India has some very English names.

Reactionary sweeden yes?

Maybe.

Make a sheet, oZode. It shall be decided then.

<Snipped quote by zombieaccount> That's the thing about Precipice. Certain people disappear for months on end and don't bother posting despite the fact that they're active on the OOC or steam.

And we calls those people Hugs.

India has some very English names.

Iknorite?

Since Sweden has no data and is a blank sheet, I should probably ask the following: -How different was the great war in this reality? I ask since I need to know if sweden would be able to take a neutral stance on the war as it had in our reality or if it would be forced into the war due to the different circumstances it may have. -Is the russian empire [before finnish independence] breathing down Sweden's neck with its conquest of finland good justification for increased militarization? To further the question, did the russian empire at the time have plans to invade Sweden as well?

The Great War was a pretty big deal in this reality, lasting for ten years and collapsing the economic structure of Europe. That being said, there is no rational reason why Sweden would have to join the war. Once the diplomatic house of cards fell apart at the beginning of the war, things were pretty much set. It was unrestricted submarine warfare that brought the US into the conflict militarily, but the US had been part of the war economically since its inception. Sweden's economy wouldn't be relevant enough to draw the same sort of reactions, so they wouldn't have any reason to join. This world does have Ethiopia join on the side of the Central powers in exchange for military support, but Ethiopia at the very least has solid reasons, having been humiliated by the British and only narrowly escaping colonization by the Italians in the last century. And the Russian Empire would have no reason to invade Sweden. They could hardly hold on to Finland as it was, and if they wanted to turn their aggressions on a neighbor Sweden just wouldn't have been their first choice. With the economy of Europe having fallen apart, Sweden would probably have suffered as well. I imagine any militarization they would have done would have happened in the wake of Russia's crisis in Finland. The thing is, I imagine Finland's military exercises now would be limited to naval actions against piracy coming out of the Communes. I can't see the Swedes watching the news hearing about massacre after massacre in Russia and Finland and thinking "Gee, we really need to get in on that." They would really have no reason to be aggressive.

If these communes are unstable enough they generate piracy, wouldn't they also be unstable enough to try to spread revolution to neighboring countries making north finland a serious security threat for the Swedish kingdom*? After all, while denmark and the baltic sea acts as a buffer state between the prussians and Sweden, Sweden is sharing borders with a communist nation that is unstable and threatens naval activity in the region. Needless to say, half of finland isn't enough to contain communism in the region. Chances are spain will want other allies in the region, which is where Sweden would come in. After all, you have not only the northern finland communes, but also the st. petersburg communes that share the baltic sea with Finland and sweden. The presence of chinese subs most certainly not helping a thing. *Can't call it a empire unless they take over finland and parts of norway again.

So the liberal use of c*** is a good thing?

If these communes are unstable enough they generate piracy, wouldn't they also be unstable enough to try to spread revolution to neighboring countries making north finland a serious security threat for the Swedish kingdom*?

Not really. They are on their own in Western Russia and too busy trying to survive (these guys have so little horse-drawn carriages are a big thing there still). They are not in any position to try and spread their ideology, nor would it be beneficial for them to do so. Quite the opposite. If the Communes started to try and spread their ideology, it would start raising flags with nations like Spain and, being isolated, the likelihood that they would have support from China in a confrontation is very small and not worth the risk. The spread of their ideology itself is not worth it. They are probably content with doing their own thing, surviving and staying hunkered down until they can gain more support from the east. They don't pose a threat, anyway. Like I said, they are barely getting by and the worst Sweden would get from them is pirates trying to smuggle things. Even antagonistic groups within the Communes would be so weak that the threat they pose to surrounding nations probably doesn't go beyond what you'd expect from Somali pirates. The threat they pose is not that great. At best, it may prompt Sweden to invest in small pirate-hunting vessels for their navy, as well as increased border security, but it probably wouldn't justify a significant military build-up.

Needless to say, half of finland isn't enough to contain communism in the region.

The Communism in the region is not spreading. Nor would it be trying to given their very vulnerable position. Communism isn't some kind of plague that infects the water and spreads outward. It needs people to spread it, and the people in the Communes are too busy trying to live day to day. And even if they wanted to spread it, they don't have the means. I am sure Sotelo could have some kind of agreement with Sweden, but I doubt it would be anything extensive. You also have to bare in mind that Sweden values its neutrality a bunch. Even during the Cold War, Sweden remained neutral, and although they did lean a bit towards NATO, they never fully committed to helping either side. And even during WWII, Sweden played it safe and stayed neutral, selling shit to both sides.

I probably overplayed the financing of spanish gold. Even with learnings toward the spanish, chances are there would be a policy of official neutrality even if underhandedly the way the government leans can be affected. However, even with neutrality I can think of reasons for trying to put finland back together like wanting finland as a united country again. However, these communes being bigger shit holes than I thought gives me different ideas of what I could do with them. For those people probably want more than rotten potatoes to eat.

Ideologies don't quite spread like that. The entire "Spread of Communism" comes from the philosophical assumption within Communism that a workers revolution would cause a chain reaction that would cause all workers to rise, and that assumption would serve as a talking point for those opposed to communism so that they would point and say "Look, they want to spread their filth to our people", but this isn't quite what it actually looks like. They're not, like, sending guys on bikes preaching door to door. There is no communist "Wololo" guy. They most they could do is have spies and saboteurs, but these actions would be costing Sweden much less then militarization would. Commie Finland and the Western Communes are more or less failed states. The biggest threat from either of them would be the effects that their internal chaos would cause. People in the communes could be destitute enough to consider piracy, but this wouldn't be state sanctioned. Rather, it would involve dudes getting whatever weapons they can get and going out in whatever boat they can find to rob undefended ships. You would also most likely have problems with illegal immigrations and crime along the border, but since your border with Finland is so small and rough, it's unlikely that crime would amount to much more than smuggling or maybe a little light farmer-robbing/cattle rustling. You'd have to ask Googer what Spain's policy regarding foreign aid is.

Even ignoring the communist part, given that north finland is a failed state while south finland from what I understand is better off, trying to reunite finland or at least work towards that goal for the sake of alleviating human suffering would have some degree of importance given that half of finland does not a working state make. Which is why I have a less military demanding idea on how to approach the finland problem. In fact, given that there's already so many militaristic nations, i'll be something not so military obsessed for a change.

Even ignoring the communist part, given that north finland is a failed state while south finland from what I understand is better off, trying to reunite finland or at least work towards that goal for the sake of alleviating human suffering would have some degree of importance given that half of finland does not a working state make. Which is why I have a less military demanding idea on how to approach the finland problem.

Remember that this wouldn't include annexation. It's pretty rare for a state to want to annex a catastrophe, at least in the modern world.

All the above said, Radek and company can't really do anything significant. They're confined mostly to waiting for China to make their approach from Siberia to relieve their situation and help get an actual flow of supplies in. At the moment most of what they get is what the Siberians and Chinese can get there through flying the Arctic circle or when the ice packs in the ocean are at its thinnest. It's not a well built region, and some commentators might conclude the European Bloc as being a failure of Communism. So there's no threat - militarily or ideologically - in their existence and probably why Spain hasn't decided to invade them first instead of Ethiopia. Piracy from Saint Petersburg would be a big to get in extra shit. But wouldn't be major. Not enough to invoke an invasion from any of its neighbors. And getting involved there would get your boots dragged into the knee-deep quagmire that is Russia and the Russian underground. The surface of the former nation is barely there. Under neath you got a whole lot of things that the Chinese IB can't really make much sense of.

You would also most likely have problems with illegal immigrations and crime along the border, but since your border with Finland is so small and rough, it's unlikely that crime would amount to much more than smuggling or maybe a little light farmer-robbing/cattle rustling.

And there isn't much up there for either party in the first place. Northern Sweden and Finland as I've gathered is a rough place, and even under a Communist government I'd think the local Sami tribes just do not give a shit and will keep doing as they do. The government would be more occupied with the urban areas and Southern Finland. As per Southern Finland's quality: that's unexplored. They are out of their mines in the north, and southern Finland is pretty much swamp. Hell, Finland in general about this time is already a second-class European nation. You're looking at a nation that'd still be incredibly young, and pitted with scars of Revolution from both Russia and Communists.

All this serious talk. Why don't we all just sit down and share some dinkity dankity pick up lines. "There are only seven planets until I ravage Uranus " "Are you wifi cause I'm feeling the connection"

Back when I was going to do stuff in South Finland, I think Aaron described it as being in a similar state to its northern parts and the Communes. It's probably doing much better than those two, but it's likely it still bares the scars of war, with buildings still being repaired, crumbled, ect. It's likely carriages are a thing but probably not the main source of transportation since they would get access to resources that the Communes and North Finland don't have plenty of, like oil.

All this serious talk. Why don't we all just sit down and share some dinkity dankity pick up lines. "There are only seven planets until I ravage Uranus " "Are you wifi cause I'm feeling the connection"

The emoticon made me laugh.

I'm just gonna drop that for a long-ass time Finland has been a mostly agrarian economy, and very weak to depression and recession from as far back as the 19th century. It probably wasn't any better off during the Great War, and surely suffered in more than spades in the post-war. And later having the Russian Empire marching all of its Grand Duchy to keep order certainly didn't help investment opportunities in the area. So even if in the last ~5 years since the last episode of revolutionary violence the situation is probably still poor and still very agrarian. And what investment they had is probably pretty low, investors like stability and a low risk of loss, which I think Finland may just be that there.