Talk:Kingdom of Prussia (1983: Doomsday)

Berlin
Its generally been a long accepted part of canon that Berlin and Frankfurt were hit by nukes, and the nuke map (though incomplete) suggests other cities in West and East Germany were hit as well. Even with the close proximity of the Iron Curtain, I don't think both sides would avoid using nukes in German territory. Mitro 13:01, September 18, 2009 (UTC)
 * Ok, I couldn't find any mention of Berlin being hit, but Frankfurt being hit was part of the article, as was Dresden, Bonn, Hamburg, Munich, etc. I was thinking of adding Strausberg, which was the headquarters of East German military, and Rostock which was the center of their Navy. But both sides had considerable forces in Berlin, so I would doubt it being a target. Berlin might be affected by the fallout from Strausberg depending on the wind. I just find it unrealistic for every major city in the northern hemisphere to be hit by nukes. According to released cold war nuclear war plans in the last few years many cities such as Vienna were targeted by only a single nuke, and most nations had interceptor squadrons and anti-ballistic missile defences. Targets would also be chosen for their strategic importance, making cities like Saskatoon, while populous, unlikely targets. Not every major city would be a target.--Oerwinde 16:21, September 18, 2009 (UTC)
 * How successful those interceptor squardrons and anti-missiles is questionable at best, but admittedly your arguments for Berlin not being targeted makes sense. I guess my biggest concern is to avoid articles where people have cities or bases survive simply so that they could create their most favored alternate nation, ignoring the fact that in all likelihood they would be targetted.  I do agree with you that population size doesn't always mean it will be target (look at the targets I chose in the  article), but that doesn't mean that factor isn't persuasive.  Still I find your argument sound for Berlin and I would have those other targets added because they seem to be likely targets.  Mitro 16:59, September 18, 2009 (UTC)

Nordic Union
The only thing I don't like about the article is the Nordic Union's treatment of Prussia. They (especially the Danish) are grade-A douchebags. I understand why the Prussians took Pomerania. It was historically part of Prussia before its forming the unified nation of Germany, and Prussia had been the victim of an unprovoked attack by the Poles. And the expelling of the Poles was to get back at the Poles for expelling Gemans after they took the territory. And when Kaiser Christian-Sigmund I came to Dennmark to try to retore reasonable relations, he made nothing but consessions and what did the ungrateful Danes do? Demand more! I have never read about a nation so intentionally uncooperative and greedy. --Yankovic270 16:12, September 24, 2009 (UTC)
 * They may have been willing to negotiate that point but Christian was so enraged by the initial demand that he closed down negotiations then and there and came home. The negative relations between Prussia and the Danes are now mostly tied directly to Christian, and when he dies and his son becomes king relations will improve dramatically.--Oerwinde 18:57, September 24, 2009 (UTC)

Graduation
Oerwinde: do you think your article is ready to be graduated? Mitro 19:01, September 25, 2009 (UTC)
 * Sounds good if theres no objections.--Oerwinde 22:02, September 25, 2009 (UTC)

No. I don't see why not. I love anything to do with Germany. --Yankovic270 22:07, September 25, 2009 (UTC)

Problem with article
I am sorry, but Germany, besides the United States and the Soviet Union, is going to get hit the WORST. The main reason for this is that most of NATO's and the Warsaw Pact forces were deployed within Germany, or just outside of it, or at least those who woul operat in the European theatre. West Germany itself made up the largest portion of European NATO. As a result, West Germany is going to get pummeled by Soviet nuclear weapons, as is East Germany. Berlin WOULD be hit, more because of the MAD doctrine then anything. Because it would have to be assumed that Berlin was going to fall, especially since NATO was unprepared for the Soviet attack, they would deny the city to the enemy. As a result, it would cease to exist. Typical plans involve multiple hit on Berlin, in the case that one or more were to fail. The resulting fall-out would kill millions. If you do disagree, you have to rememeber the NATO-nuclear weapon sharing program, in which the United States would base their nuclear weapons in other countries for that nations use. At the time, those involved would be Greece, Canada, Britain, Netherlands, Belgium, Italy, Turkey, and Germany. Most of these were depolyed in Germany, based on it being the closest to the fight, and therefore the quickest to reach its targets. Therefore, again, Germany is hit HARD. That, and you have nuclear warheads going off in shelters that have not yet been deployed, creating terrible fallout. It is just as likely that NATO would have suspected Soviet nukes to be stationed in East Germany, and would hit them extremely hard as well. As a result, I find the existance of ANY German state in the area near impossible at best. Lahbas 04:01, September 30, 2009 (UTC)


 * I looked on the internet and I couldn't find anything detailing NATO's nuclear war plans. However in my search I stumbled across "Seven Days to the River Rhine". It depicted the Soviet bloc's vision of a seven-day atomic war between NATO and Warsaw Pact forces. The map of nuclear targets is surprisingly accurate to what is written in this page (apart from a few small inconstancies).--ShutUpNavi 15:53, September 30, 2009 (UTC)