Didn't the author of this TL also write some parts of Twilight of the Red Tsar?
The Footprint of Mussolini - TL
I'd say most of the arab world is worse off (Exceptions may be Tunisia, Oman, and the Shia in Iraq), the Jews are on average worse off. I *guess* better would be South China no being under communist rule, but that really isn't apparent. I think there are areas of Europe that are Democracies/Aligned with the West that were Communist iOTL, but I may be getting TL confused. (Czech Republic?)
Unfortunately, Iraq is amongst the countries earmarked for the Ciano Plan.
I wouldn't say that about the Jews. I mean, the Jews of Italy, Hungary and the Balkans avoided the Holocaust. Sure many died in the Soviet Holocaust, but the majority survived and now are prospering in Israel and the West. Israel is strong and without enemies. Yiddish and Ladino aren't endangered. Solun (Thessaloniki) is a Jewish city again. Jews are an integral part of Italian society. Mussolini has them in high regard. Neo-Nazis, antisemites and Holocaust deniers are practically seen and despised as pedophiles.
I would dare to say that this is one of the TL's where Jews come out the best despite everything.
Bookmark1995
Banned
Yes...
But there is a downside: the Israelis, to achieve all they got, had to make an alliance with brutal authoritarianism.
As stated, Israel may not have enemies, but that has come at a very high moral cost of using nuclear genocide and ethnic cleansing to get it.
Well, on the nuclear strikes ... as Anne Frank said, they had no choice, it was that or total annihilation, the proof being the mass stockpile of chemical weapons. And about the alliance they could excuse themselves with the simple fact that Italy and Mussolini were the only ones whom cared and did something for them although the fact they didn’t join the Roman Alliance is a proof that they disagree and aren’t confortable with the most brutal aspects of fascism.
The Islamic Republic of Arabia seems very crapsacky, and at first I was glad to see Saudi Arabia gone, then I soon found out it was much worse...
Hopefully some nearby power just invades like what Vietnam did in Cambodia, and take Arabia out of its misery, the IRA seems like the islamic version of the Khmer Rouge in all honesty.
Also, why do I have a gut feeling North China due to losing the south is going to go into a super reactionary direction and turn into something like North Korea in terms of personality cult, authoritarianism, and hatred of the west...
On the bright side, with North China going that way, a South Chinese economic miracle seems a very real possibility. Also I think a South Chinese controlled KMT government has more chance to democratize and grow than a KMT ruling all of China.
KMT Soldier, yes, it is from Kalterkrieg, but look at the Thompson and uniform, looks American equipped, this is probably what KMT soldiers will look like in the China war. South China will be America's ally I think, and it once it has an economic miracle, it will be more of a partner than a simple pro American outpost.
Hopefully some nearby power just invades like what Vietnam did in Cambodia, and take Arabia out of its misery, the IRA seems like the islamic version of the Khmer Rouge in all honesty.
Also, why do I have a gut feeling North China due to losing the south is going to go into a super reactionary direction and turn into something like North Korea in terms of personality cult, authoritarianism, and hatred of the west...
On the bright side, with North China going that way, a South Chinese economic miracle seems a very real possibility. Also I think a South Chinese controlled KMT government has more chance to democratize and grow than a KMT ruling all of China.
KMT Soldier, yes, it is from Kalterkrieg, but look at the Thompson and uniform, looks American equipped, this is probably what KMT soldiers will look like in the China war. South China will be America's ally I think, and it once it has an economic miracle, it will be more of a partner than a simple pro American outpost.
The bad news is that the Shia-majority bits of Iraq are all that is left of Iraq.
Well, a very interesting update - and above all very enlightening. Fascism became too successful, it ended into an ideological conundrum and split. And this is entirely buoyable and credible, as for dramatic as well.
Not that democracies went better - just seeing what happened in Britain, where, to get rid to the BUF, Gaitskell pratically abided to the same democratic British principles. And losing Rhodesia and South Africa in the process. Would have lost those nations anyway, but were lost in the worse way possible. I sense a great Tory comeback in the next elections... At least not annexing Somaliland showed there was still some sense in London; annexing directly the Mediterranean territories would surely be later a thorn - especially over Cyprus. Malta and Gibraltar won't be an issue but Somaliland could have been.
Well, Italy Spain and Portugal also quite raised an high to impossible bar for the renewed colonization of their overseas territories. Probably they would have already to revise those plans at the start of the 70's...
Not that democracies went better - just seeing what happened in Britain, where, to get rid to the BUF, Gaitskell pratically abided to the same democratic British principles. And losing Rhodesia and South Africa in the process. Would have lost those nations anyway, but were lost in the worse way possible. I sense a great Tory comeback in the next elections... At least not annexing Somaliland showed there was still some sense in London; annexing directly the Mediterranean territories would surely be later a thorn - especially over Cyprus. Malta and Gibraltar won't be an issue but Somaliland could have been.
Well, Italy Spain and Portugal also quite raised an high to impossible bar for the renewed colonization of their overseas territories. Probably they would have already to revise those plans at the start of the 70's...
Well, in that case, I challenge you to find one country on Earth with such a history. States must forge the best outcome for their people(s), and more than that are affected drastically by the actions of those states around them. In this TL, many might believe that, without Mussolini's bite to back up Ben-Gurion and his compatriots' bark, Israel might not have existed in the first place. More than that, if a state is under real and true threat of genocide, does it not have the right to defend itself with corresponding levels of force?
Look, the truth of the human condition that must be acknowledged is that it is not perfect, and is seldom romantic or honourable. Such concepts can be ascribed to the individual, but rarely the state. History is littered with atrocities as much as it is littered with fine treasures, acts of mercy and wisdom, and that is human nature. It is the price we pay for a real, true life - anthrax for art, bombs for books, armies for peace. The human race is not evil, but it is also not strictly good, and it is folly to expect an entire species to conform to the given moral standards of a time period.
Yes, devastation has been rained on Arabia in TTL, and that is horrible. But at the same time, did we express mourning for Germans after Dresden? Did we give pity to those expelled from Eastern Europe by the Soviets? No, we did not. To treat the Arabs, who shared the same genocidal intent, clarity of purpose and brutal attitude differently would be hypocrisy on a grand scale. At least, that's the logic of the West in this TTL. We of course can see the trials and tribulations of the Arabs and lack the bias, but I think it's a bad idea, personally, to cry for the devil that was the UAR. Remember the nuclear bombing of Japan? There was a reason for that.
When dealing with a population that had an army already packing suicide bombers, fanatically devoted to their cause and ready to fight on for years... Tell me, is it more moral to nuke a few cities or to grind on in a slow desert slog that would've chewed up men, money and countless civilian lives, or to attempt to cut the head off the snake rather than starting with the tail and working your way slowly up the body?
And I have no doubt, by the by, that Aflaq would make Okinawa look tame, and that sort of war wouldn't just destroy Arabia, it would damn it completely.
Bookmark1995
Banned
I agree that for the vast majority of human history, people have had to the choose the best out of thousand bad options.
For OTL Americans, the choice was a costly invasion of Japan or a bomb that could coerce a surrender with less lives. For TTL Jews escaping a genocidal madmen, they had to seek the favor of a lesser madman.
I agree on some level that the nuking of the UAR might also be the same thing: the lesser of a lot of evils.
But here's the problem when you constantly make that choice: you're giving people adequate ammo to commit the same atrocities for even more spurious reasons.
Why did the Nazis feel secure in committing their crimes? Because the Ottoman Turks were able to get away with plundering, raping, and killing over a million Armenians. Not just succeed in killing all those people, but also banishing Armenian civilization from Anatolia. All because of perceived need to protect national borders. Ataturk talked a big game about modernization, but he had little problem swallowing the bitter harvest of the genocide and taking all those lands.
What happened when the UAR got nuked? Algerian rebels got the same nuclear dynamite thrown at them by France's liberator. This could only inspire the future use of nukes against rebellion.
Sometimes you have to rise above doing the lesser evil, and strive to be better than your enemy.
Yes, but at once, there are situations that cannot be truly won by any means other than evil ones - the question then, morally speaking, is which is the least worst choice.
I am not saying that nuking the FLN was a good move, or that the destruction of Arabia was fully justified. However:
A) The Israelis hardly instructed De Gaulle to nuke the FLN - he did so of his own accord, and the responsibility of that is his.
B) Comparing an effort to prevent a genocide known to have been planned, albeit one using rather extreme means, to an active, actual genocide... I am aware that you meant to use it as an example of how hatred can sow more hatred, but I still think it is in very poor taste.
C) I did not advocate constantly choosing the lesser of two evils, and, if you look at this Israel's history, neither has it. But when your back is up against a wall and the alternative is genocide, sometimes drastic measures are necessary.
The point isn't to always choose fear-inspiring or 'bad' options, but rather that in circumstances like that, after two genocides and being threatened by a third, there can be good reasons to shy away from mercy.
I am not saying that nuking the FLN was a good move, or that the destruction of Arabia was fully justified. However:
A) The Israelis hardly instructed De Gaulle to nuke the FLN - he did so of his own accord, and the responsibility of that is his.
B) Comparing an effort to prevent a genocide known to have been planned, albeit one using rather extreme means, to an active, actual genocide... I am aware that you meant to use it as an example of how hatred can sow more hatred, but I still think it is in very poor taste.
C) I did not advocate constantly choosing the lesser of two evils, and, if you look at this Israel's history, neither has it. But when your back is up against a wall and the alternative is genocide, sometimes drastic measures are necessary.
The point isn't to always choose fear-inspiring or 'bad' options, but rather that in circumstances like that, after two genocides and being threatened by a third, there can be good reasons to shy away from mercy.
Bookmark1995
Banned
Aflaq and his ilk were certainly NOT people who deserved mercy.
Aflaq didn't simply say "give us back our ancestral homeland" or "give us this land so the Palestinians can have a state". It was "let us do a third genocide."
Thus, it is quite easy to drop nuke on his ass. His demands went from "reasonable" to barbaric.
However, that simply is giving others precedent to do the same thing on their enemies, real or perceived. Especially those authoritarian loving fascists who, while better than Nazis or Reds, are still not very nice guys.
What would stop a fascist Italy from nuking Eithiopia? Or Portugal from doing it to Mozambique?
If you are a world leader, your choices can linger for generations to come.