Fortress Strategy: A Discussion with Army Commanding General NXNW

Day 792, 07:20 • Published in USA Australia • by Aeros

Having heard so much of the tactical reasoning as to why it’s bad to implement reforms to our present retention efforts, I decided I needed to get some information right from the horses mouth. Today’s edition is a discussion I had with the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and Commanding General of the US Army, NXNW.


Sir, You have spent most of your career out of the eyes of the general population. What has compelled you to come forward so publicly now?

”I think this is too important an issue to ignore. I have found a special niche in eRepublic and have stayed away from politics. Unfortunately, I see the present situation as a security issue.”


By issue you are referring to the present debate surrounding America’s fortress strategy?
“absolutely”

This is a bit strange coming from the Vice Chair of the Joint Chiefs. Many of the arguments for the status quo are saying the military is 100% behind their stand.

“Well, the people saying that certainly have not spoken to me. I wonder who else they have missed.”


You say that the present strategy is a security issue. Would you care to elaborate?

“When I first started playing erep (almost a year ago) military forces were by and large relatively small groups of elite troops-think knights and squires. We have moved beyond that to a sort of industrial warfare similar to WW1 with large armies on the move. In this era of "industrial warfare" quantity has a special quality. It is no secret that the eUS is now the 4th most populous state in eRepublik. This is not a good trend.”


But I've been told our population trends are normal for the circumstances. Since you were active prior to the invasion, would you agree with that assessment?

“No. We have returned to pre WW3 doldrums. This might be acceptable to some people but in my opinion it is not "normal" for one of the most dynamic e-cultures to let thousands of citizens a month just fade away. Other nations would kill to have 300 new citizens a day.”


It’s been said that the reason for that is the Game and not for lack of effort on the Governments part

“I must take the chance to give high praise to the people who volunteer for the various welcoming groups. That is hard work and often thankless. I do not think anyone is to blame per se but it is obvious that the status quo does not work and it is time for new methods.”


What sort of new methods would you be in favor of?

“I think it is worthwhile to plant a couple Q2 hospitals in states with large RL populations. Max McFarland has graciously volunteered to provide the Q2s at cost. This is a low cost venture that could yield results. Even if it fails, we will have at least tried to do something.”


This has been brought up before as you know, but has been voted down by Congress because they believe it would weaken the fortress strategy. They have also stated for this reason they will never follow through with this idea. What are your thoughts on this?

“If we had even 3K “extra” citizens not in a Fortress state, we would not need the fortress because we would have the strength to go on the offensive against our enemies. You also have to ask yourself if anyone would be willing to tangle with us and 60,000 poles. The best defense is a good offense. Also, the mega fort in FL did not stop an invasion in the first place.”


Hold on, we've heard for months now that Fortress Florida saved America

“If PEACE had wanted to spend the money (which they had on hand) they could have overrun Florida. The reason they did not go for it was because they thought they had us beat and that we intended to sign a surrender treaty. Also remember that Canada and Spain had just been renewed as countries and were proving a distraction. You also have to remember that wiping us out would have been good for the eUS in many ways. We would have been able to come back with no open wars but all of our MPP’s. “


Going back to how war has changed since last year, would our Fortresses withstand a direct attack from a major phoenix power like Hungary, or a situation of the UK with MPP's?

“ If the other side is willing to spend the money any region can be taken. Look at Spain vs France & allies. Now Spain is pretty bad ass, but France had 2 fortress regions (and built a third); but the Spanish had the troops and the gold to go for it.”


So you are saying that at the end of the day, the size of a wall does not ultimately matter?

“A wall constitutes a moving target. Take Poland for example. 60k people hitting the same spot can lay down some serious damage. Also, check out the Huns. They had a baby boom. Not all those people stuck around but that "generation" has given them a huge core of generals & FMs. bottom line, if you have the money and the human capitol you can do almost anything. Not to toot our own horn but wins in Manitoba, Nunavut, Alaska, Liaoning & Karnataka back up that assertion.”


Any final thoughts on the debate that has currently swept the country?

“it is good to see that so many people care so much. And I applaud the fact that there has been very little in the way of dirty politics. But if the status quo isn't working it is time to experiment, see what happens. Isn’t one definition of insanity doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result?”


Truer words could never have been said, thank you very much for taking the time to speak with me sir