Attacking neutral when by power not a war

Germany will have nothing to worry about since all those ships don’t land and the expensive planes will be dying to fight infantry and tanks.

If I understand your question, you would like to have distinct replies to each point somebody made in a statement.  Since everything in between the [qu0te][/qu0te] tags is going to show up in a box, if you want something like this-

[qu0te]My comment #1[/qu0te]
Your answer #1

[qu0te]My comment #2[/qu0te]
Your answer #2

-what I end up doing is copying the entire comment block, and pasting it into my reply once for each individual point I am going to reply to.  Then I just delete out the extraneous bits from each section.  This seems faster to me than going in and adding the extra [qu0te][/qu0te] tags in the original text to make room for your comments.

In other words, yes.

The reason that defending Surprise Strike casualties are moved behind the casualty strip is that some of them may be subs, which will return fire if there are no attacking destroyers.

Krieg’s response to this question on BBG agreed with Wild Bill. (See link below.)

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/570516/tanks

Even superpowers had a limit on the military establishment it could afford to maintain.

I don’t like the idea of adding units to a small country not at war; however I think the assignment of units to the neutrals could have been more imaginative, for example giving the likes of Brazil and Spain small navies, or Sweden some armour.  But these should be a once only build.

Unless perhaps you’d like to give Sweden a minor complex.

@SgtBlitz:

Dear god, ……

Blasphemy!