Reagan Backs Marcos 1986

WI Reagan had backed Ferdinand Marcos against the protesters? If so, he could've asked for US military assistance or ordered an artillery barrage on Camp Aguinaldo. In OTL he refused free-fire orders on masses of civilians, including clergy and nuns.
 
Huge PR loss for the US. In 86 people had really had enough- I have a back issue of the National Geographic that covered the overthrow of Marcos and the only reason it didn't get ugly was because Marcos fled. Military support from Reagan would lead to actual fighting in the streets- much of the Philippines Army was against Marcos and they'd probably respond to any military attack on the demonstrators. In one fell swoop Reagan would manage to alienate the world- there'd be pictures of dying protestors in the streets, nuns and priests among them as the poster said earlier. I can imagine Cardinal Sin actually taking to the streets to face down troops if it came to that.
 
WI Reagan had backed Ferdinand Marcos against the protesters? If so, he could've asked for US military assistance or ordered an artillery barrage on Camp Aguinaldo. In OTL he refused free-fire orders on masses of civilians, including clergy and nuns.

Probably it would have caused a PR nightmare back home. I believe the media back then was on the side of the protesters. US Marines shown gunning down priests and nuns on national television would lose you the Catholic vote, at least...
 
Last edited:
Or what if he'd allowed Laurel to be elected VP? Then he could claim "national unity". The mistake was ordering Aquino's assassination. The economy could be relatively stable. He'd already discredited N. Aquino with Ninoy's approval of martial law until Marcos imprisoned him. Unlike Armored Dinner Jacket, the COMELEC returns were fairly close, 53-47, or 1.6 million votes. GMA's relatively clean 2004 marginwas 1.2 million. As dictators go, he would be at most 5/10 in oppression. The problem was that he was terminally ill and refused to resign. Isn't that why the military got fed up? They wanted Enrile in there, since he was doing day-to-day governance after 1980 while Marcos drew up hit lists for extrajudicial action in hospital.
 
Or what if he'd allowed Laurel to be elected VP? Then he could claim "national unity". The mistake was ordering Aquino's assassination. The economy could be relatively stable. He'd already discredited N. Aquino with Ninoy's approval of martial law until Marcos imprisoned him. Unlike Armored Dinner Jacket, the COMELEC returns were fairly close, 53-47, or 1.6 million votes. GMA's relatively clean 2004 marginwas 1.2 million. As dictators go, he would be at most 5/10 in oppression. The problem was that he was terminally ill and refused to resign. Isn't that why the military got fed up? They wanted Enrile in there, since he was doing day-to-day governance after 1980 while Marcos drew up hit lists for extrajudicial action in hospital.

Technically, it's B. Aquino, Ninoy being a nickname. :)

I think if Laurel got the VP office, it might have soothed at least the more moderate parts of UNIDO supporters. Not all, though. The wild card here, is of course, the Church - would they have supported a compromise government? Because if they don't, then it would have the legitimacy of a mongoose in a department store.
 
The master strategist, in the Nixon/Walpole/King mold, made a fatal (literally) mistake with those two things. He could probably "corrupt" Laurel, given his rapid departure from the Aquino administration. Would Imelda succeed him upon his death, a snap election, or the OTL power struggle between her and Enrile escalate?
 
The master strategist, in the Nixon/Walpole/King mold, made a fatal (literally) mistake with those two things. He could probably "corrupt" Laurel, given his rapid departure from the Aquino administration. Would Imelda succeed him upon his death, a snap election, or the OTL power struggle between her and Enrile escalate?

Probably the power struggle bit, though Imelda would probably have used a puppet, initially.
 
Who would win, when would PI become democratic, etc? I'm amazed that only six years after the violent overthrow of her husband, Imelda would've been President if not for vote-splitting and Cory's refusal to take advantage of the grandfather clause. Would the US bases agreement have passed? Marcos used them sometimes as bargaining chips, and despite public approval and Aquino's, the Senate refused ratification in '91.
 
Who would win, when would PI become democratic, etc?

Probably Enrile, if he can get the support of the military. Remember that many Marcos supporters, even in OTL, did not exactly like Imelda. Marcos was seen, until he had Ninoy killed, as competent if not especially clean. Imelda was seen as the woman of 3000 shoes.

An interesting question, however, would be the fate of Cesar Virata and the other technocrats in the Marcos Administration. Who would they support?

As for democracy, not for quite a while, though if you get the technocratic win of the regime in power, you might see something of a Singapore in the near future - free economy, not-so-free politics.
 
It depends if they were loyalists or public servants. Even the most idealistic would be rapidly disillusioned of the latter after twenty years. GMA wouldn't be President, as she was hired as one of Cory's senior mandarins. Doubt either would want a politically cunning woman from the other side of the Dynasty War.
 
It depends if they were loyalists or public servants. Even the most idealistic would be rapidly disillusioned of the latter after twenty years. GMA wouldn't be President, as she was hired as one of Cory's senior mandarins. Doubt either would want a politically cunning woman from the other side of the Dynasty War.

Are we talking about the loyalists or the public servants being disillusioned?

And yes, I agree that Arroyo would never be president in such a situation.
 
Top