A Little Worse for Wear: A Tale of WWIII

I'd mostly be interested in hearing about the 1920's or first/second middle eastern conflicts. But that's mainly since I like seeing exactly how the trainwreck gets started :D
 
I'd mostly be interested in hearing about the 1920's or first/second middle eastern conflicts. But that's mainly since I like seeing exactly how the trainwreck gets started :D

Seconded. This is a fascinating timeline, but trying to keep track of all the details when nothing connects to anything before it or after it is giving me a headache. More pieces from the early years.
 
I'd mostly be interested in hearing about the 1920's or first/second middle eastern conflicts. But that's mainly since I like seeing exactly how the trainwreck gets started :D

You'd think by now I'd remember which conflicts were the 1st and 2nd Middle Eastern conflicts (along with the ICCs and the Indonesian conflicts)...this is what I get for having the late 20th century being an era of manifold medium-scale wars.

*checks timeline*

Ah yes. You've already heard SOME about the first two Middle Eastern Conflicts; the first being Soviet intervention in South Iran and the second being Soviet aggression towards new regimes in Syria and Iraq. I might elaborate further, though.

Seconded. This is a fascinating timeline, but trying to keep track of all the details when nothing connects to anything before it or after it is giving me a headache. More pieces from the early years.

Don't worry, I confuse myself sometimes too. The 'early years' are the hardest to write about though, because I can't count on the butterfly effect as a means of explaining differences from OTL. The communist revolt in India was a doozy to figure out because I wasn't sure how to get the revolution running. Thankfully, finding out about the assassination attempt against Lord Irwin (the future OTL Earl of Halifax) provided a good opening.

I'm really interested in the Great Uprising(I think that's what it's called) and the war of the Hordes....generally the WW3 stuff.

The thing is, neither the Great Uprising nor the First or Second Wars of the Hordes occur during WW3, or even within a decade of it, so they wouldn't exactly be "WW3 stuff."
 
This is about something that was mentioned a while ago, but I just read the entire thread in one sitting, so :/...

You mentioned that Japan should build a memorial in Taipei, which implies that they got it back from the Chinese after the Worldwide Nuclear Exchange, right? Also, if the blanketing of an entire blanket with nerve gas isn't considered as bad as other events, that's friggin' scary.

Good timeline, but I need to start taking notes...
 
This is about something that was mentioned a while ago, but I just read the entire thread in one sitting, so :/...

You mentioned that Japan should build a memorial in Taipei, which implies that they got it back from the Chinese after the Worldwide Nuclear Exchange, right? Also, if the blanketing of an entire blanket with nerve gas isn't considered as bad as other events, that's friggin' scary.

Good timeline, but I need to start taking notes...

Well, there was that summary on page 6. But stuff has happened since then, so...

Yes, Japan has Formosa post-WW3. And the nerve gassing of Formosa WAS considered as bad as the other events. The writer of the op-ed peace that I'm assuming your referencing states he understands the inclusion of Taipei and Mandalay (the latter of which, remember, was a NUCLEAR BOOBYTRAP), but not that of Urumqi.

Regardless, yes, the events of WW3 are scary. There was a lot of pent-up national aggression built up over the course of the Bitter Era (hence why WW3 is often called the Bitter War). Unfortunately, as can be seen in Haffner's Vicenary Remembrance Day speech, there are those who do not regret the acts perpetrated during the war.
 
Pro-tip for breaking writer's block: try writing in a different style/format. Hence, why I've used a format I've seen before in the TLs "No Spanish Civil War" and "Smallest Possible Difference": ATL ah.com analogue!



[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]From: [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]diverged-timestreams.int/planning/thread.dgw?=126954[/FONT]


[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Meta-Mild: A Less Than Bitter Era[/FONT]


[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]A STITCH IN THINE SAVES MINE[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]We've had a few good works lately that involve lessening the 'bitterness' of the Bitter Era. Some of them, like The Lord English's [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]And the train arrived on time[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif] (about the Indian Revolution being nipped in the bud, for those of you who aren't familiar) are completed works. There have been quite a few general what-ifs, however, that have only been vaguely explored. What I propose is that our next dt.int collaboration be a merger of all these works into one metawork. Is there interest for this in the community?[/FONT]


[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]PAVLOV'S VET[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]It has my vote. Although we're probably going to need a definitive list before it's officially accepted.[/FONT]


[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]SO MANY BEES[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Aren't we gonna need the authors' permission for this? Seems a bit jerkish to just appropriate someone's ideas without giving them a chance to say no.[/FONT]


[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]A STITCH IN THINE SAVES MINE[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Don't worry Bees, people will definitely have the opportunity to veto inclusion into the metawork. Hopefully they'll be full participants in the collaboration as well. I used [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]And the train arrived on time[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif] as an example because The Lord English has already agreed to help with this collaboration should it be approved.[/FONT]


[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]PRISONER'S WRIT[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]What's the criteria for what constitutes a 'less bitter' Bitter Era? Most of the one's I've seen on the forum revolve around stifling the rise of Communist governments, but some counter this (lest it become a Eutopia) with right-wing totalitarians instead. [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Adeus camisas vermelhas! [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]¡[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Hola camisas negras![/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif] comes to mind. So, is our definition of 'less bitter' going to be 'fewer Communist states and examine the effects thereof' or 'fewer totalitarian states and more democracy'?[/FONT]


[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]DIRTY DOZEN[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]While the 'more democracy' option seems to be in line with the “A Less Than Bitter Era” prompt, it smacks too much of a backwards what-if. A compilation of Communism-hindering divergences and an open-ended interpretation of ensuing events would be more in line with the ethos of previous collaborations.[/FONT]


[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]PAVLOV'S VET[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]P-Dubs, for those of us (hint: me) who don't know what happens in “[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Adeus camisas vermelhas! [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]¡[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Hola camisas negras![/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]”, can someone fill us/me in?[/FONT]


[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]PRISONER'S WRIT[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Pavlov's Vet: basically Brazil never goes red (hence the '[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Adeus camisas vermelhas![/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]'), but the fascistic Argentine Patriotic League launches their own bloody coup in instead (hence the '[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]¡[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Hola camisas negras![/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]'). Basically the work was an exercise in the Law of Unintended Consequences.[/FONT]


[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]CONSTABULARY CONSULTANT[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Seems pretty interesting. Am I correct in assuming that [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Five Races Under One Sun*[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif] will be included in this metawork? Guaranteeing that East Asia doesn't go red (or at least initially, there's still LUC) seems like it would be an important part of this work.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]*Sun Yat-Sen doesn't die of cancer in 1925, and thus the Soviet Union doesn't launch its intervention into China, for those who haven't read the work.[/FONT]


[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]SO MANY BEES[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]While I'm familiar with most of the finished and ongoing works that might be included in this, I don't really follow the what-ifs that are just people testing the waters for an idea. Can Stitch or someone else give some suggestions as to these?[/FONT]


[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]A STITCH IN TIME SAVES MINE[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Well, there was a good discussion recently about Kun's Hungary floundering in the early twenties with less Russian assistance. We'll probably be using that one. Another one that comes to mind is a what-if centered around Sumatra and Java remaining a part of the Netherlands' SE Asian holdings.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Also, anyone have any strong leanings towards when the 'cut-off' date should be for this metaworks what-ifs? 1930 seems like a nice round year, but if someone thinks there's a good reason it should be earlier (or maybe later) please tell me.[/FONT]


[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]DIRTY DOZEN[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Actually, if we push it back a year to 1931, we can include a what-if about the Zeroth ICC. There was a work about it a while back, but the particular what-if in question was from later in the conflict. Anybody know a good potential what-if in '31?[/FONT]


[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]THE LORD ENGLISH[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]We can probably use an earlier what-if to avert the cycle of ICCs, so a clean and neat 1930 would work. We may not even need a specific what-if for the Spanish front, as LUC elsewhere could simply do the work for us.[/FONT]
 
BUMP.

A great and a very interesting timeline. In what kind of state is the Eastern Europe during and after WWIII?

And what ever happened to the Scandinavia? :)
 
BUMP.

A great and a very interesting timeline. In what kind of state is the Eastern Europe during and after WWIII?

And what ever happened to the Scandinavia? :)

Oh my. I need to dust off my Worse for Wear files in order to answer your questions. Let's see...

Eastern Europe during WW3 (which for the region lasts from 2005-2008) is basically a meat grinder. Western European troops are busy fighting in North Africa, with the Caliphate being considered a more immediate threat than the Russians (remember that France and Italy were mentioned as being on their own vendetta against the Caliphate during the firebombing of Algiers), and the blurb about Minsk shows that many Poles felt abandoned by their supposed allies (save the Germans). Not enough troops against too many Russians. At one point, Russian troops almost reached the Danube (albeit only along a sliver of territory down Romania's Black Sea coast). It's not all one-sided, though--a European invasion out of Finland managed to encircle Petrograd for a while.

After the war, Russia's western border is certainly tense. Courland-Lithuania has been geopolitically forced into neutrality, as previously mentioned, but Finland, Poland, and Romania find themselves on the front line against Russia. In the Balkans, Serbia and Greece (who were the only nations of the region to be at war with Russia) have backed out of formal membership in the European alliance structure, but every Balkans nation except Albania is still geopolitically aligned with Europe.

As for Scandinavia: let's just say that the nations of Scandinavia will not have the same image of Social Democratic paradise as they do IOTL. For example, Norway and Sweden got rid of their nuclear arsenals in the mid-80s as part of their respective de-Communization (is that a word?) efforts.
 
Top