The Aquitaine Strategy
Day 1,478, 00:32
•
Published in Canada 
•
by
•
by SaraDroz
While I am sure we should all be pleased at the recent eUS/allied victory over eSerbia in occupied Aquitaine this change of eUS strategy seems to be the opposite of eCanadian current strategy.
By way of explanation consider firstly why the eUS has chosen to 'take out' eSerbia in Aquitaine? Because, while eSerbia still has a few occupied regions in eUS itself these are cut off from the eastern coast (and what in real terms would be their 'line of supply'). The decision to 'liberate' Aquitaine is primarily therefore a precautionary step to stop any possible re-invasion by eSerbia from Europe, that might then again link up with the regions they retain in eUS itself. In real terms the surviving Serbian forces in the US would be in a 'Stalingrad pocket' and soon be forced to surrender.
I am NOT saying that the 'Aquitaine Strategy' is right or wrong; just examining the thinking behind it.
Now let us consider eCanadas strategic thinking. Having linked with our eUSA allies at the Wisconsin/Illanois 'junction' we had effectively cut the Polish occupied regions into three parts. The 'Western pocket' of whick only North and South Dakota still remain (for now): The 'Central pocket' of Indiana and Ohio and the 'North Eastern pocket' from Maine to New Jersey. These are accessable from ePolish occupied regions on the eFrench coast. eCanada and now eUSA are seeking to eliminate the 'Western pocket' first with attacks currently under way on North and South Dakota. Presumably the 'Central pocket' will be next target.
As ePoland owns both sides of the coast (for now) on the 'North Eastern pocket' this surely makes sense. Our trouble will begin when we come to deal with this 'pocket'. The 'Aquitaine strategy' suggests that when dealing with the 'North Eastern pocket' occupied regions in Northern eFrance must be considered. In many ways the 'Aquitaine strategy' us comparable to Montgomery's strategy in WW2: To push ahead and leave 'pockets' to be mopped up later. An alternate, 'Eisenhower - ish', plan may be to just keep pushing from west to east until we get to the Atlantic coast, when we can then consider again the liberation of eFrance.
One thing that the 'Aquitaine strategy' has made clear: The future security of eUSA and eCanada requires the 'liberation' of eFrance. The question the 'Aquitaine strategy' poses is whether the pre-emptive liberation of eFrance is the better way to liberate eUSA or whether the 'broad front - west to east' plan is safer?
I hope the 'top brass' have their thinking hats on...
By way of explanation consider firstly why the eUS has chosen to 'take out' eSerbia in Aquitaine? Because, while eSerbia still has a few occupied regions in eUS itself these are cut off from the eastern coast (and what in real terms would be their 'line of supply'). The decision to 'liberate' Aquitaine is primarily therefore a precautionary step to stop any possible re-invasion by eSerbia from Europe, that might then again link up with the regions they retain in eUS itself. In real terms the surviving Serbian forces in the US would be in a 'Stalingrad pocket' and soon be forced to surrender.
I am NOT saying that the 'Aquitaine Strategy' is right or wrong; just examining the thinking behind it.
Now let us consider eCanadas strategic thinking. Having linked with our eUSA allies at the Wisconsin/Illanois 'junction' we had effectively cut the Polish occupied regions into three parts. The 'Western pocket' of whick only North and South Dakota still remain (for now): The 'Central pocket' of Indiana and Ohio and the 'North Eastern pocket' from Maine to New Jersey. These are accessable from ePolish occupied regions on the eFrench coast. eCanada and now eUSA are seeking to eliminate the 'Western pocket' first with attacks currently under way on North and South Dakota. Presumably the 'Central pocket' will be next target.
As ePoland owns both sides of the coast (for now) on the 'North Eastern pocket' this surely makes sense. Our trouble will begin when we come to deal with this 'pocket'. The 'Aquitaine strategy' suggests that when dealing with the 'North Eastern pocket' occupied regions in Northern eFrance must be considered. In many ways the 'Aquitaine strategy' us comparable to Montgomery's strategy in WW2: To push ahead and leave 'pockets' to be mopped up later. An alternate, 'Eisenhower - ish', plan may be to just keep pushing from west to east until we get to the Atlantic coast, when we can then consider again the liberation of eFrance.
One thing that the 'Aquitaine strategy' has made clear: The future security of eUSA and eCanada requires the 'liberation' of eFrance. The question the 'Aquitaine strategy' poses is whether the pre-emptive liberation of eFrance is the better way to liberate eUSA or whether the 'broad front - west to east' plan is safer?
I hope the 'top brass' have their thinking hats on...
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
Nice Read
good read
For me attacking Aquitaine was part of big EDEN plan to cut off Serbia's resources. The most important battle of this plan was the RW in South Dalmatia (Croatia). So Croatia needed a big drain of Serbia's influance - their only rubber region. Croatia won easily and saved most of their power to make it two victories that day.
awsome read
v+s
Thanks for the analysis--good read!
v+s
good analysis & read
Nice read
I thought Apuila and East Srpska Republic which happens now will hurt eSerbia more?
@ TeMing
Damage for Serbia is already done. If Croatia liberates Slavonia then Serbia will have only 4 resources (now they have 5). And all this is just hours after Serbia declared Greece for their NE so they wouldn't be able to change it for next 5-6 days.
The question is when Poland will lose all their resources?
Unfortunatly this polish law will not be accepte😛 http://www.erepublik.com/en/Poland/law/90358
Good analysiis.
eFrance has signed a "peace treaty" with Poland. France is supposed to not start any RW except for the region in the North of Paris (The actual liberated eFrance)
http://www.erepublik.com/fr/article/-rf-fa-trait-eacute-de-paix-franco-polonais-1904683/1/20
Nice article, thoroughly enjoyed it.
Intelligent article & comments. A pleasure
Great analysis. I have only joined today, so I am not up to date on information. However, I believe that we should take the 'broad front - west to east' plan first. It would be more effective to focus our forces here and push out the Polish than to expand the reaches of Canada and take eFrance and risk failing that campaign. Unless I am mistaken, taking eFrance right now might result in our forces being spread too thin.