Annexation. And the USA will likely sponser a coup against Francisco Jose soon.
In at the Death- *SPOILERS*
- Thread starter 83gemini
- Start date
Annexation. And the USA will likely sponser a coup against Francisco Jose soon.
1: No, they didn't. The Dons were permanently put out of influence in the early days of Freedom Party control, and the Mexican states embraced the freedom party. They remained loyal to the end (though Texas's betrayal left them to the sharks), and are occupied at the end. Roderiguez betrays a Freedom Party member to save his brother from temptation in his last scene, remember.
2. Baja was occupied and kept by the US this time. Though the invasion was lackluster and badly planned (green uniforms in the desert), by occupying the peninsula the US cut off the Confederate Pacific and made CS spend resources bombing the peninsula.
3. At the end of the book, Mexmillian was still on the throne, and combat had ceased between the US and Mexico.
The US was also like the UK in the postwar, because of the change in power from the Socialits to the Democrats simlar to what happed to Churchill after OTL WW2.
It was the massive qualifiers that forced me into that argument. My argument is that they are in the early stages towards genocide and there should be no argument it's mass murder. Most of the US POV characters had already expressed a desire to build camps and put civilians in them.
Someone stated it was in no way mass murder and get back to him when at least 100k were killed. I showed that even at the lowest amounts of US soldiers killed a day all over the CSA that nearly 200k CSA citizens would be murdered by the US after 6 months and by the 8 year mark at that rate you'd have 3-4 million killed.
After that, they ignored that I proved it was mass murder and then decided to just go on and on about how it was ok, cause it was just reprisals and not planned genocide. And said it was nothing like the CSA did, while ignoring how we know the US had already committed genocides against the Indians, which was told to us during How Few Remain and the great war books. Which is how they settled the West so much more quickly than in our timeline(which again was genocide).
I think too many people just want to see the CSA as the only evil in these books and ignore the evil done by the other side. The main thing I take from these books is that both sides are evil and while the US is not perfect today, it's a far cry better than what would have happened if the country were split in two.
Um, the U.S. soldiers were expressing their anger and disgust when they found out about Featherston's death camps. Going hand in hand with their hatred for the CSA, of course they're going to make hyperbolic statements to potentially rebellious Southerners. There's no evidence at all that the government of the USA is threatening any kind of genocide against the white population.
And most of the "threats" to send whites to death camps come from the black auxillaries taunting Confederate POWs.
Um, excuse me, the USA ITTL isn't Stalin's Russia--Kentucky, Tennessee, and Houston are already back in the Union, and acts of vengeance against U.S. troops are far more likely to drop, just as in Occupied Canada and Utah. As several posters have already pointed out to you, the USA's end goal isn't to depopulate the South...it's to reincorprate the South back into the Union. And any reprisals for terrorist violence is going to pale to the eight million or so people that the Confederate government murdered.
Um, the biggest lesson being taken away from the Southron Holocaust is that genocide of any kind is wrong. This will discredit racism in the USA in the same way that the discovery of the Nazi death camps IOTL did. So if anything, there'll be a critical self-examination of what they did to the Native Americans because of this.
Well, the CSA under the Freedom Party is the prime evil of both the American Empire and Settling Accounts series.
And frankly, no offense meant, it seems you're trying to minimize and cheapen the horrendous atrocities commited by the South in the books by comparing Featherston's "Population Reductions" to reprisals against terrorist attacks by the U.S. Army--which while distateful, cannot be compared to the wholesale carnage created by the Freedom Party.
Yes there is. There were mentions that many civilians were arrested and never seen again. It was hypothesized that perhaps there were camps that were unknown.
Wrong. It was Pound, Morrell and Grimes and company that told CSA civilians who were trying to organize a boycott that maybe they'll wind up in camps. The auxillaries were just outright shooting POW's.
There are hopes and plans to bring them back into the Union. But as the book ended none of the former CSA states were back in the union. And Stalin's russia wasn't killing 100's of thousands of civilians. And if Turtledove didn't want us to feel that many civilians were being killed he shouldn't have made the 100 to 1 ratio. After 6 months at a minimum 200k would have been murdered. Do you think the CSA killed 8 million in 6 months? I've repeatedly said the only thing that's kept the US from killing 8 million is the book ended.
It took us 20+ years after the holocaust to give everyone equal civil rights in the US. So I don't see how the holocaust discredited racism in the US. It stayed as bad as it had been for many years. Change didn't happen overnight. If anything the US and CSA white population still had deep seeded racism. Morrell even remarked that something would need to be done about all the mexicans at some point. But he didn't know what it was. My belief in this timeline is that it will be the Mexican population who struggles for equal civil rights in the new USA.
As was said before, the Nazi's were the prime evil in WWII, but that didn't mean that stalin's russia was not evil.
You're way off base. There is no argument about what the CSA done, which is why no one is arguing about it. The argument is about how many feel the US is justified in killing confederates(and not all confederates were white, the US would have happily killed Jorge, his brothers and mother if given the chance and they already nearly wiped out the native american population of Sequoyah).
Basically you're ignoring the facts that the horrendous acts committed by the CSA started very similarly to the way the US is acting toward the myriad of races and religious groups in their own country.
Murdering Mormons wholesale, then trying to ship them off to the far corners of the world, much like OTL did to the Cherokee. Lining up canadians for decades and killing them. Genocide against the Native americans and now mass killings of white and mexican Confederates.
Just because the US had not gotten to the point of a genocide or camps against confederates, don't mean they are not in the early stages. Someone will have to step up and stop it. No one stopped Featherston.
And that's the point. The US is fully capable of doing the same thing and in fact had already to the native american populations.
This whole argument is a circle of some thinking what the USA was doing was justified and ok, while others point out that murder is never ok and the difference between one type of evil to the next is not noticeable enough to matter. Because both are evil.
We have our own examples. Hitler, Stalin and the empire of Japan. All committed heinous acts. In the grand scheme of things can you really get away with calling any of them not evil? Is Japan the least evil because they didn't put people into concentration camps? Is that qualifier really enough not to have hatred for what they did and condemn their actions?
That was done soley to intimidate potentially rebellious Southerners. Most of the people arrested were returned, and they probably know better than to try anything so stupid again.
Complete hyperbole.
Yeah, one idiot POW got shot for insulting the dead mother of one of the Auxillaries. That doesn't prove that countless POWS were massacred.
Um, even if there's some sort of huge rebellion against U.S. authority, nowhere near 8 million Southerners would get killed. And frankly, from indications in the book, that's not going to happen. Jorge Rodriguez turned (anonymously) a Freedom Party organizer (and friend of his father's) to avoid American retaliations on his hometown. Even Clarence Potter talks a homeless veteran out of trying to cause trouble.
Um, you realize that this is an alternate history...and if anything, the Southron Holocaust will have an even greater impact on U.S. society because it happened right next door, and no real effort was made to save the people caught up in it.
So if anything, racism will be even more thoroughly discredited than IOTL. And there'll still be plenty of bigots around--but their putrid ideology will be roundly rejected for resemling Jake Featherston.
And as for the Mexican migrants, well, the USA isn't about to start putting them in camps. Chances are they'll be given something of a pathway to citizenship.
And I think it's completely asinine to start comparing TTL's USA to the Soviet Union; it just doesn't work. TTL's USA might be flawed, and it might have plenty of problems of its own, but in no way does that make it evil.
The CSA was the evil nation in these books.
Wiped out the Native American population of Sequoyah? Yeah, that's rich. There's an ongoing guerilla war going on with the Native Americans there, but it's not genocide.
And frankly, TTL's USA isn't going to be like Jake Featherston's CSA. You're rather desperate to equate what the Freedom Party did to U.S. retaliations for terrorist activities, and frankly, that doesn't work.
So you think that Tom Dewey is Jake Featherston? Boy, that's more thank a little flawed.
And lining up and killing innocents in the streets to stop terrorists does not make the US a good guy. Only the lesser of two evils.
I think you are too desperate to accept killing of innocents. You seem to think that the govt. can do no wrong.
And I think that a real democratic freedom loving republic strives to be better than the ones they are fighting.
I would not want my country today to be lining up Iraqi civilians and killing them wholesale whenever an insurgent attacked. I know that for sure.
If turtledove wanted us to think the US was better than stalin, then having them line up hundreds of thousands of civilians and having them shot and left in the streets to rot, was not the way to go about it.
Michael E Johnson
Banned
Meaning what the US is doing is the same or nearly the same as what the Freedom party did-again not correct. The methods,motives and morality of the 2 countries are not the same and therefore its not possible to equate what the CSA did with what the USA is doing .Also you keep greatly overstating the likely numbers of civillians that are killed in those reprisials but even if its about numbers the CSA has got the USA beat hands down.
It's NOT About The Numbers ...
It's About The Stain on The National Identity, Caused By Participating in Genociide ...
Recently, There's Been a Controversy in The ADL Over The Armenian Genocide, as it Was Not Originally Caused By Intentional Murder; Well ya' Know, Marchin' Miillions of People Off into The Desert and then Forgettin' ta' Feed 'em, May Not Be as Immediately Lethal as Siimply Shootin' 'em, But ya' Stiill Wiind Up, wiith Miillions of Dead Ciivillians Rottin' on The Ground!
Michael E Johnson
Banned
I agree that it not about numbers entirely but numbers are a big part of the equation. If what the USA is doing to white Confederates is equivalent to what the CSA did to blacks( ie genocide intended to wipe out the ENTIRE group) then the USA is doing a really piss poor job because its killing nowhere near as many white Confederates as they killed blacks. That might be because the USA doesnt intend to kill all white Confedrates-as they tried with blacks- because that would be a genocide.
It's Stiill Genocide it Just isn't Extiinction ...
Whiile I Do Agree, There is a Discernable Diiffereence Between The Two ...
Instead of Being a Diifference of Kiind it's ONLY One of Degree, Thus There is a Sliippery Slope Tendency Between The Points on The Contiinuum!
Wow. its been a bee with an itch not reading this thread. but with In at the death finished I say I'm pleased; most of who needed to die (Pinkard, Goering..oops i mean Koening , and of course The Snake himself.
the bit about Lt.Colonel Grimes evicting the Kaisers boys in '75 was funny and im glad he and Carsten, Cassius, and yes, even Floras Son whom doesnt get off completely lightly.
the Republic of Texas might jump on Mexico given half a chance. i was surprised at the prolific use of atomics....indeed that the CSA even had such a device operative was dubious at best but didn't detract IMO. A Solid Book sayest I
, and of course The Snake himself.the bit about Lt.Colonel Grimes evicting the Kaisers boys in '75 was funny and im glad he and Carsten, Cassius, and yes, even Floras Son whom doesnt get off completely lightly.
the Republic of Texas might jump on Mexico given half a chance. i was surprised at the prolific use of atomics....indeed that the CSA even had such a device operative was dubious at best but didn't detract IMO. A Solid Book sayest I