Miscellaneous, Non-Frivolous ASB Ideas

[stevep]

Nov 8, 2019 14:52:14 GMT Zyobot said:

Nov 8, 2019 14:40:15 GMT stevep said:

  Given western US's resources and knowledge of the cold war and what the USSR doesn't have in the way of nukes capable of hitting the US - or with a bit of pre-planning probably most/all of western Europe - I suspect the answer would be STOMP! 

I’d probably have to agree with this. There’s also Gipper’s likely advocation of military adventurism and a revival of American patriotism that the almost-immediately post-WW2 US would probably side with in principle.

However, I do wonder if someone like Ike might be more...reluctant, shall we say. Never mind how he receptive he might be to the Reaganite GOP, though whether their ideas actually hold up to scrutiny or not is a separate debate that I’d prefer to avoid here.

  Well if its still in the earlier period, 51-52 it would be Truman in the White House and he was unwilling to allow MacArthur to either use nukes or bomb China so even apart from the chaos of two separate parts of the US now in existence there is likely to be problems there.  Especially since the 'new' 1981 west would be the area from or via which reinforcements or supplies would have to come from, unless the 1951 eastern US sent stuff via the Panama Canal. 

  Question, would the western US include Hawaii?  Assume so in which case its got a more powerful fleet there but would, along with the west, have problems supporting 1951 forces logistically.  Also would the west include N Dakota.  You can probably guess why I'm asking?   A lot of Minutemen there.

  I suspect the most likely path would be that the ISOT causes chaos in the US and disrupts supplies to the US and probably some allied forces in Korea and that Reagan and 1981 US offers to step in, sending far more powerful forces from 30 years later that inflict devastating damage on the communists once they get into theatre.  Then does Mao and/or Stalin back down?  If not things could quickly go nuclear.

[Zyobot]

Nov 8, 2019 15:16:33 GMT stevep said:

Nov 8, 2019 14:52:14 GMT Zyobot said:

I’d probably have to agree with this. There’s also Gipper’s likely advocation of military adventurism and a revival of American patriotism that the almost-immediately post-WW2 US would probably side with in principle.

However, I do wonder if someone like Ike might be more...reluctant, shall we say. Never mind how he receptive he might be to the Reaganite GOP, though whether their ideas actually hold up to scrutiny or not is a separate debate that I’d prefer to avoid here.

  Well if its still in the earlier period, 51-52 it would be Truman in the White House and he was unwilling to allow MacArthur to either use nukes or bomb China so even apart from the chaos of two separate parts of the US now in existence there is likely to be problems there.  Especially since the 'new' 1981 west would be the area from or via which reinforcements or supplies would have to come from, unless the 1951 eastern US sent stuff via the Panama Canal. 

  Question, would the western US include Hawaii?  Assume so in which case its got a more powerful fleet there but would, along with the west, have problems supporting 1951 forces logistically.  Also would the west include N Dakota.  You can probably guess why I'm asking?   A lot of Minutemen there.

  I suspect the most likely path would be that the ISOT causes chaos in the US and disrupts supplies to the US and probably some allied forces in Korea and that Reagan and 1981 US offers to step in, sending far more powerful forces from 30 years later that inflict devastating damage on the communists once they get into theatre.  Then does Mao and/or Stalin back down?  If not things could quickly go nuclear.

Good point. To clarify which states I'm thinking of sending back--plus President Reagan himself, as said before--here's a map from City Data that hopefully answers those more geographical questions. Again, the Western States come from 1980-something, leaving the Eastern States to be in 1950-something:

[stevep]

Nov 8, 2019 15:32:50 GMT Zyobot said:

Nov 8, 2019 15:16:33 GMT stevep said:

  Well if its still in the earlier period, 51-52 it would be Truman in the White House and he was unwilling to allow MacArthur to either use nukes or bomb China so even apart from the chaos of two separate parts of the US now in existence there is likely to be problems there.  Especially since the 'new' 1981 west would be the area from or via which reinforcements or supplies would have to come from, unless the 1951 eastern US sent stuff via the Panama Canal. 

  Question, would the western US include Hawaii?  Assume so in which case its got a more powerful fleet there but would, along with the west, have problems supporting 1951 forces logistically.  Also would the west include N Dakota.  You can probably guess why I'm asking?   A lot of Minutemen there.

  I suspect the most likely path would be that the ISOT causes chaos in the US and disrupts supplies to the US and probably some allied forces in Korea and that Reagan and 1981 US offers to step in, sending far more powerful forces from 30 years later that inflict devastating damage on the communists once they get into theatre.  Then does Mao and/or Stalin back down?  If not things could quickly go nuclear.

Good point. To clarify which states I'm thinking of sending back--plus President Reagan himself, as said before--here's a map from City Data that hopefully answers those more geographical questions. Again, the Western States come from 1980-something, leaving the Eastern States to be in 1950-something:

Zyobot,

  Right that's a bit more than I was expecting.  Texas has a lot of military capacity.  In terms of nukes N Dakota is also there, along with the three labs in the SW and the US boomer base in Oregon.  Plus with their Pacific fleet, or at least those based in Hawaii and the west coast will be brought along.  There are also the possibility of bases in locations like Guam.  Also there will be substantial down time USN forces at bases in the Philippines and Okinawa as well as, if its actually during the Korean war a lot of other forces in theatre. 

  Down-time US will have the rather backward economically old south but also the NE and Great Lakes regions which are still major centres of industry and technology in the early 1950's so while it will be outclassed in many areas by the up timers, once the latter has adjusted to the change their still very important.

  One factor that will be an issue is the social problems in the old south especially as Jim Crow is still in place and that will be an issue for up timers even more than the down-timers.

  Steve

[Zyobot]

‘2039 Poland To 1939’. We’ll still need twenty or so more years to learn how Poland turns out by then. Once it rolls around, though, I’d like to discuss the implications that come with it getting sent a century back in time—hopefully, it’ll wallop the Axis Powers with ease.

[stevep]

Nov 10, 2019 18:12:55 GMT Zyobot said:

‘2039 Poland To 1939’. We’ll still need twenty or so more years to learn how Poland turns out by then. Once it rolls around, though, I’d like to discuss the implications that come with it getting sent a century back in time—hopefully, it’ll wallop the Axis Powers with ease.

  Well if its the same geography as 2019 Poland and the ISOT is the 1st September it will include what was in 1939 E Prussia, Silesia and eastern Pomerania.  Which would give Hitler a valid excuse for a dow but also remove pretty much all the forces just about to attack Poland, which is a large proportion of the army and probably also the Luftwaffe at this point.  So the Germans are in deep trouble.  Also while you will have 2039 Poland you will also have 1939 eastern Poland to the east of this point.  Hence there will be a lot of down-time Poles, along with many Ukrainians, Jews etc living in those areas at this date. 

  If 2039 Poland has more than a minimum military then with the destruction of so much of the Nazi forces they should be able to fairly easily hold their own against the Germans if not take the offensive and probably once they begin to realise what has happened and that the Nazis have suffered huge losses then the French and British will get active.  Also its likely that Stalin will decide "what pact with Germany" and not attack eastern Poland.  Another factor could be any 2039 NATO forces located inside Poland, which could also if they include US forces include some tactical nukes, although their not likely to be used unless things get very bad.

  Given both their technology and what they can tell about the future its going to be explosive for 1939 although it could take some time for some details to be believed by the down-timers.

[Zyobot]

‘2020 Jimmy Carter SI To 1976 Jimmy Carter’. Or, maybe we could take the man from just after he passes away IOTL and send him back for a proper fresh start.

[Zyobot]

‘2010 US Military To 1940’. Once the uptimer armed forces regather their bearings and establish relations with the Allies, it’s a years-early farewell for the Axis Powers as their armies, economies and capacity to wage war get creamed into oblivion.

[stevep]

Nov 13, 2019 14:47:34 GMT Zyobot said:

‘2010 US Military To 1940’. Once the uptimer armed forces regather their bearings and establish relations with the Allies, it’s a years-early farewell for the Axis Powers as their armies, economies and capacity to wage war get creamed into oblivion.

  Two questions/points:

a)  When you say the US military I presume you mean all the services, i.e. army, navy, air force, space command etc.  However how much of their supporting facilities go along with them.  If bases and arms dumps - at least those inside US territory their able to work for a while but lack of spares will be a problem over time.  Of course if US depose outside US territories come along it would complicate matters as they include equipment supplies and forces in Korea, Okinawa [IIRC] Europe, much of which is under German control, especially if after June 40 and possibly also in areas such as the Baltics that could be in Soviet hands.  As such if such occurs there then US equipment and also some US forces are going to be in British, German and Japanese occupied territory, among other.

b)  In 1940 the US is still neutral and has a significant isolationist element.  Especially if before Roosevelt's re-election he might be reluctant to commit the US to war including those new forces magically presented to the US and they, given all the confusion over the event and their status could well be reluctant to unilaterially go to war without Presidential agreement.

  Not to mention of course all the problems there would be be social values between the up-timers and the world their now in.

[Zyobot]

Nov 13, 2019 19:40:49 GMT stevep said:

Nov 13, 2019 14:47:34 GMT Zyobot said:

‘2010 US Military To 1940’. Once the uptimer armed forces regather their bearings and establish relations with the Allies, it’s a years-early farewell for the Axis Powers as their armies, economies and capacity to wage war get creamed into oblivion.

  Two questions/points:

a)  When you say the US military I presume you mean all the services, i.e. army, navy, air force, space command etc.  However how much of their supporting facilities go along with them.  If bases and arms dumps - at least those inside US territory their able to work for a while but lack of spares will be a problem over time.  Of course if US depose outside US territories come along it would complicate matters as they include equipment supplies and forces in Korea, Okinawa [IIRC] Europe, much of which is under German control, especially if after June 40 and possibly also in areas such as the Baltics that could be in Soviet hands.  As such if such occurs there then US equipment and also some US forces are going to be in British, German and Japanese occupied territory, among other.

b)  In 1940 the US is still neutral and has a significant isolationist element.  Especially if before Roosevelt's re-election he might be reluctant to commit the US to war including those new forces magically presented to the US and they, given all the confusion over the event and their status could well be reluctant to unilaterially go to war without Presidential agreement.

  Not to mention of course all the problems there would be be social values between the up-timers and the world their now in.

Fair questions. I suppose that US Military bases, armories and other facilities within at least somewhat safe W/Allies lands--i.e. America itself and Great Britain--should get sent back with their personnel, munitions and machinery. Germany with its hands on the latter two supplies sounds...unsafe, to put it mildly.

However, might FDR and the American public change their mind once the uptimers reveal what the Third Reich is secretly up to, as well as the atrocities being committed by other Axis Powers (and, of course, what Japan will do next December)? Or, would the downtimers probably dismiss it as propaganda?

[stevep]

Nov 17, 2019 19:35:14 GMT Zyobot said:

Nov 13, 2019 19:40:49 GMT stevep said:

  Two questions/points:

a)  When you say the US military I presume you mean all the services, i.e. army, navy, air force, space command etc.  However how much of their supporting facilities go along with them.  If bases and arms dumps - at least those inside US territory their able to work for a while but lack of spares will be a problem over time.  Of course if US depose outside US territories come along it would complicate matters as they include equipment supplies and forces in Korea, Okinawa [IIRC] Europe, much of which is under German control, especially if after June 40 and possibly also in areas such as the Baltics that could be in Soviet hands.  As such if such occurs there then US equipment and also some US forces are going to be in British, German and Japanese occupied territory, among other.

b)  In 1940 the US is still neutral and has a significant isolationist element.  Especially if before Roosevelt's re-election he might be reluctant to commit the US to war including those new forces magically presented to the US and they, given all the confusion over the event and their status could well be reluctant to unilaterially go to war without Presidential agreement.

  Not to mention of course all the problems there would be be social values between the up-timers and the world their now in.

Fair questions. I suppose that US Military bases, armories and other facilities within at least somewhat safe W/Allies lands--i.e. America itself and Great Britain--should get sent back with their personnel, munitions and machinery. Germany with its hands on the latter two supplies sounds...unsafe, to put it mildly.

However, might FDR and the American public change their mind once the uptimers reveal what the Third Reich is secretly up to, as well as the atrocities being committed by other Axis Powers (and, of course, what Japan will do next December)? Or, would the downtimers probably dismiss it as propaganda?

  On the last point those interested/willing in stopping the assorted fascist powers will see their position strengthened by the news from the up-timers and also a fair number of 'undecided' in the US are likely to be more favourable to intervention.  Also the sheer power of the modern US military will make things easier in that if used quickly, even without nukes, its going to be a curb stomp.  However it could be devisive in the US, at least until the election is over. 

  You could however see a fair number of volunteers leaving the modern military - which no longer has a formal existence or salary etc. - to aid the western allies, although there are likely to be some social clashes here.  As also between the up-timers and down time US population.

[Zyobot]

'1984 Walter Mondale Vs. 2004 George W. Bush' in--you guessed it--yet another cross-time presidential election, this time featuring the western half of the 2004 United States getting sent twenty years back in time. IOTL, Mondale got stomped into the ground hard by Gipper--but something tells me that this matchup would be considerably less one-sided with Dubya as the GOP nominee instead.

[stevep]

Well let's have a British one for a change. Attlee replaces Callaghan as Labour leader in 1979 against Thatcher. Wonder if that might make a difference, although also how depressed he might be by the state of the Labour party by that point.

[Zyobot]

Nov 19, 2019 11:10:19 GMT stevep said:

Well let's have a British one for a change. Attlee replaces Callaghan as Labour leader in 1979 against Thatcher. Wonder if that might make a difference, although also how depressed he might be by the state of the Labour party by that point.

So, does that mean he's resurrected to take on the Iron Lady and him alone? Or, is some section of the downtimer UK with a Labor Party-friendly voting bloc also sent along with him?

[stevep]

Nov 19, 2019 17:20:48 GMT Zyobot said:

Nov 19, 2019 11:10:19 GMT stevep said:

Well let's have a British one for a change. Attlee replaces Callaghan as Labour leader in 1979 against Thatcher. Wonder if that might make a difference, although also how depressed he might be by the state of the Labour party by that point.

So, does that mean he's resurrected to take on the Iron Lady and him alone? Or, is some section of the downtimer UK with a Labor Party-friendly voting bloc also sent along with him?

  Good question and shows how I didn't think things through.   Assuming that somehow he's Labour leader again, with at least a basic level of support by the party and his identity recognised and accepted by the country as a whole.  I think he could well be a centralising element for the country and secure a more moderate leadership in both the party and the country.  Albeit that he's likely to have problems with the left wing elements in the party, unions etc.

[Zyobot]

‘Xi Jinping To 1949 Mao Zedong’. I imagine that the PRC may very well be better off with a more sane and economically literate chairman at the helm ITTL—however tyrannical he may still be by Western, liberal-democratic standards.