AnimeSuki Forums

Register Forum Rules FAQ Members List Social Groups Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   AnimeSuki Forum > General > General Chat

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2014-01-20, 09:00   Link #541
Fireminer
Lumine Passio
*Author
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Hanoi, Vietnam
Age: 11
Well, with the weapon problem, I would rather go with something typical. The readers, pretty sure that most of them won't spend much time for the weapon's detail.
Fireminer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-01-20, 10:59   Link #542
Ridwan
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: قلوب المؤمنين
Well, the readers can read whatever they want.
__________________
Ridwan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-01-21, 03:17   Link #543
LeoXiao
思想工作
 
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Vereinigte Staaten
Age: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ithekro View Post
List of small arms manufacturers around 1900:
Thanks, this will be helpful.

Last edited by LeoXiao; 2014-01-21 at 04:02.
LeoXiao is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-01-21, 03:41   Link #544
Ithekro
The Comet has Come
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Republic of California
Age: 40
There are a few smaller companies that make firearms, but most were specialized in making shotguns, sporting/hunting rifles, or other non-military use weaponry. Or were craftsmen that made unique firearms for lots of money.

Also there were a few that (as far as I could tell) only made weapons for their own national military and did not take orders to sell arms to other countries. A lot of the French companies seem like that, while the British, German, and certainly the Americans, sold to many people.

Also many companies would simply make licensed versions of other companies guns. sometimes with minor changes or improvements if possible. Though usually they just made them cheaper.
__________________
Dessler Soto, Banzai!
Ithekro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-02-11, 03:09   Link #545
Ascaloth
I don't give a damn, dude
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: In Despair
Age: 31
Okay, so here's something interesting. I'm not sure whether this is the right thread for this and all, but I figured it was close enough.

So, I've found myself in an online political game set in the 2020s, and I'm playing the role of China. Specifically, I'm playing a restored Republic of China, led by a Kuomintang returned from exile in Taiwan (yeah, realism isn't exactly emphasised here). Taiwan itself on the other hand has been taken over by a militant Pan-Green faction, and has joined with Japan, Philippines and California to form a polity of its own; we'll call it 'Pacific'. Pacific has also for 'certain reasons' taken over the Fujian province.

Game has just started, and Pacific has agreed to cede Fujian back to my ROC. In return, I'm planning not to make an issue of Taiwan. However, now we've moved on to the issue of Scarborough Shoal/Spratly Islands/Senkaku Islands.

I must confess I've never followed those disputes all that closely, so I'm a little unsure of the respective arguments used by RL China to support its sovereignty over those territories. If someone can point me to a short and sweet summary, and/or suggest negotiation strategies, it would be much appreciated. Thanks!
Ascaloth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-02-11, 03:27   Link #546
aldw
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ascaloth View Post
Okay, so here's something interesting. I'm not sure whether this is the right thread for this and all, but I figured it was close enough.

So, I've found myself in an online political game set in the 2020s, and I'm playing the role of China. Specifically, I'm playing a restored Republic of China, led by a Kuomintang returned from exile in Taiwan (yeah, realism isn't exactly emphasised here). Taiwan itself on the other hand has been taken over by a militant Pan-Green faction, and has joined with Japan, Philippines and California to form a polity of its own; we'll call it 'Pacific'. Pacific has also for 'certain reasons' taken over the Fujian province.

Game has just started, and Pacific has agreed to cede Fujian back to my ROC. In return, I'm planning not to make an issue of Taiwan. However, now we've moved on to the issue of Scarborough Shoal/Spratly Islands/Senkaku Islands.

I must confess I've never followed those disputes all that closely, so I'm a little unsure of the respective arguments used by RL China to support its sovereignty over those territories. If someone can point me to a short and sweet summary, and/or suggest negotiation strategies, it would be much appreciated. Thanks!
There are very practical reasons why China claims Diaoyu (especially regarding sea LOC), but historical reasons go back to that the islands were already considered part of Taiwan's administrative zone (when Taiwan was part of Fujian province). The Japanese claim that the Treaty of Shimonoseki gave the islands to them, but even then was still administered as part of Taiwan's administration. When the ROC declared war after the Japanese invasion, the treaty was declared null and void, and territorial restoration was backed by the Cairo declaration of 1943.
aldw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-02-11, 04:18   Link #547
Ithekro
The Comet has Come
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Republic of California
Age: 40
Save that the actual treaty (San Francisco) kept said islands as administered from Okinawa, then under American occupation. When Okinawa was returned to Japan by the United States after 25 years, the islands sort of went with it. The Treaty of Taipei doesn't change matters all that much (as the treaty is with Taiwan) and was more or less made moot when Japan opened relations with the mainland in the 1970s. The peace between Japan and the PRC says nothing about islands or even anything about World War II, as that was 1978.

If the ROC is not going to make an issue over Taiwan, what sense is there in making an issue over those islands? Especially if Taiwan and Japan are in the same country (or is that just an alliance?)

If Pacific has manage to gain a foothold on Mainland China, the ROC has no foot to stand on for extra territorial claims in the South China Sea.
__________________
Dessler Soto, Banzai!

Last edited by Ithekro; 2014-02-11 at 05:41.
Ithekro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-02-11, 19:13   Link #548
Ascaloth
I don't give a damn, dude
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: In Despair
Age: 31
So if I intend to give up Taiwan, I should probably drop all claims to Diaoyu then?

How about Spratlys and Scarborough?
Ascaloth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-02-11, 23:24   Link #549
aldw
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ascaloth View Post
So if I intend to give up Taiwan, I should probably drop all claims to Diaoyu then?

How about Spratlys and Scarborough?
No, historical arguments are used to buttress practical ones, in this case protecting the Chinese LOC in order to protect the offshore EEZ. Giving up the Diaoyu Islands in this instance would allow Pacific to control Mainland Chinese maritime traffic for all intents and purposes, which is why you don't want to concede those islands in the first place. Spratlys is more a resource issue in comparison, so it's up to you to determine if you want to compromise or not. Think like a Victoria 2 player to get the gist of the geopolitical maneuvering involved.
aldw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-02-12, 00:39   Link #550
Ascaloth
I don't give a damn, dude
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: In Despair
Age: 31
Alright, so I really don't want to give up Diaoyu. Assuming I've made Pacific agree to give Fujian back, and the question of Taiwan is up in the air, as I haven't yet mentioned my stand on it. Also, Pacific is a nation in its own right (encompassing both Japan and Taiwan), and they're basically waiting to see what my stance on Diaoyu, Spratlys and Scarborough is.

I can forego Taiwan, I want to keep Diaoyu, and I can use Spratlys and Scarborough as bargaining chips. What would be the ideal strategy for me to employ, here?

Before I forget, this is also keeping in mind that my ROC is looking into signing a political and economic alliance with Pacific, as well. So, I want to keep them happy enough to still want me as an ally, while not compromising my own interests too much.
Ascaloth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-02-12, 01:00   Link #551
Irenicus
Le fou, c'est moi
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Las Vegas, NV, USA
Age: 28
Mm...joint oil and gas exploration? Promises not to develop military installations or garrisons in the sea zones? You cede some exclusive economic benefits and complete sovereignty while retaining the crucial sea transit rights.

But you'll have to convince the Pacific player in the first place why you're willing to give up on Taiwan but not the Diaoyu, without stating outright your rationale -- that you don't trust them to always keep shipping lanes open in cases of diplomatic conflict. Would s(he) accept RP arguments like placating domestic jingoism?

Alternatively, or, well, in addition to that, you can possibly propose a mutually binding free shipping agreement (+ negotiations over fishing quotas and enforcement mechanisms) for both parties, either for the entire national seas -- which Pacific will probably not accept given their much larger sea zones that they're giving up exclusive rights on -- or overlapping areas/the China Seas. It might be the first step for a free trade agreement and an eventual alliance. I don't know what kind of background the game world has, but if the Pacific component regions retain anything like the real industries of Japan, Taiwan, and California, the Chinese market would be most welcome.

The game's setting sounds very strange though. Why are they holding Fujian and -- though gameplay-wise very understandable given that the a player with the full might of the USA would just kick everybody's butt -- why is California independent and in league with Japan and Taiwan.
Irenicus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-02-12, 01:02   Link #552
Ithekro
The Comet has Come
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Republic of California
Age: 40
For what reasons did the mainland ROC not have Fujian and how did they get it back?

If ROC didn't have Fujian, they didn't have the LOC to protect in that area around Taiwan and Japan, as that was entirely controled by "Pacific". This isn't even US-Philippines-Taiwan-South Korea-Japan alliance type sea zone denial, this is one country that controls the waters from Japan to the Philippines. Those islands are a moot point in the East China Sea, because they have both Taiwan and Japan to project their EEZ.

If the ROC was having issues maintaining their own coastline, they have no method of establishing control over the South China Sea verses Pacific in the Philippines. Who holds the lands know presently as Vietnam and Indonesia? They are the other disputed parties in that sea other than Pacific and China.

We use to do stuff like that but mostly relating to naval construction and had naval focus. But those were in the age of battleships from the 1890s to the 1940s. In one version we had Chile (of all places) lay a claim on the Spratlys due to having a sailor die while they were in the area and buried him there. It was an excuse, but it was 1926.
__________________
Dessler Soto, Banzai!
Ithekro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-02-12, 01:55   Link #553
Ascaloth
I don't give a damn, dude
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: In Despair
Age: 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irenicus View Post
Mm...joint oil and gas exploration? Promises not to develop military installations or garrisons in the sea zones? You cede some exclusive economic benefits and complete sovereignty while retaining the crucial sea transit rights.

But you'll have to convince the Pacific player in the first place why you're willing to give up on Taiwan but not the Diaoyu, without stating outright your rationale -- that you don't trust them to always keep shipping lanes open in cases of diplomatic conflict. Would s(he) accept RP arguments like placating domestic jingoism?
Well, it's worth a shot, yes.

Quote:
The game's setting sounds very strange though. Why are they holding Fujian and -- though gameplay-wise very understandable given that the a player with the full might of the USA would just kick everybody's butt -- why is California independent and in league with Japan and Taiwan.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ithekro View Post
For what reasons did the mainland ROC not have Fujian and how did they get it back?
Partially my fault actually; part of my background for a restored ROC is the breakdown of the PRC due to a global economic depression, leading to yet another Warring States period for mainland China. Subsequently when the KMT reunited mainland China, the ex-PRC warlord defected to Pacific instead of rejoining the ROC for his own reasons.

Same global depression also broke up the United States, thus California with Pacific and the rest of the former US divided into Union vs Confederate yet again.

Like I said, realism isn't highly prioritised here.

This game is supposed to be based in an alternate XCOM: Enemy Unknown setting, which means ALIENS sooner or later. But it's just started, so right now we're doing 'normal' diplomacy and all that jazz.

Quote:
If the ROC was having issues maintaining their own coastline, they have no method of establishing control over the South China Sea verses Pacific in the Philippines. Who holds the lands know presently as Vietnam and Indonesia? They are the other disputed parties in that sea other than Pacific and China.
Vietnam is an NPC, while Indonesia is part of another PC faction I'll call 'Oceania'. The latter hasn't been particularly active as yet, though.
Ascaloth is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
alternate history, discussion, fiction, history

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 22:56.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
We use Silk.