OOC

OOC Discussion.

Apologies to Fish, I've got writer's block regarding our meeting at the moment. Maybe tomorrow, my brain will clear.

Looks good to me Dax, do you want to lock it or is it ok open?

Meh, I'll lock it so as to remind myself that it's finished. I always have a hard time keeping track of bilaterals whenever there's more than two at a time.

Also, the irony of me asking you if it looked kosher didn't dawn on me until after I posted it. I half expect Skyenet to comment, "No, in fact, it does not look kosher, thank you."

I did smile about the kosher remark, assuming it was deliberate. Maybe it's a subconscious piece of mischief-making?

Ditto. I'm also seconding the notion that it may have been a Freudian slip.

Totes apologies about past couple of days of inactivity. Will have replies for Schwer and MTTezla today

Waiting on a reply between Iran and Algeria too.

Roger that. Sorry, mate.

That last post made me feel like a dystopian author trying too hard.

Thanks Dax! I wonder where Esco went? I started a thread in this area. Hmm.
I'll PM him too.

And ChrisRev, I will make a thread for a meeting here either later today or in a bit. I want to get several nations together for a multi-meeting on our region.

India and Japan trying to organize an anti-China axis.

This is going to end very, very badly for both of them.

Should be fun to see.

I like this round already.

Don't make me colonize you again. There'll be no Americans to save you this time.

You can't just use a whatever-the-hell-that-animal-is (anteater?) on me! All I've got are hello kitties...

Sorry, 21c doesn't have a mercy rule.

I choose you, bipedal anteater!

Awh man, I was going to do the same thing after I got my new Pres..

Keep going with our meeting, Karto, and you will find all the anti-China goodness you could ever desire.

Okay Schwer, I never swear when I can help it, but I'm about to swear in consternation. What did you just propose to me!?

If I may offer my obviously unbiased opinion, he's suggesting that unless the USA and China enter into a strategic partnership, war is inevitable.

The proposal, to my eyes, appears to be that America sell off its chips in Asia (Taiwan, Korea, Japan, Australia, etc. over time) in exchange for Chinese support for America's own endeavors (such as Afghanistan). Personally, I wouldn't take it, though I am sitting in Tokyo at the moment (future world capital).

Apparently, since I am bold enough to attempt to gain more for Japan in six months' diplomacy than Japan did in eight years of war, Schwer is raising me one. Conniving bastard. Awfully big gamble, though. Even bigger than mine. With a democracy, at least you can polish the shoes and ditch the old figureheads. One of the few advantages over authoritarian states in geopolitics.

This round could very well turn into the greatest diplomatic/political/military RP in 21C history.

I'm really just wondering if Schwer actually thought that I'd simply give away my allies. I guess I haven't been here long enough--too loyal for that.

I'm also starting to wonder if I'm up for this high-level, crazy RPing--BUT IT'S SO MUCH FUN!

I wasn't asking America to sell off all its chips in Asia. The only chip I actually asked for was Taiwan. And, in return, I explicitly stated that he'd get a unified Korea. That's a trade that America would take even without the potential to net China as an ally.

My proposal was based upon a simple notion: whenever there are only two geopolitical forces, there can be no parity. Balance can only be achieved with the presence of at least three forces divided against one another. A bipolar world, torn between China and America, lacks that stable third pillar. Europe's too insular, Russia is a moribund power bound for the EU, and Japan lacks both spine and presence. That leaves just America and China. And we saw how well two superpowers worked out for forty years, didn't we?

Instead of attempting to facilitate the rise of a third power (like India) that may not necessarily be friendly to either of the two existing powers, I simply offered America the opportunity to build a policy around cooperation rather than antagonism. This is basically the same dilemma that Britain was forced to deal with a long time ago during America's rise and, ultimately, Britain chose to opt for cooperation.

As for what America gets out of it, well... America has to trade in a liability (Taiwan, which it cannot possibly defend). In return, America sees one problem (North Korea) hamstrung and further isolated. America then gets much-needed support in its nation-building venture in Afghanistan. Yang also implied that China would back future American bouts of interventionism abroad, something that obviously hasn't happened very often.

The only thing America loses is the right to act unilaterally in all things. Which -- and let's be perfectly honest here -- isn't exactly something that has served America very well in the past decade.

Oh, you'll get used to it. It is quite enjoyable. Though some of us still pine for the near-WWIII moments back in summer of '08, even though the quality of RPing was admittedly much lower back then (especially in my case, I full well admit).

Loyalty has its uses, sometimes worth it, sometimes not.

Oh, and as a general gripe: all this high-strung diplomacy is cutting into the time I'm supposed to be using to read the Critique of Pure Reason. Kant, is positively Kanting (taunting, geddit? geddit?) me at the moment.

How will I ever understand the full ramifications of the a priori necessity of the synthetic unity of the manifold with all these blasted distractions?

But why would I give up Taiwan now for North Korea later, especially since North Korea would take years to develop into something worthwhile? It would also really undermine my alliances with other states--because they're just pawns to me now, eh?

..and in the mean time, my buddy is counseling me to just nuke you. What great advice.