Join the new world

My thoughts on this are already in the discussion.

We should annex all of Mexico and return it in the future once there is a significant population of eMexicans devoted to the welfare of eMexico and can run a stable and friendly government and economy.

I think the Poles have left, and we should keep the 3 territories we took.

Annex the territorys already occupied. Settle for peace with mexico... But if they refuse and attempt to take back their territory then we should take more of Mexico as punishment

I personally think that taking over the rest of Mexico will not have a good influence with our southern neighbors. Any shot at a future diplomatic relationship will be lost if we continue our conquest. Simularly holding onto the 3 provinces without just cause (and a just cause does not mean being soley beneficial to America) will damper relations.

Do the "True Mexicans" even desire our help? I would say no considering the vast majority of the congress has voted to increase the mutual protection pacts to hold onto what they have left.

I do not feel that we as a nation need to be an empire. We already have the largest nation in the land population wise. We also already had 51 territories at our disposal. In reality all that is needed is somewhere to train and keep the markets operating. Baja is perfect for that. The other two are not needed. However if we hold onto Baja, Mexico should receive payments for us making use of their rightful territory.

@ everybody, Holding onto territories until we feel it is right is not going to make for a good view on us by the world. Have you ever heard of Roosevelt's big stick policy? Annexing will only make political relations with the rest of the Western Hemisphere more Hostile.

As always Id vote for a slow plan of action. If they show to be open to being friendly and want to break ties with PEACE then we could start returning their terriories one at a time over time. If they wont break ties with PEACE I wouldnt return anything. If they return hostilities I would contiue a slow march south. If They do agree to peace and fail to show that they are able to secure their country then we need to march south so we can provide ourselves with security. I would try to resolve this peacefully and I would like to keep 1 region so we could continue with fighting ourselves for xp.

Yes stewey, nothing says obey me like a bloody head on a post. I believe I got your quote right (Family Guy, some episode, some season)

Daisy, the world hates us no matter what we do.

What made relations with the Western Hemisphere hostile was our war on Canada, and our failure to protect Argentina.

No one really cares about Mexico but America, evidenced by the fact that the largest proponent of the against America in Mexico stance is a former president.

is that the view we want the eworld to have of us?

We should take Mexico City, then use it and Baja as bargaining chips
for PEACE to give China some of its land back. After that they would be returned via resistance war. We would keep the northwest and northeast as strategic positions and resistance war miltary training zones.

@Sam, woohoo let's add fuel to the fire. Heck skip the wood, let's go straight for the lighter fluid. Damn no that's not enough let's just toss on the gas can.

So, because the world hates us, we shouldn't bother rewriting history? Let's just finish screwing over our PR?

They are allying themselves with PEACE to keep us out, how is further pushing in going to make them change their minds?

What we want is irrelevant, they already have it.

If they were looking at facts, they'd see that this is America's first foray into occupation. Indonesia has more than us, Pakistan has more than us, Iran has more than us, Italy has more than us, Romania has more than us, Norway has more than us. Sweden used to have all of Germany. Even the UK had more in Belgium than we had in Mexico.

It's just funnier to stick to least imperialistic superpower with the imperialist label. When you take it too seriously, that's when it starts to have power over you.

@Ampson, Is that what the population of Mexico has been reduced to? Nothing more than bargaining chips? This never was about liberating Mexico was it? It is nothing more than an power play by the up and coming world tyrant eUSA.

The only group giving us grief for Mexico is the UK (due to a former US president), and if you check their papers, it's not even a huge deal there. Everyone else is far more concerned with Romania vs. Indonesia, the Austro-German Union against a possible invasion by Sweden, or Italy vs. Spain & Switzerland.

If we want to be held back by our own worry about our place in the world, than okay. But if you'd rather act in an unrestrained manner, or just deal with life, you're going to have ignore the bull that people throw at us.

Has anybody considered the long-term consequences of having an extra 3-8 seats in our congress? Or of having a separate national minority in our population (of whatever size), forever calling for an irredentist separatism? Or of becoming, by necessity, a bilingual country?

The war has gone well so far. I just don't see how long-term annexation of any stripe is a practical endeavor.

The expansion into Mexico just leaves a bad taste in my mouth. So yeah, I am probably being a bit hot headed. I don't feel that we are continuing it for the reasons that we started it, at least the reasons given in the press releases. I feel like I was lied to by my Government.

I've said it in other articles, I don't see the reason why America needs to be an empire. We should be militarily active but not at the cost of smaller countries. We previously posessed 51 territories all rich in resources. We also have the largest population and tax base in the game. I would rather eUS play the role of the righteous country defending the freedom and sovereignty of nations, not squashing it like a bug beneath our feat. Before the bad PR had no base. Yeah we screwed up in places, every nation does. We still have our original territories though. Or had. They had no base to toss their accusations. If we keep Mexico, they will. We will become the monster they are portraying us to be. That is the bad taste that haunts my mouth.

Strategically, the eUS benefits most if we are strong defensively & economically. Holding Mexican territories does not benefit us economically, but might defensively because (a) Baja provides a buffer territory from the south for high resource CA and (b) we can wargame there.

IMO, the best long term defensive strategy is MPPs & strong diplomatic relations based on trust with all directly bordering states & regular war games for improved military strength.

Returning the territories is in the best strategic interest of the eUS *only* if it establishes the diplomatic trust needed for such a defensive strategy. I'm not sure whether that's possible at this point.

@ ssomo, if we continue our expansion, probably not. But excellent points though.

I think we should hold on to what we have conquered and hold off and other decisions for the future

1) We need more information about the Polish situation. Are they still in Mexico? Did they leave? Are they still a threat?

2) I see two possible futures:
a) We negotiate with the Mexican government (if it is really controlled by Mexicans) for slow return of the occupied territories, and eventually an MPP between the US and Mexico. This may be difficult, in that building trust with someone you just invaded will take amazing diplomatic skills. But I think once passions cool, it's doable. Australia is slowly getting its' territory back from Indonesia via diplomatic means.

b) Mexico decides they will not trust us, will remain a hostile nation on our southern border, and maintain and develop further alliances with our enemies.

In this case, I say we keep the territories, fortify them, settle them, and use them for war games. If that sounds heartless and imperialistic, so be it.

@Daisy: I hear what you're saying, and I'm impressed by your passion. Trust me, if this was happening in RL, I'd be demonstrating in the streets against it. But this is a game, and I think the more one is able to separate RL history and passions and grievances from eRepublik life, the better the game (and again, it is a game, in which war is a major component) is served.

I think we should discuss giving all the land back to Mexico without holding it for ransom that way we could in no way be labeled as imperialist.

Oh, screw the whole imperialism argument. This is a game. War is a part of this game and frankly, a part that is nicely rewarded. If we do not grow, expand and become more powerful we will be absorbed by another nation that did. [No Mexicans were harmed in the making of this war.]

Mexico was nominally a PEACE nation. We had a valid national security interest in taking that threat off of our border. Step one, accomplished. Now all we have to do is find steps 2, 3, etc.

Take over all of Mexico

1) Baja serves as buffer point = FALSE
USA need no buffer point using Mexico territory since they only border with Mexico there. Other peace country can't attack from Baja without running across Mexico. Even if they did, Baja serves no purpose anymore.
2) Polish have left, eMexicans keep telling that to you guys, but USA just don't care or not listening and do whatever he want.

Heck, Congress isn't in control of this! Only the president can propose peace.