AHC: Second American Civil War in 20th Century

Status
Not open for further replies.
All right, your challenge is to find a way for a second ACW to occur in the 20th century.

Rules:

  • Cannot be a race war. Far too obvious. Racial "tension" being a factor is allowed.
  • Communist/Socialist revolution scenarios are allowed, but they have been done on here before, so make sure it's a fresh idea!
  • Has to be after 1900. No PoDs before that.
  • Bonus points for secession scenarios, instead of revolution ones. Either is fine, though.
Have fun! :)
 
Last edited:
I'm sure every single Great Depression civil war has been done here already, but how about a region of the US that can handle its economy perfectly well but keeps getting dragged down by the rest of the nation? They try to secede (might succeed in seceding, being that they can control the economy) and civil war ensues.

Probably not likely, but I was looking for a fresh idea. Admittedly, I haven't been on this site for its entire run, but either way, I tried.
 

Delta Force

Banned
The Shah manages to hold onto power for a few more years. Apart from accepting delivery of equipment slated to be delivered in the late 1970s/early 1980s such as F-14s, F-16s, Kidd class destroyers, and Swan built cruisers, Iran also completes the Bushehr nuclear complex. The Shah falls to a revolution and the ensuing Iran-Iraq War leads to a limited nuclear exchange between the two countries. This leaves Saudi Arabia as the only remaining major pro-Western oil exporter, although it suffers from social unrest due to the huge cash windfall not being felt outside of the Saudi elite (the country has always been a kleptocracy and only recently started domestic investment). Instead of a 1980s oil glut, the 1980s is another period of energy crisis. The Soviets achieve a major diplomatic victory in Pakistan where it will receive Soviet support in return for abandoning the United States and allowing the Soviet Union a warm weather port in the region to expand Soviet naval power and allow them to export their oil.

The United States tries to engage in an arms race with the Soviets, but they experience an economic revival due to the oil windfall and are able to keep up. Asia and Europe are also more dependent on Soviet energy exports because of unreliable Middle Eastern exports. The United States ultimately faces a major economic crisis in the 1990s from massive government overspending and goes the way of the Soviet Union in OTL, gradually breaking up as debt levels climb and taxes rise to high levels. Texas leaves first, followed by Oklahoma and Louisiana. Because Texas has a large petroleum industry and a large economy it is fiscally stable and integrates federal military forces and facilities on its soil into a powerful Texan military. Alaska might also leave the United States and become the 11th province of Canada.

The United States wouldn't experience a total breakup in a Cold War lost scenario, but it would likely lose some of the larger states able to go it alone. Some of the smaller or more far flung states might go to Canada instead. It might not be a second civil war or Shattered Union scenario, but it is an interesting alternate timeline that avoids many of the common cliches. Past 1970, it is also probably the most fractured you can get the United States without a nuclear war.
 
I'm sure every single Great Depression civil war has been done here already, but how about a region of the US that can handle its economy perfectly well but keeps getting dragged down by the rest of the nation? They try to secede (might succeed in seceding, being that they can control the economy) and civil war ensues.

Probably not likely, but I was looking for a fresh idea. Admittedly, I haven't been on this site for its entire run, but either way, I tried.

Any links to these Great Depression CW TLs? :D

It might not be a second civil war or Shattered Union scenario, but it is an interesting alternate timeline that avoids many of the common cliches.

I think this works for a second civil war scenario, actually. I'd think that the USA would probably make a show at putting down revolt, wouldn't it? I mean, you'd think they'd deploy troops, official or mercenaries, to try to keep Texas. In this scenario, it wouldn't shock me to see Texas using its troops to "liberate" Oklahoma and Louisiana, and possibly Arkansas. Arkansas is pretty rugged, so there'd probably be some sort of front there, with the Texans waging an ongoing mini-war against the cash-strapped Federal government. I could see Arizona and New Mexico joining up, too. The "Cowboy Republic," essentially. :D

What of loyalists in the hypothetical Texan government? What do they do when the Lone Star rises again? Get out, Vietnam Evac-style? Seems more likely full-on civil war breaks out as cells of US loyalists resist.
 
Last edited:

Delta Force

Banned
With a Cold War lost scenario very few regions are going to actually have fully functioning three branch militaries, and many of the rump militaries will have nuclear weapons of some kind. I imagine cooperation and trading of assets will be the general rule of thumb. For example, the US might give Texas and Oklahoma some fighters and ships in exchange for accepting a portion of the US debt and turning over some of their transport and tanker aircraft. Midwestern and Southwestern states might turn over SAC assets for similar arrangements. I imagine the US breakup would be more orderly than the Soviet one as well, they haven't gone communist (like how the Soviets went capitalist) and so perhaps a unified US military might survive (or at least NORAD command, USCG, and USN). After all, the breakup is for pragmatic economic reasons and not ethnic nationalism.
 
With a Cold War lost scenario very few regions are going to actually have fully functioning three branch militaries, and many of the rump militaries will have nuclear weapons of some kind. I imagine cooperation and trading of assets will be the general rule of thumb. For example, the US might give Texas and Oklahoma some fighters and ships in exchange for accepting a portion of the US debt and turning over some of their transport and tanker aircraft. Midwestern and Southwestern states might turn over SAC assets for similar arrangements. I imagine the US breakup would be more orderly than the Soviet one as well, they haven't gone communist (like how the Soviets went capitalist) and so perhaps a unified US military might survive (or at least NORAD command, USCG, and USN). After all, the breakup is for pragmatic economic reasons and not ethnic nationalism.

Would we face a similar situation to the USSR with the "missing" nukes? I'd could see all kinds of problems between states arising as the Feds and Texanx might send in task forces to secure nuclear sites. They'd probably especially worry about nukes by Mexico...
 
Last edited:
... Iran also completes the Bushehr nuclear complex. The Shah falls to a revolution and the ensuing Iran-Iraq War leads to a limited nuclear exchange between the two countries.

Interesting... but how do the Iraqi's get nuclear weapons? Are you assuming the Israeli's don't bomb Osirak?
 

Flubber

Banned
I dimly remember a time line here from several years ago that featured an early 20th Century US civil war involving Teddy Roosevelt and W.R. Hearst. I stumbled across it with the search function and remember enjoying reading it at the time.

Sadly, I don't remember enough about it to find it again. :eek:

Found it here. I was using too many search factors and should have just gone with the obvious from the start.
 
Last edited:

Delta Force

Banned
Would we face a similar situation to the USSR with the "missing" nukes? I'd could see all kinds of problems between states arising as the Feds and Texanx might send in task forces to secure nuclear sites. They'd probably especially worry about nukes by Mexico...

It would depend on how orderly the breakup is, I imagine you might actually have US soldiers with little or even poor pay stay at their posts just to ensure the nuclear weapons are safe. In any case most if not all of them have permissive action links, so the concern with an American weapon is the fissile material and not the weapon itself. If the PAL can be overridden that might be an issue though since tritium booster would be fairly easy to acquire to keep the weapons working for years after the theft (it is used for high end gun sights and glow in the dark applications).

Interesting... but how do the Iraqi's get nuclear weapons? Are you assuming the Israeli's don't bomb Osirak?

Osirak wasn't as useful for making a nuclear weapon as the Israelis believed, but if it were not bombed Iraq would obviously have a stronger nuclear academia and industry going into the 1980s. While some say the Osirak bombing itself caused Saddam to seek nuclear weapons, having the Shah's nuclear sites looted for fissile materials would be enough of an impetus on its own. Iran signed a very lax monitoring agreement with the IAEA during the reign of the Shah in OTL, so no one would know how advanced they were even with the Shah on the throne, although many believe he was seeking nuclear weapons as part of.his quest to make Iran a superpower.
 
1979 yuri Andropov becomes soviet leader after the death of Brezhnev from a stroke. Meanwhile the situation in Iran is getting out of control after he fall of the shah - Islamic faction is fighting the Tudeh (communists) on the streets of tehran.

Islamic faction seizes the soviet embassy and a bunch if soviet diplomats get killed. KGB warns Andropov that there is a danger of islamic radicalism spreading into Muslim regions of the user, from Iran and Afghanistan. Andropov reluctantly opts for a military solution.

December 25, the ussr invades Iran and Afghanistan.

The indo-Pakistan situation deteriorates as well. With limited air strikes and troop build ups in Kashmir.

President carter announces the carter doctrine: any soviet intervention in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait or the gulf emirates will result in a us military response. The gulf states however decline to offer bases to the us.

Iraq, which has been conspicuously excluded from the us guarantee, gradually aligns itself more closely with the ussr. Vice president saddam Hussein takes power in early 1980, purges the Ba'ath party, and announces a military alliance with the soviet bloc.

There is Islamic resistance in Iran and Afghanistan but it is weak. In Iran, it is weak because the Sunni gulf states refuse to supply arms to the Shia resistance. In afghanistan it is weak, because the only possible conduit for arms, Pakistan, is surrounded on all sides, and refuses to take he risk of allowing arms to pass hrough it's territory.

Gas prices hit $200 per gallon, causing major economic problems in the west.

Reagan is elected as new us president, promising to stand up to the soviets.

Many NATO countries begin to drift towards neutralism or finlandization in order to get access to cheap soviet gas supplies.

Reagan begins a massive military build up, as well as cutting taxes, the latter in an attempt to spur economic growth. Gas prices are so high, and the world economy so bad, that us economy continues to decline, and the deficit reaches unprecedented levels.

The democratic party in the us moves to the left, and selects Jesse jackson as their presidential candidate in 84. Reagan wins again.

By 1987 the deficit is out of control, and the us is bogged down fighting leftwing guerillas in an expensive war in central America. Reagan ends up being impeached after a financial scandal involving smuggling arms to rightwing guerillas (which congress has not authorised) in Nicaragua. Bush becomes president.

By 1988 the democratic party has broken apart in several factions and is no longer a serious threat to the republicans. The main threat to bush are right-wingers in the republican party (the so called tea party), who want to cut deficit spending. Nevertheless bush is reelected.

By 92, inflation has reached 400%, and the deficit is unsustainable. The tea party faction, led by newt Gingrich takes over the republican party.

Within 100 days of being elected, the Gingrich administration passes bills repudiating all federal government debt, and abolishing all general federal taxes (taxes may in future only be spent on the purpose for which they are raised, for example patent application fees may only be spent on the patent office). These laws are soon bolstered by constitutional amendments making them permanent.

This causes several effects:

1. A couple of years of complete chaos.

2. Eventually massive economic growth under this extreme free Market system - however as many people are left out of growth, there is great social disunity.

3. Federal government becomes much weaker.

4. Federal government starts to charge higher fees for services (and some states do the same in imitation), which restricts access to government services to those who can pay. For example, if you don't pay for the policing in your area, you don't get any. If you don't pay the full court costs, you can't conduct a civil or criminal case against someone who wronged you.

5. States become much stronger.


Now we have regionalism, no powerful central government, and social disunity... I think civil war is achievable by 2000... I may add more later.
 
Last edited:
This thread's been dead for over 3 years, but I'm still putting this here just in case: I'm creating a scenario in which the foundations for the Second Civil War is laid in early 2016, called "The Nation We Form Here." Just in case anybody wants to check it out.
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
This thread's been dead for over 3 years, but I'm still putting this here just in case: I'm creating a scenario in which the foundations for the Second Civil War is laid in early 2016, called "The Nation We Form Here." Just in case anybody wants to check it out.
Please DO NOT necro dead threads.

It is contrary to Board policy
 
Top
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top