French arms sales in T2K

[pmulcahy11b]

Maybe I'm not looking in the right place, but what real, "Good" in both a T2K and RL sense, reason does Yugoslavia have for going over to NATO without dissolving into a civil war first? And why would we accept them -- as sort of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend?" Or just one less thing to worry about? One thing the Yuguslavians and former Yugos have proved themselves is not entirely trustworthy. (Even my mother says the Croatians are untrustworthy -- and some of those on this board know about my mother's background in Yugoslavia.)

[Olefin]

Originally Posted by pmulcahy11b

Maybe I'm not looking in the right place, but what real, "Good" in both a T2K and RL sense, reason does Yugoslavia have for going over to NATO without dissolving into a civil war first? And why would we accept them -- as sort of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend?" Or just one less thing to worry about? One thing the Yuguslavians and former Yugos have proved themselves is not entirely trustworthy. (Even my mother says the Croatians are untrustworthy -- and some of those on this board know about my mother's background in Yugoslavia.)

I also have issues with how Yugoslavia fought in the war - and even the way it broke up per the two different timelines of the game - and the whole idea of Civgov sending troops there and how they ever thought they could support them once they got there as well

[ChalkLine]

France, Greece and Yugoslavia are all the major sources of my dissatisfaction with the T2k timeline. I think Italy does something weird too from memory.

However, if we do stick with those whacko hand-waves I suggest that France just ups its output to cover their own needs plus foreign sales