Re: [eia] corps-on-loan

[Michael Gorman <mpgorman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

At 11:05 AM 5/3/2003 -0400, you wrote:
>    
> While we're on the topic of amending 12.4, I thought I'd bring up the
> topic of corps on loan.  (Obviously, this is a topic of some
> importance to me...)  I am in favor of using the simple repatriation
> rules for returning corps-on-loan to their owners.  Here's
> why.  When you are withdrawing from FET, you are able to create
> necessary depots to get your troops home in one piece.  On the other
> hand, a corps-on-loan has no possibility of support when marching
> home.  It just has to keep foraging and hope that it can get back
> home with most of its force intact.  And suppose Jim wanted to be
> really vindictive.  He could easily march the corps that he
> currently has on loan all the way to Constantinople.  (If he
> *really* wanted to be vindictive, he'd march it across the Dardenelles
> and then have one of Turkey's fleets block the path back to France!)
>     Plus, wouldn't the country
> that had the corps-on-loan want the corps out of its territory as soon as
> possible.  Surely, the ruler of a country does not want a ravenous
> army marching across its territory, looting the supplies of local
> businesses and families (i.e. foraging).  I think that from the
> perspective of realism, a ruler would do whatever he could to expedite
> the journey of the corps-on-loan back to its original owner's
> territory.
>     So because of the
> possibility for abuse of the rule (and due to considerations of realism),
> I think that using the force repatriation rules for corps-on-loan makes
> sense.  Please let me know what you think.
>  
> kdh
>  
I was thinking bringing a corps on loan into your
country would count as voluntary access so you could not refuse the corps
the right to return home.  Repatriation would stop someone from
stranding the corps on a desert island though.

I think access works though on the basis that in a long game, you can
probably get away with an abuse of that sort once and then you'd better
never lose a war to the nation you did it to.  The whole point of
not doing instant repatriation was to avoid the oddity of having the
troops move faster than it is possible to move troops under ideal
conditions.  Repatriation is inherently unrealistic as the troops
can't go as fast as they might under it.  If a country wants to get
the other corps out, they can always dump it off near the border.