> We're not limiting ourselves to a 2-front war. Additionally, to think about this war in terms of fronts isn't necessarily important, this is a miniscule theater, and air superiority will be king, which we quite obviously have.

We are limiting ourselves to our ability to attack from Carpathia and East Germany, and maybe a limited amount of forces can be moved through the territory of the Union State. This is not a minuscule theater, the Great Union is one of the largest countries in Europe - this is not Ukraine, Norway, or the Baltic Union. Those nations had a stagnated, dissolving armed forces and civil war. They did not have a proficient set of air defenses, radars, massive tank-battalions, or a cohesive leadership that can readily respond. Attacking from all fronts would shock them and destroy their ability to effectively wage conflict against an invasion. Air superiority will be attainable, and will help, but our ground forces will still face the blunt defenses of a readily militarized Poland. Nations like Germany have a rather lacking military, at the moment, and would have difficulty surmounting an operation by themselves against a single, fortified front. Unless Geneva intends to be the nation who does the majority of the work in this conflict, on the future Western-Polish front, this conflict will be prolonged and more grueling without Russian assistance striking and dissolving their ranks from the East. And as far as we are aware, the Geneva Convention currently faces a million-Arabs in the Middle East. Likewise with America's surge in Iraq during the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a Genevan front will be compromised by a lack of proficient resources and logistics if Geneva attempts to fight two, massive wars simultaneously. There is no reason to *not* include Russia in our strategic objectives for the sake of ending this conflict, soon, and rapidly - under the leadership of Eastern and Nordic European nations regional to the conflict.

> Is this a minor detail? Yes, but it matters an enormous amount for morale and for maintaining the favor of the Polish people. Russian invasion, whether it's 2045 or 1945 is not remotely palatable to the Great Union, and will result in a country that is constantly seeking to cause insurrections or rebel against the EU in general. What we ultimately fear is a scenario where Russia intervenes and withdraws, and the new Great Union withdraws from the EU, or a situation where forces remain occupying for some time, and the Polish dislike for Russia is magnified.

The moral of the Polish people is already destroyed and on partisan lines. An invasion of the Polish nation by the European Union, regardless of who is involved, will stoke massive anti-EU sentiment. Especially among those who are supportive of the current government. Right now, there is massive anti-Triumvirate sentiment in the Great Union, and this will only be exacerbated by Triumvirate involvement in an intervention against Poland. Limiting one nation from the intervention will do little in regards for morale, when a post-war, anti-European sentiment will already exist for the purpose of the war. In a post-war scenario, we should be seeking to establish information-controls over the Polish nation and put Swedko in a position where she can lead once again - who is already part of a Partisan divide against the current Polish government. Either way, Polish dislike of the European Union will be magnified - and it will take strict and gradual measures to change the mindset of the Polish people which has already been fostered and reinforced by the current Polish government.

> We do not need Russian troops on the ground or aircraft in the sky.

We do not, in the same light, this could likely be conducted without Genenvan assistance. But it would surely prolong the conflict, and only make it more grueling.

> Russia provides two things that are needed: intelligence capabilities and strategic positioning. If you want this to go as smoothly as possible, then Russian support for your cause, through the pact you have, will consist of military access and cyberwarfare operations.

We would like to utilize all resources available to us to effectively counter the threat that the Great Union poses to not only the Triumvirate, but to the European Union as a whole. By limiting this operation to intelligence gathering and strategic positioning, our ability to readily address this threat that the Great Union poses is stupidly hampered for the sake of fears of anti-European sentiment which will exist anyways.

> We value Russia very closely as an ally, but doing this with EU militaries will only demonstrate the Union's ability to act as a cohesive military alliance when the need arises.

This will demonstrate dependence on the Genevan military if this conflict is to be completed conclusively and readily, which we are sure will run into problems for the sake of a military fighting two conflicts away from home. This is not something that we seek. We seek a Germany, Denmark, and Triumvirate which can readily launch an offensive against the Great Union without Genevan assistance. A Russian offensive from the East would tie up Great Union resources, and effectively allow us to surmount this offensive. Should broader European cooperation occur, we cannot have a situation where Geneva repeatedly acts as the policemen of Europe.

> Russian forces will incite extreme hatred, paranoia, enormous resent for the EU, and ultimately is completely and utterly unnecessary.

We are sure that the bombing, destruction, and catastrophe that this conflict will cause will foster extreme hated, paranoia, and resent for the EU. But its a necessary feat that must be accomplished, unless we want to start fostering closer EU ties with anti-EU nations like Poland within our apparatus. Russia will only serve to complete our strategic objectives more readily, and ensure that Triumvirate soldiers do not needlessly die for the purpose of not attacking from another front. And regardless, Russian forces will be active in Belorussian and Ukrainian neighborhoods - the Union State already holds a massive population of both. Animosity in these areas will not be as substantial as in Polish areas.

Our decision has already been made with the Union State. We will be fighting alongside them in an offensive against the Great Union from the East. Geneva cannot change, nor will it dictate, this decision. The problems that Geneva has raised or minuscule in the face of broader operations, and only assured to be problems that will be subsequently persist and be dealt with even without Union State involvement. If we must sacrifice more Triumvirate lives for the sake of making Poland slightly less anti-EU, or we must fight alongside our longstanding ally - the Union State - to make this conflict have more effective results, we will always choose the second choice.