A few questions for a TL

Devvy

Donor
As I've put my "other" TL on a hiatus, I've started more concrete planning for another TL I've had at the back of my mind for a while. Some questions I'd be interested in getting answers for though:

1) Frederick VIII of Denmark had 2 kids. The eldest went on to become Christian X of Denmark in 1912, but his second son (Carl) became King Haakon of Norway in 1905.

There was a roughly 7-10 days gap between the Norwegian Parliament (after the results of the plebiscite) offering Carl the Norwegian throne and Carl renouncing his rights to the Danish throne, as I understand it.

If the Danish King and his son's Christian's family are all killed (let's say in a palace fire or something), that would make Carl King of both (but separately) Norway and Denmark - or am I missing something? Both countries were running as parliamentary democracies by this point, so would Carl be accepted as King of both countries considering the countries' historically close relations and maybe Carl declaring that he would rule as King of both countries separately and respect each country's sovereignty?

2) The Soviets established a network of client states in eastern Europe which all joined the Warsaw Pact. Why did the Soviets not merge the client states into the Soviet Union? I understand that Stalin wanted a protective buffer against Europe, but I don't understand why such a buffer couldn't be within the Soviet Union which would surely strengthen the Commie power in eastern Europe?

3) What exactly is a DBWI? :) I can't work out an exact definition for it!

That's it for now until I think of some more.... :)
 
2) Mainly because of these reasons:

a) So as not to piss off nationalists too much (Poles especially would be inclined to think they've just swapped Nazis for Soviets).

b) To avoid pissing off the WAllies. If you go on an annexing spree, it looks really bad. And I mean REALLY bad. The Soviets would be tempting an a-bomb on Moscow.

3) I don't know the exact acronym, but it basically means an ATL written from the perspective of an alternate TL.
 
Exact acronym is Double-Blind What If. You posit a random fact from alternate history (a familiar event from OTL, gone the other way) and everyone else than makes up the events that would fit this alternate world and lead to or from this event.
 
Last edited:
As I've put my "other" TL on a hiatus, I've started more concrete planning for another TL I've had at the back of my mind for a while. Some questions I'd be interested in getting answers for though:

1) Frederick VIII of Denmark had 2 kids. The eldest went on to become Christian X of Denmark in 1912, but his second son (Carl) became King Haakon of Norway in 1905.

There was a roughly 7-10 days gap between the Norwegian Parliament (after the results of the plebiscite) offering Carl the Norwegian throne and Carl renouncing his rights to the Danish throne, as I understand it.

If the Danish King and his son's Christian's family are all killed (let's say in a palace fire or something), that would make Carl King of both (but separately) Norway and Denmark - or am I missing something? Both countries were running as parliamentary democracies by this point, so would Carl be accepted as King of both countries considering the countries' historically close relations and maybe Carl declaring that he would rule as King of both countries separately and respect each country's sovereignty?

Since Norway's independence was that they did not want to be linked to Sweden anymore, I can't see the Norwegian parliament thinking that being linked to Denmark in their stead would be a good idea.

Either Carl would renounce the Norwegian throne, and maybe suggest his younger brother for it, or he would renounce the Danish throne though he would have to do this for both himself and his son.

It would make more sense to turn down the Norwegian throne, and suggest a younger brother. Then it would be up to the Norwegian parliament to either accept the suggestion, or to approach somebody else.

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
On the annexation of Eastern Europe the Atlantic Charter stated that Britain and America weren't seeking any territorial gain from the War, where the Soviets signed up to that in anyway? I'm sure they could have staged some plebiscites that would have "indicated" support for doing so but as said above it would have inflamed nationalist sentiment and could possibly have started a war with the WAllies which in the late 1940's would have seen atom bombs dropped on Russia.
 

Devvy

Donor
Cheers guys. More stuff about the Nordics :)

4) IIRC....there was a Swedish General who advocated the Swedes occupying northern Finland (to Rovaniemi and Kemijarvi) to defend against a Soviet occupied Finland (if it lost the Continuation War I think).

Anyone know the name/got any more details/tell me I'm delusional?
 
The Swedish supreme commander, General Olof Thörnell twice presented detailed plans to the government for Swedish involvement in the continuation war on the Finnish side. The plans included 2-4 Swedish divisions defending northern Finland.

There were none among the Swedish senior officers at the time who were not anti-Soviet and pro-Finnish. Other proponents of aid to Finland were Axel Rappe, Archibald Douglas and Helge Jung (although the later was more pro-allied and would never argue to enter the war on the side of Germany).
 
Top