco and Andorra could do it.. Oh, it is something else if North Korea or france is north korea, right?
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 23,482
Likes: 12,080
|
Post by stevep on Mar 22, 2018 11:29:35 GMT
How many modern French are there? Since the colonies have come along from 1870 other than expats in the rest of the world and the French 'occupation force' in Germany as you term them . Against a still overwhelmingly popular ruler. The 1870 French will go down in a straight fight with modern forces, especially when the small number of French are backed by forces from other nations - or at least supplies from them as that brigade isn't going to have enough to last for long. Then the guerilla resistance comes. How many French resistance or simply protesters will the up-timers be willing to kill as they won't be able to imprison them all? Similarly yes the 1870 French are pretty backwards and barbarian compared to modern western Europe but then so is a lot of the modern world. There are far more brutal and repressive regimes scattered around the world. There is a basis for removing the French control of their colonies, especially in Africa and SE Asia but unless the French themselves attack anywhere, which is going to be pretty unlikely, there are going to be legal and morale problems about basically arranging a military invasion, even if supported/headed by a small number of up-time expats. Nappy III was rather eager to go to war in the 1850-60s in part because France was one of the great powers of the period, really 2nd only to Britain and with a more powerful army, plus as you say it was a lot more common then. However even by 1870 he was more cautious and aware of his own age and ill-health. Also once they realise how weak they are - and that won't take long - its very unlikely that France will threaten anyone, other than with bitter resistance to any attack. As I say the EU can enforce a military occupation and there will be those who want to, but it will significantly increase the costs of putting France back together again and at least some people will realise that. Also what will it do to its wider world view that its willing to launch unprovoked invasions of countries? As I say its a different matter if France does something stupid but the reports from the borders will make the government realise that something very strange has happened and make them pause and look for reasons. A little communication and demonstration of modern technology and as long as the French government doesn't feel threatened it will be concerned with hunkering down and seeking to understand what's happened and how to catch up. Stevep, i allways tried to explain what i meant with my words. Nobody, at last i can see nobody - would work with Napoleon the 3rd, esp. if the foreign-french would remove him. Maybe Donald T would try something, but i can´t see him trying this. My personal opinion about him is, that he is loud, but still smart. You may see it different, but i can´t see him supporting that person. And no, the EU will not wage war with france. You really seem to misunderstood what i wrote. It will be the foreign-french (as far as i understood the scenario, the whole 1870-stuff that removes modern france leave the french who are outside the french borders in our time) who bring democracy to the french people. It is an invasion of its own, because as i wrote, even albania (or modern germany, even if the Bundeswehr propably need help by switzerland, denmark and , well albania to achive it) could "conquer 1870-france. 1 tank, 2 helicopters and propably 1 airbus A380 at 1000m are enough to conquer france1870 (or germany1870, UK1870, italy1870... i hope you get my point about that) Also, because the 1870er-french could read, they just need some modern history books to understand that these french speaking guys from outside do not mean something hostile... but Nappy and co need to go... they themself would propably see it this way, after learning about the last 148 years of history... Maybe luxembourg, Belgium, Monaco and Andorra could do it.. Oh, it is something else if North Korea or france is north korea, right? An outside group, and considering the difference in culture and values even up-time French will be seen as that, can defeat the 1870 French forces, no doubt. However its one thing overrunning a country and another holding onto it. The uptimers may win a lot of support by their offer of miraculous new technology and advances but their still going to face a lot of opposition.
|
|
steffen
Ensign
Posts: 300
Likes: 18
|
Post by steffen on Mar 22, 2018 11:44:34 GMT
Stevep, i allways tried to explain what i meant with my words. Nobody, at last i can see nobody - would work with Napoleon the 3rd, esp. if the foreign-french would remove him. Maybe Donald T would try something, but i can´t see him trying this. My personal opinion about him is, that he is loud, but still smart. You may see it different, but i can´t see him supporting that person. And no, the EU will not wage war with france. You really seem to misunderstood what i wrote. It will be the foreign-french (as far as i understood the scenario, the whole 1870-stuff that removes modern france leave the french who are outside the french borders in our time) who bring democracy to the french people. It is an invasion of its own, because as i wrote, even albania (or modern germany, even if the Bundeswehr propably need help by switzerland, denmark and , well albania to achive it) could "conquer 1870-france. 1 tank, 2 helicopters and propably 1 airbus A380 at 1000m are enough to conquer france1870 (or germany1870, UK1870, italy1870... i hope you get my point about that) Also, because the 1870er-french could read, they just need some modern history books to understand that these french speaking guys from outside do not mean something hostile... but Nappy and co need to go... they themself would propably see it this way, after learning about the last 148 years of history... Maybe luxembourg, Belgium, Monaco and Andorra could do it.. Oh, it is something else if North Korea or france is north korea, right? An outside group, and considering the difference in culture and values even up-time French will be seen as that, can defeat the 1870 French forces, no doubt. However its one thing overrunning a country and another holding onto it. The uptimers may win a lot of support by their offer of miraculous new technology and advances but their still going to face a lot of opposition. For that i think the Liberation forces need to be FRENCH, no figurehead but full french. For sure the planes could be german/italian/whatever, but the commander who negotiate after moving into france should be a foreign-french (as i mentioned, there is the french-german brigade in germany, basically this strenghted with german tanks (that worked, so basically the whole german armed forces of 20-30 tanks )and some artillery move in. Resistance will be either ignored (they could not hurt the tanks or armored vehicles), or wiped out. Move to the - well known - HQs of the french army, arrest all leading officers, force em to gave public statements and - voila, 1000 foreign-french armed forces, supported by full french speaking others who will stay in the vehicles have "taken" france. With the rolling supplies, "wondertechnics" and support by many many countries the french people will quickly recognize that they will not be overrun. For sure some diehards exists, but that could be handled by the Old-style french police, after they got mobile communication, drones and satellite support. One point i mentioned earlier, these people could read about french/european history, so they will understand quickly that their neighbours of 1870 aren´t the same as in 2018.
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 23,482
Likes: 12,080
|
Post by stevep on Mar 22, 2018 12:33:52 GMT
An outside group, and considering the difference in culture and values even up-time French will be seen as that, can defeat the 1870 French forces, no doubt. However its one thing overrunning a country and another holding onto it. The uptimers may win a lot of support by their offer of miraculous new technology and advances but their still going to face a lot of opposition. For that i think the Liberation forces need to be FRENCH, no figurehead but full french. For sure the planes could be german/italian/whatever, but the commander who negotiate after moving into france should be a foreign-french (as i mentioned, there is the french-german brigade in germany, basically this strenghted with german tanks (that worked, so basically the whole german armed forces of 20-30 tanks )and some artillery move in. Resistance will be either ignored (they could not hurt the tanks or armored vehicles), or wiped out. Move to the - well known - HQs of the french army, arrest all leading officers, force em to gave public statements and - voila, 1000 foreign-french armed forces, supported by full french speaking others who will stay in the vehicles have "taken" france. With the rolling supplies, "wondertechnics" and support by many many countries the french people will quickly recognize that they will not be overrun. For sure some diehards exists, but that could be handled by the Old-style french police, after they got mobile communication, drones and satellite support. One point i mentioned earlier, these people could read about french/european history, so they will understand quickly that their neighbours of 1870 aren´t the same as in 2018. Taking is NOT holding. You have a few thousand outsiders who know the country largely from history books who have invaded the country, overthrown a popular monarchy and will alienate even more the more reactionary elements that were his main opponents. Wiping out large numbers of troops, if they take that option, isn't going to make them very popular either and is likely to cause unrest in the up-time communities. What do they do then when say there is passive opposition? Civil servants refusing to accept any orders from them and denying them information about the country. A few former soldiers and others going into guerilla war mode. Or possibly a repeat of the OTL commune? Are they going to use their firepower to sack central Paris in the latter case? Even after the defeat of the main armies OTL the republican government that replaced Napoleon III after his capture put up quite a fight against the Prussians while simultaneously suppressing the commune. Expect a lot of opposition both passive and in places violent. Especially since the occupying forces are unlikely to try the tactics of the Germans in 70 and 14 in terms of taking and killing hostages. Yes when they get access to information about the outside world they will see that the neighbours of 1870 aren't the same as in 2018. But the 1st lesson you will be giving them is that 2018 is a lot more hostile and unfriendly, especially since they will not have experienced the OTL defeat from the Prussians. Its a lot different if an armed intervention occurs in response to the down-time French doing something stupid, which is possible but unlikely. Then there would be some justification and a lot of down-timers would be able to see that. However just starting off with a violent invasion and removal of the government is the wrong way to go about it. The EU will have enough problems on its hands with the loss of 2018 France without adding an unnecessary and messy occupation to their problems.
|
|
steffen
Ensign
Posts: 300
Likes: 18
|
Post by steffen on Mar 22, 2018 13:56:51 GMT
For that i think the Liberation forces need to be FRENCH, no figurehead but full french. For sure the planes could be german/italian/whatever, but the commander who negotiate after moving into france should be a foreign-french (as i mentioned, there is the french-german brigade in germany, basically this strenghted with german tanks (that worked, so basically the whole german armed forces of 20-30 tanks )and some artillery move in. Resistance will be either ignored (they could not hurt the tanks or armored vehicles), or wiped out. Move to the - well known - HQs of the french army, arrest all leading officers, force em to gave public statements and - voila, 1000 foreign-french armed forces, supported by full french speaking others who will stay in the vehicles have "taken" france. With the rolling supplies, "wondertechnics" and support by many many countries the french people will quickly recognize that they will not be overrun. For sure some diehards exists, but that could be handled by the Old-style french police, after they got mobile communication, drones and satellite support. One point i mentioned earlier, these people could read about french/european history, so they will understand quickly that their neighbours of 1870 aren´t the same as in 2018. Taking is NOT holding. You have a few thousand outsiders who know the country largely from history books who have invaded the country, overthrown a popular monarchy and will alienate even more the more reactionary elements that were his main opponents. Wiping out large numbers of troops, if they take that option, isn't going to make them very popular either and is likely to cause unrest in the up-time communities. What do they do then when say there is passive opposition? Civil servants refusing to accept any orders from them and denying them information about the country. A few former soldiers and others going into guerilla war mode. Or possibly a repeat of the OTL commune? Are they going to use their firepower to sack central Paris in the latter case? Even after the defeat of the main armies OTL the republican government that replaced Napoleon III after his capture put up quite a fight against the Prussians while simultaneously suppressing the commune. Expect a lot of opposition both passive and in places violent. Especially since the occupying forces are unlikely to try the tactics of the Germans in 70 and 14 in terms of taking and killing hostages. Yes when they get access to information about the outside world they will see that the neighbours of 1870 aren't the same as in 2018. But the 1st lesson you will be giving them is that 2018 is a lot more hostile and unfriendly, especially since they will not have experienced the OTL defeat from the Prussians. Its a lot different if an armed intervention occurs in response to the down-time French doing something stupid, which is possible but unlikely. Then there would be some justification and a lot of down-timers would be able to see that. However just starting off with a violent invasion and removal of the government is the wrong way to go about it. The EU will have enough problems on its hands with the loss of 2018 France without adding an unnecessary and messy occupation to their problems. Hi, well we agree to disagree My opinion about that: If french forces liberate (not occupate) the french state from monarchists and chauvinistic elements and offers full support to modernize the country, raise the living standards and build up competitive economics it is hardly an occupation. My comment about "reading history books" was meant in the way that the 1870ties french could use these books. The modern french should knows that quite well. I also disagree about "more hostile world". the world in 1870 was more hostile, the big french ego and its will to wage war for a ficitional "insult" is the problem. Please remember that i basically wrote off all adults because of wrong attitude and wrote about 30-40 years of teaching them democracy. I am also in opposition to your wording about the OTL-casulties post-military defeat in france. Yes, the prussians and germans reacted very hard to partisan actions, but these were no war crimes but accepted and rightfull countermeasurements. No french soldiers got killed by mass shootings. There existed a lot propaganda, but in the know cases there acted partisans and killed german forces in military free zones. The reaction was hard - from a modern view brutal, for 1870ties pov acceptable. The only mass murderings in the 1870-71-war happened after the comune in paris was crushed and tenthousends of communards got massacred by the winning french forces. Yes, the french ruling class loose all power, but the french who can read will understand that these politicans are incompatible with modern times. Again, NO country - maybe north korea as an exception - would work with them in europe. The only fighting would happen if it couldn´t be avoided. Normally some tanks and helicopters moving onto french infantry is enough so they give up. Maybe some mach1+ bang, caused by 50feet-flying jets could do it. In my scenario i see nil fighting at all, maybe - as described 50-500 casulties on the french side, zero on the new-french side. This is no war, the troops are not at a frontline digged in. It is much to fast for them to react. "Bang" and its over. Common Guy get info that he stay in the barracks, leading officer is arrested or dead, his adjudant will give the orders.
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 23,482
Likes: 12,080
|
Post by stevep on Mar 22, 2018 15:34:47 GMT
Taking is NOT holding. You have a few thousand outsiders who know the country largely from history books who have invaded the country, overthrown a popular monarchy and will alienate even more the more reactionary elements that were his main opponents. Wiping out large numbers of troops, if they take that option, isn't going to make them very popular either and is likely to cause unrest in the up-time communities. What do they do then when say there is passive opposition? Civil servants refusing to accept any orders from them and denying them information about the country. A few former soldiers and others going into guerilla war mode. Or possibly a repeat of the OTL commune? Are they going to use their firepower to sack central Paris in the latter case? Even after the defeat of the main armies OTL the republican government that replaced Napoleon III after his capture put up quite a fight against the Prussians while simultaneously suppressing the commune. Expect a lot of opposition both passive and in places violent. Especially since the occupying forces are unlikely to try the tactics of the Germans in 70 and 14 in terms of taking and killing hostages. Yes when they get access to information about the outside world they will see that the neighbours of 1870 aren't the same as in 2018. But the 1st lesson you will be giving them is that 2018 is a lot more hostile and unfriendly, especially since they will not have experienced the OTL defeat from the Prussians. Its a lot different if an armed intervention occurs in response to the down-time French doing something stupid, which is possible but unlikely. Then there would be some justification and a lot of down-timers would be able to see that. However just starting off with a violent invasion and removal of the government is the wrong way to go about it. The EU will have enough problems on its hands with the loss of 2018 France without adding an unnecessary and messy occupation to their problems. Hi, well we agree to disagree My opinion about that: If french forces liberate (not occupate) the french state from monarchists and chauvinistic elements and offers full support to modernize the country, raise the living standards and build up competitive economics it is hardly an occupation. My comment about "reading history books" was meant in the way that the 1870ties french could use these books. The modern french should knows that quite well. I also disagree about "more hostile world". the world in 1870 was more hostile, the big french ego and its will to wage war for a ficitional "insult" is the problem. Please remember that i basically wrote off all adults because of wrong attitude and wrote about 30-40 years of teaching them democracy. I am also in opposition to your wording about the OTL-casulties post-military defeat in france. Yes, the prussians and germans reacted very hard to partisan actions, but these were no war crimes but accepted and rightfull countermeasurements. No french soldiers got killed by mass shootings. There existed a lot propaganda, but in the know cases there acted partisans and killed german forces in military free zones. The reaction was hard - from a modern view brutal, for 1870ties pov acceptable. The only mass murderings in the 1870-71-war happened after the comune in paris was crushed and tenthousends of communards got massacred by the winning french forces. Yes, the french ruling class loose all power, but the french who can read will understand that these politicans are incompatible with modern times. Again, NO country - maybe north korea as an exception - would work with them in europe. The only fighting would happen if it couldn´t be avoided. Normally some tanks and helicopters moving onto french infantry is enough so they give up. Maybe some mach1+ bang, caused by 50feet-flying jets could do it. In my scenario i see nil fighting at all, maybe - as described 50-500 casulties on the french side, zero on the new-french side. This is no war, the troops are not at a frontline digged in. It is much to fast for them to react. "Bang" and its over. Common Guy get info that he stay in the barracks, leading officer is arrested or dead, his adjudant will give the orders. You may see it as a liberating but I think the vast majority of down-time French will see it as a violent occupation. Since the 1st thing that happens in this new world is that they are immediately invaded, their government deposed and laws arbitrarily changed, with them given no say on the issue. There is an interesting contradiction in your arguments. You say that the French, reading books from the future will overcome their anger at the invasion. Then shortly afterwards stating your writing off all the adult French because of "wrong attitude" as you put it. Which at least implies your removing say ~25M adults from society as a whole and also separating them from their children so the later can't be 'tainted' by their parent's viewpoint. Which is obviously impossible. Have you ever read anything about the problems of occupying an hostile nation? Your up timers can't rule France from within a tank. Those troops are going to have to come out for food, clothing, etc at some time and what if someone then takes a pot shot at them? A lot of angry French with rifles. Also how are they going to get the information they need to actually rule the country if they can't depend on the 1870 civil servants, because the latter may be refusing to help them or possibly passing them false info? And if their in danger of being shot/stabbed/whatever any time they try and see the ordinary French population? On the question of Francs-tireurs, see the Wiki page for them. This points out that the Prussians in 1870 often did kill nearby villagers in retaliation for such attacks and that the level of paranoia in the German army in 1914 meant that hostages were taken and frequently killed in both Belgium and occupied France, often with no evidence of any actual guerilla activity. I would point out that while this sort of behaviour was reasonably legal in 1870, it did cause a lot of resentment and by 1914 widespread repugnation. The fact that the German army did in 1914 deliberately kill civilians is a fact, although not strictly related to the issue under discussion here. That such behaviour is totally unacceptable in 2018, especially since your assuming the bulk of the occupiers are up-time French is relevant and prompts the question how will they deal with large numbers of francs-tireurs?
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 23,482
Likes: 12,080
|
Post by stevep on Mar 22, 2018 15:39:33 GMT
Thinking about it there is one compromise the UN might decide on the former French veto. They could simply decide to negate it and reduce the number of permanent members of the Security Council with veto rights to 4.
|
|
steffen
Ensign
Posts: 300
Likes: 18
|
Post by steffen on Mar 22, 2018 15:46:35 GMT
Hi, well we agree to disagree My opinion about that: If french forces liberate (not occupate) the french state from monarchists and chauvinistic elements and offers full support to modernize the country, raise the living standards and build up competitive economics it is hardly an occupation. My comment about "reading history books" was meant in the way that the 1870ties french could use these books. The modern french should knows that quite well. I also disagree about "more hostile world". the world in 1870 was more hostile, the big french ego and its will to wage war for a ficitional "insult" is the problem. Please remember that i basically wrote off all adults because of wrong attitude and wrote about 30-40 years of teaching them democracy. I am also in opposition to your wording about the OTL-casulties post-military defeat in france. Yes, the prussians and germans reacted very hard to partisan actions, but these were no war crimes but accepted and rightfull countermeasurements. No french soldiers got killed by mass shootings. There existed a lot propaganda, but in the know cases there acted partisans and killed german forces in military free zones. The reaction was hard - from a modern view brutal, for 1870ties pov acceptable. The only mass murderings in the 1870-71-war happened after the comune in paris was crushed and tenthousends of communards got massacred by the winning french forces. Yes, the french ruling class loose all power, but the french who can read will understand that these politicans are incompatible with modern times. Again, NO country - maybe north korea as an exception - would work with them in europe. The only fighting would happen if it couldn´t be avoided. Normally some tanks and helicopters moving onto french infantry is enough so they give up. Maybe some mach1+ bang, caused by 50feet-flying jets could do it. In my scenario i see nil fighting at all, maybe - as described 50-500 casulties on the french side, zero on the new-french side. This is no war, the troops are not at a frontline digged in. It is much to fast for them to react. "Bang" and its over. Common Guy get info that he stay in the barracks, leading officer is arrested or dead, his adjudant will give the orders. You may see it as a liberating but I think the vast majority of down-time French will see it as a violent occupation. Since the 1st thing that happens in this new world is that they are immediately invaded, their government deposed and laws arbitrarily changed, with them given no say on the issue. There is an interesting contradiction in your arguments. You say that the French, reading books from the future will overcome their anger at the invasion. Then shortly afterwards stating your writing off all the adult French because of "wrong attitude" as you put it. Which at least implies your removing say ~25M adults from society as a whole and also separating them from their children so the later can't be 'tainted' by their parent's viewpoint. Which is obviously impossible. Have you ever read anything about the problems of occupying an hostile nation? Your up timers can't rule France from within a tank. Those troops are going to have to come out for food, clothing, etc at some time and what if someone then takes a pot shot at them? A lot of angry French with rifles. Also how are they going to get the information they need to actually rule the country if they can't depend on the 1870 civil servants, because the latter may be refusing to help them or possibly passing them false info? And if their in danger of being shot/stabbed/whatever any time they try and see the ordinary French population? On the question of Francs-tireurs, see the Wiki page for them. This points out that the Prussians in 1870 often did kill nearby villagers in retaliation for such attacks and that the level of paranoia in the German army in 1914 meant that hostages were taken and frequently killed in both Belgium and occupied France, often with no evidence of any actual guerilla activity. I would point out that while this sort of behaviour was reasonably legal in 1870, it did cause a lot of resentment and by 1914 widespread repugnation. The fact that the German army did in 1914 deliberately kill civilians is a fact, although not strictly related to the issue under discussion here. That such behaviour is totally unacceptable in 2018, especially since your assuming the bulk of the occupiers are up-time French is relevant and prompts the question how will they deal with large numbers of francs-tireurs? Hi, please read exactly what i wrote. 1.) i said that the foreign-french would liberate the country - at last in my eyes the installation of modern civilisation in france is a liberation, esp. equal rights to woman, gay etc, also the chance to develop, increase medicine healthcare... 2.) the foreign french need to remove the leadership of that 1870-france. Because these leaders are not compatible with modern world (again - that is my opinion about that). 3.) there is no war or such thing. At last that is my opinion. So i can´t see the "occupation forces". we totally disagree about how old-style-france in that scenario is lead to modern times. Propably so much that it is useless to discuss it, cause you allways come with things i never wrote or said, so it is near impossible to discuss such things. Please use the stuff the other person write, okay? 4.) my impression is, that the adult french of 1870 are "useless" in the sense that they could fully adopt to the modern world. They are born and raised in pre-historic times (to say so), with a complete different morale and social ideology. Again the same is true for all other countries, that is nothing special about france. So - my idea - is to teach and train the kids, that could adopted into the new modern world. The old ones aren´t useless, they will not be mistreated, but my feeling is, that you can´t move people from 1870 to 2018 if they are fully grown up and socialised. Esp if they never heared or saw the things that are common in our times. We do not even discuss ethic values (again - france 1870 - ready to go to war by a fictional insult, modern world : ha ha ha... what do you say? really, well who cares - that is the reaction of modern people to such "insult"). A lot of these people could adjust themself to modern standards, but not in the way that they 100% adjust. Even modern people can´t partly follow the development, the accelerated change. How should people who do not know what a car or airplane is achive that? But please stop this underlaying message you allways did. Really... i write what i think, if you belive it is something different, feel free to ask. But - as we found out in the other thread, your imaginated "insults" do not exist. The same here. My conclusion: small military unit enters france, take out the leadership, start modernisation with the help by european partners. Beside some diehard-extremists the others will be quite happy because they get acceptable medicine support, better healthcare, working conditions, improvements in all areas. If you see it different - feel free to explain it. But - untill now here i miss points from you. I described quite detailed why i think that X or Y happens. Now it is your turn. Thank you.
|
|
steffen
Ensign
Posts: 300
Likes: 18
|
Post by steffen on Mar 22, 2018 15:53:02 GMT
Oh, the partisan actions by the french were punished by hard repreasels... i never said different. Just that partisan actions caused this. No "brutal" agression existed. But yes, if a troop was shot by civillians out of the dark, the punishment was hard. i even wrote that it was brutal, esp. for our modern standards. For that time standards - nope.
Also - if you look into the comunards and the following killings, 10.000s of killed communards by the french forces in 1871 seem to be more relevant, eh? Numbers have their own gravity. That is something i do not understand - nobody mentioned something like "killing civilians", just you bring it in. For what purpose? What is your agenda with it?
Do you belive the civilised europeans would kill civilians because a madmen shoot onto some french or belgian or german soldier sitting next to an armored car? And do they slaughter like hell kids and co? If you belive this, please explain why this happens.
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 23,482
Likes: 12,080
|
Post by stevep on Mar 22, 2018 16:53:25 GMT
You may see it as a liberating but I think the vast majority of down-time French will see it as a violent occupation. Since the 1st thing that happens in this new world is that they are immediately invaded, their government deposed and laws arbitrarily changed, with them given no say on the issue. There is an interesting contradiction in your arguments. You say that the French, reading books from the future will overcome their anger at the invasion. Then shortly afterwards stating your writing off all the adult French because of "wrong attitude" as you put it. Which at least implies your removing say ~25M adults from society as a whole and also separating them from their children so the later can't be 'tainted' by their parent's viewpoint. Which is obviously impossible. Have you ever read anything about the problems of occupying an hostile nation? Your up timers can't rule France from within a tank. Those troops are going to have to come out for food, clothing, etc at some time and what if someone then takes a pot shot at them? A lot of angry French with rifles. Also how are they going to get the information they need to actually rule the country if they can't depend on the 1870 civil servants, because the latter may be refusing to help them or possibly passing them false info? And if their in danger of being shot/stabbed/whatever any time they try and see the ordinary French population? On the question of Francs-tireurs, see the Wiki page for them. This points out that the Prussians in 1870 often did kill nearby villagers in retaliation for such attacks and that the level of paranoia in the German army in 1914 meant that hostages were taken and frequently killed in both Belgium and occupied France, often with no evidence of any actual guerilla activity. I would point out that while this sort of behaviour was reasonably legal in 1870, it did cause a lot of resentment and by 1914 widespread repugnation. The fact that the German army did in 1914 deliberately kill civilians is a fact, although not strictly related to the issue under discussion here. That such behaviour is totally unacceptable in 2018, especially since your assuming the bulk of the occupiers are up-time French is relevant and prompts the question how will they deal with large numbers of francs-tireurs? Hi, please read exactly what i wrote. 1.) i said that the foreign-french would liberate the country - at last in my eyes the installation of modern civilisation in france is a liberation, esp. equal rights to woman, gay etc, also the chance to develop, increase medicine healthcare... 2.) the foreign french need to remove the leadership of that 1870-france. Because these leaders are not compatible with modern world (again - that is my opinion about that). 3.) there is no war or such thing. At last that is my opinion. So i can´t see the "occupation forces". we totally disagree about how old-style-france in that scenario is lead to modern times. Propably so much that it is useless to discuss it, cause you allways come with things i never wrote or said, so it is near impossible to discuss such things. Please use the stuff the other person write, okay? 4.) my impression is, that the adult french of 1870 are "useless" in the sense that they could fully adopt to the modern world. They are born and raised in pre-historic times (to say so), with a complete different morale and social ideology. Again the same is true for all other countries, that is nothing special about france. So - my idea - is to teach and train the kids, that could adopted into the new modern world. The old ones aren´t useless, they will not be mistreated, but my feeling is, that you can´t move people from 1870 to 2018 if they are fully grown up and socialised. Esp if they never heared or saw the things that are common in our times. We do not even discuss ethic values (again - france 1870 - ready to go to war by a fictional insult, modern world : ha ha ha... what do you say? really, well who cares - that is the reaction of modern people to such "insult"). A lot of these people could adjust themself to modern standards, but not in the way that they 100% adjust. Even modern people can´t partly follow the development, the accelerated change. How should people who do not know what a car or airplane is achive that? But please stop this underlaying message you allways did. Really... i write what i think, if you belive it is something different, feel free to ask. But - as we found out in the other thread, your imaginated "insults" do not exist. The same here. My conclusion: small military unit enters france, take out the leadership, start modernisation with the help by european partners. Beside some diehard-extremists the others will be quite happy because they get acceptable medicine support, better healthcare, working conditions, improvements in all areas. If you see it different - feel free to explain it. But - untill now here i miss points from you. I described quite detailed why i think that X or Y happens. Now it is your turn. Thank you. My underlying message is that I think X, Y, Z and give arguments for them. Your underlying message seems to be N, O, P are right because you say so and any alternative viewpoint must be wrong because you disagree with it. For instance you continue to deny that people will object to a sudden and violent invasion. Or that a small and isolated force can compel tens of millions of people to behave as they wish without any explanation as to how. [Leaving aside your desire to ignore recorded history.] Furthermore, just because you decide that insults aren't insults doesn't make you right. You need a slave alongside you on that chariot your riding. [Even if your done nothing I'm aware of to merit a Triumphant yet]
|
|