It may also have been that Blackbeard relied on his image to terrify his enemies, rather than brute force, so Featherston might have wanted to imitate that since the CS was a lot smaller population-wise than the US. The image of Confederate soldiers breaking through and cutting Ohio in half was supposed to demoralize the United States.
TL-191: Filling the Gaps
- Thread starter Craigo
- Start date
Well, at least the operation to capture Pittsburgh was a little more creative - Operation Coalscuttle. And as that operation was basically a parallel to Case Blue and the Battle of Stalingrad, I suppose it evens out.
Come to think of it when ever I think of Irving Morrell's Operation Rosebud, I always think of the movie Citizen Kane and the cryptic last word of a dying media moghul.
Oh my god. You're not joking, are you? Well, I guess its canon that Citizen Kane is in this timeline now.
My guess is that Operation BLACKBEARD was given its name as a reference to the "Do or Die" nature of the Second Great War; I'd be surprised if Featherston didn't hear the tale of how Blackbeard died a death that would make Rasputin run screaming, then make old Ned Thatch his personal hero (such defiance in the face of certain death seems very Featherston).
Since we are talking about Operation Blackbeard, I would like to imagine an alternate version of the operation. This was initially started after I read a negative review of Turtledove's books on the series.
In Turtledove's original version, the Second Great War started in Europe after Kaiser Wilhelm II died in early June. The USA and CSA stayed out of it until the Confederates invaded the United States on June 22, 1941. An informed fan of the series would know that this is suppose to parallel real-life Operation Barbossa. What many people do not know is that the German invasion of the Soviet Union was planned around May 15, 1941. The reason(s) why it was delayed is/are not clear to historians. There are a few theories here and there, such as preferring to attack in the summer, instead of dealing with a wet spring.
Whatever the actual reason, I would have liked for Turtledove to have written the Second Great War as a war that begins in North America at an earlier time in May 1941, instead of Europe in Early June 1941. This may not have triggered the European powers to declare war against each other, but it would have at least made them alert and perhaps mobilized their respective armies until someone fires the first shot. Only when Germany (and its allies?) refuse to give back conquered land to France does that actually cause the Europeans to go to war with each other, again.
Even though I like the idea of the Confederacy invading through the "Neck of America" (Ohio), I wanted to see a more organized invasion in different parts of the U.S.-C.S. border.
Perhaps the Confederacy also invades U.S.-controlled Sequoyah and "liberates" it. At least for now, Sequoyah would again be under Confederate control. There should have been a description of the CSA also invading small parts of the USA that used to belong to them. I would have liked it if we got a scene or two of the Confederate military invading/attacking the Bahamas, Haiti, and Jamaica. Even if the CSA never controlled it, I like the idea of New York City being bombed by CSA planes based on that alternate book cover of Return Engagement. Another thing that I would also like to add is that, with the help of Confederate forces crossing Lake Erie, a "Free State of Canada" is established in Ontario and fights against Americans and/or Quebecois soldiers.
Granted, all of this is not taking into account of how industrialized the CSA would be, the number of Confederate soldiers involved, and the amount of fuel needed for all this to be plausible.
Source:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Barbarossa#Reasons_for_delay
In Turtledove's original version, the Second Great War started in Europe after Kaiser Wilhelm II died in early June. The USA and CSA stayed out of it until the Confederates invaded the United States on June 22, 1941. An informed fan of the series would know that this is suppose to parallel real-life Operation Barbossa. What many people do not know is that the German invasion of the Soviet Union was planned around May 15, 1941. The reason(s) why it was delayed is/are not clear to historians. There are a few theories here and there, such as preferring to attack in the summer, instead of dealing with a wet spring.
Whatever the actual reason, I would have liked for Turtledove to have written the Second Great War as a war that begins in North America at an earlier time in May 1941, instead of Europe in Early June 1941. This may not have triggered the European powers to declare war against each other, but it would have at least made them alert and perhaps mobilized their respective armies until someone fires the first shot. Only when Germany (and its allies?) refuse to give back conquered land to France does that actually cause the Europeans to go to war with each other, again.
Even though I like the idea of the Confederacy invading through the "Neck of America" (Ohio), I wanted to see a more organized invasion in different parts of the U.S.-C.S. border.
Perhaps the Confederacy also invades U.S.-controlled Sequoyah and "liberates" it. At least for now, Sequoyah would again be under Confederate control. There should have been a description of the CSA also invading small parts of the USA that used to belong to them. I would have liked it if we got a scene or two of the Confederate military invading/attacking the Bahamas, Haiti, and Jamaica. Even if the CSA never controlled it, I like the idea of New York City being bombed by CSA planes based on that alternate book cover of Return Engagement. Another thing that I would also like to add is that, with the help of Confederate forces crossing Lake Erie, a "Free State of Canada" is established in Ontario and fights against Americans and/or Quebecois soldiers.
Granted, all of this is not taking into account of how industrialized the CSA would be, the number of Confederate soldiers involved, and the amount of fuel needed for all this to be plausible.
Source:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Barbarossa#Reasons_for_delay
Last edited:
I just wish we got more details on the war in Europe in general, you know? Not saying that what we got was bad, but it wasn't as emotional or closely followed.
I can't decide if that's a disappointment or a relief - in all honesty Professor Turtledove might be guilty of having a few too many characters in the SOUTHERN VICTORY novels (especially after he replaces the first generation with a second that does not always prove equally interesting).
Those are some very interesting ideas. Still, I always assumed that the CSA only had the manpower and resources for one big offensive (i.e. Operation Blackbeard). Granted it launched operations in the Caribbean, but those were in conjunction with the British. In fact the CSA hadn't really planned on the USA fighting on once Sandusky fell. Hence, when Operation Coalscuttle was launched, the CSA was forced to "request" that Mexican soldiers be sent to conduct security operations on the flanks of the offensive. The CSA shot its bolt in Ohio; as the CSA couldn't have won so long as the USA was willing to fight on.
Attempts by the CSA to "liberate" lost territory (northeast Arkansas, Sequoyah, or northern Sonora) would only take troops away from theaters where decisive operations were being waged.
Would a clean army myth, like OTL's clean Wehrmacht myth arise in the postwar period? Perhaps to facilitate the reintegration of the south into the union, might the US government promote such a myth?
Interesting idea there. In this case it might actually be a combination of the "lost cause" and "clean army" concepts put into one.
Its hard to say for me. Given the nature of the south at the time and perhaps even post war, the "clean army" concept would be hard to push for the US government or even by southerners that accept reintegration into the United States.
Can you elaborate more?
Does the clean myth mean that the Confederate Army was not the same organization as the Confederate Freedom Party Guard?
Like how the Wehrmacht was different from the Nazi Party/SS?
Like how the Wehrmacht was different from the Nazi Party/SS?
Yes, in the sense that the Freedom Party Guardsmen were the military arm of Featherston's political party, therefore technically separate from the Confederate States Army Command, being led by party officials and such, but delegated to army commanders when the need called for it I suppose.
However, in regards to political or racial beliefs relating to the "clean army" myth for the Confederate Army specifically, the answer to that I suspect would be much more complicated.
I'm not sure if this has already been asked or not, but what exactly are the views and platforms of the Radical Liberals?
Blood & Iron says that they want peaceful relations with the United States, but so did the socialists and the Whigs. So what do they stand for exactly? Are they supportive of equal rights or anything?
I'm sorry if this is dumb question.
Blood & Iron says that they want peaceful relations with the United States, but so did the socialists and the Whigs. So what do they stand for exactly? Are they supportive of equal rights or anything?
I'm sorry if this is dumb question.
bguy
Donor
They seem to be staunch advocates of free trade. (There is a scene in Blood and Iron where a Rad Lib congressional candidate is essentially calling for creating the TL-191 version of NAFTA.)
On race relations Ainsworth Layne campaigned in 1921 on reconciliation with the Confederate black population. However, during that same election Jake Featherston described the Socialists rather than the Radical Liberals as the party that wanted to cozy up to the Confederate black population. Based on that I would say that the Rad Libs probably support easing restrictions on the Confederate black population (such as abolishing the passbook law) but stop short of pushing for full equality.
Otherwise they are said more than once to be neither very radical or very liberal and thus we can assume that on economic issues they probably support regulation of banks and railroads and maybe an income tax on the rich to pay for some modest spendings programs but nothing too ambitious (or expensive.)
Weren’t they particularly strong in the formerly Mexican states? I kind of imagine that they were somewhat analogous to Tammany Democrats in the US—‘jobs for votes’ among the Hispanophone population, allied with those segments of mainstream Confederate society whose wealth wasn’t tied up in plantations (that is, Confederate merchants and factory owners). Maybe some members of a purely tribalistic political bent quietly discuss enfranchising blacks so they can have a guaranteed-loyal voting bloc.
bguy
Donor
At least in the antebellum South, the merchants and bankers tended to be politically aligned with the plantation owners, thus in TL-191 I would expect the merchants to be mostly Whigs.
I imagine the Radical Liberals as being a disparate coalition of three major components. The Radicals (mostly poor white farmers who would be akin to OTL’s Populists), the Liberals (mostly urban progressives who are good government types and the main advocates for better relations with the US and the Confederate black population), and the Patrons (the wealthy land owners from the Spanish speaking states. Men who would be Whigs if not for the Whigs being white supremacists.)
This factional divide also helps explain why the Rad Libs are fairly ineffective as an opposition party because their own factions would be frequently at cross-purposes with one another. The Radicals for instance probably want higher taxes on plantation owners to pay for re-distributive social programs (a policy which would be hated by the Patrons, since they would have to pay those higher taxes.) The Liberals probably favor equality for the Confederate black population but can’t move to far in that direction without alienating the Radicals (who while economically progressive tend to be racially regressive). And the Patrons probably want as much pork as possible for their districts (which the Liberals oppose as being wasteful and corrupt.) And thus the Rad Libs end up fighting each other as much as the Whigs.