There are not enough players in the game for me to consult the Confederacy (Which I'm not sure even exists, after the establishment of the Frankfurt assembly), so I am acting on my own initiative for convenience. Regardless, the effect would still be the same, as the Confederate troops would be the same as Prussian troops. Luxemburg is a state of the Confederacy, and it is the duty of the Confederacy to intervene. Semantics isn't going to get you anywhere.
And, as I have said many times before, the Dutch King has lost control of the situation. He hasn't even responded to our debate. Besides, you're the one controlling the fortress!
It is easy to spin a nice friendship with words, but is actions which count. The original occupation itself was not very controversial, but it is your refusal to share the occupation of such an important castle which worries the Prussian state, and would have worried King Csargo.
@Sardinia.
We are dismayed to hear that you do not agree with our second proposition, as Prussia sincerely believes it is the only way to bring peace to the region. A German, non-Prussian ruler (Maybe an Austrian noble?) would most certainly not be a puppet of Prussia, and we are disappointed that you have come to that conclusion when we have stressed so much that Luxemburg must be independent of Great Power control. What would be your proposal to restore peace to the area?
We would also like to hear your opinion on our first proposition, i.e. the tempoary sharing of the occupation in a condominium with France.
Bookmarks