Protect & Survive in 2012
- Thread starter tom
- Start date
The consensus on that sort of thing is that it is borderline ASB if not actually ASB. Regions are not going to brake away from the UK period.
There will still be enough boats and enough bunker oil to reestablish a semblance maritime traffic a few months after the bombs have fallen, especially in Australia and New Zealand.
The best place for the Anzacs to load refugees however would be what is left of Germany since people there will be desperate enough to leave on crammed ships with 17th century style living conditions. Anywhere where there is a semblance of governance won't cut it at first, since surviving governments will be desperate to keep what population they have.
Israel will have been a target, but their civil defence and organisation is far better than anything the Arabs have. The Israelis would probably have launched the Sampson Option at the time as the bombs fell in my opinion.
Arabs have the numbers the IDF don't. Both sides lose their high tech backers and sooner or later run out of spare parts. At that point it looks something like the 1948 war. Arab socity in the Middle East probably survives in some form but could suffer economic collapse to some degree. Some urban centres probably contineue while others might go back to nomadic lifestyles
For most of the Northern hemisphere we are probaly looking at condtions reminiscent of the start of the post Roman Dark Age. Maybe the UK central government can hold things together. Maybe they can't. If we assume they can it may well be that Central Government power is considerably weaker than pre war.
In 2012 much of the world lives in Dark Age conditions with points of light in places, even in Europe, the US and the Soviet Union. Central power as it was pre war is either much weaker or has collpased. In areas of collapse new Successor states have arien. For instance somethiing like what happened in the OTL Soviet Union could well have happened after the 1984 war with survivors in the Cental Asian republics, maybe the Baltic States assuming they survived at all, Ukraine, Belorussia. Russia itself may have broken up.
Perhaps by 2012 some breakaway areas have been or are being reunified either through diplomacy or by force.
For most of the Northern hemisphere we are probaly looking at condtions reminiscent of the start of the post Roman Dark Age. Maybe the UK central government can hold things together. Maybe they can't. If we assume they can it may well be that Central Government power is considerably weaker than pre war.
In 2012 much of the world lives in Dark Age conditions with points of light in places, even in Europe, the US and the Soviet Union. Central power as it was pre war is either much weaker or has collpased. In areas of collapse new Successor states have arien. For instance somethiing like what happened in the OTL Soviet Union could well have happened after the 1984 war with survivors in the Cental Asian republics, maybe the Baltic States assuming they survived at all, Ukraine, Belorussia. Russia itself may have broken up.
Perhaps by 2012 some breakaway areas have been or are being reunified either through diplomacy or by force.
Regarding Portugal, the grand coalition of the time will probably be maintained until things regain some normality, which take until the end of the century.
It will be a poor but functioning country, with a provisional capital in a surviving middle-sized port city, although heavy food rationing will presumably be in effect until regional European trade links are reestablished.
It will be a poor but functioning country, with a provisional capital in a surviving middle-sized port city, although heavy food rationing will presumably be in effect until regional European trade links are reestablished.
I'm not entirely sure I buy into the theory that technology would be severely retarded in all respects. For one thing, many of the building blocks for today's technology were already in place.
As an example, by 1984, early versions of cellular telephones were in use in a number of places, including the US, the Nordic countries and Japan. With most of the infrastructure for landline service damaged or destroyed, I would expect rapid development and widespread use of cellular technology during the recovery period. It would be far easier to deploy a cellular network than to rebuild the old landline based system. This would not be dissimilar to the rapid growth of cellular in the contemporary OTL developing world.
Along the same lines, the basics of modern computing existed in 1984. The original Apple Macintosh, in fact, was released in January 1984. Given the loss of so many engineers and other technical specialists, I can see the development of computing being given a rather high priority as a means of increasing the productivity of technical specialists for whom the demand will exceed the supply.
Similarly, by the early 1980s, the basic building blocks for the Internet already existed and the Compact Disc was already in use.
So, despite the widespread destruction of the exchange, I would not find it inconceivable for much of today's technology to be in use in an alternate P&S 2012. 28 years is a long time, and even if one assumes that the Exchange set the world back by around 15-20 years technologically, that still puts us somewhere between 1992 and 1997, which would be consistent with a world that takes the rest of the century to stabilize and really begin rebuilding again. For one thing, there's enough left of the United States for it to have its own economic miracle beginning at the turn of the millenium. And that seems to me to be about right -- 16 years to clean up the mess to get to the point where you have a world ready to finally turn the page and look to the future right around Jan 1, 2000.
As an example, by 1984, early versions of cellular telephones were in use in a number of places, including the US, the Nordic countries and Japan. With most of the infrastructure for landline service damaged or destroyed, I would expect rapid development and widespread use of cellular technology during the recovery period. It would be far easier to deploy a cellular network than to rebuild the old landline based system. This would not be dissimilar to the rapid growth of cellular in the contemporary OTL developing world.
Along the same lines, the basics of modern computing existed in 1984. The original Apple Macintosh, in fact, was released in January 1984. Given the loss of so many engineers and other technical specialists, I can see the development of computing being given a rather high priority as a means of increasing the productivity of technical specialists for whom the demand will exceed the supply.
Similarly, by the early 1980s, the basic building blocks for the Internet already existed and the Compact Disc was already in use.
So, despite the widespread destruction of the exchange, I would not find it inconceivable for much of today's technology to be in use in an alternate P&S 2012. 28 years is a long time, and even if one assumes that the Exchange set the world back by around 15-20 years technologically, that still puts us somewhere between 1992 and 1997, which would be consistent with a world that takes the rest of the century to stabilize and really begin rebuilding again. For one thing, there's enough left of the United States for it to have its own economic miracle beginning at the turn of the millenium. And that seems to me to be about right -- 16 years to clean up the mess to get to the point where you have a world ready to finally turn the page and look to the future right around Jan 1, 2000.
Its actually hard to say what is happening in the Middle East.Israel was nuked by the soviets as the main US ally in the region and a nuclear power it was pretty much a given.Israel in turn in order to avoid being inferior to the Arab world nuked them.The question of who is still around is hard to answer though.It largely depens on how severe was the soviet strike.At the very least they took out Dimona,Jerusalem and Tel Aviv alongside one or two places suspected of having nukes kept in storage.This would leave Israel with very few nukes remaining probably battlefield nukes here and there their best would have been used up nuking strategic targets.If that is the case a concerted effort by surviving arab forces could break Israel.With very few nukes left they would be dependent on surviving stocks of conventional ammnition which would dry up quickly.If on the other hand the soviets decided we apply the nuke everything in sight strategy then Israel is gone maybe even worse off than Germany due to its small size and highly concentrated population.My guess is somewhere in the middle between the best case of nuking Dimona,Jerusalem and Tel Aviv and nuking everything.Israel should have survived the soviet onslaught but its at the very limit of survival with whatever surviving arab armies there are having a chance to actually win.
India probably took some nukes from the PRC even assuming the minimum size of the chinese arsenal and maybe 50% where duds still New Delhi and a few other places are gone.
India probably took some nukes from the PRC even assuming the minimum size of the chinese arsenal and maybe 50% where duds still New Delhi and a few other places are gone.
Whoa up there a moment... it's actually quite likely Australia's taken some pretty serious losses itself. At the very minimum Canberra (Capital), Perth (Fleet Base West) and Sydney (Fleet Base East) are damaged or destroyed. I wouldn't be suprised if Melbourne (major population centre and core of our limited aerospace industry), Newcastle (steel production, shipyards and an RAAF base) and Woolongong (steel) also featured on the target list (as lower priority targets sub-launched cruise missiles rather than ICBMs?).
Even if we go with the first three plus Melbourne (rather optimistic), that's a very sizable chunk of Australia's population, heavy industry and refining capcity gone...
On the bright side, Australia has few targets worthy of ground bursts, and those few are remote from our prime agricultural land... so, we wouldn't suffer as anywhere near as badly from irradiated croplands.
One problem is that manyof the technical experts are likely to be killed in the nuclear attaacks or die in the aftermath. Not a complrete wipeout. Much of the high tech specialist manufacturing capabilities (microchips, plastics etc) is likewise fried. There will be survors with the know how and maybe some of these make their way to places like Portugal and Switzerland which largely survived the attack and are more socially/politically stable in the aftermath. So far as Europe is concerned places like this are the best chance for survival. stability and a certain amount of growth.
I think all this would take time and, certainly in the Northern hemisphere it will take decades to get back to pre war levels let alone 2012 levels OTL. In the best case maybe in 2040 or 2050 recovery to an OTL 2012 level might have been achieved. It may well take longer.
Places like Latin America, the Far East, Australia probably do better but their growth could be somewhat stunted. Maybe 10 - 20 years behind OTL 2012 levels.
An interesting question is what happens to Afghanistan. I suspect the Soviet garrisson pullds out after the nuclear exchange. A large part is massacred by the Mujahadeen. Afterward Afghanistan collapses back into civil war as in OTL, something like the Taliban develops, takes over and imposes a Sharia Law order. With the West and former Soviet Union in no shape tpdomuch about this Afghanistan continues under a strict Islamic regime in 2012.
0
I think all this would take time and, certainly in the Northern hemisphere it will take decades to get back to pre war levels let alone 2012 levels OTL. In the best case maybe in 2040 or 2050 recovery to an OTL 2012 level might have been achieved. It may well take longer.
Places like Latin America, the Far East, Australia probably do better but their growth could be somewhat stunted. Maybe 10 - 20 years behind OTL 2012 levels.
An interesting question is what happens to Afghanistan. I suspect the Soviet garrisson pullds out after the nuclear exchange. A large part is massacred by the Mujahadeen. Afterward Afghanistan collapses back into civil war as in OTL, something like the Taliban develops, takes over and imposes a Sharia Law order. With the West and former Soviet Union in no shape tpdomuch about this Afghanistan continues under a strict Islamic regime in 2012.
0
Australia will suffer but the metropolitan areas are so large that a single 1MT bomb is unlikely to have much effect everywhere. The centre of Sydney might very well be gone but outlying areas possibly including Sydney Airport itself could very well survive in some form.
Australia will be low on the Soviets list of priority and while it will get hit it won't be anywhere as bad as Britain or even France.
Even if the four biggest cities plus Canberra are gone, we are still left with Brisbane, Hobart and Adelaide which is a pretty good base from which to restart things up. If outlying areas of the large agglomerations are still there, this is a major bonus as well.
You would be surprised at the amount of manufacturing that takes place well outside of larger towns and agglomerations. To take your example of plastic, one of the largest plastic factories in France is actually situation in the small town of Langres which with a mere 10 000 inhabitants is not a target.
In the case of Britain, a large number of University towns starting with Oxford and Cambridge themselves have survived the strike.
What matters is not the fact that microchip factories are gone. But the fact that knowledge is still there in some form that specialists can be retrained with a "reskilling" programme and apprenticeships. In any case why make fragile microchips post war when tubes or relays will do the same job for less complexity?
I think people talking about the none 'glassed' parts of Europe being in the dark ages are someway off the mark ...
vast parts of the systems and infrastructure will still be there , most surviving towns and villages will have a sprinkling of people with craftsman or technician level engineering skills to 'make do and mend' , you can get an effective small forge with just charcoal and a hand driven air pump nearly any wood sawing job can be done manually
, it's been stated that Swindon and Oxford have survived and with it the railway works at Swindon and Morris / MG factories in Oxford
in terms of power for machine tools etc diesel engines of that era can run on biodiesel or veg oils as well as petro-diesel - diesels will run on their own sump oil given the chance ... equally diverting a stream to drive a waterwheel is not rocket science and can be done with start of the industrial revolution tools ... you 've also got all sorts of stuff that could be salvaged i'd suspect that hauliers and bus companies would 'christmas tree' parts of their fleet to keep the rest going ...
while not immediately post strike the North sea oil fields would have been surveyed by boat or aircraft to see which platform and wells were usable even if pipelines and shore facilities were disturbed
given Portsmouth got off fairly light
ly - what kind of state is Fawley in ...
if the canal and navigable river system survives you have a slow but cheap to run distribution network given that a couple of horses or a small motor can tow a loaded barge at walking pace ...
i'd expect the Electricity National Grid to be functioning as a series of mini grids if not, by 2012 reconnected fully and perhaps we'd see 'pocket power stations' either wood burning steam turbine sets of veg oil / producer gas burning diesels / turboshafts ( after all SWEB Pocket power stations were turboshafts ) in smaller sttlements which were lower priority for the restoration of mains supplies ( if the 33kv and 11kv infrastructure was badly damaged)
vast parts of the systems and infrastructure will still be there , most surviving towns and villages will have a sprinkling of people with craftsman or technician level engineering skills to 'make do and mend' , you can get an effective small forge with just charcoal and a hand driven air pump nearly any wood sawing job can be done manually
, it's been stated that Swindon and Oxford have survived and with it the railway works at Swindon and Morris / MG factories in Oxford
in terms of power for machine tools etc diesel engines of that era can run on biodiesel or veg oils as well as petro-diesel - diesels will run on their own sump oil given the chance ... equally diverting a stream to drive a waterwheel is not rocket science and can be done with start of the industrial revolution tools ... you 've also got all sorts of stuff that could be salvaged i'd suspect that hauliers and bus companies would 'christmas tree' parts of their fleet to keep the rest going ...
while not immediately post strike the North sea oil fields would have been surveyed by boat or aircraft to see which platform and wells were usable even if pipelines and shore facilities were disturbed
given Portsmouth got off fairly light
ly - what kind of state is Fawley in ...
if the canal and navigable river system survives you have a slow but cheap to run distribution network given that a couple of horses or a small motor can tow a loaded barge at walking pace ...
i'd expect the Electricity National Grid to be functioning as a series of mini grids if not, by 2012 reconnected fully and perhaps we'd see 'pocket power stations' either wood burning steam turbine sets of veg oil / producer gas burning diesels / turboshafts ( after all SWEB Pocket power stations were turboshafts ) in smaller sttlements which were lower priority for the restoration of mains supplies ( if the 33kv and 11kv infrastructure was badly damaged)
Norwegian economy
In 2012 Norway would probably be on very good recovery. Although there were quite a few nukes hitting the larger airports'n stuff and everything went pretty awful for a couple of years, still Norway would prosper in the long run. Key words is oil, fish and electricity, I plan on leaving one or two on and offshore oil producing capabilities. Most of the hydroelectric plants and the main part of Norway's grid would survive the war. A good deal of the industrial scale fishing boats and production facilities would survive. Oil and fish for export would buy all we were allowed to buy fro UK and other. Norway's large merchant fleet would sail across the globe with cargo and passengers. In Norway it would be surviving heavy industry in need of iron ore and bauxite. But nowhere near the 4 mill of people that inhabited Norway before the war. 2,5 mill inhabitants is more likely. Sweden could be the major power in northern Europe, but Norway could challenge that or, we could see a new state emerging from the ashes of Oslo and Stockholm.
In 2012 Norway would probably be on very good recovery. Although there were quite a few nukes hitting the larger airports'n stuff and everything went pretty awful for a couple of years, still Norway would prosper in the long run. Key words is oil, fish and electricity, I plan on leaving one or two on and offshore oil producing capabilities. Most of the hydroelectric plants and the main part of Norway's grid would survive the war. A good deal of the industrial scale fishing boats and production facilities would survive. Oil and fish for export would buy all we were allowed to buy fro UK and other. Norway's large merchant fleet would sail across the globe with cargo and passengers. In Norway it would be surviving heavy industry in need of iron ore and bauxite. But nowhere near the 4 mill of people that inhabited Norway before the war. 2,5 mill inhabitants is more likely. Sweden could be the major power in northern Europe, but Norway could challenge that or, we could see a new state emerging from the ashes of Oslo and Stockholm.
Central European countries like Germany, Poland etc that were directly involved in the war are gone to all intents and purposes as organised stated, The Soviet Union and United States will have take massive damage in the exchange and, if they are not completely destroyed may have broken up in the immediate aftermath but some degree of reunification may have happened by 2012. I doubt they have the strength to be more than second rate powers for the time being. Countries like the UK, France, Italy and Spain may been similarly affected though they might be reasonably well off in comparison to others Outside Europe many areas suffered nuclear attacks becuause they were allies of either the US or the Soviets. What happens to them probably depends on how stable they were pre war and their civil defence planning
I think there's an underestimation of technological progress to the modern day. Advances in science often precede applications. Given that even in America a lot of the precursors to OTL's technology and innovations will have survived in small cities and the records of non-urban universities, much of the basis for 21st century technology will still exist.
Within reason, I would expect that to translate into gradual technological advance through a process of cherry-picking useful bits of information from the old records. Less innovative than what came before, but certainly not technical stasis.
Here and there there might be the odd technology retarded only ten years, or more likely twenty. Certainly I admit the economic background will mean any such technology will be much less evenly distributed than in OTL. And things like the computer industry we had even a decade ago are completely out. But I refuse to accept that everything would be fixed at late-1980s or lower. It just doesn't fit.
Within reason, I would expect that to translate into gradual technological advance through a process of cherry-picking useful bits of information from the old records. Less innovative than what came before, but certainly not technical stasis.
Here and there there might be the odd technology retarded only ten years, or more likely twenty. Certainly I admit the economic background will mean any such technology will be much less evenly distributed than in OTL. And things like the computer industry we had even a decade ago are completely out. But I refuse to accept that everything would be fixed at late-1980s or lower. It just doesn't fit.
Portugal would probably bounce back somewhere in the 90's and start recovering. In TTL 2012, it would be back to the higher end of the developing nations. The capital would be somewhere north of Lisbon, in the largest surviving littoral city with good rail and road connections, at least until Lisbon gets rebuilt, which could take a generation (or more, depending on the level of damage) to be concluded.
Elections would be happening as usual. I'm not sure about if elections could be postponed after 87, because the laws were made to difficult any dictatorial temptations, but good sense might ensure that all parties continue activity (even if the Communist Party gets more tolerated than accepted).
Fishing would be reinforced to help feed the surviving population in a world where commercial exchanges have recovered but were very low for a while.
Industrial areas outside the two metro areas might get enlarged as well as the fringes of what used to to be Lisbon and Oporto metro areas (assuming Oporto gets hit).
The first things to get rebuilt in the damaged areas would be transportation infrastructures (rails, roads, ports), followed by whatever is not practical to relocate/rebuilt in different place, and then residential and commercial areas around those places, and so on.
Elections would be happening as usual. I'm not sure about if elections could be postponed after 87, because the laws were made to difficult any dictatorial temptations, but good sense might ensure that all parties continue activity (even if the Communist Party gets more tolerated than accepted).
Fishing would be reinforced to help feed the surviving population in a world where commercial exchanges have recovered but were very low for a while.
Industrial areas outside the two metro areas might get enlarged as well as the fringes of what used to to be Lisbon and Oporto metro areas (assuming Oporto gets hit).
The first things to get rebuilt in the damaged areas would be transportation infrastructures (rails, roads, ports), followed by whatever is not practical to relocate/rebuilt in different place, and then residential and commercial areas around those places, and so on.
Last edited:
I still see many parts of the world worst affected by the war as being in Dark Age or near Dark Age conditions. Here thewre would be starvation, rampant disease and banditry with life being nasty, brutish and short. Consider the later part of Threads for what it might be like in these areas.Recovery here might take decades at best. But, as with the post Roman Dark ages there will be areas like Switzerland, Portugal, Scandanavia where conditions will be far better. Eventually recovery will spread from here and this may be starting around 2012 but this process will take severalmore decades at least. Something similar may well be happening in the areas once known as the United States and Soviet Union.
That's a good premise for a novel, but it doesn't really fit the TL at all.
The first year depicted in the various works shows the surviving authorities throwing every person possible into agriculture. If there's enough food, people won't starve. If there's not enough food, people will starve until there is enough food. Either way, suggesting that starvation will continue for near 30 years is patently absurd. If its anywhere by 2012, it'll be in the poor bits of Africa, and sporadic at worst.
Similarly, deadly disease can't thrive indefinitely. All infections are human parasites. Ultimately, when we truly suffer, so do they. Reduced populations and travel will have improved things. It's also likely that antibiotic resistance is less bad than in OTL due to the lack of frivolous users and - immediately after the war - a period where antibiotics themselves were lacking. Admittedly the AIDS virus will face a less capable medical community, but the reduction of urban centers, trade, and travel will also have slowed its spread. Flu viruses will be less rapid in their proliferation around the globe, and West Nile Virus will likely have never colonized North America. The Black Death will be loose in rodents in the Pacific Northwest, just as in OTL, and will indeed have killed at least a few people in the '80s, maybe many. But anyone camping outdoors will have internalized safety precautions against it for just that reason.
Chronic diseases will also be reduced. The collapse of manufacturing and chemical industry will be matched by a collapse in cancer rates in the developed world after the inevitable giant spike. And the very existence of that spike will have kept cancer treatments and research from lagging too far behind OTL. Admittedly, many cancer victims would still be alive or even yet-to-be-diagnosed, but their children would be genuinely better off. I'd also argue that a far lower portion of the population would be susceptible to diabetes or heart disease. Anyone with either would have died right off the bat, and though PTSD does increase the odds, the leading factors are still diet, exercise, and smoking. This TL will subject its survivors to better environments for all three.
Violence will depend on stability of course. Stability will be reduced. So, point.
Otherwise, nah.
There is also the factor to be taken into account that nuclear related knowledge is going to improve dramatically in the years following the wars, especially in the fields of radiation protection and general radiation knowledge.
Among other things, unanswered questions like "does radiation really mutates babies" which have never been convincingly answered OTL, will be answered for good TTL. Some of the answers to these questions may or may not surprise us, since we are talking about huge unknowns here.
And there will be more potential for research, nuclear power plant construction, and anything else involving radiation simply because most people by default will have accepted the idea of a "safe" level of radiation. There'd be zero problem in TTL finding a place to bury the US's nuclear waste, for example. What's the difference?