Is terriorism still a major issue in your timeline after the second great war? Do you think anyone in your timeline might have come up with an alternate timeline that is our world?
TL-191: After the End
- Thread starter David bar Elias
- Start date
MaxGerke01
Banned
All of those things are very valid points. I would say however that most if not all of them could be accomplished by establishing mutiple independent states-especially a black one that would be allowed to be armed. Or as you say have an independent Texas. But Louisiana and Cuba would also work very well as independendant states who would probably stay loyal to the USA. But thats the issue-probably would stay loyal to the USA.
I agree what you say is probably the safer option. I just dont think its actually the more moral option considering The Destruction and all the other horrors done by the CSA. The real effect of annexation and reunion is rewarding those responsible for all that-epecially that SGW generation. I wonder what do you think about the level of support for this policy amongst Democrats and Socialists however ? I would imagine that its most strongly supported by conservatives and moderates and weakly supported or opposed or strongly opposed by most liberals and other leftists. So Democratic politicans are usually strongly for it and some Socialists are as well but some are just lukewarm and some are a definite no or hell no. I just think this is one of those times that the political parties see things very differently from the general public.
Of course there could be some oppostion to this policy on the part of the conservatives and the far right who are motivated by old fashioned bigotry against blacks in large measure but also that usual conservative go to of states rights and small governement. To them having the USA absorb Canada and the CSA might just be more than we can or should swallow ? I imagine most liberals would have no real issue with Canada being absorbed or sitting on Utah but bringing back the CSA even just to defang it is just a step too far-thats certainly how I see it....
Last edited:
MaxGerke01
Banned
Or one where the CSA isnt reabsorbed but broken into a combination of black and white lead independenant nations...
I am going to divide my reply into two parts, with the second part focused on the areas of the former Ottoman Empire and Pakistan. Before I begin, I should mention that another reader of this thread has been working on a map of TTL’s Middle East in 2031 following the end of the Ottoman Dissolution. It might be for the best if you wait on working on the Middle East section of your QBAM map until this map of the Middle East is posted; this map also shows the Caucasus and a small area of Central Asia.
-
In 2031, the territory of the former Japanese Workers Republic is controlled by the Japanese Ecological Union. It should be a different color on the map from Syndicalist/revolutionary red.
-
The borders between the Italian Empire and Egypt/Sudan in North Africa should be closer to OTL post-WWII borders in the region, though not exactly the same.
-
If possible, the respective eastern borders of the Kingdom of Belarus and the Kingdom of Ukraine should be different from the OTL eastern borders of those countries, though not necessarily dramatically so.
-
The borders of the Central Asian countries should also differ somewhat from OTL.
-
The Commonwealth of Zion does not control the Sinai Peninsula. The Sinai, in 2031, is still controlled by the Kingdom of Egypt.
-
In 2031, Hyderabad has agreed to absorption by Bharat, following a referendum on the matter in Hyderabad itself after years of Bharati pressure.
-
If possible, the member states of the German Economic Association (DWV) should be marked in light grey, in order to to distinguish those areas still directly ruled from Berlin.
Not in TTL. This is due to the very different geopolitical situation that develops throughout the world after the end of the SGW.
-
It would be highly unlikely, given the odds of probability, that someone from TTL, no matter how imaginative, could come up with an ATL matching all of the major details and trends from our world.
Are there any Black, Hispanic, Asian or other minority ethnic or racial groups that have achieved high ranking office or power in the US or in the military?
The Democrats and the Socialists will both support reunion after the SGW. For the Democrats, reunion is also about their party winning the peace and restoring US military prestige. For the Socialists, supposing reunion is also about distancing their party from Al Smith’s now universally hated prewar policy of appeasing the CSA. There will of course be debates and arguments between the Democrats and the Socialists on the best way to proceed with reunion. But no mainstream US politician from either party will support a policy of granting independence to any additional areas of the former CSA, especially during the first generation after the SGW.
-
I also don’t think that any postwar US leader, Democrat, Socialist, or Republican, would ever view reunion as “rewarding” the residents of the former CSA.
MaxGerke01
Banned
Right. TBC I dont think such independence would be granted during the first generation if it was done just as annexation and reunion would also not be done as quickly as it was OTL and without any real changes. How would it benefit the USA to add a section full of Freedomite supporters or symapthizers to its body politic ? It would take some time for these feelings to be combated and elimiated assuming they could/would be. I think that how long that should take could also be a difference between Democrats,Socialists and Republicans ?
Also maybe not the leaders or most politicans see it as rewarding the former Confederates but from the perspective of many in the general public it would seem that way. Also I would think by most blacks in North America. By definition annexation and reunion can be seen as the ultimate punishment for the CSA as it was during OTL. But Im thinking again about the long game where the CSA lost the battle but won the war in that their continued presence in the USA has somewhat altered our national character. Im not sure if the same thing wouldnt happen in TL-191 if the CSA was reintegrated into the USA. If the USA ends up seeing things more like the CSA in terms of racism or anything else then that almost makes the SGW a phryhhic victory as sadly the Civil War was in some ways imo. For annexation and reunion to work there would have to also be a real Reconstruction at every level of the former CSA society it seems to me. Would the US have the interest and commitment to do it or woud it forgive and forget all too soon ?
Last edited:
I think the best thing for the USA to do would be to let the Caribbean territories (including Cuba) have their independence, give Chihuahua and Sonora back to Mexico, annex Houston, Kentucky, and Tennessee given that they were essentially swing states in our timeline and this timeline, and also annex Arkansas and Louisiana given that neither of them voted for Featherston the first time around in 1933. The rest can temporarily be puppeted as a defanged CSA a la the Morgenthau Plan. It feels like the best of both worlds.
MaxGerke01
Banned
Right to me this would be a much better option that what was done ittl. I would also throw in an armed black client state or two in there as well...
Last edited:
Personally, I feel that David's got it right on the money in that the US portrayed in the books would never let the CSA go under any circumstances, not after everything they've been through for 80 years. I also feel that we're forgetting that if push came to shove, the US is more than capable of playing dirty in keeping the Confederates down for good if they even think of starting a guerilla problem Man with the Iron Heart style.
Here's the thing, how do you hold down all the newly added territory including not only all the former CSA but the Caribbean that probably wouldn't want to be associated with a former anti-black, genocidal state, Canada, and Utah on top of that? Something would realistically need to five sooner or later.
MaxGerke01
Banned
What about ones with the obvious biggies-the USA wins the War of Seccession (Civil War) or Second Mexican War or loses the FGW or SGW with the flip side for the CSA of course and for the Entente and Quadruple Alliance in Europe during FGW/SGW ?
Why not make Louisiana a black client state? It would also make the shape of the USA less awkward too. And I put in Houston and Kentucky as swing states because they frequently swung between the Republicans and Solid South Democrats OTL, due to being a bit more progressive in terms African-American and women's rights. Despite voting to rejoin the CSA I'm sure more than a few people in those states were less than thrilled with Featherston. Similar deal with Arkansas and Tennessee except they weren't ceded to the USA after the First Great War. In the case of Arkansas, they were one of two states not to vote for Featherston in 1933.
Key word there is probably. You're assuming that the Caribbean people would see the United States being one of the same as the Confederacy, especially since a Southerner never ascended to the Presidency at all ITTL not to mention not letting any of the Freedom Party leaders or the CS General Staff escape the hangman's noose, which would no doubt ease any hesitance from the locals.
Why would the Caribbean even want to share a country with one that might've tried to wipe them out if they won the Second Great War?
Because it isn't "sharing a country" as you put it, its the Americans visibly stomping out any hope of Confederate independence.
I still can't see the USA holding onto almost all of North America without collapsing under its own weight a la the Soviet Union in 1991.
The USSR collapsed IOTL because of a combination of being unable to compete in the eternal arms race with the US and because the CPSU had become entangled in corruption by the time Brezhnev died. The lack of anything like the Cold War and actually opposition prevents it from happening to the US of TTL.