Veoline Member
- Last Seen: 7 yrs ago
- Joined: 11 yrs ago
- Posts: 108 (0.03 / day)
- VMs: 0
-
Username history
- Veoline 11 yrs ago
Status
User has no status, yet
Bio
User has no bio, yet
Most Recent Posts
Excuse me?
I could see waves of refugees, with the attending piracy, threats to our nationals' security, a destabilization of the regional and global economy (Oilz).
It would be possible to claim some Saudi royals, each claiming to be legitimate, called upon foreign nationals, leading to the division in three parts. That would pose the problem of legitimacy, which we definitely don't need.
It would be possible to claim some Saudi royals, each claiming to be legitimate, called upon foreign nationals, leading to the division in three parts. That would pose the problem of legitimacy, which we definitely don't need.
Vilageidiotx said
I'm nerfing the importance of Islam is Ethiopia. Perhaps we could both go off of the Saudi situation? Some rival faction asked their neighbors for help and Persia and Ethiopia responded?
Yeah, good idea. I retain the role of Shia' persecution along the Gulf coast. Wait, what about a civil war between sons of Ibn Saud? That's possible, isn't it? Bloodshed and mayhem, threatening to pour over in our countries, which lead to the intervention.
we shou
Solving that should be easy then.
Actually, Persia had a motive to intervene in Saudi Arabia as the Shi'a populations who well enough happen to live on the East oil-rich coast were persecuted by the Saudi government. And Ethiopia could too in that the Saudis supported a heretical interpretation of Islam, Wahhabism. Add to that civil unrest, dynastic plots, and you have a justification!
Vilageidiotx said
Ask Googer.Though I think some of that is shoddy line drawing more then anything...
Solving that should be easy then.
Actually, Persia had a motive to intervene in Saudi Arabia as the Shi'a populations who well enough happen to live on the East oil-rich coast were persecuted by the Saudi government. And Ethiopia could too in that the Saudis supported a heretical interpretation of Islam, Wahhabism. Add to that civil unrest, dynastic plots, and you have a justification!
Actually, Ethiopia, as mad as it sounds, turned into an islamic state, so yes, the governing bodies are islamic.
I really have some questions concerning Europe:
-why is Lithuania shaped so? Why does it even exist independently from the Communes?
- why does Prussia possess only part of Eastern Prussia and not Silesia? And why does it possess the Sudetes territories. Also, why is Vienna under...hungarian control? And how did Hungary take over half of Slovakia?
-why does Romania control Gagauzia (southern Moldavia) and northern Dobruja?
-why are Croatia, Bosnia and Serbia shaped like that? It seemed they were cut with a butter knife. Croatia comprises Slovenia and misses southern Dalmatia, Bosnia has southern Dalmatia and part of Croatia, and Serbia has Albania. How did that happen?
-why is Lithuania shaped so? Why does it even exist independently from the Communes?
- why does Prussia possess only part of Eastern Prussia and not Silesia? And why does it possess the Sudetes territories. Also, why is Vienna under...hungarian control? And how did Hungary take over half of Slovakia?
-why does Romania control Gagauzia (southern Moldavia) and northern Dobruja?
-why are Croatia, Bosnia and Serbia shaped like that? It seemed they were cut with a butter knife. Croatia comprises Slovenia and misses southern Dalmatia, Bosnia has southern Dalmatia and part of Croatia, and Serbia has Albania. How did that happen?
By the way, great job for making those maps! You finally made a detailed plan. It was so confusing.
Hey everyone. Whether or not I'll return, which is unlikely in the foreseeable future, I'd still like to contribute to the organization effort, as I might be able to help piece things back together.
Before posting any summaries, I'd like to point out a few issues I think should be raised concerning the greater Middle East.
Looking at the map, I'm just telling myself, besides it being messed up, that it's not actually plausible. First of all, though I get that the point of the civil war was to balkanize the Ottoman Empire, some polities are just absurdly carved out. Chechnya is not geographically located where it's indicated on the map, nor is Ossetia. Not quite, in the latter case.
The case of Pontic Greece kind of bothers me, since it has definite historical and cultural ties with Greece. The only difference is the location. So maybe we should consider integrating the two. However, holding such a far-flung country would be a wager, especially against a resentful Turkey. As a matter of fact, why is Istanbul separated from Turkey? That's nonsensical. It's the historical capital. Then there's Kurdistan. Why is Kurdistan a ridiculous patch of..mountains? It's definitely not a viable state, and it comprises just a tiny part of the Kurd-dominated area.
As for Syria and Palestine, I believe the whole Levant should be just one nation, as it historically has been. The current real-life division only occurred due to colonial dealings between the UK and France. Plus the rebel movements were fighting for that.
What do you think of that?
Before posting any summaries, I'd like to point out a few issues I think should be raised concerning the greater Middle East.
Looking at the map, I'm just telling myself, besides it being messed up, that it's not actually plausible. First of all, though I get that the point of the civil war was to balkanize the Ottoman Empire, some polities are just absurdly carved out. Chechnya is not geographically located where it's indicated on the map, nor is Ossetia. Not quite, in the latter case.
The case of Pontic Greece kind of bothers me, since it has definite historical and cultural ties with Greece. The only difference is the location. So maybe we should consider integrating the two. However, holding such a far-flung country would be a wager, especially against a resentful Turkey. As a matter of fact, why is Istanbul separated from Turkey? That's nonsensical. It's the historical capital. Then there's Kurdistan. Why is Kurdistan a ridiculous patch of..mountains? It's definitely not a viable state, and it comprises just a tiny part of the Kurd-dominated area.
As for Syria and Palestine, I believe the whole Levant should be just one nation, as it historically has been. The current real-life division only occurred due to colonial dealings between the UK and France. Plus the rebel movements were fighting for that.
What do you think of that?
© 2007-2024