www.navalism.org

*La Paz, California*

It was hot, dry and sunny... this was NOT how it's supposed to be the week after Christmas. The construction crews had scaffolding up all over the place; the base wasn't even a work in progress- it was a work just begun. The airship hanger was just scaffolding. Piles of tin stood all bout it, blindingly bright sentries standing guard over the place they would hang. Inland was the landing area... seemingy 10 times as big as it needed to be; maybe the winds were bad here.

Lines- nice, neat, military lines- of houses, or at least what might be called 'bungalows,' stood on the beach side of the hangers. A small post exchange near the water; it's shelves full of mostly beer, bread, milk, coffee and other essentials of military life. Then the fence that separated them from the outside world.

It wasn't a military post.
It might be in another 6 months... but right now it was a construction zone with 100 soldiers and their families living in the middle of it.

"WHY did they stick us out here again?" he wondered. Ever since that midshipman had brought him these TDY orders, he'd felt uneasy about this. Off in the distance, he noticed a smudge of black on the horizon- a coal-fired ship steaming inside the Gulf. They must be near the naval base.

"Wonder why?"

BREAKING NEWS!!!

Today the Georgia State Legislature indicted David Shelton, a Democratic Representative from the Atlanta area, on charges of unethical behavior. Evidence from an undisclosed source has indicated that Mr. Shelton has been linked to businesses that are exporting poor workers overseas from within his district in an attempt to skew the vote in favor of Democratic candidates.

The working class and poorer citizens- especially Negroes- of Georgia have long voted Republican, and have been gaining strength as more moved into Atlanta from the countryside to claim better paying jobs. After the recent Senatorial elections, however, this gain had been reversed. Independent research has shown that the vast majority (over 80%) of the workers that are being moved to overseas interests from this area are from the predominately Republican-leaning neighborhoods. This has resulted in an imbalance in the representation of the voting public which gives the advantageback to the Democrats.

The investigation is ongoing. Whether or not others become involved remains to be seen.

Paris, France
04 JAN 1908

Theodore Roosevelt strode towards the offices of the Prime Minister of France with his usual air of hurriedness. It wasn't that he was necessarily an inpatient man, nor one that abhorred the necessity of waiting necessary... he was just repulsed by missing the chance to do all the things that one could be doing instead of the waiting- precisely 1 hour and 45¹/₄ minutes of it today so far. He could have easily added an extra fifteen minutes of exercise to his morning constitutional and afterward had some more time in the hotel's fine bath, or spent the time searching for a guide to help him book a hunt for red deer prior to departing Europe... the latter being his preferred choice. His favorite Winchester was- as always- locked away in his steamer trunk with an ample supply of ammunition.

As he approached the elegant doors to the PM's actual office, Ambassador Roosevelt slowed his gait; this was difficult for him, but necessary- some people took offense at his eagerness, believing it to be two parts condescending impatience and one part demanding arrogance.

For this task, neither of these impressions could enter the equation.
For this task, only perfection- pure, undiluted success- would suffice.

In his calloused hand (a matter of pride, those callouses), Roosevelt carried a folder containing several documents, among them:
trade agreements and monetary concessions amounting to $14 million Confederate dollars,
operational data for the new class of torpedo rams being fielded by the CSN,
and finally, an agreement allowing France to keep one of the Rattlesnake-class cruisers that they had constructed for the CSN over the previous year.

In short- in his hands he carried the Confederacy's most valuable commodities.

He reached the door, gave the attendant his name, and waited to be called...

I can only lament that I had no goons in the hallways to tackle Mr. Roosevelt and make off with his folder.

Ah well...

You do write very evocative news reports, by the way.  The human elements add so much to the story

Quote from: The Rock Doctor on July 18, 2007, 09:20:50 AM
I can only lament that I had no goons in the hallways to tackle Mr. Roosevelt and make off with his folder.

Ah well...

You do write very evocative news reports, by the way.  The human elements add so much to the story

I said his Winchester was locked in his steamer trunk. Ambassador Roosevelt is very adept at hiding his skinning knife, however, and should never be considered unarmed. ;) Like as not, your goon would have been given the folder- sans it important contents- and a ticket home in exchange for his ears and scalp. ;D

Thanks for the complement... I try to put myself as an observer to what's going on.
Actually, if anything, I try to emulate yourself and Swampy.

*posters that have begun appearing all over Dixie lately*

Go forth and multiply!

It's "Populate or Perish" time, I see.  ;)

Well, I do have the lowest population of any of the 1st World Countries in N-verse. It's time for my people to get to reproducing!

Quote from: Carthaginian on July 19, 2007, 09:21:30 AM
Well, I do have the lowest population of any of the 1st World Countries in N-verse. It's time for my people to get to reproducing!

Not really, the Neatherlands only have a bit more the 16 million people in the homeland, its the 30 million people on Java that is pushing up the total population for the Netherlands.

Quote from: Korpen on July 19, 2007, 09:39:32 AM

Quote from: Carthaginian on July 19, 2007, 09:21:30 AM
Well, I do have the lowest population of any of the 1st World Countries in N-verse. It's time for my people to get to reproducing!

Not really, the Neatherlands only have a bit more the 16 million people in the homeland, its the 30 million people on Java that is pushing up the total population for the Netherlands.

Well, I have no colonies as yet, and a total of just under 33 million.

So c'mon, people... start makin' like bunnies- be good at multiplication.

*Another poster, this one appealing to people's sense of religious duty*

(http://i142.photobucket.com/albums/r114/Carthaginian/Navalism/Posters/multiply.jpg)

Average family size of 5-6 children apparently not enough.

Quote from: P³D on July 19, 2007, 10:31:31 AM
Average family size of 5-6 children apparently not enough.

It's not so much that we want LARGER families... we want MORE families, though 7-8 kids for those that can support them would not be out of the question. Ultimately, people are going to have as many children as they can support.

What the Confederate Government is aiming at with this program is the growing urban section of the population- people that make the money to support more kids, but DON'T need the help on the farm. They need to start producing more children. We're also aiming to appeal to the sentiments of those who might not be having any children- confirmed bachelors of 30+ and 'spinsters' of over 25- who might think they are too old for families.

There has to be room for growth somewhere... I can't seriously be stuck with the land area to support 100+ million and the lowest population in N-verse.

Ahoj!
In Russia and Poland there used to be a tax paid by "overage" bachelors.
It still was an improvement on previous customs - guess why one of the Russian terms for an unmarried man is "whip-boy" (hlastiak), while in Poland the tax was called "the bullwhip" ...

Borys, who qualifies for a good whipping :)

Quote from: Borys on July 19, 2007, 10:46:02 AM
Ahoj!
In Russia and Poland there used to be a tax paid by "overage" bachelors.
It still was an improvement on previous customs - guess why one of the Russian terms for an unmarried man is "whip-boy" (hlastiak), while in Poland the tax was called "the bullwhip" ...

Borys, who qualifies for a good whipping :)

LOL... I lie that.
Great piece of trivia, Borys.

And for the record, I'm pushing 30 with no kids... so I'd be right up there with you in line for the whipping post. ;)

QuoteThere has to be room for growth somewhere... I can't seriously be stuck with the land area to support 100+ million and the lowest population in N-verse.

Same here, I have the second largest country in terms of land area, but the second smallest population of all PCs.

The publisher of the above poster is going to get a LARGE order...

Ahoj!

Quote from: Desertfox on July 19, 2007, 11:14:00 AM

Quote

The publisher of the above poster is going to get a LARGE order...

And don't forget the whips ...
Borys

I won't forget the whips! ;D

Men all over the CSA will be showing their wives the posters, protesting, "But it's our patriotic duty!"

Headaches are Sin!
And unpatriotic.

Ahoj!
Small correction - the best translation for the Polish tax would be "steer tax".
Sorry for misinformation.
Borys

Quote from: Borys on July 19, 2007, 12:58:33 PM
Ahoj!
Small correction - the best translation for the Polish tax would be "steer tax".
Sorry for misinformation.
Borys

That's even worse!
Instead of just whipping you, they fix it where you CAN'T have kids!
VERY counterproductive.

Ahoj!
Shit! Another gap in my English!
So steer=ox?
Unless there is a better bovine equivalent to "stud", it's the "bull tax" then.

I hate it when I make such mistakes!

Borys

Quote from: Borys on July 19, 2007, 01:19:38 PM
Ahoj!
Shit! Another gap in my English!
So steer=ox?
Unless there is a better bovine equivalent to "stud", it's the "bull tax" then.

I hate it when I make such mistakes!

Borys

LOL... in English, a 'steer' is a castrated bull, generally grown for beef.

And the problem in understanding is MINE... not yours.
You can understand English.
I can't speak a lick of Polish.
You're doing far better than I.

Ah, Bonjour monsieur l'ambassadeur, welcome to my small bureau. (Rooseveld wonderingly gazes over the casual grandeur)

How Can Glorious France help you, and the Confederation you so valiantly serve.
Premier Paixhans, the honor is mine, that you could meet me on such a short notice. I have the latest proposals my government has been agonizing over.

You mean, the issue of a closed Caribbean region, the Great Canal that shortly won't need the influx of laborers anymore and the wish for the population growth for the CSA. I must admit, that information campagne started about that is worth to be followed.

Yes premier, it is these matters we of the Confederate States of America have designs and future views about.
One of the things we would like to ask again of Glorious France is the Haïtian problem.
The southern Powerhouse, Gran Colombia, made us worried with their proposal to take over the non profitable West Indies from France. Envoy Jardan did do a good job as negotiator to defuse the tensions between our states over the Caribbean.
And our politicians have found a possible compromise. But this compromise still needs the full approval and generousity of France. As she still would have to sacrifice a part of the Glorious Empire in the name of precious peace.

I'm well aware of the plans on the Caribbean as visioned by Gran Colombia and the Confederated states. And does any of the 2 believe, if France excerts itself, the region wouldn't be peacefull. Possibly under the smoke of many a fire?
But France has grown out of such a barbarisme. And sees the potential of letting beautifull gems of colonies go from the bosom of civilisation.
But such a commitment has a price. Otherwise every state would come to France and beg for a piece of the body that makes up our Glorious Republique.
Is your country willing to pay such a price?

Yes Premier. After a lot of closed sittings my government has hopefully found a fair transaction to conclude this transfer of lands.
For the transfer of Haïti the CSA offers France the compensation of lost income for at least 6 years.
And the fifth of the Rattlesnake cruisers. This ship, and all the technology it represents will be French. Our engineers will welcome any of the French shipbuilders and engineers wishing to gain the total and complete knowledge of these technologies.

Monsieur Roosevelt. France would accept the offer. But I have to ask for a few changes. Not big ones, nor a demand for more money.
As you know, the Rattlesnake cruisers were build in Halifax. And Halifax has its share of UKN engineers. Whose knowledge about propulsion has no equal on the world. They remarked that the turbine units as used on your tough cruisers are a bit out of date. We also know that your country possesses more modern turbines. Even if we have our turbine supplier,the UKN, we are most interested in the new Conferated turbines.

That seems a reasonable change to the proposal. I do not see any reason why I can't set that in the contract.
Any more, Premier Paixhans?

Yes. And that is to avoid people or countries getting upset. France would like to keep Port Au Prince as a fleet base. Of course we can share the berths there for the patrols we have to execute to keep the Caribbean free of monsters like Agrival.

Didn't France got the information that Agrival is dead, killed in a sword duel with a Rohirrim swordsmaster?

Of course France has heared those rumors, but Peru is a secretive country, and we don't put Agrival above faking his own dead. So we refrain from making statements in that respect.
But I think we could use a bit of refreshment, care to join me for lunch?

Today, at a little after 1:00 PM Richmond time, the Confederate Congress decided to re-open our ports to ships of all nations involved in the conflict currently engulfing the world. Any ship is welcome to dock- warship or merchant- however no ship of one belligerent may leave port within 24 hours of an enemy ship, and any attack upon shipping within Confederate waters will immediately result in the seizure or sinking of the vessel in question.

Ships will be allowed to remain in port for no more than 24 hours (excepting delays necessitating from the departure of enemy vessels) within a 3 month period, during which all hospitalities will be extended to them as a body and their crewmen as individuals. The Confederacy, however, reminds the sailors of both the New Swiss and the  Alliance that our cities are not their battleground. Any crimes committed against members of a belligerent nation's military will be tried to the fullest of Confederate military law- a code not known for it's leniency.

Again, Confederate ports will be open to ships of all nations involved in the currnt conflict.
This will begin at exactly midnight, February 1st, 1908.

"Good morning, Mr. Secretary."
First Sea Lord Edwin Anderson welcomed Secretary Roosevelt into his office. As admiral of the entire Confederate Navy, he was responsible for overseeing all the secret projects that the Secretary was cooking up... from the reasonable to the damnably foolish right out to the utterly insane.
So far as he was concerned, the project they were about to discuss fell firmly within the latter category. The new plans on his desk for the specialized ship were just too bizzare.

"Good morning, Sir! How goes things at La Paz?" Roosevelt was hopeful for his little pet project at the aerodrome in southern California. The Confederate Air Force assets there were seconded to Navy control for these tests. Specialized ships for trials had been put on hold, but simulated exercises on land had been ongoing since the first aircrews had arrived.

"Things have reached an impasse, I'm afraid, Mr. Secretary. There can be no further testing without converting a test ship to see if it can be done. Practicing it on land can only take us so far. If we're really going to be able to test your theory, then we MUST see if it's possible to refuel and rearm them while actually AT SEA. The Air Corps is also wanting their airships back. I've managed to stave them off till the beginning of 1910, but after that, i cannot guarantee the continuance of thi..."

"That's a small bother, Sir, a small bother. By that time, I'll be President and I'll be able to force the Air Corps to comply!" *"My God... does the man's arrogance know no bounds" the sailor thought.* Roosevelt slapped his leg and continued "Yes, by 1912, I look to have the project perfected and completed. Perhaps the first ship will be completed before I leave office! BULLY! What a thought! Something completely new and innovative, and all at my insistence; mark my words, Sir, this will change the face of naval warfare! One day in the near future, we'll be able to use air assets to find battlefleets long before they contact us!"

"Yes, Mr. Secretary... perhaps we will- IF the sea will cooperate."

"I'm sure you'll find a way to force the sea into submission... your men always do!" And like a shot- without even a 'farewell', the cataclysmic cyclone that was the Secretary of the Confederate States Navy was out of his office, allowing blissful silence to return.

"If airships work at sea, you pompous, arrogant upstart, it'll not be because you made it happen." The First Sea Lord picked his coffee back up and began regarding the new draft plans for the ship that had arrived.

BULLY! 

Awesome characterization there.

Thanks much.
As always, I try to learn form my betters. ;)

 ;D

OoC:

I do love Teddy Roosevelt. I'd dig the poor SOB up and clone him if possible... an unending stream of President Roosevelt stretching into eternity to keep the US from turning into the national equivalent of Jean-Luc Picard- a whiny, emo social worker that would rather talk it out than step up and assume greatness. ;D

I base my characterizations of Roosevelt off two sources (no laughing):
1.) Tom Berenger in the 1997 TBS movie 'Rough Riders.' I know that the movie was knee-deep in bull manure, but the portrayal of Roosevelt is excellent. Emotional, loyal, dedicated, excited and optimistic to a fault... all those aspects are captured by Berenger's acting- if not accurately, at least desiring to be so.
2.) Robin Williams in last year's 'Night at the Museum.' All around, I'd say that this was the best portrayal of Roosevelt in any movie... Williams is a genius. Only an actor of his caliber could make a wax model of Roosevelt seem more lifelike than the 'real people' in the movie. I think that Williams did strive for a more accurate portrayal than Berrenger, despite the comedic nature of the movie.


No matter who is acting as Roosevelt, one thing must be remembered: the man is a dynamo. He doesn't stop spinning no matter what; if something gets in his way or is interjected into the works, it is chewed up and hurled back out if it can't adjust to the motion.

That's what I'm trying to capture with 'my' Roosevelt.
He leads, you follow, and everyone else either gets on the bandwagon or out of the way.

FROM: Trans-Mississippi War Dept. HQ
TO: Maj. T. S. Baldwin, CO

RE: New Personnel Arrivals

This is a notification of transfer of 8 military personnel and 6 new civilian flight mechanics to Camp La Paz.
Expect arrival on or about 5-7 FEB 1908 via train. Personnel will arrive under supervision of Lt. T E. Selfridge.
XXX MESSAGE ENDS XXX

*Ft. Joseph Wheeler, Anniston, Alabama*

"Lt. Patton expects us to do WHAT?!?! Hell, we just got this truck running again and he wants me to bugger it up again? What kind of FOOL is that guy? He fall off his horse too many times?"

"That's what he told me he wanted to do with it, Sergeant. I don't ask questions, I just follow orders... no matter how damn screwball they might seem."

"Well, Corp, if he wants to ruin ANOTHER truck, he can take that broken-down one over there... tell him if he can fix it and keep it running, he can HAVE it!."

"With pleasure, Sergeant."

*La Paz, California*

"Major Baldwin, what brings you out to our test site today?" the dapper man with the greased hair and mustache asked. His uniform was soaked to the skin in sweat, indicating that he had spent today on the ground. This was unusual for Major Nathan B. Forrest III, as he preferred to be in the air aboard the 'drop ship' whenever possible. He proclaimed that he would rather view the process of dropping the modified 200-pounder shells form the air and observe from 'the better vantage point' the effects of dropping the bombs on the target and the airship; Baldwin himself simply believed that it was the most effective way for the Missouri native to beat the desert heat. "Everything went smoothly again today. We dropped 25-pounders in large quantities today- we wanted to evaluate the effects of the lighter weapons on 'soft targets.' By the way... we're having barbecued goat for supper tonight in the mess hall."

*"What in the hell does that m..." wondered Baldwin... and then the answer hit him. "So, Major Forrest, I presume that the local farmers were compensated for their livestock? We cannot afford to have the locals in an uproar. They are already nervous enough as-is... what with these massive machines defying God's de facto decree that man is a ground-bound species. I do believe that witnessing our airships raining fire and brimstone from the sky would drive them over the edge."

"Don't worry, sir... I had them shipped from San Deigo specially for these tests. I wouldn't dream of violating the agreements not to harm the property of the locals." Only a slight note of sarcasm tinged Forrest's voice; his rather affluent upbringing left him unimpressed by the station of the locals... but unfortunately, he was the best damn airship commander in the Confederacy's young Air Corps. "How fares your project back in Florida? Any new successes?

"Actually, we had one from over 1000 feet yesterday. Stone Mountain took up 5 jumpers and all made it safely to the ground. I received word via telegraph this morning. Only one injury this time... a sprained ankle. I believe that Major Chennault with the aeroplane division might be interested in trying the device soon. It would greatly increase their hopes of survival when testing new designs. Major Chennault has told me that one of his newer designs flew for over 4 hours yesterday... thought it was a special design produced especially for range of action. Lieutenant Luke was piloting it, and he flew over 180 miles in a day. The scouting potential of the aeroplane is something that we must not overlook. We could patrol the entire DRM border with a few dozen. Instead of requiring several cavalry divisions, we could deploy 7or 8 aeroplanes every 200 miles and maintain a constant vigil!"

"I'm sure General Pershing will absolutely adore your marginalization of cavalry."

"Major Forrest, the General of the Army may take a walk for all I care. 'Black Jack' Pershing might be an excellent tactician in his field, but he is hide-bound and too traditional. The day of a man and his horse scouting the land is over... why see 5 miles when you can see 25? The answer is clear- we must move forward!"

"I agree, Sir, I agree. Come, let's see how the tests fared."

The two men mounted their horses and rode the 3 miles to the site of the bombing run. The smell was almost unbearable... burning hair, singed flesh, and emptied bowels. The men on the site had already made the count- of 200 goats in the beaten zone, only 5 survived physically unscathed and even they were completely in shock. Forrest's remark about 'goat for supper' clearly didn't refer to this particular herd. Most of the dead had sustained wounds ranging from mortal to instantly fatal, only a few had lingered any amount of time. The majority lay in grisly condition.

"Major, I'd like to make my report: 'On the test regarding use of light exploding munitions dropped from an airship against infantry targets in positions unprotected by overhead cover, I judge the results satisfactory in all ways. Also, given the limited amount of firepower possessed of such an infantry company capable of doing satisfactory damage to a target of such size as an airship, I would rate chances of success as excellent."

"I've seen enough, Major Forrest. Let's get somewhere where it doesn't stink."

"Yes, Sir."

OOC
Ahoj!

Quote from: Carthaginian on August 26, 2007, 10:44:17 PM
Lieutenant Luke was piloting it, and he flew over 180 miles in a day.

Let me guess - orphan brought up by "relatives" on a farm in driest part of Arizona? With a crazy hermit "uncle" in nearby hills?
Borys

Quote from: Borys on August 26, 2007, 11:14:38 PM
OOC
Ahoj!

Quote from: Carthaginian on August 26, 2007, 10:44:17 PM
Lieutenant Luke was piloting it, and he flew over 180 miles in a day.

Let me guess - orphan brought up by "relatives" on a farm in driest part of Arizona? With a crazy hermit "uncle" in nearby hills?
Borys

LOL... nah. The Force is NOT strong with this one.
This is actually Frank Luke, the OTL ace known for firing his twin .45's at signs and trees while riding his motorcycle down country lanes at breakneck speeds. I couldn't think of anyone better to have as a test pilot.

Luke Skywalker is already claimed by the New Swiss airforce.  Just to mention.

Well not yet...he is trying to join. He is in fact based on Frank Luke Jr. with some WW Manzo mixed in. In from Arizona so I'm familiar with that crazy ballon buster. ;D

Quote from: maddox on August 27, 2007, 09:56:46 AM
Luke Skywalker is already claimed by the New Swiss airforce.  Just to mention.

Mine is the real Frank Luke, as he was born in the CSA. ;)
Not trying to co-opt anyone else's people, but Lt. Frank Luke is going to be majorly important to the Confederate Air Corps in the 1910's-20's. Get used to seeing his name in a lot of twixes coming out of La Paz. :)

Mobile Press-Regester, 01MAR1908

The city of Mobile was today shocked at the new posters being used by the Navy to entice men into enlisting. First displayed at the Water Street offices of the Gulf Command, it was spread throughout the city and one can only assume the rest of the country by late afternoon. It's lewd language and suggestive illustration caused a calamitous uproar amongst the more mature members of our fair city, and evoked stares and vulgar behavior in the younger. It is understandable that the Fleet Renewal Program designed to bring the Confederate Navy up to modern standards demands increased enlistment- and the Press-Register encourages all men of age to serve their country- however, many think this suggestive piece is inappropriate.

(http://i142.photobucket.com/albums/r114/Carthaginian/Navalism/Posters/bigguns.png)

THE WHORE OF BABYLON! HOW LOW HAS OUR GREAT NATION FALLEN? THE WORLD WONDERS!

At least its not the heathens to the west.  Their women ride horses in a very unlady like fashion.  They have even been know to wear pants.

Quote from: Ithekro on August 28, 2007, 02:53:50 PM
At least its not the heathens to the west.  Their women ride horses in a very unlady like fashion.  They have even been know to wear pants.

Which 'heathens' would that be? ;)

Ahoj!
I prefer not to mention the depreved Brandenburgers ... who have a cottage industry turning out postcards of indecently clad strumpets like this:
http://www.bildpostkarten.uni-osnabrueck.de/displayimage.php?album=114&pos=32
http://www.bildpostkarten.uni-osnabrueck.de/displayimage.php?pos=-7334
http://www.bildpostkarten.uni-osnabrueck.de/displayimage.php?album=114&pos=38
http://www.bildpostkarten.uni-osnabrueck.de/displayimage.php?album=114&pos=24

There 77 postcards in that ... collection. SEVENTY SEVEN!

Borys

Quote from: Carthaginian on August 28, 2007, 02:57:11 PM

Quote from: Ithekro on August 28, 2007, 02:53:50 PM
At least its not the heathens to the west.  Their women ride horses in a very unlady like fashion.  They have even been know to wear pants.

Which 'heathens' would that be? ;)

Those which HAVE pants, my dear boy! Not the bare arsed SAVAGE variety of heathens!

Borys

Quote from: Borys on August 28, 2007, 03:10:17 PM
I prefer not to mention the depraved Brandenburgers ...

*whistles innocently away...*

The Legion Kondor does not discriminate on the basis of gender when recruiting, although this is to be expected from such savage bands of mercenary...well, mercenaries. ;)   So far the Regular Military Forces have been more...conventional in their recruiting, however there are a few up-and-coming young minds (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Shadow_Hearts_2_Karin_Koenig.jpg) who may prove too valuable to turn away merely due to the slight inconvience of being in the wrongly-equipped body...

I need bleach to cleanse my eyes ....

[Reality check]
While some militaries might not discriminate by gender, if they apply similar physical fitness requirements to all recruits, the number of females of adequate fitness would be considerably lower. Even today. Hundred years ago muscle power was even more important in the military.
IIRC US Army studies have shown that the a specific fitness level could be achieved by 50% of the males but sg like 5-10% of females in the relevant age bracket.

For professional mercenary troops, I think the issue is even more emphasised. Being versatile and reliable is a requirement. Female enlisted falling pregnant a month after deployment is an often heard argument in this issue, and that's with modern contraceptives.
[/Reality check]

OoC:
OK, my poster, for the record, has nothing to do with attempting to recruit females. Its just operating on the age old principle of 'Sex Sells.'

And as far as women needing to be strong to be in the military- then or now- I believe the effectiveness of the W.A.S.P.s, W.A.V.E.s, and thousands that were in the regular military in secretarial/clerical postings during WWII gives the lie to that statement. If anything, a woman in uniform preforming a rear echelon job really produces TWO soldiers... she not only does a job, but adds the more physically capable male soldier to the fighting front.


P³D...
Ever wonder why that female becomes pregnant?
It's not because the contraceptives don't work; it's more due to a defective soldier than a defective pill. Those women are looking for an out, and they take it by getting pregnant. Trust me, I've been there, done that, and covered for many of my fellows- male and female- while they were getting some on deployment. Out of 8 females in my company (two using only condoms) and 100 or so men, the only people that turned up pregnant were 5 wives back home (4 of which had actually seen their husbands in the last 10 months ;)). NONE of the female soldiers that were in my company, or in the multi-national task force I worked for over the course of a year came up pregnant, and I worked on the horniest part of BIAP (read: had the most field-grade brass and E-8/E-9 NCO's). That includes the Brits, Aussies, NZ's, and a sprinkling of other nationalities. It was a small OP (only a few hundred) and word generally got around... or video feed, if the couple was careless. ;D

The Armada has no need for such...indecent...recruitment techniques...

Especially when young Gran Colombian men know that they could instead be drafted into one of a dozen jungle divisions and spend the next two years feeding mosquitos and leeches in the rain forest...

OOC
Is the girl on the rifle a flapper?
Borys

Quote from: Borys on August 29, 2007, 07:51:21 AM
OOC
Is the girl on the rifle a flapper?
Borys

OoC:
Nah... it's a WWII-era poster that I stuck some text on in MSPaint.
She's not a flapper, just a typical 40's girl. standards of dress for women went a long way in 40 years. I just decided it would make a cool poster and co-opted it, and then thought about how something so racy would have been received in the 1910's. Then I added an (for the time) even more obscene slogan and wrote a nice little article about how the Navy was trying to entice young men with the promise of sexy ladies willing to help them with 'gun maintenance.'

Hurr-hurr nudge-nudge wink-wink
:)

*watches reality check bounce*

QuoteI need bleach to cleanse my eyes ....

What, you don't like red hair?  ;)

Carthaginian,

I concur with what you say. My point is that most rear-echelon job in 1914 just require much more muscle than in 2005 (or even in1944), just consider the tons of artillery shells that has to be moved even for a smaller unit. And that society need another ~70 years to accept the thought of female soldiers on the front. A lot of administrative jobs  today (in general, not just in the military) are filled with women, but it needed the conscript armies and mass mobilization of WWI to open most of these jobs.

In N-verse, there was not a single extended war to the scale that required the complete mobilization of the national economies on Great War level. The societies - especially the military - are male-oriented. Administrative jobs can be filled regardless of gender, just there was no need to force such a huge change on conservative militaries. And the general level  of female education is just on its way to catch up, especially in rural areas, that they could fill up those jobs that need education rather than muscles.

Where would be female soldiers in N-verse (besides the medical corps that is)? Small female-only queen's guard-type units company sized - ceremonial guard, filled with the more eager daughters of noble families (or however you call the 'landowner warrior class') and the odd suffragette of urban upbringing. Cavalry/mounted units most of the time. Mixed gender units should be out of the question.

TBH on the topic of female education 1906 is the year my grandma on my father's side was born.  She was the first Female member of her Family to complete secondary education aka high school.  I tend to agree the general educational level wont be there for a generation or there about.

First off, there are NO FEMALES in CS military line units. There are a moderate number of females in the medical units, and there are female personnel in garrison environments, generally employed in such industries as laundry, dining facilities, base housekeeping, seamstresses, etc. There is some talk (very little) about allowing for the training of female transcribers in communications concerns; also the new, longer-ranged guns have raised questions about providing manpower for calculating range tables for distance firing. Both of these positions would be better staffed by females, enabling men to serve in line units.

The chivalrous (some say chauvinistic) attitude of Confederate society will- unless drastic changes occur- prevent any acceptance of females in units that might see combat conditions. Women are delicate creatures, and it is a man's job to defend them; women are loving caregivers and it's their job to support the men. That's just "THE WAY THINGS ARE MEANT TO BE_(R)" and is not likely to be changed in the mind of most Southrons... even the ladies.

Quote from: P³D on August 29, 2007, 03:01:34 PM
Carthaginian,

I concur with what you say. My point is that most rear-echelon job in 1914 just require much more muscle than in 2005 (or even in1944), just consider the tons of artillery shells that has to be moved even for a smaller unit. And that society need another ~70 years to accept the thought of female soldiers on the front. A lot of administrative jobs today (in general, not just in the military) are filled with women, but it needed the conscript armies and mass mobilization of WWI to open most of these jobs.

Mass conscript armies did indeed open the need for women in OTL, but that was in a more stable, less mobilized world than N-verse. In our little world, there are more tensions, greater sectarian differences (CSA-UNK, UNK-Rohan, Rohan-France, CSA-DBK), several openly hostile parties constantly at odds with each other (Swiss-Chinese, Swiss-DKB, DKB-HK, etc. The N-verse world is just plain more militarized than the real world, and thus there are more jobs to be filled. I could easily see female troops being used more than OTL at any given time- especially in newer nations like Bavaria and Italy which are just looking to build up numbers.

Quote from: P³D on August 29, 2007, 03:01:34 PMIn N-verse, there was not a single extended war to the scale that required the complete mobilization of the national economies on Great War level. The societies - especially the military - are male-oriented. Administrative jobs can be filled regardless of gender, just there was no need to force such a huge change on conservative militaries. And the general level  of female education is just on its way to catch up, especially in rural areas, that they could fill up those jobs that need education rather than muscles.

I agree here fully. I also believe that a nation trying to raise the general level of education for women would be wise to induce an artificial raising of their educational levels by looking to themas a military resource. A woman doesn't have to have a college education (or high school education for that matter) to serve as a nurse in 1908... the material just isn't as complex as it is now. Women could be used in medical and clerical/secretarial postings as a way of educating them. Their educations would be 'free,' would net the military more males for 'strong back' jobs and the country more  skilled workers. The money to teach those women to transcribe Morse Code or learn to dress wounds is there (and an be taxed to gain part of the money spent back).

Quote from: P³D on August 29, 2007, 03:01:34 PMWhere would be female soldiers in N-verse (besides the medical corps that is)? Small female-only queen's guard-type units company sized - ceremonial guard, filled with the more eager daughters of noble families (or however you call the 'landowner warrior class') and the odd suffragette of urban upbringing. Cavalry/mounted units most of the time. Mixed gender units should be out of the question.

I fully agree here. Mixed units are a late 20th century invention, and IMHO a really bad idea overall; though there are a few times that they are necessary, such as with MP's*. Coed units just make life difficult during long deployments. It's a good idea to have male and female units working in close proximity (in order to preserve some degree of normalcy in socialization), but those interactions need to be rather strictly controlled, and having the units completely integrated generally presents too many problems in that respect.

*In MP units, it's vital to have females. Other females just aren't as comfortable dealing with males for some of the tasks that have to be undertaken/supervised by MP's, even in the field. The females provide the necessary measure to ease interaction tension and preform delicate tasks.

QuoteMass conscript armies did indeed open the need for women in OTL, but that was in a more stable, less mobilized world than N-verse. In our little world, there are more tensions, greater sectarian differences (CSA-UNK, UNK-Rohan, Rohan-France, CSA-DBK), several openly hostile parties constantly at odds with each other (Swiss-Chinese, Swiss-DKB, DKB-HK, etc. The N-verse world is just plain more militarized than the real world, and thus there are more jobs to be filled. I could easily see female troops being used more than OTL at any given time- especially in newer nations like Bavaria and Italy which are just looking to build up numbers

Even considering political tensions, no country had mobilized its population in N-verse to the required extent that manpower shortage would necessitate the paradigm shift. In the Swiss-Chinese war, the mobilization level even on the Swiss side was at most one or two percent, far from the above 10% that some European countries (esp. Serbia and France) faced in WWI.

A standing military of 1-2 percent of total population can be achieved by 3-year-long conscript service plus professional cadre with minimal effect on the national economy. I'd consider that adequate for political standoff, and no one is above this level in N-verse AFAIK.

Quote from: P³D on August 29, 2007, 04:02:47 PM
A standing military of 1-2 percent of total population can be achieved by 3-year-long conscript service plus professional cadre with minimal effect on the national economy. I'd consider that adequate for political standoff, and no one is above this level in N-verse AFAIK.

I didn't mean that we have a greater percentage of our populations mobilized than OTL; I said more militarized, not more mobilized. Our nations are more military-conscious than most OTL nations.
For example, the US didn't even have conscription at this time- it had no external threats.
OTOH, in N-verse North America, there are at least 4 possible combinations of warring parties with ready-made issues (CSA-UNK, UNK-Rohan, France-Rohan, CSA-DRM). This would make the population more intent on military service, and would drive more military leaders to look towards alternative methods of finding troops to serve in non-conscription environments. Remember, conscripts are suck-arse soldiers... and generals know that. Volunteers are more motivated and do a better job- especially in the kinds of jobs that we would put women doing.

I know that you're not a fan of ahistorical happenings, and I know that we try to make things semi-historical here, but I see nothing wrong with flights of fancy that involve the limited use of females in the military in period-appropriate jobs.
If you want an army of 1,000,000 men and you employ 5,000 women as 'laundry specialists' in that military, it's 5,000 less men removed form the national workforce, and 5,000 more taxable citizens than normal. That makes sense on a national level. You're raising more tax money, gaining more men in the workforce, and using women in jobs they should be used to doing... they are just now doing it in uniform.

In the more militaristic N-verse world, this seems plausible to me, and apparently to others.

The North American continent is still not less peaceful than OTL Europe (with a much higher conflict density) so I think that justification is not valid.

How much of women suffrage did the OTL ACW cause?

Quote from: P³D on August 29, 2007, 05:23:55 PM
The North American continent is still not less peaceful than OTL Europe (with a much higher conflict density) so I think that justification is not valid.

How much of women suffrage did the OTL ACW cause?

Well, there was Anti-Slavery movement, which gave rise the Temperance movement and to Prohibition, which was the primary political motivation for Women's Suffrage in the 1920's. These developments piggybacked each other, and had large female participation- right up to the highest levels in each era.

Also, if you look the first suffrage group- the National Woman Suffrage Association- was formed in 1869 and 3 states (WY, UT, CO) gave women the right to vote before 1880. Several more western States followed suit before 1919, and even NY had done so by 1917. All in all, 14 States had given women the right to vote prior to the end of WWI and the amending of the Constitution.

How many European nations had required service from the 19th century or in the early 20th century?

All European countries at least have draft (as in taking account of all males of military age). All countries that took part in WWI reverted to conscription. Spain did so in the war against Morocco. I bet Sweden, Norway and Netherlands did so, if only as a preventive measure against further escalation.

[Bending reality to my will]
While OKW, as I said, remains skeptical torwards females in any form of service, the Legion Kondor - also as mentioned - accepts recruits from the fairer sex, as Oberst Hammer follows the doctrine that 'every woman in the rear is another man at the front'.

While there are a few actual "lady soldiers" in the LK, they number less than a dozen; one - now 'Fregattenkapitan' Sally Schilling (and a Norman to boot!) - has made a name for herself; through a combination of brute competence, wily politicking and (seemingly?) preternatural reflexes - as seen in the 'Anahuac spy on PD' incident, which netted her a Blue Max - she rose to the top in the unit, and when the Slammers acquired Agrival's pleasure yacht, Hammer saw the opportunity to put that wretched crew of scum and villiany's pathalogical fear of Marissa Mars to use...

(I'm currently musing on a way to work a second lady into the Slammers, and I may have an interesting story to work that in...stay tuned.)
[/Bending reality to my will]

The huge once native population base of the DKB provides enough manpower for the current army that even fully mobilized it won't be larger than 2% of the national population. Oberst Hammer's doctrine is totally out of context regarding the DKB.

Quote from: P³D on August 29, 2007, 07:57:55 PM
Oberst Hammer's doctrine is totally out of context regarding the DKB.

Honestly, I fail to see how anything is out of context for a mercenary.
If a woman has a shrewd tactical mind and an air of authority sufficient enough to command a group of men, she would be an asset to the organization. If she would an asset to the organization, then she is someone that they would employ, because mercenary groups have to snatch up anyone that is capable... lest someone else employ them, and force that person to become your opponent.

Mercenaries (worked with a lot of them) don't have prejudices when it comes to making money.
They snap up whoever is useful to them and keep them as long as they remain useful.

I noticed that working with groups like Blackwood in Iraq.
Mercs don't see color, creed or sex- they just see $$$.

I was referring to the 'every woman in the rear is another man at the front' quote and the DKB manpower situation (its relative abundance), not implying that female general/flag officers should not be accepted by the Legion Kondor if they had proven themselves previously.

Quote from: Ithekro on August 29, 2007, 07:18:44 PM
How many European nations had required service from the 19th century or in the early 20th century?

All.
Only UK didn't.

Borys

Well Hammer isn't Brandenburgian...he's Dutch. Naturalised Brandenburgian.  ;) So it wouldn't be surprising that his opinions differed from the OKW norm.  :P

Didn't UK had to resort to conscription in 1916?

Ahoj!
It did - Ireland exempt.
The dominions also stayed volunteer thruout.
Borys

Quote from: Carthaginian on August 29, 2007, 04:45:12 PM
Remember, conscripts are suck-arse soldiers... and generals know that. Volunteers are more motivated and do a better job- especially in the kinds of jobs that we would put women doing.

You know, not for one second could I agree with that. Generally "volunteers" for the army have been the misfits of society that have been unable to hold down a regular job.
IN general a conscript army have a much better raw material to work with then a professional army, and it soldiers have a wider skill base that they can utilise in the field.

There are however plenty of exceptions both ways, but I would say that there is nothing that say that an army based on conscription would by default have a disadvantage against an army were people serve on a volunteer basis. The amount of training is generally about the same in both kinds of forces.

Quote from: Korpen on September 01, 2007, 03:27:24 PM

Quote from: Carthaginian on August 29, 2007, 04:45:12 PM
Remember, conscripts are suck-arse soldiers... and generals know that. Volunteers are more motivated and do a better job- especially in the kinds of jobs that we would put women doing.

You know, not for one second could I agree with that. Generally "volunteers" for the army have been the misfits of society that have been unable to hold down a regular job.
IN general a conscript army have a much better raw material to work with then a professional army, and it soldiers have a wider skill base that they can utilise in the field.

Here, Korpen, the volunteers have proved to be- by far- more motivated and efficient soldiers.
Since adopting a volunteer-only setup for the military, the average education level of soldiers has increased to far above that of the general population (ALL soldiers have secondary education and all officers have at least 4 year degrees) and the retention rate for experienced soldiers has also risen. Even the war in Iraq hasn't hurt us as bad as a conscript-based military retention-wise.

Quote from: Korpen on September 01, 2007, 03:27:24 PMThere are however plenty of exceptions both ways, but I would say that there is nothing that say that an army based on conscription would by default have a disadvantage against an army were people serve on a volunteer basis. The amount of training is generally about the same in both kinds of forces.

The volunteer has one innate advantage over the conscript- he WISHES to be there.
The conscript will have somewhere else he would rather be than where he is.
The volunteer may wish he was elsewhere at times, but always comes back to the fact that he is satisfied enough with his situation to remain there.

Having heard tales of men who served under both systems during the Vietnam war and it's aftermath, and having served in a volunteer force alongside conscripted forces myself... I'll always take an empty file left by a lack of volunteers over a soldier pressed into service and thinking about all the other things he'd rather be doing besides watching my back.

Carthaginian,

The situation 100 years ago was much different. Today, for medium-scale overseas war like Vietnam/Korea/Iraq, professional soldiers are much better. Due to the sophisticated equipment used today, high education levels are desirable. To use a rifle, you don't need much pre-existing education. And I could find three examples of exeptional conscript armies from the top of my head - Wehrmacht, Finland and Israel.

The big difference IMHO is the quality of the officer corps. Or, even more importantly, is their number is large enough to fill positions in the fully mobilized army, in time?
Severe war losses in the professional cadre hindered the performance of several armies in WWI (AH and UK).

In both World Wars, the US addressed the issue with a huge training effort, taking about a year until the first large-scale land operations.

Quote from: P³D on September 01, 2007, 08:54:50 PM
Carthaginian,

The situation 100 years ago was much different. Today, for medium-scale overseas war like Vietnam/Korea/Iraq, professional soldiers are much better. Due to the sophisticated equipment used today, high education levels are desirable. To use a rifle, you don't need much pre-existing education. And I could find three examples of exeptional conscript armies from the top of my head - Wehrmacht, Finland and Israel.

The average soldier has very little 'sophisticated equipment,' P³D.
Professional (one 6 year enlistment or more) NCO's are the lowest level troops that operate what could be called 'sophisticated' equipment (more in depth than a GPS or cell phone). Radios are programed by specialists, but the general soldier does little more with them than his WWII counterpart- he pushes a button to talk and looks up a commo specialist when the radio don't talk back. An aircraft mechanic might be working on a more advanced piece of equipment than his WWI counterpart, but his education is far in excess of the guy working on the SPAD as well; thus, the advances in sophistication in the military equipment is compensated for by the degree of civilian education that even the average person on the street has.

In general, all US Army equipment is (no shit, guys) designed to be operated by a person with a SIXTH-GRADE EDUCATION! All 'Dash 10' manuals (Army parlance for basic operators manuals) are written so that the average 12 year old can understand them and use the equipment detailed within.

And Israel largely uses the same equipment that the US military does...
I mean, after all, we build most of their planes, and taught them how to build tanks and APC's by giving them our old ones and letting them improve on the designs as they saw fit. Hell, some of Israel's equipment is better and more advanced than ours!
Additionally, though the average Israeli soldier is conscripted, the average Israeli soldier has a different mindset about conscription and service than the average American/European. OUr homes and hearths have been safe from real challenge for 50+ years. We do not fear for our day-to-day survival and understand the only thing standing between us and oblivion are the men with guns that watch over us.
Israel is much closer to the danger, and thus their population sees a POV much closer to the truth.
They are conscripted, but are also willing and proud to do their part.

Show me an American that would have that POV, and I'll show you someone that could have easily been convinced to volunteer if properly asked.

Quote from: P³D on September 01, 2007, 08:54:50 PM
The big difference IMHO is the quality of the officer corps. Or, even more importantly, is their number is large enough to fill positions in the fully mobilized army, in time?
Severe war losses in the professional cadre hindered the performance of several armies in WWI (AH and UK).

The US military is so top-heavy that 50% of the officers could die at a stroke, the positions be filled with civilians and the whole works would suffer not one bit.
I mean, how many Equal Opportunity officers and PX officers and Recreation officers does one army need?
Most of our officers are useless POGs that never see a rifle unless they watch a formation of real soldiers march by on the way to weapon practice.

Quote from: P³D on September 01, 2007, 08:54:50 PM
In both World Wars, the US addressed the issue with a huge training effort, taking about a year until the first large-scale land operations.

In both cases, there couldn't have been enough volunteers to fill the ranks.
Hell, there are barely enough now.
That still doesn't change the fact that volunteers that desire to be in uniform will always outperform conscripts that do not wish to be there. The problem that prevents me from properly illustrating my point is that I could never find a volunteer force large enough to take on jobs of the scale which conscript armies have had to face to produce the miraculous results seen in WWI and WWII.

If you want top-heavy army, check the Hungarian. More generals than tanks IIRC.

Quote from: P³D on September 01, 2007, 09:41:29 PM
If you want top-heavy army, check the Hungarian. More generals than tanks IIRC.

To parphprase Johnny Rico: "What kind of army has more sergeants than privates? An army that looses wars."

Quote from: Carthaginian on September 01, 2007, 08:28:11 PM
The volunteer has one innate advantage over the conscript- he WISHES to be there.
The conscript will have somewhere else he would rather be than where he is.
The volunteer may wish he was elsewhere at times, but always comes back to the fact that he is satisfied enough with his situation to remain there.

Having heard tales of men who served under both systems during the Vietnam war and it's aftermath, and having served in a volunteer force alongside conscripted forces myself... I'll always take an empty file left by a lack of volunteers over a soldier pressed into service and thinking about all the other things he'd rather be doing besides watching my back.

99% of all conscripts also wishes to be there, very few in a conscripted country are there only because they have to. So I think the basis for your argument is flawed.

But a conscription army is much more politically sensitive, making it worse for aggressive or expansionistic policies, or in wars that are perceived as unjust or none of their concern.
This means that full timers are most likely better for "small wars" and irregular conflicts far from the homeland, of the type the US have engaged in since Korea.
One thing that makes me cautions about using the US as a example of conscript vs. volunteer is that it have never in modern time faced a threat to its homeland of the type that pretty every country in the rest of the world, an enemy across a land border.

For fighting a all-out war there is no difference in motivation between a volunteer and a conscript, if anything I would think the conscript is more motivate as he is integrated into society in a way a "mercenary" is not.
On top of that in a mobilized unit the conscripts bring in significant amount of civilian skill that are lacking in a full-time force.

The major argument against conscription is its being unfair by the unlucky. Unless you allow no exemption, also making sure that those failing the psych/physical fitness tests won't enjoy civilian life meanwhile. The worst is IMO when a fraction of a given age bracket is needed to fill up the conscript TOEs (at least that's my experience).

Quote from: P³D on September 01, 2007, 09:41:29 PM
If you want top-heavy army, check the Hungarian. More generals than tanks IIRC.

Sadly the Polish army is heading that way. And all those generals had once sworn to uphold Socialism and the alliance with the Soviet Union.
Hmm, the oath was changed c. 1990. So maybe the youngest onmes hadn't.
But I'd still discharge anybody who reached the rank of Major before 1989.
But I'm the looney right, so ...
Having been subject to conscription (ended up as a sweepr in a hospital) in a country with an unpopular gov't, and with each age cohort being twice the necessary size, corruption of recruitment offciers and doctors was rampant. I agree that either call up all, or nobody. Or, those who had served get perks in civilian life - aka Wilhelmine Germany. You could not get certain jobs if you hadn't done service. And certain jobs were reserved foir 12 year servicemen, for instance.
Borys

Quote from: Carthaginian on September 01, 2007, 09:33:25 PM
The US military is so top-heavy that 50% of the officers could die at a stroke, the positions be filled with civilians and the whole works would suffer not one bit.

A positive impression I have of the US military is that if 50% of officers dissapear, their lack would pass unnoticed. However, if 50% of NCOs and Warrant Officers dissapeared, the Army would fall part. Is this correct? Or did I form a false image by reading too many discussion boards on the web?

Quote from: Carthaginian on September 01, 2007, 09:33:25 PM
I mean, how many Equal Opportunity officers and PX officers and Recreation officers does one army need?

Zero?
Borys

Quote from: Korpen on September 02, 2007, 12:19:23 AM

Quote from: Carthaginian on September 01, 2007, 08:28:11 PM
The volunteer has one innate advantage over the conscript- he WISHES to be there.

99% of all conscripts also wishes to be there, very few in a conscripted country are there only because they have to. So I think the basis for your argument is flawed.

This is no longer the case in the US or Canada, or the UK even, for that matter.
Very few nations still have that kind of nationalistic drive, Korpen.
The S. Koreans were the only ones that I met who actually seemed happy to have been drafted.

Quote from: Borys on September 02, 2007, 02:57:51 AM
[qu
A positive impression I have of the US military is that if 50% of officers dissapear, their lack would pass unnoticed. However, if 50% of NCOs and Warrant Officers dissapeared, the Army would fall part. Is this correct? Or did I form a false image by reading too many discussion boards on the web?

Any military that looses 50% of their NCO Corps may as well hang it up.
You can make a passing fair lieutenant out of a civilian in a training course, and you can make most any fool into a private, but a sergeant must be cultivated.

The Soviet Army tried 'instant sergeants'... I'm sure you know how well that concept worked out.

Quote from: Carthaginian on September 02, 2007, 06:27:59 AM

Quote from: Borys on September 02, 2007, 02:57:51 AM
[qu
A positive impression I have of the US military is that if 50% of officers dissapear, their lack would pass unnoticed. However, if 50% of NCOs and Warrant Officers dissapeared, the Army would fall part. Is this correct? Or did I form a false image by reading too many discussion boards on the web?

Any military that looses 50% of their NCO Corps may as well hang it up.
You can make a passing fair lieutenant out of a civilian in a training course, and you can make most any fool into a private, but a sergeant must be cultivated.

The Soviet Army tried 'instant sergeants'... I'm sure you know how well that concept worked out.

Different way of operating, most conscription armies place much less weight on NCO and more on junior officers. On the other hand all officers have served as privates and all the way up.

Quote from: Korpen on September 02, 2007, 06:37:26 AM
Different way of operating, most conscription armies place much less weight on NCO and more on junior officers. On the other hand all officers have served as privates and all the way up.

Yeah... but what good does that do if the training is inadequate to the task of making an officer- or private, for that matter? I find it interesting that the best Soviet commanders were the ones that came up during the Tsarist period under procurement strategies similar to ours. The Soviet officer training program was as faulty as the NCO training, IMO (and that of all the literature that I've been exposed to).




Anyway, new news as soon as I get through studying this next bit of school material!

Quote from: Carthaginian on September 02, 2007, 06:51:11 AM

Quote from: Korpen on September 02, 2007, 06:37:26 AM
Different way of operating, most conscription armies place much less weight on NCO and more on junior officers. On the other hand all officers have served as privates and all the way up.

Yeah... but what good does that do if the training is inadequate to the task of making an officer- or private, for that matter? I find it interesting that the best Soviet commanders were the ones that came up during the Tsarist period under procurement strategies similar to ours. The Soviet officer training program was as faulty as the NCO training, IMO (and that of all the literature that I've been exposed to).

Sure, but bad training have nothing to do with volonteers vs conscripts, after all I rate the israeli or Swedish army far higher then the Nigerian one...

Quote from: Carthaginian on September 02, 2007, 06:25:54 AM

Quote from: Korpen on September 02, 2007, 12:19:23 AM

Quote from: Carthaginian on September 01, 2007, 08:28:11 PM
The volunteer has one innate advantage over the conscript- he WISHES to be there.

99% of all conscripts also wishes to be there, very few in a conscripted country are there only because they have to. So I think the basis for your argument is flawed.

This is no longer the case in the US or Canada, or the UK even, for that matter.
Very few nations still have that kind of nationalistic drive, Korpen.
The S. Koreans were the only ones that I met who actually seemed happy to have been drafted.

Being happy with it is another thing then being content with it.
But a conscript soldier is much more a part of the society then a professional one, so if you got lots of corruption in society in general, you will get lots of it in the army as well. But the opposite is also true, in a country with low lever of corruption, the conscription sustem is unlikely to be.
A major factor in this is how the sytem treats it soldiers, in a country such as Russia, were violence against and between soldiers are common, and standards of living are low, there is much less imputus to do service. On the other hand, in countries were conscripts feel like they are still respected, and get to do something meaningful, the level of motivation to do service is far higher.

Quote from: Korpen on September 02, 2007, 06:37:26 AM
Different way of operating, most conscription armies place much less weight on NCO and more on junior officers. On the other hand all officers have served as privates and all the way up.

The "all officers have served as privates" is not found in Soviet style armies. The officers do not care for the men, and leave them to the NCOs -  the longest serving of the conscripts - who savagely and brutaly overlord over the rest. Between 5PM and 7AM the barracks function in a manner similar to a prison. Unless somebody is killed or seriuosy injured the officers DO NOT INTERVENE.

Borys

In the N-verse France, there is already made a reference to the feminists, and the drive to "equality".

In a very primitive society, females were seen as the leaders (behind the scenes or not), the ones that organise everything not directly involving hunting and warfare.

In a more modern society, females became mothers, the reason why an empire could grow.  To be sheltered and protected, so more babies could be born.

It's when the standard of living gets high enough, the acceptation of women in harder/more dangerous roles of life (not that being a farmers wife ever was easy or light) can start, but only if the females demand it;

The only exception is "political urgency".  The best example is the difference between Nazi Germany and the Allies.  Even at the worst moments for Nazi Germany, the women were "held" at their traditional values, when Rosie the Rivetter was propaganda issue in the US.

For the N-verse France, The Suffragettes are demanding free acces to the army and navy for females that want such a carreer.   

QuoteThe only exception is "political urgency".  The best example is the difference between Nazi Germany and the Allies.  Even at the worst moments for Nazi Germany, the women were "held" at their traditional values, when Rosie the Rivetter was propaganda issue in the US.

Part of the reason was that the ineffective, labour-intensive German agriculture. The rural women had to work the farms, so that Germany could avoid starvation, unlike in the Great War. That woman workforce was just unavailable for industrial production - therefore the Germans had to revert to forced labour.

Quote from: maddox on September 02, 2007, 10:26:14 PM
It's when the standard of living gets high enough, the acceptation of women in harder/more dangerous roles of life (not that being a farmers wife ever was easy or light) can start, but only if the females demand it;

To put it bluntly - just as there always had been a surplus of expandable males, now there is alos a surplus of expendable women.
Borys

I'm wondering if the argument has a flaw in it based on the use of the work "conscript".  Most of the nations Korpen has mentioned as high rated I believe have "required service" as opposed to what the Americans would call "being drafted".  For a "required service" country, it is expected that you will serve in the military and afterwards can be called back and you are aware of this fact.  In the United States, we have a draft still, at least in terms of placing your name into the draft once you are 18 years old.  After Vietnam there has been no active draft of American civilians, thus no one expects to be called for military service unless you volunteer to serve with one service or another.  Drafts are only called in times of war and when the nation is desperate for manpower.  In addition to this, after Vietnam, the Army decided that using draftees was a bad idea for the reason Cartaginian has mentioned.  Draftees and volunteers did not particularly want to serve in Vietnam, but the volunteers at least could say that it was their own fault for being in a service (in some cases it was more that they got to choice which service rather than be drafted into the army.  My father volunteered for the Navy because his draft board decided he could go to the army even though he was registered for college, just in summer break...he got in about three hours before he recieved his draft notice.  He still ended up serving in Vietnam, on a PBR in the canals near Cambodia in 1969 and 1970).  In a post-Vietnam America, most politicians know that bringing up the draft again is amount to political suicide and neither the populations, nor the military, want draftees anymore.

What's ironic about the draft for the USA is that as a former Second Class Petty Officer (E-5), I can tell you the Navy in most rates is critically under mand. When my command went to the gulf we had to pull people off of other commands just to meet the minimum requirements to take our ship into a war zone.  Recruiters continuously miss their recruiting goals, not enough people want to join.  The answer to this at least for non technical rates is the draft.  I am a firm believer that at age 19 every person should be required to serve for 2 years in the military or some Peace Corps type institution. 


/end rant

On the great conscription vs. volunteer army debate I have the following two bits.
1)   For the time period an all volunteer army can be of much higher quality.  The classic example of course is the British Army in WW1.  The 3 Corps of the BEF were the finest troops on the battlefield bar none.  The reason is troops signed 10 year enlistments and after the Boer War the British army drilled firearms accuracy.  There material wasn't the best as the pay wasn't all that hot compared to a factory worker but they were very well trained and drilled.  Of the great powers only the United States also had a volunteer army and it was no were near as good as the British in either training or doctrine and once it entered the Great War was basically remade in the image of the French Army.  This is were the US armies obsession with firepower comes from. 

2)   Of the mass conscript armies the German army was the best without a doubt followed by the French, Russians, Austrians and the Italians.   The German and French had well educated populations to draw upon and long term service NCO's.  10 years in the German army would get you a nice civil service job.  Both France and Germany had professional highly trained officers.  Were well equipped, trained and had at least competent military doctrine.  The tipping point was the Germans had twice the volume of NCO's per 1,000 men and a more decentralized tactical setup.  Orders from the top in the German army would state an objective, give resources available, general timing and leave the specific details up to the unit commander.  The French and British armies were far less flexible.  So while the manpower of the German Army wasn't well trained as the BEF it was close to it and a far larger military force.

Michael

A few figures about reinstating conscription. As it was said, better to draft everyone than only the unlucky few at the age of 18 for 9-12 months. That might even allow for a brief overseas employment (1-3 months) after training.
Now in the US, four million male and female reach the age of 18 every year. If the average conscript grunt cost $25K a year, we are at $100bn. If 75% of them is unfit for frontline service and have to go to the peace corps (cost reduced to half) that's $40bn of savings, and still 1,000,000 troops available.

Quote from: P³D on September 03, 2007, 01:10:21 PM
A few figures about reinstating conscription. As it was said, better to draft everyone than only the unlucky few at the age of 18 for 9-12 months. That might even allow for a brief overseas employment (1-3 months) after training.
Now in the US, four million male and female reach the age of 18 every year. If the average conscript grunt cost $25K a year, we are at $100bn. If 75% of them is unfit for frontline service and have to go to the peace corps (cost reduced to half) that's $40bn of savings, and still 1,000,000 troops available.

Actually that is basically my point.  My dad was drafted after he got his student exemption jerked for attending a Vietnam War protest.  He says it was the best thing that happened to him, he went on to a 30 year career in the Navy.  By throwing your net wider you have a greater chance of catching the type of fish you want, sure you get a few trash fish but you catch more desirable ones as well

Quote from: P³D on September 03, 2007, 01:10:21 PM
A few figures about reinstating conscription. As it was said, better to draft everyone than only the unlucky few at the age of 18 for 9-12 months. That might even allow for a brief overseas employment (1-3 months) after training.
Now in the US, four million male and female reach the age of 18 every year. If the average conscript grunt cost $25K a year, we are at $100bn. If 75% of them is unfit for frontline service and have to go to the peace corps (cost reduced to half) that's $40bn of savings, and still 1,000,000 troops available.

There would be a rather large up front cost.

1) Many more trainning camps
2) More NCO's to train the drafties
3) All the other equipment tied to the expanded army.

As to what to do with it.

First I would think a 15 to 18 month term of service would be more usefull.
Second boarder patrol, the raw manpower alone should bring to a halt the illegal aliens.
Third public works, road and bridge building is a fine tradition of government spending and the perfect place to put those unwilling to carry a gun as it would be against their morals.

Michael

Do we even need the Border Patrol? Interesting discussion BTW.

15-18 months isn't long enough to get your money out of a fry-cook, much less a trained professional like a heavy equipment operator or welder. Such short-term workers would never be profitable. You'd need at least training + 24 months to get anything useful out of them, plus incentive to retain at least 5% of them for cadre to train the next group. You'd also spend the 'profit' of the first 2-3 rotations building facilities to suport the program.

4 year minimum to get the program to work.

Heinlein had the perfect idea:
Work Corps
Military Service
Limited Franchise

I say it would work better than anything we've tried so far.

I'll split the thread and move it to the meeting room.

Carthaginian, do you know, when a raw recruit would be shipped to Iraq, the soonest, after how many  month of training?

The problem is that longer time periods would increase US Army/NG  to horrendous size. As I see from my limited conscript experience, you need a minimum training period of 6-9 months to be able to do anything useful. If you want to see a return for investment (say one overseas tour of 3 months) you won't want to send soldiers into harms way without less training. 12 month is the bare minimum. Anything more would scare the shit out of the Rest of the World, and would cost a lot.

I'm not saying it can't be done, but it would need almost Iraq war level defence budget.

Quote from: P³D on September 03, 2007, 06:33:28 PM
Carthaginian, do you know, when a raw recruit would be shipped to Iraq, the soonest, after how many  month of training?

Depends- a raw infantry recruit can be cranked out in about 12-13 weeks... a bit more if you cut out the 'sensitivity training' and such crap. Call it 10 weeks in a dire "holy shit, Batman" kind of emergency.
Other jobs take longer... some a LOT longer. MP's and Engineers are 18 & 16 week courses respectively and not easily reduced in length. Combat medics are more on the order of 24 weeks... that's half a year, just to train them! Surgical techs and X-ray techs take many MONTHS to make. Aircraft mechanics go for more than a year, and divers go for 24 months!

All MOS's (Military Occupation Specialty) are necessary for a war, and many can't be rushed like an infantryman.

Quote from: P³D on September 03, 2007, 06:33:28 PMThe problem is that longer time periods would increase US Army/NG  to horrendous size. As I see from my limited conscript experience, you need a minimum training period of 6-9 months to be able to do anything useful. If you want to see a return for investment (say one overseas tour of 3 months) you won't want to send soldiers into harms way without less training. 12 month is the bare minimum. Anything more would scare the shit out of the Rest of the World, and would cost a lot.

I'm not saying it can't be done, but it would need almost Iraq war level defence budget.

A 3 month tour is a waste- you piss the troop off, but never really get him acclimated to combat. 6 months minimum for any kind of tour. Preferably a year. 18 months starts to approach fatal burnout.
You must balance experience and exhaustion with units rotated into action... they must be experienced enough to know how to fight, but not on the front so long as to loose effectiveness gained from experience.


And the crux of having an army big enough to do everything with is that it costs too much money to do anything with it. A balance is big enough to stall for reenforcement, small enough to maintain in the long run.

Boot camp lasts 2 months, AIT is dependant on rate, Infantry school is 3 months, give the kid 30 days leave after AIT and he could be shipped out.  So Total Time from drafted to Active Unit say 6 months.  These are the Current Real World Numbers, if you enlisted Tomorrow you could be in an Active Unit in 6 Months.

As for Expansion of training facilities, The US Navy has 2 Inactive boot camps.  They are in Sandiago, and Orlando.  Personnel could be pulled from several locations to facilitate the upswing in training of recruits.  It takes 1 chief and 2 petty officers to train a division, with our current top heavy navy they could most likely double training in 3 months.

so the long and the short is for the army it would be about the same 9 months for the first class and a new one every 6 months after that.

Quote from: Tanthalas on September 03, 2007, 10:14:33 PM
Boot camp lasts 2 months, AIT is dependant on rate, Infantry school is 3 months

Army infantry school isn't that long.
MP school isn't that long, and it's almost double infantry school.
Infantry is the shortest training time of all MOS's.
Not much you have to teach an 11 Bulletcatcher.;)

I was using the numbers from marine infantry school which i knew figured army would be about the same guesse i was wrong =P

Quote from: Tanthalas on September 03, 2007, 11:13:45 PM
I was using the numbers from marine infantry school which i knew figured army would be about the same guesse i was wrong =P

Well, Marine Infantry School teaches some pretty heavy stuff.
Army Infantry school teaches them how not to trip over their feet in the dark. ;)

There are some Army courses that'll bring you up to about the same speed as Marine Infantry School, but those are taken later on in your career. The Marines just plain have a more difficult job than the Army Infantry.

*The Confederate Capital, Richmond, Virginia*

"Thad, come in! To what do I owe the pleasure?"

"Mr. President, it would appear that the parties at war in the Pacific are back at the table again. The Swiss are balking at the possible loss of Tasmania and refusing to repay the Franj, but otherwise it appears that things might be successful. Sir- and this is just my opinion- I think they might just succeed in declaring peace this time."

"I hope so, Thad... 'cause this is the alternative that's been suggested to me."

Papers were shuffled across the desk, going from the President's hands to those of the Vice President. Thadious noticed his boss's hands were shaking as he drew them back.

"Sir, this would bode ill for us economically. We have good trade with the Alliance nations, and we're sunk in that joint canal venture with Rohan and the Swiss. It wouldn't be us bad if the war is over soon... but if it drags on another year or so, we might just be hurting."

"Thad, I've been told that if this war drags on for more than 6 months, the whole balance of power could be shifted on BOTH sides of the world as a result. In short- if the war continues beyond June of 1909, we may be FORCED to pick a side regardless of any action taken or not taken prior to then... and I think you know which side we'd be forced to come in on."

"Yessir, I'm aware of that."

"Very well, then. Set up a meeting with the economic advisors and see if you can telegraph the people on the attached list with invitations as well. Make it... oh, for next Tuesday. That should give enough time."

"Yessir."

"And Thad... ask Mr. Ingals in his telegraph about the completion dates for Nuevo Leon and Coahuila, and tell him we've finalized the proposed changes to Louisiana and Arizona. Additionally, tell him to be prepared to activate the contingency planning for the proposed Nuevo Leon #5; she'll be called New Mexico if construction begins, and will be completed to the original design."

"Yessir."

*flyers seen posted in Atlanta, GA*

Mr. Vice President... I have the latest forigen affairs reports in.

"That's good Billy... give 'em to me"

"It appears that the situation with Gran Colombia isn't as bad as we feared. We can probably step down to Option Alpha on the Gulf Stream project. Also, I think that we should green light Plan 3 for fleet development rather than Plan 4 or 5. The new long-range cruiser design studies are beginning to wrap up, and should be ready for presentation soon. We can discontinue the other design studies we had underway as precautions."

"That's good news.... it'll save Theo a pretty penny on his budget. What else you got for me?"

"Well, Sir, there is THIS..."

*the vice president furriously flips pages, skimming content and scanning graphs*

"You're shitting me, Billy. That fast?"

"Maybe even faster, Sir... it's a very sensitive equation. If the varriable is changed- our oil exports- then the possible answer changes proportionately. The greater the change in the varriable..."

"The greater the change in how long the war in the Pacific lasts.

Billy, I want you to alert General Pershing immediately, and First Sea Lord Anderson. Now, don't backtalk me... I know it's 11 PM. Tell General Pershing that Thad needs him here NOW. He'll handle getting word to Anderson. Since they are both in Alabama, it'll be about 2 days to get them here... that'll just give us time to get ready. Also, contact the embassies of the DKB, HK, the Dutch and the Japanese here in town, and I want a telegraph out IMMEDIATELY to the MK embassy in San Diego.

It's time to put an end to this damnable war.

Oh, and contact Rohan. Tell them that we are buy-out ready if they choose to go that route."

"Yes, Sir."

"Oh, and Billy... bring me a plug of tobacco... my nerves are starting to crave it."

"Bottom drawer, under the false bottom, Sir. A good aide knows how to plan."

Looking at that...

Quote*flyers seen posted in Atlanta, GA*

This is good to know...

*Spies furiously for GULF STREAM*

Here you go.
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/83/C-20_Gulfstream.gif)
:D

Quote from: The Rock Doctor on September 13, 2007, 01:14:02 PM
*Spies furiously for GULF STREAM*

IC:
In response to some rather informal queries from GC Intelligence, the CSA promises that a light brief on Gulf Stream will be delivered to the office of the President For Life himself later on in the week (when I get back from Drill this weekend). ;)

Until then... we offer the 'messengers' back to Gran Colombia, happy and well-fed on Creole and Texican cusine.
We recommend that they are offered a stateroom unto themselves... preferably one vented to the outside of the ship. :D

OoC:
Gulf Stream is the name of the general contingency plan for Gulf Command.
It contains:
1.) possible deployment strategies for current assets, including 'floating' assets for loan from the Atlantic and Pacific fleets.
2.) Projected construction plans and design studies for several sets of contingency plans based on current and future events.
3.) General warplan orders for a Gulf/Caribbean-centered conflict, focusing primarially on the historic rivalry with whatever the Mesoamericans are calling themselves this week. Baseline contingency plans also exist for the UKA, GC and even Rohan... though the latter is more on where it would be advantagous for the CSA to scuttle their ships in the face of overwhelming odds. ;)

Good to know.  Nothing wrong with contigency planning.

May I recommend that in the event of war with Rohan, the CSA scuttle its fleet in the entrance to the New Beleriand Canal?

Atlanta Constitution Journal
letter to the editor #5
-------------------------------------

Dear Editor:

All across our fair city, more of those deplorable socialistpropaganda flyers have begun appearing. Why, Sir, do these people believe that they have a right to steal from others with impunity simly because they do not wish to take responsibility for themselves and work? Is there nothing that our police forces r legislators can do to put a stop to this advocacy of government-sponsored theft?

Working for a Living

Habsburg Ambassador nods approvingly and sighs with understanding

Quote from: Borys on September 27, 2007, 10:05:13 AM
Habsburg Ambassador nods approvingly and sighs with understanding

OoC:
Unfortunately, I think this is just the begining of the CSA's problems with Socialists.
I doubt very seriously that they will triumph, but it's going to be a rather nasty time bringing them under control.

At least the governement and military are not weakened by war at this point.  Otherwise a Red revolution might stand a chance.  They might still succeed, but it will be on the political level (like in several non-communist counties that have socialist policies or parties that lean heavily in that direction), but it also depends on the national mindset and if the government type can work at all within the current framework (without being inflamitory or radical).

*to Confederate Counsuls worldwide:

SABATEURS HAVE CUT MANY TELEGRAPH LINES ACROSS COUNTRY STOP RICHMOND SAVANNAH ATLANTA MOBILE AUSTIN MEMPHIS VICKSBURG SAN DEIGO HARDEST HIT STOP EXPECT COMMUNICATION DIFFICULTIES NEXT WEEK AT LEAST STOP ACT IN BEST INTRESTS OF CSA IN CRISIS STOP GOD SAVE DIXIE END




*am swapping ISPs; will be absent till at least next friday when new service picks up*

(What date is this news?)

Quote from: Ithekro on October 03, 2007, 06:57:25 PM
(What date is this news?)

Call it mid-May 08.

Thank God for school access.

*to Confederate Counsuls worldwide:

WESTERN CONFEDERATE TELEGRAPH SERVICE                                                                      24 MAY 1908

HAVE DETERMINED SOCIALIST TERRORISTS TO BE CAUSE OF TELEGRAPH SABATAGE STOP APPEAR TO HAVE BEEN COORDINATED BY CENTRAL ORGANIZATION STOP DO NOT REPEAT DO NOT SUSPECT CRIMSON INVOLVEMENT STOP REPAIRS UNDERWAY BUT NOT LIKELY TO COMPLETE FOR 1-2 MONTHS STOP IMPARED COMMUNICATIONS TILL THEN STOP CONSIDER BEST INTRESTS OF CONFEDERACY UNTIL STABLE COMMUNICATION REESTABLISHED STOP GOD SAVE DIXIE END