I have no idea as well, since all that we only know a few moments ago is that She and Cassius had participated in joint manoeuvres before, so there might be a chance that they both once messed around before, as for the details and the truth? Only time can tell.
Which is still ultimately about the people who live on that land, not the land itself.
I’m not saying the flyover states shouldn’t be represented, I’m saying they shouldn’t be able to hold the places where most of the people live hostage.
I agree with sentiment just not with the interpretation of the hostage situation. If we are talking specifically about the last election cycle it was states like Pennsylvania with “costal elite” fortresses like Philadelphia that overturned he will of the popular majority, not Wyoming.
In the context of swing states? Yes. In the context of the reliable, popular foundations which allowed states like Pennsylvania and Michigan to become tiebreakers in the first place, no.
Did Cassius have an affair with her because his dad wanted him to? I can imagine his old man going, “Fine, this is beneficial to the family.”
Question, is this affair the basis of the “graft and corruption” charges leveled on her?
What? No. The last guy killed himself.
She’s his replacement.
Note that Lord Cassius and Richsgraavyn vam Rusch are nearly the same age.
That is interesting, very meritocratic, now I feel bad for Cassius. “Why aren’t you a minister yet? Sato is a minister in charge of the whole navy. Just imagine what you could achieve if you actually applied yourself.”
Problem is the math doesn’t add up. Wyoming has 3 electors and Pennsylvania has 20. It takes 7 Wyoming sized states to overturn the will of one Pennsylvania in Congress. Additionally, those majority rural states are reliably conservative so you wouldn’t see much of a change even with proportional representation. Winner-take-all and gerrymandering in populous but politically divided states has a much more straight-line correlation to out of wack Federal representation.
What can the MC invest in, depending on the area they come from?
I don’t think that seven Wyoming sized states should have roughly equal influence to one Pennsylvania sized state, given the population disparity.
It’s not the only thing throwing things out of wack, but it most certainly does as long as the electoral college exists.
@Cataphrak @cascat07, I was thinking, how successful would you rate Tierra adopting a “Fleet in Being” strategy against Takara in the event of a war. While the Tierran Navy won’t be as effective as the Kian one due to their sheer amount of firepower and staying power on the Kian vessels. I would say that the RTN is considerable enough of a navy to divert Takaran assets away from the main front that will be Kian.
Also if the bigger ships remain in port, they can always take out their big broadside batteries and remount them as coastal batteries.
Anyone else with an opinion can jump in!
the big guns garing had in the last battle in guns would be better for shore batteries.
I mean, the big Tierran naval guns are massive since they are meant to punch through thick hulls. Those can be added later, but the main thing will be surviving the first push.
I think this touches on my wider point here: that giving disproportionate representation in the Senate to a rural, parochial minority has (along with various other Jeffersonian schemes), over the past two centuries, skewed American politics far more towards agrarian and reactionary direction than has really been healthy.
Takara’s got a lot of tools to neutralise a fleet in harbour: II wetwork teams, regular Richshyr units, or simply eating the casualties to get past those harbour defences from the sea.
Takara understands that Tierra’s most dangerous capability is naval just as well as we do. They’ll almost certainly be trying to “Copenhagen” as much of the fleet as possible as an opening move.
I’m not sure where to go with this at the moment, but as far as talking Takara vs. Tierra;
Functionally, Takara has a steam powered navy that also has the advantages (in the context of the 19th century) of a sail powered one - it maneuver however it damn well pleases and has long cruising range without having to worry about refueling (for the ship).
This is a serious problem for either Tierran ships or forts, since a fair piece of the disadvantage of ships vs. shore batteries is no longer a thing when you master the wind instead of being mastered by the wind…
is there technology for mines yet in this state of the infinite sea also in the 1400s italian city states invented a catapult like thing that when an enemy warship sailed over it the device would spring up and puncture the ship. I would put those in tierras harbors.
Also since you guys seam to all know about the naval battle for Copenhagen Couldn’t tierra do what the danish did with those floating fotresses
As distasteful as you may find him the Senate was ultimately a small state vs large state debate/compromise when the constitution was being written. Virginia was one of the big states. I really didn’t have a whole lot to do with the agrarian paradise of Jeffersonian dreams. It was more like Rhode Island didn’t want to be lorded over by New York.
I feel like Tierra’s move here would be the “American” one here and to embark in global (flattal?) commerce raiding.
So basically, we don’t need a fleet since the Takarans can murder it with a wave of a hand or just blow it up in the harbor.
That should be the perfect justification for tearing up the fleet if we get an alliance with Kian.
Kian would probably only sign that alliance in the first place to bring the RTN on-side. You got to pay your 2% of GDP you know…