More realistic Draka winning.

Ok this in't a very original idea of itself more realistic Draka timelines seem to be a dime a dosen round here but they have one thing in common they all seem to end in the Draka being defeated or at any rate failing to conquer the world. Since the whole point of the series seems to be a bad guy wank this seems a little odd to me. So what features might a realistic Draka timetable that still involves them winning (eventually) have and what alterations to Draka society might be necessary.

Two ideas to get you thinking.

1 The Draka have several periods of time that they seem to be (indeed prehaps are) liberalising granting rights to serfs etc only for events to halt this resulting in them being less obviously a threat. (can really only work for so long if you wast them to conquer.

2 The free world develops into a much worse place (think capatilism as portrayed by the most hysterical communist propoganda or stalanist states resulting in less reason for the draka to be resisted.
 
You should take this discussion to ASB section. There where we discuss about fictional series like the Draka, Peshawar Lancers etc

In my opinion, maybe the USA turns into a paranoid anti-Draka after American Civil War (Draka helped the Confederates, right) and that would justify US' annexation of WHOLE North America.

Another was instead Pearl Harbor, Japan started Pacific War by attacking Manila (or other naval bases in Philippines) since the region had become an US State and a strategic position in East Asia.

Lastly was US turned to a communist state after a more sever Great Depression (due to its larger territory)
 

Rubicon

Banned
Draka winning.... anything ... realistically is ASB. Why? Population.

I did some numbering on the Draka population, and giving realistic birthrates, maternal death rates, life expectancy, infant mortality and an extremely generous immigration.

In the year 1900 the total Draka population would be just over 2 million people.

In other words, they can't do shit.
 

Sumeragi

Banned
I don't know. The population of White South Africans in 1904 was supposedly 1,116,805. Once we suppose the generous immigration and also consider how fast Southern Rhodesia had been populated (1,500 in 1891, 75,000 in 1945, 150,000 in 1955), I can see the possibility of the population going up to 5 million by 1900, which would be EQUAL to the OTL population of all ethnic groups of south Africa in 1900. I somehow also expect the use of Indian labor in offsetting the black majority, so if we do force quite a bit of movement, I can see the possibility of Draka reaching up to Angola, southern Congo, and southern Tanzania.

However, taking over all of Africa? That ain't happening unless we have separate waves of pieds noirs getting to the north coast and also adopting the thinking of the Draka, which can't be done without Metropolitan Europe closes its eyes to atrocities.
 

Rubicon

Banned
I don't know. The population of White South Africans in 1904 was supposedly 1,116,805. Once we suppose the generous immigration and also consider how fast Southern Rhodesia had been populated (1,500 in 1891, 75,000 in 1945, 150,000 in 1955), I can see the possibility of the population going up to 5 million by 1900, which would be EQUAL to the OTL population of all ethnic groups of south Africa in 1900. I somehow also expect the use of Indian labor in offsetting the black majority

I said Draka population. And I gave the Draka an extremely generous immigration rate, for the Draka population to be higher, you need to mass produce and mass distribute penicillin 50-60 years earlier then in real life to reduce the 'infant' mortality rate, you would also need to discover the bacterial effect on maternal death rates about 20-30 years earlier to achieve 5 million Draka by 1900.
 
Draka winning.... anything ... realistically is ASB. Why? Population.

I did some numbering on the Draka population, and giving realistic birthrates, maternal death rates, life expectancy, infant mortality and an extremely generous immigration.

In the year 1900 the total Draka population would be just over 2 million people.

In other words, they can't do shit.

That's one way they're ASB, The Draka expansion across Africa also ignores geography, logistics, and disease. Equatorial Africa was known as "The White Man's Graveyard", the the Draka take and hold it without anyone getting so much as a case of the sniffles.
 
You should take this discussion to ASB section. There where we discuss about fictional series like the Draka, Peshawar Lancers etc

Not true. This absolutely belongs in "Alternate History Books and Media". Any discussion or expansion of concepts in published fiction belongs there. Actually this thread belongs there more than half the stuff that's there now, but that's just me bitching.
 
If we want to go this route, perhaps have the USA turn into a Draka-In-North-America and use the OTL-style rise of the USA via both World Wars to make that possible. Super-South-Africa taking over the world is very much not-possible, not as Stirling has it, there's no way to un-ASB that ASB premise. It's not that an evil dictatorship cannot overtake the entire world, it's just South Africa is not where it could realistically start from.
 
A mod will take care of it. Look up Ians Realistic Draka thread. Its very good, if you can get used to the Bright Green on Black.
 
If we want to go this route, perhaps have the USA turn into a Draka-In-North-America and use the OTL-style rise of the USA via both World Wars to make that possible. Super-South-Africa taking over the world is very much not-possible, not as Stirling has it, there's no way to un-ASB that ASB premise. It's not that an evil dictatorship cannot overtake the entire world, it's just South Africa is not where it could realistically start from.


Funny...I hear a distant voice whispering "Decades of Darkness." What do you think it could mean? :D

Bruce
 
Top