Didn't the author of this TL also write some parts of Twilight of the Red Tsar?Even world in Twilight of the Red Tsar is bit worse than TTL.
Didn't the author of this TL also write some parts of Twilight of the Red Tsar?Even world in Twilight of the Red Tsar is bit worse than TTL.
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?)This is not even near of FAT, not even close. I barely would call this TL as dystopic. Yes some places are very terrible places and for some nationalities has done terrible things but still world is not much worse than OTL in early 1960's. Nuclear weapons has used more than in OTL but at least there hasn't been WW3 or psychopats as POTUS. Even world in Twilight of the Red Tsar is bit worse than TTL.
Unfortunately, Iraq is amongst the countries earmarked for the Ciano Plan.Shia in Iraq
This is not even near of FAT, not even close. I barely would call this TL as dystopic. Yes some places are very terrible places and for some nationalities has done terrible things but still world is not much worse than OTL in early 1960's. Nuclear weapons has used more than in OTL but at least there hasn't been WW3 or psychopats as POTUS. Even world in Twilight of the Red Tsar is bit worse than TTL.
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?)
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.
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.
Yes, but the Shia areas in the South got grabbed by Iran, right?Unfortunately, Iraq is amongst the countries earmarked for the Ciano Plan.
The bad news is that the Shia-majority bits of Iraq are all that is left of Iraq.Yes, but the Shia areas in the South got grabbed by Iran, right?
@Sorairo I'm making a map that I will publish after Mussolini's death. I have two doubts: Cameroon is independent and under French protectorate? Should I already show the Qattara Sea?
Yes.
But it isn't exactly an honorable history.
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.
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.