You're mostly right! My map is just of the original proposal, which is more associated with the name Frankland; later, longer-lasting proposals were called Franklin and significantly smaller.
Proposals and War Aims That Didn't Happen Map Thread
- Thread starter Beedok
- Start date
I N T E R M A R I U MAnother day, another dystopian manifesto:
In the year 2009, American strategist George Friedman published the book The Next 100 Years, which is supposedly a set of predictions about the geopolitics of the 21st century. A while again I read the book at it quickly became clear to me that, while the stuff he says could be seen as mere forecasting, it also kind of sounds like a series of suggestions and plans, with the ultimate goal of crushing Russia, China and other Eastern Bloc nations, and then permanently asserting global dominance by defeating the allies-turned-enemies of Turkey and Japan. For reference, here's a couple interpretations of what his world looks like in 2050, right before the "third world war" which he says would only take half a million lives:
In a way, this kind of seems like the exact reverse of Dugin's Foundations of Geopolitics, displaying a similar end goal except for the opposite side.
No joke my first thought when I saw this photo (and before I read the text) was that this was a plan to create a new state after rising sea levels swamped the east coast.
Very interesting. I have this book but never read it. I guess I should.
Does this count as a “proposal that didn’t happen”? It simply hasn’t happened yet and we don’t yet know if it will, even if he doesn’t win today’s election. I’m not rejecting it on a “current event” basis (with which I don’t agree, anyway), but rather on a “it’s not a ‘didn’t’ yet” basis.
These next two sets of maps are technically the exact opposite of suggestions, they're suggestions of exactly what ideally shouldn't happen. Yup, that's right, more well-researched nuclear war maps, except these ones are up-to-date.
The first of these is a pair of maps from the book The 2020 Commission Report on the North Korean Nuclear Attacks Against the United States, which is basically what it says on the tin. What matters here is that the book uses a combination of official North Korean statements, maps shown in propaganda videos, and best-guess logic to conclude what Pyongyang would try to hit in the event of a nuclear war. Now, the first map can't be found anywhere online so I had to take a photo myself using my Mac so it's blurry, sorry about that.
The estimated death toll from this scenario is 2.8 million, plus whatever the population of North Korea in 2020 is.
This second map comes from a very recent simulation done by Princeton University, using known data about the nuclear arsenals and targets of NATO and Russia to simulate a war between the two. You can read more about the project here: https://sgs.princeton.edu/the-lab/plan-a
And here's what Europe looks like at the end of the "tactical" phase of the scenario, and what the world looks like at the end of the "strategic" phase of the scenario.
The estimated death toll from this scenario is 34.1 million from the initial nuclear exchange.
Anyone can feel free to make Worlda or QBAM adaptations of any of these, although it would be appreciated I doubt anyone will.
The first of these is a pair of maps from the book The 2020 Commission Report on the North Korean Nuclear Attacks Against the United States, which is basically what it says on the tin. What matters here is that the book uses a combination of official North Korean statements, maps shown in propaganda videos, and best-guess logic to conclude what Pyongyang would try to hit in the event of a nuclear war. Now, the first map can't be found anywhere online so I had to take a photo myself using my Mac so it's blurry, sorry about that.
The estimated death toll from this scenario is 2.8 million, plus whatever the population of North Korea in 2020 is.
This second map comes from a very recent simulation done by Princeton University, using known data about the nuclear arsenals and targets of NATO and Russia to simulate a war between the two. You can read more about the project here: https://sgs.princeton.edu/the-lab/plan-a
And here's what Europe looks like at the end of the "tactical" phase of the scenario, and what the world looks like at the end of the "strategic" phase of the scenario.
The estimated death toll from this scenario is 34.1 million from the initial nuclear exchange.
Anyone can feel free to make Worlda or QBAM adaptations of any of these, although it would be appreciated I doubt anyone will.
Last edited:
Holy shit, they didn't even nuke Paris ?!This second map comes from a very recent simulation done by Princeton University, using known data about the nuclear arsenals and targets of NATO and Russia to simulate a war between the two. You can read more about the project here: https://sgs.princeton.edu/the-lab/plan-a
And here's what Europe looks like at the end of the "tactical" phase of the scenario, and what the world looks like at the end of the "strategic" phase of the scenario.
The estimated death toll from this scenario is 34.1 million from the initial nuclear exchange.
Anyone can feel free to make Worlda or QBAM adaptations of any of these, although it would be appreciated I doubt anyone will.
Or Brest ? Looks like the main tactical targets in France are in North and Eastern France, and Toulon.
Well, never let it be said that the North Korean military isn't ambitious. 
More likely is the sky over Pyongyang having a traffic jam where different countries' nukes are fighting over who gets to blow it up.
More likely is the sky over Pyongyang having a traffic jam where different countries' nukes are fighting over who gets to blow it up.
Technically it wouldn't be the West Bank anymore, though, as it's not bounded in the east by the Jordan.
There are quite a few surprises in there. Alaska, Hawaii, Iceland, most of Iberia, most of France, most of the UK...
Edit: Upon closer examination, all of Russia's nukes in the "strategic" part of the scenario were aimed at North America, so no cities in Europe were targeted.
Personally if I were in charge I'd include the entire CSTO on one side instead of just Russia, but maybe they assumed it would all be over before the CSTO could do anything.
Last edited:
Crazy Boris
Banned
It would probably still just be called “West Bank” out of convention.
I can’t really think of anything else to call it, East Palestine maybe? (With Gaza being West)
China:This second map comes from a very recent simulation done by Princeton University, using known data about the nuclear arsenals and targets of NATO and Russia to simulate a war between the two. You can read more about the project here: https://sgs.princeton.edu/the-lab/plan-a
And here's what Europe looks like at the end of the "tactical" phase of the scenario, and what the world looks like at the end of the "strategic" phase of the scenario.
The estimated death toll from this scenario is 34.1 million from the initial nuclear exchange.
Anyone can feel free to make Worlda or QBAM adaptations of any of these, although it would be appreciated I doubt anyone will.
China:
Don't mind me, just...doing some military exercise suspiciously-not-suspiciously close to the North Korean border.
So, that was a lie. Here's the actual last map before then (at least the last map I'm making for this thread before then):
So, you may have a lot of questions already. So do I.
Let's start with the smaller two of the three countries shown. Modern Malaysian irredentism appears to consist solely of the Indonesian half of Borneo, which has a small movement to break of the latter and join the former. Then there's the Idea of a unified "Greater Indonesia" containing Indonesia, Malaysia (not shown), Singapore, Brunei and East Timor.
Now, as for all the blueness that's been splattered over the map, this is a compilation of American expansionist ideas limited to those from within this decade. So, no concepts that haven't been mentioned before 2010. I'm also not including Haiti because that was just a comment, nor am I including the UK or Ukraine because Europe's had a bad time in enough of my maps already. As for the others, well in addition to some of the modern ideas on Wikipedia's 51st state page I've also added the following:
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/pe...iberate-hong-kong-communist-chinas-occupation
https://www.reviewjournal.com/opinion/letters/lets-make-mexico-the-51st-state/
https://www.guyanausa.org/
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-rel...ea-of-cuba-becoming-51st-state-300375531.html
https://www.newsweek.com/china-taiwan-two-systems-hong-kong-usa-democracy-1315516
https://www.rappler.com/newsbreak/iq/56124-timeline-ph-us-state-annexation
http://springtimeofnations.blogspot.com/2012/01/will-siberia-become-51st-stateor-maybe.html
So now the question becomes, which idea is crazier? Turning Hong Kong into an American colony, inhaling all of Mexico as a single state, or conquering two thirds of Russia?
What would all of Mexico as a single state do to the House?
There's also this gem, a nuclear target plan from a 2001 report from the National Resources Defence Council. You know it's an American plan when a "precision" attack would kill 8-12 million.
While we're on the topic, here's some more war plans that were detailed in that report, which unlike the above had the goal of killing as many people in the target nation(s) as possible. Note that the last one shows a hypothetical Russian strike on NATO, at least what NATO was back in 2001.
As usual, Worlda/QBAM adaptations would be useful.
Why do I think of pimples when looking at the last two?While we're on the topic, here's some more war plans that were detailed in that report, which unlike the above had the goal of killing as many people in the target nation(s) as possible. Note that the last one shows a hypothetical Russian strike on NATO, at least what NATO was back in 2001.
As usual, Worlda/QBAM adaptations would be useful.