1) A strange and, in modern times, inaccurate description of trade. Especially since it seldom are countries that do the trading, but rather companies. Please tell me how Lockheed "took advantage" of countries weaker than the US in "the Deal of the Century".
2) In my "cut and run" scenario...
A very strange basis for a TL.
If the leadership of a country prioritize economic growth, GDP/capita, innovation, standard of living etc they would embrace both market economy and international cooperation, since that have given best results. The countries that have done othervise did put...
Correct, but irrelevant for this discussion. If Soviet wasn't defeated by summer 1943 (notice - not IOTL 1943, but any 1943 given Barbarossa in 1941) Germany and Finland would lose. Therefore the LL after summer 1943 should not be counted.
Also - I miss the British aid to the Soviets 1941-42 in...
Finland had a population of 3 millions - Soviet Union had a population of 160 millions.
So the only way for Finland to retake the areas lost after the Winter War was
a) due to ASB
b) incredibly well done and well timed diplomacy
c) a successfull operation Barbarossa.
Lets discard a, assume...
Difficult - but disbanding the regional Territorial Forces, that in facto were armies on a state/republican scale, could be one part. (There were also a national Territorial Force, that could take over the regional forces missions and equipment.)
Maybe an early submarine with schnorkel, drop shaped hull and more batteries - an "XXI light", ready 1939 or 1940.
It would not need much more resources than IOTL sub building white the allies would have far more difficult ASW job, no matter bad signal discipline on the german side.
The choice for the Soviet leadership was to either have a working agricultural sector, or a Party that remained in power. To allow farmers that owned/controlled their farms would open up a can of worms - from higher food prices for the workers in the cities, higher standard of living in the...
Ironically I think the good personal relationship between Reagan and Gorbatjov had more influence on the dissolution of the USSR than Reagans military build up. It gave Gorbatjov more manuvering space - and in the end it was Gorbatjovs internal reforms that crushed the USSR.
But as already...
1) Pre WW1 there were big political changes in Britain, away from the laissez faire of the 19th century. Lloyd George and Churchill were some of the reformers with the Peoples Budget, curbing the powers of the Lords in Parliament and (at least partly) tax-financed welfare for workers. Without...
a) There were no reason for Israel to use nukes against Egypt. The whole of Sinai was a strategic buffert for Israel, while the Syrians were attacking Israel itself. Some hours by tank speed and the Syrien could have cut Israel in two parts.
So the only target for Israels nukes were Syria...
A ground detonation against dispersed mechanized troops is not especially useful. Say that 100% of the troops within 1000 meters are killed (and that is a very high estimate) and 50% in the range 1000-2000 meter. Outside that I doubt any troops inside armored vehicles would be affected.
In...
The obvious effect is no objectivism, no "Fountainhead" or "Atlas Shrugged". And that would be big, since objectivism and/or Rands book have influenced a lot of people.
On the other hand libertarianism was already alive and kicking without Rand, who was firmly against libertarianism on...
Here are some interesting facts regarding the IOTL swedish nuclear program. Both reactors and weapon programs.
http://guests.armscontrolwonk.com/archive/author/andreas_persbo/page/2
Just some points
1) Chernobyl style reactors are designed to produce weapon grade plutonium. Without nukes no one would build such a reactor.
2) Todays non-chernobyl reactors are heavily influenced by the criteria for US Navy submarine reactors in the Cold War. Without WW2 there would be...
Many. Apart from the political mistakes before 1958, my take would be
* Not involving the SVA more. Yes, they were corrupt and inefficient, but moving in 500 000 US troops were far worse. Both from a PR, political and military point of view.
* Running WW2 against a guerilla. The revolution...