Talk:Soviet Socialist Siberia (1983: Doomsday)/Archive 1

map
Thanks for providing a visual! Does the USSS have control over that whole territory, or is some of that just a claim? Benkarnell 05:20, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Yes that is more or less what Siberia controls in the year 2008 (apart from a few blown-up cities inside that map). The territory it starts out with at first is going to be smaller, but as the USSS begins to rebuild its air force/navy its going to start to annex the untouched areas left in Arctic Russia, Alaska, and the northern isles of Japan by the mid 2000's.--ShutUpNavi 18:09, 12 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Concerning Alaska I do not think they would be able to claim it that rapidly... As Alaska is quite heavily destroyed and nuked (military bases and everything) i cant imagine that a Siberian Government would be interested in annexing a transcontinental territory... Maybe focussing on China, Mongolia and Ural... But this large complex needs more in depth-thoughts as it will be touching so many difficult topics at once (remaining nuclear Weapons and how to deal with it etc.)...that's just my though about that (Xi'Reney) not logged in, sry...

O.K I took some of your advice. On the map I made the areas actually controlled by Siberia in green with the areas it claims in dark grey. Now I am going to have Siberia merge with Mongolia seeing as they already have a lot in common back in the 1980s. I am still going to have them go after Alaska, but this time it will be limited to the Aleutian Islands and the Bering Sea coastline as they have a large fishing indestrie and a oil that the soviets would want for there country (and its not that far away). I desided to take your advice and ignore Japan though. And of cource they now claim all of the old Soviet Union, but they cant gain control over it.--ShutUpNavi 23:03, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Name
First of all I don't understand why the independent Siberia exists at all. Why the Soviet authorities who survived in Siberia would suddenly stop claiming the territory of the European USSR? I believe the name and "de-jure" map of the Soviet Union would remain the same as before the Holocaust.

Anyway "Союз Советских Социалистических Сиби́рь" and "Union of Soviet Socialist Siberia" sound terrible both in Russian and in English. In theory, "Union of Soviet Socialist Siberia" is "Союз Советской Социалистической Сибири" in Russian, but it's still stupid: how you can make a union out of a half of just one Soviet republic? At the best it would be a republic: Siberian Soviet Socialist Republic (Сибирская Советская Социалистическая Республика, based on most Soviet republics' names) or Siberian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic (Сибирская Советская Федеративная Социалистическая Республика, based on the name of Russia, which seems more appropriate because Siberia includes ethnic autonomies like Buryatia). — Hellerick 04:35, 21 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I agree with what you said. I mainly named it that because I couldn’t think of any other way to name it at the time. As you see the country now claims all of the territory in the Soviet Union, and since in now will have territory in Alaska and Mongolia it can still be a Union. Anyways I am thinking about changing the name back to just the Soviet Union. But for now I need to stop coming up with more ideas and get to work on writing this page.--ShutUpNavi 23:10, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Unrealistic figures
Most notably hit was the port city of Vladivostok, and the biggest of Siberian cities Novosibirsk where up to 4 million people died alone. — in 1982 the population of Novosibrisk was less than 1.4 million people. To kill 4 million people you would have to roast an area of the size of France.

The civilians living in Siberian cities however had less warning and were given evacuation orders only moments before the nukes hit. — Why? The Soviet Union was preparing for the war for decades, and everything was thoroughly thought over. The "System of Civil Warning" worked (and still works) very well, all the people were taught what to do etc. There would be a huge number of survivors. It would very difficult to survive after the war, because Siberia always was depending on the supply from the rest of Russia/USSR, and simply can't exist all by itself, especially with its economics and communications destroyed in the war. — Hellerick 15:34, 19 May 2009 (UTC)


 * It sounds like Navi was considering changing the official name back to USSR. Of course, the rest of the world may call them Siberia.  Navi, I wondered the same thing: how did the Siberians handle the self sufficiency issue?  Benkarnell 16:00, 19 May 2009 (UTC)