Special Bulletin: Aftermath A collaborative TL

Geon

Donor
Given the large number of burn victims (see epilogue) it is likely you will have a major scandal investigation regarding why some were allowed to be treated at the burn centers and other weren't. It won't matter that the Department of Health will point out there aren't enough beds to go around. That will rise the question, why aren't there? Heads will roll.

On the domestic front you are probably looking at a recession, a bad one. Consider one factor, insurance companies are going to be asked to pay out millions if not billions on claims in the Charleston area. Any businesses based in Charleston are gone permanently. That is another hit to the economy.

Televangelists such as Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson will be proclaiming the apocalypse. Witness their reactions after 9/11. Can you imagine what it would be after a nuclear attack on this country? Likely they will retract and tone down their rhetoric later but this will add fuel to the fire so to speak regarding the nation's mood.

In foreign reaction consider that in Europe the anti-nuclear activists will stage massive demonstrations in West Germany, France, and the U.K. demanding removal of U.S. nuclear weapons - which the U.S will refuse. Several liberal senators and congressmen in the U.S. will likely lend their support to the anti-nuclear movement, and likely sign their political death warrants come November, 1984. Also, as here in the U.S, you are likely to have violent counter-demonstrations as well as police breaking up some of these demonstrations as fights break out between the two factions.
 
Given the large number of burn victims (see epilogue) it is likely you will have a major scandal investigation regarding why some were allowed to be treated at the burn centers and other weren't. It won't matter that the Department of Health will point out there aren't enough beds to go around. That will rise the question, why aren't there? Heads will roll.

On the domestic front you are probably looking at a recession, a bad one. Consider one factor, insurance companies are going to be asked to pay out millions if not billions on claims in the Charleston area. Any businesses based in Charleston are gone permanently. That is another hit to the economy.

Televangelists such as Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson will be proclaiming the apocalypse. Witness their reactions after 9/11. Can you imagine what it would be after a nuclear attack on this country? Likely they will retract and tone down their rhetoric later but this will add fuel to the fire so to speak regarding the nation's mood.

In foreign reaction consider that in Europe the anti-nuclear activists will stage massive demonstrations in West Germany, France, and the U.K. demanding removal of U.S. nuclear weapons - which the U.S will refuse. Several liberal senators and congressmen in the U.S. will likely lend their support to the anti-nuclear movement, and likely sign their political death warrants come November, 1984. Also, as here in the U.S, you are likely to have violent counter-demonstrations as well as police breaking up some of these demonstrations as fights break out between the two factions.
Not to.mention that NBC would probably get sued (for realism we will use nbc instead of RBS). On an9ther note, some would criticize them for their anti nuclear stance.
On Iran, like geon notes and I already pu5 toghether, Iran is going to be pretty ballsy after the attack. America's economy is not ready for war.
One thing about reagan is that as much as he hates commies and as much as the media painted him as the man who would start world war 3, it is unlikely that given America's recession, Reagan would risk a war with Iran. Sure Iran could take over an oil tanker. But as much as the people would want if, even if he is pretty pissed, he would probably send in a spec ops team to take back the ship.

Reagan may be mad, but I don't see that impacting his leadership abilities inany way.
Note: we have sent spec ops to foreign nations without going to war over it.
 
Not to.mention that NBC would probably get sued (for realism we will use nbc instead of RBS). On an9ther note, some would criticize them for their anti nuclear stance.
On Iran, like geon notes and I already pu5 toghether, Iran is going to be pretty ballsy after the attack. America's economy is not ready for war.
One thing about reagan is that as much as he hates commies and as much as the media painted him as the man who would start world war 3, it is unlikely that given America's recession, Reagan would risk a war with Iran. Sure Iran could take over an oil tanker. But as much as the people would want if, even if he is pretty pissed, he would probably send in a spec ops team to take back the ship.

Reagan may be mad, but I don't see that impacting his leadership abilities inany way.
Note: we have sent spec ops to foreign nations without going to war over it.
Alright, So let me explain. We may in fact go to war with Iran in the future. But definently not like what happened after 9/11. America has to recover from the immense economic loss before it can even think about going to war. War is expensive. Simple as that. Yes, I know it was under a month between when 9/11 and when we invaded afghanistan, but that was- (Forgive me for putting it statistically)- Litterally only 2 Tall Skyscrapers and Repairs to the Pentagon. This was a whole city that can't be rebuilt. Not to mention a major commercial port and Rally Point for SLBM ops. We are now in possibly the worst depression since 1929. Sure, we might bounce back in a shorter amount of time than the Great Depression. But in reality we have to assume that there are 2 possible ways this can go in short and long term.

SHORT TERM

There are 2 ways we can go about this in the short term. The first option is Iran taking that tanker thinking the US won't react. Reagan, in his rage and belief that this could snowball to something worse, Flat-Out declares war on Iran. The people support. Problem is, America is in no way able to support a war footing. In fact it makes the depression worse almost immediately. Despite you thinking that this leads to WW3, you have to know that as of 1983, Iran had no relations with Russia. The Islamic Republic was still very young and was only then feeling safe enough to build external relationships. This would either have America Beat Iran in a surprise attack, or Iran humiliatingly defeat them. Either way, WW3 has not begun, but America is on an even weaker economic foothold. I don't see this as realistic. No matter what your politicall thoughts on Reagan was, there is a general consensus in the contemporary that he was one of the greats, If he actually had this attitude OTL we would not even be here. I honestly think we should take short-term 2

Short term 2 starts out the same with Iran taking over a oil tanker. Reagan of course is pissed. But he knows that America is not ready for a war. Rather, he sends in special ops commandos to take back the ship. This saves time for america to get back on track economically, and gives time for Iran to build a relationship with the Soviets. ITTL, we will see a world war between NATO And Warsaw Pact. As well as Iran. Then the only thing to do is decide whether or not its nuclear.
Long term options

So how does each option end up? Well in TL1 (immediate war with Iran) the nuclear depression is made much worse by the war, much to the enjoyment of the USSR.
By the time we reach present day, our worldclooks a lot like the red world submod for hoi4 millenium dawn. A hardline Soviet Union has won over the USA economically, and manages to spread communism to most of the world by the time it splits up (it was weak already. Give it til 2005 under the hardliners.)

For Option 2, Iran wants revenge, and has a new ally. The USSR. Incident in persian gulf leads to world war 3. Simple as that.
 
The long-term consequences of fallout would not be as great as you'd think...Charleston is a port city and the prevailing winds will blow out to sea.
 

Geon

Donor
The long-term consequences of fallout would not be as great as you'd think...Charleston is a port city and the prevailing winds will blow out to sea.

Erinn Go Bragh, Derpsternium

If you check out the point at 1:37:26 the reporter says that offshore winds blow fallout westward forcing the evacuation of an additional 400,000.
 
This is some of what I can see happening in the Aftermath of the Nuclear Destruction of Charleston.

First off it will likely take 2 weeks for the Fallout from the Charleston blast to completely subside.

Both Houses of Congress will immediately conduct a completely through investigation into the entire events prior to and after the Nuclear Detonation regarding the Evacuation proceedings (Like if a larger area should have been evacuated prior to the detonations), Was the security of the locations storing the Nuclear Materials Sufficient enough? (And how the material used in the device was able to be stolen?), Was the Anti-Nuclear movement or the Soviets truly to blame?, What would need to be done to prevent any Future Attacks?, The media coverage of the events as some the examples and expect these investigations to last at least several months.

Long Term Security Changes - Real major Security Improvements will get implemented in all Facilities that Manufacture, Process, Handle and Store all forms of Nuclear Material. Major Enhancements to all Security measures being implemented in New York and Washington D.C. (Both cities will be given the utmost priority for protection) as well as all major cities in the country. A real expansion of the Counter-Terrorism capabilities of the country will be implemented and I do agree that the Department of Homeland Security will be formed much earlier than OTL (Expect it to be Officially formed by the beginning of 1984 ITTL) and both the F.B.I. and the C.I.A will be given a real substantial amount of additional resources to prevent Future acts of Terrorism of any kind.

Regarding the people that are forced to permanently relocate from the Charleston area and the families of those killed in the blasts - You should expect Millions of Dollars being raised through Telethons, Charity Events, Donations through various organizations in addition to Federal Funds (As the entire Charleston area post Nuclear Detonation will be definitely declared a Disaster Area) being allocated which would be good for the Insurance Companies as that can help them with possible claims that they might end up dealing with.

What the Anti-Nuclear movement will face - In the aftermath of the destruction of Charleston the Anti-Nuclear movement will definitely face a real severe Backlash from the public that will last for decades, Any demonstrations of any kind they attempt to initiate in the U.S. after the detonation will likely result in them facing violent reprisals from the counter-demonstrators and I will agree with Geon that there will be the inevitable clashes (Expect them to be violent) involving both sides and the Police will truly have their work cut out in dealing with both sides (And do expect scores of people from both sides ending up Arrested). It would be safe to say that the Anti-Nuclear movement will become a extreme Liability for everyone including every Politician out there (Even remotely saying anything nice about the Anti-Nuclear Movement will guarantee an absolute decisive defeat for any Politician and absolute Unemployment for those not in Politics).

Could the Network face any legal repercussions - That would depend on the outcome of the Investigations into the Media coverage but Lawsuits could be possible.

What will be truly debated for years to come - The actual number of Long Term deaths related to the Nuclear Detonation in regards to the actual Radiation Poisoning that the survivors of the blast have received (There will be long term deaths related to the exposure to the Radiation from the blast expected), The true cost of the Negative Impact on South Carolina (Economic Losses, Costs of sealing off the Contaminated areas for decades).

Dealing with the loss of the Port Facilities - The Port Facilities in the area that don't get damaged in the blast will still be lost and be completely off limits due to the Radioactive Contamination from the Fallout. Expect a combination of new Port Facilities and existing Port Facilities being expanded to offset the losses (And fill the void) as quickly as possible (Being done within 12 to 18 months).

Reactions from the International Community - Multiple nations will express their Condolences regarding the loss of life from the Charleston blast (And do expect flowers being placed outside scores of America's Embassies in a number of World Capitals).

Any chances of even the remote idea of contemplating and possible discussion of any level of Compromise with the Soviets on anything will be all but gone. The Soviet Union would need to permanently forget about even talking about any level of Disarmament not just Unilateral Disarmament since Reagan and all Future Presidents that follow will outright refuse to listen to any and all Soviet Hardliners.

If you check out the point at 1:37:26 the reporter says that offshore winds blow fallout westward forcing the evacuation of an additional 400,000.

It was said in the end that a total of 500,000 (Including the additional number that was evacuated) would be forced to permanently relocate to other parts of the Country.
 

Geon

Donor
Here are some further thoughts I have on the subject.

An investigation reveals that while some of those in the Charleston anti-nuclear group had leftist leanings there is no clear connection of that group with the Soviet Union. Reagan is not happy as he would like to think the "evil empire" had some part in this.

The Soviets do send condolences to the U.S. along with a demand to draw down their medium range ballistic missile arsenal in Eastern Europe on a one for one basis with the U.S. removal of all Pershing missiles from West Germany.

Regan's answer to this is simple: "NO!"

The Soviets of course publicize President Reagan's intransigence causing major anti-nuclear demonstrations to break out in major European cities - especially in France, West Germany, and the U.K. They are very violently put down by the police with hundreds of arrests and many injuries. Attempts by anti-nuclear activists in the U.S. to stage such protests here are either stopped in their tracks by local authorities who fear an outbreak of violence or if they are foolishly allowed to occur result in equally massive counter-demonstrations. Remember Charleston becomes the watchword for both sides. There are clashes in the cities where the demonstrations occur with the luckless police caught right in the middle and dozens are arrested on both sides with many hurt.

In the Middle East the Iran/Iraq war is still raging. Iran publicly praises Allah for the blow delivered to the Great Satan and there are televised demonstrations with U.S. flag burnings and thousands chanting "death to America" holding photos of a ruined Charleston. President Regan is determined that Iran will not profit from this tragedy. The best way to deal with Iran at this point is to fund their enemy Saddam Hussein. So, in another irony Hussein finds himself a beneficiary of the Charleston Disaster receiving financial and military aid from the U.S. in his war with Iraq.

It doesn't take long for Iran to learn of this. The Iranians - falsely - believe the U.S. has suffered a crippling blow psychologically and will have no stomach for an incident overseas while they are dealing with a major disaster at home. They decide to show once and for all that the U.S. is a paper tiger now. An Iranian squad of Revolutionary Guard in speed boats takes over an American supertanker as it is leaving the Persian Gulf. They hold the crew hostage and steer it to the nearest port. The Iranians say the crew will remain in Iranian custody until the U.S. agrees to suspend all aid to Iraq. Any refusal and another tanker will be seized. Reagan of course is not happy. He orders a Delta team/Seal force to recapture the tanker and rescue the hostages. The mission is successful but several members of the Iranian armed forces and Revolutionary Guard are killed or wounded.

So, now you have an Iranian crisis on top of everything else. And the Soviets are loving every minute of it. Plausible?
 
Here are some further thoughts I have on the subject.

An investigation reveals that while some of those in the Charleston anti-nuclear group had leftist leanings there is no clear connection of that group with the Soviet Union. Reagan is not happy as he would like to think the "evil empire" had some part in this.

The Soviets do send condolences to the U.S. along with a demand to draw down their medium range ballistic missile arsenal in Eastern Europe on a one for one basis with the U.S. removal of all Pershing missiles from West Germany.

Regan's answer to this is simple: "NO!"

The Soviets of course publicize President Reagan's intransigence causing major anti-nuclear demonstrations to break out in major European cities - especially in France, West Germany, and the U.K. They are very violently put down by the police with hundreds of arrests and many injuries. Attempts by anti-nuclear activists in the U.S. to stage such protests here are either stopped in their tracks by local authorities who fear an outbreak of violence or if they are foolishly allowed to occur result in equally massive counter-demonstrations. Remember Charleston becomes the watchword for both sides. There are clashes in the cities where the demonstrations occur with the luckless police caught right in the middle and dozens are arrested on both sides with many hurt.

In the Middle East the Iran/Iraq war is still raging. Iran publicly praises Allah for the blow delivered to the Great Satan and there are televised demonstrations with U.S. flag burnings and thousands chanting "death to America" holding photos of a ruined Charleston. President Regan is determined that Iran will not profit from this tragedy. The best way to deal with Iran at this point is to fund their enemy Saddam Hussein. So, in another irony Hussein finds himself a beneficiary of the Charleston Disaster receiving financial and military aid from the U.S. in his war with Iraq.

It doesn't take long for Iran to learn of this. The Iranians - falsely - believe the U.S. has suffered a crippling blow psychology and will have no stomach for an incident overseas while they are dealing with a major disaster at home. They decide to show once and for all that the U.S. is a paper tiger now. An Iranian squad of Revolutionary Guard in speed boats takes over an American supertanker as it is leaving the Persian Gulf. They hold the crew hostage and steer it to the nearest port. The Iranians say the crew will remain in Iranian custody until the U.S. agrees to suspend all aid to Iraq. Any refusal and another tanker will be seized. Reagan of course is not happy. He orders a Delta team/Seal force to recapture the tanker and rescue the hostages. The mission is successful but several members of the Iranian armed forces and Revolutionary Guard are killed or wounded.

So, now you have an Iranian crisis on top of everything else. And the Soviets are loving every minute of it. Plausible?
Yeah, I would not sèe Reagan going to war when theres a depression. We had just recovered and then this happens. He will send in all the spec ops he needs till america is back on track.

This could give some time for the young Iran to form a relationship with the Soviets. One problem though. How does Israel like it when they find their one true ally is giving aid to one of their enemies? Would Reagan really be willing to compromise this? Honestly I see Iran taking the tanker with or without the USA giving aod to Iraq.

Perhaps Iran/Iraq war becomes a proxy?
 

Geon

Donor
Yeah, I would not sèe Reagan going to war when theres a depression. We had just recovered and then this happens. He will send in all the spec ops he needs till america is back on track.

This could give some time for the young Iran to form a relationship with the Soviets. One problem though. How does Israel like it when they find their one true ally is giving aid to one of their enemies? Would Reagan really be willing to compromise this? Honestly I see Iran taking the tanker with or without the USA giving aod to Iraq.

Perhaps Iran/Iraq war becomes a proxy?

Israel would not be happy to be sure with the U.S. providing aid to one of its enemies. But, given that one of her major allies has just had a major city nuked and Iran is cheering on the sidelines I think Israel would have the common sense to accept what is happening. They might stage a mild diplomatic protest but with the attitude of understanding why this is being done in the first place.
 
Israel would not be happy to be sure with the U.S. providing aid to one of its enemies. But, given that one of her major allies has just had a major city nuked and Iran is cheering on the sidelines I think Israel would have the common sense to accept what is happening. They might stage a mild diplomatic protest but with the attitude of understanding why this is being done in the first place.
Okay, I can see that. What if this war goes proxy instead of turning the cold war hot.
 

Geon

Donor
I suspect it will become a proxy war with the Soviets withdrawing support from Saddam as they will consider him no longer a reliable partner. Iran on the other hand...yes they will not be friendly to the Great Northern Satan but it is likely they will be glad to get technology and support from whatever source they can get. Also there's the possibility of funding some of Saddam's internal enemies to unseat him.

It also means the Soviets will redouble their efforts to take Afghanistan. Wherever they can show the U.S. weak or gain a toehold the hardliners will try to push. I am afraid you will see as someone has said an irony in that this extreme anti-nuclear group's actions at Charleston is going to push things to an East/West confrontation sooner or later.
 
I suspect it will become a proxy war with the Soviets withdrawing support from Saddam as they will consider him no longer a reliable partner. Iran on the other hand...yes they will not be friendly to the Great Northern Satan but it is likely they will be glad to get technology and support from whatever source they can get. Also there's the possibility of funding some of Saddam's internal enemies to unseat him.

It also means the Soviets will redouble their efforts to take Afghanistan. Wherever they can show the U.S. weak or gain a toehold the hardliners will try to push. I am afraid you will see as someone has said an irony in that this extreme anti-nuclear group's actions at Charleston is going to push things to an East/West confrontation sooner or later.
As the person who said that, I can see WW3 starting at somepoint. I dont think it will primarily be nuclear. It will be some time before the USA is ready for that. I give it until the early 90s. I also give the USSR until c. 2005 beforw it begins to collapse.
 
On a side note, the evacuation and destruction scenes in Charleston would foreshadow what would happen six years later, when Hurricane Hugo hit the city (and the surge nearly drowned hundreds of evacuees at a high school north of Charleston)...
 
Last edited:
I'm wondering how Hugo hitting that area would affect it ITTL (assuming it isn't butterflied away, of course)...
Letsassume it is not.hugo does not come until 89. I am guessing That cleanup efforts last until 1988. Anyway. The hurricane won't do much since Rebuilding has only just begun. Not a lot of people will move back right away so evac will be much easier.
 
Top