American Spaniard Contention - Official US Statement

[Mr. Rothschild]

First off, I'd like to start by saying the views, opinions, and reasoning within this statement are those of the US congress and citizenship and in no way reflect those of of the Spanish government and people. If they wish to contest they are free to do so.

Now I am sure you've all been wondering as to what exactly is happening within the islands of Avonmora lately. With the release of the Herald, your curiosity must be higher than ever. Here is my official statement and declaration of the hostilities between the United States of America and Spain.

Day 196 of year 3 the US made the decision to consider expansion for the nation. We put much thought and deliberation into our choice of land to seize. There are several nations with land holdings currently among the islands and several factors to be considered such as alliances, friendships, nation size, strength, and location. We weighed our options and settled on Vaasburg. The primary factor in this decision being national size. We knew it would be a difficult road, and Spain is no push over. There was just no way we could take a port from one of the other smaller nations. It is difficult to start out, and we have an overwhelming desire to see the map diversified and diplomatic relations struck. We have no interest in map domination nor ultimate control.

Our goal being 4 ports total and helping other nations achieve a similar size. Once Vaasburg was taken, Spain naturally retaliated as any nation would and should do. Discussions commenced, and are still on going at this time. US congress and the Spanish government are working to come to an arrangement that can benefit both nations and others in the future. While it is not an easy task to please everyone, we are making that attempt.

Spain has done very well in their growth, and ability to hold so many ports for so long. For that they have my respect and admiration. However, we believe their strength would further advance, as any nations would, by holding and building up a smaller number of ports. This is easier to accomplish as one is not spread thin, and you can easily achieve a high tax income by investing in those few ports that would otherwise be extremely voodoo intensive and expensive if you tried the same on several controlled ports. This also allows new nations to grow and develop and become part of the economically growing islands.

Our proposal to Spain is this; the US wishes to keep and will fight for Vaasburg and Newland thus completing our 4 port goal and limit set out. In return you take all other 7 ports back under your control as before. What you do with those ports is up to you, but in an ideal world it would be great to see your nation give others the chance to grow and reduce your port count to promote a diverse map and larger entertainment in the future for all.

If there are any questions regarding this statement you may message me in game. I will not be posting here until another statement is required or necessary.

[Mr. Rothschild]

One question I was asked is, "Why would you go through the trouble and expense of taking all of Spain's ports, if you only desire 1 or 2?"

To clarify: Our move to capture every Spanish owned port was not for anything more than a strategic play against a much larger nation. There is no intent to keep them, however at this time it is in our best interests to hold them for a time.

[Most Lee Harmless]

Watching this as a slightly interested observer, a few points do raise themselves : as an all-out act of aggression the USA's clean sweep of Spanish ports is impressive, but at what cost? The sheer amount of coin needed for such an act is, one supposes, supported by the massive banking interests under the USA flag : one supposes further that continuing cash support will be required to maintain the new conquests from both Spains efforts and those of others flags who may see an opportunity to benefit : so, my thoughts come to this : Spains treasury is an acknowledged fact : it is vast, probably as vast as the combined wealth of the USFR banking system : so, in a spending war of attrition, how solid is that USFR banking system, how much are customer funds are being placed at risk in this fascinating adventure?
My conclusion is the fat lady hasn't sung yet on this one, and will not for some considerable time : what is left in the ensuing wreckage may not satisfy either party, nor justify the cost : still, it will create opportunities for others, so, for that, we must thank you even if, in the end, you dont get your just reward for such a high risk gamble.

[Mr. Rothschild]

While your observation Danik is sound, it must be stated that as a banker I have always taken care of my clients, and their funds will never be put at risk. This was promised in the USFR forum.

[Most Lee Harmless]

Indeed, it is a policy I follow myself, rigidly ring-fencing customer funds : but hard times or crisis can test even the sternest resolve, and I speak from experience there arising from the recent FOX incursion into Mexico. But the true gambler assess the risks : Spain has nothing to lose now save its treasury, its purpose rendered moot by the loss of its ports, so, spending it is not a burden : the USA has acquired a massive set of cash obligations, influence bleeding away at 1% per day every reset.

I do see your tactic of establishing facts on the ground before negotiation has its merits, to some it may look more like a reprehensible piece of bullying funded by excessive wealth, not all of it yours. My view, its live by the sword, die by the sword : Spain didnt get its empire by being nice either. But politics is never just about 'facts on the ground' or displaying excessive strength for that colors opinion both for and against. Nobody liked Barbados during its hegemony for the reason it never let anyone else play the port game, consequently, it lost it all. Maybe thats Spains inevitable destiny too, though Spain never was averse to widening the ownership of ports and acted to do so on many occasions : beware that historic inevitability doesnt become the USA's fate as well.

Trust is a delicate flower, it takes a damn long time to grow but can be broken in a moment and oft can never be fully repaired. Thats an historic inevitability too, especially for bankers.

[Stan Rogers]

Tis so true all that has been spoken of here.
Perhaps USA does not yet understand the burdens that accompany the ownership of numerous ports.
The constant drain from 1% of their influence evaporating away every day. That equates to a 10% GC drain on a country's treasury immediately.
Of course then, there is the constant drain on population as being the largest nation invites all sorts of national ranking quests and constant visits by rats and other such debilitating happenings.
One more thing USA is about to learn is, sometimes, ports are easier to gain than to lose.

[Mr. Rothschild]

I believe the fact that the US does not wish to keep so many ports is being lost.

If they were ours, we'd give them to other nations, currently on the map and new ones looking to grow. They are not however as they are Spains ports. Again, the strategy to take the ports for now is not to keep them. There are other reasons to the move, and the US will let them go with out contention as soon as both governments agree on a deal to better the map for everyone.

[Stan Rogers]

Please Mr. Rothschild but I do beg to differ.
You see, I have advocated Spain to give up much of its holdings now for quite some time due to the vulnerable position it places us.
Unfortunately, my cries fell on deaf ears and was soundly debunked by some.

One of the problems was, would you give a strong financial stream or port to someone who would like to cut your throat ? It's like having a pet scorpion. You never know when it will turn and sting you so you keep it in the cage.

Personally, I do not believe the USA can maintain its current holdings without endangering it's financial position and its clients in Avonmora.
Not arguing... just an opinion that is quite possibly wrong.

So sorry, I was not able to finish what I wanted to point out.

Mr. Rothschild, what you do not seem to realize is, Spain does not need or want 9 ports but would rather have 3 ports of its choosing at a time of its choosing. Perhaps with its current population it MIGHT be able to support 5 ports. It would depend on its core population and its ability to maintain such

[Black sparrow]

It's nice to see some talk in the forums about this. This way, the rest of us know the whereabouts of what is going on without having to ask around. Learning from the source is always better.

I will avoid taking a side here and for this to happen, I will keep my opinions to myself. Tokelau, to whom I belong, is after all a neutral banking nation.

I want to say though that this plan, this happening, has been amazing to spectate so far and it really stirrs me up on what will happen next. Whatever this will be, the expectation of the next event, is really fascinating.

[Stan Rogers]

This so be true Mr. Sparrow I too am enjoyably excited at the prospects that have presented itself.
I am sure it is no secret that Spain can have any port it wants.
Reaching a consensus on what ports we want seems to be the sticking point within the Spanish council.
I am sure the excitement also spreads to the USA with not knowing how this adventure they embarked upon is going to turn out.

One thing we can take from this is, no plans of war survive it's first battle.