TL-191: Filling the Gaps

There were at least 3 in the novels:

Willy Knight's coup attempt

Nathan Bedford Forrest III's coup attempt

The atomic bombing of Newport News
Don't forget about the attempt during the 1936 Richmond Summer Olympics. When a hotdog vendor almost killed him, but was stopped by Clarence Potter. Who was their to Featherston himself, and the only reason he shot the the assassin was to keep the guards from killing innocent bystanders.
 
I've done some rough calculations for what could potentially be casualty numbers in the Second Great War. By dividing OTL German and Soviet deaths from WWII by German and Russian deaths in WWI, and then multiplying them by the generally accepted figures for US and CS GWI deaths, I got the following results:
GWI/WWIGWII/WWII
GER1.75 Million10 Million
RUS/SOV2.25 Million17 Million
USA1.1 Million8.3 Million
CSA0.9 Million5.15 Million
Adding in 8 Million for the Reduction adds to about 21.5 Million total deaths in North America, and 13 Million in the CSA alone, well over a third of the Pre-war population. These numbers are just a guess though, and I'd like to hear other people's thoughts.
 
I don't think it's a good idea to use OTL Soviet numbers for calculating US deaths. The North American front in GW2 is very different from OTL Eastern Front. The CSA is not waging a war of annihilation like Nazi Germany.

For civilian deaths, I'd use Belgium in WW1 since like the Germans in OTL and the Americans in TL 191 the CSA took and massacred hostages. So find the number of Belgiums executed by the Germans, divide it by the population of occupied Belgium and then multiply that number by the population of occupied Ohio and Pennsylvania. There would also be deaths from strategic bombing. I doubt the CSA could ever produce as many planes and bombs as Nazi Germany, so I'll take 20,000 as a very rough estimate for those killed in CSA air raids. That's about half the number of Brits the Germans killed in the blitz.

For the nuking of Philadelphia you could use Nuke Map.

Comparing US military deaths in GW2 with OTL USSR also doesn't work very well. The US forces would be better supplied than the Soviets and of course POW deaths would be much less since the Confederates aren't deliberately starving them to death. Maybe for estimating deaths we could take OTL Union battle deaths (not including any deaths from diseases) and adjusting for the greater population.

These probably will yield better numbers.

Also while it's common to say the TL191 US is like the USSR, it's actually a pretty inaccurate comparison. The only things they have in common are that they were invaded by a smaller revanchist neighbor on June 22, 1941 and they both deported a rebellious minority at the end of the war.

Also the CSA is not very similar to Nazi Germany, but that's another story.

The GW1 numbers look more plausible. It makes sense that the US would have more dead since they were fighting on two fronts. I wonder how many deaths Canada would have?

Edit: I'll try running some numbers later. There might be better OTL comparisons to use.
 
Last edited:
I've done some rough calculations for what could potentially be casualty numbers in the Second Great War. By dividing OTL German and Soviet deaths from WWII by German and Russian deaths in WWI, and then multiplying them by the generally accepted figures for US and CS GWI deaths, I got the following results:
GWI/WWIGWII/WWII
GER1.75 Million10 Million
RUS/SOV2.25 Million17 Million
USA1.1 Million8.3 Million
CSA0.9 Million5.15 Million
Adding in 8 Million for the Reduction adds to about 21.5 Million total deaths in North America, and 13 Million in the CSA alone, well over a third of the Pre-war population. These numbers are just a guess though, and I'd like to hear other people's thoughts.
Casualties of GW1 sounds believeable. But for GW2 Russian and German casualties seems bit high IMO.
 
Also the CSA is not very similar to Nazi Germany, but that's another story.
Well except for the whole thing about deliberately killing millions of people in an attempted genocide. Also it goes without saying that there were cases of the Confederates treating US Pows very badly. Americans werent seen as an inferior race like the Nazis saw the Soviets but it was pretty close all in all ....
 
Well except for the whole thing about deliberately killing millions of people in an attempted genocide. Also it goes without saying that there were cases of the Confederates treating US Pows very badly. Americans werent seen as an inferior race like the Nazis saw the Soviets but it was pretty close all in all ....
The Population Reduction is different from the Holocaust. Other than both being genocides and both involving gas chambers, they're pretty different. A better comparison might be the Armenian genocide.

Almost all Holocaust vicitms were from Poland and the USSR. Very few were from Germany. But most victims of the population Reduction were residents of the CSA. Like the Armenians who lived among the Kurds and Turks Confederate blacks shared a country with Confederate whites.

During Weimar, Jews were legally citizens and were mostly assimilated. Antisemitism, while not gone, was not prominent outside of the right. But in the decades leading up to the Armenian genocide the Armenians suffered immense oppression. Twenty years before the genocide, tens or hundreds of thousands of Armenians were killed in the Hamidian massacre. Just like the Armenians, blacks were the victims of state sponsored oppression for decades before being killed. And like the Armenians, blacks suffered cruel massacres twenty years before genocide.

The Nazis viewed Jews as conspirators who wanted to rule the world. For decades, and especially after the events at Van at the start of WW1, the Turks viewed Armenians as a fifth column, who needed to be destroyed to save the country. After the events of the Red Rebellion white Confederates viewed blacks as a dangerous fifth column, who needed to be destroyed to save the nation.

Most Germans were not *directly* involved in the Holocaust, but everyday Turks and Kurds took part in the Armenian genocide. And like the Turks and Kurds, everyday Confederates would have to be involved in the Population Reduction in order for it to occur.

As far as treatment of POWs goes, sure it was bad, but I highly doubt there were orders to kill off as many Yankees POWs as possible. OTL 2/3 of Soviet POWs were starved. I am unaware of such a death toll in any other modern war. Even the Japanese, who are infamous for their wartime treatment of POWs "only" killed about 1/4. About a third of German POWs died and that was afte4 Germany waged a war of annihilation against the USSR.
 
I don't think it's a good idea to use OTL Soviet numbers for calculating US deaths. The North American front in GW2 is very different from OTL Eastern Front. The CSA is not waging a war of annihilation like Nazi Germany.

For civilian deaths, I'd use Belgium in WW1 since like the Germans in OTL and the Americans in TL 191 the CSA took and massacred hostages. So find the number of Belgiums executed by the Germans, divide it by the population of occupied Belgium and then multiply that number by the population of occupied Ohio and Pennsylvania. There would also be deaths from strategic bombing. I doubt the CSA could ever produce as many planes and bombs as Nazi Germany, so I'll take 20,000 as a very rough estimate for those killed in CSA air raids. That's about half the number of Brits the Germans killed in the blitz.

For the nuking of Philadelphia you could use Nuke Map.

Comparing US military deaths in GW2 with OTL USSR also doesn't work very well. The US forces would be better supplied than the Soviets and of course POW deaths would be much less since the Confederates aren't deliberately starving them to death. Maybe for estimating deaths we could take OTL Union battle deaths (not including any deaths from diseases) and adjusting for the greater population.

These probably will yield better numbers.

Also while it's common to say the TL191 US is like the USSR, it's actually a pretty inaccurate comparison. The only things they have in common are that they were invaded by a smaller revanchist neighbor on June 22, 1941 and they both deported a rebellious minority at the end of the war.

Also the CSA is not very similar to Nazi Germany, but that's another story.

The GW1 numbers look more plausible. It makes sense that the US would have more dead since they were fighting on two fronts. I wonder how many deaths Canada would have?

Edit: I'll try running some numbers later. There might be better OTL comparisons to use.
Fair enough, it was a rough experiment of sorts, and the numbers are certainly too high. the GWI numbers are taken from the books, where Morrell says the US loses a bit over a million and the CS a bit under a million. I do think that GWII numbers would be significantly higher than GWI though.
Casualties of GW1 sounds believeable. But for GW2 Russian and German casualties seems bit high IMO.
The Russian and German casualties are from OTL, sorry if I didn't make that clear.
 
Fair enough, it was a rough experiment of sorts, and the numbers are certainly too high. the GWI numbers are taken from the books, where Morrell says the US loses a bit over a million and the CS a bit under a million. I do think that GWII numbers would be significantly higher than GWI though.

The Russian and German casualties are from OTL, sorry if I didn't make that clear.
Yeah, GW2 casualties would definitely be higher. Especially for the Confederates (even before considering the population reduction). By the end the army was basically scraping the bottom of the manpower barrel, and lots of civilians were killed in air raids and the atomic bombings.
 
So I've been thinking about the Siege of Winnipeg in the FGW (and in a broader sense the Canadian Campaign). In TL if I remember the siege of Winnipeg took years all the while the Trans Canadian Railway was open with the Canadian position in Winnipeg keeping the railway open. The more I think about it the less sense that makes. Even if the Canadians can hold Winnipeg the geography of the prairie provinces means that small parties of American calvary can just tear up the railway or capture the small railway towns at will at any number of points. The Canadians just don't have the manpower to hold the entire length. The disparity in troops, armaments, industry, population, and finances between the US and Canada (even this Rump US facing the Confederates) are just to stark to allow the Canadians to plausibly be able to hold the Prairie provinces. Realistically pretty much everything between Western Ontario and Vancouver (BC itself probably can't hold but Vancouver if suitably fortified could probably hold as a fortress port city) pretty much automatically gets conquered by the US.

Now the way that years long "Siege of Winnipeg" occurring actually makes sense to me is if it's the result of Pre War Canadian political infighting and a political inability to publicly accept the fact that the Prairie provinces are indefensible. Basically it's a situation like Fortress Singapore or the pre WW2 US war Plans in regards to the Philippines. The proponents of "Fortress Winnipeg" manage to successfully argue for the construction of a large series of fortifications around Winnipeg and the stationing of a substantial portion of the Pre War Canadian army in Winnipeg. The notion is that by holding Winnipeg the Canadians can keep the railway open and the US army will be forced to devote so much of it's forces to the siege (and the assumed numerous assaults on the pre war built new concrete fortifications) that they won't be able to occupy the rest of the Prairies and their efforts further east will be Stymied.

Instead when the war starts the US does invade and besiege Winnipeg. But instead of settling in for numerous infantry assaults enough forces are left to encircle the City and artillery left to bombard it but the rest of the Army goes elsewhere. Raiding parties capture or tear up numerous lengths of the Trans Canadian Railway. A substantial percentage of the best part of the pre war Canadian army (including some of it's best and most modern artillery) are trapped far away from where they could actually have proven useful (say in the East) slowly being bombed and starved into submission. The US Army figures that even if the defenders of Winnipeg manage to break out with the railways captured or torn up the Canadians will have to abandon almost all of their heavy equipment and munitions and try to walk hundreds of miles. If they do manage to break out the US Calvary can raid at the edges slowly weakening the Canadian forces until they're weak enough to either surrender or be decisively be defeated by a smaller covering force.

In the end "Fortress Winnipeg" actually outlasts Canada as a country only surrendering several weeks after the unconditional surrender of the Canadian Government. The Canadian forces involved will go down in history as "The Last Canadians" as a result but the general consensus of military academics is that the entire concept was fatally flawed and that "Fortress Winnipeg" ended up not only weakening Canada but speeding up it's demise by at least several months.
 
Didn't Morrell take part in cutting part of the Trans Canadian Railway in 1916? I mean he was sent to Western Canada after being banished from the General Staff for a disaster in Utah.
 
The Population Reduction is different from the Holocaust. Other than both being genocides and both involving gas chambers, they're pretty different. A better comparison might be the Armenian genocide.



Almost all Holocaust vicitms were from Poland and the USSR. Very few were from Germany. But most victims of the population Reduction were residents of the CSA. Like the Armenians who lived among the Kurds and Turks Confederate blacks shared a country with Confederate whites.
I really think this borders on an offensive argument.First of all it flirts with the notion that all the CSA blacks had it coming to them because they were all Red Rebels against the CSA government.This is far from true as most blacks stayed if not loyal to the CSA government they stayed quiet and some put on the CSA uniform and fought for the CSA despite all it had done for them. Were any of them spared from the Destruction ? Also the argument that the CSA was only interested in killing off a disloyal fifth column of blacks in the CSA is disproved by what they did to Haiti. Haiti was targeted because it was a black ruled country with lots of professional black people in it who the CSA saw as subhuman which is very similar to the way Nazi Germany targeted Poland and the Soviet Union. The argument that the average OTL German had no knowledge of the Holocaust and nothing to do with it is very much what US troops heard in Germany in 1945 from countless former loyal Na.zis. This notion means that the German army was not responsible for much of what happened and we know it was. There wasnt a clean army in Nazi Germany or Freedomite CSA . The CSA killed blacks it came across in Ohio and elsewhere in the US proper and who knows what it would have done if it had won and actually spread down into Central and South America both of which have substantial black populations.

The Population Reduction is very similar to the Holocaust however you look at it....
 
Last edited:
I really think this borders on an offensive argument.First of all it flirts with the notion that all the CSA blacks had it coming to them because they were all Red Rebels against the CSA government.This is far from true as most blacks stayed if not loyal to the CSA government they stayed quiet and some put on the CSA uniform and fought for the CSA despite all it had done for them. Were any of them spared from the Destruction ?
That's because racist fears are never rational. The Confederate whites saw ALL blacks as disloyal and untrustworthy because a minority of them rebelled. Similar things in OTL have happened. For example, there was no evidence that Armenians (or Greeks for that matter) were disloyal, but the actions of Armenian revolutionaries were used to tar ALL Armenians as disloyal.

Also the argument that the CSA was only interested in killing off a disloyal fifth column of blacks in the CSA is disproved by what they did to Haiti. Haiti was targeted because it was a black ruled country with lots of professional black people in it who the CSA saw as subhuman which is very similar to the way Nazi Germany targeted Poland and the Soviet Union.
Haiti is the only place outside of the south where the Confederates commit genocide. As far as Southerners were concerned, Haiti was living proof that black people were disloyal, since it was created in a slave rebellion. Note that fear of black rebellion does not preclude seeing black people as racially inferior, and indeed only a racist would see a whole ethnic group as disloyal.

Also, now that I think of it, the population reduction is really the logical end point of southern fears of slave rebellion.

The argument that the average OTL German had no knowledge of the Holocaust and nothing to do with it is very much what US troops heard in Germany in 1945 from countless former loyal Na.zis. This notion means that the German army was not responsible for much of what happened and we know it was.
Where are you getting this from? I never wrote that Germans didn't know about the Holocaust, or that the Heer didn't commit war crimes. A quick search of my posts in After 1900 would reveal I know those to be false.

There wasnt a clean army in Nazi Germany or Freedomite CSA . The CSA killed blacks it came across in Ohio and elsewhere in the US proper and who knows what it would have done if it had won and actually spread down into Central and South America both of which have substantial black populations.
Cincinnatus Driver hear rumors that the CS Army was harder on US blacks than the Freedom Party was on Confederate blacks. While there certainly were atrocities committed in Ohio and Pennsylvania, they were probably more like the massacres of colonial troops carried out by the Wehrmacht and SS during the invasion of France., than the Final Solution. Like those German atrocities, the Confederates were inspired by racist propaganda, but there were no official orders from Berlin/Richmond to kill all colonial soldiers/black Americans. Anyway, the black population of the US is very small in TL 191, so there wouldn't have been many in occupied Ohio and Pennsylvania

As for Confederate plans to expand the Population Reduction, there is little evidence. The CSA occupied the Bahamas during the war, and did not kill the black population there. There is no evidence that the Freedomites wanted to expand into Latin America. They were mostly concerned with defeating the US and making the CSA the preeminent North American power. Also, Jefferson Pinkard in his interrogation says that the CSA never harmed any Yankee blacks. Of course, the interrogators reminded him of Haiti.
 
The Nazis viewed Jews as conspirators who wanted to rule the world. For decades, and especially after the events at Van at the start of WW1, the Turks viewed Armenians as a fifth column, who needed to be destroyed to save the country. After the events of the Red Rebellion white Confederates viewed blacks as a dangerous fifth column, who needed to be destroyed to save the nation.



Most Germans were not *directly* involved in the Holocaust, but everyday Turks and Kurds took part in the Armenian genocide. And like the Turks and Kurds, everyday Confederates would have to be involved in the Population Reduction in order for it to occur.
Where are you getting this from? I never wrote that Germans didn't know about the Holocaust, or that the Heer didn't commit war crimes. A quick search of my posts in After 1900 would reveal I know those to be false.







Cincinnatus Driver hear rumors that the CS Army was harder on US blacks than the Freedom Party was on Confederate blacks. While there certainly were atrocities committed in Ohio and Pennsylvania, they were probably more like the massacres of colonial troops carried out by the Wehrmacht and SS during the invasion of France., than the Final Solution. Like those German atrocities, the Confederates were inspired by racist propaganda, but there were no official orders from Berlin/Richmond to kill all colonial soldiers/black Americans. Anyway, the black population of the US is very small in TL 191, so there wouldn't have been many in occupied Ohio and Pennsylvania



As for Confederate plans to expand the Population Reduction, there is little evidence. The CSA occupied the Bahamas during the war, and did not kill the black population there. There is no evidence that the Freedomites wanted to expand into Latin America. They were mostly concerned with defeating the US and making the CSA the preeminent North American power. Also, Jefferson Pinkard in his interrogation says that the CSA never harmed any Yankee blacks. Of course, the interrogators reminded him of Haiti.
Germans were directly involved though their knowledge and support of the Holocaust. Direct involvement is more that loading up trains and locking the doors of a gas chamber.Also if the Population Reduction was the logical extension of the Confederate view of blacks then the Holocaust was certainly the logical extension of the Nazi view of Jews,The fact that most Jews killed were from Poland and the USSR proves nothing other than thats where most Jews were living. German and Western European Jews were hardly exempt from the Holocaust there just were not as many of them, On a related note we have no reason to believe that if the CSA had won that they would have not instituted a "black free" policy wherever they ruled including sections of the USA if they annexed them as well as whatever they took in Mexico,The Caribbean and Central and South America.. Yes we dont know for sure if they would have gone that far but if they had won there isnt much that could have stopped them and its clear that black people wouldnt have a future in areas ruled by the Confederacy which certainly was what the Nazis thought about Jews in areas ruled by Germany. Again I fail to see how the Population Reduction is not like the Holocaust ?
 
Germans were directly involved though their knowledge and support of the Holocaust. Direct involvement is more that loading up trains and locking the doors of a gas chamber.Also if the Population Reduction was the logical extension of the Confederate view of blacks then the Holocaust was certainly the logical extension of the Nazi view of Jews,The fact that most Jews killed were from Poland and the USSR proves nothing other than thats where most Jews were living. German and Western European Jews were hardly exempt from the Holocaust there just were not as many of them, On a related note we have no reason to believe that if the CSA had won that they would have not instituted a "black free" policy wherever they ruled including sections of the USA if they annexed them as well as whatever they took in Mexico,The Caribbean and Central and South America.. Yes we dont know for sure if they would have gone that far but if they had won there isnt much that could have stopped them and its clear that black people wouldnt have a future in areas ruled by the Confederacy which certainly was what the Nazis thought about Jews in areas ruled by Germany. Again I fail to see how the Population Reduction is not like the Holocaust ?
This is what I meant by direct involvement:

"During the Holocaust German civilians were almost never involved in the killing, which occurred mainly in Poland and the Soviet Union. (Of course, this later enabled many Germans to claim they had not known what was going on.) At worst they saw their Jewish neighbors being rounded up and sent of f ;
they rarely witnessed an actual killing. In Turkey the whole death- dealing pro-cess was routinely accompanied by robbery and looting for personal gain by townspeople, villa gers, and tribesmen. The number of Muslim civilians per-sonally involved, directly and indirectly, in the deportation and mass murder of Christians during 1894–1924 must have been enormous."

From The Thirty Year Genocide

Given that black people were a large minority in the CSA, it would have been impossible to carry out the population Reduction without direct support from Confederate white citizens. It is quite likely that many if not most took some role in rounding up, despoiling and transporting blacks to the camps.

And it needs to be repeated that the role of Jews in Nazi ideology is very different from the role of black people in Freedomite ideology. Writing that the Holocaust is the logical endpoint of Nazi antisemitism and that the population Reduction is the logical endpoint of Freedomite ideology does not mean that the ideologies are identical or even very similar. One could just as easily write that the Rwanda genocide was the logical endpoint of Hutu power ideology, but to imply that the Rwandan genocide and the Holocaust are the same or largely the same is a very inaccurate view of history and erases the very real differences between the two.

While I can't disprove that the CSA would try to kill as many black people as possible outside the south and Haiti, or that the Freedom party wanted to expand into Latin America, there is no textual evidence to support those possibilities.
 
Didn't Morrell take part in cutting part of the Trans Canadian Railway in 1916? I mean he was sent to Western Canada after being banished from the General Staff for a disaster in Utah.
And the war started what two or three years before by that point? It just seems unrealistic for the Trans Canadian Railway or the Canadian prairie to hold out anywhere near that long. Even with the US being a sort of rump state (lacking the OTL Confederate states) and fighting against the CSA in the South and against the Brits/Japanese/CSA at sea I just can't see the Canadians holding onto the west that long. The balance of power between the two countries is just too much in the US's favor and the terrain is just too indefensible. If the Canadians had spent the money and resources pre war to fortify Winnipeg they could have held it that long but it would have been a waste and they still couldn't keep the railway open.
 
Central American and Caribbean Dictators of TL-191
*Something I thought of. Lots of head canons. I apologize for not knowing enough Central American History to write more details.

Brief History


French map of the Federal Republic of Central America (Yellow Borders, before Chiapas became part of Mexico)​

After the end of the War of Secession in 1862, there were a total of three attempts to reintroduce a Central American Union among the countries of Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Costa Rica. Previously a part the First Mexican Empire forty years ago, the Central American countries declared independence and formed the United Provinces of Central America. The nation only lasted for less than twenty years until its dissolution in 1841. Some men, such as Francisco Morazán and William Walker, tried to reunify Central America, but ultimately failed or the reunion lasted temporarily.

The emergence of the Confederate States of America caught the attention of the Central American countries. With the strong alliance made between the Mexican Empire and the CSA, the rest of Central America wondered what fate their respective nations would be during their interaction with a slave-holding, agrarian nation with the diplomatic backing of Britain and France. During the last half of the 19th Century, the Caribbean and Central American region were under the strong influence of Britain, the CSA and to a small extent, Mexico. Out of all the nations of Central America, Costa Rica enjoyed political stability and a peaceful democracy.

When the First Great War occurred, the Central American nations were officially neutral. However, they were economically and diplomatically inclined to support the Entente Powers in North America, with the exception of Costa Rica who usually maintained stronger diplomatic relations with the USA. The Central Powers winning the war surprised the Central American nations and reevaluated their interests with the victorious USA, the defeated CSA and Mexico, the newly formed country of Belize, and the absence of British diplomacy in North America.

During the Interbellum years, the CSA tried to re-establish connections with the Caribbean and Central America, which had little success due to USA interference and preference. It wasn’t until Featherston’s election to the Confederate Presidency that the region began to gravitate toward the grip of the CSA, mostly through the help of Confederate-owned fruit companies since the 19th Century and Confederate-supported dictatorships in Central America and the Caribbean.

When the Second Great War began, the nations of Central America also declared neutrality and were likewise economically sympathetic to the CSA. The dictators of Central America at the time copied their government and policies similar to that of Featherston, albeit with a lack of racial genocide. The exception was Trujillo from the Dominican Republic, who contributed to the Population Reduction in Haiti. Their reigns were often noted for bringing in regional stability, industrialization, infrastructure and wealth to their respective countries, however, the money would always go primarily to the elite, never being used to help the poorest of the poor.

At the end of the Second Great War, it was revealed that many Confederate businesses and businessmen in Central America were heavily involved in Featherston’s Confederacy. Under the banner of Defreedomitization, many of these companies and their CEO’s were shut down and arrested for their Freedomite connections, including government officials from nearly every Central American nation. What was left in Central America was a power vacuum that the USA or Mexico sought to exploit and control.

Guatemala

Jorge Ubico Castañeda (President of Guatemala: February 14, 1931 – October 19, 1944)
Known as "Central America's Napoleon", Ubico had financial connections with the Confederate Citrus Fruit Company, initially a shell company that dealt with secret military C.S. planes, but he made it into a more legitimate business, alongside Valentine Bros. News of the Population Reduction and the people of Guatemala no longer being able to tolerate Ubico's excess rule helped add momentum to the Guatemalan Revolution in October of 1944. He was hounded by the revolutionary mob, beaten, and hanged to death. He was never tried for his connections to the Freedomites.

El Salvador

Maximiliano Hernández Martínez (President of El Salvador: March 1, 1935 – May 1, 1944)
Hernández Martínez was known for his killing of Salvadoran Socialists during reign. Although not directly involved with the Freedomites, the land-owning oligarchs had some connections with the C.S. government before Featherston's rise to power and after it. Hernández Martínez would eventually be overthrown during a putsch and killed on May Day in 1944.


Honduras

Tiburcio Carías Andino (President of Nicaragua: February 1, 1933 – January 1, 1949)
The least affected by Featherston, Carías Andino nevertheless ruled Nicaragua as a strong, military leader. He was brought to national attention when it was discovered that former Freedomites were living in his country, causing a scandal that forced him to resign his presidency and live out the rest of his life in seclusion until 1969.

Nicaragua

Anastasio Somoza García (President of Nicaragua: January 1, 1937 – May 5, 1945)
Similar to Carías Andino, former Freedomites were found to be living in his country after the end of the Second Great War. However, Somoza García was actively involved in smuggling in Freedomites and giving them citizenship and other types of government help since 1943. The United States demanded the lives of the Freedomites and for the president to resign. Somoza García was found dead in his office with his throat completely cut open to the point that only his vertebrae remained connected between his head and neck. The killer was never found but the prevailing theory is that his death was done by the U.S. government.

Dominican Republic

Rafael Trujillo (President of the Domincan Republic: August 16, 1930- January 1, 1945)
Often called the "Caribbean Featherston", Trujillo was the most active in his support for Featherston's Confederacy. Already prejudiced against Haitians, Trujillo gained the attention of Featherston when he perpetrated the Parsley Massacre in 1937 against Haitians in the Dominican Republic. During Operation Blackbeard, Trujillo invaded Haiti from the east, while the Confederates invaded from the west. In less than a day, Haiti was completely conquered and both Confederate and Dominican forces indiscriminately killed every black-skinned person they could find. Once Haiti was liberated, the Dominican Republic was invaded by U.S. forces, occupied, and Trujillo was captured. He was later put on trial for crimes against humanity and executed by firing squad at midnight on the first day of 1945.
 
Last edited:
So I'm thinking that the US would post SGW probably keep former Confederate POWs for forced labor for a good while after the war. Both to keep potential partisans and trouble makers away from home (where a lot would support insurgencies) and to make up for the damage of the Confederate Invasion. I think American civilians would be seeing disarmed former Confederate POWs doing construction, demolition, bomb disposal, agricultural labor, infrastructure work, mining, logging, even working in industry in some form. This OTL lasted for years with former WW2 German POWs with the last getting released by the USSR in the late 50's.

I'm feeling you'd probably see about the same (especially since the US formally annexed/destroyed the CSA). Former POW's families probably won't be seeing them for at least a decade (unless they become injured and considered worthless for labor). It won't be Nazi or Imperial Japanese style "Extermination through labor" but it will be hard forced labor for a good long while.

Part of reperations extracted from the former CSA will also include the drafting of a signifigant portion of the still useful for labor Confederate civilians. I expect pretty much any and all industry in the former CSA will be either destroyed or dismantled and salvaged by the US.
 
Yeah, GW2 casualties would definitely be higher. Especially for the Confederates (even before considering the population reduction). By the end the army was basically scraping the bottom of the manpower barrel, and lots of civilians were killed in air raids and the atomic bombings.
I wrote a piece a few years ago on the American home front in SGW. I think I had the total US dead at 900,000 with with about 600,000 wounded. I don't much care what the Confederate dead is, as they lost.
 
Last edited:
Order of Battle during the British Invasion of Ireland, circa July of 1941.

Central Powers Forces:

Irish Defense Forces:
42,000 Active Soldiers
106,000 Reservists
132 Heavy Machine Guns
95 Field Artillery Guns
22 Mortars
29 AA Guns
13 Rolls-Royce Armored Cars
4 Leyland Armored Cars
8 Landsverk L-180 Armored Cars
7 Ford Mk IV Armored Cars
14 Ford Mk V Armored Cars
2 Landsverk L-60 Kegs
12 Fiat CR. 42 Biplanes
9 Lockheed Hudson Maritime Patrol Bombers
3 Dornier Do 24 Flying Boats
6 Fieseler Fi-156 Storch Army Co-Operation Planes
27 Training Aircraft of various models
1 Patrol Vessel
1 Armed Trawler
2 German built S-Boots

Radius Forces:

British Forces:
137,000 Soldiers
155 Heavy Machine Guns
120 Field Artillery Pieces
41 Mortars
10 Light AA guns
15 Daimler Armored Cars
10 Cruiser Mk III Tanks
5 Cruiser Mk II Tanks
58 Hawker Hurricane Fighters
42 Bristol Blenheim Light Bombers
24 Vickers Wellington Medium Bombers
38 Handley Page Harrow Transports
10 Supermarine Walrus Recon Planes
Light Cruisers HMS Coventry and HMS Carlisle
7 Destroyers
4 Sloops
2 Corvettes
8 Vosper MTBs
4 Amphibious Assault Ships
10 Troopships
6 Transport Ships
 
Last edited:
Top