Talk:1983: Doomsday

Before you start editing, please read the Editorial Guidelines.

Discussion Archives: | Page 1 | Page 2 | Page 3 | Page 4 | Page 5 | Page 6 | Page 7 | Page 8

Former Proposals: | Page 1 | Page 2 | Page 3 | Page 4 | Page 5 | Page 6 | Page 7 | Page 8

=GENERAL DISCUSSION= The following is for general discussion to improve the TL that does not involve article proposals Structured into rough sections for easier navigation.

Countries/Regions/Politics
Archives: Page 1 Page 2

KwaXhosa
KwaXhosa I can see this been a thorn in the side for NB and with LoN membership on hold due to NB's occupation I think NB granting KwaXhosa its independance would be a a logical step any thaughts --Owen1983 18:34, December 7, 2009 (UTC)
 * According to the History of New Britain (1983: Doomsday) and KwaXhosa (1983: Doomsday), the occupation of KwaXhosa ended some time ago. The nation never lost its independence during the occupation either.  You really need to start reading articles before you being commenting on them.  Also I don't think this qualifies as a fundamental issue.  Mitro 18:58, December 7, 2009 (UTC)

Graphics / Visualization /Cartography
Section Archives: Page 1

New World Map
Due to size, the discussion for the new world map has been moved here: File talk:World83DD v1.2.PNG. Mitro 17:57, December 7, 2009 (UTC)

New Virginian flag
Now that Virginia is officially starting to help the other survivors states in the South, they need a more politcally correct flag. Their current flag is offensive everywhere but the "Neo-Confederate" states. And no, I will not accept either Virginia or West Virginia's flags. Inspired by the little contest for the new flag for the NAU (and by the fact that I don't have an artistic bone in my body), I will take ideas for the new flag. Post your ideas either here or on my talk page, and I will judge them fairly.

PS: Owen1983, since you were disqualified for not being inivited, consider this an invitation.

Yankovic270 02:33, November 24, 2009 (UTC)

Ok, here's my contribution. The blue field is the blue of the West Virginia and Virginia flag, the Cardinal is the state bird of both Virginias, Kentucky, and Ohio, and the stars represent the parts of each former state that are part of the republic. --Oerwinde 11:56, November 24, 2009 (UTC)

i like this flag. its unique.--HAD 12:21, November 24, 2009 (UTC)

We need at least two more flags for me to make a desision. HAD, why don't you make the flag you talked about in the Virginia talkpage. Yankovic270 12:44, November 24, 2009 (UTC)


 * Oerwinde, thats a very pretty flag. Benkarnell 15:33, November 24, 2009 (UTC)

Until there are other actual choices, I will uses Oerwinde's flag. Yankovic270 00:21, November 25, 2009 (UTC)

i don't know how to crate flags. like i said, i like this falg. its cool. ho and bye the way, box containig info on North American Nations has'nt had the flag changerd.neither has THE WCP page been updated --HAD 10:22, November 25, 2009 (UTC)

Nor do I. That is the whole point of this little contest. With only a single candidate, this contest isn't very much of a contest. For one thing, there needs to be other choices. I like Option 1, but where's Option 2, 3 or 4? --Yankovic270 20:18, November 25, 2009 (UTC)
 * Creating a flag is super easy if you have the right program. I just use photoshop and selection tools to piece together multiple images. I have friends who can fully paint things from scratch, what I've done with my flags is super basic stuff. Maybe I'll try to think up some other options or look at HAD's suggestion and make that. Any ideas? My first flag was trying to use a symbol of the area. I wanted something that symbolized the military but couldn't come up with anything, so I went with the state bird of 4 of the 5 states the republic had territory in.--Oerwinde 08:22, November 26, 2009 (UTC)

That's just it. If I had the right program. The only image-editing software I have on my computer is MS Paint, and somehow I doubt that is the right program. Evem I had a program I knew how to use, I have no idea on what to make the flag. --Yankovic270 12:43, November 26, 2009 (UTC) --Yankovic270 12:43, November 26, 2009 (UTC)

I followed a consideration from the community some time ago and I use INKSCAPE for the flags/maps I make... opensorce and for free... and if you have doubts? ...My then 9years old brother made the flags for Soloville, Kinshasa-Brazzaville with that program within 2 horus...:) and the I made with the program as well... really easy--Xi&#39;Reney 23:48, November 26, 2009 (UTC)

Ok, I added HAD's suggestion of the Confederate national flag without the battle banner. Also, the modern confederate flag with reversed colors could represent a modern confederacy with the ideals of state rights, etc. Without the outdated ideals of the old confederacy.--Oerwinde 21:46, November 28, 2009 (UTC)

Now that I think of it, all the options are good. The third flag makes me think of the Freedom Party flag in the Harry Turtledove Southern Victory series. --Yankovic270 22:55, November 28, 2009 (UTC)

I know I said I would choose, but I cannot. I will put it up for a vote. Anyone who likes any of the options message their choice (1,2,3). I will go out and say this: "None of the above" is not an option. If you don't like the options (and you can make flags), feel free to add your own choice. If the flags stay the same size as they are now, we can have a maximum of three other options. --Yankovic270 22:55, November 28, 2009 (UTC)

I would go with option 1 --Owen1983 23:12, December 10, 2009 (UTC)

Could some other people vote? No offense Owen, but one vote does not a contest make. I need some variety, and what would be the point of having a contest if you are just going to unceramoniously pick one option. and once again: "None of the above" is not an option. --Yankovic270 01:36, December 14, 2009 (UTC)

Alright, I'll vote for the Turtledove-esque option number 3. --DarthEinstein 02:42, December 14, 2009 (UTC)


 * A vote for number 1 from me. --Karsten&#160;vK (talk) 18:05, December 14, 2009 (UTC)

i vote for number 1. to be honest, my flag ain't that good and the Turtledove-esque flag has to many CSA overtones to be acceptable in a post DD world. on a related isuue, it is my opinion that the Virgininia Seal needs changing. --HAD 11:01, December 15, 2009 (UTC)

Wiki/Timeline/Article Technicals
Section archives: Page 1

New discussion page(s)
Considering how large this page gets, I'm thinking about splitting the discussion page into 7 seperate discussion pages based on the current sections on the talk page. You can check out my idea on my sandbox: User:Mitro/Sandbox. Feel free to make suggestions or even edit the page to help improve the idea. If you all like it, I will split the discussion page when we have consensus. Mitro 03:45, December 21, 2009 (UTC)

Culture / Society
Archives: Page 1

Religion: Unification of Orthodox/Catholic Church ?
As much as I may be opposed to it, I still think it should be proposed...
 * With Orthodox Christianity and Roman Catholicism in tatters (Australia, Greece, New Zealand, Turkey being the strongest vestiges of Orthodoxy, South America being the strongest of Catholicism) the two religions might be more prompted to unite the Ancient Churches. Of course whoever is the caretaker of Catholicism might want to discuss it as obviously everyone here is going to have a different idea. Though there are still a great many matters that would need to be taken care of. Would the new South American pope even want to relinguish power to nothing more than "First Among Equals".

Mr.Xeight 02:57, November 18, 2009 (UTC)
 * How can Turkey have the strongest vestiges of Orthodoxy? What about all those people in Socialist Siberia?--Vladivostok 13:50, November 18, 2009 (UTC)

Could someone shed some light on the proportionalities/basic principles in the Orhodoxy? Like numbers of followers in each country? And international hierarchy in between the Orthodox Church??

I would really welcome it if we treat the religious topics in a careful way (evolving them through rational discussion) as it is too simple to offend some readers/contributors with this issue !!--Xi&#39;Reney 20:49, November 18, 2009 (UTC)

I didn't say it had a BIG population, only that there more Greeks who jumped ship from the Motherland and headed East. Northern Greece certianly doesn't, nor Thrace, nor Yugoslavia, they're all dead! And didn't the USSR surpress Orthodoxy anyway? Besides, are there even a lot of Orthodox Christians in the Russin Far East? I could just be stereotyping here, but I'm guessing the great percentage of the native Turkic Tribes of Siberia and the like are animists or shamanists? And of course you have to take into affect whether any Orthodox Christians in Siberia could even communicate with their Western brothers.
 * Xi, I can look it up. If all else fails, I can inquire to my priest, I'm sure he can direct me to an Inter-Orthodox website.
 * To answer about inter-Orthodox hierarchy, it's complicated... Let's use me for example. I'm a Greek Orthodox Christian under the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of North & South America (now called "The Americas"). I can attend liturgy at an Antiochan, or Russian, or Ukrainian, or even an Oriental Orthodox (who are not in-communion with us.). I can even receive communion from any of the above churches (though receiving from an Oriental Orthodox church is frowned upon). That's about it. We're "expected" (a great deal of rules are unwritten and unofficial, they're more like guidelines you're expected to folow) to only get confession from our own subsect, meaning I can not receive confession from a Russian Orthodox priest. Unless there's a shortage in the area, priests from their respective sects give liturgy at their own church. I know of some saints who were Greek that became Patriarchs in Russia, but of course this was hundreds of years ago. There is an inter-Orthodox Group I know of, SCOBA (Standing Conference of the Canonical Orthodox Bishops in the Americas).
 * Doomsday might change all of this. For all we know the surviving Russian and Serbian monks who were forced to leave Mt. Athos might be able to hold liturgy in Greek churches now.

Mr.Xeight 23:29, November 18, 2009 (UTC)

Does anyone have any ideas at all? Is the caretaker of DD's Catholicism interested? Mr.Xeight 22:58, November 21, 2009 (UTC)

i have not had much thaught on catholism but but I agrre reunifications a logical step --Owen1983 00:25, November 22, 2009 (UTC)

You did not just say that...
 * You do know that there are other Christian religions out there besides Catholicism & Protestantism right? You do know that there Orthodox Christianity is the 2nd largest Christian religion? You have no idea how much that angers me to see so much ignorance in Western Europeans and Americans who choose not to look beyond their own life.
 * Do not come to my page and give me an apology, in-fact don't bother responding to this comment. Just be more informed next time you open your mouth to comment.

Mr.Xeight 00:35, November 22, 2009 (UTC)

As a Protestant, I feel like anything I have to say on this matter is limited at best. But I'm not inclined to believe that even a nuclear war would necessarily lead Roman Catholicism and the various branches of Orthodoxy to seek to become one Church. I am inclined to believe that adherents of Catholicism and Orthodoxy would continue to follow their own faiths.--BrianD 01:02, November 22, 2009 (UTC)

Owen 1983 is being his usual, irksome self again causing ditress for all. This time he created a page for the "Catholic Church", giving it only a completely made up timeline and a horrific stream of sickening typos.
 * Xi'Reney, have fun trying to discipline him; as if any attempts have been successful in the past. Hopefully this time he won't say I'm in cahoots with him trying to off one of DD's integral parts of the interworkings of the creative process.

Mr.Xeight 01:44, November 23, 2009 (UTC)


 * Xeight...agree, the Catholic Church thing is quite awfully made...though yet solved. if I should alone be trying to discipline this TL, the discussions and all around it...then I would have a new full-time job... which I would love to do indeed :) I think the wiki dynamic regarding corrections/discipline is quite reliable in this...even though I tend to believe that you will have a close view on his behaviour/contributions, out of personal motivation, won´t you?...--Xi&#39;Reney 20:27, November 23, 2009 (UTC)

Makes sense that there would be a vestige of Eastern Orthodoxy in Turkey. After all, the religion was officially started in the city then known as Constantinople. --Yankovic270 21:32, November 23, 2009 (UTC)

And what about the Mormons? Or the Baptists, Lutherists, Anglicans and other Protestant sects? They did not vanish after DD. In fact, I think Utah might have made Mormonism their official religion. Yankovic270 21:49, November 23, 2009 (UTC)

Hey,really ist would be hard to unify the ortodxal and cathollics.I think that their may exist more different beliefs after Doomsday than before it. Despite that,i think we need an article for Ortodoxal Christianity,because there are still many in Greece,Siberia,and the survivors from Bulgaria,Serbia,Poland etc. --Zeifodd 12:47, November 29, 2009 (UTC)


 * It's an interesting thought, anyway. X8, did you have any concrete ideas regarding Catholic-Orthodox relations after DD? As an aside, did we even reach a consensus on whether the post-DD world was generally "more religious" or "less religious"?  Benkarnell 02:54, November 30, 2009 (UTC)
 * I doubt the Orthodox and Catholic churches would unite. Over the centuries the differences in teachings have gotten further and further apart due to the Catholic tendency to adapt Catholic teachings with societal advances, while the Orthodox church tends to try to keep to the original apostolic teachings. My opinion on the religiousness of the post DD world, I think depends on how heavily affected the region is. I think regions that were more or less unaffected might become less religious because of the whole "If there was a god how could he let this happen" type thing. Where more affected regions the survivors would likely have turned to religion either because they had nothing else or due to a view that god kept them safe through it all or something like that. Muslim nations would likely see the destruction of most of the Christian world as proof of Islam's truth, and would likely see a lot of new converts. Especially in Africa.--Oerwinde 08:19, November 30, 2009 (UTC)

Ben, to answer your question, I've always liked Oer's idea the best. It makes sense and that's what I've based my few writing regarding religion on. But yes, Oer, you're right they are quite different, something that I see all the time at my my predominantly-Catholic school. What I'd see the reuniting as a purely (how should I put this. I can't really think of the right word atm) act of friendship. They would be reunited on paper, their formerly individual churches would carry on as they always have. Who would be able to stop them? I'm sure contact and travel are nigh-impossible from country to country, imagine crossing the Atlantic to boot. So it's really only an act of "Our churches are in tatters, let's unite not because we want to but because we have to". Or at least that's how I'd see it. Mr.Xeight 23:46, November 30, 2009 (UTC)

I will try to outline my views on this matter. First, the differences between Catholicism, Orthodoxy and the Protestant churches is not confined to the question of the primacy of the papacy, there are also questions of dogma, which pose an insurmountable barrier to the union of the churches. Second, the lack of communication between regions of the world after the nuclear holocaust may frustrate the realization of the purpose of uniting the churches even in the event that it would raise. Third, the destruction of the ecclesiastical hierarchy of all Christian denominations, as well as seminars and church schools to the various religions lead to a phase of confusion, religious education seriously decay. Fourth, religiosity would be expressed with difficulties in a public way, not to say that is not published because it was the chase, but because the need would be difficult holding masses or religious events as we know them (migration, work forced, etc. ..) Fifth, most likely resurface millennial tendencies, according to which the DD. would indeed be the arrival of the third age of man and therefore the teachings and standards of the New Testament would have expired as well as the Old Testament for Christians. Heresies coming noww strongly. In conclusion. I do not think, in my opinion, it had a tendency to unity, but on the contrary, would produce a movement of fragmentation and church separate evolution so far known, they might even led to new churches and religions. It is true that there is a conclave in Rio de Janeiro, but it is possible for the survival of the Catholic Church in South America and other regions relatively well communicated outside these regions there is considerable room for speculation on this subject.--Tristanbreiker 18:46, December 6, 2009 (UTC)

Sorry I took long to respond, what the song fails to mention is that it's also the busiest time of the year, and that's when with POST-BREAK finals!
 * But now I actually (thanks to Tristan's comment) that there wouldn't be a reuniting, but infact a seperating! The Celtic Church (1983:Doomsday is a prime example. Bulgaria, Serbia, Northern Greece, East Thrace are all gone, there's no reason to try to delve into their surviving religious community. What seems interesting to me is Europe's situation. The Patriarch of Venice is mentioned,, maybe he's become the de-facto leader of Italian Catholics of th Peninsula

status of historical artifacts and monuments
Doomsday certainly destroyed countless of these, so whats left? --User:WAJJER--WAJJER 01:28, December 13, 2009

no structures survived in Europe or North America but i remember a tv show frome the 1990s caled Buck Rogers in the 25th century which was set long after a nuclear war and it stated Mount rushmore survived so I guess it survived in this OTL--Owen1983 21:57, December 14, 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if Rushmore survived the war, but was defaced later during the violent period of Sioux nationalism. Benkarnell 22:03, December 14, 2009 (UTC)

I think what you just described can be described as a war crime. And why on earth would the want to deface it? They have the huge statue of Crazy Horse, so they should be happy. I think we should have them intent to deface the monument, only to get twarted at the last minute. --Yankovic270 22:37, December 14, 2009 (UTC)

Any historical monuments in West Virginia? Because they would survive Doomsday reletively easily. --Yankovic270 22:37, December 14, 2009 (UTC)


 * The Black Hills are just about the most sacred place in the world in traditional Sioux culture, and many Sioux see Mt. Rushmore as an unconscionable, if not downright insulting, scar on them - and that's *here*, not *there*, where there was a radical, militant, nationalistic movement that took hold among the tribe. There was a huge protest at the mountain in 1971 (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Rushmore#Controversy).  And Crazy Horse is (1) unfinished even today, and (2) opposed by many for the same reason they oppose Rushmore.  I would imagine that destroying Rushmore would symbolically show the Sioux nationalists' victory over the successors of the US and their purging of their new country of all US ifluence.  It's kind of like the Taliban destroying those Buddhas.  I'd imagine that the Lakotah Republic would have apologized for such an act, though, once moderates were in power and seeking to join the North American Union.  Benkarnell 22:54, December 14, 2009 (UTC)

I would hunt down those responsible, try them and summarily execute them. I doubt there is a citizen in any of the American survivors states whose blood wouldn't boil over this atrocity. Hell, there might be a backlash against Native Americans. Scratch that. There will be a backlash on Native Americans. I could see mobs of angry citizens lynching any aboringinal they can find, and destroying all they own. Even will the apology, I doubt the ill will caused by this atrocity will go away any time soon. It is harsh, but pretty much any American I know whould be absolutely furious if anything happened to Mount Rushmore. I see the Virginian Republic expelling any aboriginals in its territory over this outrage. --Yankovic270 23:08, December 14, 2009 (UTC)

I am not american but I think Mount Rushmore is a very inportent monuman to US history and ensuring there survival will preserve the past IMHO I would like to see Mount Rushmore preserved as a LoN world heratige site--Owen1983 23:17, December 14, 2009 (UTC)


 * Yankovic - this isn't real. Benkarnell 00:40, December 15, 2009 (UTC)

Aren't you Canadian? Mr.Xeight 00:53, December 15, 2009 (UTC)

Yes, but it doesn't take an american to see that the sculpture at Mount Rushmore is as much a beloved symbol of America as the Statue of Liberty. Think of it this way. You are an American lets say, and someone defaced Mount Rushmore with graffiti or explosives. You would probbably be angry. If such an attack would happen in real life most Americans would be furious. I imagine the reaction would be the same in the 1983:Doomsday timeline. Yankovic270 01:36, December 15, 2009 (UTC)
 * I think you are overreacting Yank. Maybe OTL if someone destroyed Mt. Rushmore people would be upset, but would there be a huge backlash against Native Americans?  No.  Look at 9/11, probably the greatest tragedy in American history.  Was every single Muslim American rounded up into camps or did the streets run red with Arab blood?  No.  Was there some violence, yes but all things considered it certainly wasn't as bad as, lets say, what happened to the Sikhs when Indira Gandhi was killed in 1984.  I believe over 3000 people died.  Americans just aren't like that except for those few ignorant white trash yokels.  I don't think you truly understand the American mindset.
 * As for this ATL, consider this Yank, why should anyone care? If the Lakota do destroy the monument it could take years for the majority of Americans to find out.  Only the people of the PUSA would know about right away, but they would be enemies anyway so they have other reasons to hate them.  Furthermore there are a lot of American survivor states that don't even see themselves as Americans anymore (like the MSP), would the destruction of the monument really effect them?  Also there are Americans who have been born since DD who probably have never even seen pictures of the place, how could they get an attachment to it?  And why would all Native Americans be helpless?  Many reservations are away from targets and would have access to farmland and other necessities.  If anything they most Indians would be better off then non-Indians in North America.
 * It just seems odd that an ethinic American upon finding out the monument was destroyed would go psycho and kill the first Native American they see. Also compare the destruction of the monument to DD itself.  If Americans would go nutso on some Indians for blowing up some stones, what would they do to a citizen Socialist Siberia, the successor state to the USSR?  Mitro 05:08, December 15, 2009 (UTC)

We haven't even established any fate for Mount Rushmore, much less its destruction. And how would you, in a post-WWIII world, destroy or even deface the monument? That would have to be a pretty massive undertaking, and you'd pretty much be the only ones to know about it. I'd like to hear a realistic explanation of why, and how, Mt. Rushmore would be destroyed...if it's determined it wasn't, then Owen's idea of making it an LoN world heritage site is an excellent idea.--BrianD 06:31, December 15, 2009 (UTC)
 * Now I'm no expert on blowing up monuments, but wouldn't conventional explosives, maybe dynamite used by firefighters and construction workers, be enough to damage the monument? Mitro 13:49, December 15, 2009 (UTC)

Its possible the Statue of Liberty survived. Although it would be damaged. Most Berlin landmarks survived, I would guess the Pyramids would survive as well, they would be far enough away to escape with only superficial damage. Keep in mind that a lot of the suburban areas of major cities would survive mostly intact, while the fallout would push the population away or kill them, so any landmarks in the suburban areas of major cities would likely survive.--Oerwinde 07:58, December 15, 2009 (UTC)

I think both Americans and Native Americans would be outraged i can imagine the culprits being tried and sentaced to hard labor reparing the damage they caused--Owen1983 18:37, December 15, 2009 (UTC)
 * Again, why would they be punished? As Ben pointed out a lot of Native Americans don't like the monument to begin with.  Furthermore I doubt a sovereign nation is going to turn over its citizens to be tried for doing something that said nation probably approved of when it happened.  As for other Americans, why should they care?  Consider the Americans in Australia who integrated into Australian culture or the survivor states that have established new identities.  Why would they care?  Mitro 18:45, December 15, 2009 (UTC)

As major cites have been destroyed, major artifacts are now lost. so local museums, like my local bassetlaw museum, could have surived in the UK and in other nations. but due the chaos, they would be ransacked (remember what happened in Iraq after the invasion). also being used: in my museum a 5th century log boat would be used as firewood for any survivors, or using old farm tools. In the UK, Stonehenge could survive with some cathderals; Ely, Lincoln (?), Peterbrough. I'm only mentioning this as the 'Rushmoore argument' and others focuse on America. It is fine discussing about it, but I would like some discussions on a much, broader scope. This does sound like univeristy speack, since i am a student. --WAJJER 19:13, December 15, 2009 (UTC)

I agree with walker I think we are ignoring the topic becuse people are focusing on America

I'd imagine the artifacts in Berlin would take on increased value. The Berlin Wall might be a major historic site. Obviously as Switzerland was not attacked the museums and artifacts there would have survived. Same for South America. Perhaps the Great Wall of China as well? And, I'm wondering if it is possible that something survived in the ruins of the Vatican in Rome, perhaps in some kind of underground chamber?--BrianD 23:30, December 15, 2009 (UTC)

Miscellaneous discussion
Archives: Page 1

Wikibreak announcement
For a variety of reasons, I'm not going to be very active on this site for a little while. Part of it is that for Christmas I'm working in a shop instead of in classrooms, so I don't have access to computers in the middle of the day. But I'm also getting a little frustrated with certain aspects of 83dd and feel it's time to take a breather. This probably won't be as long as my last (unannounced) absence, essentially August-September... maybe five months is just the limit of my Internet attention span. I'll respond to any posts on my own talk page. All I ask is that everyone please, please do not leave Mitro to do all the archiving. He's busy too, and this page can get quite big. Merry Christmas! :) Benkarnell 22:44, December 17, 2009 (UTC)

Doomsday on Facebook
For all of those who use Facebook, I created a facebook group for Doomsday: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=215628041113

Hopefully it will help atract some new contributors! Mitro 19:58, December 19, 2009 (UTC)

=CURRENT ARTICLE PROPOSALS= Please list any and all current article proposals and their discussion here. If the proposals only involves a specific section of the article, please state that. Also remember to use  when reviewing new articles.

French Foreign Legion
From French Guyana I started working on this article...removed the obsolete and put it to work in progress/Stub I will focus on the detachment in Guyana... if our France experts would like to take care of some parts of Mainland Legion remains (if there are any??)...welcome--Xi&#39;Reney 22:19, November 27, 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not much of a France expert but I do know the 13th Foreign Legion Demi-Brigade was stationed in Djibouti during DD. Mitro 22:57, November 27, 2009 (UTC)

I'm creating a page on CANZ Armed Forces.--MC Prank 15:25, November 21, 2009 (UTC)

India articles
I added information on Khalistan and Operation Red Blood which was blank before that. Any ratification problem --MC Prank 15:25, November 19, 2009 (UTC)
 * Can you link to the page? Benkarnell 05:56, November 21, 2009 (UTC)

http://althistory.wikia.com/wiki/India_(1983:_Doomsday), here. --MC Prank 07:21, November 21, 2009 (UTC)
 * See also Republic of Khalistan (1983: Doomsday) and . Mitro 03:22, November 24, 2009 (UTC)
 * For Red Blood, why did India attack Arunachal Pradesh first? Wouldn't it make sense to first go after areas that are adjacent to UIP lands? Come to think of it, I thought the UIP was a pretty decentralized body for getting the different areas to agree with each other. How is it finding so much military success all of a sudden?  One success (Sikkim) seems OK.  But this step-by-step reconquest seems to be flying by awfully easily.  Benkarnell 02:58, November 30, 2009 (UTC)

It is easier to conquer Arunachal Pradesh as it borders the UIP from both sides, that is, if you have seen the map. Yeah, I realised my mistake. Now I'll Limit Red Blood to just Arunachal Pradesh and The current UIP members form a federal country. First, it stabilizes over a course of time and then goes on to re-claiming the break-away states. You were right this success was just too easy considering UIP just a provisional body. --MC Prank 16:26, November 30, 2009 (UTC)


 * Even with the changes, it seems to be too much, too fast. That's two national governments completely wiped out in two months.  I'm sure they were far from being stable, modern powers, but then, India's UIP isn't very stable or modern either.  (EDIT) Also, wouldn't Manmohan Singh be a citizen of Khalilstan and not the President of India?   Benkarnell 13:23, December 9, 2009 (UTC)

Manmohan Singh was the Governor of RBI, India's central bank in 1982, before that he taught at the Universty of Delhi, and also worked for the Foreign & Finance Ministries so there's a lot of chance that he could try to unify India OTL. And you must be knowing that all sikhs dont live in just Punjab. --MC Prank 16:20, December 11, 2009 (UTC)

LON Authority for Space Operations
To bring forward the issue of spaceflight (and in a larger frame more global themes in 1983: Doomsday) i propose the canonization of the LoN - Authority for Spatial Operations, situated in Kourou and established by the TSAR treaty in January 2009. Aiming at coordinating and supervising spacfaring and realted activities worldwide in the signing and ratifiying states.

A frame I worked out now, some details are needed (site for ANZC launch site... etc. I already tried to refer to what I found in other articles, but not sure if got everything. Harmonizing with League of Nations and other pages will be done if approved.

Thanks for your help and comments.--Xi&#39;Reney 19:01, November 8, 2009 (UTC)

Before Doomsday the US was a major force in Space exploration but with the US gome the only two countries that have the recourses ar the SSS and ANZC and theres another thing how are these governmants going to justify a space program when people in meny parts ofthe world have medievel living standerds --Owen1983 19:07, November 16, 2009 (UTC)
 * You know what Owen, this is one of the few times I have to agree with you. Space exploration in all likelihood will be a low priority even among the first world nations.  Mitro 19:15, November 16, 2009 (UTC)


 * My intention is definitely not bringing any moon mission into DD. Any ambitious space program Would sound like Science fiction. I am mainly thinking about practical focus, e.g. satellite starts for reestablishing communications and/or meteorological/reconaissance purposes, maybe a GPS-like system in a timeframe roughly 2009...more economical than rebuilding vast terrestrial infrastructure once you get a functioning rocket system back to work. --Xi&#39;Reney 22:03, November 16, 2009 (UTC)


 * This is true, we take satellites so much for granted nowadays that we forget just how much the Space Race has benefited society. If you can just get a satellite up there, it is much easier to use it to communicate, instead of building miles and miles of land lines.  nd then there are the public safety benefits that come from being able to see hurricanes and the like when they're still out in the middle of the ocean.  Benkarnell 23:40, November 16, 2009 (UTC)
 * Satelites make sense, my concern though was for more ambitios space exploration designs I have been seeing pop up on certain articles. One proposal suggested that an American survivor state could make it back to the moon sometimes in the 2010s.  Mitro 00:13, November 17, 2009 (UTC)


 * Where is that page? Benkarnell 00:52, November 17, 2009 (UTC)
 * It was on the proposal, but Riley has removed it but has kept the space exploration which still seems unlikely IMO for such a nation.  Mitro 03:11, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

I could see Virginia starting a space program. Considering what kind of nation Virginia is, the space prgram could have started as an unexpected side effect of missile research. --Yankovic270 03:21, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

War in the Mediterranean!
Discussion moved to Talk:Second Sicily War (1983: Doomsday). Benkarnell 19:56, October 13, 2009 (UTC)

New British elections
British elections coming up! Bob 20:23, November 18, 2009 (UTC)
 * See 2009 Realm of New Britain General Election (1983: Doomsday) for the article in question. Mitro 03:09, November 24, 2009 (UTC)
 * Wouldn't the Anglo-Africans just continue parties popular among them, such as the Progressive Federal Party, instead of copying British parties for no apparent reason? --Karsten&#160;vK (talk) 14:04, November 30, 2009 (UTC)
 * We've already noted that British people from the UK came to New Britain. Many of these people would have been politicians, with a collapsing government and civil disorder, when an existing stable party community arrives, it only makes sense that they would take root and stabilise political aggravations. Bob 13:09, December 3, 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh sure, that make sense. It's the Anglo-Africans I'm talking about however. Why would they conform to a model identical to the one previously used in Britain and forget everything about their own political history? Especially given the fact that they form the majority of the population, that just doesn't make sense to me. Also, given the fact that South Africa used a system of proportional representation and I've never heard of any country that moved from a proportional system to a district system as rigid as the British one (correct me if I'm wrong on this though), my estimate is New Britain would definitely have more than just two to three political parties. You may even want to spice things up by adding an ethnic Xhosan party, openly supportive of KwaXhosa. --Karsten&#160;vK (talk) 14:38, December 4, 2009 (UTC)
 * The thing is I've put in alot of information into the table but it doesn't come up. Can anyone help? Bob 11:34, December 5, 2009 (UTC)

There would be a large Xhosa population, given NB's location. But Karsten, a couple things: South Africa's state collapsed and there was a lot of population displacement, so it's plausible that NB wouldn't resemble South Africa too closely. Though since most people would be used to a PR government, I would expect them to keep that. Benkarnell 18:23, December 6, 2009 (UTC)

I think kertens got a good point a political parties should reflect the ethnic diversity in NB --Owen1983 18:46, December 6, 2009 (UTC)

Article on Soviet Alaska created by Vlad. Mitro 03:10, November 24, 2009 (UTC)
 * Not to be annoying and stubborn, but. As I was re-reading the Authority for Space Operations page, I was reminded of another reason to at least be careful before we reject this page: the idea of a Soviet Alaska - and of some sort of Soviet-ANZUS conflict - has been embedded in the TL for some time.  It's not quite as bad as the Panama issue, but it's still significant.  I'm not sure how many pages we would have to look over and change if we now decide that there are not, and never have been, any Soviets in Alaska.  Benkarnell 17:01, November 30, 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm glad that you're fighting for the article to stay,I really am and I would be too, it's just that I can't come up with such a solid reason to still have it as canon.--Vladivostok 19:21, November 30, 2009 (UTC)
 * I'd really rather not think of it that way. This canon issue, really, is what bothered me from the time that Alaska's existence was most recently questioned.  We started having proposals and canon for a reason.  We, as writers, were tired of not knowing what was "real" within the universe of 1983DD.  With a system of canon/QSS, you can be assured that what is written down is a "fact", and write freely based on that assurance.  It's like a pile of bricks, where every new item rests on what came before it.  When we start bringing long-established facts into question, like Panama and now Alaska, it's like reaching into the pile and pulling out a brick that's 4 or 5 rows down.  It doesn't affect just that one item, it also will move the ones resting on top of it.  The details of the Alaskan Autonomous Oblast or Territory or what-have-you were not fleshed out until very recently, but the existence of a Soviet Alaska, and of some kind of ate 80s/early 90s conflict over it, have been part of the body of knowledge for a long time.  The August world map includes it. (Yes, I know I also had a couple of non-canonical bits on that map, especially South Africa.  But the Alaskan situation was not mine; it was based on material that had already been discussed and accepted.)  I'll repeat that I have no idea how many pages that bit of information is currently affecting.  Definitely the George Bush article, for one.  But we are going to make a /lot/ of unpleasant work for ourselves if we get in the habit of debating and changing stuff that we agreed on already.  Benkarnell 19:55, November 30, 2009 (UTC)

I absolutely agree with you Ben. When I came here I was working with previously established data and this removing of Alaska from canon was somewhat surprising to me. But now I seriously have doubts in the plausibility of Alaska. Back when Alaska and Socialist Siberia were made, more than half the articles we have just didn't exist. And Alaska wasn't really an issue, since there were no articles covering the area, except the ones established, it was regarded as the best option. But now, after fleshing out Siberia and the surrounding area, people started to take notice at a few of the flaws associated with the article. And so it had to be changed. I'm not saying we should just go and rewrite everything,I'm just saying that we should try to work out some of the inconsistencies from past articles, as well as be watchful of new articles.--Vladivostok 20:59, November 30, 2009 (UTC)


 * So Vlad, what do you want specifically to do with the page? Could we have a shrunken A.A.T. - the Alaska Peninsula, the land around Bethel, and the St. Lawrence, Aleutian, and Nunavak Islands, maybe?  Benkarnell 13:39, December 9, 2009 (UTC)
 * Well,I'd hate to see all of the page just marked obsolete, a shrunken Autonomous Territory would work best. I just don't know anymore what the reason behind annexing the land could be. Maybe the small skirmishes led to smaller places joining the Socialist Union, that could be plausible.--Vladivostok 21:35, December 9, 2009 (UTC)

I changed a couple of things in the article to maybe make it a bit more palatable, basically making the territory smaller and generally toning it down a bit. Comments are welcome.--Vladivostok 21:09, December 13, 2009 (UTC)

Superior military articles
See: Republic of Superior Air Force (1983: Doomsday), Republic of Superior Army (1983: Doomsday) and Republic of Superior Navy (1983: Doomsday). There have been some objections regarding the size of the Superior military and the number of vehicles they command. Mitro 03:24, November 24, 2009 (UTC)
 * I think they're fine now that Lahbas clarified that those numbers represent the reserves (defined as most able-bodied adults) and not active personnel. Benkarnell 17:03, November 30, 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah but there are still the issues involving the number of planes and ships Superior operates. Mitro 18:50, November 30, 2009 (UTC)

the plane numbers have been explained in the Republic of Superior Air Force (1983: Doomsday) talk page --Owen1983 22:41, December 3, 2009 (UTC)
 * Owen haven't you noticed the number of people on that talk page who believe that explanation is too optimistic/implausible? Mitro 03:37, December 5, 2009 (UTC)

Canon nation that is finally being fleshed out by Brian. Mitro 03:26, November 24, 2009 (UTC)


 * Anyone have thoughts on the article? I'm working on it as I can. The non-historical portions are easy to create. Right now I'm most concerned about the history of the country, and want to be sure it's realistic and doesn't contradict whats been established as canon for the TL nor for any other countries. Please let me know what you think!--BrianD 18:50, December 14, 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't know much about Singapore, but the article looks good. Sorry I couldn't be of more help.  Mitro 17:25, December 19, 2009 (UTC)
 * Unless there are any objections I think we should go ahead and graduate this article. Mitro 03:20, December 21, 2009 (UTC)

Article created by Yank. Mitro 03:27, November 24, 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't think so. New Jersey, as always, got the worst of it, lying as it does in the middle of several major metropolitan areas.  It looks like Yank hasn't developed it, anyway.  But based on the infobox, it looks like it was part of the "ethnic Americans re-create Old World culture" craze, something that's been rejected overall.  Benkarnell 18:01, November 25, 2009 (UTC)

It is because they are lead by a group of the American Mafia, many of which came from Italy. Sicily specifically. It isen't implausible that some of these mobsters have fond memories of home. --Yankovic270 18:18, November 25, 2009 (UTC)
 * If anybody survived in NJ, organized crime bosses would likely be the ones running things soon afterward. But they'd be the bosses of a hardscrabble shantytown, nothing like the rulers of a modern nation-state.  They'd probably use barter (or an economy of "you eat what we say you eat"), not some newfangled "lira" currency.  And like all simple societies, theirs would probably be fluid, mobile, and impermanent.  I could see the mafia guys running their shantytown for a few years after DD, but after that things would probably change as they ran out of bullets and their mechanical devices stopped working and people came and went from the area in search of a land that could yield more food.  Rembember, Yank - this is post-apocalyptic fiction. The whole point is that society collapses and we have to start over from a primitive state.  It's the same reason, by the way, that Virginia can't be the mechanized modern state that you've been trying to describe.  In the affected areas, people are only concerned with food and security, and they have to get both without relying on modern technology.  Benkarnell 18:52, November 25, 2009 (UTC)

Hey Yank, I thought of this today. A full-fledged state anywhere in New Jersey is unlikely - no resources or infrastructure to support that kind of development - but we've had very little detailed work on the seminomadic "clans" now said to inhabit most of North America. Why not a clan led by former New Jersey mafia? After all, the mafia already have "clans". And their family hierarchy is exactly the sort of informal social structure that would survive an Apocalyptic event even while civil government fell apart. So whaddya say? A bilingual Italian-English nomadic clan centered on New Jersey. You could even call them Clan Trenton. Benkarnell 02:50, November 27, 2009 (UTC)

I then want my ex-mafia nomads to eventually find a place to settle down and start a small nationstate. Where should that be? --Yankovic270 03:18, November 27, 2009 (UTC)

Article created by Brian. Mitro 03:28, November 24, 2009 (UTC)

Article created by Zeifodd. Zeifodd

I checked it out and the country was hit by one nuke so with a bit of work I would think this would deserve graduation--Owen1983 22:19, November 30, 2009 (UTC)
 * I find it hard to believe that Bulgaria would only get hit by one nuke. Other Soviet client states were hit by several (like East Germany and ) and I can't think of a good reason why Bulgaria would avoid similar multi-strikes.  Also what does this mean: "Bulgaria somehow survived the doomsday for a week but after a mistake a bomb has falled in Blagoevgrad in the doomsnight."  It seems to suggest that Bulgaria was not actually attacked until a week after Doomsday which doesn't make any sense.  Mitro 15:25, December 1, 2009 (UTC)

It definitely needs work, and I agree that being hit by one nuke only is unlikely. I suggest that there are about four to eight targets, one of them being the capital. The other targets would be other important cities and strategically important locations, major ports, etc. I don't know much about Bulgaria so I can't give exact cities. --DarthEinstein 16:59, December 1, 2009 (UTC)

OK,you are right,there is information that a nuke has hitted Sofia: "Bulgaria somehow survived the doomsday for a week but after a mistake a bomb has falled in Blagoevgrad in the doomsnight." yeah this is weird maybe i wanted to :"Bulgarians have been hit by 5 nukes in the Doomsday.The capital and 4 other big towns were destroyed and abot 2.5 mln have died.Other 3 mln were hitted by the radiation,the other 1 mln have tried to evacuate in Greece,Africa or Turkey." So it's very possible that 500 000 people have survived(from 7.5 mln) and big part of tham want to come back if it's possible. Thanks and commen --Zeifodd 18:50, December 2, 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry Zeif, but your article is still not entirely realistic. First of all, any surviving peasants would have now way of getting to Greece, Turkey, and especially not Africa. They could never get past the nuclear Hell that is Northern Greece. Going west to Serbia, not exactly better. Any survivors would be relegated to their original areas. Sorry, but I doubt any sort of organize government can exist in the Balkans; the only reason Greece survived is because of the islands and the south.
 * Sorry if some of my sentences are scattered-brained. My Mom has Greek Christmas songs blasting, and I mean quite literally too-loud to hear yourself think.

Mr.Xeight 22:56, December 2, 2009 (UTC)

Yes.I see your point,but it is possible for people to escape,not many,might be 10000 but even if they hadn't,there is a huge number of bulgarian emigrants because of the communist government and even today in OTL they are millions.Really,may be the emigrants would prefer stay at safe in South America or Africa,but a little number of them is probable to try to get back their own land or something near it. But the radiation...is a problem.First they are in the western part of Balkans,so the only bombs have fallen in Bulgaria,Greece and Romania.They are less than 9 and it's still possible to make a little society.But really it can be very hard and dangerous to live there,so may be no more than 15-20 thousand people would come back at first.Would be that OK?Leave a shout --Zeifodd 14:47, December 5, 2009 (UTC)


 * It really depends on what would have been hit in Bulgaria. Sofia would have been destroyed, but given that Bulgaria wasn't the strongest of allies to the USSR most other urban areas would have been spared. Military bases on the other hand wouldn’t be so lucky. Anyone know what military targets there would have been?--ShutUpNavi 17:17, December 8, 2009 (UTC)

If you mean some military complexes and so on...it's hard to say.There are mainly army legion centers in several places,but some big goal-no.Nothing was too special or dangerous,except the nuclear electro central,so it's possible that no big attack over Bulgaria has been planned. However it seems possible for 10 thousand people to come back. Leave your idea. --Zeifodd 18:25, December 15, 2009 (UTC)

An article I created concerning already established facts on the Siberian space program.--Vladivostok 20:56, December 3, 2009 (UTC)

An article I created for a citystate in the southern US that, unfortunately, didn't survive.--BrianD 23:12, December 9, 2009 (UTC)

Article I created based on when it was mentioned in the Riley.Konner 00:34, December 10, 2009 (UTC)

An article I made outlining a possible new organization.--Vladivostok 15:22, December 12, 2009 (UTC)

I think creating this will create fear and tension a lot of countries suffered due to the events of 1983 i dont think thay want to go down the same road trice --Owen1983 22:13, December 14, 2009 (UTC)
 * Well most other stronger world nations in the TL have some sort of formal alliance in which they are in. The ANZC has allies all around the Pacific, almost all of South America is in the SAC, not to mention the ADC, which is the remnant of NATO. I think this organization would come without any surprise.--Vladivostok 13:58, December 15, 2009 (UTC) you have made a good point--Owen1983 18:48, December 15, 2009 (UTC)

Unless there are any objections I think we should go ahead and graduate this article. Mitro 03:22, December 21, 2009 (UTC)

I just looked over the article. It says that it is a reincarnation of the Warsaw Pact; however the only one of the new nations that was in the Warsaw Pact was Siberia (as the successor to the USSR). I guess it could be seen ideologically as the reincarnation of the pact, but I think that that sentence should be removed. Other than that I think it's fine. --DarthEinstein 03:42, December 21, 2009 (UTC)

Created by KingSweden 21:31, December 15, 2009 (UTC) A small survivor community in eastern Washington, presuming the Columbia River Valley wasn't hit too hard.

Dutch Wastelands
An article of mine. It's about the low-lying areas in the Netherlands that have become flooded into swampland Post Doomsday.--ShutUpNavi 20:09, December 16, 2009 (UTC)
 * I like it. Mitro 13:44, December 17, 2009 (UTC)

Article created by Owen. Mitro 17:37, December 19, 2009 (UTC)

Article on one of the fictional leaders of an MSP city state. Article created by an anon. Mitro 17:37, December 19, 2009 (UTC)

Article copied directly from Wikipedia, needs a lot of work. Article created by Owen. Mitro 17:37, December 19, 2009 (UTC)

Article created by Zeifodd. Mitro 17:37, December 19, 2009 (UTC)

Article created by Bob. Question: would the UK manage to evacuate 900k to southern Africa? Mitro 17:37, December 19, 2009 (UTC)

Article created by Owen. Mitro 17:37, December 19, 2009 (UTC)

Article created by Tristan, probably is up for a quick graduation. Mitro 17:37, December 19, 2009 (UTC)

Article created by Jnjaycpa. Mitro 17:39, December 19, 2009 (UTC)

Formerly an empty canon article, but an anon has begun to expand on the history. Mitro 17:39, December 19, 2009 (UTC)

Article created by Zeifodd. Mitro 17:39, December 19, 2009 (UTC)

=FUNDAMENTAL ISSUES= Archive 1

''This subsection is placed to focus on things covering decisive, vital issues concerning the consistency of 1983: Doomsday as a whole and the Timeline specifically. PLease treat this section with the necessary respect and place things not belonging here below !! Comments of non-registered users will not be tolerated in this Talk section! This TL is not without flaws, and especially in the first time (me myself) a lot of things were inserted out of curiosity or not spending much time on repercussions. And due to the complexity level we have reached with 1983: Doomsday now each of these flaws might have world-spanning consequences... I will focus on identifying and eliminating those flaws/inconsistencies to strengthen the basis of the TL and prevent repercussions on the excellent contents written at all fronts. This of course in the established manner of consensus and discussions! I bring this up as a consequence of the "Canal discussion" further below with the intention keeping an eye on above mentioned things.'' Objections? --Xi&#39;Reney 22:14, November 11, 2009 (UTC)

Geopolitics and related issues
The geopolitics article needs some serious revising, as well as future plans of friction and conflict. Since I was planing on doing articles for Guatemala and Haiti, I thought of making the Caribbean a major hot-spot of international political conflict. We already have the SAC on one side, communist nations on the other, and the ANZC is never far behind. I don't know which side the East Caribbean Federation will turn to, but my guess is the ANZC. I also think that the Pakistan invasion of Afghanistan and the Siberian intervention will also cause the SAC to have a more aggressive stance towards the USSR. I'd like other editors to say where they think the current situation will lead, escalation or will the blocs back down?--Vladivostok 16:57, December 2, 2009 (UTC)


 * What happened in Afghanistan? I totally missed that one.
 * Central America and the Caribbean are definitely starting to look very interesting for the geopolitician! One of the most interesting things to me is how the ANZC sort of missed the boat when it came time to find satellites in the region.  Siberia definitely wasted no time in forging (and sometimes re-forging) ties with leftist states there, and the SAC probably considers the whole place its natural backyard.  Since we know nothing about Honduras and El Salvador, and the South American nations have no real satellites in the area so far, I think it would malke sense to give pro-SAC governments to both countries.
 * The East Caribbean Federation is an interesting case. It's kind of a regional bloc unto itself.  We know Haiti is economically dependent upon it, and we also know the Dutch Antillean political scene is more-or-less divided between pro-ECF and pro-South America factions - so it's got influence over some of its smaller neighbors.  But the ECF is definitely no match for South America, or for the Siberia-Cuba-Nicaragua bloc once it starts flexing its muscles.  So it seems natural to cooperate with the ANZC, even apart from their shared English language and culture.
 * The Panama Canal will shape what we know about the region. XiReney and I thought we had consensus that the canal remains intact today, but Lahbas has objected, and he raises some good points... It's critical because if there is no Canal, the ANZC has basically no access to the Caribbean and will not play a role as, for example, a patron state of the ECF.  There's also the French Island super-state to consider, which has a potential role to play as a neutral power in the Caribbean alongside Guyane and Costa Rica.  Without a Canal, the French Caribbean islands have no real way to contact French Polynesia, or New Caledonia beyond it.
 * The French Island state was one of the big reasons I (and presumably XiReney) were so uncomfortable about changing the canon that the canal was spared a nuclear attack. XiReney will probably tell you that the French Island idea was written back when the entire timeline was short on details, but the fact remains that it's a very early piece of canon, and I'd rather do what we can to keep it.  Benkarnell 18:23, December 2, 2009 (UTC)
 * Afghanistan has become a battleground( what a shocker,right?), and pro-Pakistan and pro-USSR forces are fighting for dominance there. And since Pakistan is an ally of the SAC, I think it can serve as an interesting story development. I'm not really familiar with the French islands, I don't know what role they would play, other than mediators. I planned for Haiti to be the focal point of bickering between the blocs. Socialists, SAC and the EFC or ANZC all fighting for dominance. I figured Guatemala was already socialist,because the Yucatan Republic article kind of says so. Fero said something along the lines of the Dominican Republic also being socialist,but that was reverted and frankly, that would be a bit much. I think the Caribbean could be more of a battle between the EFC, SAC and the USSR,since the ANZC doesn't really have firm allies in the region. The Pacific seems more likely a place to have the ANZC totally dominate regional politics.--Vladivostok 21:16, December 2, 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh yeah,and concerning the Canal, I saw the discussion a few days ago. Could their have been an indirect attack? That would damage the Canal severely,but could their have been an effort to repair it before the Benjamin Franklin went on its world tour?--Vladivostok 21:20, December 2, 2009 (UTC)


 * here is the population and area of [Lesser Antilles] (a shorth easy table in spanish) an you can see trehe is not sow many people, and remember Venezuela 30.000.000 in south and Puerto rico in north 3.000.000, Lesser Antilles nations are weak, they can be move to every body to every where, by military or demography or monetary power, "Resistance is futile", i think they have a oportunity off independece if there come a survivar military ship of USA/France/UK in september 1983, ¿every USA military ship is CANZ now? i think september-november1983 was unhead and USS Independence;) can port in there. One of this is a bless in that time List of aircraft carriers of the United States Navy --Fero 00:57, December 3, 2009 (UTC)
 * So,if I understood correctly Fero, there is a chance that American military equipment and vehicles managed to get into the hands of island nations in the Caribbean? Well, it is plausible, but I do think Puerto Rico and perhaps any surviving U.S. Army personnel in Panama would get the majority of the military hardware. Unfortunately, the Puerto Rico article is a stub. I could see Puerto Rico, Mexico and the Dominican Republic forming some kind of alliance to counter the influence of other major powers. Do you have any plans for these articles Fero?--Vladivostok 16:08, December 3, 2009 (UTC)

Virginia is probbably enthusiastically attempting to get its Dixie Alliance to at least Regional Power status. The Virginians are to send expeditions throughout the Southern United States, signing alliances with any survivor states they come across. Yankovic270 16:58, December 3, 2009 (UTC)

Saguenay War
if 1983 Doomsday was real what would you opinion be

here is my opinion Canada started the war not Saguenay it wouldd not surprise me if the assasination was sponsored by these Neo Nazi thugs who call themselves the Canada First Party --Owen1983 23:32, December 17, 2009 (UTC)


 * If it were real I wouldn’t want either side to fight in this pointless war (if it were real, the war serves a good purpose for this timeline). Now if I had to take sides I would pick Canada. Regardless if the assassination was sponsored by Canada itself, Saguenay is still starting a war over the death of one man. Starting a war is hardly an appropriate response to that, and scores of innocent people are going to die as a result. And we don’t even know if it was just the political party or a lone extremist. The fact that Saguenay is carving out a puppet state out of former Canadian territory seems to prove to me they weren’t starting this war in defense. --ShutUpNavi 00:16, December 18, 2009 (UTC)

after reading this I am not going to take any sides becuse there both been stupid starting a war becuse one guy got shot and we are not sure if this was sponsored by Canada and i think Sagueney have reacted without understanding he fact and canada has acted on them there are no winner or losers in war only stupid poeple--Owen1983 00:58, December 18, 2009 (UTC)

The war is being fought over for more than just the assassination, similarly to how the First World War was fought over for more than the death of Archduke Franz Ferdinand. However I would not like to take sides. I would prefer to treat this with a neutral point of view. --DarthEinstein 03:10, December 18, 2009 (UTC)

Possibilities for East Anglia
Having found this site via Mitro's Facebook site an idea did occur to but for it to go any further I would need to know how much East Anglia suffered on Doomsday. Any help on this score would be appreciated

Just realised that I placed this in the wrong section and it should be in current article proposals and I don't know how to put it there. Apologies for the mistake as I've only just joined

Verence71 09:56, December 21, 2009 (UTC)