Proposals and War Aims That Didn't Happen Map Thread

Discussion in 'Alternate History Maps and Graphics' started by Beedok, Jun 15, 2014.

  1. Luminous Headwing Consulting

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2014
    Location:
    The Piedmont of the Appalachians
    No one's spick as Gascogne
    No one's quick as Gascogne
    No one's border's as incredibly thick as Gascogne
    For there's no nation quite half as manly
    Perfect, a pure paragon
    You can ask any Gaul, Scot, or Saami
    And they'll tell you whose alliance they prefer to be on

    Gascogne:
    When I was a county, I ate four dozen towns
    Ev'ry morning to help me get large
    And now that I'm grown, I eat five dozen towns
    So I'm roughly the size of the Raaaaaj
     
  2. Etruscan-enthusiast35 Human until proven guilty

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2018
    Location:
    Hobbiton, The Shire, Eriador, Middle-Earth
    I never knew I needed that in my life, but now I'm glad that I do.
     
  3. Crying Your ideology is shit, SHIIIIIIIIT

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2017
    Location:
    A Boring Dystopia
    You could theoretically have a group who wants to monopolise force, but never use it, so that someone else can't monopolise force and use it (against them)
     
  4. Drex Alférez de caballería

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2017
    Location:
    Regum Valentiae, Monarchia Hispaniae
    Probably I messed up with the first given I got stuck between inspiring myself from Valencian or Castilian.

    Anyhow, after seeing that map of Occiberia I searched through the net and saw different irredentist or separatist claims within Spain, so I compiled them in a map. Of course, some of them are more troll than real.

    [​IMG]
    Andalusia:
    Layer 1: Modern Andalusia
    Layer 2: Ceuta, Melilla and Gibraltar
    Layer 3: Murcia
    Layer 4: Algarve and the Alentejo (well, most of it) a.k.a. Portuguese Andalusia
    Layer 5: Other adjacent territories in Spain and Morocco

    Navarre/Basque Country:
    Layer 1: Modern Navarre
    Layer 2: Upper Navarre (France, divided in 1512)
    Layer 3: Basque territories
    Layer 4: Castilian territories with former Basque presence
    Layer 5: Ancient Basque-Aquitanian territories

    Galicia:
    Layer 1: Modern Galicia
    Layer 2: Galician-speaking territories in Asturias and León
    Layer 3: "Southern Galicia". Territories down to the Douro
    Layer 4: Portugal (including Olivença)

    Asturias/Leon:
    Layer 1: Modern Asturias
    Layer 2: León
    Layer 3: Leonese-speaking territories in Portugal
    Layer 4: Adjacent territories claimed
    Layer 5: Former territories of the Kingdom of Leon (and to get an access to the sea in the south)

    Castile:
    Layer 1: Old Castile
    Layer 2: New Castile and La Rioja
    Layer 3: León, Cantabria and Utiel-Requena
    Layer 4: "Greater Castile", including Castilian-speaking Basque Country, Extremadura and Murcia
    Layer 5: Asturias, Andalusia, Alentejo, Algarve, former Castilian Valencia, Ceuta, Melilla and Gibraltar
    Layer 6: The rest of the Iberian Peninsula, including Basque and Catalan territories outside of it. Oh, and also the Rif.

    Catalonia:
    Layer 1: Modern Catalonia
    Layer 2: Catalan-speaking territories adjacent to Catalonia
    Layer 3: Fenolleda (Occitan-speaking Northern Catalonia)
    Layer 4: Catalan (or so)-speaking territories: Valencia, Balearics and Alger
    Layer 5: The rest of Valencia
    Layer 6: The former crown of Aragon, including Septimania

    Aragon:
    Layer 1: Modern Aragon
    Layer 2: Lands claimed by Aragonese regionalists (Aragonese Navarre and Aragonese-descended Valencia)
    Layer 3: Former crown of Aragon
    Layer 4: Navarre and other adjacent territories

    Valencia:
    Layer 1: Modern Valencia
    Layer 2: El Carxe (Valencian-speaking Murcia)
    Layer 3: Catalan (or Valencian)-speaking territories south of the Ebro
    Layer 4: The rest of Catalonia and the Balears
    Layer 5: Aragon, Murcia and the Turia-Júcar watershed

    Murcia:
    Layer 1: Modern Murcia
    Layer 2: Lands of the former Kingdom of Murcia
    Layer 3: Albacete (was part of Murcia until the 80's)
    Layer 4: Other parts of Valencia that were Murcian
    Layer 5: Almeria and Alicante
     
    AUGGP, Prof_Chemical, Swede and 16 others like this.
  5. LSCatilina Vassican Labosiotos Vergagnatos

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2008
    Location:
    Polanian Occupation Zone in Transylvania
    Spéciale décidace to @Alex Richards

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    Projects of reunion to Switzerland of Chablais and Faucigny (possibly Carouge) parts of Savoy, in one or two new cantons. These regions were supposed to be militarily occupied by Switzerland in case of territorial threat by the Treaties of 1815, making the "neutralized zone of Savoy".
    In 1860, some prospects were made into annexing this region as France was taking over Savoy, but local population was at best uninterested, at worst hostile.

    Proposed cantons were either on Chablais and Faucigny either forming two cantons (first map) of forming one sole canton and Carouge being tied to Geneva (second map)
     
    Last edited: Sep 21, 2018
  6. LSCatilina Vassican Labosiotos Vergagnatos

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2008
    Location:
    Polanian Occupation Zone in Transylvania
    Map of Syria, Iraq, Arabia and Libya as envisioned by Robin Wright in 2013

    [​IMG]
     
    GermanDjinn, Swede, Miner and 4 others like this.
  7. Faeelin Lord of Ten Thousand Years

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2004
    City states? God he's dumb.
     
  8. Crying Your ideology is shit, SHIIIIIIIIT

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2017
    Location:
    A Boring Dystopia
    I'm beginning to see a connection between 'people who don't understand the Middle East' and 'people who think the Middle East should be broken up into small countries'.
     
  9. Suvareshkin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2014
    You, a geopolitical plebe: We should consider the culture and etymology of the subject national group to determine what monicker their hypothetical country would ha-

    Me, The Expert: ATTACH -STAN TO LITERALLY EVERYTHING.
     
  10. Skallagrim Not the one from YouTube. Different other fellow.

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2014
    No-one could ever be dumber than the barbarians who hate city-states. City-states are awesome. :cool:

    (In case of Baghdad, which is right there between the sunni and shi'a areas, and has both populations represented within it, I can certainly see the logic of making it a city-state if you decide to divide Iraq into multiple countries...)


    The big problem is that the borders are often poorly drawn. It's easy to be haughtily dismissive about attempts to create more homogeneous countries and to make sure people who hate each other with a passion aren't crammed into one country... if you're looking at it from the perspective of the West, which already went through that. Less than a century ago, irridentist claims based on ethnic interests were literally the thing that sparked World War Two. How was that solved? By re-drawing borders and - in many cases - mass deportations. Messy, but things have been a lot better in Europe since then. Except of former Yugoslavia, of course, where ethnic tensions and claims... oh. Wait.

    I have no doubt that major border revisions could vastly improve the political situation in the Near East and Middle East. If you make sure that every group that ardently feels distinct and has trouble with the neighbours has its own country, you'll have a lot more peace and tranquility than you get when you force multiple such groups into one artificial country drawn up by colonialist rulers.

    So, yeah. Break things up into small(er) countries. It really is the way to go.
     
  11. LSCatilina Vassican Labosiotos Vergagnatos

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2008
    Location:
    Polanian Occupation Zone in Transylvania
    @Skallagrim
    Redrawing borders and separating population (whom main identitarian distinctions are rather relatively recent or relatively recently exacerbated) on a top-down perspective is also preventing these population to undergo similar evolution and nation-building on their own grounds (and original solutions) that western countries managed to pull of eventually, and risking to turn the region in yet another ethnicised national ensemble like it happened in Balkans with the known consequences.
    Of course it can be messy, if not bloody, but western meddling in Balkans doesn't have a good record anyway to really appear as peace-giver there.
     
  12. Analytical Engine Monarchist Collectivist Federalist

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2007
    Location:
    UK, EU (for the moment), Earth
    He's especially good at imperialism...
     
  13. Skallagrim Not the one from YouTube. Different other fellow.

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2014
    I'll readily admit that there's a lot of potential for things to go wrong in practice. And in any case, dramatically re-drawing the borders of a whole region would automatically require military invasion and occupation-- which i do not support, no matter how idealistic the goals might be.

    Regarding the nation-forming process, I do see things a bit differently. I think it's better to separate first, and then freely allow voluntary(!) unification, than it is to throw various groups together into artificial countries that typically oppose secessionism. (for instance: Iraq, which was artificially crafted by the British and has since then opposed a Kurdish wish for independence.) The should, in my view, be nothing to oppose hypothetical smaller states to later unify. For instance, if you have a Mesopotamian Arab Shi'a state, an equally Arab and Shi'a Khuzestan, and an also Arab and Shi'a Kuwait... those might at some point choose to unite into a federal state. Great. That's far from impossible, in the same way it was far from impossible for Germany or Italy to unify. I don't think that allowing all such regions independence first, and then letting them choose(!) if they want union later, is in any way robbing them of their chance to evolve towards federalisation etc.

    As far as the Balkans are concerned, I think the major mistake there was the creation of Yugoslavia. Same mistake that was made when they made Iraq, really. And as far as I'm concerned, one with a similar solution. If I'd been in charge of "solving that puzzle" after World War I, I'd have gone all the way in creating countries for all nationalities, with the borders made to reflect the real ethno-linguistic and religious situation on as detailed a scale as possible. Thus yielding separate countries for Slovenes, Croats, Serbs, Bosniaks and Macedonians. Of course, in the case of the Serbs and the Bosniaks, this would involve creating either two non-contiguous countries... or some population exchanges. Neither option is truly attractive, but if decisively implemented, either could probably have yielded a situation far more stable (and far more 'definitive' and thus more accepted by the local population) than OTL ever did.

    tl;dr -- almost every time the Western powers tried to create artificial states that put a lot of different grouops together, it led to horrors. It's too late to really change things now without more horrors, but an ATL where such forced unions were avoided altogether would almost certainly be a more pleasant place.

    (All of this reminds me that I should really try my hand at a "less crappy Middle East borders" map.)
     
    Analytical Engine likes this.
  14. Faeelin Lord of Ten Thousand Years

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2004
    Just because Europeans are barbarians who have to ethnically cleanse their neighbors doesn't mean the rest of the world is.

    Also, I guess Belgium, India, and hell, the European Union don't exist?
     
  15. Faeelin Lord of Ten Thousand Years

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2004
    "You see guys, the Bavarians and Prussians are entirely different peoples, riven by religious conflict. Not like Arabs, who all speak the same tongue and have the same God..."- Some guy four timeliens over.
     
  16. SeaCambrian Alien Space Bat

    Joined:
    May 28, 2018
    That makes me wonder what would a world map look like if every country's name ended in -stan (perhaps with 1 serious and 1 satirical version for each country).
     
  17. Etruscan-enthusiast35 Human until proven guilty

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2018
    Location:
    Hobbiton, The Shire, Eriador, Middle-Earth
    Poland
    Serious: Lechistan
    Satirical Polandastan
     
    Damian0358, AUGGP, dakkafex and 3 others like this.
  18. Crying Your ideology is shit, SHIIIIIIIIT

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2017
    Location:
    A Boring Dystopia
    Kurvastan
     
  19. Ivoshafen Just A Man From Gondor - Recovering from SATS

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2016
    Location:
    Indiǣna
    Indiana
    Serious: Wabashistan
    Satirical: Hoosieristan
     
  20. Crazy Boris Cool Dood

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2017
    Location:
    Holy Albertan Empire

    What really bugs me is why name those new Arabian states after directions instead of calling them Hail/Jamal Shammar, Hejaz, Asir, and Al-Hasa?