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

Former Proposals: | Page 1 | Page 2 | Page 3 | Page 4 |

GENERAL DISCUSSION
The following is for general discussion to improve the TL that does not involve article proposals.

War!
Moved to: Talk:2009 Saguenay War (1983: Doomsday). Please direct all questions, comments, concerns, etc. about the Saugenay War (or whatever its name will eventually be) there please. Mitro 18:31, September 16, 2009 (UTC)

Proposition for the Condition of Asia
Discussion moved to. Mitro 18:17, October 14, 2009 (UTC)

New Britain-LoN
Would anyone be adverse to New Britain joining the LoN? They technically don't occupy KwXhosa anymore, though KwaXhosa is bound by treaty not to attack NB. Bob 17:12, October 12, 2009 (UTC)
 * They're not going to join immediately, certainly, since the LoN seems to act very slowly on these matters. Do they have a friendly nation that is a member of the LoN that can "sponsor their membership", if you will?  That would probably improve their chances.  Canada might work - looking thru the news, NB seems to have gone out of its way to strengthen ties with Canada in recent months.  Benkarnell 21:07, October 13, 2009 (UTC)
 * So if Canada said that NB was in a position to rejoin then they could albeit after some time. Also how come the LoN reacts so slowly. Surely they want to react swiftly enough to prevent another world war occuring? Bob 15:59, October 15, 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm sure they're much quicker to respond to a crisis than they are on issues like membership. Even our UN would't just drop sanctions and say "all's forgiven" after a week or so of compliance... or would they?  It may be that sanctions have been lifted for now, and I'm sure they would a team (likely from the RZA) to travel to KwaXhosa and report back to the LoN on how the transition to independent rule is going.  Any body would want to make sure that NB is acting in all good faith and is serious about giving up its claims/desires for Xhosa territory or influence.  And that would be required (I'm guessing) just to secure a permanent lifting of sanctions.  Actual membership will probably be a couple of months down the road. As international diplomacy goes, the timetable I'm proposing isn't really that short - look how long the EU takes to add new members.  Look how long it took the UN to recognize the PRC, not the RoC, as the legitimate government of China.   Benkarnell 20:11, October 15, 2009 (UTC)

New Hawaiian colony
In my latest news article, Hawaii's congress authorized a new colony in Ogasawara, or the Bonin Islands. I'd like some feedback on potential problems with the undertaking. Ogasawara is pretty far away. Do you think that Hawaii has the resources to create and maintain settlements there? Do you think they might come into conflict with Japan? And how do you think the ANZC itself will react to this claim? Benkarnell 21:10, October 13, 2009 (UTC)

History Pages
I've noticed that some pages have been made for nations' histories. Is each nation supposed to have its own history page? --DarthEinstein 18:16, October 14, 2009 (UTC)
 * No, I've only been doing that when articles get too large. Still if anyone wants to split the history section of a nation into its own article, that is perfectly fine.  Mitro 16:07, October 16, 2009 (UTC)
 * Hawaii probably needs it. That page has turned into a beast.  Benkarnell 20:07, October 16, 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.

Liberia
What would happen to the nation of Liberia in Africa? --Yankovic270 18:48, September 29, 2009 (UTC)
 * I was just recently looking up that whole region to see how Nigeria would be doing, so Im curious as well.--Oerwinde 18:55, September 29, 2009 (UTC)

We could have a repeat of what happened in the early 19th Century. A group of American settlers/refugees fleeing the situation on the home front. It may seem strange, but anything is better than the anarchy of the former States. Especially from the eyes of one of these refugees. --Yankovic270 21:28, September 29, 2009 (UTC)


 * There were already Americans living in Liberia, and I doubt that people would cross the Atlantic to reach it. It would be more likely that those people would divert to Latin America.

Also, it appears that Liberian history would play out much like it did, though I can't say for certain. At the time, the country was under a dictatorship that could have potentially have held onto its power. However, there was also popular support for movements against the government, both peaceful and armed, and therefore it is likely that the nation could have simply dissolved into anarchy. Lahbas 21:40, September 29, 2009 (UTC)

With no foreign aid or arms supplies from Europe or North America, many of the African countries would likely be unable to sustain military coups as well and would likely either dissolve into anarchy with roving bands of machete wielding raiders, or stabilize due to the need to become self reliant.--Oerwinde 17:57, October 1, 2009 (UTC)

I think the Liberians have the best chance of regaining a democratic government, due to the American heritage of many of its citizens. We should have and article here, as this region of Africa has not been written on. There have been nations in the North, South and East. Why leave West Africa out of it. --Yankovic270 18:05, October 1, 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm no expert on Liberia, but from what I remember the American-descended elite was hardly the force for democracy in the country. Their latest dictator was named Charles Taylor, after all.  I definitely don't want to implicate an entire ethnic group here, or say "every American-descended Liberian is evil!".  Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, the current President, is a great hero of democracy, and she obviously has an Anglo-American name.  But Liberia's "American heritage" is definitely, definitely no guarantee that they will turn to democracy.  Benkarnell 18:19, October 6, 2009 (UTC)

In 1983, Liberia was ruled by Samuel Doe, who had overthrown and killed the previous leader in a military coup three years earlier. His rule had already become extremely corrupt and repressive at the time of Doomsday. What is interesting to note, is that he was in NYC on Doomsday attending a session of the UN and as such, would most likely have died. I don’t know it this would have made any difference in the long run in that another warlord/dictator would have quickly stepped up and assumed power. In our timeline, Doe battled several coup attempts before being killed a former ally in 1990 who immediately became the same kind of ruler as he had been. --Fxgentleman 20:18, October 7, 2009 (UTC)

Ok. So if not Liberia, can someone create an article for a nation in the area around Liberia? --Yankovic270 00:38, October 10, 2009 (UTC)

There is currently some dispute about whether Prussia would exist as stated. Please see the article's talk page for more details. Mitro 13:29, September 30, 2009 (UTC)

North Sea German survivor state //
Incase the Prussia article gets deleted I have come up with another area in which we can have a survivor state. I am actually basing this on an old friend of mine who lives part time in the area. As you can see from the map it is made up of parts of Lower Saxony and Schleswig-Holstein. The dark Green areas I have throughly searched and found that even in the worst case scenario would not have been attacked, or badly affected from fallout. Plus they would have the resources needed for survival. The light green areas I am not so sure about. It depends on wither or not Kiel, Lübeck, or Bremen were attacked. So what do you think about my suggestion? And would any of those three cities have been blown up?--ShutUpNavi 17:07, October 1, 2009 (UTC)


 * The Southwest half I would have to say yes to, as Bremen was where the major military base for the Americans in Northern Germany was. Kiel might also be hit, being the base for the Canal that cut through that area. However, I believe that that Northern portion "could" potentially survive. I have to run to classes, so I'll check and give you feedback latter. Lahbas 17:34, October 1, 2009 (UTC)
 * Depending on the size of the nukes used on the Netherlands, the whole area that you're looking at, aside Schleswig-Holstein would be under some level of irradiation. The nuke from Kiel would've likely blown north and east, affecting Lubeck and Mecklenburg. Louisiannan 18:16, October 1, 2009 (UTC)

I just checked again and most of the radiation would have landed in North Rhine-Westphalia, just south of what I have listed here. It would receive some indirect fallout but like Friesland (which this more or less borders) it wouldn't be enough end civilization here. Also was the American base at the city of Bremen or the port of Bremerhaven? Not that it matters much as I can incorprate it into the article either way when I go to make it.--ShutUpNavi 19:43, October 1, 2009 (UTC)


 * Sorry, but in the northern region, Kiel, Hamburg, and Lubeck are gone. Nukes would likely also be strategically placed along the Kiel Canal, so as to deny Allied fleets entrance to the Baltic Sea. There is this tiny untouched portion in the far North, bu that might fall under Danish influence. Lahbas 19:50, October 1, 2009 (UTC)
 * I think it could be possible for Kiel to survive, for the reasons on the Prussia talk page. The canal would be a strategic location to be captured, and could be easily blockaded rather than nuked. I don't know the strategic importance of Lubeck or why it would be nuked, could you explain?--Oerwinde 07:44, October 6, 2009 (UTC)

All right I have changed the map. Now that I know that they are blown up/irradiated all the light green areas are gone while the dark green ones have slightly shrunk. I have however added the islands of Rügen and Fehmarn in the Baltic. As for Denmark in the initial years after doomsday they are going to shut off the border to prevent an overflow of refugees, as they are already packed trying to accompany the ones from Copenhagen. Plus these areas don't want to be assimilated into the Danish Culture. Finally all these areas form there own societies at first, but as shipping/transportation is eventually restored they are eventually reunited into one country.--ShutUpNavi 20:55, October 1, 2009 (UTC)


 * That Western portion, again, will not make it. To much radiation coming from the Netherland"s nuclear reactors, along with the blanket of Soviet nuclear weapons. In Holstien, cut the arm off of that Northern portion about half-way, leave the island, and you got my agreement. Hamburg having been nuked would not allow settlement that far south. You can even extend a little on the East half of the Northern portion as well, as Lubeck and Kiel still have quite some distance from you border. The Eastern area I am not sure about, because ther might have been Soviet installations around that area that would have been nuked. I can't read into the Polish and German articles that discuss that however. Lahbas 21:22, October 1, 2009 (UTC)


 * I’ll take what you said into account. I would like it if some of the western part could survive though. How about I limit it to the north coast of East Frisia, or even just the East Frisian Islands? If not then that’s fine.--ShutUpNavi 23:05, October 1, 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm not the final say, that is left to the admins (Mitro, Louis, Ben). Anyway, forget what I said about the West, it could survive, though it would be shaky. Just try to keep it relatively near along the coast, not far inland, and you should be fine. Could even join up with Friesland, or at least share borders. Lahbas 23:09, October 1, 2009 (UTC)

Alright I have taken all suggestions into account and have created a page for this new nation (now called ). I don’t have much written down right now, but expect to see a lot more later on when I get a chance to write more.--ShutUpNavi 03:15, October 2, 2009 (UTC)


 * Contrary to what you might think, "East Frisian" is not in fact a dialect of Frisian but a dialect of Low German/Saxon, almost identical to my own "Gronings". The East Frisians do still generally identify as Frisians, the main problem with East Frisia joining Friesland is the area in-between: the province of Groningen (or 'here' from my point of view). Though the Groningers are largely of Frisian ancestry, the more prestigious Low German language got adopted over here over time, and nowadays many Groningers, without using much of an overstatement, would rather drop dead than being identified as Frisians (Groninger history in a nutshell ). I'm not at all averse to having Friesland and North Germany share a border, but I honestly believe that if the Groningers were to choose between teaming up with a nationalist Frisian regime, or teaming up with the Low Germans to the East, the choice for the Low Germans would be an easy one. --Karsten&#160;vK (talk) 14:07, October 5, 2009 (UTC)

I was about to graduate the article, but then I read this paragraph:

"In the first few years after 1983 the resources in Schleswig-Holstein were stretched to the limit, but were otherwise holding up. The people who immigrated here were now to be employed in the increasing agriculture and fishing efforts in the region. Meanwhile blocks of Soviet style apartment buildings were hastily constructed in order to resettle the survivors. The new army, although small at first, proved adequate enough to protect Schleswig-Holstein from the mostly unorganized gangs that tried to raid it."

That seems highly optimistic compared with what we have sen happen in other heavily attacked regions. The phrase "stretched to the limit but otherwise holding up" is the biggest problem for me. I don't see how a refugee community could exist in Schleswig-Holstein without a certain amount of starvation, disease, and infighting over scarce resources - yes, even if the refugees are the famously regimented German people. I suggest saying, "In the first few years after 1983, the refugees suffered from scarce resources. Mortality from death, disease, and fighting was terribly high.  The ad-hoc committees that had been created to maintain order and distribute supplies very nearly fell apart.  They survived only because most of the people had become dedicated to the idea of unity, and so the nascent government held together long enough to get through the crisis."

You know, one of the biggest things that might help Schleswig-Holstein is the sheer number of bombs in the region. There were fewer refugees because almost everybody was already dead. That, at least, can explain how the S-Holsteiners were able to feed a good portion of the newcomers. Benkarnell 21:15, October 16, 2009 (UTC)


 * I have to agree I like what you said better. I’ll add it. Just to let you know I have most of this article worked out so far. The only thing that is holding me up from finishing this page is deciding what to do with the bordering Netherlands providence of Groningen (see Karstens talk page). Once I figure out what to do with it I will finish the page.--ShutUpNavi 01:06, October 17, 2009 (UTC)

NEW
I have moved the obsolete Republic of Lincoln to Nebraska. I remember my derisive comments towards Nebraska, and I am "eating crow" for them. I just could not figure out any other place that could be called the Republic of Lincoln. That and with Omaha's presumed destruction, Lincoln's being the largest settelement in Nebraska gave it a lot more influence. Besides it is the capital of Nebraska anyway. --Yankovic270 00:24, October 6, 2009 (UTC)


 * Overall I like the page and am very happy to see the Lincolnians thriving!
 * I have a few concerns, though, mostly small ones.


 * The North American Union is literally just next door, and like Lincoln and Gondor, it is a placeholder regime anticipating an unanticipated time when the rightful US government will be restored. The NAU even has a state called Nebraska, which I had assumed was based on some remnant of the state government.  I suppose the NAU's Nebraska could be a different survivor community that organized separately from Lincoln and joined the NAU.  Maybe now Lincoln is like a nonviolent version of Canada's Saugenay: The NAU sees no reason why Lincoln doesn't join up, while Lincoln sees no reason to be anything but independent.
 * When the USA government in Canberra dissolved itself, it was not in contact with the interior of North America. Even the NAU didn't find out about it for several years.
 * 1984 seems quite early for a community used to stable US rule to try their hand at forming a whole new country. I'd think that there would be a couple of predecessor regimes trying to maintain continuous rule in Nebraska, before giving up and forming a new republic.
 * For some reason, everyone calls it the ANZC, not CANZ. Don't ask me why.  Maybe it's to avoid the impression that the commonwealth is a pile of metal cylinders.
 * On a personal level, I'm uncomfortable just taking flags from another ATL. I think the group is creative enough that we can come up with good symbols for Lincoln.  Plus, flags with detailed seals, maps, and writing are bad enough.  A flag with a detailed portrait of an individual just seems like vexilological heresy, because it's so hard to make different flags look identical.  The flag of the State of Washington is just plain horrible, IMO.  That said, the flag is distinct and not at all unattractive.  It helps that the image is a high-contrast BW picture of Abe, not a full-color portrait like the monstrosity in Washington.  I think I could get behind a flag like this if the word "Lincoln" were removed, it being unnecessary.
 * Overall I want to repeat that I like what you wrote very much. Benkarnell 18:43, October 6, 2009 (UTC)

I have edited the flag. I also request that the the North American Union may be adjusted so that the NAU abandons its claims to Nebraska in return for Lincoln renouncing its claims to any territory outside the pre-doomsday state borders. --Yankovic270 01:50, October 7, 2009 (UTC)


 * I kind of like the idea of a separate community in western Nebraska that did join the NAU. Benkarnell 02:28, October 7, 2009 (UTC)

It would not be compatible. If the Republic of Lincoln was founded in 1984, then by 1996 (when the NAU was founded) the Lincolnites would have solidified control over the ENTIRE State. The close proximity of the two nations would foster very good relations, but the border would be pegged at the Wyoming and South Dakotan borders. Since most of the NAU is Northwest of the Lincolinites, this would not affect the NAU too much. And it is not like I am making the Lincolnites too expansionist. I have them just claiming their state and nothing else but. --Yankovic270 02:19, October 8, 2009 (UTC)


 * A couple things to consider.


 * Since the NAU page is canon, Louisianan would have to approve big changes to it (like disappearing his own State of Nebraska).
 * The NAU may have been founded in 1996, but its constituent communities are all older than that.
 * If the USA is as bad as we've been assuming, it's definitely possible that even after all these years Lincoln has not been able to secure the entire state. Nebraska's big, with lots of room for people of all sorts to roam around. Chances are Lincoln, with a small population, would not have much use for a lot of that prairie land and wouldn't expend the resources to control it, not when the only real advantage would be a larger spot on the map.
 * I don't want any of that to seem rude. I'm just trying to share my ideas.  Benkarnell 02:56, October 8, 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree with Ben. I only see Lincoln controlling only the eastern portions of the state, not the entire state.  Just one correction though, the NAU was my brainchild not Louis'.  Mitro 14:57, October 8, 2009 (UTC)
 * That's right, I was confusing it with Utah. My apologies!  Benkarnell

Ok. I have relented on the issue. The western part of the state is in NAU hands. And does anyone like the other changes I made? Including the Doomsday memorial, and Abe Lincoln-centered culture. --Yankovic270 21:29, October 9, 2009 (UTC)


 * I do like the memorial. Is it in Lincoln, though? (The page never said where specifically it is). Regarding Lincolnism, there are people who see him as a deity? That sounds a little far-fetched to me, especially given that at least 10 percent of the populace are atheists. It seems more reasonable to me that, in a stable of a society as Lincoln seems to be, that any number of people would see Lincoln as not so much a god as an inspirational figure, perhaps not someone to worship but someone to model one's life and values after. People who follow Lincoln in this manner could be adherents of any religion, or no religion at all.--BrianD 00:08, October 10, 2009 (UTC)

Yes it is in Lincoln. But I will keep Lincolnism. It is the North American equivalent to the Cult of the Once and Future King in New Britain. Except their is naturally evidence that the figure they worhip existed. Again, considering how much Abraham Lincoln is welded to the culture of the republic that shares its name, there might be people who would establish a religion based arround him. It is basically Christianity with a different face. I truly believe that Abe Lincoln is the only person who could fit the bill. He was kind, compassionate but he knew how to be firm. From the bits and peices I gleaned from church, that is exactly God's "personality". I don't want to offend, but if there is anyone in the Western world i'd "Deify", it would be Abraham Lincoln. --Yankovic270 00:32, October 10, 2009 (UTC)

And if anyone is good with Photoshop, I would like a picture of the Doomsday memorial. I would like it to look like the memorial I described. It is mostly copper, with iron deailing on the plinth, and of course a recycled concrete plinth. --Yankovic270 00:37, October 10, 2009 (UTC)

That's cool, Yankovic. May I ask why the city fathers decided to reinforce Abraham Lincoln with the culture so strongly?--BrianD 01:00, October 10, 2009 (UTC)

Because of the fact that Abraham Lincoln is pretty much universally knowan as THE #1 Best US President EVER. And because of the fact that Lincoln was just growing up as a city when Lincoln was assassinated. And they need a guiding light, a hero to help them get through Doomsday. And Abe provides a perfect candidate. Basically now whenever they have a problem (and I am not trying to offend anyone) they don't ask themselves "What would Jesus do?", they ask themselves "What would Abe do?". I'm sorry but noone, not even Gerge Washington, can compare to Lincoln. --Yankovic270 01:29, October 10, 2009 (UTC)

Anyway, I am pretty much finished. Anyone want to comment on it? --Yankovic270 20:26, October 13, 2009 (UTC)


 * I still like most of it. And though I feel like kind of an ass doing it, here are still more bullets with the issues I still have:


 * 1984 seems much to early for Lincoln to totally give up on the USA and l themselves a "republic". Until then, I'd imagine they'd just stick with "Nebraska" or "Government for the Greater Lincoln Area" or something just as temporary-sounding.
 * They would hot have known about vents in Australia in 1996; it would have taken them at least until 2000 or later, ,IMO.
 * ANZC, not CANZ.
 * I agree that creating an exact replica of DC is unrealistic not just because they couldn't do it (basically they'll have to survive with almost no industry or modern technology, after the first few years), but because they wouldn't want to. Maybe a grid and a few bits inspired by DC, but by that time the Lincolnians would, probably and hopefully, be exploring their own identity and not just trying to copy the old USA.  Benkarnell 21:41, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

Multi-National Peacekeeping Force (MNF) (1983: Doomsday),, and
All articles relate to the Middle East. Very little is written on the region and these proposals are trying to flesh it out. Mitro 18:41, October 6, 2009 (UTC)

MediFleet (1983: Doomsday)
Proposed LoN organization. Mitro 18:44, October 6, 2009 (UTC)

India (1983: Doomsday)
Article is already canon, but MCPrank has been expanding on the history a little and it may need approval before graduation. Mitro 18:45, October 6, 2009 (UTC)

Venezuela (1983: Doomsday)
Article is already canon but a large section was already added and the article itself needs a lot of work. Mitro 18:47, October 6, 2009 (UTC)
 * Generally very optimistic, but for South America I think it's OK. Colombia and Venezuela both seem to have brought out the best in themselves, while Brazil had to go through a difficult period before coming into its own.  Remember that it is established that Venezuela attacked and occupied a portion of Guyana at some point (we don't know when, I think).  So it has to get a more militant government sometime later.  Another minor point: no nuclear winter in this TL.  Benkarnell 06:38, October 10, 2009 (UTC)

Vatican (1983: Doomsday) and Celtic Church (1983: Doomsday)
Religion related articles that have been proposed. Mitro 18:48, October 6, 2009 (UTC)
 * I like everything in the Vatican page, and it fits exactly with what we talked about a few months back: a South American-based Church. The Celtic Church is entirely within Mjdoch's discretion and does not need to go through the proposal process.  Benkarnell 18:55, October 6, 2009 (UTC)
 * I graduated the Celtic Church. Mitro 22:47, October 8, 2009 (UTC)

Republic of Rif (1983: Doomsday)
Proposed article on a Morroco successor state. Mitro 18:51, October 6, 2009 (UTC)
 * It looks unfinished. But I like the idea of the Spanish getting involved in the mid-80s.  It seems to fit.  Benkarnell

Kingdom of Northumbria (1983: Doomsday)
a nieghbour kingdom that i've written to link into Kingdom of Cleveland (1983: Doomsday) page, currently a work in progress--Smoggy80 11:37, October 10, 2009 (UTC)

2010 FIFA World Cup (1983: Doomsday)
Hello, I'm BrianD, and have followed the 1983: Doomsday timeline for some time now. What you've done and are doing is amazing. I made a contribution to the 2010 FIFA World Cup page; please read and review, and if it works for the group, feel free to use it.--69.2.202.199 21:00, October 8, 2009 (UTC)BrianD

also, I intended for this to go under Article Proposals, not separately, so I apologize for the mistake.BrianD 21:08, October 8, 2009 (UTC)
 * Its really easy to fix, just add extra equal signs. Mitro 21:23, October 8, 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks, Mitro. I've added 1983: Doomsday to the header.--BrianD 21:25, October 8, 2009 (UTC)

Next Saturday's games in the European Group B are on, pending the outcome of events with Sicily. If Sicily and Greece go to war, play would be suspended until the cessation of hostilities.--BrianD 03:04, October 11, 2009 (UTC)

Mr.Xeight raised a point about Sicily's participation in international soccer. I think they would be allowed by FIFA and the other Euro nations (despite political issues), but I could be wrong on this one. Anyone else have an opinion?--BrianD 04:18, October 11, 2009 (UTC)

First, soccer is as important to Italy as it is in any other nation on Earth. I see no reason why Sicilians, ruled by the Mafia or not, would abandon that even in the midst of doomsday (nor why the mobsters would not be football fans). On to the topic at hand:

The closest precedent to Sicily-Greece I could find was the 1970 football war between Honduras and El Salvador, which started after the nations finished their home-and-home series in World Cup qualifying.

FIFA has suspended various national associations in recent years for the following reasons:


 * Iraq for the government's decision to dissolve its national Olympic committee (then revoked by FIFA after written assurances Iraq had not dissolved its soccer association


 * Brunei, Chad, Macau and Niger for government interference in their soccer association's affairs

From the Wikipedia article on FIFA: "One of its unique policies is to suspend teams and associated members from international competition when a government interferes in the running of FIFA's associate member organisations or if the associate is not functioning properly."

In my view, despite the actions of its government Sicily's national soccer federation has conducted its affairs according to the letter of the FIFA law, and its government has not interfered (at least overtly) in its affairs. Here, FIFA hasn't had any reason (yet) to discipline and suspend the Sicily national association; thus, it gets to compete in international competition. It's possible that Sicily would do everything to toe the line because it realizes the importance of getting its team to the World Cup (especially since it's ahead by two points going into the final week of group play), and the propaganda advantages that would come with it.

However, this is a country that attacked another country's ship DURING World Cup qualifying, so who knows what its leaders are thinking?--BrianD 13:43, October 11, 2009 (UTC)

By the way, Sicily and Greece played to a tie in both of their matches (I based this group on Group B from the actual African qualifying tournament, with Sicily as Tunisia and Greece as Nigeria, and Tunisia and Nigeria played to ties in their two matches). I'm leaning toward having them both go ahead and play, especially since their final matches are both in the Nordic Union (Sicily at Finland, Greece at Sweden). --BrianD 13:53, October 11, 2009 (UTC)

Unless there's a solid reason for not doing so, I'm going to have them play out Group B. Sicily would need to win outright to hold off Greece. Wonder what would happen if Sicily lost?--BrianD 04:14, October 14, 2009 (UTC)

Headquarters
On the NewsHour page, I listed Luque, Paraguay as the headquarters city of FIFA. Luque is the HQ of the South American Football Confederation. Since FIFA was re-constituted in South America, it seemed the natural place. But if anyone objects or has a better idea, I can change it. Benkarnell 21:13, October 13, 2009 (UTC)


 * How about this: Luque is currently the headquarters, with offices in Zurich, Alpine Confederation (FIFA's real-world HQ is in Zurich). I have the draw and an upcoming meeting in Zurich in December; we can keep that, especially since Celtic Alliance is closer to Zurich than Paraguay, or change it. There are "ongoing discussions" between the Europeans and South Americans on where the HQ will eventually end up.--BrianD 04:10, October 14, 2009 (UTC)

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

So I started this page for two reasons. First this TL really is lacking articles on famous individuals and what they did in history. I know not every TL on this site focuses on people, but I think for 1983: Doomsday to really be comprehensive and complete, we need to talk a little on those great men and women and what they accomplished. Second, Bush holds a special place on this TL. He is the last American president and one of the few individuals who actually gets a shout out on the TL proper. It still is not complete, I'm currently gathering information from the various articles and adding a few details where they are missing, but comments are welcome. Mitro 01:10, October 12, 2009 (UTC)


 * I added some clarifying details to the Invasion of Hawaii section and a note on his biography. This is a great idea! GHWB is a good choice for our first biography page, since he is so prominent in the main Timeline.  And most of his scenes in that come from the original, anonymously written source text - the "1983DD Torah" that forms the basis for our many pages of Talmudic writings.  Benkarnell 04:05, October 12, 2009 (UTC)

Ok we really need to set the record straight on when Siberia invaded Alaska. I'm sure it affected not only Bush's presidency but the entire TL. Mitro 02:07, October 13, 2009 (UTC)
 * Also when exactly did Bush land in Australia/become President. I have seen both 1984 and 1986 used.  Mitro 18:10, October 13, 2009 (UTC)
 * Bush was sworn in on May 6, 1984. The places that say 1986 are either a typo, or copy-pastes of that typo.  I just fixed the original one in the Timeline.
 * Navi has only posted that Siberia invaded Alaska "sometime in the 1990s". And earlier makes more sense than later, since the later you go in history, prsumably the more organized the US or ANZC administration is in Alaska.  In 1990, it may have still been possible for Russians to invade eastern Alaska and not encounter any American presence for hunderds of miles, then send out a message sayin, "We occupy large parts of the state.  We will now meet and discuss terms."  And especially early on, the APA and ANZUS forces would have ben too stretched as it was to do much.  Benkarnell 19:47, October 13, 2009 (UTC)
 * I was thinking of doing it around 1994 and making the war relatively short. I think the war would be relatively short, I doubt anyone would expect it and the loss of half of Alaska might motivate Bush to believe that there isn't much hope for the US in general.  Furthermore there was never an official peace treaty to Doomsday, technically the remnants of the USSR and USA are still at war.  Consider what happens when Siberia attacks and says "hey we are just defending ourselves, we are still at war with America."  A symbolic ending to WWIII might be in store.  Mitro 14:11, October 14, 2009 (UTC)


 * So something that prompts Bush's resignation, and which also leads to some kind of healing? Two wonderful ideas!  Benkarnell 20:47, October 14, 2009 (UTC)

A Survivor nation in Kentucky
KENTUCKY Hypothetical Nuclear Targets Primary: none Secondary: Fort Campell (Christian), Fort Knox (Harkin), Louisville, Richmond. Tertiary: Covinton (Cincinnati, OH.), Henderson (Evansville IN.), Owensboro, Paducah.

It maybe possible that because Kentucky has no primary targets that it may have been spared the worst of Doomsday. A survivor nation could possibly manifest itself here. Perhaps this nation could be feuding with the Virginian Republic or may be even an ally do to their close proximity. Your thoughts? --GOPZACK 20:58, October 12, 2009 (UTC)

You know, originally the name Virginian Republic (or Empire as its prototype name was) was a misnomer. It was more based in Kentucky and Tennessee than in Virginia. And I am in full support of ANY allies for my precious brainchild, Virginia. --Yankovic270 22:14, October 12, 2009 (UTC)

Very good I quite like the Virginian Empire I say we possibly make a survivor nation of some kind based out of Fort Knox--GOPZACK 23:30, October 12, 2009 (UTC)
 * Why would Fort Knox make a good location? Mitro 23:32, October 12, 2009 (UTC)

Gold! The United States Bullion Depository holds about 4,603 tons (4 176 metric tonnes) of gold bullion (147.4 million troy ounces). It is second in the United States only to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York's underground vault in Manhattan some type of gold backed economic system could be based off of it--GOPZACK 23:36, October 12, 2009 (UTC)

I completely agree with you on that. And with the Republic of Superior, Virginia, and West Texas in the area, it is not like they don't have a use for that cash. I see a healthy amount of trade between the nations, especially Kentucky and Virginia. And the Federal Reserve could potentially be salvaged. it lies 80 feet below street level, and is in a water and airtight steel vault. I think that provides plenty of insulation. And if it survived, it is not like the gold is going anywhere. I also notices that the map's lighter red section has a border simmilar to that of Austria. --Yankovic270 00:06, October 13, 2009 (UTC)


 * I see West Texas more likely to trade with Dinetah, Deseret and the NAU, at least initially. Superior would probably be very interested in the gold.--BrianD 00:49, October 13, 2009 (UTC)

I would argue for Fort Knox either being bombed (because not only does it store the gold but is also a military base) or somehow lucking out. Louisville would definitely have gotten hit because of its position as a port on the Ohio River, as well as the two Ford plants there (I don't think UPS had built its presence at the airport yet). The gold could be there waiting for someone to get it, especially if the powers in Kentucky couldn't hold things together and everything fell completely apart.

In the Virginia article it implies that the airborne left Fort Campbell because of the "untenable" situation in Kentucky and Tennessee; this tells me that chaos reigned, at least in the Hopkinsville and Clarksville areas. That said, it is possible you have survivor villages and towns around the state, especially in the eastern half (where the mountains might have muted some or much of the radiation). It's also possible you had a group of people from Bowling Green, Glasgow and Cave City who hid out in Mammoth Cave for as long as possible before starting their own survivor community, perhaps salvaging the Corvette plant and usable facilities at WKU for their own use.--BrianD 00:47, October 13, 2009 (UTC)
 * There is also the fact that gold is useless in a post-apoc wasteland shortly after nuclear war. When food, clean water and medicine are more important do you really think gold will have any influence?  The economy if any in the area will be barter.  Fort Knox will not be the center of any Kentucky state simply because of what is inside its vaults.  Mitro 01:08, October 13, 2009 (UTC)

It could be that the Kentuckians could have pulled themselves together after the airborne pulled out. Plus Fort Campbell is well outside the area actually controlled (and not just claimed) by Kentucky. The lighter red section of the map could be feuding warlords. And Fort Knox was a Secondary target, not a primary one, in fact there isn't a primary target in the whole state. The state could have survived unscathed nucularly, but torn apart by civil confict. I could see a pact beteen Kentucky and Virginia to reclaim the rest of the state. With force if necessary. --Yankovic270 01:23, October 13, 2009 (UTC)

I can go along with Fort Campbell lucking out and not getting hit, and even with Fort Knox getting hit but the bomb not doing enough damage to prevent salvage of the gold in the vaults. I'll insist, though, that Louisville did get hit (isn't it canon that, "when in doubt, it got nuked"?), and though everything in the state generally fell apart, there are scattered communities around the state that survived. If the state survived intact and held it together you would have to have heard from it by now, and it probably be on the level of Superior and Canada.--BrianD 01:35, October 13, 2009 (UTC)


 * I wonder if some dynamic personality - Thompson? - found scattered townships around the state and convinced them to come together as a reborn state, and pledged to rebuild not just in the military bases but also in abandoned cities like Lexington and Bowling Green, if a Commonwealth of Kentucky would work? If gold has any meaning in this economy (and I assume it would), then Kentucky is potentially rich, and it has an abundance of coal in the eastern regions for power. Even if no one was left in the state, surely Virginia at least would move in for the natural resources.--BrianD 01:42, October 13, 2009 (UTC)

I think they could use the coal for power and the gold as financial leverage perhaps the good folks at Fort Campbell weren't to concerned with the gold or maybe they did not know the fate of Fort Knox to the north --GOPZACK 02:18, October 13, 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Yankovic270 possibly the largest and most powerful country amongst all the warlords could be the Commonwealth of Kentucky based in and around Fort Knox--GOPZACK 02:25, October 13, 2009 (UTC)


 * For the sake of this TL, I would assume that everything in the FEMA report would be destroyed, or at least be hit by a nuclear device of some kind, despite their status. As such, Fort Knox should be considered lost in the war. Lahbas 03:27, October 13, 2009 (UTC)


 * I understand where you're coming from, Lahbas - I used the FEMA page as reference for my proposal on West Texas - but no one knows for certain that it's 100 percent accurate. And, I like Burlington and Montpelier in Vermont not having been hit by nukes!--BrianD 03:48, October 13, 2009 (UTC)

I really doubt that Kentucky would be the largest and most powerful country in the area. I agree with Lahbas that Fort Knox was no doubt lost and even if it did survive the gold would be useless to a post-nuclear holocaust economy. Furthermore Kentucky's position on the map makes it was too suseptible to chaos caused by refugees. The only parts of Kentucky that are most likely to survive are their portion of the Cumberland Plateau and the Jackson Purchase.

On a related note, I'm worried about the large number of American survivor states that are popping up. Canon tells us that the state governments collapsed and anarchy prevailed over most of the US. But current proposals make me worry that things are going better in the US then what the TL has always reported. Small communities surviving and expanding are plausible, but large nation-states coming out of post-Doomsday America is stretching it. Mitro 14:00, October 13, 2009 (UTC)


 * My thought that Kentucky would be a powerful nation was based on the very best-possible-case scenario, and on others' insistence that nothing there got hit. Personally I believe that things there would turn into a state of chaos, and that any signs of humanity there are found in small survivor towns, not just in the areas you mentioned but also perhaps around Cave City (Mammoth Cave) and in the eastern Kentucky mountains. --BrianD 14:26, October 13, 2009 (UTC)


 * Also, Mitro raises another important point: canon. While it would be nice for survivor states to rise from the ashes of the apocalypse, any scenarios have to be realistic. I'm surprised that someone hasn't already fleshed out what exactly happened to all of the states in the union; that might be very helpful for everyone to flesh out, going forward, so we don't open up the wiki one day to find someone's presented a proposal for a 10 million-strong Confederate States with a million-person capital built on the ruins of Atlanta.--BrianD 14:47, October 13, 2009 (UTC)
 * The only problem with deciding what happened now for an area as large as the former continental US is that we will potentially prevent others from proposing their own ideas, which might be better then what we could think of. We should't deter others from adding their thoughts and insights, hence why we move slowly as we flush what is going on across the world.  Sure it causes problems (look at Africa, not even targetted and yet there is very little information because not many people are knowledgable about the area) but as long as we follow the Editorial Guidelines and keep our plausibility detectors on high we should be able to keep things nice and neat.  And that is the biggest problem with Kentucky, its already canon that things were bad there, hence why the 101st packed up and moved to West Virginia.  We have to be careful about how large and stable a state we create in Kentucky.  Mitro 14:57, October 13, 2009 (UTC)
 * It's good to know that, Mitro (particularly for someone like myself). Could it be established, perhaps, that despite ham radio operators around the continent, as well as radio and probably TV operational in the established survivor states, that communications is still spotty, with large areas no one has heard from? It could provide an answer to why no one's heard from Pennsylvania or the deep South, and provide a way for someone to come in with a great idea for those areas. Regarding Kentucky, I have my own ideas on how bad things got, so I'll create a page with my proposal in the next day or so.--BrianD 15:07, October 13, 2009 (UTC)

I am looking forward to what BrianD proposes and am interested in possibly contributing to that. I would however like to see some kind of small survivor nation built out of Kentucky, maybe not in and around Fort Knox but in Cave City (Mammoth Cave) and in eastern Kentucky with the possibility of some kind of fascist military dictatorship run by a rouge General at Fort Knox (that may have not even been hit).--GOPZACK 15:43, October 13, 2009 (UTC)

Where can i find the FEMA list? at what website? --HAD 12:10, October 14, 2009 (UTC)


 * http://www.survivalring.org/cd-targets.php (you can take it or leave it as you wish. It may be a guide for writers when creating scenarios on what survived and what didn't, but I wouldn't consider it to be canon, nor supersede whatever already has been canon).--BrianD 12:50, October 14, 2009 (UTC)

thanks. considering that doomsday was sudden event, would it be more likely that the teriatry targets would survive?--HAD 15:34, October 14, 2009 (UTC)


 * You can't know for certain, but it's certainly possible.--BrianD 20:57, October 14, 2009 (UTC)

The Commonwealth of Kentucky is up. Please comment in the talk section and share your thoughts on the article --GOPZACK 23:03, October 14, 2009 (UTC)

Manitoba?
What fate is drawing in the surviving communities of Manitoba? Is it a nest of Warlords, or is there a (as much as posible in this TL) stable state? I could see the small rural communities surviving and banding together. --Yankovic270 02:21, October 14, 2009 (UTC)

You know what? I am going to "adopt" the region. Seeing as the Republic of Lincoln is just about done, I want a project to complete. --Yankovic270 02:40, October 14, 2009 (UTC)

would you mind if iu started this article? i think a "commonwealth of manitoba" with its capital in churchill would be a good idea.--HAD 12:10, October 14, 2009 (UTC)

I am going to use the old borders of the old Red River colony, also known as Assiniboia. Portions of Southern Manitoba and parts of the former US. It has historic significance, and people could have survived due to the dispersed rural nature of the region. I am going to use the small town of Niverville as the captital, as it would have survived Winnipeg's destruction.

Sounds good. --HAD 15:26, October 14, 2009 (UTC)

--Yankovic270 13:20, October 14, 2009 (UTC)


 * Remember that Canada controls the bit of Manitoba coast on the Hudson's bay. Of course that probably won't matter too much if they are only around the south. Would they expand a bit into northern US territory? And what about their relationship to the NAU? Also Superior is fairly close I suppose, so they might have some sort of relationship with them, even if they only met recently. --DarthEinstein 16:24, October 14, 2009 (UTC)

Cave City
Cave City is up, for those who want to look at it. It is a very, very rough outline, and I'm going to need a few days to flesh it out.--BrianD 04:46, October 14, 2009 (UTC)
 * I've already begun to do so. The best point of contact with the rest of the world at this time for Cave City has to be with some sort of scouting party from the Virginian Republic, which not only is canon, but has some sort of interest in the region and is the closest known nation-state to the region.--BrianD 21:26, October 14, 2009 (UTC)

Republic of West Texas
The Republic of West Texas (1983: Doomsday) article is also up, and comments are much appreciated. I've fleshed this nation-state out as an isolated republic that looked to Mexico for help early on, and had relations turn south after the Mexico City earthquake (and perhaps because of a few influential military and government officials who wanted nothing to do with the U.S., angry over the deaths of its thousands of its citizens and the forced triage of its border states).--BrianD 20:53, October 14, 2009 (UTC)

I've rewritten the article, allowing for limited, unofficial contact with Dinetah, Deseret and Colorado over the years. I'm not sure who wrote Dinetah, and I don't want to violate canon, but given that Dinetah includes northwestern New Mexico and West Texas southwestern New Mexico, I can't imagine the two nations NOT having met each other early on. I also took out the part about the kids discovering the NAU and Dinetah scouts.--BrianD 21:44, October 15, 2009 (UTC)

I'm done with the article, although I would like for folks to review it to make sure there are no conflicts with canon, particularly in regards to Mexico and Dinetah.--BrianD 21:15, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

New Situation for Mexico

 * Just a proposal. Chiapas and the Yucatan states fight for independence as free states, continuing to the present-day. They are armed by Cuba and a now Communist Guatamala, which has gone on to take over El Salvador and Belize. The insurgents have control over large parts of their claimed territory, but are largely unrecognized internationally (a situation similar to the conflict in Georgia). Everything else is as OTL, with the new district capital, and the jointly controlled Mexican-LoN Northern states. I have never done so much outlining in my life......Lahbas 22:18, October 14, 2009 (UTC)
 * Chiapas and Yucatan controlling Belize would put them into conflict with the East Caribbean Federation.--BrianD 22:21, October 14, 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah Belize is a part of the ECF according to canon. Mitro 23:21, October 14, 2009 (UTC)

Interesting; a nation embracing a political ideaology that doomed the world. Not that I'm saying this is impossible, or implausible, or deplorable, just interesting. I'll be watching the debate and upgrading into canon. Mr.Xeight 22:29, October 14, 2009 (UTC)
 * By their view, it could be Capitalism that doomed the world, or just the conflict between them. --DarthEinstein 22:35, October 14, 2009 (UTC)
 * DarthEinstein's right. Though we know that the apocalypse was triggered by a Soviet mistake, for all the Cubans and insurgents know, it was Washington that launched the first missiles. I don't think they would hesitate to tell their people that, either. --BrianD 22:38, October 14, 2009 (UTC)


 * I gave Belize to Guatamala only because they historically have territorial claims to the territory. At the same time, I don't think that by the time Guatamala would invade, by the early 90's, there would be an international community to stop them. (The LoN would not exist until I believe 2008, and the ECF military I would think to be incapable of a counter-invasion). Lahbas 00:05, October 15, 2009 (UTC)


 * When I put the map together I imagined Guat. occupying parts of inland Belize, while the proper Belizean government is part of the ECF and controls most of the coast. We can adjust borders and give most of Belize to Guatemala, though, without disrupting canon, as long as Belize at least keeps a rump state on the coast, presumably centered on Belize City.  Benkarnell 11:41, October 15, 2009 (UTC)


 * I just re-read the Mexico article, and any new states in southern Mexico will have to be harmonized with it. The far-right México Primero party, now illegal, was calling for Mexico to occupy Central America as late as last spring.  This doesn't fit with the proposal, which assumes a weak Mexico and a strong Guatemala.  I think we can interpret Yucatan and Chiapas as somewhat lawless, maybe filled with some rebels from the south, but not as full-blown Guatemalan puppets.


 * [edit] Also, League of Nations control in the northern states is a proposal that the Mexican government has made. I doubt the League has the resources to intervene in so large an area.  It's basically still  brand new organization, after all.  Benkarnell 02:40, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

What if after Doomsday the Mexicans consolidated control over the more central territories, leaving the inhabited outer territories to their own machinations. --Yankovic270 02:52, October 16, 2009 (UTC)


 * There can't be a "what if" about it. What's there is there, especially since Guinesscap, the caretaker for Mexico, is more-or-less inactive right now.  We have to be extra careful not to mess up his pages with material that contradicts what he wrote.  And what's written is: "May 10, 1987 - The influx of Central American refugees and indigenous uprisings in Yucatán and Chiapas force president de la Madrid to federalize the the five southern border states of Chiapas, Tabasco, Campeche, Yucatán and Quintana Roo. These five states are dissolved and made into two federal territories, Istmo-Chiapas and Yucatán. Most of the Mexican Armed Forces are stationed here." And this year, "Right-wing extremists use the situation [food riots] to call for an end to immigration and closing the borders at Istmo-Chiapas and Yucatán. The "México Primero" party is formed with dozens of Catholic defectors from the PAN already in congress. They demand the annexation of the Central American states, the creation of reservations for all "Indian insurgents" and for Catholicism to be made the official religion."
 * IMO that _does_ leave room for guerrilla groups that control pieces of territory, maybe even sponsored by Guatemala. But Mexico has to have at least a good deal of control over things like border checks.  How about making the Yucatan and Chiapas rebels something like the Taliban in Afghanistan right now - in control of some out-of-the-way parts of the country, able to cause a lot of trouble, and able to sneak back and forth across the border; but when you get down to it, not in any state to actually govern the territory they claim. Just an idea - it's one way to fuse the ideas together. Benkarnell 04:20, October 16, 2009 (UTC)
 * I like that idea. Question - how strong, or weak, IS Mexico?--BrianD 05:14, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

Albania
Enver Hoxha ordered the construction of some 750,000 bunkers (for a population of 3 million), in the OTL has been viewed as an example of dictatorial eccentricity but in the ATL may mean the saving of many lives. Coupled with the fact that there was only a nuclear explosion in Tirana, the Albanian capital, and that the Albanian territory is very mountainous, which it would preserve enough of nuclear contamination. The backwardness of the country would not be an obstacle in the post-nuclear world, however the population was accustomed to decades of famine and poverty. Ethnic persecution in neighboring Yugoslavia and its eventual successor, the South Slavic Union would involve a large influx of refugees from Kosovo and Macedonia to replace the population died. Finally the power vacuum in northern Greece allow Albanian expansion in this area Tristanbreiker 17:04, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

You have it the other way around. The island of Kerkyra (called "Corfu" in English) has actually been highly interactive on the Albanian coast, not so much colonizing so much as banding together with any surviving refugees, having tiny settlements fly the Kerkyran flag. Mr.Xeight 01:14, October 17, 2009 (UTC)

Corsica
Still have not said anything about Corsica, what suggestion you more attractive?, Power vacuum?, Independent Republic?, another French rival republic of the Republique Francaise des Terres Australes?, allied Republic to the Republic of Sicily?, puppet state of the Sicilians?, puppet State of the Alpine Confederation? or none of these options...Tristanbreiker 17:57, October 16, 2009 (UTC)
 * What if the Corsicans have their own republic, however there are many supporters for alliance or annexation with all of those that you mentioned, leading to lots of civil unrest, and perhaps becoming a warzone in the new war with Sicily.--DarthEinstein 19:33, October 16, 2009 (UTC)
 * The Republique Francaise des Terres Australes definitely claims it; that's been written already. How about - Corsica is a pawn in the rivalry between the Alpines and Sicily? Each side supports a faction in a long-drawn-out proxy war in Corsica.  Benkarnell 21:57, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

I always envisioned an indepedent republic wary of the Alpinians and Sicilians, which is why I've never written anything on their involvement on the war. But a decision on the fate of Corsica would be very helpful for my Sicily War, which hasn't seen direct army-to-army fighting, and nothing bigger than spontaneous firing from ships encircling North Africa, but believe me, it's-a-comin'. Mr.Xeight 02:33, October 17, 2009 (UTC)