Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: New border in SR4
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Pages: 1, 2
Patrick Goodman
QUOTE (hermit)
Patrick Goodman ... for someone who's relatively new here ... why DO you want to change the border?

The simple answer? I'm a Texan, and it offends my pride. I find it aesthetically unpleasant, too. There's really not much more to it than that.

I also found much of the partitioning of the old USA a little hard to believe, and the Aztlan invasion of Texas was just a part of it. If I could remake any piece of canon in the game, it would be how the NAN came about. The end result might be largely the same, but the journey would be different (though we would have completely avoided the whole CalFree fiasco, I think). I can't change that, any more than I can undo the in-game invasion of Texas by Aztlan...but I can push for a series of events that allows Aztlan to stay around while at the same time getting the hell out of Texas.
Crimsondude 2.0
This is going to be interesting.
Patrick Goodman
I did mention somewhere in here that I'm a cranky bastard sometimes, didn't I?

To be honest, CD, I don't think I have anything that'll convince you. It is just a pride thing with me, and I don't deny it. I also don't expect to win this argument with Rob, either; I've been pitching it at SR line developers for a number of years now, and it's gotten nowhere. It's my own personal windmill (along with PC heights and weights, where I think I have a better chance of actually effecting change), and I intend to tilt at it for as long as I can keep up my own interest.

It is, however, the reason I introduced the Azziewatch data haven and the Sons of the Alamo. I need someone to tilt at the windmills with me. We might not win, but we're going to fight anyway. (If I ever get off my ass and work on some of the fiction I have outlined, I'll be making some use of some of this material, too, but I think holding your breath would be contraindicated.) If some of the GMs out there want to fight that fight with me, I feel happy to have provided some tools.
Sharaloth
I'm not entirely sure that's a good enough reason. Just because you don't like it? Okay, I don't like that Canada merged with the US and lost a good chunk of itself in the process. That's not even logical with the way Canada's politics work. We'd have kept most of the praries, BC, and hell, most of the Territories too (Quebec's a different story). That would, actually be the only reason the US would really want to merge with Canada, the vast amount of natural resources we have. The way it is now, the US picked up fifteen million people and a big, red maple leaf in the merger, and lost the whole of the south. Bad deal all around, really.

But that's what happened in the game, and we can only extrapolate that things went from bad to shit-poor sometime in the early 21st century in the SR universe, making such a ludicrous land giveaway and unprofitable merger acceptable to Canada (or even the US). The best thing Canada did for the US when they merged was introduce the concept of a whole slew of parties into what had once been a 2 party system.

This is aesthetically unpleasing to me and offensive to my pride, as a Canadian, that we should allow our nation to be reduced so greatly. I'm not even really interested in seeing the UCAS take back that land in SR, it's a different world, with different borders, and a lot of things are radically, inalterably different from our world now. That's one of the things I like about SR. Why should they change the Texas/Aztlan border? The azzies got that land through force of arms, they're bloody well going to work to keep it, and it's going to take significantly more than Texas can offer to shift them.
Patrick Goodman
QUOTE (Paul)
QUOTE (hermit)
Patrick Goodman ... for someone who's relatively new here ... why DO you want to change the border?

Well because He wrote it, is my guess. Pat's afree lancer, and while I wouldn't be able to quote line and verse of what he's wrote, I can vouch for its quality.

I appreciate the vote of confidence, but I didn't exactly write the Texas/Aztlan dispute; that was there since the start of things. I did write a couple of things centered around them, though, as mentioned above. The Azziewatch crew can be found in Target: Matrix and a little bit about the Sons of the Alamo can be found in Year of the Comet.

I thank you for your vote of confidence.
Patrick Goodman
QUOTE (Sharaloth)
I'm not entirely sure that's a good enough reason.

Never said it was. Don't read more into things than I put there.
Sharaloth
QUOTE
Never said it was. Don't read more into things than I put there.

I did not read anything more into your statement than was there, I simply stated my own beleif that your reasons are not, in my opinion, good enough to warrant a change. Whether you claimed they were or not is irrelevant to said opinion.
Kanada Ten
I won't go over what Crimson laid out in the other thread, but I'm coming for that point of view.

The only thing I can see happening is a peace deal between the CAS and Aztlan where the land dispute is ended. However, there would have to be something in it for the Azzies. Something big. Really the only reason the CAS is against Aztlan is the Texas situation, right?

So what could the CAS give Aztlan?
    Well, Denver, right? Probably not going to happen, but slim chance.
    Stop the pirates in the Caribbean (which hurt both nations' trade and tourism).
    End the military agreements with the PCC.
    Stopping aid to the Yucatan.
    A return of all spies and handing over terrorists, stopping paramilitary groups.

Eyeless Blond
I happen to think the entire history regarding Calfree is a load of trash, and I'm not alone in this. It basically portrays my home state (and in particular my home city of LA) as a mix of half-aware hippies and yuppies with their heads so far up their own anuses that they didn't notice and were incapable of reacting at all to any of half a dozen armies slowly gathering at its borders. I doubt any of it's going to change, though (though Saito had damn well better be dead by 2070! biggrin.gif); I wouldn't really expect it to.
Chance359
QUOTE
A return of all spies and handing over terrorists, stopping paramilitary groups.


But then Kane would have to stop blowing shit up.
Kagetenshi
Personally, I'd like to see Texas get completely taken over, but that's just me.

~J
Capt. Dave
Kick the Azzies out of Texas! Count me in as a second for Patrick Goodman's idea.
No way would Texas allow Aztlaners to keep part of their soverign soil forever...
Neuron Basher
QUOTE (Eyeless Blond)
It basically portrays my home state (and in particular my home city of LA) as a mix of half-aware hippies and yuppies with their heads so far up their own anuses ...

You mean they aren't? eek.gif

I couldn't help myself. Bad Neuron Basher, bad bad. embarrassed.gif
Crimsondude 2.0
QUOTE (Patrick Goodman)
I did mention somewhere in here that I'm a cranky bastard sometimes, didn't I?

To be honest, CD, I don't think I have anything that'll convince you. It is just a pride thing with me, and I don't deny it. I also don't expect to win this argument with Rob, either; I've been pitching it at SR line developers for a number of years now, and it's gotten nowhere. It's my own personal windmill (along with PC heights and weights, where I think I have a better chance of actually effecting change), and I intend to tilt at it for as long as I can keep up my own interest.

It is, however, the reason I introduced the Azziewatch data haven and the Sons of the Alamo. I need someone to tilt at the windmills with me. We might not win, but we're going to fight anyway. (If I ever get off my ass and work on some of the fiction I have outlined, I'll be making some use of some of this material, too, but I think holding your breath would be contraindicated.) If some of the GMs out there want to fight that fight with me, I feel happy to have provided some tools.

That's fine.

But I like to think that if I can remain dispassionate about my own dislike for Texans and the fact that I despise Aztlan just as much for being worse to its people than Mexico is, and using them as fodder for, well, evil agendas, then I will have to see an argument that isn't predicated on personal bias.

Nothing is absolute, and I know that if a country really wants to it will find a way to get into a war. But a war between the CAS and Aztlan, which is the only way I see this happening, would cripple them both.

But then again, this is as good a time as any for a deus ex machina move.
kevyn668
Anyone want to link the original pissing match so I can follow along?
Kanada Ten
http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?showtopic=7664

Like near the end of the middle.
Crimsondude 2.0
QUOTE (kevyn668)
Anyone want to link the original pissing match so I can follow along?

hahaha

That's so far from what this is.
Sandoval Smith
The problem, as I see it, is that there really is no good way to balkanize the U.S. I've seen it done a couple different ways, and someone always ends up calling shenanigans. I just shrug and don't let myself get worked up over it.
kevyn668
QUOTE (Crimsondude 2.0)
QUOTE (kevyn668 @ Mar 15 2005, 09:15 PM)
Anyone want to link the original pissing match so I can follow along?

hahaha

That's so far from what this is.

Really? It seems like that is exactly what this entire forum is about.

Its all "SR4 is the SECOND COMING," or "SR4 is the ANTICHRIST."

What the fuck? It happend. We'll deal. Some people are furious. Some people are not. Deal.

Patrick Goodman
QUOTE (kevyn668)
Anyone want to link the original pissing match so I can follow along?

What pissing match? Crimsondude and I are hardly engaged in a pissing match. While we tend to disagree on a number of things regarding Shadowrun and its rules and its world, the fact is that he and I have always (at least I think always) managed to keep it civil.

In this case, we're disagreeing on a fairly major thing for both of us. We've disagreed before, and we will again, on this subject even though the dispassionate and rational side of me knows that he's right. As a writer, I know he's right, and I believe his reasoning to be sound. It's just not a rational subject for me. And if I want to get my way, I had better come up with a damn good rationale to make it work.

But this is hardly a pissing match.
Kanada Ten
QUOTE
Really? It seems like that is exactly what this entire forum is about.

Its all "SR4 is the SECOND COMING," or "SR4 is the ANTICHRIST."

What the fuck? It happend. We'll deal. Some people are furious. Some people are not. Deal.

WTF? That's not what this is about at all. This isn't even about a fouth edition, rather whether Texas can free its lost territory in some "logical" or at least rationalized way.
kevyn668
Noted. To both of you.
Pthgar
Rationale: Something along the lines of a NATO like treaty between UCAS and CAS, resonable considering the two countries have more in common than not. This really spooks the Azzies into "securing their border" UCAS comes into it on CAS's side. The other NAN's are freaked (especially Souix), they come in on Azzie's side. CFS is a late commer on the UCAS/CAS side after a pre-emptive move on them by the NANs. Tir Taingire stays neutral, Seattle, in effect becomes it's own city state. It's the american import of euro-wars and Ares laughs all the way to the bank.

In the end, the CAS/UCAS mostly win and get some land. Maybe even re-unify.
Kanada Ten
The NAN isn't likely to side with the Azzies... like ever. Not only would Pueblo piss itself over losing the CAS support, the rest of the NAN would rather have the UCAS looking at Aztlan than themselves. And the CFS would have to solve several small problems before it could do anything like support a war.

Besides, Aztlan is a superpower with nukes and stealth bombers, submarines, and so on. A war wouldn't happen in a pleasant way.
Pthgar
Not saying it would be pleasent. It's a war, pretty much the definition of un-pleasent.
As for the NAN's supporting the Azzies, they were allied in the past. I was just positing that the Souix would be more concerned with the UCAS (whom they've been having a sort of cold war with) than the Azzies.

Hmm... Now that you mention it it would be more likley that the North American Treaty Organization would spook the Souix into attacking UCAS and the Azzies would just be attacking the CAS while they were preoccupied helping the neighbors to the north. The rest could stay the same though.

It really could fall out any number of ways and still be plausible in light of how wars have started historically.
CanvasBack
Given that the PCC thwarted Aztlan's goals of retaking Al Norte by going into L.A. and given the role the PCC and CAS had in ousting the Azzies from Denver I find that war between Aztlan and at the very least the PCC/CAS faction to be HIGHLY likely. There's been a brushfire war going on for awhile now in the SR universe, something has to give. Look for the UCAS to get in on that action and probably Amazonia as well. The rest of NAN never really looked at Aztlan being one of them anyway.

If you want to have reality intrude on the balkanization of North America... The CAS never happens because frankly there is one large ethnic minority down South that just wouldn't "cotton" to that idea. But the balkanization does provide one useful function in that it provides a clear demarcation between fantasy and reality... As if magic and cyberweapons weren't enough... wobble.gif
Pthgar
QUOTE (CanvasBack)
Given that the PCC thwarted Aztlan's goals of retaking Al Norte by going into L.A. and given the role the PCC and CAS had in ousting the Azzies from Denver I find that war between Aztlan and at the very least the PCC/CAS faction to be HIGHLY likely. There's been a brushfire war going on for awhile now in the SR universe, something has to give. Look for the UCAS to get in on that action and probably Amazonia as well. The rest of NAN never really looked at Aztlan being one of them anyway.

If you want to have reality intrude on the balkanization of North America... The CAS never happens because frankly there is one large ethnic minority down South that just wouldn't "cotton" to that idea. But the balkanization does provide one useful function in that it provides a clear demarcation between fantasy and reality... As if magic and cyberweapons weren't enough... wobble.gif

That's a good scenario. The thing is, I've been waiting for a war in N.A. for a while. All the ingredients are there and statistically wars happen every 15-20 years in the 20th century and early 21st (for America at least, much more often if we look to conficts all over the world. There are wars going on all the time.) If we discount the Corp War, N.A. is overdue.
Critias
Depends on what you mean by "war." I've always been of the opinion there are constant small unit actions and skirmishes going on all over North America (and I don't just mean Shadowruns) -- Ghost teams blowing up Sioux stuff too near the border, Wildcats taking out supply convoys too close to Sioux turf, etc, etc. Low-scale conflict, but conflict nonetheless. Constant raids and border scraps between, well, just about everyone.

And don't forget the occasional genuine push/land grab. A lot of those have been very vague in their size descriptions, but what's it take to count as a "war?"
hermit
I dunno. It's not hard to imagine the CAS (with possible UCAS support) starting a war to reclaim their national honor - wars are often about this matter.

I always had a hard time imagining Americans just accepting the loss of land and prestige and pride the formation of the NAN meant, shrug, say "geez, we asked for it" and move on and be pals with these nations. I have a very difficult time imagining them to even recognise them as nations (much like mainland China has a dire problem recognising Taiwan actually is a distinct nation), let alone have diplomatic relations with them.

An all-out war between a UCAS/CAS block that feels confident again now and has some major Mojo backing up their nukes, too, and a NAN that's increasingly at each others' throats and thus presents a somewhat weakened target is way overdue. And I'd consider the chances of a reunited Anglo block pretty decent, too - if only because they vastly outnumber the natives and can muster ressources they can only dream of.

And it'd not be unlikely to start - again - with Texas feeling it is too small, and needing to expand it's borders. Besides, the UCAS and CAS have a vast underclass who are unemployed, poor and have little chance of changing this. Nationalist fervor and the spinning of an external enemy have always been the method of choice to keep such tensions from boining over. Just look at China and Russia.

Of course, this won't be as easy a war as the US-Mexican war was. It'd lead to a massive bloodshed on both sides. We'd see death and internment camps springing up again, for sure. It'd be messy and very likely to go nuclear. Possibly, it'd have to be ended Eurowars style by a third party (Imperial Japan? Ghostwalker?).

Sure, it'd be insane, and senseless, and not gain any party involved anything worth the while. But has the prospect of complete devastation ever stopped any nation from restoring it's honor?
Smed
Interesting discussion. I really enjoyed reading Crimsondude's reasons in the other thread. They seem well though out and completely rational. In a sane world, what he's stating should happen. Of course, governments don't always act rationally....
Nikoli
Personally, I'd rather see a bloodless merger than a new war.
Maybe it's the fact that I come from both sides of the border so to speak.

Many on both sides are proud of the positive shared heritage between the cultures (like the Windtalkers and their bravery in WWII) but there is a much longer standing air of distrust on teh Native side because of all the treaty violations, bad blood and mishandled goverment programs. Overcomming that will be difficult, to achieve it there needs to be some outside threat looming that could envelop all three nations and not think twice about it. Like Aztlan invading, using blood spirits in the slums to cause devastation, etc. Give them some huge common foe and watch them call on the good parts of a mutual past to band together against the common foe, of course the aftermath there would be a return to the infighting, that is the sad truth of human nature. But you'd have a reunified nation, expanded even with the added Canadian states,
you'd have the potential for runs involving the interim goverment as old guard politial powers consolidate power bases and try and protect themselves from the others.

It'd knock a huge block out of Tir's powerbase, Saito would be up drek-creek without a smartlink and return Aztlan tot he country we love to hate.
Kanada Ten
Reunification would be a political nightmare even in just terms of paperwork. And which government was going to give up autonomy? What support does idea that it could come about with anything short of a real true war with millions of casualties and conquering come from? Historically, no one gives up their nation freely. Hell, look at the European Union. That's barely an alliance and they're all kicking and screaming. A trans American alliance is far more likely than reunification, but even that has huge obstacles.
Pthgar
QUOTE (Critias)
Depends on what you mean by "war." I've always been of the opinion there are constant small unit actions and skirmishes going on all over North America (and I don't just mean Shadowruns) -- Ghost teams blowing up Sioux stuff too near the border, Wildcats taking out supply convoys too close to Sioux turf, etc, etc. Low-scale conflict, but conflict nonetheless. Constant raids and border scraps between, well, just about everyone.

And don't forget the occasional genuine push/land grab. A lot of those have been very vague in their size descriptions, but what's it take to count as a "war?"

I consider all of the black ops and 3rd party puppeteering as part of the cold war. Like USSR and US. Sometimes it got a little warm or even downright hot but it was never considered a real full out war.
Crimsondude 2.0
QUOTE (Patrick Goodman @ Mar 15 2005, 10:17 PM)
QUOTE (kevyn668 @ Mar 15 2005, 10:15 PM)
Anyone want to link the original pissing match so I can follow along?

What pissing match? Crimsondude and I are hardly engaged in a pissing match. While we tend to disagree on a number of things regarding Shadowrun and its rules and its world

We do?

I should probably pay more attention then.

QUOTE (Smed)
Interesting discussion. I really enjoyed reading Crimsondude's reasons in the other thread. They seem well though out and completely rational. In a sane world, what he's stating should happen. Of course, governments don't always act rationally....

Oh, yeah. That's the fatal flaw in my analysis that countries act rationally.

However, it's also backed up by a suggestion of complacency, in-fighting, and a lack of will.

Otherwise, a lot of the ideas tossed around here are also suffering from a fatal flaw: A lack of a catalyst to act. Otherwise, there's no reason to assume anything's going to change overnight.
Patrick Goodman
QUOTE (Crimsondude 2.0)
QUOTE (Patrick Goodman @ Mar 15 2005, 10:17 PM)
What pissing match? Crimsondude and I are hardly engaged in a pissing match. While we tend to disagree on a number of things regarding Shadowrun and its rules and its world

We do?

I should probably pay more attention then.

Little things, mostly, and they're not important enough for me to talk about them most of the time. Or even remember what some of them are, beyond this particular issue here, the vast majority of the time. It's probably just because I'm a contrary old coot, too.

You are one of the few here that I consistently pay attention to, however, when these kinds of things come up. As I said elsewhere, your reasoning is generally sound, and you don't enter into flamewars unless there's damn good cause (and I don't really ever remember you entering into them in the first place, now that I think about it). You're nice to deal with.
Crimsondude 2.0
Thanks.
Smed
QUOTE (Crimsondude 2.0 @ Mar 16 2005, 12:40 PM)

Oh, yeah. That's the fatal flaw in my analysis that countries act rationally.

However, it's also backed up by a suggestion of complacency, in-fighting, and a lack of will.

Otherwise, a lot of the ideas tossed around here are also suffering from a fatal flaw: A lack of a catalyst to act. Otherwise, there's no reason to assume anything's going to change overnight.

I remeber a great SF book I read back when I was in college I think, about a secret angency that's only purpose was to make sure that government did not get too efficent. The premise was that if governemnt got too efficient, or had too many people all with the same desires, that it could cause too much trouble. A little inefficiency and infighting would help to keep it from getting in too much trouble. Great book, just wish I could remeber what the title was. It was about 20 years ago.

I agree that it would take some catalyst to make this happen, but from what I've read so far on what might happen in System Failure, it sounds like there is going to be massive change that take place very rapidly. Rapid change causes a good bit of fear and anxiety, making people and governments behave in ways they might not normally act otherwise.

It wouldn't be the first time a government has picked a fight with someone to distract its own population from massive changes at home.
hermit
QUOTE
Hell, look at the European Union. That's barely an alliance and they're all kicking and screaming.

Nope, it's far more than an alliance, and less at the same time. The EU has no military dimension (and will never have if the US has their way), but is very engaged in shaping (or trying to shape) member nations' policies. This goes from standardised celphone networks and the famous bananan bend to 'guidelines' that member nations are required to integrate into national law. It's a weird, patchwork, chimeric creature, but cannot be fitted into any cathegory.

QUOTE
A trans American alliance is far more likely than reunification, but even that has huge obstacles.

I don't see even that. The individual nations have too diverging sets of interests. The UCAS is seeking to reestablish itself as a superpower, ebing the only nation except for the JIS to operate large aircraft carriers (R3). The CAS is isolationist and mainly concerned with navel-gazing and keeping Aztlan from snatching more of Texas. The NAN are torn and struggling, offering an image more reminiscent of the Arab League than the EU - just take the Tshimshian-Salish war, the quarrels between Ute and Pueblo, and Sioux is paranoid anyway and hates the UCAS' guts. And Tir Taingire could care less if all it's neighbours were devoured by horrors, provided they can keep those out of their little realm.
How shall these nations ever agree on a common command structure? Why should the SSC be bothered with defending the CAS from an Aztlan attack? Aztlan would never be able to conquer all of America, that'd stretch their forces way too thin. Besides, the smallish SSC military is more than occupied with the Tshmshian situation. Likewise, I can hardly imagine the UCAS to come to the PCC's rescue when they are hit hard by the Azzies due to being spread out too much and having too many of their forces bound by LA's occupation. One less competitor on it's way back to former glory.

QUOTE
Reunification would be a political nightmare even in just terms of paperwork. And which government was going to give up autonomy?

Believe me, the paperwork is the least problem about two nations unifying. Also, occasionally, nations have given up autonomy to merge - take the Republic of New Granada, Germany, or the (short-lived) Arab unions in the 70s, or the planned merger of Moldovia and Romania (excluding Transnistria, whcih will merge with Ukraine instead). Mostly, this is done because of some leader's grand visions (whichdefinitly was the case with the Arabs and Germans), sometime sbecause of economic reasons (like with Moldovia), and sometimes it's just the result of post-colonial troubles.

Anyway, the EU arguably is half a unification too. You'd be surprised at how much autonomy new members surrender to Brussels.

But yes, unifications of nations are the exception, not the rule. Whcih brings me to point 2: American Reconstruction in Shadowrun.

QUOTE
Many on both sides are proud of the positive shared heritage between the cultures (like the Windtalkers and their bravery in WWII) but there is a much longer standing air of distrust on the Native side because of all the treaty violations, bad blood and mishandled goverment programs.
Overcomming that will be difficult, to achieve it there needs to be some outside threat looming that could envelop all three nations and not think twice about it. Like Aztlan invading, using blood spirits in the slums to cause devastation, etc. Give them some huge common foe and watch them call on the good parts of a mutual past to band together against the common foe, of course the aftermath there would be a return to the infighting, that is the sad truth of human nature. But you'd have a reunified nation, expanded even with the added Canadian states,
you'd have the potential for runs involving the interim goverment as old guard politial powers consolidate power bases and try and protect themselves from the others.

Jarman wanted to kill them all off, Nazi-style, in his death camps. Whatever positive shared heritage there may have been once, it is no more. Attempted genocide has managed to disrupt every multi-racial culture. Just look at Yugoslavia, Germany, India/Pakistan/Bangladesh ... there're very few examples of a society pulling back together and go back to the good old days. Add to that a strong feeling of pride about having been able to squash the world's last superpower, and you can be sure the NAN will have nothing about reunification.
All the more as there's surely a lot of bitterness on the Anglo side for getting their ass kicked by some rag-tag heathen lowlifes (I know what my folks in the US, and most Americans I know, think of Indians, and it's not very nice). US (and presumably slightly less so, Canadian) Anglos aren't really good losers. I'd bet there'd be a large anti-Indian lobby in the UCAS and CAS - much like the anti-Cuba lobby and groups on Florida today, only much more bitter and hateful.
And a common enemy works only so much in bringing people together. The result, even if the NAN and UCAS/CAS gang up on Aztlan, would be fighting between the different factions over the spoils (maybe that mysterious Locus thing), not a reunified, if a bit unruly, USA. The USA is gone for good in the Shadowrun world, which is one of the more interesting parts about this world, really.
Bottom line: I don't see an American Restoration any time soon. There's just too much hatred on all sides for that. Or at least, that's how I see it.
Pthgar
For my part I was not seriously envisioning a restored USA. I was just providing a reasonably realistic way that the CAS (Texas) could gain back some of it's land. There are many ways a war could happen.
I just think that if the CAS or UCAS feel threatened in any way they will look around them and say "Who could I live with the easiest?" The answer is each other. That alliance would provoke the other North American countries into being much more agressive and could lead to war. Especially if crap gets as messed up as it seems.
It would be a great shock to me (as well as seem a little unrealistic) to think that the some borders somewhere wouldn't change after all of the system failure/crash stuff.
hermit
QUOTE
I just think that if the CAS or UCAS feel threatened in any way they will look around them and say "Who could I live with the easiest?" The answer is each other. That alliance would provoke the other North American countries into being much more agressive and could lead to war. Especially if crap gets as messed up as it seems.

Yeah, that might make sense. It might well make the NAN get their act back together, even.

QUOTE
It would be a great shock to me (as well as seem a little unrealistic) to think that the some borders somewhere wouldn't change after all of the system failure/crash stuff.

Yeah, true ... maybe soem fo the Indian nations die off and are divided between their neighbours? Tshimshian comes to mind ... or the PCC. Also, something HAS to happen about California.
Crimsondude 2.0
QUOTE (hermit @ Mar 16 2005, 11:27 AM)
(I know what my folks in the US, and most Americans I know, think of Indians, and it's not very nice).

Then you know some real dipshits.

QUOTE (Smed)
It wouldn't be the first time a government has picked a fight with someone to distract its own population from massive changes at home.

You don't say.

A government can get its people (or a majority of them, anyway) to go to war with the right justification. I just see no reason for CAS, specifically, to invoke any justification to go to war on Texas' behalf.
hermit
QUOTE
Then you know some real dipshits.

Yup. But it seems most of Bay City thinks that way ...

QUOTE
A government can get its people (or a majority of them, anyway) to go to war with the right justification. I just see no reason for CAS, specifically, to invoke any justification to go to war on Texas' behalf.

With the right spinning, rather. Or just by invoking fierce nationalism. Just look at China's fervor over Taiwan ... or Uganda's assault on the DRC. And as for spinning ... one word: Iraq.
Crimsondude 2.0
No shit.
hermit
Anyway, if the CAS government would like to have it's populace focus on ogther things than some really stupid shit they did, they'd surely start yelling at Aztlan and calling for getting the rest of Texas back from the Azzies - and might even provide the press with topm secret documents about just what the Azzies do in their teocalli. this should be a very viable reason to go and rescue their Texan brothers, though the prospects of the CAS succeeding aren't too good.
shadow_scholar
As someone who actually lives in Austin presently (very close to it) I understand Patrick's frustration and pride issue, but a personal agenda does not a good story make. Given the history it makes perfect sense that Mexico...er...Aztlan would try to get Texas back the way they did. And it also makes sense that Texas would now want it back. The seeds were sown hundreds of years ago, and I imagine some of that bitterness will never go away, but I think the current state of things makes for an awesome Shadowrun setting in Austin.

That's where I have my current group of runners now, while all my other games used to be in Seattle. I feel a much closer bond to my new game because I am familiar with the area. Yeah, some of my players were a little pissed when I explained to them how south Austin is now in Aztlan hands, but this provides so many places to go with various storylines. I loved the idea and instituted that the city would be split up by its own natural border, the Colorado River.

Still, I do feel that pride tugging at my heartstrings to think that half of Texas now belongs to its old enemy. But honestly, I find the story aspects it provides to be much more interesting and logical. Why would Texas now invade Aztlan? I don't know, but I would guess that an underground/terrorist type war had been happening in the former southern Texas for a while now, ever since Aztlan invaded, especially in San Antonio. Some of you may perceive that Texas=Anglos and South Texas=Mexicans (Aztlaners) but honestly, the races are a lot more mixed down here, and I see a lot of Texan hispanics staying in Aztlan territory because they love the place and couldn't make it out, therefore starting an underground war. Perhaps this war has been fueled by CAS, or more specifically, Texas resources, and while Aztlan has been slowly pulling resources from Texas to apply them to the Yucatan it makes perfect sense that the north Texans are itching to get the former south Texas back. But would that be enough? I think not.

It would take something big, really big, and really bad that Aztlan have to do to make a war official. Something like launching a major counterstrike to the former Texan terrorists and it getting really, really bloody and brutal. I'd say something akin to concentration camps, that kind of atrocity might spur on some action, or maybe Aztlan kicks off some majorly nasty, nasty magic in the former south Texas as a testbed for tactics in the Yucatan or as a perceived new military tactic to be possibly used against the rest of the NA, or even world, and all the adjacent countries freak and want to know everything they can about it. So Texas and the rest of NA reach an agreement to invade the former south Texas to get it back. Texas gets its land back, and the rest of NA head off a major magical threat. Honestly, if Aztlan was faced with multiple armies from various countries the fight wouldn't last long. Or maybe when stared down with such a massive military force Aztlan would just eventually walk away willingly, but no doubt leaving behind some nice "present" to be discoverd when south Texas was reclaimed.

Could it make sense? Yes, I think it could. But honestly, I'd rather it didn't happen, but that's only because of a personal reason of mine, because I love the new Austin setting I've created. If someone could tell me how to post a spoiler type link I'd be happy to lay down the history I've written for Austin since the early 21st.
CanvasBack
QUOTE (Crimsondude 2.0)

A government can get its people (or a majority of them, anyway) to go to war with the right justification. I just see no reason for CAS, specifically, to invoke any justification to go to war on Texas' behalf.

But would they go to war on their own behalf?

The powers that be in Aztlan/Aztechnology may decide that the events in Denver demand retribution and a reclamation of territory including all of California, parts of Nevada, Utah, the rest of Arizona, New Mexico, all of Colorado, the rest of Texas, probably Oklahoma, and maybe even New Orleans. They may justify it to themselves as putting back together the lands stolen from them during the Spanish Colonial and later the Mexican era by the colonial powers of old and the young U.S.A. Given the ultra-nationalist bent of the Azzies, I could easily envision them nuking the shit out of the Yucatan, cordoning that area off. Redeploying on their Northern Border and riding hell bent for leather towards Denver. That has the potential to get most of NAN against them as well. Also, IIRC, CAS is currently boycotting Aztechnology goods so they've got yet another incentive to "open up free markets" for their wares.


I wouldn't dismiss a re-unification movement out of hand. SoNA made plenty of references to the Republicans, Democrats, and the True American Party or some such laying the ground work for it in both the UCAS and the CAS. It probably would take more than 5 years and there would have to be yet another Constituitional Convention (That could take many years to work out...) and an actual reunification plan. It wouldn't necessarily have to effect California at all, either, but it would definitely put the NAN in the proverbial shit-fit state... But they had to deal with the remnants of the old U.S. and Canada for a bit after the Treaty of Denver anyway so that cold possibly be spun as a regression to the former state of affairs, minus Aztlan. Anythings possible though...
Pthgar
Just to throw a bucket of gasoline on the fire, don't forget about the "New Revolution" from Threats 2.
moosegod
QUOTE
So, we have the PCC which is drawing more and more distant from its sister NAN states. We have the CAS, which is dependent on primarily high tech (read: Matrix) technology. And we have the UCAS, which apparently maintained much of the US's military. Add an aggravated enemy to the south (the Azzies), who hate the PCC for taking LA, and throw in a major Sons of the Alamo incident... Sounds like an alliance.

The PCC's forces have been mentioned as being very drawn out, however. They can call on the Sioux, who will likely try to force them into more NAN compliant activities. The CAS probably doesn't have the forces required.

The UCAS sees it's opportunity. The DF adds some goodwill and diplomatic help, and WHAM, we have an alliance. Maybe not straight up unification to begin with...

The Manitou appeal to the UCAS for help against the other majorities and join the country in exchange for monetary aid and freedom from ummm... those guys(the Japanacorp), which Novatech supports. Novatech brings the two together...

With the Souix in the middle, it would be difficult. But the STC and Tsimshan go to it. This time Mitsuhama gets heavily involved, demanding Sioux involvement, distracting them for several months, especially if the boss of the intel service is coopted. Mitsuhama takes it on the chin from the Corporate Court for "their" bioweapons and has to leave Tsimshan. Tsimshan returns to the STC.


Sorry, bringing this in from my other thread.
Crimsondude 2.0
I'm not going to comment on or refute every idea. Frankly, it takes me too long and I can't spend all day on DS like I have been able to before.

However, I will leave you with some things to consider about how to go about trying to shift the borders around.

What would any country gain from an alliance, if that is your goal? Would it override the political costs, given that every country in NA pretty much hates the others. Who would be willing to expend the political capital to do so, according to canon? Who would gain from the alliance? Who would lose? Who would benefit the most from seeing the alliance fail? What means do the supporters have at their disposal to influence a) the other country (countries), b) their own political party/power base, c) their nation's public.

As far an invasion and land-grab go, there are several questions. What is the political structure of the aggressor government? What is the economic/socio-political status of the country? What is the country's relations with a hostile or neutral or friendly nation? What, if any, social/political/economic/other upheavals are they experiencing? Why would an invasion be justified? How would an invasion be justified? How would an invasion serve to alleviate or distract from that problem? Who would be leading the call for invasion? What kind of political capital can they muster? Who is their opposition? How much political capital can they muster? What is the position of the military? What are the military capabilities of the two+ nations? What are the worst-case scenarios for military action? What is the likelihood for escalation? What is your occupation strategy? What is your long-term settlement strategy? How will you enforce a military government of the occupied territories (to use an American WW2 term)--specifically, what do you do with a) POWs; b) civilians; c) insurgents; d) infrastructure; e) law & order; f) government; g) money; h) the economy; i) the security of the new border; j) relations with all of your original + occupied territory neighbor nations; k) relations with corporate, and specifically megacorp activity; l) possible retaliation; m) language issues; n) OT power sites and resources; o) magical, technological, and physical effects on the battlefields; p) domestic and international media; q) Machiavelli's six rules for conquest from The Prince (Some of which have been mentioned, but specifically whether you will colonize your newly conquered territory).

Think about those, because the characters actually conducting these political activities will have to consider at least these things before they do anything as drastic as this. Then we'll talk.
Crimsondude 2.0
QUOTE (CanvasBack @ Mar 16 2005, 12:16 PM)
The powers that be in Aztlan/Aztechnology may decide that the events in Denver demand retribution and a reclamation of territory including all of California, parts of Nevada, Utah, the rest of Arizona, New Mexico, all of Colorado, the rest of Texas, probably Oklahoma, and  maybe even New Orleans.  They may justify it to themselves as putting back together the lands stolen from them during the Spanish Colonial and later the Mexican era by the colonial powers of old and the young U.S.A.

Just to be complete, to restore Spanish Mexico they'd have to invade CAS, PCC, CFS, Ute, Denver, S-SC, Sioux, and TT.

Good luck!

QUOTE (shadow_scholar)
I loved the idea and instituted that the city would be split up by its own natural border, the Colorado River. 

Just to make sure--You do know that this is the border in Austin in Shadows of North America, right? That's why I suggested that the DMZ peace bridge is a more appropriate analogy to Austin than the Berlin Wall (well, one of many, actually).
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Dumpshock Forums © 2001-2012