Political Situation Question…

[SilverAngelSurfer]

Clever.  Thank you, Krieg.

They may simply declare war on Japan however without actually having to attack any Japanese territories, leaving the Amur/Manchuria stalemate as is and simply allowing them to occupy pro-Allied Persia and possibly attack pro-Axis Iraq (or Finland and Bulgaria if Germany is silly), correct?

I also wonder if their At War NO also applies to being at war with anyone or if that will only apply to being at war with European Axis nations.  Otherwise I can see a R1 DoW against Japan being standard simply for them to get the NO and be able to move into neutral territories.

[Krieghund]

@SAS:

They may simply declare war on Japan however without actually having to attack any Japanese territories, leaving the Amur/Manchuria stalemate as is and simply allowing them to occupy pro-Allied Persia and possibly attack pro-Axis Iraq (or Finland and Bulgaria if Germany is silly), correct?

Yup.

@SAS:

I also wonder if their At War NO also applies to being at war with anyone or if that will only apply to being at war with European Axis nations.  Otherwise I can see a R1 DoW against Japan being standard simply for them to get the NO and be able to move into neutral territories.

It only applies to European Axis powers.

[WILD BILL]

Thanks Krieghund, Russia being able to invade neutrals (and how to do it) before its at war w/Euro axis will be a great tool.

One other thing, is Russia (when not at war w/Euro axis) able to pass through Denmark straight?

[Krieghund]

Yes, if Germany gives its permission.

[calvinhobbesliker]

@Krieghund:

Yes, if Germany gives its permission.

Which it won’t

[WILD BILL]

@calvinhobbesliker:

@Krieghund:

Yes, if Germany gives its permission.

Which it won’t

Funny guys, does it have to be in writing?

[shohoku201]

Another political situation question for global

“Japan. At war with China. Movement of Allied forces into China is an act of war against Japan. May declare war on UK, ANZAC, USA, France, or the Soviet Union per the normal rules. Declaration of war against either the UK or ANZAC immediately results in a state of war with both. Being at war with France, the Soviet Union, or USA are all mutually exclusive meaning being at war with one of these does not affect relations with the other two. Japan may only attack Dutch territories if at war with UK and ANZAC.”

So unlike Pacific, if Japan attacks UK/ANZAC, they are still not at war with USA?

[calvinhobbesliker]

@shohoku201:

Another political situation question for global

“Japan. At war with China. Movement of Allied forces into China is an act of war against Japan. May declare war on UK, ANZAC, USA, France, or the Soviet Union per the normal rules. Declaration of war against either the UK or ANZAC immediately results in a state of war with both. Being at war with France, the Soviet Union, or USA are all mutually exclusive meaning being at war with one of these does not affect relations with the other two. Japan may only attack Dutch territories if at war with UK and ANZAC.”

So unlike Pacific, if Japan attacks UK/ANZAC, they are still not at war with USA?

Yes, they are.

[Krieghund]

As in AAP40, an unprovoked Japanese attack on UK/ANZAC allows the US to declare war.

[maverick_76]

Krieg is such a life saver, thanks for being here for us to pick your brain.