TL-191: Postwar

Argentina was on Britain's side of the war, so I don't see them getting the Falklands.

Then it would be really hard unless Argentine at last minute change its side.

But I agree too that Chile is bit unlikely since it didn't ever want these islands. And that just would create new conflict between Argentine and Chile anyway. So probably Americans could take them or even allow Britain keep them altough that is probably pretty unlikely.
 
1) Reparations from the previous war were part of the trigger to the one that has just finished. It is unlikely that they would be demanded again. Much better to seize economically valuable territory (which is proposed in the rest of the treaty) along with seizing all foreign British investments. You get the money without the instability.
The reparation payments are more about keeping Britain down rather than monetary gains. OTL after WW2 there were several reparations payments levied on Italy and Germany, though these are in no way as severe as the ones Britain has to pay.

2) How is BICA going to be enforced when a future British Parliament says "Get stuffed" and a British court concurs?
With its fleet and economy scrapped, its cities in ruins, its most valuable territories in German or Japanese hands, and its economy in shambles, it will be several decades before Britain can successfuly challenge both the U.S. and Germany. As defying both powers would be suicidal (as they both have superbombs, and Britain's have been confiscated and its nuclear scientists interned in Germany), Britain has little choice but to comply with B.I.C.A. Whether this arrangement is sustainable remains to be seen, and I plan on exploring the consequences of BICA's flawed structure in the future.

3) Re the Falklands, are you trying to start a war between Chile that has never claimed the Falkslands and Agentina that has? It is more likely that the US will take over adminstration then convert the islands into a terriotry. That way it would have a notional claim on a slice of the Antarctic and who knows how valuable that might be?
My thinking was that Chile had annexed Tierra del Fuego and parts of Santa Cruz Province after WW1, and that the Falklands would be a natural extension of this newfound territory. However, I'll probably retcon the treaty as you brought up some great points about the advantages of the U.S. taking over the Falklands.
 
Last edited:
With its fleet and economy scrapped, its cities in ruins, its most valuable territories in German or Japanese hands, and its economy in shambles, it will be several decades before Britain can successfuly challenge both the U.S. and Germany. As defying both powers would be suicidal (as they both have superbombs, and Britain's have been confiscated and its nuclear scientists interned in Germany), Britain has little choice but to comply with B.I.C.A. Whether this arrangement is sustainable remains to be seen, and I plan on exploring the consequences of BICA's flawed structure in the future.


My thinking was that Chile had annexed Tierra del Fuego and parts of Santa Cruz Province after WW1, and that the Falklands would be a natural extension of this newfound territory. However, I'll probably retcon the treaty as you brought up some great points about the advantages of the U.S. taking over the Falklands.
1) Superbombing a country because the courts of it say that Parliament can ignore a veto from said superbomber is ASB.

2) If the annexation of Tierra del Fuego and parts of Santa Cruz Province has taken place I withdraw my objection. Lets assume that the annexation took place with the blessing of the USA (a bit like giving Ireland Ulster). Chile gets not only the Falklands, but also South Georgia. In addition, Argentina relinquishes its claim on Antarctic territory to Chile. A cheap way for the USA to reward an ally :) . (On OTL Chile initiated a claim in 1940 and Argentina in 1943. No reason why on TL_191 the claims could not be made in the same years.)

3) Further on the Antarctic, the remaining British and the French claims including Port Lockoy (assuming that it is founded in 1944 as in OTL) would probably be transferred to Germany . That leaves the New Zealand and Australian claims dated 1933 OTL and the Norwegian claim 1931. No reason for the latter not to stand. However the Australian claim includes Kaiser Wilhelm II Land dating form 1903. It may be expected that Germany will maintain their claim or even expand it.

The USA had no Antarctic base before 1956 OTL , at least not one that is still in existence. With the Chileans moving in during 1947 (OTL) along with the Germans either building one or rennovating Port Lockoy the continent is open for business.
 
1) Superbombing a country because the courts of it say that Parliament can ignore a veto from said superbomber is ASB.
Of course it is ASB. But a nation that has been superbombed before will than more likely adopt a policy similar to Finlandization to avoid aggrivating the US and Germany. It would also be interesting to see how Britian could try to play off the U.S. and Germany against one another in order to increase its own leverage.

2) If the annexation of Tierra del Fuego and parts of Santa Cruz Province has taken place I withdraw my objection. Lets assume that the annexation took place with the blessing of the USA (a bit like giving Ireland Ulster). Chile gets not only the Falklands, but also South Georgia. In addition, Argentina relinquishes its claim on Antarctic territory to Chile. A cheap way for the USA to reward an ally :) . (On OTL Chile initiated a claim in 1940 and Argentina in 1943. No reason why on TL_191 the claims could not be made in the same years.)
I should have mentioned the annexations of Tierra del Fuego and Santa Criz Province in the 1945 post. Antarctica is going to be a mess with multiple nations staking overlapping claims (like OTL), and its a topic that I should probably explore in the future.
 

bguy

Donor
Of course it is ASB. But a nation that has been superbombed before will than more likely adopt a policy similar to Finlandization to avoid aggrivating the US and Germany. It would also be interesting to see how Britian could try to play off the U.S. and Germany against one another in order to increase its own leverage.

Is it ASB though? In the OTL 19th century it was common enough for European imperial powers to send their navies to bombard the cities of nations who did things the imperial power did not like, and it's not like this gunboat diplomacy was limited to just Africa and Asia either. (Witness the British conducting a multi-day shelling of Copenhagen in retaliation for the Danes, a neutral nation, not agreeing to hand their fleet over to the British.) Given that a lot more atomic weapons were used in TL-191 than IOTL, the TL-191 world may not develop much of a nuclear taboo, and without a strong nuclear taboo (and with imperialism still being very much in vogue in their world), imperial powers using superbombs on recalcitrant foreign nations could develop as the logical extension of gunboat diplomacy.
 
I would see most logical that Argentina would get Falklands and Guatemala British Honduras (Belize). And perhaps Gibraltar could be annexed by Spain.
Why would Spain get Gibraltar and not Germany?

And as previously mentioned the Argentines were friendly to Britain so I don't see why the Americans wouldn't keep it, along with Belize.
 
I agree with this as well. Giving Chile the Falklands will just lead to a future war with Argentina, nor would Chile want them. Chile should more realistically be given French Polynesia as their eye would be more on the Pacific. Taking the Falklands from the UK and giving them to Argentina in the peace treaty would almost guarantee the US a new faithful ally. Basically turning a foe into a friend, especially if the Empire of Brazil acts more as an independent power.
Giving the Falklands to anyone will lead to a war eventually imo.
 
Why would Spain get Gibraltar and not Germany?

And as previously mentioned the Argentines were friendly to Britain so I don't see why the Americans wouldn't keep it, along with Belize.

Well, I don't see any reason why not to give Gibraltar to Spain and Belize to Guatemala. Or they too could jump to the war on last moment when see their chance.

Giving the Falklands to anyone will lead to a war eventually imo.

With most nations it is probably that way but it Falklands are given to Americans, any government of Argentine hardly is stupid enough even to think attacking on Falklands. But that depends what in USA will happen but if things are really stable and USA not show signs on weakening Argentine probably just decide not attack. Even stupidest possible miltary leader would realise that being suicidal.
 
Well, I don't see any reason why not to give Gibraltar to Spain and Belize to Guatemala. Or they too could jump to the war on last moment when see their chance.
Kick them while they're down I always say. Especially when they wronged you in the past.
it Falklands are given to Americans, any government of Argentine hardly is stupid enough even to think attacking on Falklands.
True, but it would be funny if it happened.
 
Hello,

With developments from the POD , how would the Mid-West and West of the United States be affected?

Maybe far more industry centered out in the west since the region is far from the CSA? The Socialists were already popular in the Midwest IIRC so a bigger voter pool of industrial workers could make the west/mid west states completely socialist for Presidential elections.
 
Why would Spain get Gibraltar and not Germany?
Well, I don't see any reason why not to give Gibraltar to Spain and Belize to Guatemala. Or they too could jump to the war on last moment when see their chance.
Spain annexed Gibraltar after the superbombing of Britain.

With developments from the POD , how would the Mid-West and West of the United States be affected?
As of 1945 the Midwest is still recovering from the effects of Operation Barbarossa. While the brunt of Dewey's infastructure building and economic rehabilitation programs are focused on the region, most of the industrial plants and cities remain heavily damaged. The current recession in the U.S. is not helping matters, with many residents of the Midwest impoverished and unemployed.
 
Really enjoyed the update. In the Great Gatsby analogue you have Gerlach (Gatsby) being the one to leave for the Midwest. Think you meant the other guy.

While I am sad to see the Truman Plan not get adopted as that will be the best plan in the long term the US is understandably hesitant and vengeful. Unfortunately the former CSA will likely turn into a Vietnam-analogue, at least in the Deep South. Border States might adjust better especially once American families move in.

Would the U.S. establish ‘Bunker Boroughs’ of fenced and armed American neighborhoods in the South so as to protect American personnel while also showing that the Northerners may not feel safe with the ‘murderous genocidal Southerners’

It would cause a lot of heartache and friction which I feel is an angle this TL is going to explore. If Northerners and Southerners lived in mixed neighborhoods there would be a lot of animosity at first but could turn into mutual understanding and smoother relationship long term. But with them segregated based on nationality/demonym then frustration and hate will simmer.

Also I know the Democrats are the conservative party in TL-191 but I feel that they would create a Department of Veterans’ Affairs* to aid servicemen and servicewomen.

*Now I know with conscription being the norm since the Second Mexican War perhaps the VA only takes care of current servicemen, veterans of wars, and those soldiers who went career rather than just their conscription term. That way a soldier who did his 1 year conscription in 1934-1935 doesn’t get the same benefits as a career soldier. Just a thought.

Also, to help curb costs of garrisoning the former Confederacy which will lead to increased frustration from the Confederate population, perhaps the U.S. instigates an Occupation Tax, perhaps a flat fee, or tied to property tax or some such.
 
Last edited:
Well, I don't see any reason why not to give Gibraltar to Spain and Belize to Guatemala. Or they too could jump to the war on last moment when see their chance.

With most nations it is probably that way but it Falklands are given to Americans, any government of Argentine hardly is stupid enough even to think attacking on Falklands. But that depends what in USA will happen but if things are really stable and USA not show signs on weakening Argentine probably just decide not attack. Even stupidest possible miltary leader would realise that being suicidal.
Gaining the Falkslands is of no strategic advantage to the USA because at the time they had no interest in the Antarctic. Also it is on the opposite side of the Anarctic to Kaiser Wilhelm II Land so holding it is of no strategic advantage to the German either, assuming of course they want to annoy their ally in the New World.
 
Interesting TL so far...

...it occurs to me that even if Japan has agreed not to develop superbombs, with rocketry and chemical/bioweapons they could develop enough of a deterrent that nobody decides to come for them.
 
So the US is going to go Morgenthau on the former CSA? Deserved or not, it’s going to be brutal to watch. But I’m still interested in this TL. I wonder if the USA eventually decides to ease up on the South or just divide the Confederacy into two since absorbing it into the Union again may not be super popular. I have a feeling this will make The Troubles look like a walk in the park by comparison.
 
So the US is going to go Morgenthau on the former CSA? Deserved or not, it’s going to be brutal to watch. But I’m still interested in this TL. I wonder if the USA eventually decides to ease up on the South or just divide the Confederacy into two since absorbing it into the Union again may not be super popular. I have a feeling this will make The Troubles look like a walk in the park by comparison.
They may not ease up for at least Dewey’s term(s) plus if the Socialists take back power they can’t appear weak on foreign policy. Matters concerning the South are a bit of domestic/foreign policy oddly enough.
 
Wasn't Benito Mussolini officially in TL-191? He never took power, like in OTL, but is at least mentioned.
Mentioned but not named. Mentioned as an Italian politician who promised to have the trains to run on time. Flora read about him from a newspaper.
 
Really enjoyed the update. In the Great Gatsby analogue you have Gerlach (Gatsby) being the one to leave for the Midwest. Think you meant the other guy.
Thanks! I've just fixed the entry for "Under the Red, White, and Blue"

Would the U.S. establish ‘Bunker Boroughs’ of fenced and armed American neighborhoods in the South so as to protect American personnel while also showing that the Northerners may not feel safe with the ‘murderous genocidal Southerners’
I think they would be more akin to bases rather than neighborhoods. The South is not attractive to Yankee settlement at the moment due to the guerilla war occuring there as well as alternative options in Canada.

Also I know the Democrats are the conservative party in TL-191 but I feel that they would create a Department of Veterans’ Affairs* to aid servicemen and servicewomen.
Perhaps they will. Dewey has already passed economic assistance for veterans of the SGW.
 
Top