Or he is inaccurate or not being precise for the sake of being poetic?
The Great Crusade (Reds! Part 3)
- Thread starter Aelita
- Start date
Or he is inaccurate or not being precise for the sake of being poetic?
The Sandman
Banned
Magadan would require an entirely new railroad to be built across over a thousand miles of some of the worst terrain on the planet, followed by building a bridge over the Lena at Yakutsk, followed by another seven hundred miles of new railroad. In wartime.
That's not happening.
As best as I can tell, the ports of Vanino or Komsomolsk-na-Amure are the best options, at least until Vladivostok is usable again, and even those still need a rail line built to them (OTL, much of that line was built from 1944-46 with German and Japanese POWs). Constructing the Baikul-Amur Mainline is going to be absolutely critical, since during the early part of the war the eastern part of the Trans-Siberian is guaranteed to be interdicted by the Japanese (it basically runs right on the Manchurian border).
As for who to focus on first, the reason Japan needs to be taken down is that until their navy and air force have been annihilated, the Japanese can interdict the UASR-USSR supply line from the Home Islands. They can also mount constant attacks on the Kuriles and Sakhalin from Hokkaido. In order to secure those islands, and thus the Sea of Okhotsk, without spending years trying to bomb Japan into submission first, Hokkaido more-or-less has to be invaded. Once you've done that, you might as well secure the whole island, at which point invading Honshu becomes the next logical step.
Neither of your assumptions make any sense. This Germany is going to be getting full economic support from Britain and France (and through them their colonial empires) up until 1943-44. And in order for the Germans to turn west and invade France when they're already at war with the Soviet Union, they pretty much have to have forced something resembling an armistice along the Eastern Front; even the OTL Nazis weren't crazy enough to start a second major front until after the first one was (or so they assumed, at least) rendered irrelevant.
Japan, meanwhile, will collapse even faster if it's being invaded by both the Soviets and the US; either because it's being invaded several years earlier, in which case they would have to hold out for three or four years in order to drag the war on for that long, or because it's being invaded under the same conditions as IOTL, in which case mass starvation is going to collapse Japanese society during the winter and spring of 1945-46 if the invading armies don't manage it first.
The Netherlands are being invaded several years later than IOTL, and will be under German occupation for far less time, so chances are that either things haven't gotten quite bad enough to force the Franks into hiding or they'll be liberated before their hiding place gets rumbled.
That would be a very silly reason to nuke Kyoto, given that it hasn't had any governmental functions (civilian, military or Imperial) since 1868. It would be like nuking Vienna because the Hapsburgs used to live there.
If it's on the targeting list, it's there for the reasons it was IOTL until Stimson had it removed: it's the largest city left that hasn't already been bombed, and probably has some industrial targets on the southern side of the city. Still not a great target, though; too big to wreck more than a small portion of it, not enough military value. And it's not really near enough to any other likely targets to make it a viable secondary target (a la Nagasaki) or to be able to divert to a secondary target if weather interferes (why Kokura didn't get slagged).
I didn't realize just how bad Magadan's position is, scratch that.
Actually I think the appeal of Kyoto for the Comintern is that it was the seat of the emperor for many years, destroying it therefore is heavily symbolic and probably is attractive to the Soviets and Americans.
I think you overestimate how much strength the Russo-Americans are going to be able to throw against Japan in the early stages of the war. The Americans can also supply the Soviets through Murmansk and Arkangel, which makes the urgency of liberating the Russian Far East a bit less pressing. Therefore while Japan can be a serious pain to the Comintern, it is not the existential threat that Nazi Germany is. Therefore all available resources are going to be ploughed into the Russian Western Front.
Actually Germany attacks France and Britain in 1942.
I suspect the British and French will be pretty miserly with their aid even before 1942. While Britain and France certainly fear Russia and America, it goes against the prior policies of both nations to allow Germany to become the hegemonic power on the continent, and I expect that they are hoping that both the Comintern and Germany 'lose', even though that isn't particularly likely. I don't dispute that there will be aid from Britain and France to Germany but I expect that it will have to be paid for in hard cash (a reverse of pre-Lend-Lease aid to Britain in OTL) and it will start to decline rapidly, especially as it is hinted that left-wing governments or anti-German governments take power in Britain and France at some point prior to the invasion.
teg
I want to comment on something on this timeline as a Government and Politics graduate: This alternative timeline is possibly the most realistic view of how a communist economic and social policy would be implemented in the US. More specifically I call it constitutional communism, in comparison to authoritarian communism in Russia and (later in this timeline) the People's Republic of China. This is for a good reason: The US has a strong tradition of democratic constitutional rule, the Soviet Union had no prior tradition before the 1917 revolution.
That's why in the UASR Constitution, there is no leadership clause as in the Soviet Union Constitution.
What is more interesting is how the Socialist Republic of Japan will turn our after World War II, but that's too far out in the future.
That's why in the UASR Constitution, there is no leadership clause as in the Soviet Union Constitution.
What is more interesting is how the Socialist Republic of Japan will turn our after World War II, but that's too far out in the future.
As is mine.
40 million more actually. It's a certainty that far more Americans will die ITTL's WWII (thanks to their deployment on the Soviet front), but that leaves at least 30-35 million more deaths suffered by other countries. That probably means even more graves for Chinese soldiers, and a possible eruption of conflict in places which IOTL avoided the combat aspect of the war (sub-Saharan Africa, India, Latin America, Sweden...).
Reading Libertad's post on the previous thread got me wondering: Is conspiracism (the insane Alex Jonesy '9/11 was an inside job' or 'Cars can be powered by sheer ignorance of thermodynamics' types) present in this world?
If so, what kind of conspiracy theories exist in this ATL?
If so, what kind of conspiracy theories exist in this ATL?
I would imagine so. Conspiracy theories long predate even communism (I mean, looking at certain antisemetic canards, they are very much like conspiracy theories, or outright are conspiracy theories). I can't imagine why the US being Communist would suppress this idea; in fact, the events of the Revolution would seem to provide a fertile ground for all sorts of insane ideas, like, say, the left-wing perpetrating the imposition of military dictatorship so they would have an excuse to revolt. Probably not many people in the UASR would believe that, but some Latin Americans or descendants of those who fled might...
Well, Marxism itself doesn't lend well to grand conspiracies, because one of the chief canards is that the system is bigger than anyone and no one is really in control. But yes, conspiracy theories will exist, but I don't think they will be as popular
I haven't decided what conspiracy theories exist ITTL as of yet. There's one that's popular among American exiles that President Wood was assassinated as part of a communist plot to advance the revolutionary struggle, but that's really mundane and plausible as far as conspiracy theories go.
Gack! Brain malfunction while reading this! I see where it starts off now in the scheme of things.
Last edited:
Will there be an analogue to the John Birch Society forming among the die-hard anti-communists in occupied Cuba? While the OTL organization's namesake is spending life in prison for assassinating Earl Browder, surely there are other victims of the Red hordes worthy of having their names taken up by paranoid conspiracy mongers. Longworth Society, anyone?
Besides that, there's also the "Freedom Press" you hinted at in the revision, which published that "Last Days of the Republic" piece by Barry Goldwater. In that piece, Goldwater rails against the immigrants and "foreign agitators" who united with "homegrown demagogues" to bring down the old order. The rhetoric in that piece seems very akin to that of Ron Paul and his supporters spouting nonsense about the Fed and the UN's plans for "one-world government". Just replace the UN with the Comintern and it'll be easy for TTL's conspiracy theorists to formulate BS not much different from OTL.
And of course, with the perception of being sandwiched in between the Red menaces, anti-Semites in Europe pre-WWII must have had an even easier time promoting hatred of the Jews and their "Judeo-Bolshevik" grand plan for usurping the world.
Reading the recently departed Winston Smith's comments about neo-capitalist parties has got me thinking.
Its obvious that returning to the old order isn't going to be popular and after the last die-hards leave the scene in the late 1970s/early 1980s at best, its going to be even less viable, so they aren't going to be advocating that. I have been reading A Short History of the Future by W. Warren Wagner. The book attempts to explore a history of the future from the late 1990s (it was first written in 1989 and then revised in 1992 (you can guess why) and 1999) to the year 2200, looking at a late capitalist society, a socialist world government, and then at an anarchist/communist society.
The relevance to my point is that after the Commonwealth (the socialist society) is toppled in the mid 22nd century for being too good at its own job (in effect, they greatly over-estimate how long it will take them to make the state obsolete), human society breaks down into small communes with government structures varying from direct democratic socialist to elected monarchy and a number of communities emerge which decide to reinstate capitalism. However these communities do not restore old-style capitalism but rather entrepreneurial capitalism, which views the enterprise as the goal not accumulation. I'm doing a very bad job of describing this but I'd recommend the book to anyone. Not sure if it is still available on Amazon...
teg
Its obvious that returning to the old order isn't going to be popular and after the last die-hards leave the scene in the late 1970s/early 1980s at best, its going to be even less viable, so they aren't going to be advocating that. I have been reading A Short History of the Future by W. Warren Wagner. The book attempts to explore a history of the future from the late 1990s (it was first written in 1989 and then revised in 1992 (you can guess why) and 1999) to the year 2200, looking at a late capitalist society, a socialist world government, and then at an anarchist/communist society.
The relevance to my point is that after the Commonwealth (the socialist society) is toppled in the mid 22nd century for being too good at its own job (in effect, they greatly over-estimate how long it will take them to make the state obsolete), human society breaks down into small communes with government structures varying from direct democratic socialist to elected monarchy and a number of communities emerge which decide to reinstate capitalism. However these communities do not restore old-style capitalism but rather entrepreneurial capitalism, which views the enterprise as the goal not accumulation. I'm doing a very bad job of describing this but I'd recommend the book to anyone. Not sure if it is still available on Amazon...
teg
Well, well, it's ok if you all do not want to believe.
But i'm not going to risk being banned for this. I want to stay on this site and BK... it's sad seeing you did this but it's ok... I totally understand.
So, let's close this chapter for everyone. I'm going to shut up now. Don't worry if you're seeing this BK. I'm not going to risk banning myself again. For the rest, just please respect that I have some beliefs that you might not all believe and yes, it cannot be tolerated here. Forget this. Thank you.
EDITED: I edited a sentence so that this thing would really stop. I don't want to argue about this for my sake and also for Jello. Thank you.
Hmmmm. Well, it's looks like that the oil producing world is divided 50/50 between the Comintern and the capitalists.
Jello, is it the Socialist Republic of Japan or an American allied social corporatist Nippon Republic as I saw in your post in Alternate Political Parties thread? What is it really? Can you give us an answer or a hint?
Can it just be the Nippon Democratic Republic and it's a socialist republic with corporatist tendencies kind of thing?
Thanks for plugging about the book.
iddt3
Donor
So on the 40 million more causalities, I think most of those are going to have to be Civilian, probably Japanese, Russian and German. Yes the US is going to have more casualties than OTL, but Logistics limit the number of men they can put in Harms way (supplying men in Russia is going to be a great deal harder than supplying them in the UK), even in the more brutal atmosphere of the Eastern front. So I belive it's been hinted at that the war was both better and worse for the French than OTL, better because the occupation is much shorter, worse because the French more French are more enthusiastically collaborationist, so it's harder to put the whole episode behind them. Perhaps after Japan is neutralized, it gets left to wither on the vine with a submarine blockade (Given the US has the UK as a potential enemy, I suspect they invest even more in subs than OTL) and looses millions due to starvation. Maybe Germany breaks out the Gas on the British and French and gets anthraxed and nuked in response. Still, 40 million is a rather large amount to account for. Does Moscow fall? That would certainly add to the death toll.
You also have to remember that there are some areas of the world that experienced no fighting IOTL that will experience major fighting. Like South America, for example.
So Brazil is going to join the Axis I guess. Will the United Nations forces try to invade it? I saw in one of the sigs of the alternate AH.com members here of the "Rainforest Wars", an alternate alternate invasion of Brazil. Will you make it happen as part of the cannon TL for example? God, I want a commie Brazil here. Besides, we are not looking for American occupation of Japan here, it's more like an establishment of an independent postwar Japanese government rather an indirect occupation of a SCAP giving directives to puppet Tokyo government.
Could also be that South American allies get involved in invading Brazil, then other nations are dragged into it. Im betting Argentina and Chile will mix it up a little.
iddt3
Donor
Ah ok, that could certainly add another few million to the death toll if things get nasty.