Map Thread IX

Status
Not open for further replies.

Chairwoman Roxelana

B_Munro said:
:rolleyes: The problem is not Russia, it's _greece_. They are going to nearly be rivalled in numbers by the Turks they are taking on board (and would not be able to successfully govern) save in the case of massive expulsions, which only Russian help makes possible.
Click to expand...

42% of Greece`s Population would be Turkish without expulsion.
 

SRegan

Max WW2 Germany with (fanciful) colonial claims

And this is what happens when you let Ribbentrop loose on a Risk board - again a compilation of OTL plans largely based on the quotes compiled by Totentanz over on DA. I haven't included French and Italian colonies whose fates would certainly have to be reconsidered if Germany went this far in Europe - nor have I included 'Neudeutschland' (Brazil) since as far as I can tell this was an allusion to a possible National Socialist revolution that could open the country to German markets rather than actual colonial practice. Also added in further French ports the Germans wished to control. There's some evidence the Germans would have considered Germanising their own Croatian puppet state and integrating it in future years. Apparently the mood over what should be done with a defeated Britain swung frequently and violently - shown them simply occupied/German-controlled outside the Third Reich here. Note many of these ideas (like the preoccupations of Werner Best, SS Reich Security top man in Paris, with Balkanizing France and Spain) simply didn't interest Hitler and were unlikely to be implemented for that reason alone; see the previous post for why Mittelafrika was a no-go. There's a couple more maps on this theme - Himmler's precious Burgundy (shown here in rather reduced form as a semi-autonomous SS state), Maximum Mussert (Dutch collaborators ahoy), plans for South America and American and Canadian would-be collaborationists.

Pity the poor Ossewabrandwag in South Africa:

"Van Rensburg (leader of the OB) pursued such war games. He would gladly have accepted a gauleiter for South Africa in the person of Rommel, and was prepared to dissolve South Africa as a sovereign state to incorporate it into a German world empire." (Radical Afrikaner Nationalism and the History of the Ossewabrandwag, Christoph Marx)

Unfortunately for them:

“Early in 1940 Ribbentrop approved a communication to South African leaders who were thought to be sympathetic to the Nazi cause, informing them that ... it would acquiesce in South Africa’s annexation of Southern Rhodesia. Germany’s only goal in Africa was to ensure its supply of tropical and subtropical raw materials; it was not contemplating the creation of a separate state on African soil and it recognized the Union of South Africa as the leading white state in the South African Lebensraum.”

Of course, when you want them to take over... :rolleyes:

Ribbentrop Weltreich.png
 

Chamonix

Napoleon's forcing of the Treaty of Copenhagen gave him the victory he never saw in our world, with Continental Europe falling under his purview. His changes to the pre-war systems that made Europe work allowed him domination over the continent, as well as an area from which to expand into the rest of the world. His successors to this day, Napoleon II and III, have continued his plans, though the considerably more liberal Joseph I is next in line for the French throne.

The Spanish were finally put down by the creation of multiple Autonomous Duchies, three of which survive today. (Of course, the utter destruction of several revolting cities helped)

Portugal, run by a minor branch of the Bonapartes, is a non-entity when it comes to... well, anything.

France herself is divided into three zones. The Duchy of Brittany, whose continuous revolts led to some measure of self-rule (though Paris has a rather large number of troops there, to be sure), France proper, and the Kingdom of the Netherlands, ruled by the house of Oranje, and somehow, despite Paris' meddling, probably the most autonomous of any member of the Pact.

Italy is run by the Savoie-Bonapartes, and still has problems in Venice.

Germany is a rather strange state, run by the Tucher-Bonapartes from Nuremberg itself, with the majority of its army either putting down the Poles or sitting on the Prusso-Russian border.

Hungary, run by the Habsburg-Bonapartes, is still rather peeved (but too busy being scared of the Russians and policing Serbia to do anything).

Prussia hates everyone.

The HBEDO is the most recent member, and the combination of revolts during the 1870s and the Franco-Russian war of 1883 has made its Islamic rulers speak French and Greek (Napoleon II and III were true philhellenes) and create two names for the Empire. Not that it changes what they call it, but being in Paris' good graces is considerably better than not.

The Nuremberg Pact itself is part of the larger Madrid Pact, which includes much of the Americas, Africa, and Eastern Asia, in opposition to the Imperial League (Britain, China, Russia, Brazil, Japan), who dominate the rest of the world. War is on the horizon...
_______________________

So, what do y'all think?

Nuremberg Pact-1901.png
 
Last edited:

Snaut

A sequel to my earlier map from post #3133 in this thread (p. 157):

After its creation in 1946 the Vienna Pact would rapidly expand, changing dramatically in the process. What began as an alliance against Soviet adventurism would soon develop into a largely German-dominated economic zone. Thus having achieved its dreams of a vast sphere of influence in the east, Germany had in a way won the Great War. It was a common consensus that nuclear weapons had made conventional war obsolete, and therefore neither the insidious West nor hated Soviets could interfere in the affairs of Mitteleuropa again (without risking utter destruction – a risk hardly anybody believed them capable of taking). Unsurprisingly many expected that the 1950s would be just the beginning of a long period of peace and rapid growth for Germany. But time would show that, in relative terms at least, it had already reached the high-water mark of its power.

As time passed, Germany became increasingly dependent on its economic bloc. At the time of the bloc’s formation this partnership was mostly beneficial to both sides; but as time went on, the temptation on Germany’s behalf to manipulate the economies of its clients in its favor grew. Naturally this caused increasing resentment throughout the Vienna Pact. And as most of them still retained varying degrees of independence, keeping all of its clients in line was a complicated task for Germany. (Had the USSR remained the looming threat it had been in the 1940s and 1950s, fear of it could have helped hold the Vienna Pact together. But following the crisis and subsequent reforms of the post-Stalin period, the Soviet Union’s policy had become almost benign. The old objective of weakening Germany by breaking its hold on eastern Europe had become an end in itself rather then a means of sowing disunity before absorbing the region.)

Encouraged by the USSR’s changed attitude and its various backup plans involving the use of biological and chemical weapons in the event of war so as to make an attack on it not worth the effort, Poland was the first to distance itself from Germany. This gradual process went unnoticed at first, partly because its economy and foreign policy had always been somewhat more independent of the Reich then most other Vienna Pact members. (Some also assert that the Poles’ original aim was merely to wring out concessions using the threat of defection, and not to abandon Germany altogether.) And Poland was only the first to do so. Before long several ‘defectors’ would join it in the emergent ‘Warsaw Group’, its formation tacitly approved by the USSR. However, it would (for a time, at least) be a nebulous organization, a propaganda victory for the governments of the member states rather then anything material. With the Serbian Federation shaky, and Latvia having been largely influenced and infiltrated by Soviet agents, the old Polish-Romanian alliance was the group’s core.

The partial decay of Mitteleuropa which followed did not take place overnight. Instead it was a largely peaceful process as one satellite state after another began drifting away from Germany – which in turn would attempt to tighten control over the ones still remaining by various means, from threats of damaging trade embargoes to more direct actions. In 1983 Yugoslavia, which was also seeking to turn away from Germany, descended into civil war. The extent of German involvement in the triggering of this conflict remains a hotly disputed matter. But it is generally accepted that the objective of the subsequent German intervention was, from the beginning, to establish puppet states in Croatia and Slovenia. (Serbia proper was by then considered a lost cause.)

Mitteleuropa’s crisis marked the end of an era for Germany. It would remain prosperous and powerful, but its days as a world superpower were clearly over: like Britain, France and many others, it was now outclassed by the USA and USSR, the latter having by now reformed to the point of scarcely deserving the name. Germany entered the 1990s with part of its former sphere of influence still intact. What it retained had even become more cohesive: Berlin’s machinations had placed its remaining satellites under its direct control. But it virtually ceased to involve itself in world affairs outside these satellites. And while Germany’s orbital stations armed with nuclear missiles would remain in place, the various projects of farther expansion beyond Earth’s orbit - the Mars landings, lunar bases, asteroid mining projects and so on – were postponed and scaled down. (Although the competition between the US, Soviets, Anglo-French and others would provide the impetus for continued exploration and expansion).
 
Last edited:

Chamonix

Zaius said:
Brandenburg-Poland and the separate Prussia are intriguing. What's the backstory behind them?

And what happened in Galicia?
Click to expand...

Napoleon I decided after the Treaty of Copenhagen that Prussia had to be brought to heel. So, he broke Prussia into the Kingdom of Prussia and the Grand Duchy of Brandenburg-Poland under the German Crown, which experienced a series of Republican and Unificationalist revolts in the 1840s and 50s, as well as a massive *Socialist insurrection in 1897. As such, the Grand Duchy was dissolved in favor of military administration.

Galicia is one of the three remaining Spanish Autonomous Duchies, as its citizens have voted to remain in that position in every plebiscite since 1820.
 

B_Munro

Chamonix said:
Napoleon's forcing of the Treaty of Copenhagen gave him the victory he never saw in our world, with Continental Europe falling under his purview. His changes to the pre-war systems that made Europe work allowed him domination over the continent, as well as an area from which to expand into the rest of the world. His successors to this day, Napoleon II and III, have continued his plans, though the considerably more liberal Joseph I is next in line for the French throne.
?
Click to expand...

Lots of weird borders. That Transyvania only rather loosely matches the historical Transylvania, which the Hungarians always considered an integral part of their country, and that Prussia makes very little historical sense. Did Napoleon draw its borders while drunk? Why not an independent Poland, which would be pro-Napoleon at least? Why rumpified Portugal? Brittany? France never had much trouble with them OTL after 1815. Also, what's this about the Americas? This crippled Frankenstein of a Spain is never going to maintain the loyalties of the American colonies - and what is the role of the US in this timeline, anyway?

Bruce
 

Chamonix

B_Munro said:
Lots of weird borders. That Transyvania only rather loosely matches the historical Transylvania, which the Hungarians always considered an integral part of their country, and that Prussia makes very little historical sense. Did Napoleon draw its borders while drunk? Why not an independent Poland, which would be pro-Napoleon at least? Also, what's this about the Americas? This crippled Frankenstein of a Spain is never going to maintain the loyalties of the American colonies - and what is the role of the US in this timeline, anyway?

Bruce
Click to expand...

Most of those borders are products of wars with Russia and other pro-Russian states, with the last war being ended at military lines.

No colonies in the Americas (except most of the Caribbean under joint Franco-Spanish administration), but the US is one of the strongest allies of France, as is most of South America (though that's less out of love for France and more out of fear of Brazil and Britain).
 

Snaut

Chamonix said:
Galicia is one of the three remaining Spanish Autonomous Duchies, as its citizens have voted to remain in that position in every plebiscite since 1820.
Click to expand...

Should have been more clear, I meant the Galicia in what had once been southern Poland. And which appears to contain most of the population of Transylvania.
 

B_Munro

Chamonix said:
Most of those borders are products of wars with Russia and other pro-Russian states, with the last war being ended at military lines.

No colonies in the Americas (except most of the Caribbean under joint Franco-Spanish administration), but the US is one of the strongest allies of France, as is most of South America (though that's less out of love for France and more out of fear of Brazil and Britain).
Click to expand...

I fail to see why weird-ass borders _inside_ the block should be the result of foreign wars. Portugal? Prussia? (Saxony-Poland would actually make historical sense). And why is this assumption that democratic USA and autocratic Napoleonic France would be good buddies? They weren't OTL. Did the UK turn *fascist or something?

Bruce
 
Top
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top