New Deal Coalition Retained Pt II: World on Fire

Reader mode
Lazer_Pages

Lazer_Pages

Is reviving every WW2 era dispute a good idea?

I mean seriously the world just went through a world war, the last thing it needs is revanchism over territorial claims that haven't matterd for 50 years.
 
Redcoat

Redcoat

Banned
Lazer_Pages said:
Is reviving every WW2 era dispute a good idea?

I mean seriously the world just went through a world war, the last thing it needs is revanchism over territorial claims that haven't matterd for 50 years.
Click to expand...
Well it wouldn't be too hard to reward Poland with a couple of border adjustments like Zaolzie or something.
 
IntellectuallyHonestRhino

IntellectuallyHonestRhino

Lazer_Pages said:
Is reviving every WW2 era dispute a good idea?

I mean seriously the world just went through a world war, the last thing it needs is revanchism over territorial claims that haven't matterd for 50 years.
Click to expand...

I think for many the issue hasn't exactly been solved properly. I think that is part of the whole Eastern European right wing nationalism narrative. The hatred and tension is still there for many, tough I think with many that is not the case. Its complicated.

For example, I think many Hungarians have not gotten over Trianon and I especially don't think the Croats Bosniaks and Serbs have gotten over what happened in the 1990's.
 
Thomas Dewey

Thomas Dewey

There isn't really much of a reason why the United States would create even more problems in Eastern Europe by giving Hungary even its 1942 borders with Romania. The primary aim of the western powers at this point is to weaken Russia and Communism, not to play around with borders for their own enjoyment and certainly not to alienate countries such as Romania by forcing them to cede majority-Romanian lands. The US would gain absolutely nothing from such revisions and only create resentment, which should be fairly obvious to all involved ITTL.

The only parties that will really be gaining lands will be those that were major members of the allies (i.e. Germany and Italy) and those that will be taking land at the expense of the USSR itself (i.e. Poland, perhaps Romania and Finland). It is perhaps realistic that there might be some smaller border revisions when there is a foreign majority (e.g. Hungarians in southern Slovakia), but anything larger than that will harm the future security of the peace.
 
GDIS Pathe

GDIS Pathe

Catalunya said:
I could see a independent landlocked Transylvania, just to punish the Soviets main ally in Europe a little extra.
Click to expand...

Creating states who will only serve to be a major area of contention between two nation-states and whose national identity doesn't exist seems dumb and counter-intuitive and a waste of time why are the Wallies creating issues when there shouldn't be any? Give the Hungarians in the region autonomy and special language rights and leave it at that
 
IntellectuallyHonestRhino

IntellectuallyHonestRhino

Helmuth von Moltke said:
but anything larger than that will harm the future security of the peace.
Click to expand...

I suggested this more as another one of those Greater national boundaries that can be formed. Look, I don’t want to sound rude, and I could be a complete idiot for saying this, but NDCR 2 is not about what is the safest but about grandeur. Rumsfeld is also not the greatest leader by any stretch, and if the French went crazy in Versailles and the other treaties in their draconian measures than why would a President Rumsfeld not so the same? Russia is utterly destroyed, no way China is growing to its OTL strength in the 21st century, and thus in this unipolar world America can do the heck it wants. I see this as a careless decision long term by the Rumsfeld administration for short term gain but that is done all the time. We aren’t playing as UN diplomats but are witnessing an awesome TL where crazy stuff happens. I want to see what will happen in a harsh peace? What will occur? No real person is getting hurt so I treat this as excitement. In some ways its opera. It’s awesome. So while I appreciate some of the criticisms I feel that it fails to understand the theme of this TL. @The Congressman’s work inspired me (his part one at the time) to become a TL writer and join this site as a member. And so I have witnessed this TL for a while. The theme is not gritty nitpicks. For heaven sakes urban African American communities supporting the more laissez faire Party! It’s not super accurate! But it’s jnteresting to see the politics form. To see Reagan win the South with African American supporters is interesting. Nixon as a martyr for civil rights is interesting to see. The wars development is interesting to see. I feel that many who object to my idea fail to understand the core and genius of this TL. It’s not a realistic examination of the Cold War era and how to slightly tweak it and get very different and highly impactful results but it is theater. We see Sadam fighting with America, a communist Iran, an even more troubled South Asia. So many grand things occur that it is so fun to suggest an idea and see how @The Congressman will integrate it. This TL is about creativity and fun! It sacrifices formality after a certain extent to allow the creative juices to flow. This is NDCR, and it is a unique TL!!
 
Thomas Dewey

Thomas Dewey

IntellectuallyHonestRhino said:
I see this as a careless decision long term by the Rumsfeld administration for short term gain but that is done all the time. We aren’t playing as UN diplomats but are witnessing an awesome TL where crazy stuff happens.
Click to expand...
The issue is that there isn't really any short-term gain to giving Hungary Romanian land like there was to many of the decisions at Versailles. It wasn't a member of the allies and unless there is a powerful Hungarian lobby hiding somewhere in Washington, there isn't a compelling political reason either. I agree that this TL is great mainly because of the amazing possibilities it offers for an altered world. However, I see this more in the form of the restoration of the Hohenzollern's and the other examples that you mentioned than weird decisions in the peace deal. For this TL to continue to be entertaining it has to be plausible, and I feel as though there are many other opportunities to get into interesting situations without throwing reason to the wind.

IntellectuallyHonestRhino said:
I want to see what will happen in a harsh peace? What will occur?
Click to expand...
The Congressman has already provided us with numerous possible flashpoints originating in this upcoming peace, most notably the Milosevic-lead Greater Serbia and the movement of Polish and German borders so that they absorb numerous other nationalities. Its more fun if the conflicts resulting were the result of rational decisions that we can understand and plausibly predict.
 
IntellectuallyHonestRhino

IntellectuallyHonestRhino

Helmuth von Moltke said:
For this TL to continue to be entertaining it has to be plausible, and I feel as though there are many other opportunities to get into interesting situations without throwing reason to the wind.
Click to expand...

Again, some of the domestic events from NDCR are not accurate in the slightest, yet this TL is amazing to read. So I feel that since that ship has already sailed, you can’t completely make the arguement. I don’t see it as more out there than African American voting in this TL or even how the duality of party systems work and why the progressive party is not realistic, etc. But since you’ve already read to this point I’m assuming you’ve found it very entertaining thus far as I have too. So I fail to see the logic there.


Have you read Part 1?
 

lukedalton

Helmuth von Moltke said:
There isn't really much of a reason why the United States would create even more problems in Eastern Europe by giving Hungary even its 1942 borders with Romania. The primary aim of the western powers at this point is to weaken Russia and Communism, not to play around with borders for their own enjoyment and certainly not to alienate countries such as Romania by forcing them to cede majority-Romanian lands. The US would gain absolutely nothing from such revisions and only create resentment, which should be fairly obvious to all involved ITTL.

The only parties that will really be gaining lands will be those that were major members of the allies (i.e. Germany and Italy) and those that will be taking land at the expense of the USSR itself (i.e. Poland, perhaps Romania and Finland). It is perhaps realistic that there might be some smaller border revisions when there is a foreign majority (e.g. Hungarians in southern Slovakia), but anything larger than that will harm the future security of the peace.
Click to expand...

While the logic behind this it's true, this war had not only devastated the continent but also caused millions of death; logic and understanding had take a temporary leave for a vacation and their substitute are rage and vengeance. Hell, even the USA had tasted the awful taste of war on their territory and so i doubt that they will be on forgiving mode for any treaty.
Take Italy, by the time of the start of the war, the mere idea to take back our prewar territory was considered idiot, there were now so few italian there and open and rabid nationalism considered a thing of the past; by now? Pre-war border will not be enough, half of the country devastated and i doubt that the Soviet and co. has been very lenient in their occupation; basically the italian goverment will want Fiume, Albania (as a protectorate, puppet goverment, or at least direct control/annexation of Valona), more island on the Adriatic and pratical assurance that neither Croatia or Serbia can be a danger for the future. In any case, any goverment in Rome will apply the 'De Gaulle' treatment if forced to retreat to the assigned border (basically they bring with them everything that's not nailed on the surface...frankly it's very possible that they will do in any case due the devastation caused by the Jugoslavian army)
 

Archangel

Lazer_Pages said:
Is reviving every WW2 era dispute a good idea?

I mean seriously the world just went through a world war, the last thing it needs is revanchism over territorial claims that haven't matterd for 50 years.
Click to expand...

Helmuth von Moltke said:
There isn't really much of a reason why the United States would create even more problems in Eastern Europe by giving Hungary even its 1942 borders with Romania. The primary aim of the western powers at this point is to weaken Russia and Communism, not to play around with borders for their own enjoyment and certainly not to alienate countries such as Romania by forcing them to cede majority-Romanian lands. The US would gain absolutely nothing from such revisions and only create resentment, which should be fairly obvious to all involved ITTL.

The only parties that will really be gaining lands will be those that were major members of the allies (i.e. Germany and Italy) and those that will be taking land at the expense of the USSR itself (i.e. Poland, perhaps Romania and Finland). It is perhaps realistic that there might be some smaller border revisions when there is a foreign majority (e.g. Hungarians in southern Slovakia), but anything larger than that will harm the future security of the peace.
Click to expand...
I agree, changing borders will restart problems that were solved, and will run contrary to all the lessons learned the hard way in ww2. And it won't hurt communism, nor the USSR, quite possibly even aid it, since it portrays the western allies as causing unnecessary problem on countries that had already suffered a lot under communism.
 

Prince Daemon Targaryen

lukedalton said:
While the logic behind this it's true, this war had not only devastated the continent but also caused millions of death; logic and understanding had take a temporary leave for a vacation and their substitute are rage and vengeance. Hell, even the USA had tasted the awful taste of war on their territory and so i doubt that they will be on forgiving mode for any treaty.
Take Italy, by the time of the start of the war, the mere idea to take back our prewar territory was considered idiot, there were now so few italian there and open and rabid nationalism considered a thing of the past; by now? Pre-war border will not be enough, half of the country devastated and i doubt that the Soviet and co. has been very lenient in their occupation; basically the italian goverment will want Fiume, Albania (as a protectorate, puppet goverment, or at least direct control/annexation of Valona), more island on the Adriatic and pratical assurance that neither Croatia or Serbia can be a danger for the future. In any case, any goverment in Rome will apply the 'De Gaulle' treatment if forced to retreat to the assigned border (basically they bring with them everything that's not nailed on the surface...frankly it's very possible that they will do in any case due the devastation caused by the Jugoslavian army)
Click to expand...
The Italians are very close with the German and Polish Freyists that rule their countries. The hope is to have the Freyist resistance put in charge of much of eastern Europe, having a friendly power bloc while also not having any one country be able to challenge them in that bloc
 

SuperFrog

@The Congressman

I was wondering if we could see a list of senators at this time. This is what I was able to work out on my own.
Alaska
D - Steve Cowper
D
Hawaii
P - Patsy Mink
R - William F. Quinn
Washington
D - Booth Gardner
R
Oregon
D - Ron Wyden
R
California
R - Ed Meese
R - Pete McCloskey
Nevada
D
D
Idaho
R - Unknown, replaced Frank Church
R
Utah
D - Wayne Owens
R
Arizona
D - Cesar Chavez
D
Montana
D
D
Wyoming
D
D
Colorado
P - Dick Lamm
R
New Mexico
D
R - Harrison Schmidt
North Dakota
P
P
South Dakota
D
R - Unknown, defeated McGovern
Nebraska
D - Bob Kerrey
D
Kansas
R
R
Oklahoma
D
R - Dewey F. Bartlett
Texas
D - Kent Hance?
R - Antonin Scalia
Minnesota
R
R
Iowa
P
R
Missouri
D - Mel Carnahan
R
Arkansas
D - David Pryor
D
Louisiana
D
R - David Treen
Wisconsin
P - Dave Obey
R - William Dyke?
Michigan
D - Dave Bonior
R - Fred Upton
Illinois
D
R
Indiana
D
D
Ohio
D - Jerry Springer
D - John Glenn
West Virginia
D
D
Kentucky
D
D
Tennessee
D - Al Gore
R - Lamar Alexander
Mississippi
R - That Cochrane
R - Medgar Evers
Alabama
D
R - Jeremiah Denton
Maine
R
R
New Hampshire
D
R - Alan Shepard
Vermont
R
R
Massachusetts
D - John Kerry
R - Mitt Romney
Rhode Island
D
R - Lincoln Chafee
Connecticut
P - Lowell Weicker
R
New York
D - Hugh Carey
C - James Buckley
New Jersey
P - Ruth Bader Ginsburg
P
Pennsylvania
R - Barbara Hafer
R
Delaware
R
I - Joe Biden
Maryland
R
R
Virginia
D - Pat Robertson
R - John Warner
North Carolina
D
D
South Carolina
D - Strom Thurmond
R - Carol Campbell Jr.
Georgia
D
R - John Lewis
Florida
D - Bob Martinez
D - Claude Pepper? He's probably dead
 
Reader mode
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top