Miscellaneous >1900 (Alternate) History Thread

@Aghasverov so what do you suggest?
Whew... from Italian Unification in the 1860's to 1972 is a lot of ground to cover. I'd say start as early as possible, making Italy more militaristic and more stable internally in the late 1800's (different constitution/parliamentary/electoral system maybe)? Turn Italy into the German Empire of the central Mediterranean. Italy concludes WWI with all the gains promised in the London Pact and then some. No "mutilated victory" probably means no rise of Mussolini, leaving the field wide open for a more competent but equally ambitious strongman (or a series of strong and nationalistic PM's).
If there's a WWII as in OTL, Italy takes the winning side from the beginning, playing a major role in the defeat of the Reich, and acquires more territory and more prestige for itself, doubtless leaving Yugoslavia (if there still is one) resentful. By this time Italy is recognized as one of the "Big Five" globally, leaving the French resentful at being demoted to a second-rate power.
Malta, not quite sure what to do about that one yet, unless the UK somehow wound up without it at the conclusion of the Napoleonic Wars...
 
Whew... from Italian Unification in the 1860's to 1972 is a lot of ground to cover. I'd say start as early as possible, making Italy more militaristic and more stable internally in the late 1800's (different constitution/parliamentary/electoral system maybe)? Turn Italy into the German Empire of the central Mediterranean. Italy concludes WWI with all the gains promised in the London Pact and then some. No "mutilated victory" probably means no rise of Mussolini, leaving the field wide open for a more competent but equally ambitious strongman (or a series of strong and nationalistic PM's).
If there's a WWII as in OTL, Italy takes the winning side from the beginning, playing a major role in the defeat of the Reich, and acquires more territory and more prestige for itself, doubtless leaving Yugoslavia (if there still is one) resentful. By this time Italy is recognized as one of the "Big Five" globally, leaving the French resentful at being demoted to a second-rate power.
Malta, not quite sure what to do about that one yet, unless the UK somehow wound up without it at the conclusion of the Napoleonic Wars...
I did came with some ideas. Although @Aghasverov my PODs are in the late 1940s
 
Whew... from Italian Unification in the 1860's to 1972 is a lot of ground to cover. I'd say start as early as possible, making Italy more militaristic and more stable internally in the late 1800's (different constitution/parliamentary/electoral system maybe)? Turn Italy into the German Empire of the central Mediterranean. Italy concludes WWI with all the gains promised in the London Pact and then some. No "mutilated victory" probably means no rise of Mussolini, leaving the field wide open for a more competent but equally ambitious strongman (or a series of strong and nationalistic PM's).
If there's a WWII as in OTL, Italy takes the winning side from the beginning, playing a major role in the defeat of the Reich, and acquires more territory and more prestige for itself, doubtless leaving Yugoslavia (if there still is one) resentful. By this time Italy is recognized as one of the "Big Five" globally, leaving the French resentful at being demoted to a second-rate power.
Malta, not quite sure what to do about that one yet, unless the UK somehow wound up without it at the conclusion of the Napoleonic Wars...
If it attacks first or allies itself with another power and let's say, the British are occupied elsewhere (longer Falklands War maybe?) Malta might be left alone.
 
Last edited:
If it attacks first or allies itself with another power and let's say, the British are occupied elsewhere (longer Falklands War maybe?) Malta might be left alone.
Or, Malta, immediately after independence in 1964, has a left-wing coup, the British for some reason decide it's a purely internal matter for the Maltese, and decide not to intervene (unlikely but given global politics in 1964 not impossible). The Maltese withdraw from the Commonwealth, but wish to stay neutral and non-aligned as far as the east-west split, so align with Tito, needing at least one powerful friend in the world. This kills 2 birds with one stone, so to speak :)
In any case, got to get British/Commonwealth involvement out of the mix, if you want any chance of Italian success...
 
Basically I am doing a post-WW2 more relevant Italy. Some people live longer and don't mysteriously die.
Malta in the 80's was really in the italian sphere of influence, officially there is a treaty that obblige Italy to defend Malta sovereignity in case of attack, that was due to the rising tension with Lybia when in the late 70's there were suspect of the presence of oil near Malta and the 'good colonel' tryed to bring the island under his protection with a lot of heavy handed move...the italian goverment stepped up with NATO implicit support.
Maybe ITTL Gheddafi move sparks a limited conflict and in the end, Malta decide to unify with Italy or sign more binding treaty.

Jugoslavia, well...Uncle Joe can decide to invade in the early 50's and Italy is offered some piece back as a way to have some political support in the west/divide NATO or simply unilaterally (but with the usual implicit NATO support) occupy a zone of Istria as a way to have a buffer zone

France? No, a war with France mean no NATO or no EEC big butterfly and unless the italian nuclear weapon program ITTL is given the OK and it's very quick...nobody will really want fight a nuclear power.

a war between Italy and France-Jugoslavia-Malta can happen only if France fall to communism in the 1968 after a very brief civil war or simply a quick revolution (and just that mean a lot of butterflies) and Tito become extremely aggressive or it's subsituted by someone aggressive and decide to join/align with neocommunist France.

For Malta, maybe Don Mintoff go through with his menace to loan a base to the Soviet Navy and is quicker in cut any military and political tie with the UK and become more friendly with Libya
 
I'm reading Castles of Steel, and I'm wondering if anyone's done a decent "What if Ingenhol had destroyed Warrender & Beatty's force after the Scarborough raid?"

That would seem to be a huge POD - the HSF was literally ten miles from stumbling across an incredibly isolated chunk of the British battlefleet, and could've very likely destroyed six battleships and four battlecruisers, almost certainly taking far fewer losses.
Well, I wrote Ingenohl's Glory about 20 years ago. I think Petike found it on a Wayback Machine some years back. I don't remember if it was any good, though it was apparently noteworthy. It would have been before I found this site, and was probably up on my old IF website back in the ancient days
 
If it attacks first or allies itself with another power and let's say, the British are occupied elsewhere (longer Falklands War maybe?)
Malta in the 80's was really in the italian sphere of influence, officially there is a treaty that obblige Italy to defend Malta sovereignity in case of attack, that was due to the rising tension with Lybia when in the late 70's there were suspect of the presence of oil near Malta and the 'good colonel' tryed to bring the island under his protection with a lot of heavy handed move...the italian goverment stepped up with NATO implicit support.
Maybe ITTL Gheddafi move sparks a limited conflict and in the end, Malta decide to unify with Italy or sign more binding treaty.

Jugoslavia, well...Uncle Joe can decide to invade in the early 50's and Italy is offered some piece back as a way to have some political support in the west/divide NATO or simply unilaterally (but with the usual implicit NATO support) occupy a zone of Istria as a way to have a buffer zone

France? No, a war with France mean no NATO or no EEC big butterfly and unless the italian nuclear weapon program ITTL is given the OK and it's very quick...nobody will really want fight a nuclear power.

a war between Italy and France-Jugoslavia-Malta can happen only if France fall to communism in the 1968 after a very brief civil war or simply a quick revolution (and just that mean a lot of butterflies) and Tito become extremely aggressive or it's subsituted by someone aggressive and decide to join/align with neocommunist France.

For Malta, maybe Don Mintoff go through with his menace to loan a base to the Soviet Navy and is quicker in cut any military and political tie with the UK and become more friendly with Libya
My PODS so far

  1. The Franco-Thai War goes even better for the Thais and take Laos and Cambodia
  2. No Ho Chi Minh?
  3. Germany partioned between multiple states (two to the Warsaw Pact) and is not given the Marshall Plan money (instead it goes to the others plus Portugal) so Italy has some more money post ww2, also France takes land from Germany and won't leave it soon.
  4. Roosevelt finishes his mandate. Truman goes to the polls and wins 2 terms. The Democrats holds the Presidency until 1962
  5. Eisenhower gives up smoking, lives longer to gets elected for two terms (1962 and 1966) followed by Nixon (1970-1978)
  6. No Vietnam War
  7. Palmiro Togliatti dies but his assassin is not caught and a Communist seeks vengeance against the other parties leaders
  8. Small 2nd Italian Civil War : Commies get beaten
  9. Mattei, Olivetti, Tchou don't die very mysterious deaths (so 1) Nuclear project goes ahead and we have a better 2) Better workers rights 3) the IT sector in Italy starts earlier).
  10. France wins the Algerian War but it is not over yet.
  11. Mitterand is elected in 1968
  12. Italian Social Movement gets elected in 1972 and Mitterand says "I won't tolerate a fascist government on my border" attack, joined Yugoslavia and Malta who fear an irredentist Italy.
  13. In Yugoslavia is a period of protests (THIS HAPPENED IN REAL LIFE) especially in Croatia/Slovenia and tensions escalate even further when the war with Italy starts.
  14. Ravna gora (Serbian far right nationalist and royalist group) organizes a revolt in Serbia.
  15. Italy's first victory is with the Maltese government. Occupation Britain does nothing because Labour won the 1970 general election.
  16. The French are stretched thin between having to manage their German territory with terrorist attacks by the Occupied Germans and Algeria in the Second Phase of the Algerian War of Independence
  17. Tito's Yugoslavia is cracking almost two decades before thanks to the Ravna Gora and the students protest. When the Italians arrive in Ljubjiana, the pan-slavic market socialist experiment is over. Dalmatia, Istria and Ljubiana are handed over.
  18. Nixon with his paranoia might help Italy against (European) socialist President Mitterand fearing "commies" ? (Forgot to mention NO WATERGATE)
  19. France looses the war and has to return the lands given to Napoleon III and Corsica. They also loose/still hold (haven't decided yet) Algeria and/ but manage to curbstomb their German territories. Probably the death of the French Socialist Part?
@Luke @Aghasverov so what do you guys think?
 
My PODS so far

  1. The Franco-Thai War goes even better for the Thais and take Laos and Cambodia
  2. No Ho Chi Minh?
  3. Germany partioned between multiple states (two to the Warsaw Pact) and is not given the Marshall Plan money (instead it goes to the others plus Portugal) so Italy has some more money post ww2, also France takes land from Germany and won't leave it soon.
  4. Roosevelt finishes his mandate. Truman goes to the polls and wins 2 terms. The Democrats holds the Presidency until 1962
  5. Eisenhower gives up smoking, lives longer to gets elected for two terms (1962 and 1966) followed by Nixon (1970-1978)
  6. No Vietnam War
  7. Palmiro Togliatti dies but his assassin is not caught and a Communist seeks vengeance against the other parties leaders
  8. Small 2nd Italian Civil War : Commies get beaten
  9. Mattei, Olivetti, Tchou don't die very mysterious deaths (so 1) Nuclear project goes ahead and we have a better 2) Better workers rights 3) the IT sector in Italy starts earlier).
  10. France wins the Algerian War but it is not over yet.
  11. Mitterand is elected in 1968
  12. Italian Social Movement gets elected in 1972 and Mitterand says "I won't tolerate a fascist government on my border" attack, joined Yugoslavia and Malta who fear an irredentist Italy.
  13. In Yugoslavia is a period of protests (THIS HAPPENED IN REAL LIFE) especially in Croatia/Slovenia and tensions escalate even further when the war with Italy starts.
  14. Ravna gora (Serbian far right nationalist and royalist group) organizes a revolt in Serbia.
  15. Italy's first victory is with the Maltese government. Occupation Britain does nothing because Labour won the 1970 general election.
  16. The French are stretched thin between having to manage their German territory with terrorist attacks by the Occupied Germans and Algeria in the Second Phase of the Algerian War of Independence
  17. Tito's Yugoslavia is cracking almost two decades before thanks to the Ravna Gora and the students protest. When the Italians arrive in Ljubjiana, the pan-slavic market socialist experiment is over. Dalmatia, Istria and Ljubiana are handed over.
  18. Nixon with his paranoia might help Italy against (European) socialist President Mitterand fearing "commies" ? (Forgot to mention NO WATERGATE)
  19. France looses the war and has to return the lands given to Napoleon III and Corsica. They also loose/still hold (haven't decided yet) Algeria and/ but manage to curbstomb their German territories. Probably the death of the French Socialist Part?
@Luke @Aghasverov so what do you guys think?
Forgot that the KMT wins against Mao.

This the timeline of the US elections in my TL (not published this one yet, have to perfect and continue my ATOMIC 911 timeline), I know it is highly unlikely the two parties hold office for THAT long, but it is not impossible in my opinion.

TIMELINE OF DEMOCRATS AND REPUBLICANS HOLDING OFFICE

DEMOCRATS 1933-1962

REPUBLICANS 1962-1994

DEMOCRATS 1994-2008

REPUBLICANS 2008-2020

@Aghasverov @lukedalton
 
My PODS so far

  1. The Franco-Thai War goes even better for the Thais and take Laos and Cambodia
  2. No Ho Chi Minh?
  3. Germany partioned between multiple states (two to the Warsaw Pact) and is not given the Marshall Plan money (instead it goes to the others plus Portugal) so Italy has some more money post ww2, also France takes land from Germany and won't leave it soon.
  4. Roosevelt finishes his mandate. Truman goes to the polls and wins 2 terms. The Democrats holds the Presidency until 1962
  5. Eisenhower gives up smoking, lives longer to gets elected for two terms (1962 and 1966) followed by Nixon (1970-1978)
  6. No Vietnam War
  7. Palmiro Togliatti dies but his assassin is not caught and a Communist seeks vengeance against the other parties leaders
  8. Small 2nd Italian Civil War : Commies get beaten
  9. Mattei, Olivetti, Tchou don't die very mysterious deaths (so 1) Nuclear project goes ahead and we have a better 2) Better workers rights 3) the IT sector in Italy starts earlier).
  10. France wins the Algerian War but it is not over yet.
  11. Mitterand is elected in 1968
  12. Italian Social Movement gets elected in 1972 and Mitterand says "I won't tolerate a fascist government on my border" attack, joined Yugoslavia and Malta who fear an irredentist Italy.
  13. In Yugoslavia is a period of protests (THIS HAPPENED IN REAL LIFE) especially in Croatia/Slovenia and tensions escalate even further when the war with Italy starts.
  14. Ravna gora (Serbian far right nationalist and royalist group) organizes a revolt in Serbia.
  15. Italy's first victory is with the Maltese government. Occupation Britain does nothing because Labour won the 1970 general election.
  16. The French are stretched thin between having to manage their German territory with terrorist attacks by the Occupied Germans and Algeria in the Second Phase of the Algerian War of Independence
  17. Tito's Yugoslavia is cracking almost two decades before thanks to the Ravna Gora and the students protest. When the Italians arrive in Ljubjiana, the pan-slavic market socialist experiment is over. Dalmatia, Istria and Ljubiana are handed over.
  18. Nixon with his paranoia might help Italy against (European) socialist President Mitterand fearing "commies" ? (Forgot to mention NO WATERGATE)
  19. France looses the war and has to return the lands given to Napoleon III and Corsica. They also loose/still hold (haven't decided yet) Algeria and/ but manage to curbstomb their German territories. Probably the death of the French Socialist Part?
@Luke @Aghasverov so what do you guys think?
1 - OK
2 - maybe better Giap
3 - it will cause a lot of butterflies, the european economic recovery will be slower (Germany was the engine of Europe even at that time)
4/5 - lot of butterflies (early cold war, korean war, suez crisis to make an example)
6 - epic butterflies
7 -ok
8/9 - ok
10 - difficult, at most a division of the place with the Oran region remaining in French hand
11 - OK
12 - any irredentist nation in Europe will raise alarm in both USA and URSS and frankly any capital in the continent and Mitterand declaring war to Italy for the MSI being elected as part of the goverment is really difficult. Italy is a fellow member of NATO and of any collaborative european organization so while tension are realistic, go to war will be much more harder.
13/14 - OK
15 - hard to see any Maltese goverment going to DOW Italy, for fear of any possible irredentist claim...maybe Malta break faster from the UK and align itself with Libya and the war is between Jugoslavia and Libya (with Malta support, willingly or unwillingly) and Italy. Frankly a war between two western european democracies during the cold war it's difficult to see; even the one potentially between Greece and Turkey was stopped by the USA due to the consequences for NATO in general.
17 - OK, but Italy will ask/get/obtain his preWWII border, maybe the territory promised to her by the Treaty of London...the rest it's too complicated to get, obtain and mantain
18 - Nixon becoming president after Eisenhower will seriously tone down his paranoia and a Franco-Italian war will basically destroy NATO
19 - France can lose the war (even if very hard to see) but giving up so much land...not happening due to her having a lot of nuclear weapons and the rest of the western nation blocking such move. Frankly is more probable that a political hostile France will simply block any help to Italy from NATO or the rest of Europe.
 
@Aghasverov well thanks ! My TL is basically "Ok, how can we have a basically less shitty world?" / "Finlandized" still forgot to mention a couple of things :
  • Pakistan is none existent after the 1971 War of India thanks to Afghan intervention, you see a greter Afghanistan besides a Sikh puppet state and a independent Kashmir as well.
  • The King of Afghanistan is couped while in Rome but Italians help him get back at his traitorous brother
  • Communist Greece that invades with the USSR Turkey with the Beria Plan and exiled Kingdom of Greece in the islands and Cyprus
  • The Beria Plan also mentions a Greater Armenian SSR and maybe a Commie Kurdistan.
  • There is a greater Syria (thanks to no intervention in 1958 in Lebannon, the Iraqi officers also overthrow the Jordanian monarchy and annex the country and getting Kuwait in 1961 , Syria and Iraq join together with the proposal of Saddam being accepted by Hafez Al Assad ) but haven't managed to get Palestine back.
  • The Federation of Arab Republics actually works and stays in place but Syria isn't included (Egypt+Sudan+Lybia)
  • Biafra War goes awry for the Nigerian Government and it fucking collapses ➡ it splits in Yorubaland, Arewa (North Muslim majority state) and Biafra. Or more

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

@lukedalton

2) Who is Giap?
3)I can't predict which butterflies honestly except other countries receive more money
6) Can't predict such butterflies (at least not in Italy) only things I see is a
  1. possible delay in Civil Rights and they are made by a Republican instead of a Democrat
  2. No Hippie Movement but we loose like tons of movies , novels and other stuff that were made because of it
  3. USA is more conservative?
  4. Black Panthers , BLA , Malcom X and others might become a bigger problem?
10) I don't say they keep it forever. (Unless I go full VLAD TEPES for there)
12) Point 3 can maybe delay enough for France to have a later nuclear program? Again, the reason why I territorially enlarged France is so that is plausibly stretched thin with her forces, it could be an escalated border war that concludes in a situation like Syria-Israel OTL (where one country occupies part of the other. The USSR historically had always good relation with Italy (even when were at war with them in WW2) so I don't see problem in their part. USA? Maybe if I get Nixon to have bigger fish to fry...?
13)
18) You forgot that with no help in sight during Algerian War France was basically a member that didn't collaborate. Also I think Nixon would rather see a "New-Fascistic" Italy win rather than a "Eurosocialist" France win. Mitterand also IRL/OTL basically hosted people like Cesare Battisti so I would not be surprised if he saw a menace in Giorgio Almirante's Italy.
17)/19) You forget some people to this day IRL haven't forgotten what Tito's partisan has done to Italian Istrians and Dalmatians (google foibe) and that the Italian Social Movement would probably want revenge for their bretheren. Vengeance and logic don't always correspond, and I see this Italian going full brutal with the territorial handover since Tito was half Slovene and half Croat. Today there's just the remembrance of the day, there was a diplomatic tit for tat between Slovenia and Italy in one occasion for such thing. I think that the sentiment will still be pretty strong (if RECALL CORRECTLY even Togliatti was against giving the land to Yugoslavia but you know we lost the war) in 1972/3
 
@Aghasverov well thanks ! My TL is basically "Ok, how can we have a basically less shitty world?" / "Finlandized" still forgot to mention a couple of things :
  • Pakistan is none existent after the 1971 War of India thanks to Afghan intervention, you see a greter Afghanistan besides a Sikh puppet state and a independent Kashmir as well.
  • The King of Afghanistan is couped while in Rome but Italians help him get back at his traitorous brother
  • Communist Greece that invades with the USSR Turkey with the Beria Plan and exiled Kingdom of Greece in the islands and Cyprus
  • The Beria Plan also mentions a Greater Armenian SSR and maybe a Commie Kurdistan.
  • There is a greater Syria (thanks to no intervention in 1958 in Lebannon, the Iraqi officers also overthrow the Jordanian monarchy and annex the country and getting Kuwait in 1961 , Syria and Iraq join together with the proposal of Saddam being accepted by Hafez Al Assad ) but haven't managed to get Palestine back.
  • The Federation of Arab Republics actually works and stays in place but Syria isn't included (Egypt+Sudan+Lybia)
  • Biafra War goes awry for the Nigerian Government and it fucking collapses ➡ it splits in Yorubaland, Arewa (North Muslim majority state) and Biafra. Or more

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

@lukedalton

2) Who is Giap?
3)I can't predict which butterflies honestly except other countries receive more money
6) Can't predict such butterflies (at least not in Italy) only things I see is a
  1. possible delay in Civil Rights and they are made by a Republican instead of a Democrat
  2. No Hippie Movement but we loose like tons of movies , novels and other stuff that were made because of it
  3. USA is more conservative?
  4. Black Panthers , BLA , Malcom X and others might become a bigger problem?
10) I don't say they keep it forever. (Unless I go full VLAD TEPES for there)
12) Point 3 can maybe delay enough for France to have a later nuclear program? Again, the reason why I territorially enlarged France is so that is plausibly stretched thin with her forces, it could be an escalated border war that concludes in a situation like Syria-Israel OTL (where one country occupies part of the other. The USSR historically had always good relation with Italy (even when were at war with them in WW2) so I don't see problem in their part. USA? Maybe if I get Nixon to have bigger fish to fry...?
13)
18) You forgot that with no help in sight during Algerian War France was basically a member that didn't collaborate. Also I think Nixon would rather see a "New-Fascistic" Italy win rather than a "Eurosocialist" France win. Mitterand also IRL/OTL basically hosted people like Cesare Battisti so I would not be surprised if he saw a menace in Giorgio Almirante's Italy.
17)/19) You forget some people to this day IRL haven't forgotten what Tito's partisan has done to Italian Istrians and Dalmatians (google foibe) and that the Italian Social Movement would probably want revenge for their bretheren. Vengeance and logic don't always correspond, and I see this Italian going full brutal with the territorial handover since Tito was half Slovene and half Croat. Today there's just the remembrance of the day, there was a diplomatic tit for tat between Slovenia and Italy in one occasion for such thing. I think that the sentiment will still be pretty strong (if RECALL CORRECTLY even Togliatti was against giving the land to Yugoslavia but you know we lost the war) in 1972/3
2) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Võ_Nguyên_Giáp basically communist vietnam military leader

For all the rest (invasion of the URSS and communist Greece of Turkey included), well it can happen only without NATO, EEC and with a very different (but really really different) cold war. The only biggest fish to fry for any president than a war between two very important NATO members will be the Soviet launching the invasion of western europe and frankly the only way France launch a war against Italy in case of MSI at the goverment is that this happen due to a coup, if not relations will be more cooler for a while and anyone in Paris will wait till the new goverment the next month as this is the perception of many foreigner regarding the italian political system.

Post WWII there were a big taboo regarding changing border in the continent, so going for a legalistic 'they have attacked us and we get only what promised by the original treaty of london (even if pre warII border will be much more acceptable)' will give at least a feag leaf and be answered only by protest instead of sanctions...and going for a brutal treatment of the civil population will basically destroy any international support for Italy even if attacked (whatever Kissinger or Nixon want...corpse in live tv really make any action look good; at most a more 'discrete' transfer of population can be barely acceptable if not involve too much violence and permit people to leave with the bulk of their possession).

Frankly, if you avoid the part with France the rest is ok but for Malta, better going for a support for Lybia and a earlier disangagement from the UK/commonwealth...otherwise the British will be involved in any case (they consider themself still a great power and surely can't be permit this, regardless on who's at the goverment). Plus Malta on his own deciding to dow Italy is hardly believable, much more credible if it's more forcebly involved by someone like the good colonel that just a couple of years before had nationalizated many foreign assets and expelled the italian citizen that lived in Libya (IRL things diplomatically recovered, ITTL things can become worse)

In such scenario both USA and URSS can just look wary at the situation and Nixon can give material help as to OTL Israel in 73 as both Tito and Libya at this stage are more solitary players and wild dog in the game of diplomacy and they will be much more worried that the situation expand and both superpowers will have the reasonable hope to bring back on the fold the two nations if they are defeated.
France become involved in some manner against Italy and the entire western alliance basically dissappear with the URSS avoiding any move due to the notion: why stop your enemy from making a terrible mistake.
 
Last edited:
For all the rest (invasion of the URSS and communist Greece of Turkey included), well it can happen only without NATO, EEC and with a very different (but really really different) cold war. The only biggest fish to fry for any president than a war between two very important NATO members will be the Soviet launching the invasion of western europe and frankly the only way France launch a war against Italy in case of MSI at the goverment is that this happen due to a coup, if not relations will be more cooler for a while and anyone in Paris will wait till the new goverment the next month as this is the perception of many foreigner regarding the italian political system.
@lukedalton

  • For Greece, Communist Victory in the Civil War. The Beria plan could go on just before 1949. I mean, Mitterand was pretty much an interventionist in the regard that he let people like Battisti walk free in the French Republic. But yeah, I will have to get rid somehow of both EEC (which since Deutschland ist kaput, it is basically done already) and for NATO, well how we avoid formation of NATO? FDR Greater Appeasement for Stalin maybe? I think SEATO or its equivalent becomes more important and TTL equivalent of NATO. (Already have a name : Pacific & Asian Treaty Organization)
  • USSR is headed by Kosygin, Khruschev heir. I think he WOULD be cautious.
  • So, for Malta I have to basically make the island align or be threatened by Gheddafi or well the threat of the SOVIET BASE could give a casus belli for Christian Democrat Italy (in my TTL I don't see the MSI winning before 1972, even with Liberals, Communists, Socialists and others out the picture)
  • For the territory, yeah a situation were people are not exterminated but can leave with their possessions is the most likely. Giorgio Almirante and the MSI in general were a lot of things, but I doubt TTL they would become genociders. This could also lead to them holding Dalmatia and Istria much better, with also the Expelled Dalmatians and Istrians coming back to their ancestral lands and some of them potentially becoming (or returning) land owners overnight.
  • For France... that's the tricky part. I envision a scenario like the IRL/OTL Golan heights, not recognized but you can barely do anything, if anything at all.
 
Failure of the Norwegian Campaign for Germany in WW2

Source: https://uboat.net/allies/warships/ship/3484.html

POD 1 : HMS Triton sinks the cruiser Blucher on 8 April 1940 with a successful torpedo strike. On 9 April 1940, Norwegian coastal fortresses at Oslo sink Lutzow (instead of Blucher, now on the ocean floor) and the cruiser Emden is also sunk by the Oslo fortresses. The German invasion force bound for Oslo is sunk at sea and attempts to land troops by air to capture Oslo fail.

Source: https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/ahc-make-britain-industrially-stronger-before-ww2-and-less-dependent-on-lend-lease-during-ww2.406342/page-11

POD 2: On 8 April 1940, HMS Renown and its escorting destroyers sink the German cruiser Admiral Hipper and its destroyer taskforce in exchange for losing HMS Glowworm, preventing the German invasion of Trondheim. Interrogation of the German survivors results in the Home Fleet heading straight for Narvik. The Home Fleet sinks Scharnhorst and Gneisenau on 9 April 1940 in exchange for losing HMS Renown and HMS Repulse. Over the next few days (until 14 April 1940), 4 British destroyers are sunk in exchange for sinking all German destroyers at Narvik.

POD 3: British cruisers carrying out Operation R4 sink the entire German invasion force bound for Bergen in Bergen and successfully land troops who assist the Norwegians in defeating and capturing the German invaders in Bergen. The cruisers Konigsberg and Koln are sunk with the training ship Bremse at Bergen. Cruiser Karlsruhe captures Kristiansand only to be torpedoed and sunk by HMS Truant outside of Kristiansand.

POD 4: Due to earlier Norwegian mobilisation, the Egersund invasion force is sunk by Norwegian torpedo boat Skarv and the invasion force's survivors reach Kristiansand instead. Sola airbase, Egersund and Stavanger stay in Norwegian hands. On 18 April 1940, HMS Sterlet sinks German training ship Brummer off Kristiansand before Sterlet is sunk by depth charges. Kristiansand and Narvik will be the only Norwegian ports controlled by German hands on 20 April 1940. In addition, all German supply ships sunk in the otl Norwegian Campaign in April 1940 will be permanently sunk in this Norwegian Campaign, along with the merchant ships Rio de Janerio as in otl, Rauenfels (as in otl), Roda (as in otl), Main (as in otl), Sao Paulo (as in otl), Levante (scuttled off Trondheim to prevent capture) and Barenfels (sunk in Bergen) permanently sunk by April 1940. All German tankers sunk in the otl Norwegian Campaign would be permanently sunk in this timeline.

POD 5: Naval victories off the Norwegian coast result in more decisive action taken against the Germans at Narvik, resulting in their surrender before June 1940 along with the Allied recapture of Narvik. The same occurs with all other German controlled Norwegian ports, resulting in the German invasion of Norway failing completely by 21 May 1940.

Aftermath

See https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/warships1discussionboards/norway-fisaco-part-8-the-epilogue-t8073.html

July 1941: Despite the heavy paratroop losses of a German pyrrhic victory at Crete, a second failed invasion of Norway shortly after the start of Barbarossa (which fails as in otl) costs the Kriegsmarine the Graf Zeppelin, the Bismarck, 2 pre dreadnoughts, the Prinz Eugen, the Admiral Scheer (plus Lutzow in April 1940 as mentioned above and Graf Spee before the 1st pod), both Leipzig class cruisers and 10 destroyers. In exchange, the Royal Navy loses HMS Glorious, HMS Hood, 3 cruisers and 8 destroyers. The sea threat to Norway has been ended by the moment. The remaining purpose built Kriegsmarine ships of cruiser size and larger will stay in Germany until their complete destruction at the Battle of the North Sea while attempting to destroy Arctic Convoy JW 58 in April 1944 and over the Normandy landings. Another German cruiser named Lutzow will be sold to the Soviets and remain incomplete but afloat at Leningrad postwar.

WW2 goes roughly as otl or is sped up by a few weeks (German iron ore and heavy ship shortages, the increased German need to defend the German and Danish North Sea coasts and the German need to defend Axis Finland's borders with Norway and Sweden plus the amphibious and paratroop losses being balanced by fewer German troops in Norway excluding some of these troops being lost at sea; with the Axis Power composition same as otl but with Norway not invaded successfully by Germany).
 
Last edited:
@lukedalton

  • For Greece, Communist Victory in the Civil War. The Beria plan could go on just before 1949. I mean, Mitterand was pretty much an interventionist in the regard that he let people like Battisti walk free in the French Republic. But yeah, I will have to get rid somehow of both EEC (which since Deutschland ist kaput, it is basically done already) and for NATO, well how we avoid formation of NATO? FDR Greater Appeasement for Stalin maybe? I think SEATO or its equivalent becomes more important and TTL equivalent of NATO. (Already have a name : Pacific & Asian Treaty Organization)
  • USSR is headed by Kosygin, Khruschev heir. I think he WOULD be cautious.
  • So, for Malta I have to basically make the island align or be threatened by Gheddafi or well the threat of the SOVIET BASE could give a casus belli for Christian Democrat Italy (in my TTL I don't see the MSI winning before 1972, even with Liberals, Communists, Socialists and others out the picture)
  • For the territory, yeah a situation were people are not exterminated but can leave with their possessions is the most likely. Giorgio Almirante and the MSI in general were a lot of things, but I doubt TTL they would become genociders. This could also lead to them holding Dalmatia and Istria much better, with also the Expelled Dalmatians and Istrians coming back to their ancestral lands and some of them potentially becoming (or returning) land owners overnight.
  • For France... that's the tricky part. I envision a scenario like the IRL/OTL Golan heights, not recognized but you can barely do anything, if anything at all.
Do the Beria Plan and there will be even more incentive to try a NATO alliance and if FDR go with a greater appeasement for Stalin (very possible, in private he seem ok to Stalin dominate the continent just to root out the fascist element) it's an ulterior reason for the remaining western european nation to stick together (also add a brief italian civil war).
This will happen https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Union_(alliance) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Brussels and it's assured that Italy after the civil war will rush to sign it and Portugal and Spain will be also invited
Get rid of the EEC and you also get rid of the european miracle for at least another decade or even more (the Marshall Plan was only one part of the reason Western Europe rebound economically in less than 2 decades), honestly the more reasonable scenario is the USA initially trying to return to his pre-war 'isolationism' but seeing how the URSS is inglobing europe piece by piece once Truman is in charge go for fully support them but not in a formal military alliance or not putting troops there and concentrate his military alliance treaty in the asia and pacific area.


Mitterand was OK in letting people like Battisti roam free in France, but it's totally different from deciding to launch a war of aggression against a neighbour because the MSI has been elected in the goverment coalition (no way that they can win alone, they will be part of a DC led group and nobody, Almirante in primis, will be stupid enough to even thing to give them the leadership position, it will be politically unfeasible), not if the URSS is even more breathing on their neck and even more if the other side can have nuclear weapon...honestly it's damned western europe post WWII, there is no way short of some coup by aggressive moron that a nation will launch a war against another, better scrap this part.
France is a democracy and Mitterand, without any serious reason except 'fascist are part of the coalition goverment' will not have the political clout to launch a war, especially in such scenario...hell Mitterand can be butterflied away

The URSS will be occupied in eating popcorn and watching wester europe destroying herself letting them picking the leftover.

Honestly is more probable that France and Italy will collaborate for the nuclear project, money was tight and more nation partecipate to the program, more share the economical cost; frankly if NATO is not a thing, i see the British try a pan-european programm so to lower the cost of their own program and speed the process due to the soviet bear looking very scary
 
Do the Beria Plan and there will be even more incentive to try a NATO alliance and if FDR go with a greater appeasement for Stalin (very possible, in private he seem ok to Stalin dominate the continent just to root out the fascist element) it's an ulterior reason for the remaining western european nation to stick together (also add a brief italian civil war).
This will happen https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Union_(alliance) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Brussels and it's assured that Italy after the civil war will rush to sign it and Portugal and Spain will be also invited
Get rid of the EEC and you also get rid of the european miracle for at least another decade or even more (the Marshall Plan was only one part of the reason Western Europe rebound economically in less than 2 decades), honestly the more reasonable scenario is the USA initially trying to return to his pre-war 'isolationism' but seeing how the URSS is inglobing europe piece by piece once Truman is in charge go for fully support them but not in a formal military alliance or not putting troops there and concentrate his military alliance treaty in the asia and pacific area.


Mitterand was OK in letting people like Battisti roam free in France, but it's totally different from deciding to launch a war of aggression against a neighbour because the MSI has been elected in the goverment coalition (no way that they can win alone, they will be part of a DC led group and nobody, Almirante in primis, will be stupid enough to even thing to give them the leadership position, it will be politically unfeasible), not if the URSS is even more breathing on their neck and even more if the other side can have nuclear weapon...honestly it's damned western europe post WWII, there is no way short of some coup by aggressive moron that a nation will launch a war against another, better scrap this part.
France is a democracy and Mitterand, without any serious reason except 'fascist are part of the coalition goverment' will not have the political clout to launch a war, especially in such scenario...hell Mitterand can be butterflied away

The URSS will be occupied in eating popcorn and watching wester europe destroying herself letting them picking the leftover.

Honestly is more probable that France and Italy will collaborate for the nuclear project, money was tight and more nation partecipate to the program, more share the economical cost; frankly if NATO is not a thing, i see the British try a pan-european programm so to lower the cost of their own program and speed the process due to the soviet bear looking very scary
@lukedalton

I was thinking of an earlier Tangentopoli plus Andreotti actually being found guilty of Mafia related stuff early to avoid a coalition with the DC, with De Gasperi killed in a retaliatory attack together with others for Togliatti's death, also since the latter assassin is not caught, the MSI can go into coaltion with a potentially large Blocchi Nazionali.
So maybe the solution for getting territory from France is either :

  • France falls to Communism and they leave the Italian irrendentist to the new Republic. If France falls to Communism, I see a possible massively huge exodus to the North African colonies, but in order to any of that to happen De Gaulle must be out of the picture.
  • Civil War in France also in the late 1960s (could be probable?) I know tensions were high at least as much as Italy
 
Do the Beria Plan and there will be even more incentive to try a NATO alliance and if FDR go with a greater appeasement for Stalin (very possible, in private he seem ok to Stalin dominate the continent just to root out the fascist element) it's an ulterior reason for the remaining western european nation to stick together (also add a brief italian civil war).
This will happen https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Union_(alliance) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Brussels and it's assured that Italy after the civil war will rush to sign it and Portugal and Spain will be also invited
Get rid of the EEC and you also get rid of the european miracle for at least another decade or even more (the Marshall Plan was only one part of the reason Western Europe rebound economically in less than 2 decades), honestly the more reasonable scenario is the USA initially trying to return to his pre-war 'isolationism' but seeing how the URSS is inglobing europe piece by piece once Truman is in charge go for fully support them but not in a formal military alliance or not putting troops there and concentrate his military alliance treaty in the asia and pacific area.


Mitterand was OK in letting people like Battisti roam free in France, but it's totally different from deciding to launch a war of aggression against a neighbour because the MSI has been elected in the goverment coalition (no way that they can win alone, they will be part of a DC led group and nobody, Almirante in primis, will be stupid enough to even thing to give them the leadership position, it will be politically unfeasible), not if the URSS is even more breathing on their neck and even more if the other side can have nuclear weapon...honestly it's damned western europe post WWII, there is no way short of some coup by aggressive moron that a nation will launch a war against another, better scrap this part.
France is a democracy and Mitterand, without any serious reason except 'fascist are part of the coalition goverment' will not have the political clout to launch a war, especially in such scenario...hell Mitterand can be butterflied away

The URSS will be occupied in eating popcorn and watching wester europe destroying herself letting them picking the leftover.

Honestly is more probable that France and Italy will collaborate for the nuclear project, money was tight and more nation partecipate to the program, more share the economical cost; frankly if NATO is not a thing, i see the British try a pan-european programm so to lower the cost of their own program and speed the process due to the soviet bear looking very scary
Algeria_France_Locator.png
Very bad and effortless rendition of an exodus from the Mainland to French Algeria, sorta of a Taiwan-like/Kaiserreichy/The Footprint of Mussolini scenario.
 
@lukedalton

I was thinking of an earlier Tangentopoli plus Andreotti actually being found guilty of Mafia related stuff early to avoid a coalition with the DC, with De Gasperi killed in a retaliatory attack together with others for Togliatti's death, also since the latter assassin is not caught, the MSI can go into coaltion with a potentially large Blocchi Nazionali.
So maybe the solution for getting territory from France is either :

  • France falls to Communism and they leave the Italian irrendentist to the new Republic. If France falls to Communism, I see a possible massively huge exodus to the North African colonies, but in order to any of that to happen De Gaulle must be out of the picture.
  • Civil War in France also in the late 1960s (could be probable?) I know tensions were high at least as much as Italy
Not without a totally different electoral law, otherwise it's coalition time for everyone and you get Tangentopoli only if you get the toxic situation of the 80's otherwise while corrupt the situation will be on the manageable .
If France fall to communism in 1948, a similar scenario is possible...naturally Italy at this stage will be basically the only nation left in continental western europe not under communist regime with the exception of the Iberian nation, at least till the communist invade to get rid of the fascist regime and Sweden, Swizterland and Austria but they don't really count...with this scenario the fate of Italy is basically irrilevant and any non communist goverment basically kiss Moscow feet to be permitted to have an agreement like Finland or go the Israel route and arm itself to the teeth (nuclear weapon included) but with the URSS involved dow anyone will happen only if there is lead poisoning at national level.
The only way is that someone occupy that for create a buffer zone, but keeping it as mantain Italian independence will be necessary the presence of a lot of american military...otherwise Moscow can simply say to Rome to give that back to communist France, and Italy can only say: sure no problem

If there is a civil war in the late 60's...it will be brief and any Italian goverment will give back the territory to the legitimate French goverment, maybe a return to the pre-war border and some piece of Nice but surely not Corsica, all Nice and Savoy, why? Because this things are no more kosher, especially between supposed allies and fellow western type democracy.

Really, get rid of France dow Italy, is really the albatross in such TL unless you have a total different geopolitical scenario for not only Europe but the entire cold war
 
Top