Talk:Sultanate of Turkey (1983: Doomsday)

Archive

Great Caucasian War
(REMOVED Because its unrealistic. Kept for later reference)

In 2008, shortly after the Mingrelian War, Turkey discovered the presence of an independent Azerbaijan. Building upon long running ethnic and religious connections, Turkey made an effort to reach out to the country. In May 2008, an alliance between the two countries was concluded. With this alliance, Turkey planned to gain access to Azerbaijan's vast oil reserves, however, Armenia and Georgia both refused to allow the construction of pipelines through their territory that would be guarded by Turkish soldiers. As a result, the Turkish Imperial Council began to lay out war plans against both Armenia and Georgia with the intent to subjugate both nations for both the purpose of securing their new oil pipeline and to end the occasionally skirmishes in the more lawless areas of the border.

On Feburary 8, 2009, the Turkish military launched a two-prong assault into Georgia and Armenia with the intent to drive towards the Azerbaijani border. Azerbaijan also used this oppurtunity to move against Armenia to reconquer the territories it lost in the Nagorno-Karabakh War. The vastly more powerful and larger Turkish military had reached the nuclear remains of Yerevan in Armenia and the small town of Samtredia, only 20 miles from the Georgian capital Kutasi, in two weeks. In the process, Turkey quickly overran the independent republic of Adjara, which was of no consequence to the expansionist Turkish government Recent Georgian reforms of their military was slowing them down in the north, but Armenia began to crumble under the two front war between Turkey and Azerbaijan. By June 2009, Turkish forces had surrounded Lake Sevan and reached the Azerbaijani border, thereby cutting Armenia in half. The northern portions of the country were quickly overrun by Turkish forces, but guerilla forces in the south slowed down the Turkish-Azerbaijani advance significantly.

In June 2009, Georgia's ally Abkazia joined the war to assst Georgia. Together, their troops were able to prevent the Turks from capturing Kutasi. However, with northern Armenia taken by Turkey, a massive Turkish-Azerbaijani assault was launched into southern Georgia. Rustavi and most of southeast Georgia was conquered. Finally in August 2009, a final offensive was launched with the objective of crushing the last of Georgia's resistance. By this time, the ruins of T'bilisi had been captured and they had slowly been pushing north. However, Kutasi still held out. A week after the final offensive was launched Kutasi had fallen and the last pocket of Georgian resistance was pushed to the Abkazian border. After this, Abkazia surrendered and Georgia, controlling no more territory, also surrendered. The Great Caucasian was finally ended in December 2009.

As per the terms of the peace treaty, Turkey annexed the western half of Georgia and Azerbaijan the eastern portion. For Armenia, Turkey annexed everything north and west of Lake Sevan and Azerbaijan annexed the rest. All the territory annexed by Turkey was organized into multiple semi-autonomous provinces within the Sultanate. They managed their own internal affairs while submitting to Turkish military and diplomatic control. A guerilla war started in Nagorno-Karabakh, but ended after six months of quarantine and starvation. Once all combat ceased, the contruction of the pipeline began immediately. It stretched from Prisaat, Azerbaijan to Erzurum, Turkey. With only three thousand casualties, the Turkish leadership was now confident in the power of their military. Now fueled by a new source of oil, the Turkish government ordered an immediate rearmament and prepared for the next war. They set their sights south to reclaim Kurdistan. Caeruleus 18:39, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for eliminating the Caucasus War!VENEZUELA 02:56, June 27, 2010 (UTC)

And outright annexation is simply out of the question. I have learned in my time as a contributor to 1983: Doomsday that in order to get your aticles graduated you need to conform to the timeline's canon. Otherwise it gets rejected as obsolete and is removed from the timeline. And I doubt you want that.

Yankovic270 02:59, June 27, 2010 (UTC)

Well, I think I've removed all the more outlandish portions of my article. Graduation should be coming soon.

Not until you stop pretending you can hold onto Cyprus, accept that more than two cities in Turkey would be bombed, and shrink down your land-claim... Mr.Xeight 03:22, June 28, 2010 (UTC)

Exactly. You are ignoring most advice given, as well as restrictions held here.

Lordganon 3:32, June 28, 2010 (UTC)

I removed the wars and extended the time span (all of Turkey wasn't reunited until 2009). As for the bombings, what else would be bombed? I'll try to adjust accordingly. And why can't they take northern Cyprus? The southern half is still Greek. Idk if the Federation of Greece controls it or not. I don't really care who does. You even said they haven't touched it Mr Xeight. Pre-Doomsday northern Cyprus was under Turkish control anyway. It wasn't reunited with the rest of Turkey for nearly 10 years, when they were desperate and near starvation. There was no massive invasion either. Contact was established and the Turkish Cypriots petitioned for and received entry into the Sultanate. If any of that wasn't made clear in the article, I'll try to clarify it. Caeruleus 04:44, June 28, 2010 (UTC)

Cyprus' Greek population massacred the British and Turkish populations, I've made that clear, besides it was okayed for me to take it over, I even made it known by talking about Cyprus being one of the stars of the flag, or at least it's speculated to be. And with the island being nearly 100%, they'd fight your sultanate until the whole population died or you ran away. So stop going for a Turkey-wank or face a war with Greece. Mr.Xeight 05:32, June 28, 2010 (UTC)


 * Once again, the Turkish Cypriots have superior firepower. How can you slaughter someone who has more guns than you? You can't. Plus, they're main worry will be how to survive with the lack of imports, so they'll probably be lacking food and other supplies. Caeruleus 18:08, June 28, 2010 (UTC)
 * The Greeks outnumber the turks 7:1 thats how.Oerwinde 07:11, June 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * So...human wave tactics manage to overrun most of the northern half of the island after suffering over 50% casualties because of inferior weapons, lack of ammunition, and a total loss of any foreign support, which didn't particularly help them before Doomsday? Sorry, but I don't see that as a particularly likely scenario either. If the Confederation of Greece invaded some time in the 90s or early 2000s, they could have won. Otherwise, its doubtful at best. Caeruleus 04:12, June 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * Well being a member of the Confederation would put the Confederation's military at their disposal, who knows? Plus the turkish soldiers will have lost all contact with command on the mainland with Ankara and Izmir gone, and Iraq and Afghanistan have shown what a small force of ill equipped people who believe in something can do to a larger more advanced force. And the turkish soldiers don't have any national guard reserves to send in to back them up. I'm not saying who would win, just that its not so one sided.Oerwinde 07:29, June 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * Darn you and your counterexamples. So, let's clear something up. Is Greek Cyprus a member of the Confederation of Greece or not? And if it is, when did it join and did it contribute military forces to the Greek Cypriots struggle against the Turkish Cypriots? That pretty much decides how this goes. Btw, someone here should probably write a Cyrpus article after all this discussion. Caeruleus 04:39, July 1, 2010 (UTC)

And when you say the Royal Family of the Sultanate is the House of Osman, are you implying that the current monarch is the OTL pretender to the throne? If you expect him to be living and ruling in Turkey, then you should only be expecting his ashes; he's lived in New York City since 1941. Or do you mean that the Turks are ruling the country in his memory? Mr.Xeight 05:38, June 28, 2010 (UTC)


 * That was explained in the article. The House of Osman is the imperial dynasty that ruled the Ottoman Empire, the predecessor to the Republic of Turkey, until 1920 when they were dethroned. The family survived and moved to the United States. At the time of Doomsday, they were on vacation on a cruise in the eastern Meditterrean that landed in Turkey after Doomsday. People discovered his identity and chose him to become sultan.Caeruleus 18:08, June 28, 2010 (UTC)

'''I think there would be more than just the two strikes. Diyarbakır and Eskişehir house major air bases, Izmir is the southern naval headquarters as well as housing a major army base. Gölcük naval base would likely have been hit as well. Izmir at least would definitely be hit.Oerwinde 08:16, June 23, 2010 (UTC) '''

What do you mean what else would be bombed? I already have an ENTIRE TOPIC DEVOTED TO THAT. That you responded to no less. Izmir is gone, Diyarbakir and Eskisehir would likely be hit too, they house air commands. Golcuk would be hit, and likely Erzincan and Malatya which house army commands. Those are just the cities that house the command centers of various military branches. I haven't looked up major industrial centers, but Istanbul, Izmir, and Ankara are probably the big ones and they're already hit. Adana is a major industrial center, but its mostly textile and food processing so I could let that one slide.Oerwinde 06:09, June 28, 2010 (UTC)

And of course I know the US held (or rather holds) nukes in Turkey, so you know that's going to be bombed. And as for a foodd-processing center, they might want to cripple the supply of edible foods the Capitalist-Turks have, so that may very well be up for nuking. Found it, they're housed at Incirlik Air Base. Wow, that's only ten kilometers from Adana, a major city in Southern Turkey. Southern Turkey may not be the best place to put your Sultanate then. Mr.Xeight 06:23, June 28, 2010 (UTC)


 * Fine. Adana gets nuked. Caeruleus 18:08, June 28, 2010 (UTC)

Southern Turkey is still the best place to put it. Military targets in the south are pretty much all concentrated in the far east, and the rest are central or northern. So other than Incirlik, there aren't any other places I can think of off the top of my head in the area that makes up the sultanate at first that would be hit.Oerwinde 08:37, June 28, 2010 (UTC)


 * I'll add some strikes in the east and north then. Caeruleus 18:08, June 28, 2010 (UTC)
 * Look, here are some important cities on Turkey, which I think will probably be hit.
 * Imagen_1.png
 * Thank you for the map. That'll make this much easier. Caeruleus 02:17, June 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * Imagen_1.png
 * Thank you for the map. That'll make this much easier. Caeruleus 02:17, June 29, 2010 (UTC)

That's the one thing I hate about this site (well not the only one), you people put your comments right undernearth previous comments you're commenting on instead of in a linear way right after the other-makes it impossible for us lazy people to see what's going on. After looking back at old stuff, this is what's happening with Cyprus...
 * They were nuked twice by the Soviets-the British were taken out quickly and loudly.
 * The native-Greeks and Turks fought instead of working together after a nuclear holocaust (I originally had them as friends, but Mr. Hicken dissuaded from that and showed me the two groups would instead fight to kill each other). The island is like 87% Greek and 12% Turkish; guess who won.
 * The various Greek city-states find Cyprus in the late 1990s and Cyprus is let into the union only because of ethnic reasons; it was in terrible condition, utterly terrible (two nukings and an ethnic-cleansing'll do that to you).
 * Their fate from then on in I never wrote because I focused on acquiring North Africa and the Morean Fascism.

So, Cyprus is a member and if Turkey happens to wander over there in the 2000s then they'll find a probably 100% Greek island and will be booted from any attacks and weakened any more. So thanks to me focusing on Cyprus early on (like December of 07 or 08), Cyprus is saved from any Turkish domination. And how do you even know that the Royal Family was on vacation? If you can't find specific examples that they were cruising around the Med, then the group (before all Hell broke loose) assumes they were at home and are currently very crispy critters. Besides, weren't Turkish youths brainwashed into Republicanism and all that? Very few nations in the modern era actually accept their monarch back after decades apart, in fact Spain's the only example that comes to mind. Mr.Xeight 06:10, July 1, 2010 (UTC)

 Mr.Xeight 06:24, July 1, 2010 (UTC)


 * If Greece is claiming Cyprus, then I'll drop that portion. As for the royal family, I made it up. They could have been on vacation. I don't know if they actually were, but it doesn't particularly matter anyway. Gotta be creative with these things. The only reason they accepted the monarchy though was because that was the only compromise the civilian, military, and religious leaders could come up with for a new goverment. And yes, they were sort of brainwashed by republicanism, but that was mainly the military. That was sort of explained in the article when Konya became the capital. Konya is the "citadel of Islam" and is very conservative and somewhat fundamentalist. Since it was the largest surviving city and became the capital, local political elites forced the military to accept a more conservative goverment, which materialized as the Sultanate. However, the military forced the local political elites to accept a largely secular state with constitutional monarchy. So you have elements of both philosophies present. Plus, the New Turkey Party gained power in the late 90s and they were a secular, pro-military party which strengthened the republican nature of the state. Caeruleus 15:19, July 2, 2010 (UTC)

Macedonia
Hey I'm making a page for 1983:DD called the Kingdom of Macedonia, I was wondering if you were okay with me mentioning our countries making contact if thats okay with you. Ownerzmcown 1:33, June 29, 2010 (UTC)


 * Sure. That's fine. Feel free to elaborate on the relationship. I'll read over it and ok it if you do. Caeruleus 02:12, June 29, 2010 (UTC)

Okay, so here is the basic situation between our countries at the moment, their really close allies and soldier from your country helped my country win a civil war, check it out. Ownerzmcown 22:55, July 2, 2010 (UTC) 10:55, July 2, 2010 (UTC)


 * I wrote it into my article. Caeruleus 18:23, July 3, 2010 (UTC)

Is it okay that I just say I've made contact with your trading partners too, or do I have to check with their writers first? Ownerzmcown 14:16, July 5, 2010 (UTC) 14:15, July 5, 2010 (UTC)


 * For trade, no. For alliances, yes. Caeruleus 18:17, July 5, 2010 (UTC)

Annexation of Northern Cyprus
REMOVED - In conflict with canon

During the same period when Turkey came in contact with Thrace, a naval expedition was sent out to the island of Cyprus. The Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus was a breakaway republic formed before Doomsday that controlled most of Northen Cyprus. To the south was the Republic of Cyprus, a Greece-controlled government. Before Doomsday, it was a major point of contention between the two nations. Turkish leaders wished to reestablish contact with the island because a fairly large Turkish military contingent was based there to support the breakaway nation.

When the expedition fleet arrived at the shores of Cyprus, it found, to its surpise, a relative stable, if undersupplied, nation. The Turkish military contingent on the island had seized control of Northern Cyprus. The British bases on the island had been destroyed by small nuclear attacks from a Soviet nuclear submarine in the eastern Meditterrean. Luckily, the yield of the nuclear strike was very small and the fallout cloud quickly blew past the island into the sea. Thanks to this stroke of luck, Northern Cyprus had been able to survive, although in a state of complete isolation. Once they landed on the island, the Turkish Cypriots immediately welcomed those from their mother country. An ambassador who accompanied the expedition presented the Turkish Cypriot leadership with an offer of annexation. They would be given full rights as a province of the Sultanate of Turkey. Knowing the desperation of their situation, Northern Cyprus quickly agreed to become part of the Sultanate. In early 1996, Northern Cyprus had become a Turkish province. The annexation was met by praise among all Turks. However, the Republic of Cyprus, which still controlled the Southern half of the island and was a member of the Confederation of Greece, was infuriated. The annexation served to quickly worsen tensions between the two states.

Thoughts on Article
Caeruleus:Per our recent discussion, I have had an opportunity to review your article on Turkey. Given the recent changes you made since I started this, I went back and took a second look and made some revisions. As such, my apologies for the delay. Having read through it, I have several thoughts. To begin with, I think you made a good start to build upon and your idea on revising the Sultanate is indeed interesting. Although the sultanate idea is not improbable, I would have imagined something more akin to a military junta or dictatorship. I say this given Turkey's military has a habit of stepping in an taking over such as they had done in 1980. I would also closely look at the religous angle. Turkey has prided itself on being a secular state, so I am not sure it would go over to being an Islamic State. This said, I have a number of concerns.

I believe your article is far to optimistic in comparison to what the reality would have been. Turkey was a vital member of NATO and the only member on the border with the USSR. It would have been subject to USSR short and long range weapons as well as bombers. Given all NATO nations such as Britain, France, Italy, and Spain were pummeled, it would stand to reason so would Turkey. Although it is reasonable to hypothesize Turkish/NATO forces would have fought back, I think many weapons would have gotten through. Given they were right on the border, their reaction time would have been far less than say England or the US, no matter how good the radar was. I could see some bombers and perhaps a few warheads being downed, however the nation would still have suffered catastrophic damage between the strikes (which would be multiple in some locations) along with the fallout from these hits and those outside its borders. Although only certain cities were listed originally listed on the strike list, that did not mean they were the only places to be hit. Sometime ago, Turkey was designated as a nation which ceased to exist, in part given the number of strikes it would receive. A few months ago, I started doing research for a short article on the country and what would have occurred. Based on my research, I concluded at least the following targets would have been hit: Istanbul and Ankara and the surrounding area

Incirlik Air Base - NATO - 5 miles from Adana (Note: NATO kept nuclear armed planes on ground)

Izmir Air Force Station (USAF): Located on Turkish western coast, Izmir

Akinci Air Base (Turkish AFB): Located northwest of Ankara

Balikesir Airport, located in city of Balikesir (Note: NATO kept nuclear armed planes on ground)

Bandirma Airport, military and civilian airport located in city of Bandirma

Cigli Turkish military AFB, near Izmir (NATO units based here)

Erhac Airport, also known as Malatya Erhac Airport (Turkish military/civilian) 21 miles Malatya

Erkilet Airport (Turkish military/civilian) 3.1 miles north of Kayseri

Eskisehir Airport (Turkish military): Eskisehir (Note: NATO kept nuclear armed planes on ground)

Pirinçlik Air Base (NATO): Near Diyarbakır (NATO Radar Base)

Konya Airport (Turkish military/civilian): Located near Konya, (used by NATO)

Etimesgut Air Base (Turkish AFB): Ankara

Gaziemir Air Training Command (Turkish AF): Izmir

Merzifon Airport (Turkish AFB): Merzifon

Bartin Naval Base (home to sub pens): 6.1 miles nw of Bartin

Foca Naval Base (home of Turkish Marines): 2.6 miles se of Foca

Golcuk Naval Base (main naval base for logistics): Golcuk

Cengiz Topel NAS (Turkish naval base): east of Izmit (turned over to NATO in 1981) In addition to these targets, the Soviets likely would have struck the ten largest cities as well, some of which are on my list. Attached is a map I created reflecting some of the strikes I have elaborated on.

When you factor in the massive damage from strikes, radioactive fallout, EMP damage, collapse of the infrastructure, outbreaks of disease, and the lack of water and food, I do not honestly see Turkey having the strength to be able to advance politically, economically, or militarily to the lengths you have depicted, even twenty-seven years out from Doomsday. The major focus of any survivor states will be on those elements immediately neccessary to survival, such as food. Industrialization might come over time, but in a limitted capacitiy, probabley by the mid 1990s. I don't logically seen heavy industry occuring, let alone car or electronci manufacturing. Shipbuilding would be relegated to small coastal ships or fishing boats. As for energy, even if the hydropower dams were not destroyed, their systems would have been burned out by EMPs and be useless. Wind might be used on a small scale, such as windmills, but wind turbines or solar would again not make sense. It is also important to note, that in 1983, the population stood at about 47.8 million of which about 44% lived in urban areas. The most densly populated areas of the country were located in those regions which would likely have been targeted. Given these factors, within six months of Doomsday, the population would more than likely have been less than half this number with many suvivors either ill or having fled south by land or boat. Does this mean your country can't exist, no. However, I think it makes more sense that Turkey would divide into several nations. In addition to Kurdistan, I would see a nation arising along the Gulf of Antalya (yours likely), and one in Hatay Province, which at one time was a seperate region. I would recommend creating additional states in the country rather than one.

I believe the likliest scenario for Turkey would be this: Turkey is hit in at least 30 locations. Major NATO and Turkish Air Force and Naval facilities are targeted with a number of the largest cities, including Istanbul and Ankara. The nation suffers a complete meltdown. There is no one government, just a lot of little areas vying for power. Many who are not dying from disease/raditation flee to surviving ports or adjacent nations to escape. The PKK seizes southeastern Turkey in a bloody war. The nation breaks down into several smaller nations. By sometime in 1984 elements of the military still around begin to take control of larger areas and establish a rump nation, likely under military rule. They utilize harsh measures to ensure survival of the people and focus on establishing order, moving it into lawless areas and ensuring the essentials for survival are available. (Given limitted resources any attempt to pacificy warlords and such would indeed last well into the 2000s.) Contact is slowly established with other nations, such as eastern Syria, Lebanon, and the GSU. Industrialization would begin slowly, sometime in the mid-1990s with the assistance of other nations. Its projection of power would be limitted to within the Anatolian Peninsula, no further. By the early 21st Centruy, some areas who are still independent, begin having discussions about reuniting into a new Turkish state.

As I said, I think you have a good start but you definitely need to do rewrites. I noted you have dropped some areas, such as Cyprus, which is good, given they were not realistic. I do ask that you not advance into Syria given I have future plans for my article as I earlier said. I sincerely hope my thoughts have been of help to you in this matter and I look forward to seeing your future revisions. Once this is done, I could see some kind of future interaction between your area and mine in the Middle East. If you have any questions or wish to talk further, let me know. I will try to respond in a timely manner if possible.--Fxgentleman 03:24, July 6, 2010 (UTC)

Interesting. This is definitely something to think about. Thank you for figuring this all out. But, I do have a few concerns/questions. Do you think a unified Turkey by 2009 is too unrealistic? Also, how many independent nations are you thinking arose from Turkey, just two main ones with a few smaller juntas or something more like Warlord Era China? Caeruleus 03:51, July 6, 2010 (UTC)

The nation is still too large. It would be impossible to have taken control over all that territory again, even in all the time that has passed.

Also, so long as it is written that they possess nukes it will not be graduated.

Lordganon 20:35, July 11, 2010 (UTC)

Why is possessing nukes a problem? Caeruleus 01:09, July 19, 2010 (UTC)

It's just overkill - empire-building. While it sounds plausible, it really isnt - they'd have been launched.

There's no reason for it. All it is is just a way to arm yourself with nukes.

Lordganon 10:09, July 19, 2010 (UTC)

They probably wouldn't have launched every nuke and would still retain their nuclear artillery since that never had a chance to be reused. But, like you said, it is sort of overkill. I'll remove it. Caeruleus 14:03, July 19, 2010 (UTC)

I am currently trying to read your article and catch up on all your changes. However, I noted your main map still shows Turkey having absorbed a chunk of Syria and I wanted to remind you in regards to my earlier statement. I plan to create two new states in Syria. One in the eastern area beginning from the Euphrates to its old borders and one to the southwest corner near Jordan. If you want to absorb some ex-Syrian land in the northwest I would not be adverse as long as it doesn't conflict with my plans. Please let me know what you are intending to do. Thanks.--Fxgentleman 03:51, July 26, 2010 (UTC)

Sorry about all the updates. I have a lot of time during the summer, so I update it almost daily. The chuck of northern Syria is all I plan for Turkish advances into Syria. If it conflicts with your planned states, I don't mind reducing Turkish controlled areas of Syria in size. Also, remember that much of the Euphrates and the northeast corner of Syria is controlled by Kurdistan, so I hope that doesn't interfere with your plans.

Also, since you're trying to catch up, what are your thoughts on a Turkish-Israeli alliance built off of pre-Doomsday relations between the two countries? Caeruleus 05:39, July 26, 2010 (UTC)

My apologies for just now getting back to you. I have read through your article and for the most part I think it is okay, although a bit optimistic in some areas. As to relations, I don't see any problems with diplomatic ties between Israel, Lebanon, Jordon, etc. I could see some sort of Middle East type of NATO between the GSU, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, and Turkey in order to stand up to future Iranian aggression. I would ask you to remove the area dealing with the integration of Lebanon's economy into Turkey. Again, I could see economic trading or alliances, but I would prefer Lebanon's economy to remain separate. Also, please change your map to reflect the concerns I raised previously regarding Syria. I am still planning to create two new nations in the former Syria and your map still gives an impression the nation has been mostly absorbed by Turkey. Otherwise I am okay. Thanks.--Fxgentleman 00:19, August 18, 2010 (UTC)

Graduation
For you random followers of this article, does anyone have any final, reasonable objects to this article's graduation? I'd like to see it graduated soon. Caeruleus 01:08, July 19, 2010 (UTC)

The nukes, and the size. It was not very plausible before all the strikes were added, and it definitely is not now.

Of course, I've said it so many times already that its obvious you won't listen. But it still stands - and that wont go away. Others have told you this too.

It is a good article. But the empire-building is too much. It wouldn't be possible to reach so far over the mountains in this period of time.

Lordganon 10:13, July 19, 2010 (UTC)

It's not really empire building since they haven't expanded past Turkish borders. Also, I'm working on further explaining how they expanded so quickly. But to sum it up for you, southern Turkey was taken in the early years entirely by the Sultanate. Northern Turkey was all but abandoned after the nuclear strikes in the area and the few survivors were plagued by famine and diesase. They were all too willing to join the Sultanate with minimal resistance. Southeast Turkey was controlled by the Republic of Hatay, which collapsed midway through their war with the Sultanate due to internal rebellion. I'm still writing the article about that. Northeast Turkey was devestated by Doomsday and Soviet invasions, so the area was divided between relatively weak warlord who were constantly at war with each other. Several allied with the Sultanate and together they were able to conquer the rest. Those who allied with the Sultanate joined it after the rest were conquered. I'll dive into more detail when I complete the associated Republic of Hatay and Eastern Turkish Wasteland articles.

So, it's a plausible divide and conquer scenario. As for the mountains, those only became a major problem in the eastern campaigns when the primary combatants were Sultanate-armed warlords who wouldn't have had to worry about pushing all the way through the mountains. Caeruleus 14:10, July 19, 2010 (UTC)

Interesting with the other two articles, but it would likely be better if they still existed independently - maybe have them fighting hatay atm, or conquering parts of the western wastelands. The expansions were believable - if barely - before the additional strikes were added, but with the increased destruction in the western part of the nation, it would be too engaged in rebuilding to really expand into the other areas this much.

Besides, I suspect that as it is right now this state would be far stronger than Greece, lol. And its already been established as being the strongest in this area, so....



Lordganon 06:41, July 21, 2010 (UTC)

My current plan for the Republic of Hatay is to have an internal rebellion in the middle of the war that destablizes their government, and, since it's an oligarchy, it was disasterous. After that, the Sultanate would take another two years to just basically clean up the remaining warlords in the area. I hope it will fit in well with the rest of it.

I haven't focused much on the rebuilding, so I'll have to work on those portions. Currently, I've just assumed that they quarentined all areas that were nuked and the largest problem eminating from the strikes was the massive loss of life, almost a third of the total Turkish population. How would you see their rebuilding going?

Well, in all honesty, the fact that Greece is a regional superpower is laughable at best, however, since it is part of canon I will respect that. I'm attempting to phrase it so that Turkey is a powerful state that threatens Greece, but is still weaker than it, especially navally. Turkey's main advantage over Greece is superior numbers. In the future, Turkey will surpass Greece, as it has OTL. But that won't occur for several years. I'm thinking like 2015 or so. Caeruleus 16:52, July 21, 2010 (UTC)

With most military and major cities nuked, Turkey would have massive refugee problems, and with a lack of forces to ensure stability....

Basically I think you should just do what I did with Prussia. Move up the timeline. I originally had Prussia invading Poland in the late 80s and have expanded almost to Lubeck. To fit plausibility and the concerns of the other editors I moved the polish invasion up to the mid 2000s to account for a greater period of reconstruction and establishing control over their area. Do the same here, move it up so the Hatay war is currently ongoing or just ended and spread out the timeline to show a greater period of reconstruction. It would also make it more plausible for a country dealing with massive reconstruction efforts, just concluding a war, and beginning to expand into an area torn by warlords and raiders... to give aid to Macedonia. And reverse engineering things can be a time consuming process. So reverse engineering american military hardware and putting them into mass production would first require adequate facilities for the reverse engineering, would probably take years, and then there would have to be the construction of adequate facilities for manufacturing, plus the aquisition of materials.Oerwinde 17:23, July 21, 2010 (UTC)

Is the way in which the refugees are handled, as currently written in the article, not adequate then? If you haven't read the article in the past 24-48 hours, reread it. I've added a fair amount that changes several things. Caeruleus 18:19, July 21, 2010 (UTC)

Thrace is not north of Ankara, which you seem to be suggesting. The Aegean ports, yes - but not Ankara.

The thing is Caer, the refugees would have destroyed much of central Turkey. Whatever was left in western Turkey would have been destroyed in the same manner too. And, at least the Ankara pass would be too heavily irradiated to pass through for quite some time. Others would likely be the same way.

But yeah, you definitely seem to be understating the damage that they would cause. Though, this is better than before, I admit.

What Oer is saying is basically what I've said all along, really. Compare this nation-state to others that are canon, and the struggles that they faced. Say Virginia for example. While you've got more population to work with, the basic idea is the same.

Do what Oer said, and maybe add some bits about the Aegean ports only now being brought up to spec for usage.

You can add the Syrian parts to the Hatay article - will make sense there, but not so much here now.

Outside of the core regions, most of the country would have to be rebuilt. Fighting, refugees, or strikes would make sure of it. What you also haven't really considered is the Hatay war impact either - the areas they took in the war would need to be rebuilt too - and these are the core areas used to rebuild elsewhere, which would slow the whole process down. The war itself would mean that there was less resources to use in such a way too.

As to the war, maybe have them get to the gates of Konya - like a month later than planned, maybe. Then, have them turned back just before the gates of the city, and a long counteroffensive from there. If they could get that far, it would take a VERY long time to get them out of the country, so long as they have any decent officers in charge.

After the Hatay war, you'd have to rebuild Hatay, as well as parts of the Sultanate, as these would have been damaged by the war and rebellions in Hatay. As Oer said, this would likely be where you'd be at the present as a result. And, your military power would be hindered by having to occupy the area - and the citizens would not join your army for quite some time, either.

But, as I've said before, only those provinces south of the mountains, or in them - not the coastal ones, or maybe even the ones directly inland from there as well, depending on the size of the coastal ones - should be under your control as of yet. It's just that with the war, and the presence of Hatay in general, they wouldn't have the forces to get that far, even if I'd thought it was realistic before Hatay was added to this.

This wouldn't really hinder the Macedonian Intervention either, though the numbers may have to be adjusted depending on when the Hatay war occurs - you won't have the numbers if the war is going on, at least not that many to send.

You may want to decrease the population somewhat more as well.

I do like the wasteland part as well, except for the takeover bit. Maybe have the Trabzon part of that area being aided by Greece too - there's a long history of Greek possession of that place, even after the fall of the Byzantines. Note, not part of Greece, but aided by them.

Decrease the state-of-the-art talk in the military section. Like Oer said, it will take a long time to reverse engineer all this stuff. Probably, it would mostly be 1960s-type weapons. Though, you are right about the airforce - it likely would be.

Take out the Minerallia~ mention in the International relations. I've alreadly decided in going over articles for Ven that that one and its war are not plausible. Maybe mention something about Turkish attempts to act as a go-between for peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan in light of their war over Kazrath~. Note, Armenia is stronger militarily that Azerbaijan, though outnumbered a little. Them as low-level allies works though - just remember the distance would mean that no intervention would be possible.

Now, Israel and Turkey have a LONG history of being allies of some sort. I see no reason why even in light of the increased Islamic essence of Turkey here why there would not be some sort of relations - and good ones at that. Even in light of the strikes in Israel and everything, they would likely be source of arms or something, at least. Maybe talk to Fx about this.

Iran has been making trouble across the region by funding terrorists. I could see them going after with this in some manner the ancient enemies of Persia, the Ottomans.

And yeah, I agree with you - as it stands right now, Greece is overstated. I'd think about it as most of their military equipment being intact - but Turkey's was not. But, as it stands, not much to do about it.

Lordganon 03:47, July 22, 2010 (UTC)

Wanted to say too - Xeight is due back soon - apparently he went to Greece or something - and may have something to say, so it can't graduate until then.

Lordganon 04:18, July 22, 2010 (UTC)

Okay. Let me try to repsond to this wall of text :/


 * Thrace is north of Ankara...I don't know where you think Ankara is, but its in the center of the country.


 * I'm picturing the refugees being kept in northern and central Turkey. Western Turkey would have refugees, but less so due to the lower number of nuclear strikes in the area. I think the current timeline for the annexation of Western Turkey is fine. Though the timeline for the rebuilding of the ports will have to clarified.


 * I'm still working on elaborating on the damage caused and the initial years of the Sultanate in regards to their survival.


 * I haven't really had time to work on the Republic of Hatay stuff. All territory involved in the war until the Battle of Osmaniye will probably have to be rebuilt. After that, the Hatayan military largely collapsed and after the capital fell, the only thing left to deal with were bandits and minor warlords. Also, part of the reason the war ended so swiftly is a popular rebellion that occured against the Republic. They were a very oppression government who became desperate when they began to be driven back. Basically, the people were sick of it and rebelled with Sultanate support. This will be elaborated on in the Republic of Hatay article.


 * Thank you about the nukes reminder, again.


 * For the population, I just took 50 million, the population of Turkey in 1983, subtracted the 20 million dead. Then used half the OTL population growth rate of Turkey to calculate their 2010 population.


 * Possibly. I'll consider it. I've been thinking about having them supported by Armenia who feared a powerful, expansionist Sultanate reaching their borders. Greece could be a good candidate.


 * As for the state-of-the-art stuff, my assumption is that some NATO personnel survived Doomsday and cooperated with the new government to help them reverse engineer equipment. Also, Turkish personnel who were familiar with the equipment pre-Doomsday would also assist. I believe Turkey received plans for most of the imported American weapons and could produce at least some of it themselves and take care of technical support for it. Is that reasonable for explaining why they were able to reverse enginneer most of it by the late 1990s?


 * If the war is implausible, I'll remove the Mingerlia portion. I like the idea about diplomatically intervening in Armenia/Azerbaijan's war.

I've been thinking about an Israeli-Turkish alliance, but I haven't been sure why or how it would come about. I'll ask Fx though.


 * I have long term plans for a Turkish-Iranian cold war. I was thinking of having Turkey/Azerbaijan/Israel?/Lebanon? vs. Iran/Kurdistan/MLA/Pakistan.


 * I have plans for war with Greece around 2011-2015, but I'm not quite sure how that will work. I've also considered Turkish intervention in the Second Sicilian War. I need to sort out Turkish diplomacy first.


 * Mr. Xeight said that as long as I left Cyprus alone, respected Greece's power, and honored Greek territory on Turkish lands he's fine with it. Caeruleus 05:32, July 22, 2010 (UTC)

Heh, no worries lol. That's what happens when I think too much about something ;)

I'm aware where Ankara is - but if they were headed to Thrace they wouldn't end up there, as Thrace is a fair ways Northwest of there.

Actually, western turkey may even be a bit worse, as the refugees would be more desperate and thus destructive. But, that will mean a longer time to rebuild, not so much to conquer. The people there will not be in shape for years to be soldiers, either. This may add a year or two to the conquering time there, but is fine as it is.

You may be better off finding a port to build yourself, as the only real port on the Aegean in territory you have is Izmir, and that was nuked. Try the cities of Urla or Aliaga in Izmir Province for this. They look on the map to have decent harbors and not be easy to take from turkey, unlike most other options.

Even if the military falls back fairly rapidly, they'll still have fought back - and the rebellions would destroy more of their territory too. I'd make it so that rebels against the sultanate are still there, as even if they had rebelled with support, not all would have done it. And, like I said, it may be better to have the turning point battle right outside Konya. But, either way you need to take the destruction in Sultanate territory into account.

I'd make it maybe ~37.5 million people or so - a fair number in the western territories under control here would be too radiated to reproduce. And there's the war with Hatay to take into account too. But, most of that would be that some of these citizens would be under Greek control too - not all would die or flee from Greek territory.

Greek and Georgian, more like. But Trabzon would likely get some Armenian support too, true enough. It would definitely be a tougher nut to crack than the rest of the area, irregardless, because of the outside support. Likely even enough to stay independent, truthfully. I could even see it being involved officially with Greece, though not a member of it.

Thing is, while they would help the Sultanate, they'd only really know in most cases how to operate and maintain the vehicles. You're right about the plans - the Turks were/are able to make arms, and a few types of vehicles. This would likely end up being one or two at most that they could build like this, as some would be lost with DD. They would only be able to reproduce some of it, even by the late 90s. Probably all of it by the present day, though it would not be used throughout the forces yet by any means.

Yeah, its definitely impossible, given the weakness of Azerbaijan. Offering Turkey as a mediator between the two would be good, though convincing a power with less interest in the result to aid them would be a plan, as I doubt Armenia would accept if they were doing it themselves, given things. Like I said, you have to remember with that that Armenia is definitely and obviously stronger than Azerbaijan.

Really, you could base the alliance on the pre-existing relationship between the two. It would be low-level, given the more Islamic nature of the state, but nothing wrong with it existing. But, more than mentioning a relationship would be something to discuss with Fx. Given the nature of the state, I can say that arms shipments would be out, however.

Something like that cold war, not a bad future plan. But what I meant is maybe some Islamic extremists in the state now, believed to be financed by Iran. They are financing them in Dagestan and Central Asia, so why not here?

I'd go with the intervention, to a degree - nothing of war, but something to make Greece nervous. That would work. War in the future is a good goal, but something to discuss with Xeight.

Don't forget to talk to Fx about Syria! No idea what he has planned there.

What I meant was that he may have some objections or something. Doubt it, other than size, but..... never know.

Also, Edirne in Thrace would have gotten nuked, and I've written that into Rhodope, so it should be added to the strikes.

And yeah, will remind ya about the nukes repeatedly until I see them gone, lol.

...lastly, I'd be willing to help a little with the Wastelands article. More so Trabzon, but I'd do it readily.

Lordganon 13:58, July 22, 2010 (UTC)

You realize northwest is still north right? But that's okay. Some of us are okay with directions, others not so much lol.

Once again, I need to elaborate on the reconstruction efforts. I'm planning the expansion of surviving ports and the building of New Izmir.

Between the reversal 100 miles from Konya and the Battle of Osmaniye is where most of the damage will take place. I still need to write the article on that though.

Good point about the population.

I'm thinking that they small arms, tanks, and possibly a few helicopters will begin to be produced in the late 1990s, and they'll be based on pre-Doomsday NATO weaponry. Missiles and advance aircraft will begin to be produced around 2008.

I'll have to think about the mediation.

Why would arm shipments be out?

That's an option. Currently, I'm planning for the rivalry to originate from the Turkish desire to reannex Kurdish lands and Iran is an ally of Kurdistan.

I think he's planning a state of some sort in Eastern Syria.

The nukes are gone.

Currently, I'm planning Trabzon and Patnos to be the dominant Wasteland states. Between them, they dominate several smaller states. Elazid is another strong state, but they're supported by Kurdistan. Initially, the Sultanate will ally with the smaller states who will conquer other smaller states. Eventually, Trabzon and Patnos become directly involved in the war. Shortly after this, the Sultanate starts sending troops across the moutains. First, Elazid is conquered to end Kurdish influence and gain a foothold in the wastelands. Next, several of the smaller states are reinforced directly by Turkish troops. Then, Patnos switches sides after seing Turkish troops at their border and being promised certain concessions, including becoming a semi-autonomous state within the Sultanate once the war is over. After that, it becomes a grinding war against the powerful Second Empire of Trabzon until, finally, in May 2009 Trabzon is taken. So if you can sort of write something that goes somewhere along those lines, that would be great. I still haven't decided how I'm going to change the wars in the east though. Caeruleus 16:20, July 22, 2010 (UTC)

Heh. I'm better with directions then you'll ever be and I actually find that mildly insulting, lol.

What I mean is that an expedition to the area around Thrace would head north from more towards the Aegean, and never even go through the mountains near the ruins of Ankara.

Really, there wouldn't be a surviving Aegean port - the only ones besides Izmir are in Greek territory, and Izmir was destroyed. But the other cities I gave you should work nicely for New Izmir, though I'd call it the name it already had myself. Cities that start with "New" are overrated, lol.

For sure - but, it may flow better to have it happen just outside Konya - sounds better, lol. More mystique. Maybe even have a Islamic religious fellow call it to happen there.

I'd make it 1960s weapons that they can build late 90s, but no tanks - those are hard to build. At the very least none later than the 50s, anyway. But, 1980s ones should be build-able by 2008, though I would make it so that the missiles, advanced aircraft, and tanks can only be constructed very slowly - maybe a dozen a year of each at most - at this time.

Really, to the best of my knowledge Turkey is trying to do that nowadays anyway, not too far a stretch to mediate here too.

Way I figure it, the fact that Turkey is Muslim really prevents much of that kind of thing today - and here, they are more religious. Israel would not be as evil-sounding, but.... doubt it would happen anyway.

That sounds good as a way to start it, though I'd do the Islamic militants anyway.

That's what I'd heard too, though who knows - a Turkish puppet state might be possible ;)

Sounds like a good general outline for the area, though I'd wait for the change in the wars to be done first before I did anything. Personally, I'd make it so they have some sort of isolated contact with these states, with the conquest sometime in the future, and have the Hatay war just ending. Maybe some kind of mini-war with a satellite state of theirs in Syria too.

But, given the Greek irredentism shown elsewhere - and the links held by the Georgians and Armenians there - that they would let a war of conquest for Trabzon go so easily is something I myself doubt. and, with the outside support, it would likely take a generation to get relatively loyal subjects there at all.

What I'd do with that is make them some kind of vassal-state. Kind of like your plans for Patros, but just slightly more independent. Kind of like the princely states of the old British Raj in India, or the autonomous republics in modern Spain OTL. Independent, but with Turkey controlling their foreign affairs and being able to demand a levy of soldiers in times of war. Maybe some sort of tribute too. Look up vassals on wikipedia for more or this.

Lordganon 03:49, July 23, 2010 (UTC)

There are no more Greeks in the Trabzon area. There are few few Greeks in Turkey at all, and they mostly life on the eastern coast. Any Greeks would would have lived in eastern Turkey would have been expelled during the population exchanges of the 1930s. So Greek irredentism wouldn't be a major issue there. The Empire of Trabzon would the a throughly Turkish state, with small Armenian and Georgian minorities. Though, something you could incorporate, is the involvement of ex-Soviet military leaders in Trabzon leadership. They would be junior leadership though. The Emperor, and his inner circle, would be Turkish.

I was thinking more like the autonomous republics of Spain OTL. They would be able to control their own internal affairs and have their own militia. But they would be subject to national conscription and have their foreign affairs controlled by the national government. For Trabzon, since they resisted so heavily and were the primary combatant in the war, they were conquered, annexed, and placed under provisional military rule, which would last until 2013-14. Caeruleus 23:57, July 23, 2010 (UTC)

I'm aware that there isn't - but they've gone and taken the more "greek" areas in the west, even though Greeks havent been there in more than a half-century. Trabzon had a large number of Greeks until then too. It's far enough away that they would have no control, but I could see them have designs on the area. If it helps, the empire of trabzon that existed long ago was the last independent Greek state - conquered by the Ottomans after the fall of the Byzantines, in the late 1400s - until the early 1800s. Irredentism is basically taking territory that was once yours, or you believe to be rightfully yours. Trabzon would easily fit there. I'm not saying it would be Greeks in charge - you are right that it would be Turks - but it makes a lot of sense for both the Georgians and Greeks - and to a certain extent the Armenians - to be influencing that state, given historical interests on the part of all three in the region.

And, my current plans to modify Georgia have the military staying there and basically being in charge.

That's what I was saying for the republic bit, though make the troops only allowed to be called up in time of war. I'd wait for the war to finalized before deciding how this turns out. Like has been said by myself and Oer, it would likely be the best plan to have only feelers being sent into the area, not have any under Turkish control.

And, fyi, its not uncommon in wars for the loser - even on that scale - to be occupied militarily and then made some sort of vassal (in this case an autonomous state). They'd have to become some sort of prince, but I'm sure under duress and threat of death they'd agree ;)

Lordganon 06:04, July 24, 2010 (UTC)

Ah. I understand what you're getting at now. I suppose the Greeks could at least be perceived to be assisting Trabzon or be assisting them in name only. However, I would like to prevent any expansion of the already unrealistic Greek superpower. They can have a political agenda there, but I doubt much support, be it financial, military, or otherwise, would actually be forthcoming.

I would still like to see full unification by 2009-2010. Even though it seems a bit of a stretch, it is certainly not the most unrealistic thing on this timeline. I believe if the sheer conquest aspect of it is deemphasized and replaced with more semi-peaceful political unification, it would be plausible.

Some autonomous states are certainly planned in the east, and possibly the north.

Caeruleus 15:49, July 24, 2010 (UTC)

There ya go. I'd expect maybe a couple shiploads of supplies of some sort - food, clothes, something like that - but no more. Basically, just some sort of political support to the current regime - that means nothing, in the end.

Without conquest, that would sound better - too optimistic, but better, since conquest of that area in that time-frame would be impossible. They'd have little support for campaigns from soldiers from those areas, mind - think that they would serve, but in the slowest and laziest way possible. Normal for conscripts from territories like that. This would make campaigns in that area difficult, and leave some parts still independent, so long as they dont campaign against the Sultanate in some way. What I'd do in that light is make the Hatay war just ended, and with many of these autonomous states only recently sworn to the Sultanate - basically, having sworn themselves to the Sultan once the obvious victor was seen in the war. A few holdouts would exist, of course, which campaigning in the next couple of years would remove.

I'd change that to definitely the northern half of the country being full of them - with the current setup, that area would have been on its own for a while, which would mean some sort of organization established there. That would make my concerns about that area go away, for sure. This would make the Northeastern bit have to change though, definitely. But I do like the idea.

Should tell you about my Georgia plans too - I was thinking a military dictatorship of some sort, put into place by the remains of the military forces which survived the fighting with Turkey in the area after Moscow ordered them to attack Turkey.

The breakaway republics? OTL they were supplied, aided, helped, etc. by Russia - which isnt happening here. Thus, independence not happening - they'd stay autonomous, under force.

I'll have them support Trabzon in some manner - help establishing the state, some supplies afterwards as possible.

Lordganon 06:09, July 25, 2010 (UTC)

There would still be a good amount of conquest. Hatay would be conquered. Much of eastern Turkey would be conquered. Northern Turkey would mainly just be absorbed, usually peacefully. The incorporation of northern Turkey would be relatively easy due to the minimal population, lack of supplies, and isolated nature of the communities in the area. As far as Hatay goes, I can see that war being pushed back or extended until 2003 at the latest. However, they could have been conquered by then. Some residual rebels could reside within the area for a few years, but that's it. In the east, about half the states in the area would join the Sultanate voluntarily or through a small show of force. The rest would be conquered, but the only one that would be difficult to deal with would be Trabzon, where substantial rebels would continue after the war was officially over.

Eight years for the Eastern Conquest is plenty to largely subdue the area imo. Two years for the Hatayan War may be a little short, so I'll think about extending that.

The Turkish Imperial Army is about 60% volunteer. Also, it is mostly the volunteer portions of their army that are used in offensive campaigns. The conscripts are mainly assigned to occupation or internal security duties. So they wouldn't have a lot of problems with lazy conscripts during war. Also, like in OTL Turkey, the military instills a strict sense of nationalism and the state's basic idealogy into its volunteer members. It would be very nationalistic and loyal to the state, which would also decrease problems with personnel and internal dissent within the military.

What I was thinking for northern Turkey was the establishment of mostly provinces, except around the Greek border possibly, because the area was so chaotic during the post-Doomsday years that no strong warlords or states emerged. The area would be mostly small, local communities or maurading bands strugling to survive. Once the Sultanate came, they would mostly want to join the Sultanate who would then organize them into a working government.

Military dictatorship sounds good for Georgia, especially becaus of the large concentration of Soviet forces posted there. However, there would definitely be breakaway republics. Within the Soviet Union, several of these breakaway republics had semi-autonomous governments. During the chaos of Doomsday, all the republics with semi-autonomous governments would breakaway from any post-Doomsday state that tried to claim them, unless they were reconquered by force which would involve a major war. The other OTL breakaway republics that did not have their own semi-autonomous government would see large-scale indepedence movements for sure, and probably indepdence. They would be supplied by fleeing Soviet, and possibly Turkish, soldiers who either fled to them or abandoned their weapons during the chaos of Doomsday. Abkazia and Ossetia would definitely gain their independence. Mingrelia could, but it is more doubtful. They would probably either be conquered by Georgia or would gain indepedence and be an extended part of the Eastern Turkish Wasteland that could possibly be conquered by or be allied with Turkey.Caeruleus 05:36, July 26, 2010 (UTC)

Aside from the strike on the Georgian capital, the only other strikes thereare a pair of coastal cities, one of which is the main city in Abkazia. A nuclear bomber base in North Ossetia would also have been hit. Except for the losses in the fighting with the Turkish soldiers, the majority of their military equipment would remain intact. This alone would prevent their independence.

But, OTL, the ONLY reason why both of those areas are not under Georgian control is because they both are being supplied - and reinforced - by Russia.

The fleeing Soviet troops would end up under Georgian authority, and there's no reason for the Turks to flee in that way - why end up ruling a bunch of Georgians when you can set up your own state in turkey? ;)

At any rate, my plans are not in question at all here - yours are ;)

The thing is, even after less than 10 years, you'd find quite a few of those states would not give up their authority quite so willingly. Add in the fact that Turks are historically a much more independent-minded folk than most, and its a problem.

Overall, it gets too strong and too big too fast. I guess that's the problem, really - and when you ask for objections to graduation on the proposal talk page, others will tell you the same thing.

Remember, I am trying to help you here.

Lordganon 12:16, July 26, 2010 (UTC)

And the only reason Georgia is strong enough to keep them down OTL is because they're supported by the US. But I'll reserve any further comments for Georgia's talk page.

Explain why you think the Turks are historically more independent minded. Since the foundation of the Ottoman Empire, almost 700 years ago, Turkey has been a united country and people with few, if any, rebellions occuring in Turkish-inhabited territory. Also, since WW1, Turkish nationalism has been very high. OTL, this was enforced through the cult of personality created by Kemel Ataturk and the Turkish military. ATL, this is forced by necessity, nationalism, remanants of Kemal Ataturk's philosophy, and military force. Despite the coups and such, Turkey didn't have a lot of the kind of internal divisions or differences that would prevent other countries, like China, from reuniting in this time. Plus they're not that large of a country.

It's not really that strong. It's just strong enough to reunite Turkey. It's still weaker than Greece and fears war with Kurdistan. It is also unwilling, and somewhat unable, to advance further into the Caucusus at this time. Its main advantages over neighboring states are population and resources. By 2010, it has mostly reindustrialized in the southwest, but much of the north and east is still minimally developed. They're really only developed militarily and have transportation inferstructure in place in those areas.

Besides, if Ireland can conquer half of Britain and parts of France, Greece can become an expansionist superpower, and the Mafia can conquer Tunisia and almost conquer all of Italy, a united Turkey in 27 years isn't that far fetched. Caeruleus 16:51, July 26, 2010 (UTC)

Both of those two are effectively independent now - this was established with the aid of Russian troops in the early 90s - and if they were not still stationed there it would likely have been reconquered by Georgia, with or without the American aid. But yes, for the Georgia talk page only.

Once upon a time, there was a Turkish state for nearly every clan - look at maps before the Ottomans got really strong and took Constantinople for more on that - had its own state. The way I figure it, after so long being on their own they would have regained this, to a certain extent - while some would willingly give up to become an autonomous state, the majority likely wouldn't or would only do it after fighting for a while first. Besides, why would you give up power so willingly if you were in charge? Would you? I know I wouldn't ;)

It's just WAY too optimistic, really.

The thing is, I know how strong you intend it to be - but the problem is that it reads like its a lot stronger than that.

And I do agree that it is possible to reunite the majority of the country in that time-span - I guess what I'm saying is I'm holding out for at least ONE independent state to be left out of this re-unification at this time, and the Trabzon state sounds the most likely. Call it on the verge of war, but not quite to war yet to avoid antagonizing Georgia/Greece.

Lordganon 07:23, July 27, 2010 (UTC)

Yes, but that was over 700 years ago. Turky wouldn't totally revert to a tribal-like situation in 5-15 years. Based on your point, the assumption you seem like you're trying to make it that once given the chance to have power, people will automatically seize it and refuse to give it up. While this is partially true in some cases, you have to factor in the devestation of Doomsday, pre-Doomsday loyalties, and popular desire for reunification.

Honestly, it probably reads too optimistic because it's too long and rather detailed. So it probably sounds like I'm creating an unstoppable war machine, right?

That's a possiblity. My thinking, though, is why would Turkey leave a single state left standing? They would, conceivably, have the power to defeat it, even if from nothing but sheer numbers. So why wouldn't they?

Caeruleus 09:32, July 27, 2010 (UTC)

That's an overstatement, but yes. I just think that you're understating how it would be, and badly.

To a certain extent, but I consider it empire-building, like I said.

If it's supported by outside states - kind of a buffer, I guess - it would be to avoid antagonizing them and risking war with an actual opponent so soon after Hatay.

Lordganon 20:34, July 28, 2010 (UTC)

I don't think I am. Yes, many areas will become independent and fight for that independence fiercely. But if you have a gun pointed at your head or are dying of starvation, that independence can, and will, quickly become a secondary though. Military force or desperation have been used to annex new territory throughout history, as it would in a post-Doomsday world.

What's wrong with empire-building? The post-Doomsday world offers the perfect conditions for empire-creation and most nations would, and have according to canon, engaged in it. Plus, empire-building typically involves the conquest of other nations. What Turkey is doing is more analagous to national unification. An all-out invasion of the Caucusus, Syria, or Iraq would be more analagous to empire-building.

Trabzon could be a buffer for Georgia or Armenia, but both states are weaker than Turkey and Turkey would have little to fear from them. If it's supported by Greece, they'd be unable to assist them because they'd be involved in the Second Sicily War from 2008 to an as of now undetermined date.

Caeruleus 21:22, July 28, 2010 (UTC)

True enough, but if any authority at all has been established - like you have, to a certain point stated there was - it would be fought over. Even worse, in this case. You're saying that the semi-warlords that were in the army would give up to the Sultanate - but given the Extremist Secular and Republican views held by the army (They've had several coups when the army thought the government was too religious or not republican), I doubt they'd give up power willingly to a Sultanate, especially if there is an increase in religion like it seems in the article.

Empire-building is something that's been avoided on DD, at least on a large scale. Even in areas that were untouched by DD, the lack of government, fallout, and lack of workable modern machinery for the most part would mean a general breakdown in society and everything. This would mean that large-scale empire building is out, as even areas unharmed directly by DD would need to be repaired/rehabilitated. You're right about it being more like unification, but even then, given the amount of territory and the likely damage of the area it is effectively empire-building.

True enough, it is stronger than both, likely even combined. At the same time, however, your resources are coming from south of the mountains, so that while you would win a war in the end, even against both, their power bases being closer would likely mean that it would be very long and drawn out, causing them much more trouble than its worth. Besides, it is both common and likely that a nation would support small vestiges of authority near their borders - keeps the bandits away ;)

On another note, thinking about the population - you should lower the 1983 population by another million or two, since that would be the amount left in territory now under Greek control. While a certain amount would go to the sultanate, a sizable amount would also stay put. Shouldn't lower the net population by too much.

Also, add Edrine, near the Bulgarian border, to the nuclear strikes. I've had that in Rhodope and Vidin since day 1 as being hit - basically, its a large city to start, and would be the basis of any Turkish attacks into Bulgaria, so killing it (as well as Istanbul) would remove the threat for a while.

Lordganon 11:31, July 30, 2010 (UTC)

For the warlords who gave up, their choice was basically join or die. As for the secularism and republicanism of the army, the secularism was maintained because Islam is a growing force, as in OTL, but not an official or dominant force. It's also still a democratic state, but the head of state is the Sultan, who's ironically pro-democracy.

I see no reason why limited empire building can't take place in certain areas, especially areas that weren't affected, but that's not where I plan to go in the near term. National unification will be achieved through a combination of force of arms and diplomacy by 2009. Further military action will be down the line, but not necessarily soon. And, despite the lack of modern equipment, people used to be able to make their own guns. They'll learn to do that again if necessary. Conquest is carried out by whatever weaponry is available, whether that's tanks or spears.

No war against Georgia and Armenia is planned. Though any influence they have in the Eastern Wasteland will be eliminated by 2009.

I suppose the population can be lowered slightly.

I don't see why Edrine would be nuked. It has no significant military base, it's a relatively small city, and it's only culturally important. The only reason it would be attacked is because it's a border city, yet most border cities weren't nuked. It would probably be bombed by conventional bombers, but no nuclear strike would take place there.

16:08, July 30, 2010 (UTC)Caeruleus

In my book, the army wouldn't see it that way at all. It may still be a democracy, but it's not a republic. And that simple fact would do it. The growing force of Islam - which would likely be obvious, even if not official - would mean that the secular ones would have issues too. The majority of the ex-military warlords wouldn't join for that reason.

True enough, but like I said - most of these mountain passes, without modern weapons, could not easily be forced so long as the people at the barricades had guns - and that territory, good luck getting heavy machinery in.

Like I've said before, it just seems to expand too fast. And when you actually ask for objections, I've no doubt you'll hear more of the same.

You are underestimating the Georgians and Armenians - they still have the majority of their pre-DD weapons intact, remember. Especially in the case of Armenia, they would have a vested interest in keeping Turkey out of the area - they'd have no desire to have a potential ally of Azerbaijan there that could swing the balance in Azer~ favor, easily. And Georgia would be more interested in the buffer state to keep out the warlords/bandits.

I did make it so Ossetia was independent - North Ossetia was more or less unscathed, and that they would invade but be stalemated.

In effect, two stalemated wars - and its definite that neither would want a potential future opponent easily on their backdoor, so it makes sense. Come to think of it, Georgia would probably have some sort of relationship with the Greeks too. <Is trying to remember ancient history, so bare with it)

Maybe, but that was my logic. No sense risking an attack, after all - and the Soviets have been shown to have an interesting lack of caring for their allies when choosing targets, fallout-wise. Doesn't hurt the article, either way, so you may as well add it.

Lordganon 01:20, August 3, 2010 (UTC)

Good point, but since that would require me rewriting the entire article, it stays a monarchy. My current justification is that all the generals thought it was a temporary solution to secure Konya and the Sultan would be deposed in a years. To their surprise when they considered deposing him years later, the Sultan was widely popular and supported by the civilian and religious leadership, so they were forced to maintain it.

You say "seems to" which doesn't exactly make me pause and want to reconsider. Forgive my thinkheadedness, but I still don't see why its not possible.

Georgia would be busy keeping its rebellious provinces under control. Armenia would have Azerbaijan to deal with. Neither would have much military equipment because most of their airforces would probably be shot down during the post-Doomsday border fighting with Turkish and NATO forces. Army forces based in the area would largely run out of ammunition and fuel for their heavy equipment, and possibly their small arms, once supply lines had broken down. Also, neither Georgia or Armenia have any native oil, gas, or coal sources (I think), so they would be lacking enough fuel to have any significant military strength. They'd be strong enough to supply the warlords during the war and later fund the insurgencies in the area after the war, but not strong enough for all out war with Turkey, which if nothing else could beat them through sheer numbers.

Georgia has never had a significant relationship with Greece (I think). The Byzantines controlled Georgia once upon a time, but after that, they were controlled by Muslim empires for several centuries until finally conquered by Russia. So now pre-existing relationships there.

Well, I do need some Turks in Thrace to survive, so there will be someone to revolt against Greece in 2015 or so ;)

Caeruleus 01:47, August 3, 2010 (UTC)

I'm not saying it shouldn't be a monarchy - as you wrote it, it makes sense. Just that the officers of the mini-states you have "giving themselves" up to the Sultanate wouldn't do it quite so easily.

What I'm saying is it would be harder to get over the mountains like that as easily as you seem to think, and that you're over-estimating the usefulness of the western areas in like the first decade. It would mean re-writing, but think of it this way - its something pretty well everyone has had to say about it, and you'll hear it again when you ask on the main page for objections to graduation.

Remember, I'm trying to help.

Given the location of armed forces in both Georgia and Armenia, the Armenian forces would be blocked off from Turkey for the most part. Largely, this means only Georgia would have battles going on around it. That area of Armenia is too mountainous for easy fighting, anyway. Armenia is basically barren of such resources, but would be able to get them from Iran easy enough. Georgia itself has some oil/gas reserves - looks like enough to run the military off of, too. The types of battles - and terrain - in the area there would prevent much use of fuel, due to lack of usefulness for vehicles and slow movement. As things go, Armenia and Azer~ are deadlocked - Armenia didn't lose most of its equipment with DD, but Azer~ did - which would mean that after the truce happened, they would be strong enough to make the Sultanate think for a second before trying anything with them. Georgia would be a little weaker militarily, but if you look at Ossetia, they have stalemated Ossetian forces not far from the border. As I discovered in my research, South Ossetia only has around 50,000 people - and without outside support, this would be easy to overcome for the Georgians. As for the other breakaway region, its capital was a naval base, and would get pancaked, killing any state there before it started.

Like I said, that area is mountainous. All you have to do is block the passes with barricades and infantry, preferably with artillery backing them up, and any attacking force, even with artillery and planes of their own, would have trouble breaking through. A combination of the colder weather and terrain in the mountains, really.

Ammunition is harder to get, but can be done and produced most anywhere, given some materials.

Georgia hasn't had a strong relationship with the Greeks since the Byzantines were strong - they've never really been part of it, though they are related peoples - and it was a battleground for a while between them and Persia. Yet, as has been seen in this area a few times, the Greeks are very into irredentism (and LONG ago stuff at that) after DD, and would no doubt be seeking to re-establish Byzantine influence. Heck, one of the options for the Greek flag here was the Byzantine flag, for pete's sake! And, fyi, they were independent for a long time, only being partially subjugated by the Muslims at one point, and breaking free after Persia was weakened, until their annexation by Russia.

Way I figure it, it does no harm one way or the other, and its already listed as being gone. It'll still mean surviving Turks for your rebels. Though, I wish Xeight had gone into more detail, since for the Greeks to be in such control, I'd hate to know what they did to the Turks there.

Lordganon 08:18, August 4, 2010 (UTC)

Like I said before, they assumed it was a temporary creation to obtain stability. That's reason enough for military officers who still think they're in charge.

So how would you change about that? And I'm envisioning only the core area (pre-1990) would be useful. The western and southeastern areas would be reindustrialized by the mid-2000s though. Also, Turkey is mountainous, but it's not that mountainous. They're not crossing the Alps or anything like that. Invaders have passed through Turkey with relative ease throughout history, as would Sultanate forces.

Army equipment would survive. Their air forces would largely be destroyed post-Doomsday or be abandoned. Iran would not sell Armenia oil. They wouldn't sell Georgia oil either. Both are enemies of Azerbaijan, who Iran would support (somewhat), which is enough to prevent the sale of oil. Also, remember, Georgia has 3 breakaway republics and a small population. Combine that with a lack of food, the nuclear strikes, the fallout, and the refugees and you wouldn't be seeing a very strong Georgian state. Abkhazia and Ossetia would probably break away, but definitely Abkhazia. And the independence movements in Georgia weren't urban movements, so the nuclear strike in Abkhazia wouldn't hamper them greatly.

No. Georgia was under Ottoman control for several centuries after the fall of the Byzantine Empire. Persia hadn't controlled Georgia since the Sassinians. And, like I said before, Greece irredentism post-Doomsday is both unrealistic and overstretched. Since it's canon, I accept. However, any further promugation of it is unnecessary and unrealistic. Plus, Georgia, at most, would merely trade arms with Greece, but Greece would have difficulty supplying Georgia because most of the Bosporus was nuked.

Mr. Xeight's article tells you nothing. The probability of Greece actually taking over both sides of the Turkish Straits are incredibly low, so idk how he justifies that. Since he has no detail though, we can assume anything we want about the area. So, I'm assuming, Edrine wasn't nuked ;)

Caeruleus 16:15, August 4, 2010 (UTC)

In Konya, yes - but not the ones who are warlords. By the time Sultanate representatives got there, it would be painfully obvious that it being temporary was not the case.

The Southeast, for sure - that'd only really be war damage. Heck, the Southwest, besides Greek controlled areas, would largely be fairly easy to fix too. However, the Western areas themselves - closer to Thrace and Izmir - would be decades to fix.

The easternmost regions of Anatolia are high mountains. While the highest parts are in Kurdistan by the map, the northeastern ones are high too. The area is characterized by forests at lower altitudes in the valleys, and mountain passes at higher altitudes. The only really easy access is on the Black Sea Coast - and it's a very small area there at all. You're right about central Turkey - but the Eastern regions are just like the alps, likely even worse.

Iran may be Muslim - even the right kind for Azerbaijan - but Azerbaijan is fairly non-religious today, and has been like that for quite some time (some 50% of people there today consider it to be irrelevant, even if they are nominal Muslims). While Iran may be more inclined to support them despite this,but as they are also funding the anti-Soviet campaign (mostly) in Aralia, their intense dislike of the Soviets would mean that they would be willing to supply these countries with oil/gas for resources, or some sort of the same, since the market for both has dropped off greatly globally. It wouldn't be much, but it would be enough to run military equipment for the most part, especially with remaining active reserves held by the Georgians and reserves captured by Armenia fighting with Azerbaijan added to it. All of this is besides the fact that most of Azerbaijan's reserves are off-shore or around Baku, making them destroyed or inaccessible.

Actually, if you read the Georgia and Ossetia articles you'd see that is wrong. Still ~2 million people there in Georgia, fyi. Most of the population of Abkhazia actually lived/lives in that city - kill it, and most are gone. They still declare independence, but can't keep it this way. South Ossetia itself actually has a population of less than 100,000 on its own - even adding North Ossetia to the mix means that they cannot take all of it. But, given the situation in Georgia, they can't take it all back. In the end, they aren't a threat to Georgia, but need to be watched - blocking the passes would do it.

Like I said, without outside support neither nation would have managed OTL what they have managed - the Georgians outnumber them, 4 million or so to no more than three quarters of a million combined. And here, both of the two have had a strike - the main city of Abkhazia is gone, as well as a fifth of North Ossetia in an airfield strike - which combined make the odds still roughly the same.

The movements may have been based in the country in these two areas, but the population of both without outside support kills them.

Georgia was actually composed of a few vassal states to both the Ottomans and Persia on and off from 1516 to the 1730s - which is completely different. Nominally independent, paying a tribute, and constantly fought over between the two, but not part of either state. The Sassinians were actually the last Persian state to completely control the area, but by no means were the last to control some of it.

Greek actions are overrated, true enough, but if they have done all of this stuff, then the rest of Greek activities since DD have to be taken in the same light. I hate to say that, but......

The Bosporus being nuked would cause some damage, sure - but, its more than big enough so that it would still be easily passable. Especially with the Greeks controlling both sides.

I assumed that all on my own, and wrote it as such in the Bulgaria articles - and it was canonized ;)

Lordganon 09:03, August 5, 2010 (UTC)

No. The Sultan had little power in 1984-1990. At that time, the Imperial Council ruled the country like an oligarchy similar to that of pre-Doomsday military regimes in Turkey. So it wouldn't be obvious.

Most of Thrace is under Greece control, so that's their problem. Other parts of northern Turkey would receive fallout and damage from post-Doomsday chaos, but that's it.

The average height of the mountains in eastern Turkey is 1100 to 1900 meters. The average height of the Alps is 2000-4000 meters. So eastern Turkey isn't that bad. The valleys and forests would be fairly easy to pass through and much of the pre-Doomsday inferstructure would still be intact anyway, especially in areas where warlords repaired it. Travel through the area would be somewhat difficult where resistance was, but otherwise it would be rather straight-forward.

Iran would support Armenia over Azerbaijan because of ethnic and religious issues. There are more Azerbaijanis in Iran than there are in Azerbaijan. The Supreme Leader of Iran (both OTL and ATL) is an Azerbaijani-Iranian. Also, they would never support a Christian nation who's engaging in ethnic cleansing over a Muslim nation, especially if the MLA had any say in it.

Idk why I'm still talking about Georgia, but whatever. I think their state would largely collapse post-Doomsday, but then again, I don't really care.

No, they actually don't. It's already been said repeatedly that the Greeces would be overstretched, and if their actions aren't already canonized, I don't have to assume they would occur. So I'm not.

And you can't sail through an area that permeated with nuclear radiation. That'd be like walking through post-Doomsday New York. You'd get radation poisioning.

24.53.131.132 14:35, August 5, 2010 (UTC)

^ That was me btw. I didn't notice that I wasn't logged in. Caeruleus 16:32, August 5, 2010 (UTC)

Summary of "Graduation" Points
The Graduation got too long, too quickly, and Idk what it even says anymore. For my own sanity, here are a summary of all (I think) major points.


 * Turkey sounds too strong, which is out of step with canon.


 * Deemphasize the sheer conquest aspect of the state
 * Further explain the rebuilding/reindustrialization efforts taken.


 * Elaborate on the Hatayan War and Eastern Conquest ( done in other articles)


 * Create more semi-autonomous states within Turkey

If I missed any (Lordganon), please add them.
 * Possibly move up timeline, but probably unnecessar y

Caeruleus 09:32, July 27, 2010 (UTC) Updated Caeruleus 01:18, August 3, 2010 (UTC)

Heh. Sounds like anything I touch, lol. Curse of having a degree in history, I guess.

And please, LG!

Sounds about right - but I'd make some aspects more "dark" in nature too.

Lordganon 10:37, July 28, 2010 (UTC)

By "dark" nature, do you mean the expansionist, almost imperialistic, nature of the state? Or the Islamic nature of the state? Or possible internal repression? Or something else? Caeruleus 21:26, July 28, 2010 (UTC)

Just less positive, I guess. Though a touch of repression might be a plan too.

Lordganon 10:53, July 30, 2010 (UTC)

So, LG, since you're the only one who's still commenting on this. I've added most of the fixes. The elaboration of the wars will be in other articles. Do you have any other objections to its graduation? Caeruleus 01:18, August 3, 2010 (UTC)

Make it less..... strong worded/cheery.

Lordganon 01:22, August 3, 2010 (UTC)

That would require me rewriting half the article, which isn't happening for something as minor as the tone of the article. Think of it as neutral instead. It's not really cheery, imo. It's just not very bleak.

Caeruleus 01:48, August 3, 2010 (UTC)

Same difference.

And it really just means that you have to change some words here and there. Not too bad.

Lordganon 07:32, August 4, 2010 (UTC)

It would be a lot more than a few words lol. I'd have to reword the entire thing, since none of it is doom and gloom. I think it's fine. It clearly states the state and position of Turkey in the region, which shows it in step with canon.

Caeruleus 16:19, August 4, 2010 (UTC)

You're not getting what I mean - just add some more negative description words to some parts, maybe a sentence or two making it look more grim than it is now. Nothing too major.

Lordganon 07:38, August 5, 2010 (UTC)

The population a bit... huge, isn't it? I know it's "only" half the (as of the 2009 cenus) population of Turkey, but according to this, Turkey has a higher population then Socialist Siberia!HAD 19:18, August 9, 2010 (UTC)

Really? I didn't know that, but the current population numbers for Turkey make sense imo. I took the 1983 population minus 10 million for immediate loses from the strikes minus another 10 million post-Doomsday losses minus another 3 million lost during the wars and those in the Greek and Kurdish controllec areas of Turkey then I multipled it by half of Turkey's OTL growth rate. Plus, that's Siberia. No one lives in Siberia anyway. Caeruleus 19:30, August 9, 2010 (UTC)

Template Issue
I must just be bad with these things because they fail to work for me. Can someone add "Bayezid III" as Sultan and "Devlet Bahçeli?" as Prime Minister? Caeruleus 19:59, August 15, 2010 (UTC)
 * Are you using rich text editor? Sometimes it causes issue when you try to edit infoboxes. Mitro 14:46, August 16, 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't think so? But thanks. Caeruleus 17:19, August 16, 2010 (UTC)