Search results

I don't know why they should, though? A cold-war-scenario is more likely, but still....I have this idea that Germany would be more or less content to let Japan deal with Asia (there's plenty to keep them occupied there, and while they're bugged down in south-east Asian jungles, they're not any...

A likely possibility could be something like the pre-Napoleon principalities.

Sigged! :D

Socialist victory in the US is even more ASB than the OP challenge is...

"People of the book", yes. That means Christians and Jews. Pagans? Not so much.

I diisagree: The worst time would be once the enemy has enough nukes to make sure that MAD takes place.

I predict another flame-war...

But again: There was a point in the beginning of the Cold War where both the US and the Soviets had nukes, but where the Soviets didn't have enough to ensure MAD in case of nuclear war. And THAT would have been "the best time", if "best" means "least likelihood of mankind going bye-bye"

I think we all lol'ed a bit at the headline, but the question is not entirely without merit. There are definitely times during the cause of the cold war where a nuclear exchange between the US and the USSR would be MORE fatal and devastating than others. I don't know if I could say which...

A non-communist Soviet Union? That would basically just be the Russian Empire....and the ethnic tensions are simply too massive for that to be feasible. The communist ideology, and the brute force of the KGB, was what kept the USSR together. Once Gorbachov relaxed a bit, we saw what happened.

As has been said: Avoiding the world wars is a non-negotiable in relation to preserving that optimism. However, the progresses will be slowed down significantly from OTL. NO, I'm not saying that's a bad thing. I'd much rather have the extra 50 million people alive, than moonlandings and laptops.

Again, this is a problem that develops, also as you say, after the enacting of tolerance, then legalization, and eventual adoption as state religion, of Christianity. Not something that was applicable until 311-324, thereby still rendering the statement I responded to erroneous.

But...the church didn't become reconciled with Rome until roughly the time of Constantine's conversion. There were even persecutions until the Edict of Tolerance in 311, and Christianity didn't become legal until 313. And just because there were more Romans coming into the church it does not...

That's a fail. That's a "chronology off by 250 years"-fail.

Relative to Russia and Eastern Europe, that's for darn sure.

Sweden, like Denmark and Norway, would fare relatively well in a national-socialist dominated Europe, due to those insane racial theories that were so dominant in nazi ideology.

That would require my #2 - the Soviets install a puppet regime. Or a POD before 1900 with a much, much more successful radical socialist movement gaining overwhelming popular support and thus able to either seize power democratically and amend the constitution, OR carry out a violent revolution.

I see two possibilities for Denmark. In chronological order: - The Easter Crisis of 1920 HM King Christian X dismissed the elected government led by C. T. Zahle, over a dispute about whether or not to re-annex central Slesvig to Denmark following WWI. The result was a public uproar that COULD...

Or an Axis victory in WW2....or a victorious USSR in WW3 (I REALLY need to update my TL soon...sorry to any readers who might read this :S ). Both scenarios would at least mean that English wouldn't in the long run continue to be lingua franca, even if it was before.

As much as my Danish heart would in one sense like to have SOME satisfaction for April 9th (though we'd be a bloody mess afterwards), an Allied invasion of Denmark is pretty ASB, IMHO, especially following a failed Overlord. The assault would've have to be launched across the North Sea, a pretty...