TL-191: Filling the Gaps

Discussion in 'Alternate History Books and Media' started by Craigo, Feb 12, 2010.

  1. FanOfHistory Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2018
    Yeah, but this time Japan's facing a Russia that knows what losing feels like. In OTL, Russia was overconfident because they were a Western nation facing against a second rate Asian power. TL-191 Russia has been through WW1, a bloody civil war, and WWII. I think that the new Tsar isn't about let Russia lose to Japan, which they probably think is still an inferior Asiatic power
     
  2. Zoidberg12 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2012
    Location:
    New Jersey, U.S.A.
    List of Governors of Florida

    5. John Milton (Democratic) (1861–1865)
    6. William W. J. Kelly (Independent) (1865–1869)
    7. George Franklin Drew (Independent) (1869–1873)
    8. Noble A. Hull (Independent) (1873–1877)
    9. William Dunnington Bloxham (Independent) (1877-1881)
    10. Edward Aylsworth Perry (Whig) (1881–1885)
    11. Vicente Martinez Ybor (Whig) (1885–1889)
    12. Francis Philip Fleming (Whig) (1889–1893)
    13. Henry Laurens Mitchell (Whig) (1893–1897)
    14. Milton H. Mabry (Whig) (1897–1901)
    15. William Sherman Jennings (Whig) (1901–1905)
    16. Napoleon Bonaparte Broward (Whig) (1905–1909)
    17. Livingston W. Bethel (Whig) (1909-1913)
    18. Albert Waller Gilchrist (Whig) (1913–1917)
    19. Park Trammell (Whig) (1917–1921)
    20. Cary Augustus Hardee (Whig) (1921–1925)
    21. John Wellborn Martin (Whig) (1925–1929)
    22. Doyle Elam Carlton (Whig) (1929–1933)

    23. Sidney Johnston Catts (Freedom) (1933–1936) †
    24. Spessard Lindsey Holland (Freedom) (1936–1941)
    25. Robert Lee Caldwell (Freedom) (1941–1944)*

    -. Irving Morrell (Military) (1944- )**


    † = Died in Office
    * = OTL's Millard Fillmore Caldwell
    ** = As head of the Atlantic Military District

    List of Governors of South Carolina


    69. Francis Wilkinson Pickens (Democratic) (1860-1862)
    70. Milledge Luke Bonham (Independent) (1862-1866)
    71. Andrew Gordon Magrath (Independent) (1866-1870)
    72. James Lawrence Orr (Independent) (1870-1874)
    73. Franklin J. Moses, Jr. (Independent) (1874-1878)
    74. William Dunlap Simpson (Independent) (1878-1880)
    75. Thomas Bothwell Jeter (Whig) (1880-1882)
    76. Johnson Hagood (Whig) (1882-1884)
    77. Hugh Smith Thompson (Whig) (1884-1886)
    78. Benjamin Ryan Tillman (Whig) (1886-1890)
    79. States Rights Gist (Whig) (1890-1892)
    80. John Calhoun Sheppard (Whig) (1892-1894)
    81. John Gary Evans (Whig) (1894-1896)
    82. William Haselden Ellerbe (Whig) (1896-1898)
    83. Miles Benjamin McSweeney (Whig) (1898-1900)
    84. Duncan Clinch Heyward (Whig) (1900-1904)
    85. Martin Frederick Ansel (Whig) (1904-1908)
    86. Coleman Livingston Blease (Whig) (1908-1912)
    87. Charles Aurelius Smith (Whig) (1912-1916)
    88. Richard Irvine Manning III (Whig) (1916-1920)
    89. Robert Archer Cooper (Whig) (1920-1924)
    90. Thomas Gordon McLeod (Whig) (1924-1928)
    91. John Gardiner Richards, Jr. (Whig) (1928-1932)
    92. Ibra Charles Blackwood (Whig) (1932-1934)
    93. Joseph Emile Harley (Whig) (1934-1936)

    94. Olin D. Johnston (Freedom) (1936-1942)
    95. Strom Thurmond (Freedom) (1942-1944)

    -. Irving Morrell (Military) (1944- )*


    * = As head of the Atlantic Military District

    List of Governors of North Carolina

    37. Zebulon Baird Vance (Democratic) (1862-1865)
    38. Jonathan Worth (Independent) (1865-1868)
    39. William Woods Holden (Independent) (1868-1871)
    40. Tod Robinson Caldwell (Independent) (1871-1874)
    41. Curtis Hooks Brogden (Independent) (1874-1876)
    42. Zebulon Baird Vance (Independent) (1876-1878)
    43. William Woods Holden (Independent) (1878-1881)
    44. Thomas Jordan Jarvis (Whig) (1881-1885)
    45. Alfred Moore Scales (Whig) (1885-1889)
    46. Daniel Gould Fowle (Whig) (1889-1891)

    47. Daniel Lindsay Russell (Radical) (1891-1893)
    48. Thomas Michael Holt (Whig) (1893-1897)
    49. Elias Carr (Whig) (1897-1901)
    50. Charles Brantley Aycock (Whig) (1901-1905)
    51. Robert Broadnax Glenn (Whig) (1905-1909)
    52. William Walton Kitchin (Whig) (1909-1913)
    53. Locke Craig (Whig) (1913-1917)
    54. Thomas Walter Bickett (Whig) (1917-1921)
    55. Cameron A. Morrison (Whig) (1921-1925)
    56. Angus Wilton McLean (Whig) (1925-1929)
    57. Oliver Max Gardner (Whig) (1929-1933)
    58. John C.B. Ehringhaus (Whig) (1933-1937)

    59. W. Kerr Scott (Freedom) (1937-1941)
    60. Luther H. Hodges (Freedom) (1941-1944)

    -. Irving Morrell (Military) (1944- )*


    * = As head of the Atlantic Military District
     
    Archangel likes this.
  3. TITUP Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2017
    Location:
    St. Louis, Missouri

    Nice. As a native of northern New Hampshire I await with anticipation your future works! The books make it clear that New England is pretty reliable Democrat territory and you have done a good job of sticking with some stout conservatives!
     
    Zoidberg12 likes this.
  4. TITUP Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2017
    Location:
    St. Louis, Missouri
    I think it is a reasonable assumption that the Japanese would be VERY cautious about any moves towards Russian Alaska... having taken great strides to disengage themselves from the War with the USA (and ever more powerful USN) it would be foolhardy to move on Russian Alaska as that would clearly be seen as a challenge to the USA's now hegemonic influence in North America. Why needlessly antagonize the newly nuclear USA when there are so many other easy pickings in the Asian pacific rim? Logistically the Aleutians are also cut off by thousands of miles of some of the harshest winter oceans in the world from Japan's main holdings in Asia. I think its safe to say that while the IJN may have a wish list that includes Russian Alaska there is very little chance (no way) Japanese imperial leadership would jeopardize reigniting war with the brand new USA superpower.

    Just my $0.2
     
  5. Zoidberg12 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2012
    Location:
    New Jersey, U.S.A.
    List of Governors of Louisiana

    16. Thomas Overton Moore (Democratic) (1860-1864)
    17. George Foster Shepley (Military) (1862)*
    18. Henry W. Allen (Independent) (1864-1868)
    19. Joshua Baker (Independent) (1868-1870)
    20. Henry C. Warmoth (Independent) (1870-1872)
    21. John McEnery (Independent) (1872-1873)
    22. Francis T. Nicholls (Independent) (1873-1877)
    23. Louis A. Wiltz (Independent) (1877-1881)
    24. Samuel D. McEnery (Whig) (1881-1888)
    25. Francis T. Nicholls (Whig) (1888-1892)
    26. Murphy J. Foster (Whig) (1892-1896)
    27. William W. Heard (Whig) (1896-1900)
    28. Newton C. Blanchard (Whig) (1900-1904)

    29. John Newton Pharr (Radical-Liberal) (1904-1908)
    30. Donelson Caffery III (Radical-Liberal) (1908-1912)

    31. Luther E. Hall (Whig) (1912-1916)
    32. Ruffin G. Pleasant (Radical-Liberal) (1916-1920)
    33. John M. Parker (Radical-Liberal) (1920-1924)
    34. Hewitt Bouanchaud (Radical-Liberal) (1924-1928)
    35. Huey Long (Radical-Liberal) (1928-1937) ††

    36. James A. Noe (Freedom) (1937-1938)
    37. Richard W. Leche (Freedom) (1938-1942)
    38. Sam H. Jones (Freedom) (1942-1944)

    -. Dwight D. Ironhewer (Military) (1944- )**


    †† = Assassinated
    * = As Union Military Governor of Louisiana from July 2 to November 4, 1862
    ** = As head of the Delta Military District

    List of Governors of Arkansas

    6. Henry Massey Rector (Democratic) (1862-1864)
    7. Harris Flanagin (Independent) (1864-1868)
    8. Thomas Fletcher (Independent) (1868-1870)
    9. Elisha Baxter (Independent) (1870-1874)
    10. Augus Hill Garland (Independent) (1874-1877)
    11. William Read Miller (Independent) (1877-1881)
    12. Thomas James Churchill (Whig) (1881-1883)
    13. James Henderson Berry (Whig) (1883-1885)
    14. Simon Pollard Hughes, Jr. (Whig) (1885-1889)
    15. James Philip Eagle (Whig) (1889-1893)
    16. James Paul Clarke (Whig) (1893-1897)
    17. Daniel Webster Jones (Whig) (1897-1901)
    18. Jeff Davis (Whig) (1901-1907)
    19. John Sebastian Little (Whig) (1907)
    20. John Isaac Moore (Whig) (1907-1909)
    21. George Washington Donaghey (Whig) (1909-1913)

    22. Joseph Taylor Robinson (Radical-Liberal) (1913-1915)
    23. George Washington Hays (Whig) (1915-1917)
    24. Charles Hillman Brough (Whig) (1917-1921)
    25. Thomas Chipman McRae (Whig) (1921-1925)
    26. Tom Jefferson Terral (Whig) (1925-1927)
    27. John Ellis Martineau (Whig) (1927-1928)
    28. Harvey Parnell (Whig) (1928-1933)
    29. Junius Marion Futrell (Whig) (1933-1937)

    30. Homer Martin Adkins (Freedom) (1937-1941)
    31. Benjamin Travis Laney (Freedom) (1941-1944)

    -. Dwight D. Ironhewer (Military) (1944- )*

    * = As head of the Delta Military District

    List of Governors of Cuba

    1. Thomas Hunt Morgan (Military) (1877-1879)
    2. Robert E. Rodes (Military) (1879-1881)
    3. Tomás Estrada Palma (Independent) (1881-1889)
    4. Luis Estévez y Romero (Whig) (1889-1893)
    5. Emilio Núñez (Radical) (1893-1897)

    6. Enrique José Varona (Whig) (1897-1901)
    7. Francisco Carrillo Morales (Radical-Liberal) (1901-1905)
    8. José Miguel Gómez (Radical-Liberal) (1905-1909)
    9. Domingo Méndez Capote (Radical-Liberal) (1909-1913)

    10. Mario García Menocal (Whig) (1913-1917)
    11. Alfredo Zayas y Alfonso (Radical-Liberal) (1917-1921)
    12. Carlos Manuel de Céspedes y Quesada (Radical-Liberal) (1921-1925)
    13. Carlos Mendieta (Radical-Liberal) (1925-1927)
    14. Federico Laredo Brú (Radical-Liberal) (1927-1929)

    15. José Agripino Barnet (Whig) (1929-1933)
    16. Federico Laredo Brú (Radical-Liberal) (1933-1935)
    17. Miguel Mariano Gómez (Radical-Liberal) (1935-1937)

    18. Ramon Grau (Freedom) (1937-1941)
    19. Carlos Hevia (Freedom) (1941-1944)

    -. Joseph Stilwell (Military) (1944- )
     
    Archangel likes this.
  6. Zoidberg12 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2012
    Location:
    New Jersey, U.S.A.
    List of Governors of Houston

    1. Frank E. Wheelock (Democratic) (1918-1922)
    2. Richard M. Chitwood (Democratic) (1922-1926)
    3. William H. Bledsoe (Democratic) (1926-1930)
    4. Roy Alvin Baldwin (Democratic) (1930-1934)
    5. James Allred (Democratic) (1934-1938)
    6. Walter Frank Woodul (Democratic) (1938-1941)

    Vacancy (1941-1944)
    -. Walter Krueger (Military) (1944-1945)
    7. John Lee Smith (Democratic) (1945- )
     
    Archangel likes this.
  7. Odinson Talk Nerdy To Me

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2018
    Location:
    The Constitutional Monarchy of Virginia
    StromThurmond was killed in 1941 during the bombing of Charleston
     
  8. Allochronian Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2018
    Location:
    originaltimeline
    So much material to read over!

    There was a previous thread that resulted in a series of good questions:

    Did/Would there be any Confederate influence in Asia, especially during the Boxer Rebellion of 1899-1901?

    Regardless of the answer, Turtledove gives us a brief mention of an event that happened in TL-191: Hispano-Japanese War. Out-of-universe, it's a unique form of parallelism that is meant to be compared to the OTL Russo-Japanese War of 1904-1905. In-universe, this war resulted in a Japanese victory that allowed them to control more of the Pacific than OTL.

    When would this war plausibly occur?

    Would there still be a Russo-Japanese War, or would Czar Nicholas II become more cautious after seeing an Asian power victorious over a European power and negotiate with Japan over control of Manchuria?


    I always imagined that Japan would (eventually) gain control of the Eastern-most parts of Russia during and at the end of the Second Great War. Not complete control, but they would gain a decent grip on the costal regions all the way up to the Bering Sea. I don't see them gaining control of Russian Alaska. It is in my opinion that I see Russian Alaska being cut off from the mainland and either become its own nation or eventually be annexed into the United States.
     
    Alterwright and Odinson like this.
  9. Zoidberg12 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2012
    Location:
    New Jersey, U.S.A.
    List of Governors of Sonora

    1. Henry Hopkins Sibley (Independent) (1882-1886)
    2. Santos Benavides (Independent) (1886-1888)
    3. Luis Emeterio Torres (Independent) (1888-1890)
    4. Antonio Escalante (Independent) (1890-1892)
    5. Carlos Rodrigo Ortiz Retes (Radical) (1892-1894)
    6. Ramón Corral (Radical) (1894-1896)
    7. Luis Emeterio Torres (Radical) (1896-1900)

    8. Ramón Corral (Radical/Radical-Liberal) (1900-1904)
    9. Rafael Izábal (Whig) (1904-1908)
    10. Fernando Aguilar Aguilar (Radical-Liberal) (1908-1912)
    11. José María Maytorena (Radical-Liberal) (1912-1916)
    12. Ignacio L. Pesqueira (Radical-Liberal) (1916-1918)
    13. Plutarco Elías Calles (Radical-Liberal) (1918-1922)
    14. Adolfo de la Huerta (Radical-Liberal) (1922-1926)
    15. Flavio A. Bórquez Velderrain (Radical-Liberal) (1926-1928)
    16. Francisco Elías Suárez (Radical-Liberal) (1928-1930)
    17. Abelardo Rodríguez (Radical-Liberal) (1930-1934)
    18. Plutarco Elías Calles (Radical-Liberal) (1934-1936)

    19. Álvaro Obregón (Freedom) (1936-1940)
    20. Francisco S. Elías (Freedom) (1940-1942)
    21. Anselmo Macías Valenzuela (Freedom) (1942-1944)

    -. Robert L. Eichelberger (Military) (1944- )*


    * = As head of the Mexican Military District

    List of Governors of Chihuahua

    1. Thomas Green (Independent) (1882-1886)
    2. Mariano Samaniego (Independent) (1886-1888)
    3. Luis Terrazas (Independent) (1888-1890)
    4. Carlos Pacheco Villalobos (Independent) (1890-1892)
    5. Carlos Fuero (Radical) (1892-1894)
    6. Rafael Pimentel (Radical) (1894-1896)
    7. Miguel Ahumada (Radical) (1896-1900)

    8. José María Sánchez González (Radical/Radical-Liberal) (1900-1902)
    9. Enrique Creel Cuilty (Whig) (1902-1906)
    10. Alberto Terrazas Cuilty (Whig) (1906-1908)

    11. Abraham González (Radical-Liberal) (1908-1909)
    12. Doroteo Arango (Radical-Liberal) (1909-1913)
    13. Miguel Ahumada (Radical-Liberal) (1913-1915)
    14. Arnulfo González (Radical-Liberal) (1915-1917)
    15. Emilio Salinas (Radical-Liberal) (1917-1919)
    16. Abel S. Rodríguez (Radical-Liberal) (1919-1923)
    17. Ignacio C. Enríquez (Radical-Liberal) (1923-1927)
    18. Luis L. León (Radical-Liberal) (1927-1929)
    19. Francisco R. Almada (Radical-Liberal) (1929-1933)
    20. Rómulo Escobar Zerman (Radical-Liberal) (1933-1937)

    21. Roberto Fierro Villalobos (Freedom) (1937-1939)
    22. Rodrigo M. Quevedo Moreno (Freedom) (1939-1943)
    23. Práxedes Giner Durán (Freedom) (1943-1944)

    -. Robert L. Eichelberger (Military) (1944- )*


    * = As head of the Mexican Military District
     
    Archangel likes this.
  10. Alterwright "You were never even a player."

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2018
    Location:
    California, USA
    I believe that Japan's territorial demands from Mikhail II and the Russian Empire in the summer of 1944 in the wake of their defeat against the Germans could potentially reflect a possible Russo-Japanese War in TL-191 - instead of it occurring in 1904-1905 as in our world, this one could occur in 1944, namely for the acquisition of resources.

    Japan is in a much more advantageous position to claim territory from the Russian Far East in 1944. Provided it can get its massive logistics and supplies issues sorted out in Manchuria and China, the Japanese stand poised for an ambitious and potentially successful conquest of the Russian Far East, namely the territory in as far west as Vladivostok and as far east as Lake Baikal - I'm unsure how far north they would go though. Kamchatka perhaps? Unsure. Again, there is the supply and logistics issue that needs to be considered since Siberia is just so vast. They can only take as much land as far as their fuel gauge would go, and that's even considering the fact that they do have control of the Dutch East Indies.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kantokuen

    ^^^ --- Again, a really good idea for what Japan's plans were for the Russian Far East could be understood through their "Kantokuen" Plan. It details an offensive into Russia with targets including Lake Baikal and Vladivostok. From these plans we can at least get a basic idea for what they were after how far they would go.

    And this is where I have to clarify something - I don't believe Japan would invade Russian Alaska or gain control of it. And by that I mean they would not invade the Alaskan mainland. Anchorage and Juneau? Out of the question. Actually setting foot on mainland North America? Not in their interest. The Navy would likely disagree to supporting the Army for an adventure like that. Siberia would be the main priority through and through and even that would be pushing the Army and Navy's cooperation to the straining point.

    ... But landing troops on the Aleutian Islands to to cut off Russian Alaska and any possible reinforcements that might be sent west to Siberia via the sea? Yes, I believe the Japanese would try that. Securing a few vital islands in the Aleutians to secure there flank and deny the Bering Sea and Bering Strait to the Russians for as long as the Siberian Campaign goes on? Yeah I think they would try that.

     
  11. Alterwright "You were never even a player."

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2018
    Location:
    California, USA
    Thank you for that, I greatly appreciate it! I apologize in advance for what might be impassioned statements. I got a lot to say on this subject, as you'll see soon, so I apologize.

    By the "end" of the war in the summer 1944 in TL-191, the assumption that the United States has "hegemonic" influence in North America is still fairly tenuous to me. Canada, while fairly subdued, is still under military occupation and still hosts rebel cells willing to fight against the United States, something that Japan as exploited in the past during 1920s and 1930s. Though those efforts failed, these rebels are by no means gone and unsupported. And then there's the former CSA to consider and Utah to a lesser extent, with even more fervently defiant populations still unwilling to call themselves Yankees. Military occupation and martial law will have to be an unfortunate necessity to keeping the southern states under control. That will require many men and resources that the United States will definitely need to keep the lid down on things. Consolidation, reconstruction, and enforcement of a new authority over the southern states would be the United State's priority despite a willingness to police world affairs when it comes to atomic weaponry.

    It is also a reasonable decision that striking the Aleutian Islands is, in my opinion, as cautious as the Japanese can get if they decided to send forces there. Siberia would be the main theater of operations for their probable offensive into the Russian Far East in 1944, no question about it. It would require many men and resources and the region they wish to control in Siberia holds much for them to take. Alaska as it is in TL-191 holds no value to the Japanese - this assumption I agree with and I actually don't believe they have ambitions to even try to take Alaska away from the Russians.

    The importance of the Aleutians, in my opinion, and strictly the Aleutians, is another story. Their value is in where they lie in the sea and what the Japanese can do to put more strain on the Russians to get them to the negotiating table on less favorable terms.

    They would deny the Bering Sea and possibly the Bering Strait to the Russians, cutting off Alaska and cutting off another source of possible reinforcements for the Russians to send west into Siberia via sea lanes. To secure a possible flank from which the Russians can transport troops into Siberia. From these islands, if they manage to build airfields on them, or take islands with existing airfields, they can also potentially strike at naval bases in Kamchatka where parts of the Russian Pacific Fleet could be anchored, especially at Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky. I believe that any serious move into Siberia would also put the Russian Pacific Fleet (if there is one in TL-191) on a high alert status - Vladivostok would be a primary target for the Japanese and the Russian Pacific Fleet's headquarters would be there. If the Russian Pacific Fleet moves in response to an invasion of Siberia, the Imperial Japanese Fleet will have to respond.


    Now, taking that into account, it would be foolhardy of the Japanese to attack the Russian Alaskan mainland in North America itself. It would be out of their operational limit. With troops setting foot here I believe this would set off more of an alarm to the United States and would be cause for serious worry. This is something the Japanese would not want to have and would be an unadvised move. But to be fair Alaska is still Russian territory. Not United States territory. This is something the US will have to consider too.

    Even if the US was to respond to movements in the Bering Sea, what could they respond with in time? Would they really get involved in a possible war between two former and feuding Entente Powers? The same logic of traveling thousands of miles to the Aleutians, to some of the harshest winter conditions in the world, also applies to United States. Without a Panama Canal in place that travel time is doubled for the existing fleet in the Atlantic, with any force concentration bound to be noticed by the Japanese. The US Navy in the Pacific in TL-191 by 1944, from what we are aware of, only has two escort carriers in the Pacific, with their only fleet carrier sunk and with the only other known carrier possibly in the Atlantic. The Japanese Navy most certainly have their own escort and fleet carriers prowling the Pacific and they certainly have more of them to spare. The US Navy in the Pacific would be dealing with a Japanese Fleet that is much more potent and much more well supplied, given that the Japanese had control of the oil of Dutch East Indies since the inter-war years in TL-191. It would be tough going for the USA even with the Sandwich Islands in their control. The Japanese have demonstrated in the past that they have the capability to strike the US west coast as well, with far more potency than they did in our timeline. They have done so multiple times with varying degrees of success. Regardless, it is a capability that the US is aware of and should greatly consider before going off and teaching Japan a lesson.

    With regards to the USA being a nuclear superpower that Japan should not mess around with - again I believe that's debatable. We can't forget that Great Britain has also demonstrated that it has created the atomic bomb in this timeline - and Japan attacked them regardless, specifically they attacked British colonies in Asia and the Pacific. Britain has also demonstrated the capability to use it as well, having dropped a bomb on Hamburg, Germany, with another bomb ready for use before the bomber carrying it was shot down. By June or July of 1944, the Japanese are very aware that Great Britain has the capability of producing atomic weaponry and delivering it. By this time it is also aware that the United States and Germany have the bomb. And yet by the end of the Second Great War Japan is the only great power to emerge from it still intact and without getting nuked - and its still growing. Even if the US was to make another atomic bomb and put it on a bomber to try and intimidate Japan, the distance to deliver that bomb is a long way off from striking anything important within the Japanese Empire, even if it was coming from the Sandwich Islands or Midway or Wake. If bombers can't hit the home islands or its major colonies, then the US doesn't have the intimidation factor. It too would be needlessly antagonizing Japan. Simply put, the US doesn't have the force necessary to intimidate Japan into complying with their wishes in the summer 1944. Later, yes, but as things are in 1944 TL-191, I don't think so.

    The Asian holdings on the Pacific Rim are either in Japanese control, are about to fall under their control, or are being contested by the British, the only power in the Pacific with a navy capable of defying the Japanese, even during the late stages in the war, although it is battered and stretched across the world. The Philippines, Indochina, The (former Dutch) East Indies, the port cities along China's coast and multiple islands across the Pacific are already under Japanese control by the end of the war and the US Navy has failed to contest those territories. Soon or presumably soon Malaya, Hong Kong, and Singapore will fall to the Japanese. Its run out of Pacific islands worth conquering really, besides possibly the Sandwich Islands, Midway, and Wake, the later two they merely just abandoned after taking them from the US.

    I'm not denying the US is a nuclear armed super-power in TL-191. It certainly deserves that title. But its a country that has been deeply scarred and battered because of this war, fighting the Confederates in a massive battle to the death, one in which nuclear bombs were dropped on its own soil. It has shown the willingness to face down countries it sees as a threat and the US government has shown a desire to check Japan's ambitions in the Pacific. Japan is a world power, arguably a super power in its own right in TL-191, a true equal to the United States in terms of military power and force projection. The Pacific is divided in influence and Japan arguably has an advantage. The US will be able to properly contest Japan in TL-191 in due time believe, its inevitable. But in 1944, just after a massive war, to imply that Japan should not mess with the USA because it is now in possession of an atomic bomb is debatable... especially given that Japan may be looking to develop one of its own in TL-191.

    If the United States wants to get involved in a possible war between Japan and Russia over possession of Siberia due to both countries potentially squaring off up north in the Bering Sea on the Aleutians, then I believe the United States seriously needs to consider the options it has before going in and trying to intimidate Japan out of the area.
     
  12. EnglishCanuck Blogger/Writer/Dangerous Moderate

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2011
    Location:
    The Commonwealth
    In regards to the UK and Japan, I haven't read the books in a while, but I do know that the wiki suggests that at the end of the war the Germans and the US were considering letting the UK up easy in order to act as a bulwark against Japan. This does make sense on a few levels, the High Seas Fleet was apparently decisively defeated in 1942, while the Royal Navy remained a potent striking force. Though the USN could fight Japan, keeping the RN as a buffer might make some sense.
     
  13. FanOfHistory Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2018
    Really? Where does it say that
     
  14. Gaius Julius Magnus Gone Fishin'

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2012
    Location:
    The Once and Future Kingdom of New England
    Yeah, I could see Germany and the US wanting to keep France and the former CSA (their historic respective enemies) down and out while Britain could end up like Japan in OTL. A former enemy turned ally agaisnt a new threat.
     
  15. EnglishCanuck Blogger/Writer/Dangerous Moderate

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2011
    Location:
    The Commonwealth
    Here in their part about the Atlantic campaigns. Since the HSF does not play a substantial role in the story (and the British spark a major uprising in Canada circa 1942 suggests that the HSF was defeated at some point at sea.

    For me that does make sense, as the Kaiser would have probably gone in the direction of super-dreadnoughts instead of aircraft carries and AFAIK there are no German aircraft carriers in TL-191. I always pictured something like a German Operation Ten-Go, where the battleships of the High Seas Fleet sortie, only to be devastated by the air power of the RAF and the RN carriers.

    It makes sense to me that they might prop the British Empire up a bit, with certain restrictions. Engineering an independent India, allowing Britain to retain their colonies that are in the way of Japan and forcing British attention to the Pacific rather than Europe.
     
  16. Gaius Julius Magnus Gone Fishin'

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2012
    Location:
    The Once and Future Kingdom of New England
    Their African presence might also be dismantled but yeah I could see them being seen as an extra ally agaisnt Japan. So outside of losing India, they could end up keeping what they have left in the Pacific and Asia.
     
  17. Zoidberg12 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2012
    Location:
    New Jersey, U.S.A.
    According to the Turtledove wiki, while Anne Colleton died in said bombing, it was left unclear whether the obliquely mentioned Strom survived the bombing. I like the idea of him surviving, becoming Freedom Party governor of South Carolina, being arrested by the US Army after the war and then committing suicide in 1948 while in US Army custody.
     
    Odinson likes this.
  18. Alterwright "You were never even a player."

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2018
    Location:
    California, USA
    How he'd survive that is beyond me.
     
  19. Tiro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2015
    Just wanted to pop in and say how grateful I am for all you fellows keeping this thread going; I keep meaning to post something and one keeps missing the mark!:confounded:
     
    Odinson and Alterwright like this.
  20. Tiro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2015
    For the sake of my self-respect, I did a little thinking and a very minor bit of calculation recently averaging out casualties of the Overland Campaign with those for the Franco-Prussian War (with the Confederates as the Prussians and the USA in place of France), which gave me the figures of 89,821 casualties (killed, wounded or captured) on the Southern side and 112,265 (killed, wounded or captured) on the Northern.

    These are very rough figures indeed, but one wanted to post SOMETHING and would also be grateful for any thoughts you Good Fellows may have on the subject.
     
    Alterwright likes this.