blah the Prussian

The problem with Jiol was that he was handled too anticlimactically. Just because he goes down easily to the heroes doesn't mean there shouldn't be a buildup to fighting him.

Congratulations, Gunlord! This was the first fic I ever read, and it was an introduction that set my expectations a bit too high in terms of general quality. Seriously, great work with this.

I was joking, but yeah. Mussolini's shtick in real life was that he talked big but relied on uncle Dolfy to back him up. I guess the big thing to think about is how much of a let down he would be if WWII was fiction. He's the creator of Fascism, come on! He should be more threatening! Maybe the Mussolini like character could appear in the Prologue and burn down the lord's castle or whatever, and then when the Lord fights him later he goes down easily. If he was the leader of a nation, the closest analogue would probably be Shagall, in FE4. Obviously he wouldn't be the main villain, but I suppose he could go through a character arc of how far he has fallen; Mussolini ended up as just another Petain or Quisling for Hitler's empire, his New Roman Empire just another satellite of the Third Reich. For the love of god, though, don't make Hitler some cult leader or dark dragon!

Daesh are not morons. They know that they can't actually bring down America, so they focus their energy on Iraq and the FSA. The attack on Paris was a relatively low budget affair. Daesh are evil bastards, but they wouldn't have come this far if they were petty.

Yeah, it is ridiculously a America centric to assume that just because Daesh are fundamentalist Muslims automatically means they hate America most.

You kind of did fight Mussolini with Excellus.

Nah, this gunfire is to arrest one of the perpetrators.

Isn't it possible to block him?

Well, that does sound like Rome, though I don't think that the Lopt Empire is all that fair to the Romans. In any case, the Granvalle Empire would be in its HRE phase, although maybe Alvis is a bit more like Napoleon; not originally monarch but becomes one and has a utopian vision.

Happy birthday, creator of my first forum!

Lebanon is still far closer to active combat than Paris is. It is also home to Hezbollah, who are fighting ISIS. From a strategic standpoint, it makes sense that ISIS are attacking Lebanon. France, by contrast, has done nothing but air raids. Another thing to consider is that the media we read comes from westerners. Check Al Jazeera, and they focus much more on the Beirut attack.

You are spot on about Italy, however Japan pretty much got what it was promised. It turned against the Entente because it's military got the idea that all of Asia should be ruled by a Pan Asian state led by Japan. That's the kind of utopian vision we've both been talking about.

Wait, when was Granvalle a Republic? I always thought of them as being closer to the Holy Roman Empire, given its German references and feudalism.

Why the attack on Paris is more important than individual attacks in Iraq/Syria: 1. Iraq and Syria are both active war zones. It can pretty obviously be inferred that a good deal of people are dying there. It's for the same reason that in 1941, the attack on Pearl Harbor got more coverage than the ongoing German bombings of London. 2. More than any other country, Iraq and Syria are committed to fighting ISIS. France, though, isn't, and thus this incident may convince them to play a larger role. Thus, it is of greater significance.

That sounds quite interesting, although maybe Prince Shaka is a bit too directly referencing a certain Zulu king. However, while it is okay to be pure evil, being evil for evils sake doesn't work in a political setting. For a villain to be threatening in anything dealing with war, they need to have followers, and being a sociopath prevents that. Even insane monarchs were often quickly overthrown. The reason why the Joker works is that he doesn't need minions to pose a threat, while people like Ashnard or real world villains like Hitler obviously did. No matter how purely evil a villain is, they need to appeal to someone. For example, no matter how disgusting it is, you can see how Ashnard's social Darwinism would appeal to peasants treated like slaves merely because of their birth. The villain needs to have a realistic motivation.

The Mad Kings War is basically WWII. Ashnard/Hitler follows a Social Darwinistic set of ideas and invades Crimea/Poland, France, etc, while attempting to commit genocide against the Laguz/Jews. Meanwhile, the heroes get help from Begnion/the Soviet Union, a massive empire with some moral issues, who proceed to do the heavy lifting in defeating Daein/Germany, only for a guy named Ike to get the credit. Begnion/the Soviets then proceed to install their own oppressive regime over Daein/Germany, which is toppled through the efforts not only of rebels but also from people in the government, particularly Sanaki/Gorbachev.

Also, what did France have to do with any of the grievances of ISIS? France washed its hands of Syria following its withdrawal from the region in the wake of WWII.

Except Germany didn't start WWI, it had it forced upon it. All the countries involved had the war forced upon them. In any case, there is also the fact that the ToV had the goal of punishing Germany, while the treaty after WWII had the goal of reconciliation. The same goes for the Middle East; any peace treaty needs to have the goal of reconciliation..

Um, no, Germany never had an a bomb blown up in its lands. Both Germany and Japan learned from their defeats that aggression does not work. Also, without the A bombs Japan would have been even more devastated.

Probably. The US won a war during the Great Depression, after all, and Nazi Germany significantly outmuscled ISIS and Iran.

Ted Cruz has apparently declared that as soon as he is in office he will declare war on Iran. Donald Trump has met his match.

Yes, yes it is worth it. There will always be evil, but that doesn't mean we have to let evil win. The damage done to both the west and the Middle East would be far greater if we leave ISIS be, because they will not let us be. As Edmund Burke said, "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."

According to Serebii, Corocoro is announcing basically everything happening with Pokemon in 2016. His had better be Pokemon Z, but speculate away, forumites!

Do you recognize that this current situation is self defense? I can't see how it can be seen as anything else. To respond to your previous point, a was on ISIS doesn't equate to a war on Islam; on the contrary, it means liberating the countless Muslims living under ISIS. I would consider the vast majority of Muslims in ISIS occupied territory to be more like the Poles, not German civilians. Any Muslim who supports ISIS gets what he deserves when he is killed. @Yojinbo: The key word here is was. It doesn't matter how good life for Syrians under Assad used to be, the fact is that he is hated by Syrians now. I could debate you on just how shitty of a person Assad is, but it doesn't matter because he isn't staying in power; even Russia has realized that. Also, monarchy is always the answer. Embrace the global monarchist restoration. It is your destiny.

For rapprochement to begin, first the bad guy needs to be defeated. Thus, your example doesn't apply. If you want to make another option, make one. Let us know when you're done. We, meanwhile, will be solving the problem. Why do I have no right to take a life, regardless of the reason? If someone will blow up the world if I don't kill him first, do I have a right to take his life?