TL 191: The Southern Occupation

[MERRICA]

Just something I might add, There would be a large cultural struggle between the US and the occupied CSA as they both used founding Fathers and American Patriots as heroes in both countries so there will be a large effort by the US to reaffirm the fact that the founding fathers are AMERICANS, not confederate.

 

[Joshua Ben Ari]

did the Japanese take over parts of Siberia in the series?

Considering we barely know anything outside of North America, I'm gonna put it in as a solid "probably"

Would the Japanese really be in a position to supply Canadian rebels? Not only will the U.S. be on higher alert against such acts (given the Pacific War in 30's), but the Japanese wouldn't have a lot to spare given their moves against British colonies in Asia.

Considering they've fought a war with the United States, and are scared of American power across the Pacific (especially post-SGW with Australia and New Zealand in the American camp), I'd be pretty sure that the Japanese would try and supply Canadian rebels

 

[m0585]

Considering we barely know anything outside of North America, I'm gonna put it in as a solid "probably"



Considering they've fought a war with the United States, and are scared of American power across the Pacific (especially post-SGW with Australia and New Zealand in the American camp), I'd be pretty sure that the Japanese would try and supply Canadian rebels

Very good point. I guess it would have behooved the Japanese to keep the U.S. tied down fighting Canadian rebels so that they couldn't make any moves in the Pacific.

 

[Joshua Ben Ari]

Very good point. I guess it would have behooved the Japanese to keep the U.S. tied down fighting Canadian rebels so that they couldn't make any moves in the Pacific.

Exactly. From what I remember, the Pacific War was itself an attempt to curb American expansion in the Pacific. Anything that Tokyo could do to fight the Americans and their expanding power in the Pacific is probably going to be done

 

[bguy]

Exactly. From what I remember, the Pacific War was itself an attempt to curb American expansion in the Pacific. Anything that Tokyo could do to fight the Americans and their expanding power in the Pacific is probably going to be done

Except Japan is far more vulnerable to the Americans smuggling arms to anti-Japanese rebels than the Americans are to the Japanese smuggling arms to Canadian rebels. As previously mentioned all the U.S. Navy and Coast Guard have to do is seal off the Canadian Pacific Coast to shut down the Japanese smuggling operation. That is a trivially simplistic task compared to what the Imperial Japanese Navy will need to do to prevent retaliatory American smuggling since the Japanese will have to seal off the much longer combined coastlines of Indonesia, Indochina, the Philippines, Taiwan, Korea, and Japanese occupied China. (As a comparison of the comparative difficulties involved, the Canadian Pacific Coastline is 15,985 miles total while the Philippines coastline alone is 22,549 miles, and Indonesia's coastline is 33,988 miles. Thus just those two territories alone already require the Japanese to guard a coastline more than three times the size of the coastline the U.S. has to protect.) So why exactly is Japan going to risk its entire colonial empire just so it can slightly inconvenience the United States Coast Guard?

 

[Joshua Ben Ari]

Except Japan is far more vulnerable to the Americans smuggling arms to anti-Japanese rebels than the Americans are to the Japanese smuggling arms to Canadian rebels. As previously mentioned all the U.S. Navy and Coast Guard have to do is seal off the Canadian Pacific Coast to shut down the Japanese smuggling operation. That is a trivially simplistic task compared to what the Imperial Japanese Navy will need to do to prevent retaliatory American smuggling since the Japanese will have to seal off the much longer combined coastlines of Indonesia, Indochina, the Philippines, Taiwan, Korea, and Japanese occupied China. (As a comparison of the comparative difficulties involved, the Canadian Pacific Coastline is 15,985 miles total while the Philippines coastline alone is 22,549 miles, and Indonesia's coastline is 33,988 miles. Thus just those two territories alone already require the Japanese to guard a coastline more than three times the size of the coastline the U.S. has to protect.) So why exactly is Japan going to risk its entire colonial empire just so it can slightly inconvenience the United States Coast Guard?

And yet the Japanese did the same thing before the Pacific War, with all of those territories, when they managed to sneak past the US Coast Guard and the US Navy to smuggle arms into Vancouver and British Columbia to help support Canadian rebels. If they can do it once, they can do it again - especially if the US is trapped in a cold war analogue with Germany and Austria-Hungary (which seems to be the way the post-SGW world looked like it was heading).

 

[bguy]

And yet the Japanese did the same thing before the Pacific War, with all of those territories, when they managed to sneak past the US Coast Guard and the US Navy to smuggle arms into Vancouver and British Columbia to help support Canadian rebels. If they can do it once, they can do it again

And you don't think the situation is just slightly different post-SGW than it was in 1932?

When the Japanese did it in the 1930s it was against a U.S. that had spent the last decade under pacifistic Socialist presidents who had badly neglected the American military during their time in power. And even then the Japanese 1) still got caught, and 2) failed to set off any sort of Canadian uprising.

And post-SGW the following factors all make the Japanese trying to repeat the smuggle arms to the Canadians gambit even less likely.

1) After Operation Blackbeard the U.S. is going to be far more paranoid about being sneak attacked by its neighbors than it was in 1932, so it is very unlikely Japan will be able to catch the U.S. Navy and Coast Guard asleep at the switch a second time. The waters off the Canadian Pacific Coast are accordingly certainly going to be heavily patrolled;

2) Given the massive technological advances in radar and aircraft since the 1930s, it is now much easier for the U.S. to guard its coastline than it was in the 30s;

3) Given that the U.S. has the atomic bomb and Japan doesn't, the potential price for Japan getting caught smuggling arms into Canada is far greater than it was in the 1930s. (What does it profit a nation to smuggle a craft of rifles to Canadian rebels if it then loses Tokyo?) and;

4) Even if Japan eventually gets atomic weapons in sufficient quantity to enforce MAD on the U.S., Japan is still far more vulnerable to the U.S. smuggling arms to nationalist rebels in Japan's occupied territories than the U.S. is to Japanese smuggling. This wasn't true in the 1930s because the U.S. did not then have any bases particularly near the Japanese colonies, and given submarine technology in the 30s, U.S. subs could not realistically get deep into Japanese territory without being spotted (since submarines in the 1930s needed to spend most of their time on the surface.) By the 1960s though the U.S. will have nuclear powered submarines that can easily cross the entire Pacific while staying submerged the entire trip, so it is now much easier for the U.S. to sneak ships into Japanese waters. And of course the U.S. is very likely to acquire bases in Australia. (Which is probably terrified of the Japanese Empire.) If the U.S. is given a carrier base in Australia, they will be able to pretty much permanently plant a carrier battle group or two right off the Indonesian coast, which will make it incredibly easy for the Americans to smuggle arms into Indonesia. (And with bases in Australia, the U.S. carrier groups can also pretty easily sail into the South China Sea which will enable smuggling arms to nationalist rebels in Vietnam and the Philippines.)

So again why are the Japanese going to pursue a policy that has a very real possibility of leading to the nuclear destruction of Japan and even if that doesn't happen still 1) won't work and 2) gives the U.S. the green light to do the same thing (and far more effectively) to Japan's own colonial empire?

- especially if the US is trapped in a cold war analogue with Germany and Austria-Hungary (which seems to be the way the post-SGW world looked like it was heading).

Nothing in the novels supports that the U.S. and Germany-Austria-Hungary were moving towards a Cold War situation. If anything the novels show the exact opposite as they showed the U.S. and Germany having an excellent wartime relationship (seeing how Germany shared nuclear secrets with the U.S., something that OTL the U.S. never (intentionally) did with the Soviets) and then continuing to work together post-war.

 

[Joshua Ben Ari]

And you don't think the situation is just slightly different post-SGW than it was in 1932?

When the Japanese did it in the 1930s it was against a U.S. that had spent the last decade under pacifistic Socialist presidents who had badly neglected the American military during their time in power. And even then the Japanese 1) still got caught, and 2) failed to set off any sort of Canadian uprising.

And post-SGW the following factors all make the Japanese trying to repeat the smuggle arms to the Canadians gambit even less likely.

1) After Operation Blackbeard the U.S. is going to be far more paranoid about being sneak attacked by its neighbors than it was in 1932, so it is very unlikely Japan will be able to catch the U.S. Navy and Coast Guard asleep at the switch a second time. The waters off the Canadian Pacific Coast are accordingly certainly going to be heavily patrolled;

2) Given the massive technological advances in radar and aircraft since the 1930s, it is now much easier for the U.S. to guard its coastline than it was in the 30s;

3) Given that the U.S. has the atomic bomb and Japan doesn't, the potential price for Japan getting caught smuggling arms into Canada is far greater than it was in the 1930s. (What does it profit a nation to smuggle a craft of rifles to Canadian rebels if it then loses Tokyo?) and;

4) Even if Japan eventually gets atomic weapons in sufficient quantity to enforce MAD on the U.S., Japan is still far more vulnerable to the U.S. smuggling arms to nationalist rebels in Japan's occupied territories than the U.S. is to Japanese smuggling. This wasn't true in the 1930s because the U.S. did not then have any bases particularly near the Japanese colonies, and given submarine technology in the 30s, U.S. subs could not realistically get deep into Japanese territory without being spotted (since submarines in the 1930s needed to spend most of their time on the surface.) By the 1960s though the U.S. will have nuclear powered submarines that can easily cross the entire Pacific while staying submerged the entire trip, so it is now much easier for the U.S. to sneak ships into Japanese waters. And of course the U.S. is very likely to acquire bases in Australia. (Which is probably terrified of the Japanese Empire.) If the U.S. is given a carrier base in Australia, they will be able to pretty much permanently plant a carrier battle group or two right off the Indonesian coast, which will make it incredibly easy for the Americans to smuggle arms into Indonesia. (And with bases in Australia, the U.S. carrier groups can also pretty easily sail into the South China Sea which will enable smuggling arms to nationalist rebels in Vietnam and the Philippines.)

So again why are the Japanese going to pursue a policy that has a very real possibility of leading to the nuclear destruction of Japan and even if that doesn't happen still 1) won't work and 2) gives the U.S. the green light to do the same thing (and far more effectively) to Japan's own colonial empire?

Not by that much, no. After Blackbeard, I do agree the US will be paranoid about sneak attacks, but they'll also be comfortable in their power post-SGW believing that no one can take them on. I will grant you the technological advances makes it harder, but if as you say that a massive coastline will negatively affect Japan, it will also negatively effect the US.

As for the atomic bombs, what makes you believe that Japan won't try and get nuclear bombs? The Pacific War, from how I understood it, was Japan trying to counter US influence in the Pacific. Now with a nuclear armed America? Japan, at least in my opinion, would try and develop their own nuclear weapons as a deterrent or something they could potentially use against the United States.

I will agree that Australia/New Zealand will side with the US because both would be terrified of the Japanese empire, and the US will most likely station carriers there. However, it would be a useful Cuban Missile Crisis analogue, wouldn't it? The Japanese attempt to blockade some US island in the Pacific (Midway maybe?), the US retaliates by placing nuclear missiles in Australia, and everything goes to hell. There will be nationalist rebels in Vietnam, the Philippines and Indonesia (I'd agree that this would be the main focus for the US in dismantling the Japanese Empire), but considering how brutal the Japanese were in OTL to nationalists and rebels, I can only imagine how brutal they'd be in TTL. Though wouldn't the Philippines have a group that's loyal to Japan? It's been a Japanese colony since the Hispano-Japanese War.

Nothing in the novels supports that the U.S. and Germany-Austria-Hungary were moving towards a Cold War situation. If anything the novels show the exact opposite as they showed the U.S. and Germany having an excellent wartime relationship (seeing how Germany shared nuclear secrets with the U.S., something that OTL the U.S. never (intentionally) did with the Soviets) and then continuing to work together post-war.

Yes, a wartime relationship. As for sharing nuclear secrets, that was (at least to me) because Britain and France was developing nukes and Germany was terrified of that. Once the war is over, and the peace settles in for at least the short-term, I do see Germany and the United States moving towards a Cold War situation.

 

[theg*ddam*hoi2fan]

Funnily enough, the first thing I did on this site was my own slight alteration to TL-191. Looking at it now, it's fairly amateurish, but I stand over the basic concept: rather than the somewhat schizo way they acted in the vanilla setting, Japan and the Central Powers end up burying the hatchet and agreeing to work together - greater potential rewards for Japan, in the shape of British colonies in Asia.

The way it ended up was:

1) Japan and the 'Greater East Asia Treaty Organisation' being the major hegemon in Asia.

2) A couple of major revolts by neo-Confederate elements, but a gradual winning over of the Southern populations and the re-integration of the South (and statehood for the Canadian provinces).

3) The UK breaking up and England becoming a Socialist republic, allying with the US.

4) Socialistic US becoming a major economic and military power like OTL, but this time with no laissez-faire capitalism and a workforce even more unionised than OTL, along with major social welfare programmes.

5) Germany ending up fighting basically 'Vietnam on steroids' - revolts in Africa, and at the same time trying to keep their Austrian and Ottoman allies together (and failing rather painfully).

While the writing and many of the conclusions now look fairly laughable, I still stand over the concept of (a) Japan changing sides between wars (not really much for them to gain in a war with the US, besides the Sandwich Islands, but lots to gain fighting Britain), and (b) Germany having to fight bloody conflicts to try to quell the mess that Europe and Africa will be after the Second Great War.

 

[bguy]

Not by that much, no. After Blackbeard, I do agree the US will be paranoid about sneak attacks, but they'll also be comfortable in their power post-SGW believing that no one can take them on.

I really doubt the U.S. would be that complacent towards Japan, a country that: 1) has a massive empire in the Pacific, 2) has fought three wars against them in less than 50 years, and 3) has already previously been caught trying to smuggle arms to Canadian rebels. And besides it's not as though it would take that much effort on the part of the U.S. to seal off the Canadian coastline. OTL Operation Market Time (which largely shut down North Vietnamese maritime smuggling into South Vietnam) only needed three boat squadrons and some patrol aircraft, and the South Vietnamese coastline was twice as long as the Canadian Pacific coast is.

I will grant you the technological advances makes it harder, but if as you say that a massive coastline will negatively affect Japan, it will also negatively effect the US.

Except the Canadian Pacific coastline isn't massive. (Certainly not compared to the amount of coastline the Japanese have to patrol.)

As for the atomic bombs, what makes you believe that Japan won't try and get nuclear bombs? The Pacific War, from how I understood it, was Japan trying to counter US influence in the Pacific. Now with a nuclear armed America? Japan, at least in my opinion, would try and develop their own nuclear weapons as a deterrent or something they could potentially use against the United States.

I'm sure Japan will pursue atomic bombs, but they are starting out significantly behind the U.S., so it is going to take them a while to catch up. OTL the Soviets didn't achieve nuclear parity with the U.S. until the mid-60s. It will likely take Japan at least that long as well, and that assumes Japan doesn't immediately get hit with an atomic strike from the Americans as soon as Japan first tests an atomic bomb.

And of course if Japan does ever achieve nuclear parity with the United States then it won't need to stir up anti-American revolts in Canada to keep the Americans at bay in the Pacific. Japanese ICBMs pointed at American cities will be far more effective.

I will agree that Australia/New Zealand will side with the US because both would be terrified of the Japanese empire, and the US will most likely station carriers there. However, it would be a useful Cuban Missile Crisis analogue, wouldn't it? The Japanese attempt to blockade some US island in the Pacific (Midway maybe?), the US retaliates by placing nuclear missiles in Australia, and everything goes to hell. There will be nationalist rebels in Vietnam, the Philippines and Indonesia (I'd agree that this would be the main focus for the US in dismantling the Japanese Empire), but considering how brutal the Japanese were in OTL to nationalists and rebels, I can only imagine how brutal they'd be in TTL. Though wouldn't the Philippines have a group that's loyal to Japan? It's been a Japanese colony since the Hispano-Japanese War.

Well that rather depends on how Japan treats the Philippines. Is it going to be treated like how the OTL Japanese treated Formosa or like how the OTL Japanese treated Korea?

Yes, a wartime relationship. As for sharing nuclear secrets, that was (at least to me) because Britain and France was developing nukes and Germany was terrified of that. Once the war is over, and the peace settles in for at least the short-term, I do see Germany and the United States moving towards a Cold War situation.

I don't know. In WW2 the U.S. was worried that the Nazis were developing nuclear weapons also, but that still didn't convince us to share nuclear technology with the Soviets (or even tell them about the Manhattan Project until we had already successfully tested a bomb). In that sense Germany sharing nuclear secrets with the U.S. shows a much more friendly wartime relationship than the OTL U.S. and Soviets had, and a better wartime relationship makes it more likely the two nations will be able to stay friendly post-war. (Especially since they really don't have conflicting nationalist interests anywhere.)

 

[m0585]

first thing I did on this site was my own slight alteration to TL-191. Looking at it now, it's fairly amateurish, but I stand over the basic concept: rather than the somewhat schizo way they acted in the vanilla setting, Japan and the Central Powers end up burying the hatchet and agreeing to work together - greater potential rewards for Japan, in the shape of British colonies in Asia.

I'd be very interested to read that TL if available.

 

[theg*ddam*hoi2fan]

I'd be very interested to read that TL if available.

Here: https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/tl-191-5-the-sun-rises.320026/

The formatting wasn't great - first thing I wrote - and some pages have that [FONT][quot] thing (though most of them are fine). But I had fun with it...

 

[Joshua Ben Ari]

I really doubt the U.S. would be that complacent towards Japan, a country that: 1) has a massive empire in the Pacific, 2) has fought three wars against them in less than 50 years, and 3) has already previously been caught trying to smuggle arms to Canadian rebels. And besides it's not as though it would take that much effort on the part of the U.S. to seal off the Canadian coastline. OTL Operation Market Time (which largely shut down North Vietnamese maritime smuggling into South Vietnam) only needed three boat squadrons and some patrol aircraft, and the South Vietnamese coastline was twice as long as the Canadian Pacific coast is.

I always imagined that the US would be focused on dealing with Southern resistance (which there will be), the rise of Canadian neo-nationalism and dealing with deporting the entire Mormon population of Utah onto the Big Island of Hawaii to really notice for the first decade or so. The first decade is going to be the US trying to browbeat their Southron, Canadian and Mormon populations into submission and I do feel the Japanese would most likely take advantage of that.

Except the Canadian Pacific coastline isn't massive. (Certainly not compared to the amount of coastline the Japanese have to patrol.)

That's true

I'm sure Japan will pursue atomic bombs, but they are starting out significantly behind the U.S., so it is going to take them a while to catch up. OTL the Soviets didn't achieve nuclear parity with the U.S. until the mid-60s. It will likely take Japan at least that long as well, and that assumes Japan doesn't immediately get hit with an atomic strike from the Americans as soon as Japan first tests an atomic bomb.

And of course if Japan does ever achieve nuclear parity with the United States then it won't need to stir up anti-American revolts in Canada to keep the Americans at bay in the Pacific. Japanese ICBMs pointed at American cities will be far more effective.

I don't think it'll take that much time. Look at Britain in TL191 - they managed to achieve nuclear weapons in a very short amount of time to nuke Hamburg. Japan is very likely to hit nuclear status by the early 1950s, though parity with the United States is going to be probably around the mid-1960s. There seems to be a much faster rate in TL191 of nuclear status (even the CSA managed to get nukes, and they were pretty backwards economically to the United States).

While I agree that Japanese ICBMs pointed at American cities is going to be effective, being able to foment within the United States is going to be seen as good. It'll distract the US, forcing them to police their own citizens and inspire resistance.

Well that rather depends on how Japan treats the Philippines. Is it going to be treated like how the OTL Japanese treated Formosa or like how the OTL Japanese treated Korea?

I agree. Hopefully, it'll be treated like Formosa though considering that TL191 seems to emphasize that might makes right, I'm worried...

I don't know. In WW2 the U.S. was worried that the Nazis were developing nuclear weapons also, but that still didn't convince us to share nuclear technology with the Soviets (or even tell them about the Manhattan Project until we had already successfully tested a bomb). In that sense Germany sharing nuclear secrets with the U.S. shows a much more friendly wartime relationship than the OTL U.S. and Soviets had, and a better wartime relationship makes it more likely the two nations will be able to stay friendly post-war. (Especially since they really don't have conflicting nationalist interests anywhere.)

I think it was also because the US hadn't fought a war with the USSR before, whereas by the SGW the Americans and Germans had already fought a world war before together. I don't think it was a more friendly wartime relationship, I think it was a sense of "we're both dealing with people who are also developing this weapon. Here, have some of our research". As for nationalist interests, I disagree - Africa is going to be the big conflict zone if only because in the specter of the Southron Holocaust, the US is most likely going to want decolonization as quickly as possible, while Germany is going to want to hold onto its colonies as best as it can.

 

[Deleted member 82792]

What are OTL celeberties like Selena Gomez or Ariana Grande doing?

 

[bguy]

I always imagined that the US would be focused on dealing with Southern resistance (which there will be), the rise of Canadian neo-nationalism and dealing with deporting the entire Mormon population of Utah onto the Big Island of Hawaii to really notice for the first decade or so. The first decade is going to be the US trying to browbeat their Southron, Canadian and Mormon populations into submission and I do feel the Japanese would most likely take advantage of that.

But again patrolling the waters off of British Colombia isn't going to require a lot of resources from the U.S. It doesn't require carriers or battleships, just a few squadrons of patrol boats, a squadron of patrol aircraft and maybe a squadron of destroyers to watch out for Japanese submarines. The U.S. is perfectly capable of doing that and maintaining its occupations. (Especially since guarding the Canadian coastline is part and parcel of maintaining the Canadian occupation anyway.)

And again it is national suicide for Japan to mess with U.S. colonies when the Americans have nuclear supremacy. There isn't much of a nuclear taboo in TL-191, and the U.S. already dislikes the Japanese anyway, so they won't hesitate to nuke Japan if they catch the Japanese trying to smuggle arms to the Canadians.

I don't think it'll take that much time. Look at Britain in TL191 - they managed to achieve nuclear weapons in a very short amount of time to nuke Hamburg. Japan is very likely to hit nuclear status by the early 1950s, though parity with the United States is going to be probably around the mid-1960s. There seems to be a much faster rate in TL191 of nuclear status (even the CSA managed to get nukes, and they were pretty backwards economically to the United States).

Merely getting nuclear weapons isn't enough though. The Japanese have to achieve nuclear parity with the U.S. to be safe. Indeed the period of maximum danger for Japan is probably when they have achieved nuclear weapons but do not yet have a nuclear force sufficient to enforce MAD on the U.S since that is when the Americans are most likely to launch a nuclear attack on Japan. (OTL the U.S. didn't nuke the Soviets during that when we had nuclear supremacy over the Soviets because 1: even though the Soviets couldn't really effectively hit the U.S. they could devastate American allies in Europe and Northwest Asia and 2: the U.S. was not that bloodthirsty. I'm not sure either of those limitations exist in TL-191 though. The TL-191 Americans don't really have any important allies near Japanese territory, so Japan doesn't really have any hostages, and because of Operation Blackbeard the U.S. is far more paranoid and bloodthirsty in TL-191 than it was OTL. As such the U.S. is far more likely to be willing in TL-191 to launch a pre-emptive nuclear strike on Japan once Japan gets atomic weapons.)

While I agree that Japanese ICBMs pointed at American cities is going to be effective, being able to foment within the United States is going to be seen as good. It'll distract the US, forcing them to police their own citizens and inspire resistance.

Except doing so just encourages the Americans to return the favor in Japanese territory, and has been repeatedly mentioned the U.S. can much more easily sneak arms to anti-Japanese rebels than the Japanese can sneak arms into Canada. So why would Japan want to unleash this particular genie?

I think it was also because the US hadn't fought a war with the USSR before, whereas by the SGW the Americans and Germans had already fought a world war before together. I don't think it was a more friendly wartime relationship, I think it was a sense of "we're both dealing with people who are also developing this weapon. Here, have some of our research". As for nationalist interests, I disagree - Africa is going to be the big conflict zone if only because in the specter of the Southron Holocaust, the US is most likely going to want decolonization as quickly as possible, while Germany is going to want to hold onto its colonies as best as it can.

You've mentioned that before, but I still don't see why you think Americans are going to care about Germany's African empire simply because of the Destruction. OTL the Holocaust didn't much influence U.S. foreign policy, so why would the decidedly more cold-hearted TL-191 U.S. be so sway by the Destruction that it destroyed its most important alliance?

 

[Joshua Ben Ari]

What are OTL celeberties like Selena Gomez or Ariana Grande doing?

Probably either don't exist (butterflies), or are involved in the music industry like OTL though music is probably going to be more Latin in style.

But again patrolling the waters off of British Colombia isn't going to require a lot of resources from the U.S. It doesn't require carriers or battleships, just a few squadrons of patrol boats, a squadron of patrol aircraft and maybe a squadron of destroyers to watch out for Japanese submarines. The U.S. is perfectly capable of doing that and maintaining its occupations. (Especially since guarding the Canadian coastline is part and parcel of maintaining the Canadian occupation anyway.)

And again it is national suicide for Japan to mess with U.S. colonies when the Americans have nuclear supremacy. There isn't much of a nuclear taboo in TL-191, and the U.S. already dislikes the Japanese anyway, so they won't hesitate to nuke Japan if they catch the Japanese trying to smuggle arms to the Canadians.

I'd argue that it would, considering that (again, it's been a while since I've read) Japanese submarines managed to reach Vancouver and Victoria to supply Canadian rebels. But you are right that the US wouldn't have to extend that much resources to guard the Canadian coastline. But assuming that the US has also taken Alaska (I think they did in DBE's timeline), that adds to the amount of coastline and the Japanese could smuggle weapons through the Aleutians.

Just like it would be suicide for the US to mess with Japanese colonies by the mid-60s. I always imagined (though it's just me) that the Germans and Japanese would find a way to get rapprochement by the 1960s since they switched sides to fight the British. The Japanese might get German support to counter American influence in the Pacific.

Merely getting nuclear weapons isn't enough though. The Japanese have to achieve nuclear parity with the U.S. to be safe. Indeed the period of maximum danger for Japan is probably when they have achieved nuclear weapons but do not yet have a nuclear force sufficient to enforce MAD on the U.S since that is when the Americans are most likely to launch a nuclear attack on Japan. (OTL the U.S. didn't nuke the Soviets during that when we had nuclear supremacy over the Soviets because 1: even though the Soviets couldn't really effectively hit the U.S. they could devastate American allies in Europe and Northwest Asia and 2: the U.S. was not that bloodthirsty. I'm not sure either of those limitations exist in TL-191 though. The TL-191 Americans don't really have any important allies near Japanese territory, so Japan doesn't really have any hostages, and because of Operation Blackbeard the U.S. is far more paranoid and bloodthirsty in TL-191 than it was OTL. As such the U.S. is far more likely to be willing in TL-191 to launch a pre-emptive nuclear strike on Japan once Japan gets atomic weapons.)

Your logic is pretty clear, and I like that. But the US would have to cross vast portions of the Pacific to reach the Home Islands (or develop ICBMs) while Japan just has to keep on the defensive. And the Japanese, facing a more militarized and nuclear-powered US, would try as quickly as they could to develop and increase their nuclear stockpile.

Except doing so just encourages the Americans to return the favor in Japanese territory, and has been repeatedly mentioned the U.S. can much more easily sneak arms to anti-Japanese rebels than the Japanese can sneak arms into Canada. So why would Japan want to unleash this particular genie?

Fear can do pretty impressive things. My logic is that if Japan is really, truly scared of the United States, they'll try and cause issues within the United States to help their cause.

You've mentioned that before, but I still don't see why you think Americans are going to care about Germany's African empire simply because of the Destruction. OTL the Holocaust didn't much influence U.S. foreign policy, so why would the decidedly more cold-hearted TL-191 U.S. be so sway by the Destruction that it destroyed its most important alliance?

Look at the Herero and Namaqua genocide in German South-West Africa. There's no real concrete numbers, but German newspapers from 2004 reported around 60-65,000 dead. I do think the Americans are going to care about Germany's African empire, if only because of a sense of guilt that they could have done more to prevent the Southron Holocaust.

 

[scourge]

Since the US has access to all those Confederate rocket scientists, couldn't they just develop ICBMs and arm them with nuclear warheads? I doubt Japan would be able to retaliate against that.

 

[bguy]

I'd argue that it would, considering that (again, it's been a while since I've read) Japanese submarines managed to reach Vancouver and Victoria to supply Canadian rebels. But you are right that the US wouldn't have to extend that much resources to guard the Canadian coastline. But assuming that the US has also taken Alaska (I think they did in DBE's timeline), that adds to the amount of coastline and the Japanese could smuggle weapons through the Aleutians.

Except the Aleutians are islands, and Alaska at this time might as well be an island. (OTL there wasn't a highway connecting Alaska to the rest of North America until 1942, and I rather doubt that highway was built in TL-191), so the Japanese smuggling goods to the Aleutians or Alaska doesn't help them any. They will still eventually have to sail those goods into Canadian waters if they ever want to get them to Canada.

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

Just like it would be suicide for the US to mess with Japanese colonies by the mid-60s. I always imagined (though it's just me) that the Germans and Japanese would find a way to get rapprochement by the 1960s since they switched sides to fight the British. The Japanese might get German support to counter American influence in the Pacific.

Well the Japanese pretty much have to get German support if they want to avoid getting nuked when they start their own atomic program. Now why Germany will want to support Japan (who has proven itself to be a completely unreliable ally) is a good question.

Your logic is pretty clear, and I like that. But the US would have to cross vast portions of the Pacific to reach the Home Islands (or develop ICBMs) while Japan just has to keep on the defensive. And the Japanese, facing a more militarized and nuclear-powered US, would try as quickly as they could to develop and increase their nuclear stockpile.

Well the distance from Honolulu to Tokyo is 3,854 miles. (And the distance from Seattle to Tokyo is 4,779 miles.) OTL the U.S. had inter-continental bombers (the B-36) with a 10,000 mile range by 1946. So assuming the TL-191 U.S. still invested in intercontinental bombers (which seems logical since the U.S. was just at war with both Britain and Japan and thus would have wanted a long range bomber), the U.S. should very soon after the end of the SGW have the ability to deliver atomic bombs to the Home Islands.

Look at the Herero and Namaqua genocide in German South-West Africa. There's no real concrete numbers, but German newspapers from 2004 reported around 60-65,000 dead. I do think the Americans are going to care about Germany's African empire, if only because of a sense of guilt that they could have done more to prevent the Southron Holocaust.

A sense of guilt that they could have done more to prevent the Holocaust didn't affect U.S. foreign policy OTL. Why would it affect the TL-191 U.S.?

 

[pattontank12]

Hmm... You've got a lot of rock-solid ideas: a Remembrance-state in WV, an Appalachian state and a rump USA with a Putin expy.

Okay here's some ideas for (not) Putin 1) grew up in Pittsburg during the 50's with both of his parents having fought the CSA as members of the local militia,2) after graduating at top of his class in army intelligence and serving four years stomping out Neo-Canadian guerrillas would later transfer to the ISB Internal Security Bureau 3) Quickly gaining a reputation for his cold, ruthless and brutal efficiency especially against former Confederates 4) During his time in the ISB he would become a staunch Democrat and Militarist 5) Had secretly supported the attempted military of the late 80's when several high ranking and influential military officers attempted to overthrow the US government seeing as weak and indecisive 6) soon rose to power not long after the US collapse of the early 90's in the rump US.

 

[wilji1090]

The idea I had presented of the USA rebuilding the South and endearing the Confederates to their cause sounds like a pipe dream, but honestly, I think the only US figure who could pull off something like that would be Robert McNamara. It'd be his "Only Nixon could go to China" moment of realpolitik; however, I sincerely think that McNamara could ultimately bring the Canadian and Confederate territories under Yankee control. After quietly removing Southron nationals and Canadian nationals, of course.

Any thoughts on that?