I'm working on my first real timeline, and I've reached the outlining stage, but I wanted to get the board's opinion before I commit to this set of events.
My PoD is in the early 40s, when the Nazis decide against building the V-2, and instead put the money into their atomic weapons program. They don't get anywhere close to an atomic bomb, but the intelligence reports on the Nazi bomb project make Molotov take the Soviet bomb program more seriously. He isn't able to get much more in the way of resources for the project in the middle of World War II, but when the US detonates its own weapon Stalin's estimation of Molotov rises precipitously. As a result, when butterflies kill Stalin with a heart attack in 1949, Molotov is his nominal successor, although in practice he's merely the head of a triumvirate. Although I'm not sure who the other members are. He also credits his survival and ascension to the atom bomb, with effects that will be felt later.
With the Soviet leaders preoccupied with succession politics, the Korean War is delayed until June 1952. During those two years of delay, the Democrats win the 1950 elections and Truman gets somewhat more of the Fair Deal passed, including repealing Taft-Hartley. However, a scandal in his administration keeps Truman from running again. Johnson's cuts in the defense budget continue, and the draft is not renewed in 1950 - although Truman is, in theory, committed to Universal Military Training, he is unwilling to spend the money.
When the Korean war begins, US forces are unable to hold back the North Koreans, and the Pusan perimeter is in danger of being overrun before sufficient reinforcements can arrive - they have the men, but they're in the wrong place, and they don't have the sealift or supplies to get them there in time. As a result, in July Truman decides to detonate an atomic bomb off the coast of North Korea as a warning shot, threatening atomic strikes on North Korea if they don't pull back.
Back in Moscow, Molotov was against this adventure in the first place, but had been overruled by his triumvirate partners. With the Korean adventure threatening to lead to disaster, he is able to purge the rest of the triumvirate and force the North Koreans to pull back to their side of the border.
The war comes in the middle of the 1952 presidential election, which is between Taft-Warren for the Republicans and Stevenson for the Democrats. (When the nominations were being made, the Korean War hadn't started yet, giving Eisenhower's concerns over Taft's isolationism less urgency). Taft is able to portray the Korean War as Truman's fault, a mixture of over-commitment to countries that aren't relevant to our interests and unwillingness to fund the military. Taft wins the election, and then dies in early 1953 as IOTL, leaving Earl Warren as president.
Specific Areas of Concern:
Would the end of the draft and two more years of Johnson really be enough to weaken the US military to the point that an atomic demonstration would be necessary?
Would Taft be able to frame the crisis as I've described, or would the Democrats still be riding the "rally-round-the-flag" effect by election day?
Would Taft be willing to accept Earl Warren as his vice-president?
A variant I've considered delays the Korean War for only one year, which gives Johnson less time for defense cuts and Truman less time for the Fair Deal, but has the advantage of giving enough time before the 1952 election to have the decision to use atomic weapons occur after Chinese intervention rather than when the US is only facing the North Koreans, as well as giving more time for the "rally-round-the-flag" effect to fade.
A second variant delays the Korean War for an extra year, having it start in 1953. But having the US elect Taft even after the Korean Crisis has ramifications for NATO that would be very interesting, narratively speaking.
A third variant has Taft discovering his cancer earlier, so that he's unable to run in 1952. But that also lacks the interesting conflicts within NATO, and would seem to be getting a little excessive for butterflies, who've already killed Stalin three years early and kept Truman from running.
I know that, no matter how this ends up, I have a lot of research to do on this before I post anything "for real." But I don't want to read a dozen books about Earl Warren only to decide I can't get him into the presidency the way I want to, so I wanted to get the views of those more knowledgeable than myself before I start checking things out of the library.
My PoD is in the early 40s, when the Nazis decide against building the V-2, and instead put the money into their atomic weapons program. They don't get anywhere close to an atomic bomb, but the intelligence reports on the Nazi bomb project make Molotov take the Soviet bomb program more seriously. He isn't able to get much more in the way of resources for the project in the middle of World War II, but when the US detonates its own weapon Stalin's estimation of Molotov rises precipitously. As a result, when butterflies kill Stalin with a heart attack in 1949, Molotov is his nominal successor, although in practice he's merely the head of a triumvirate. Although I'm not sure who the other members are. He also credits his survival and ascension to the atom bomb, with effects that will be felt later.
With the Soviet leaders preoccupied with succession politics, the Korean War is delayed until June 1952. During those two years of delay, the Democrats win the 1950 elections and Truman gets somewhat more of the Fair Deal passed, including repealing Taft-Hartley. However, a scandal in his administration keeps Truman from running again. Johnson's cuts in the defense budget continue, and the draft is not renewed in 1950 - although Truman is, in theory, committed to Universal Military Training, he is unwilling to spend the money.
When the Korean war begins, US forces are unable to hold back the North Koreans, and the Pusan perimeter is in danger of being overrun before sufficient reinforcements can arrive - they have the men, but they're in the wrong place, and they don't have the sealift or supplies to get them there in time. As a result, in July Truman decides to detonate an atomic bomb off the coast of North Korea as a warning shot, threatening atomic strikes on North Korea if they don't pull back.
Back in Moscow, Molotov was against this adventure in the first place, but had been overruled by his triumvirate partners. With the Korean adventure threatening to lead to disaster, he is able to purge the rest of the triumvirate and force the North Koreans to pull back to their side of the border.
The war comes in the middle of the 1952 presidential election, which is between Taft-Warren for the Republicans and Stevenson for the Democrats. (When the nominations were being made, the Korean War hadn't started yet, giving Eisenhower's concerns over Taft's isolationism less urgency). Taft is able to portray the Korean War as Truman's fault, a mixture of over-commitment to countries that aren't relevant to our interests and unwillingness to fund the military. Taft wins the election, and then dies in early 1953 as IOTL, leaving Earl Warren as president.
Specific Areas of Concern:
Would the end of the draft and two more years of Johnson really be enough to weaken the US military to the point that an atomic demonstration would be necessary?
Would Taft be able to frame the crisis as I've described, or would the Democrats still be riding the "rally-round-the-flag" effect by election day?
Would Taft be willing to accept Earl Warren as his vice-president?
A variant I've considered delays the Korean War for only one year, which gives Johnson less time for defense cuts and Truman less time for the Fair Deal, but has the advantage of giving enough time before the 1952 election to have the decision to use atomic weapons occur after Chinese intervention rather than when the US is only facing the North Koreans, as well as giving more time for the "rally-round-the-flag" effect to fade.
A second variant delays the Korean War for an extra year, having it start in 1953. But having the US elect Taft even after the Korean Crisis has ramifications for NATO that would be very interesting, narratively speaking.
A third variant has Taft discovering his cancer earlier, so that he's unable to run in 1952. But that also lacks the interesting conflicts within NATO, and would seem to be getting a little excessive for butterflies, who've already killed Stalin three years early and kept Truman from running.
I know that, no matter how this ends up, I have a lot of research to do on this before I post anything "for real." But I don't want to read a dozen books about Earl Warren only to decide I can't get him into the presidency the way I want to, so I wanted to get the views of those more knowledgeable than myself before I start checking things out of the library.