Talk:Second Sicily War (1983: Doomsday)

/Archive/

Current Status
This seems like an interesting and probable war. But is this war still going on? Or is it even still going to happen at all? Caeruleus 01:01, July 19, 2010 (UTC)

The originator wanted to make it last a while, so I believe its going on until we decide to end it.Oerwinde 04:13, July 19, 2010 (UTC)

Cool. Is someone going to update it though? Nothing has been added to the war since ATL November. Can this please not be some let's rape Sicily gangbang though? Caeruleus 04:23, July 19, 2010 (UTC)

I agree that it shouldn't rape Sicily. Everyone else seems to think the end result should have Sicily pushed back to only the island. I wanted to keep it with most of Naples, Sardinia, and Malta.

Seeing as this matter might go out of control, the Italian Peninsula Alliance is being put on stand by.--Sunkist- 05:02, July 19, 2010 (UTC)

Considering the issues with Tuscany's canon status, and the Italian Peninsula Alliance being a proposal until that stuff can be dealt with that doesn't mean much.Oerwinde 05:23, July 19, 2010 (UTC)

Oh, I thought the Alliance was about to be canon, what happen...what happend to Tuscany? >:(--Sunkist- 05:32, July 19, 2010 (UTC)

Oh well, seems like San Marino can be on stand by.--Sunkist- 05:47, July 19, 2010 (UTC)

The Sicily article stated that they established a demarcation line with the alliance of the Genoans, Venetians, and Alpine that ran through Pisa and Florence, meaning around half of Tuscany's territory actually belonged to Sicily. Arstarpool has decided to alter canon to fit Tuscany now that he's caretaker of Sicily as well, but I oppose it and think Tuscany should either gain its independece from the 2nd Sicily War, or exist as a sovereign state until the original Sicily invasion, is split by the original invasion, and is unified after the 2nd sicily war. Its all on the Tuscany talk page.Oerwinde 06:15, July 19, 2010 (UTC)

I was revisiting this article and, though this seems to be against general consensus, Sicily probably wouldn't completely lose this war, at least on the Greek front. Sicily is a highly industrialized, militarized state with a larger population than Portugal, Pais del Oro, or Greece. None of them would be able to stage a succesful land invasion of Sicilian territory, except possibly Sardinia. Any land advances made during the war would be made by Alpine/Italian forces and that front would probably stalemate. If the Celtic Alliance and/or Nordic Alliance sent troops, you could see major amphibious assualts against Sicilian territory.

Also, on the naval front, Portugal and Pais del Oro's navies would both be rather small, probably inferior to the Sicilan navy even when combined. Sicily did end up controlling most of pre-Doomsday Italy's navy too. If Sicily implemented sucessful measures to supress political opposition, there would be no substanital rebellions in the Italian mainland south of the Tiber River. Southern Italy is a core area of Sicily and, thanks to the desire for stability after Doomsday, would consider themselves part of Sicily. Historically, just being in a dictatorship alone doesn't spark rebellion and the stability and relative economic prosperity Sicily brought post-Doomsday would be enough to ensure the general loyalty of the vast majority of the population of southern Italy. I see the war ending with the lost of Italian territory south to the Tiber and any Libyan territory they control plus reparations. The other fronts would stalemate, unless there was significant ouside intervention either in support of or against Sicily. Caeruleus 21:55, August 15, 2010 (UTC)

Maybe Sicily could invade Kabylie, and later Kabylie would be free by the Greeks, because Kabylie is a Greek ally and de facto puppet. VENEZUELA 22:01, August 15, 2010 (UTC)


 * Sicily would probably invade Corsica before they would invade Kabylie imo. Though, they would pick their target based on which would involve the intervention of the least other nations. If they were aiming to specifically antagonize Greece, they would probably invade the eastern Greek islands or Libya. Caeruleus 22:44, August 15, 2010 (UTC)

New Stuff
Ok, since MrX has been delegating stuff and I had put some thought into this earlier, I think some stuff needs to be re-written. First of all, the Alpine Confederation isn't going to be an active participant. They still cling to the threads of their neutrality and likely wouldn't participate in an offensive action. Maintaining a defensive stance in northern Italy would be the extent of their participation I think, maybe with some volunteer troops joining with Tuscany and Venice, similar to US citizens volunteering for the Canadian military in WW1 and WW2 before the US got involved. With the Greeks a larger, more organized, and better equipped enemy, the Sicilians will focus on them drawing troops from the north. Tuscany, Venice, and Genoa use the opportunity to push south and liberate Tuscany and San Marino, doing so by November. The initial Greek invasion of Apulia is defeated in November as well, giving the Sicilians the advantage and in December Sicilian troops land in Corfu. Corfu is fully occupied by Sicily by the end of December and an invasion of Greek Libya is planned. Also in December, a Sicilian counterattack in the north begins. Aided by resistance fighters in Tuscany the Sicilians see heavy losses there and in the fighting around San Marino. Essentially we see a stalemate and constant back and forth between the italians and Sicilians until about March, 2010. By March we see Sicily occupying the Greek Ionian islands, and having a foothold in Greek Libya. After much delaying and deliberating the ADC finally agrees to act against Sicily in March. With the declaration of War by the ADC members, Sicily begins an invasion of Corsica. With increased morale from the ADC's declaration of war, the Greeks rally and defeat a Sicilian invasion of mainland Greece. By May the Sicilians have been pushed out of the Ionian islands and pressure has been put on Sicily in the east as well. Portuguese and Pais del Oro ships harrass Sicilian ships between Sicily and Tunisia, allowing for Nordic Union troops to begin an invasion of Tunisia.

With Sicily distracted more by the Greeks rallying in the Ionian islands and the ADC mobilizing, the Italians in the north begin to push south again, fully liberating Tuscany, the Sicilians retreat to New Rome to make their stand, where they will hold the Italian advance until July.

Nordic Union troops occupy Tunisia by June and a joint Nordic/Pais del Oro force begins an invasion to liberate Corsica. Corsica is liberated by the end of June and Nordic and Corsican troops land in Tuscany and make their way to aid the Italians in the siege of New Rome.

Greece has liberated Libya by mid July and begins massing for a second invasion of Apulia. Greek troops capture Ortranto at the beginning of August and begin landing more troops. With Tunisia lost, Rome about to fall, Greek troops massing in Apulia, and ADC naval forces maintaining dominance of the seas, Sicily begins to consider suing for peace.

New Rome falls in September and Greece begins an advance. Sicily sues for peace mid September. A cease fire is called and negotiations begin for a peace treaty. A treaty is signed in October in New Rome. Sicily cedes south Tuscany to the Tuscan Republic and some lands to San Marino. A buffer state is created around former Rome with New Rome as its capital, as the Sicilian investment in the infrastructure over the last 15 years has paved the way for an independent state. The southern tip of Apulia is ceded to the ADC to be administered by Greece. An ADC base will be built near Ortranto. Sicily must pay reparations to Greece and Corsica in order to aid in reconstruction of occupied territory. Greece pushes for a complete disarmament of Sicily or even an unconditional surrender, but is overruled by the ADC who aren't willing to commit further to the war when peace is at hand. The timeline can be expanded, but thats the general idea.Oerwinde 10:11, August 20, 2010 (UTC)

This is a very sensible and plausible plan, Oer. HAD 11:10, August 20, 2010 (UTC)


 * This much better, but I disagree with a few, largely minor, things. Greece would probably never be able to occupy any part of Italy. Sicily is as advanced, equiped, and organized as the Greeks are, but the Sicilians are more numerous which probably prevent any successful Greek invasion. Also, the northern Italian states, without direct Alpine assistance, probably wouldn't intervene, since they were all occupied by the Alpine Confederation. If they did intervene, they wouldn't be that successful because of, once again, their lower population and lesser infrastructure.


 * And, according to your outline of the war, what happens to Tunisa after the war if the Nordic Union occupies it? Would it revert back to Sicily or would they continue to occupy it? Also, I doubt the Nordic Union/Pais del Oro could completely occupy Tunisa. They'd probably only manage to conquer the northern portion, including Tunis. Caeruleus 18:58, August 20, 2010 (UTC)

Sicily, wile in control over a large population, would only have 7-10 million that would be loyal. Remember, most of their territory has been gained through conquest.

And the Celts and Nordics are both stronger than Sicily, anyway, even if the Celts can only send minimal forces due to their commitments in Canada.

The Alpine confederation is not occupying Northern Italy - they are garrisoned there in order to keep it safe, no more.

Greece should be more than able to undertake those actions, eventually - I'd even call the successful landing on the mainland being due to Greek defense commitments elsewhere, opposing Turkey and Macedonia. But, ADC control of the seas would cut off the Sicilian forces, and eventually force their surrender. The morale increase would help, but not do it on its own.

I've always felt that the naval units of the Sicilians were overstated - the largest portion of the Italian Navy would have been at Taranto, and it should have been nuked. It makes no sense for it not to be. This would have destroyed much of the fleet there. The location of the base for the Greeks afterwards sounds good, though I'd make it the whole Province of Lecce myself.

Maybe switch Libya and the Ionians around? Seems to me it would be harder for the Greeks to keep them from occupying all of that rather than the Ionians.

I've no doubt the Nordics could land in Tunisia and take it - its not like the locals would support the Sicilians. As for after the war, why not add it to the Malta LoN zone?

The Corsica part sounds iffy to me - the Nordic Union only has so many troops. Make it a Portuguese and Spanish invasion, maybe.

As for the ability of Greece to invade that area, I consider it possible - Sicily has over-extended itself, and it's time for it to pay the penalty - since they only have so many troops, and they cannot be everywhere at once.

The rest sounds quite possible to me - its a defeat for Sicily, but by no means a crushing one.

Lordganon 21:47, August 20, 2010 (UTC)


 * Fascism and nationalism do wonders to a conquered population. Remember, there were many Poles, Belgians, etc. who volunteered to assist the Third Reich. Not to mention conscription and other forceful measures. Despite the Sicilian dictatorial government, most of the population would still be fairly loyal, or at least not prone to rebellion.


 * The Celts and Nordics wouldn't be that much stronger than the Sicilians, if at all. The Sicilians did do nothing but industrialize and build up their military for 15 years after all.


 * Greece doesn't have the population to undertake those sort of efforts. They have a total population of 4 million. The maximum percentage of their population that could be involved in any military effort is 16%, and that would place extreme stress on their economy and society. So, with a maximum military population of 640,000, divided between three branches (Army, Navy, Air Force), and minus the logistics/non-combat personnel, Greece's total number of infantrymen would only be about 100,000. And, since this probably wouldn't be a total war situation for Greece and they probably aren't stressing themselves that much, a more realistic number is probably 30-50,000. And you'd have to subtract the number of border troops guarding mainland Greece and their North African territories from that. So you'd have a Greece that's stretched to the max and barely able to defend their Libyan territories and Ionian Islands. Their navy could still be very strong, but their army would be too weak and lack the numbers to invade mainland Italy.


 * The Sicilian Navy would still be relatively strong because any surviving Italian/NATO naval units in the central Meditterranean would probably land in southern Italy. Plus, they had 15 years to build up a navy. It could easily have become very powerful in that time. Certainly more powerful than the Portugeuse or Spanish navies.


 * The Tunisians wouldn't support the ADC landing either if they wanted to give administration of Tunisia to another foreign power, the ADC, or the LoN.


 * Portugal and Spain are still trying to reconquer their respective countries, have other territories to defend, and minimal populations. Neither of them would be able to launch a counterinvasion of Corsica. It's either the Nordic Union, the Celtic Alliance, or no one.


 * And, honestly, I'm still questioning whether Sicily would lose. So far, to me at least, it doesn't seem very likely. Caeruleus 23:20, August 20, 2010 (UTC)

It's one country that's barely had contact with the outside world versus almost all of Western Europe and North Africa-what's the competition?
 * Anyway, LordGanon, Caeruleus is just going to try and find a way to destroy anything that contains the words "Greece" and "Mr.Xeight" in it, so since this is my article I give you 100% permission to put all of what you thought of on the article's main page. I still don't get why everyone thinks that a state that spends more money on propaganda than food production could win a war. Where else beside the surviving factories is Sicily going to get all of its weapons? After a certain while they're going to need outside resources and then they'll wither away due to the embargo. Mr.Xeight03:41, August 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, believe it or not, I'm not after you Mr.Xeight. Nor am I particularly driven to destroy Greece. I'm merely reflecting on the facts. Yes, it is true. I do not think Greece is a realistic article, but it is canon, so I'm not trying to change that. However, that does not mean anyone here must continue to twist the facts to further accomadate the current status of Greece in this althist.
 * Also, there is no reason why Sicily wouldn't have much contact with the rest of the world. Just because Europe hates it doesn't mean it would have no friends. South America might be dislike them for their imperialism, but I can certainly see Socialist Siberia and other CSTO states willing to trade and communicate with them. And that "one country" as you put it would have a greater population and agricultural base than Portugal, Spain, and Greece combined. In addition, there is a high likelihood that they are equally industrialized as any country in the ADC. They do control most of pre-Doomsday Italy, which was a top 10 nation economically, industrially, and militarily. Do not underestimate or count out Sicily just because they're a pariah or "mob state."


 * In addition, so far in this article, in my opinion, you, along with many others here, are forgetting the facts. When considering a war, you must consider all variables, such as populations, industrialization, agricultural production, etc. That's all I'm trying to do. I'm sorry if you see this as a personal attack of some sort, but it's not. Caeruleus 04:43, August 21, 2010 (UTC)

So...
So I was just wondering, is there an end in sight? Is there a war even going on at the moment?--Vladivostok 21:59, November 22, 2010 (UTC)

Well...a bunch of articles reference it, but nothing actually appears to have happened with it... Caeruleus 22:42, November 22, 2010 (UTC)

We decided to end the war three-years from last year; just assume it's pretty-average skirmishes in the Ionian and Mediterranean Seas. Mr.Xeight 23:01, November 22, 2010 (UTC)

Does that means its basically a minor war between Sicily and Greece that drags on forever? Or was it a major war with large territorial exchanges? Caeruleus 23:42, November 22, 2010 (UTC)

We'll decide that in two years. Mr.Xeight 23:50, November 22, 2010 (UTC)

The entire war? Or just from here on? Caeruleus 00:04, November 23, 2010 (UTC)

Oh, well then I'll ask you in 2012 then. But keep in mind that if new content is to be created in the area, people would need to know at least the general standing of the area. Perhaps it would be best if there was an update at least every 6 months?--Vladivostok 07:42, November 23, 2010 (UTC)

If someone volunteers to do update the war I'll gladly grant them their request because I can't handle high-school and a handling a war anymore. To any would-be caretakers of the War, I'd like to ask you drop me a message on my talk-page. Oerwinde, above this message outlined the war, and I for one like it, so I might just go with that one, although I don't think I'd allow Sicily to leave this war with Tunisia in tow. Mr.Xeight 05:00, November 24, 2010 (UTC)


 * This is a live event, so shouldn't the caretakers of each nation involved decide what their nation does? Btw, Sicily losing Tunisia is unrealistic. Caeruleus 19:33, November 24, 2010 (UTC)

Great... Too bad nobody asked you about Tunisia though. Mr.Xeight 02:51, November 25, 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm simply saying, keep it realistic. Caeruleus 12:22, November 25, 2010 (UTC)

I am keeping it realistic: Sicily's losing North Africa. Mr.Xeight 20:36, November 25, 2010 (UTC)


 * And that's unrealistic...but we'll debate that when something is written. Caeruleus 01:15, November 26, 2010 (UTC)
 * And why exactly is it unrealistic, Caeruleus? Fedelede 01:33, November 26, 2010 (UTC)

Buddy, you can debate it all you want and we're not going to listen to you, so don't even waste your time. Just as you were damn stubborn about Turkey we'll be damn stubborn about the war. Mr.Xeight 02:49, November 26, 2010 (UTC)


 * Okay. I don't have a problem with that, Mr. Xeight. You have a right to defend your views.


 * Fedelede, I believe its unrealistic because there's no nation with the capabilities to take it. Ultimately, the ADC isn't that powerful.


 * Greece is equally powerful as, or possibly slightly more powerful than, Sicily, but has to worry about hostile nations on its borders (Macedonia and Turkey) so they can't devote their entire military strength to the war or they risk inviting war. That essentially ensures a stalemate between the two.
 * Portugal and Spain are weak nations with very small populations, so they most they'd be able to do is blockade the Straits of Hormex. They also are more focused on the reunification of their respective homelands, so they wouldn't want to waste valuable resources against a nation that doesn't present an immediate threat to them and their strategic goals.
 * Corsica is weak and would probably be conquered by Sicily in the early stages of any war.
 * The Republic of Rif and North Germany are too weak to do anything and have no blue-water navy.
 * Canada is too far away and has its own problems to deal with.
 * The Celtic Alliance is essentially just Ireland with a bit more land, so they wouldn't be particularly powerful. They would probably inherit part of the British Navy, but their low population would restrict their military potential. Also, they are only strong in relative terms, since most of the world was reduced to Third World-status due to Doomsday. So essentially, they would as strong as Sicily, except they would have a larger navy and smaller army. Any participation from them would mainly be opposing their navy in the western Mediterranean, but without aircraft carriers they wouldn't be able to pass through the Straits of Messina or between Sicily and Tunisia due to Sicilian air power.
 * The Nordic Union is the only truly powerful nation in the ADC, but they are composed of Denmark, Norway, and Sweden, which pre-Doomsday and OTL are very peace-minded nations. They probably wouldn't enter the war for at least 6 months while they attempted to negotiate a peace. After that, they probably would, but they may not have the capabilities for waging a long distance war in the Mediterranean. Pre-Doomsday, their navies were focused on defending themselves against a Soviet invasion. Until the first war with Sicily, their post-Doomsday navy would be focused on dominating the Baltic and North Seas. Neither of these naval configurations are the type necessary to wage long rang naval engagements, especially when they would involve amphibious assaults. They probably wouldn't have aircraft carriers either because of the expense and the fact that they don't need them.


 * The above essentially means that any intervention from the ADC would merely be a naval expedition force. With their limited numbers and ability to conduct amphibious assaults, they would really only be able to liberate Corsica. To invade Sardinia or Tunisia is out of the question because of the lack of numbers, long supply lines to northern Europe, and fortified Sicilian defenders. The war could see some minor territorial changes between Greece and Sicily in western Libya, Albania, or the Ionian Islands, which would probably be in Greece's favor. However, Sicily wouldn't lose Tunisia, unless of course the Alpines intervened which would divert enough of Sicily's army to enable a successful ADC invasion of Tunisia. But the Alpines won't intervene unless the Sicilians launch an invasion of northern Italy. Caeruleus 03:53, November 26, 2010 (UTC)

Do you forget that Tunisia is both Muslim and Arab, despises the ultra-Catholic Mafia-rule of Sicily, and get aid and an independent republic with help from Greece and its Algerian allies? You completely forgot Kabylie and probably a few other Algerian states are not too far away and would be eager to gain another Arab-Muslim ally. Greece's isn't letting Sicily gett off easily; case closed, thanks for being so concerned. And you must have missed last year I mentioned Alpinia being a main-ally and opponent to the Sicilians in the war and bullrushing into Northern Italy; they're already invading the north! Mr.Xeight 03:58, November 26, 2010 (UTC)

I guess I should jump in here since I'm the caretaker of Sicily, Celtic Alliance, Spain, North Germany, and Alpinia.

Spain is not as weak as you'd portray it. Neither is North Germany, and the Celtic Alliance is a world power. The Nordic Union isn't. Its a collective, not a country. Spain and Portugal can just keep the western from busy while the IPA and Alpinia invade from the north, leaving Greece to invade from the east. Sicily would be down in 6 months.

But as weird as this might sound, I would reccommend that Sicily not fall completely. Its basically the only major pariah state in 1983: Doomsday in a sea of benevolent nations. Arstar 04:31, November 26, 2010 (UTC)

Mr.Xeight, just because Tunisians would be anti-Sicilian doesn't mean any possible revolt would be sucessful. Also, Kabylie and the other Algerian states are small and weak, so they would provide a second front but it wouldn't be a deal maker. And Alpine intervention doesn't make sense. They intervened initially to prevent further conquest, not be the conquerors themselves.

Arstarpool, how is the Celtic Alliance a world power? It's just Ireland, with some additional territory. They don't have the wealth or reach to be defined as a "world power." However, I want to hear your explanation of this. Also, in regards to North Germany, when it comes to waging wars in the Mediterranean, yes they are weak in that situation. Spain is weak because they have a small population, their largest piece of territory (Western Sahara) is a non-Spanish area with lower levels of industrialization, and this would make them a fairly poor country. They wouldn't be able to afford the type of military needed to fight a major conflict, like this one. Caeruleus 04:59, November 26, 2010 (UTC)

You don't read anything, do you? The Celtic Alliance is the world's 6th Largest economy, and one of the leading military powers of Europe. Its safe to say its the most powerful nation in Europe (Nordic Union is not a nation). And you seem to forget Ireland is a moderately economic powerful nation, too. So adding Scotland and Wales and Brittany could only do good. Also, if the Celtic Alliance has no "reach" than how come it waged a war (and won) in North America? How does it have allies in Massachusetts?

Spain has 3,300,000 people, and if you would have read the history of its predecessors you would see how many Spaniards there actually are in Western Sahara. Its predecessor, Pais del Oro was one of the most powerful countries in Europe/Africa, and after the unification with the Spanish Republic this only could have increased.

And who made Sicily this power in the first place? It's pretty much North Korea all over again, no friends, very little trade, etc.

Than you forget the IPA, which is Tuscany, San Marino, Genoa, and Venice with a bunch of Alpinian weapons. They've been waiting for this day. Especially Tuscany. The day where they liberate southern Tuscany and San Marino stops getting attacked.

Somehow, I have this gut feeling that you're trying to put Turkey and Macedonia into this somehow. Somehow. Somehow. 05:21, November 26, 2010 (UTC)


 * Being the world's sixth largest economy in a world of Third World nations doesn't make you a world power. Also, I highly doubt that they would be the world's sixth largest economy. Argentina, Brazil, Columbia, ANZC, Siberia, Japan, Mexico, Cuba, Venezuela, Chile, the UIP, Greece, Saudi Arabia, and Iran would all have larger economies. While the Celts would probably have a higher GDP per capita than most of the previously listed nations, their overall GDP would be lower. And their economy would be less than $350 billion (using US Dollars at current OTL exchange rates) regardless. That's less than OTL Turkey or South Africa and they don't have major international military capabilities. Also, "reach" is defined by a ability to project power. The Sagueney War was a land war, so it basically just involved acquiring enough cargo ships to get everything over to safe Canadian ports, which isn't exactly difficult. Having allies in Massachusetts is irrelevant to anything I said.


 * Let me put what I'm trying to say in context. The Celtic Alliance would be much poorer than the OTL United Kingdom, in terms of overall GDP. As a result, their military would be much weaker. They wouldn't have any aircraft carriers (which are very expensive), their small population would limit the size of their armed forces to under 300,000 personnel in peace time with up to 1.2 million in a desperate total war situation (which wouldn't happen), and their lack of military bases outside the British Isles means they're essentially restricted to allied ports. The UK, OTL, is no longer considered a world power but they still have a GDP of $2.1 trillion, has 2 small aircraft carriers, and bases around the world. I'm not disputing Celtic dominance in northern Europe, but to be a "world power" they have to be able to reach across the globe. Their domain is limited to the North Atlantic and Western Europe. They're a regional power.


 * According to OTL numbers, the total population of the Western Sahara is roughly 513,000 in 2004 with about 20,000 in 1974. So there are less than 40,000 Spaniards in Western Sahara (not counting any that may have immigrated there). So the majority population there would still be Sahrawi. Also, pre-Doomsday, the Western Sahara was an incredibly poor territory with an economy solely based on agriculture. That leaves about 2.8 million, mainly Spaniards, living in the Canary Islands (which have an agriculture-export based economy OTL), the Balearic Islands (which has very little industry OTL), and Melilla (whose principle industry is fishing). While some things would have changed since Doomsday, Pais del Oro would have been a primarily agrarian economy with limited military potential. The merger with the Spanish Republic would provide Spain's only real industrial center.


 * Sicily isn't North Korea. They're run by the mob, not crazy communists. Remember, the Mafia, at its core, is a business, a brutal and oppressive business, but a business nonetheless. Their goal is to make money. They thrive on trade, though mainly illegal trade. Once they came to power, they would continue this tradition. They would trade with much of the world, though their trade would be restricted once they started coming into conflict with Portugal, Spain, and Greece due to their various blockades of critical sea lanes. If nothing else, you can expect Sicily to be the source of all drugs traded in Europe and North Africa. And they could have friends, especially within the CSTO, the OBN, Turkey, Macedonia, Iran, Pakistan, or other anti-ADC states. And, even if they were like North Korea, North Korea is a highly militarized state with a military that is one of the largest and most professional in the world, so a North Korea-like Sicily would still be very powerful.


 * I don't think the IPA would intervene without Alpine support, due to their lower numbers. But even if they did, Sicily would have obviously constructed elaborate defenses to hold them back or would have launched a northward offensive at the beginning of the war to eliminate them. Like all nations, Sicily wouldn't enter a war it knew it didn't have a good chance of winning (of course that doesn't mean they can't overestimate their abilities).


 * Well, if you've read the Turkey and Macedonia articles, which I assume you have, the Turkey article says they've begun reaching out to Sicily and the Macedonia article says they will support Turkey in any major war. So Macedonian-Turkish intervention is possible down the road, but honestly, I haven't decided what I'm going to do. I was trying to wait until this war was caught up to date before I decided anything, but if it isn't going to be written for 3 years (which doesn't make sense to me) I'll have to decide another way. Caeruleus 07:21, November 26, 2010 (UTC)


 * I would say this, the CA has the Sabre assault ships as well as the CS remembrance under construction and assuming that the Sea Harriers and Harriers had survived it would be possible to operate a limited air group. Therefore the CA would be able to project power in the Mediterranean.Vegas adict 16:29, November 26, 2010 (UTC)


 * Oh really? I didn't know about that. But if its still under construction, it wouldn't be operational until the later stages of the war. When it became operation, it would give them an advantage and give the ADC the possibility of breaking Sicilian air dominance around Tunisia. Thanks for informing us. Caeruleus 17:22, November 26, 2010 (UTC)


 * They could also operate a few Harriers from the Sabres, there VTOL aircraft for a reasonVegas adict 18:50, November 26, 2010 (UTC)


 * I don't understand the argument that the Northern Italian states have little numbers. Northern Italy has nearly 50% of Italy's population, and Central italy is recent conquests and would likely resent Sicilian occupation. If the Sicilians have significant forces in Tunisia and Sardinia to hold them, as well as other operations against Greece, combined with ADC blockades and offensive actions, and a resisting population, liberating Sicily's northern territories would be a priority goal for the IPA, and there would be no better time. I think the plan I outlined above is a decent start, obviously with some tweaks based on new info etc, and stretching out the timeline so its not so rushed, but the outcome is plausible.Oerwinde 09:02, November 26, 2010 (UTC)


 * Venice has a population of 268,000, Tuscany has population of 490,000, Genoa has a population of 1,750,000, and San Marino has a population of 54,271. All together that's a population of 2,562,271. (I used the numbers listed on those individual articles btw.) Since most of the strikes occurred in Northern Italy and there were none in Sicily itself, Sicily would have a population of at least 18-30 million (10 million in Tunisia, 5 million in Sicily, up to 500,000 surviving in Sardinia, plus several million in Central and Southern Italy). They would sustain their population growth from the strong agricultural base in Sicily and southern Italy. Also, if northern Italy has 50% of Italy's population pre-Doomsday, 50% of the population would live in the rest of Italy (which is all controlled by Sicily).


 * However, if Sicily lost the war or the Alpines intervened, the scenario you outlined above (minus the loss of Tunisia or Sardinia) would probably be the most likely scenario (Though I'm still not sure the IPA would enter the war, but they could). There probably would be resistance in recently conquered central Italy (mainly occupied Tuscany). The blockades would hurt, but since Sicily would have probably been more or less blockaded since they announced they would blockade the Suez Canal it would hurt less each year. To remind everyone, my main point was that Sicily wouldn't lose Tunisia or other large chunks of territory. Regardless of the outcome of the war, they will at least keep Tunisia, Sicily, Italy south of Naples, and probably Sardinia. I never said they couldn't lose the war. Caeruleus 13:23, November 26, 2010 (UTC)

Does anybody listen to me? The Alpinians already began their invasion of Northern Italy last year! Besides the seize of Malta that was like the first thing I mentioned. Mr.Xeight 15:39, November 26, 2010 (UTC)


 * Yes, we listen, but we're debating the entire war because barely anything has been written so far and most of what has been written doesn't make sense. Even though you're technically the primary writer of the article, you still have to have a general consensus among the 1983DD community (primarily those caretakers whose nations are involved with the war along with others) to make this war part of canon. Malta wouldn't have been taken because that would involve the LoN and the ANZC, which is a true world power, and ensure Sicily's defeat. Alpine involvement is debatable, but even if they were involved, they wouldn't immediately go on the offensive (even if they did, it wouldn't occur as quickly as is currently written) because they would attempt to find some sort of peace arrangement due to their continuing attachment to the idea of peace before war from pre-Doomsday. Caeruleus 16:09, November 26, 2010 (UTC)
 * Xeight, can you point me to where it says that Greece siezed Malta? There's a bunch of articles that state otherwise, that Malta is an independent republic under LoN supervision that came before the creation of this article.
 * Also, might I point out that the IPA was formed to beat the shit out of Sicily if a war ever emerged. Plus if things get really dire remember there are still a couple nuclear-missile-armed submarines left over.
 * Has anyone thought of dissolving the war from canon? It's just an idea, don't get pissed. But we're arguing more than we're actually working on the war. Arstar 19:15, November 26, 2010 (UTC)
 * Xeight, if you read the Alpine Confed article, they are still trying to hold on to some of their Neutrality. So far they have never been involved in an offensive action, and after their first victory against Sicily, they sued for peace rather than go on the offensive. The AC wouldn't invade Sicily. Give support to the IPA most likely, but they wouldn't commit troops to an offensive action.
 * With the population numbers keep in mind that Tunisia was occupied near the beginning of the war. They can't draw on that for troops because the resentment would be too high. Sardinia I believe is in a similar situation. Their population base is pretty much just Sicily and Southern Italy. As for the population numbers for Northern Italy, the AC controls the most populated areas of Northern Italy but they aren't part of the AC. If the AC doesn't commit to the IPA's liberation mission, there would likely be a large number of volunteers joining up with the IPA forces from Lombardy and such.
 * I actually agree with you Caer that Sicily wouldn't lose the war per se. The way I envisioned the outcome was pretty much the ADC is stretched thin, but pushing on, and Sicily basically just looks at the costs of continuing the war vs ending it and sees no gain in continuing it and sues for peace. Greece is the only one who wants to continue but can't do so without ADC support. The negotiated peace results in the liberation of occupied territories in the north, but recognized sovereignty over Sardinia. Tunisia is still up in the air depending on the arguments. While Sicily is on the losing side of the war, they are still strong enough that the peace isn't entirely one sided and likely negotiate opened trade relations in order to build their economy, as like was said, they are very business minded and increasing their economic growth would be a major goal for the Sicilian government. Losing some rebellious territory in exchange for opening trade would likely be seen as a good trade.Oerwinde 19:44, November 26, 2010 (UTC)
 * I actually agree with you Caer that Sicily wouldn't lose the war per se. The way I envisioned the outcome was pretty much the ADC is stretched thin, but pushing on, and Sicily basically just looks at the costs of continuing the war vs ending it and sees no gain in continuing it and sues for peace. Greece is the only one who wants to continue but can't do so without ADC support. The negotiated peace results in the liberation of occupied territories in the north, but recognized sovereignty over Sardinia. Tunisia is still up in the air depending on the arguments. While Sicily is on the losing side of the war, they are still strong enough that the peace isn't entirely one sided and likely negotiate opened trade relations in order to build their economy, as like was said, they are very business minded and increasing their economic growth would be a major goal for the Sicilian government. Losing some rebellious territory in exchange for opening trade would likely be seen as a good trade.Oerwinde 19:44, November 26, 2010 (UTC)


 * Arstar, there are like two sentences at the bottom of this article that imply Malta may have been taken, but that obviously wouldn't happen. And dissolving it from canon is a possibility, but the war would probably occur in some fashion eventually.


 * Oerwinde, I didn't account for the AC-controlled areas of Italy, but if the Alpines stayed neutral, would they allow volunteers to participate? It depends on how neutral they would want to be. Other than that, I pretty much agree with you, but I still maintain that they wouldn't lose Sicily to the ADC. Caeruleus 20:02, November 26, 2010 (UTC)
 * They aren't alpine citizens and there are no fixed borders so I don't see why they would disallow volunteers. Alpine citizen volunteers are possible for them to deny, though obviously some would slip through, but Italians living in the Alpine occupied areas I don't think they would really bother with.
 * And unless you meant Sicily wouldn't lose to the ADC rather than they wouldn't lose Sicily to the ADC, I agree. The ADC wouldn't take a step on the island, too heavily defended. Any gains would be on mainland italy, Sardinia, or Tunisia. Sardinia and Tunisia due to their recent aquisition, and mainland italy due to the allies in the north allowing easy landing of troops and such. The Greek foothold in Apulia would be near the end of the war and would be the main thing causing Sicily to sue for peace. It wouldn't be much, just a single town, but its enough to start funneling in troops. The Sicilians could push them out, but with massive costs in infrastructure and manpower. Being business minded, too high of a cost, hence suing for peace.Oerwinde 21:56, November 26, 2010 (UTC)
 * The two sentences regarding just say they attacked Greek ships in the area, but the Malta-Lampuesa Corridor has been under LoN supervision, not part of Greece.
 * I think dissolving the war is well, an idea we should take into account. As if the Saguenay War didn't take a massive amount of work to show the presence of new nations, this will be a doozy. But rather than fully dissolve it we should move it to being a recently erupted conflict. In my opinion. Arstar 22:43, November 26, 2010 (UTC)
 * The two sentences regarding just say they attacked Greek ships in the area, but the Malta-Lampuesa Corridor has been under LoN supervision, not part of Greece.
 * I think dissolving the war is well, an idea we should take into account. As if the Saguenay War didn't take a massive amount of work to show the presence of new nations, this will be a doozy. But rather than fully dissolve it we should move it to being a recently erupted conflict. In my opinion. Arstar 22:43, November 26, 2010 (UTC)
 * I think dissolving the war is well, an idea we should take into account. As if the Saguenay War didn't take a massive amount of work to show the presence of new nations, this will be a doozy. But rather than fully dissolve it we should move it to being a recently erupted conflict. In my opinion. Arstar 22:43, November 26, 2010 (UTC)
 * I think dissolving the war is well, an idea we should take into account. As if the Saguenay War didn't take a massive amount of work to show the presence of new nations, this will be a doozy. But rather than fully dissolve it we should move it to being a recently erupted conflict. In my opinion. Arstar 22:43, November 26, 2010 (UTC)

Oerwinde, I meant Sicily would lose to the ADC (barring some sort of game changer), but would only lose minor amounts of territory.

Arstar, when would you have it starting then? In 2010-2011 maybe? Also, if we change the date of the war, can we please change the cause of the war? The current one is just plain boring, not to mention a horrible PR tactic. Caeruleus 00:10, November 27, 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, the new year would be a good start point. Arstar 00:46, November 27, 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, I suppose that's a possibility. Although I'm not completely against keeping the starting date as is. Out of the four of us debating atm, 3 of us have accepted a minor Sicilian defeat after a long, drawn out war. So there can't be that much debate remaining, unless of course other people chime in (which would be welcome). Caeruleus 00:57, November 27, 2010 (UTC)

Fuck this war; I've said it twice now, I'll be just deleting this war; Sicily can go on being run by antisocial wankers then and persecute the Arabs in Tunisia. Fun... Mr.Xeight 01:42, November 27, 2010 (UTC)

Let me start off by saying that as far as I'm concerned, this whole thing is an affair of those whose nation-articles are involved. While everyone else has the right to say their opinion, I think that things are getting blown out of proportion here by others working towards their own ends.

And, my agreement with Oer's original gameplan still stands (though I admit to disagreeing with the length put forward by Xeight)

Malta is independent, though hosting a Spanish garrison and a full ANZC fleet.

Canon dictates that Sicily possesses a navy that lost four ships from its fleet in an engagement with the Greeks. From this, I interpret that the Greek navy must be around equal in strength.

The basic result is that the ADC dominates the seas, outside of a few areas, after a couple months of war.

And given how it started - Sicilian attacks on Greek merchant shipping - that none of you have even really thought of what the ANZC fleet at Malta will do beyond dismissing it. Simply put, it would not be pleasant. While direct intervention would be illogical, they would fulfill their objective of ensuring safe passage for neutral vessels in and around Malta. And the only way to manage this would be to prevent the Sicilians from moving in the region. Add in a rebellion in Tunisia - anyone who thinks that they would be loyal is a touch off their rocker (that'd be like saying the Poles were loyal to the Nazis!)- and it would be easily occupied.

Given the extensive damage done to Sardinia by nukes(look at the Italy map - the population would be tiny now), I honestly doubt that there is more than a couple thousand troops there belonging to Sicily. Spanish, Portuguese, and Corsican troops should be able to take it fairly easily. Call it within a couple months.

Of course, the Sicilians will have a few months where they can launch invasions, etc. This would be when the Ionians and Libya are attacked, in an effort to gain a profitable and quick peace. With these being fought off - bitter combat, too - it becomes less profitable, even with the loss of Tunisia and Sardinia, which to be honest would only have been good to drain economically anyway (and I kinda doubt that one, myself - look at old colonies for that one, lol!).

The Libya force would be cut off from sea support pretty easily. While they would have the land route from Tunisia to reinforce, that's only good to a point. Eventually, there'd be no supplies to send there either, and by that point the Nordics and Celts, with a little North German and Rif backing, would arrive and secure it. This'd be within 6 months or so.

A small Greek attack on Italy in the first few months gets beaten off - they've long had troops there for that reason. IPA forces, with Alpine support, take the opportunity given them by a Sicilian pullout of troops from that front to fight elsewhere (the Ionian invasion) to launch an counteroffensive of their own. As already discussed, this would likely only get to Rome or so at most (the guys in the south are very likely to support the Sicilians to some degree), and with it being a delicate situation, where the Sicilians will likely launch a counter-attack eventually. Past this, the Sicilians are too strong to force any further. The same goes for their position on Sicily - there'd be no way to crack that little nut. Remember, the IPA has been arming for payback for a long time.

The Sicilians would make some headway in the islands - despite their naval weakness, they could still easily get supplies over at night (ala~ Japanese in the Solomon Islands during WWII) - but eventually the Italian attack would mean they would need to get out of dodge, in order to secure their own territories. This would take longer - more like 9 months to a year - but the result would be a retreat. Troop numbers would be about the same, with a slight Sicilian advantage.

A Greek counterattack following this, using Greek troops freed up by the arrival of other troops in Thrace to relive them in October 2010, would assault the province of Lecce, on the boot of Italy, sometime in November, securing most of it (remember the long-standing Greek interest in that area!). While only successful in taking the "tip of the boot," it would be the the proverbial straw, convincing the Sicilians that it was no long worth pursuing any further (the mafia would, given position with the IPA, think that great chances for territorial gains - i.e. San Marino and Tuscany in Italy, and maybe more - would remain until this point). They then sue for peace, a more or less a status quo.

Canada stays out of the whole affair, for obvious reasons. Half the Celtic forces only get there late for the same reasons.

Air battles would be effectively a draw until September 2010 or so at earliest, when Celtic and Nordic airplanes arrive.

Chalk the peace in December up to Nordic pressures for peace, considering their more anti-war nature, despite the position of power.

October 10th 2009, to sometime in December 2010. Simple.

Tunisia made into a LoN mandate, and given to the Spanish and Rif to manage. Corsica gets Sardinia in the same manner, with the IPA helping them (mostly Genoa and Venice, I'm sure). And then the Greeks have Lecce province under the LoN.

Lordganon 08:48, November 27, 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, I must say, that's more realistic than the previous scenarios presented that involve the loss of Tunisia, but I still disagree on a few points. Btw, here's me exercising my right to chime in ;)


 * 1. Although the Greek Navy would be roughly equal to the Sicilian Navy, that doesn't mean the ADC would achieve immediate domination of the seas. The Portuguese and Spanish Navies are very weak since most of their ships originate from pre-Doomsday and have since fallen into disrepair and are now unusable. They would be able to blockade the Straits of Hormez and defend the Balearic Islands, but that's about it. The Corsican Navy would be virtually nonexistent and Corsica would be the first thing conquered in any ADC-Sicily War.


 * 2. The ANZC fleet would be there under LoN mandate to protect the corridor for neutral shipping. They would be under no obligation to protect belligerents, nor would they want to. So basically, the ANZC/LoN would say to everyone "If you attack neutrals, we'll bomb you." And as long as everyone stayed in line, they would sit quietly at Malta.


 * 3. A Tunisian rebellion probably would occur, but its success is debatable. Also, the situation under which Tunisia was conquered was never clarified. If they did it at the behest of a major Tunisian crime organization (the Tunisian equivalent of the Mafia) for example, that Tunisian mafia would be in control of Tunisia and rebellion would be less likely or at least less dangerous to Sicily. If it was just a blatant conquest of a stable nation, the rebellion would obviously be more intense.


 * 4. As stated previously, the Alpines wouldn't directly intervene unless Sicily attacked the IPA. The IPA would have the assistance of Italian volunteers under Alpine occupation. Nonetheless, the IPA would make some advances. Tuscany would probably be liberated.


 * 5. Sicily would rule the skies for essentially the entire war. The ADC doesn't have enough bases in the area to project their power (as I sort of explained above). And since no Celtic or Nordic reinforcements would be able to reach Greece, their only bases would be in the Balearic Islands (and Corsica once liberated), which would only give them the advantage on that front.


 * 6. The LoN is not an imperialist organization. If Sicily lost the territories you stated they would, Sardinia and Tunisia would be given independence because they were independent before the war. The SAC, Siberia, Nordic Union, and ANZC (not to mention many other nations in the LoN) would not allow various ADC nations to gain these territories as colonies.


 * Caeruleus 15:51, November 27, 2010 (UTC)