Talk:1983: Doomsday

Before you start editing, please read the Editorial Guidelines.

Discussion Archives: | Page 1 | Page 2 | Page 3 | Page 4 | Page 5 | Page 6 |

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

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

Religion
Hi all, don't contribute alot to discussions...hence I make a lot of mistakes. I've noticed that religion has not been a point of discussion in the TL and wondered what people thought? I've posted a proposal on the and Catholic Church, I'll also expand on a religious stub for the, but would really like to see something on other christians, buddhism, Islam and indigenous religions of Australia 22 September 200 9 15:38 Mjdoch

I brought up religion and foreign embassies a month or so ago, no one focused on it much. Mr.Xeight 17:22, September 27, 2009 (UTC)

I would see a rise in atheism in the areas less affected, and a rise in religion in those more affected. From a "If there was a god he wouldn't let this happen" kind of opinion, but in the more affected areas, religion is all the people would have left.--Oerwinde 20:33, September 27, 2009 (UTC)

Just to remind folks that unhelpful comments such as the one listed under the Celtic Alliance and Europe really are not part of the TL rules..."Today, it offers hope and social welfare that contrasts the nihilism of the few remaining atheist circles". Sorry but if people happen to be athiest so what, it is not our place to judge peoples moral or social parameters. We must be mindful that christians fire atomic bombs too. Would fellow users be ok if this was removed? Mjdoch 30 September 2009, 16:11 (GMT)
 * IMO I think the events of Doomsday might actually weaken the numbers of athiests in the post-Doomsday world. Like the old saying goes "there are no athiests in foxholes" and I guess the Earth just became one big foxhole for the survivors of Doomsday.  Sure people are going to ask "how could God allow this to happen" but the need to survive will cause people to turn to things to keep them going more then just food or shelter can, such as faith in God.  That being said I agree that the line you quoted comes off as too POV.  It almost sounds like an advertisement for the Catholic church.  Mitro 17:19, September 30, 2009 (UTC)

Movies
whith Hollywood/Vinewood gone how will the film industry develop--Owen1983 16:03, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Please try to follow the right format when adding new topics. That being said, Australian and South American movies would come to dominate the world film market but it would be a while after DD before they reach a world wide market.  Mitro 16:45, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * What, no Bollywood? Louisiannan 22:44, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

I think India needs to focus more on its mutinous warlords first. Mr.Xeight 00:29, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Whatever dude, but Bollywood would still exist, I am not a fan though. Despite the warlords, it'll be there, I am Indian so I know more about this stuff. Obviously, Bollywood will emerge as the world leader in film industry, it is next to Hollywood anyways. MC Prank 16:40, September 3, 2009 (UTC)
 * You know India *here*, Prank. You don't necessarily know what Xi'Reney and the others have understood India to be following Doomsday.  I think that Mr. Xeight may be closer to the truth of the matter -- Bollywood as it is today may be some ways off yet. Louisiannan 17:34, September 3, 2009 (UTC)
 * Louis is right. It has only been since 2003 that  has received a stable government (the UIP) in the post-Doomsday world, but that was shortlived and the rump UIP has only tenous control at best.  Such an atmosphere is not conducive to a major movie industry in any country.
 * Furthermore India's nuclear weapons are still unaccounted for in this TL. Which warlords have them?  Have they ever used them?  Could Bombay/Mumbai being a radioactice crater, a target of a Delhi warlord?  I still think any movie industry will be farther south in South America or Australia/New Zealand.  Both are part of the "first world" in this TL and thus have more time and money to spend on entertainment then war-torn (potentially radioactive) India.  Mitro 18:09, September 3, 2009 (UTC)

Yeah alright, whatever, but man I didnt think that this idea of India being divided into warlordships and breakaway states is plausible. First of all, in 1983, one party, Congress ruled almost all the states, i.e. they won elections in all the states. Though the constituion of India, made it more or less a federal country but before 1990s, India was practically a unitary state. The Central Govt. (i.e.Federal Govt) had strict control over the states. Moreover, guess what, Indira Gandhi, the most authoritarian & pro-unitary Prime Minister the country ever had, was in office on 26 Sept. 1983. Anyways, now that you have done this, I'm telling you, warlords cant have nukes. There are no nukes assembled, the nuclear core is kept separate and the fission device separate. No single warlord can have it alone. There would be, at most a dirty bomb. Although if warlords collaborated, they could have proper nukes. MC Prank 15:50, September 4, 2009 (UTC)
 * The early 1980s wasn’t exactly a period of peaceful unity for India. There was the rise of insurgents in Punjab; violence in Assam between native villagers, refugees from Bangladesh and other Indians; tensions with the Sikhs after Operation Bluestar; abuse of civil liberties; and hell Indira Gandhi would be assassinated by her own Sikh bodyguards in 1984 touching off the death of over 3000 Sikhs.


 * Factor in the current events and it is not exactly that hard to believe that India would collapse after Doomsday. Though not directly targeted, they would suffer all the effects of the radiation clouds engulfing the northern hemisphere.  Radiation poisoning would kill many people and seriously effect the food production of India leading to famine and violence as people tried to get food to feed their families.  The loss of the large economies of the US, Europe, USSR, China and Japan would also cause India’s economy to take a nose dive and lead a significant percentage of the population being unemployed.  It wouldn’t be difficult to predict that some secessionists or power-hungry generals would take the opportunity to assert some control over their specific areas.


 * Maybe you are correct about India’s nuclear weapons (I will have to look it up), but it doesn’t seem like it would be difficult to get the specific parts and rebuild the weapon. Mitro 16:10, September 4, 2009 (UTC)

It is not maybe, I am correct about India's nukes, and as for the Indian ballistic missiles, they were not fully developed yet. 2-3 or more warlords would have to collaborate together could have proper nukes though. Getting nuclear weapons wont be very difficult, but it wont be easy either. Also, the Emergency was imposed in 1977 not in 1983. Its Operation Bluestar that takes place in 1983 MC Prank 05:06, September 5, 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm assuming the Indian air force had bombers that could also deliver the weapons. Also all of the events I refereed to happened roughly between 1980 and 1984 and are meant to show that the Indian political scene was unstable enough during the early 80s that the political, economic, and environmental implications of Doomsday could splinter the country.  I never mentioned the Emergency which lasted from 1975 to 1977, I'm not sure why you brought it up though I apologize if I accidentally referred to something that happened back then.  Blue Star also took place in June 1984, not in 1983.  Mitro 21:27, September 7, 2009 (UTC)

Okay I'm confused. How did a discussion of the Post-Doomsday film idustry turn to the totally unrelated subject of nuclear weaponry? Can we go back to discussing what the Post-Doomsday filmakers would put on the silver screen. Obviously not anything like The Terminator, because the film's future is too much like this timeline's present. --Yankovic270 22:09, September 13, 2009 (UTC)

Well, there could be both optimistic & pessimistic alternate history films, one with a failure in the Cuban Missile Crisis and one in which DD never happened. Talking about Sci-Fi, what about some movies with an A.I. force trying to take on the dismantled and nuclear war-torn humanity. -- MC Prank 14:07, September 18, 2009 (UTC)


 * Alternate history films aren't that popular, really. I don't see why they'd become popular in this timeline. Superhero films, however, would probably exist. Romances will probably always exist. --DarthEinstein 16:02, September 18, 2009 (UTC)

How about a sci-fi film where a guy fom "our" universe got transported to the 1983: Doomsday universe, where he has to stop an evil plot orchestrated by a fictional group of Neo-Nazis in Argentina to take over and establish a "fourth reich" in South America. The Neo-Nazi leader could be based on Josef Mengele, Klaus Barbie or any of the other Nazis who escaped to South America. Or He could be an entirely fictional character like Arnold Toht from Indiana Jones or Deathshead from the Wolfenstein video games. When I say "like", I mean "similar to" and not completely copying. --Yankovic270 20:04, September 19, 2009 (UTC)

Hello? Is anyone there? Anyone? --Yankovic270 12:55, September 23, 2009 (UTC)


 * About your idea above: I would try to stay away from anything involving "our" universe. The rest of it looks fine, though, because in movies the most crazy things can happen. --DarthEinstein 13:09, September 23, 2009 (UTC)

By "our", I mean what the people in the 1983: Doomsday universe imagine our universe to be. Either that or the guy is from a near to far distant future of the Doomsday timeline. When the effects of Doomsday (ie Radiation) have finally vanished. --Yankovic270 16:33, September 23, 2009 (UTC)

And my nation of Virginia would likely produce a propaganda film describing its rise to power, and how "terrible" things were before they "rescued" Virginia. --Yankovic270 14:35, October 10, 2009 (UTC)

"Dust" of USA
In 1983 the US had a population of around 230,000,000 and had maybe thousands of nuclears weapons rain down from the sky onto their hapless soil. How big was the attack? How many people died? How many survived 1983? In order for a natural evolution of the population of the bombed-out remains of the US, how many people should survive and how many people should each splinter-nation have in its boundaries? Am I correct when I say Superior has 6,000,000 citizens? What about the other nations within the former United States? You can count it, I however question it.Fero 04:00, 22 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Superior has that many citizens specifically because it receives refugees from both the US and Canada. At the same time, abortion has been discouraged in recent years in the Republic, resulting in a nice baby boom. Lahbas 13:24, 22 August 2009 (UTC)


 * we have a lot of "countries" in the Canada-USA frontier, some of them are weird, but i think we need a place to the arround 6 millions peoples ive in southwest of USA, Gulf of Mexico states, "black states" (i must not use the N word because is nasty in english), what all that people do where they go, where they stay, what is not destroyed in that zone CSA region need a living town--Fero 02:21, 24 August 2009 (UTC)


 * That's true, though I don't know much about the region. Though, maybe there could be a nation called "Aztlan", named after the mythological Aztec homeland. Or maybe an Apache country. DarthEinstein 02:33, 24 August 2009 (UTC)


 * we dont need aztlan, we have not nuked Mexico, i am talking about Texas, Florida an the land betwine them, there is nothing aztec--Fero 03:00, 24 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, race issues will certainly heat up again in the South, after having only been settled in the last couple of years, and there will likely be “white” and “black” nations dotting the landscape, no one big nation like there is in the North. Texas is a wasteland, having been a major population center, as well as being a supplier of US oil. Florida would suffer a similar fate, but mostly on the southern tip. The Deep South is what would largely escaped unscathed, except for major cities like Birmingham and Atlanta. I’ve largely finished Superior, so I may take up a drafting of the region sometime this week and present a format. Lahbas 03:17, 24 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I think groups like the Klan would be easily able to sieze power in the unaffected parts of the South. I see a considerable portion of western Texas not even being touched by nukes and also parts of New Mexico and Arizona. A fascist state in this part is very much plausible. What about the White Republic of America or something like that? User_talk:MC_Prank


 * I think Texas will be largely on its own, though, given that to get to the more "ripe" prospects to the west there are large deserts, whereas there's much arable and usable land to the north and east that will likely draw Texan attention more than the blasted deserts of the west.


 * Speaking of which...whoo-boy, what a mess Phoenix and Santa Fe would be! Louisiannan 18:42, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

What if we have a citystate in the midwest lead by a former criminal? And could have people used the underground facilities of Alcatraz as a bomb shelter? If so I can see a small amount of people scratching out a primitive existance on the island. They could use Peruvian terrace farming techinques and hardy crop varieties. --Yankovic270 21:22, September 19, 2009 (UTC)

And since Alcatraz Island has had tours since it was closed 20 years pre-DD, it is plausible that the people surviving are tourists who were allready on the island. Also another factor that makes it plausible as a impromptu bomb shelter is the network of tunnels that the island hosts. The Civil War fort under the prison could be turned into a bomb shelter. And potentially the wind patterns could have blown the fallout/radiation away from the island. --Yankovic270 21:41, September 19, 2009 (UTC)

Is everyone speechless because of how good the idea is? --Yankovic270 20:13, September 23, 2009 (UTC)


 * Hmmm... a nation of tourists on Alcatraz? I kind of like the idea. Also, if you want to get the attention of people, try making proposal pages for these ideas. --DarthEinstein 21:53, September 23, 2009 (UTC)

I'll create it with the way I usually do it. By inserting it on the Domsday Nation page. And the creating it after. --Yankovic270 14:11, September 24, 2009 (UTC)
 * I know its not entirely accurate, but http://www.carloslabs.com/node/20 shows that a bomb targeted on San Fran, would leave Alcatraz in the shock zone of the bomb destroying any quake proof buildings on the island.(based on the Ivy Mike 10.5 mt bomb simulation, as the common bombs during the cold war were 7-10 mt.)--Oerwinde 08:01, September 28, 2009 (UTC)

And I might place the Republic of Lincoln in Lincoln, Nebraska. Was there any atomic impacts near the city/town? --Yankovic270 13:44, September 25, 2009 (UTC)
 * Looks like Omaha would likely be the closest target.--Oerwinde 17:10, September 27, 2009 (UTC)

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

World Population
I think the total world population for this timeline is way to low. Even in the worst situation I found that the population must be higher. Africa alone has a higher population then the world in this timeline. Assuming only one sixth of the people in Asia survive (which is unrealisticly low) that would give us about 500 million people. Add on South America (about 300 Million) and we have 800 million. If this is true then there would be no one left in North America, Africa, Europe or Oceania.

Obviously that's not the situation. I'm not sure what the total world population would be, but I think it would have to be more than 2 Billion. Ether way wee need to change what we have now.--ShutUpNavi 19:16, September 3, 2009 (UTC)

U agree on 2 billion--Owen83 19:10, September 4, 2009 (UTC)

You have to remember that India was spared nuclear strikes. India's population as of 1983 was 730 million. 800million survivors would mean only 70 million survived outside India.--Oerwinde 08:08, September 14, 2009 (UTC)

Even in India, people would die due to the nuclear fallout from the strikes on China MC Prank 16:54, September 17, 2009 (UTC)
 * I figured the Himalayas would keep most of the fallout out of India. Most of it would get blown onto Vietnam and Cambodia. Even if some of it does hit india, I don't see more than 200 million dying in india, which would still lead 5/8 of the world population in India. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing. Indian empire anyone?--Oerwinde 18:35, September 14, 2009 (UTC)


 * The fallout depends on the size of the bombs that struck. There would be effects on India, but unless there were direct hits, I'll bet that most Indians didn't get any more radiation than a chest x-ray, if that. Louisiannan 22:54, September 14, 2009 (UTC)


 * Checking some maps of wind patterns in the pacific, it seems that during the colder times of the year, the coastal winds around china would blow down towards indonesia, carrying the fallout more towards there and the phillipines, during warmer times of year it would blow northern, carrying it more towards Korea and Japan.--Oerwinde 08:14, September 15, 2009 (UTC)


 * Another reduction of populations would be due to the possible failure of the Monsoons(due to the climate chaos after the nuclear summer)and the following famines, small scale battles for food resources and disease that would happen due to the collapse of the medical systems in India. this could kill tens of millions possibly?--Smoggy80 16:34, October 2, 2009 (UTC)
 * Its still not enough to explain the magnitude of deaths. 800 million is just not a realistic number. In 1983, India and Africa, two regions that were relatively untouched, had a combined population of around 1.2 billion. Modern day is over 2 billion. If you take into account South America's stated population of 350 million, and don't count any population outside of only India and Africa, it means nearly 1.5 billion people die in Africa and India alone. Once the rest of the world is taken into account, that number jumps a bit more. 800 million is not a realistic population number. Considering the damage done, and comparing to OTL population of over 6 billion, I think around 2 billion is a fair number. That would put 3/4 of the world population in India, Africa, and South America, which seems about right to me.--Oerwinde 18:10, October 2, 2009 (UTC)

Alright here's my view on what the world population would be.

Europe-Likely suffered the worse as it saw a large amount of Nukes used over a small amount of space. Many small nations like Holland and Belgium have been almost completely wiped off the map. Even "Well off" countries like the Celtic Alliance and the Nordic Nations suffered millions of deaths. Also take into account that there might have been large scale immigration from here. I am not an expert on climate, but given how northern the European countries are any change in climate could be devastating. A total European population of only 60 million seems likely.

North America-The US, Cuba, and Canada are gone dropping the continental population by over 300 million. Still Central America and the Caribbean would retain most of there population leaving the continent at around 200 million people.
 * My only problem with this is that Mexico, Central America and the Caribbean (minus Cuba) don't equal even 200 million today. I realize that you are only listing estimates, but considering the climate changes and refugee problem, there populations should have shrunk (at least for  since they are going to have a lot of American refugees).  Plus places like  have been going through and on going civil that would no doubt effect their population.  Mitro 22:15, September 28, 2009 (UTC)

South America-Likely handled the war the best, the population would be around OLT’s 300 million.

Africa-the situation would have been horrible here, but then again it’s not much better OTL. Given increased warfare and lack of foreign aid I can see most African countries loosing around 1 to 3 million people each. Add in decreased birth rates and Africa has about 900 million people left.

Asia-Over half of China is gone, as well as parts of Japan. Still the Indian sub-continent would retain most of its population, even in the event of political collapse, wars, and climate change. Southeast Asia's would drop by a few million thanks to damage spilling over from China. The Middle East and Central Asia remain big question marks as we can’t seem to figure out if they blew up, collapsed, were taken over, or are perfectly fine. Add in the variables and a population would be somewhat over 2 billion.

Oceania-Even if the population increased it would still be too small to really count.

So this would give us a total world population of (and this is only a very rough estimate) closer to three and a half Billion.--ShutUpNavi 13:46, September 28, 2009 (UTC)

Korea
According to the nukes map Korea was not nuked at all! I know the map isn't supposed to be 100% accurate, but I'm just asking whether there was a reason for this, or just an oversight. If the latter we have to figure it out, if the former... we still have to figure it out. --DarthEinstein 02:27, September 13, 2009 (UTC)

Yeah. I totally agree with you on that Darth. There should be a nation in this impact-free zone. Either it be that Korean gov't in exile on Jeju-do or a (reluctant) union of North and South Korea done for survival's sake rather than anything else. The Federation/Republic of Korea. --Yankovic270 00:09, September 15, 2009 (UTC)


 * Probably it would be best to track the history step by step. Both China and the US were out of commission quite quickly, so just after Doomsday would seem the perfect opportunity for either the North or the South to launch an all-out attack on the other side.  Benkarnell 21:45, October 9, 2009 (UTC)

Proposition for the Condition of Asia


East Asia


 * China has reentered the Warlord era, though it has centralized into several major states since its fall in 1983. Republic of China, the only democratically elected government among the Chinese states, is largely recognized as the PRC's successor. East Turkestan, Tibet, and the Socialist Republic of Maio are fighting for independence, while Manchuria is fighting with the Soviet Socialist Republic of Siberia for control of Manchuria. Mongolia has also moved in a taken parts of Inner Mongolia. A remnant of the South Korean government still exists on the island of Jeju-do, while the Ryuku Islands follow a path of independence as a result from being cut-off from Japan.

Middle East


 * Probably the most confusing situation. Israel somewhat expanded into the Sinai, but largely remained in its current territory. Iraq and Iran largely fell apart, Iran from the loss of central cities to Soviet Nuclear weapons, Iraq to the loss of the international oil market. Kurdistan, Assyria, the Socialist Republic of Iraq, and the Islamic Republic of Iraq would be formed in the aftermath. Syria would maintain itself, moving into Lebanon, the Greek Christians taking the remnant and becoming members of the Greek Confederation. The Caliphate of Mecca would be formed along the Red Sea coast, while Palestinian refugees would from the states of Palestine on the East Bank of the Jordan, which would continue to fund terrorism in Israel proper. The League of Nations would also intervene in the area, occupying the location of the former Saudi oil refineries, in order to build up reserves. Baluchistan also has declared independence, and is waging an insurgency campaign against Pakistan.
 * Iran defeated by soviet weapons? why not israeli?Tristanbreiker 17:14, September 24, 2009 (UTC)

Caucasus


 * There really is no explanation needed here. Most ethnic groups were able to earn their independence following the collapse of the central authority from Moscow. The only problem however was that constant warfare began throughout the region as a result. The only area of difficulty is determining the ethnic layout following the nuclear destruction of cities within the region.

Central Asia


 * Again, same problem. Though this is largely the ethnic layout, there is difficulty to determine the effects of the nuclear war upon distribution of the various groups. On a side-note, Tajikistan is split in two by Hazara, while the remainder of land in Afghanistan has since been occupied by the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.

Other Areas of Note

- Iran - Was not sure what the aftermath government would look like with the loss of central authority, though it could be assumed the situation would devolve into something like China.

- Burma - Considering how many independence movements there are, there could be as many as 100 different countries making up the area.

- Turkey - Was not sure how large Turkey would be, due to the loss of many major cities. Likely would include Anatolia, but just wasn't able to draw a decent, in my mind, realistic border.

- Central China - Again, not sure what would be there. Probably two additional warlord states, but I leave that up to you guys.

- Indochina - Situation could very much become like that of China, especially if Hanoi and Saigon are hit by nuclear weapons. Vietnamese troops were stationed in both Laos and Cambodia, so if the situation did devolve, they would cease to exist as independent states.

Tell me what you think. Lahbas 21:46, September 14, 2009 (UTC)

All right to respond to some of your ideas.


 * East Asia. I like what you have going here a lot. Only thing is that Mongolia would be part of Siberia, though Outer Mongolia might now be part of it.
 * Middle East. Not bad ideas, but I don’t know if I agree with the idea of it being nuked (see what I rote in the M.E section below).
 * Caucasus. I think that is right on the money, nothing to argue with.
 * Central Asia. Can you stay away from here for a little while? I have recently been thinking about re doing the Siberia article to include some of these areas. Other wise I have no problems.
 * Indochina. Even in the most pessimistic situation I can’t see the countries here being nuked by anyone, though fallout and refugees from China however would pose a serious problem. Perhaps South Vietnam becomes independent again because of this.--ShutUpNavi 23:45, September 15, 2009 (UTC)

The Cambodians could rebuild and resettle the old Khemer capitol of Angkor. --Yankovic270 01:35, September 17, 2009 (UTC)


 * We've nixed "rebuilding the ruins" in other areas before, since there's no real reason for it to happen - other than tickling the fancies of people who enjoy thinking about history ;-). In general I like your scheme, since it gives us a place from which we can work.  The problem, of course, with creating dozns of countries is that it could potentially limit somebody else with a great idea.  Maybe create an Asia page based on your ideas, and label it as tentative until people want to get involved.  Generally I think your map fits the TL - it avoids illogical superpowers, but doesn't pretend that the entire continent is empty.  Benkarnell 21:58, October 9, 2009 (UTC)

Hello
the editorial giudelines said to introduce yourself here, so so i am! I'm HAD. i didn't have much time to create an account, hence the Rubbish name. i'm new at this, so i apoligize if i have broken any rules or anything!
 * Welcome. I'm looking forward to working with you.  If you have any questions feel free to leave a message on my talk page.  Mitro 13:48, September 17, 2009 (UTC)

Stalled Proposals
The proposal category is starting to get very crowded. Though I'm not asking people to stop creating new proposals, if you do get the opportunity please try to complete any unfinished proposals you may have and nominate them for graduation. If you don't think you can continue working on any of your old proposals then please say so and maybe another editor can pick up the slack and finish it. Hopefully we can shrink both the proposal category and this talk page. Mitro 16:55, September 22, 2009 (UTC)

African Expedition Force
This is an idea that I've had for some time. I had the idea of a group of Masree, Greeks, and Libyans to go through the heart of Africa, to remake contact with nations who haven't seen foreigners since 1983. I was thinking they might start in southern-Egypt and work their way all the way to Cape Town. As for the route, they could go straight down, or around maybe going west to Algeria, Pais del Oro, skirt around the Sahara, down to Kinshasa-Brazazaville, and so forth to Cape Town, going into the east African coast, to Somalia (how friendly would it be?) and right back to Alexandria. What do you guys think? Mr.Xeight 00:43, September 23, 2009 (UTC)


 * A perilous journey, but one that's definitely overdue! Probably most of Africa has kept in touch with foreigners (people from nearby regions), but not with the international community that has formed.  This sounds like a job for the Greek, Libyan and (What's Masree, please?) branches of the WCRB, which could provide funds and technology from a wider area than the individual governments.  Benkarnell 22:01, October 9, 2009 (UTC)

Return
I'm back from a long time away. Whaddidimiss? Benkarnell 13:13, September 26, 2009 (UTC)
 * Welcome back. We got a lot of new faces, a lot of new articles and the war in Saguenay is still going on. Mitro 15:28, September 26, 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, um, that was premature. I'll be out of town and away from my computer for a week... carry on, then.  Benkarnell 11:31, September 28, 2009 (UTC)

Happy Doomsday
26 years ago a nuclear war was averted by the actions of one man. I plan to toast Colonel Stanislav Petrov at 6 pm Central time and I hope you all will join me. Many of us are alive today because of him, plus we got a great POD out of it! Mitro 16:31, September 26, 2009 (UTC)

Cheers at 1 hour and 14 minutes late! Mr.Xeight 00:14, September 27, 2009 (UTC)

WCRB Update
There has been a large number of new contributors as of late, so if there is a "command post" you want to claim please do so and I will add it. If you have no idea what I am talking about, see the bottom of this page or the bottom of the article. Mitro 22:09, September 28, 2009 (UTC)

Location of Famous People on Doomsday
I have been reading through newspaper articles as part of the ongoing research I am doing and came across information concerning the whereabouts of certain historical figures on Doomsday and wanted to pass it along to everyone. Since I could not tell which section among the discussion pages was appropriate for such info, I hope it is okay in listing it here. I discovered neither President Ronald Reagan nor Secretary of Defense Casper Weinberger were in Washington DC during the time Doomsday would have occurred. Apparently, President Reagan flew to NYC on September 25, 1983, staying overnight at the Waldorf Astoria. The next morning he gave a speech before the UN General Assembly, which addressed of all things US proposals to reduce the number of medium range nuclear missiles in Europe, before flying home the same day. As for Secretary Weinberger, he apparently had flown to China to discuss forging a new military relationship between the US and China. He arrived in Tokyo on September 24, moving on to Peking the next day. The articles I was reading also said Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi and Moroccan King Hassan II were both in NYC and met with Reagan. Prince Sihanouk of Cambodia was also in NYC as well. I could see this being a possible problem with the original intro. I would imagine there would be contingencies to evacuate the president in such a situation, probably by emergency helicopter to the airport so he could board Air Force One. But if I understand correctly, he would have to be flown to where NECAP was stationed. Since I don’t know where it was, unless someone else knows, I can only wonder if there might be enough time to this. As to Weinberger being absent, I do not know if it would have much of an impact. As a final afterthought, if anyone does revise the pre-Doomsday section in the future, they may want to add something about the USSR shooting a South Korean passenger plane on September 1, 1983. It was a significant incident at the time and did ratchet up the East-West tensions. Thanks. --Fxgentleman 02:03, October 1, 2009 (UTC)
 * Can you provide links to some of these articles? I would be interested in reading them and referencing them in articles.  Mitro 02:07, October 1, 2009 (UTC)

I will see what I can do. I located the articles through an online fee for service newspaper database system called ProQuest. Our library allows any local resident with a library card to access for free the Washington Post and NY Times online. I will see if I can post links you can access. If I can, where should I post them? In the off chance the links do not work, I also have PDFs of the articles that can be emailed. --Fxgentleman 03:08, October 1, 2009 (UTC)
 * Just put the links here. Mitro 13:08, October 1, 2009 (UTC)

I posted the weblinks in question earlier, but have since removed them because for some reason they no longer function. I had tested them and they were okay, but when I just checked again they were all non-functional. So short of sending the articles by PDF, I am afraid I can't help you. By the way, when I was assembling the links earlier, I ran across another piece of information on a famous person I had not seen previously. Apparently British PM Margaret Thatcher had flown to Ottawa, Canada on Doomsday eve and as such would not have been in London. --Fxgentleman 02:55, October 2, 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for this! If we do have to change the Reagan info, we'll be tinkering with some of the oldest material in the timeline!  I don't see that as a huge deal, though, because even as it is Reagan's only significant act in the TL is dying.  If he does it earlier, so be it.  GHW Bush plays a much larger role, but you don't mention him being away from Washington DC, which is what the timeline assumes.
 * Thatcher in Canada could have much more wide-ranging implications. Ottowa was a target, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if she had time to get out.  I wonder if she might end up in one of the two versions of Canada (one on the Atlantic, the other out in Alberta)... or someplace else entirely.  (Hands off, Bob, there's no way we're sending her to Africa! :-P
 * I agree that she would likely be able to get out in time, being the UK's PM. I doubt she would go north, as there isn't much there. That could be a plus, though, because there wouldn't be any bombs going off there. Going north would lead her to lawless regions anyway. She could try for the east, which will be chaotic as well, with Ottawa, Quebec and Montreal all being hit. But she might reach the Canadian Remainder Provinces still. Or perhaps south... but that doesn't make sense, because she'll know that the US will be much harder hit than Canada. West is a possiblility too... she'd want to stay away from Toronto, and might reach the Superior-controlled coastline of the Great Lakes. So it seems to be a choice between the Canadian Remainder Provinces or Superior, or heading off into the north. Sorry if I seem indecisive, but I'm finding it hard to put myself into the mind of a head of state in a foreign country during a nuclear holocaust. --DarthEinstein 00:06, October 7, 2009 (UTC)
 * By the way I integrated her into my history of the new Canadian Prime Minister on this page. --DarthEinstein 20:39, October 9, 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't think anything has been written on Hassan II, I. Gandhi, Secy. Weinberger, or Sihanouk yet, but if any of them survive in the places they're stuck in, we could have interesting stories.
 * And thanks for the bit on the South Korean plane. It definitely adds context and should be added to the intro.  Benkarnell 22:11, October 6, 2009 (UTC)

Glad the information can be of some help. I have been pouring through news articles of the August-September 1983 time period in regards to my the stuff I am writing on the Middle East and thought it might help. I know recently someone raised the question as to what might have happened to Liberia. I noted that Samuel Doe, who headed the nation at the time, was also in NYC on Doomsday. You figure these things would have some type of effect on certain places, going leaderless all of sudden. I know it plays into what I am writing on Jordan since King Hussein was in Asia at the time and would have survived and most likely gotten home to help rally his crippled nation. By the way, the evening of September 25 was also the night of the Emmy Awards in LA, so alot of celebs would have been there and perished. --Fxgentleman 23:53, October 6, 2009 (UTC)

Leave of absence
Due to a family emergency I will be away for an indefinate period of time. I might drop in to see what is going on, but participation will be low. I'll try to return as soon as I can. Mitro 21:33, October 2, 2009 (UTC)
 * Thankfully the emergency was able to resolve itself and I can return to my regular level of editing, though my weekend was shot to shit. Mitro 13:57, October 5, 2009 (UTC)

Leave of Absence

 * I had planned to make a significant to many of my proposals and pet projects on this forum during this week. However, my grandfather passed this morning, and I have decided to put my contributions to this forum on hiatus until the situation within the family calms down. Lahbas 21:52, October 4, 2009 (UTC)


 * I’m sorry to hear that man. I don't think anyone can blame you for not being here. Either way you have my condolences, and I hope you make it through the next few days alright.--ShutUpNavi 00:54, October 5, 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry to hear that as well. We Greeks say "Zoe sa sas" which abstractly would transate to remember their life. Though it doesn't help much, a great many people here can sympathize with you, myself included. Mr.Xeight 20:53, October 5, 2009 (UTC)


 * Alright, I am back. I'll start a blitz tommorow, hopefully. Right now, Thunder Bay is my target. Lahbas 21:58, October 10, 2009 (UTC)

Indonesian Earthquake
did you guys here about the earthquake in indonesia last week? theres info on the tsunami in samoa but not the indonesian earthquake.--HAD 11:19, October 6, 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't know who wrote the blurb on the Samoa tsunami, but whoever it was finally motivated me to flesh out Samoa's history and government, so thank you! The tsunami in Indonesia was on the same day as the one in Samoa, and it was a good deal worse.  With the lack of infrastructure, Aceh and the I.I.I.L. are still recovering from the tsunami of 5 years ago.  The wave last week could have potentially major consequences in both countries.  The I.I.I.L. just put a new constitution into effect this year, and its democracy, such as it is, is still very fragile.

Benkarnell 18:08, October 6, 2009 (UTC)

i don't think a tsunami hit the Indonesia. just a really bad earthquake. this could have bad consequences for the region, although the CANZ would probaly send aid.--HAD 09:36, October 7, 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, you're right. I was away in the woods for a week and cut off from news, so forgive me. Finally reading some news articles on the quake, it actually was centered near Padang, which is exactly on the demarcation line between Acehnese and Indonesian controlled Sumatra *there*.  So we might actually have touching stories of cooperation between the enemy countries.  This was prefigured by this year's constitution, which does not mention the laim to Acehnese-occupied Sumatra. Amid all the crises in the world, maybe Aceh and Indonesia are coming closer to reaching an acord. Benkarnell 14:04, October 7, 2009 (UTC)

Categories for images
We've done a fairly good job of putting maps and flags into subcategories of Category:1983: Doomsday: putting htem all in the category makes it easier to see the scope of the TL visually, and allows them to be sampled in other pages more easily. But there's no place to put the rapidly growing collection of photos (not including portraits, which go in the People category). What would you say to putting them into Category:Media (1983: Doomsday)? Photos are media, after all. Benkarnell 22:03, October 6, 2009 (UTC)

Election time
As you may know, in TTL there was an election in Canada two days ago. I've already figured out who's winning, but I'm wondering how long it would take for votes to be counted? Especially due to the large size of the two northern provinces. Should the results be announced now, or in a week, or sometime else? --DarthEinstein 18:32, October 8, 2009 (UTC)


 * Probably methods for counting aren't as advanced as we use *here*. Ballot boxes also need to be collected from remote areas and outposts only partially under Government control.  A week should do it.  Benkarnell 18:35, October 8, 2009 (UTC)
 * If they have a phone system, it shouldn't be too different than what we have now. We still use paper ballots and count by hand (worked the election a few years ago). Then election officials report by telephone from each voting station. Unless the phone system hasn't been re-established by 2009 I don't see it taking more than 1-2 days.--Oerwinde 18:50, October 8, 2009 (UTC)

I suppose I'll post the results today then. --DarthEinstein 19:46, October 9, 2009 (UTC)

Hello, introducing myself
I also am following the guidelines re: introducing yourself. I'm BrianD, I'm from Kentucky and if this timeline had actually happened I would have been vaporized by one of the nukes hitting my hometown. This entire timeline is amazing, and I've followed it pretty closely for months. Following sports is a hobby of mine, and the role of sport in international politics and affairs has always interested me. I've seen a few references to sports in the various articles - hockey leagues in Canada and Victoria, the World Cup in the Celtic Alliance - and posted an idea I had regarding qualification for World Cup 2010 in this timeline (I wish I had posted it a few months earlier, as qualification for the real World Cup is coming to a close). My thoughts are regarding sports that, now that the various nations have recovered from Doomsday and established themselves, that there is momentum towards reestablishing major international events like the World Cup and the Olympic Games and (on a lesser level) events like Tri-Nations rugby. I assume FIFA already has been reestablished, and that someone - the LoN, perhaps the people who run FIFA itself - will soon reestablish the IOC.

On a national level, I'll also assume that if Cleveland has a three-tiered soccer league, then Celtic Alliance, Alpine, Nordic Union and probably Prussia have professional leagues as well (and that the South American and Mexican leagues are going strong). For Australia, given how quickly the A-League has become popular there in the real world, I'll guess there's some kind of equivalent in the DD world (along with ANZC's rugby and footy leagues). I don't have many ideas for the former U.S., save that any organized sports in the former U.S. so far has been played at the youth and amateur levels; people are just now beginning to consider professional sports as a viable option. Reestablishing the NFL, MLB, etc. and NCAA Division I college sports would be decades away; you'll first see something like the Pacific Baseball League and Victorian Hockey League then, perhaps in a decade or two, regional leagues.

Anyway, those are my thoughts, and I welcome your feedback. Thanks for the opportunity to read this timeline, and to contribute.--BrianD 03:16, October 9, 2009 (UTC)
 * Welcome. I look forward to working with you.  Mitro 14:50, October 9, 2009 (UTC)


 * The former American Samoa created the American Football League in 1991 for diehard enthusiasts of our barbaric version of the international pastime. It's become quite popular over the years, especially in the ANZC, and I wouldn't be surprised if some Pacific coast cities have teams as well.  Despite frequent requests, the AFL is still HQed in Pago Pago.  Benkarnell 22:09, October 9, 2009 (UTC)


 * More popular than footy and rugby? Interesting (now I'm wondering how Doomsday affected rugby and Australian rules football - the two most popular sports in Australia - and how American football and soccer have impacted the sports scene in ANZC). How many franchises are in this league, and where are they located? --BrianD 23:48, October 9, 2009 (UTC)


 * Oh, no no no no no, not more popular than the regular sports. I just meant that it's quite popular considering it was started in Samoa, of all places.  The AFA is _the_ American Football organization for the Pacific.  Probably it spread first among US immigrants, and then among [www.eteamz.com/nz-american-football/ the relatively few Ausso-Kiwis] who are American football fans.  Benkarnell 02:11, October 10, 2009 (UTC)

CURRENT ARTICLE PROPOSALS
Please list any and all current article proposals and their discussion here. If the proposals only involves a specific section of the article, please state that. Also remember to use  when reviewing new articles.

Armed Forces
I'm thinking about creating articles on armies of the ANZC, SAC, Soviet Siberia, Celtic Alliance and other nations. If you ratify it, then there's no problem. MC Prank 08:15, September 12, 2009 (UTC) Well, if there's no America, then there's no Colt, no ArmaLite. No Germany, no Heckler & Koch. I suppose they all will be taken up by mainly Thales Australia. MC Prank 09:34, September 13, 2009 (UTC)

Heckler & Koch might get reserected in Prussia. It is a possibility. Also I did not know that the IRA had American made weaponry. I saw the Armalite rifle on Deadliest Warrior, in perhaps the most contreversial episode of the whole series (IRA vs Taliban) but I never knew the origin. And speaking about the IRA,(if they existed at the time) I am pretty sure the would be satisfied with this situation. Not only is Ireland unified, but is occupping parts of Britain insted of the other way around.

Sig-Sauer of alpine confed are still in buisness? they build guns! Sabb ,PIlatus and embrear build military aircraft.HAD 08:15, September 17, 2009 (UTC)

--Yankovic270 23:26, September 16, 2009 (UTC)

No Mauser or ArmaLite or Colt. I think Thales Australia or Metal Storm will develop this timeline's M4A1. MC Prank 12:18, September 17, 2009 (UTC)

Why develop new guns? why not improved M16's? 2nd point: does any mind if i edit CANZ page for military equipment, famous units, etc?--HAD 12:58, September 17, 2009 (UTC)

i have just editded the CANZ page to give more detail on the armed forces. i hope nobody minds.--HAD 13:22, September 17, 2009 (UTC)

I totally agree with the improvement of "classic" weapons rather than making up new ones. My nation of Virginia uses improved Tommy guns. --Yankovic270 16:16, September 17, 2009 (UTC)

The point is that, if you think strategically, it will sound like common sense that any surviving developed nation would develop new weapons. There'll obviously be a lot of political turmoil in mosty parts of the world, with terror groups and fascists gaining power, they would try to get an edge over there possible enemies. Speaking of improving, dont you know M4A1, M16 all are just technically "improved" versions of AR-15, which was made way back in 1958. M16A2, which is just a longer version of M4A1, and a direct predecessor to the M4, was out in the early or mid 80s, which means that its design was already there well before Doomsday. Speaking of which, I dont think designing M4 would be such a big task. I appreciate your efforts in the ANZAF section, HAD, but leave the guns to me. And why would Embraer build aircrafts for ANZAF? Its a Brazilian company and ANZC & SAC are political rivals right.

Embraers a private company isn't it? if the CANZ pays well, why Wouldn't Embraer build aircraft for the ANZAF? and about the politics, well brazil needs a working population,, to provide jobs and a large order from the CANZ would provide those jobs. anyway, the aircraft i mentioned are for Air Defence. Building Air Defence fighters would not upset SAC to much, would it?--HAD 08:20, September 18, 2009 (UTC)

if you feel these reasons are inadauqate, i will change the manucfactuers to Pilatus and give the ANZAF a locally built AEW platform based on the C-130 airframe. in fact, i will do so right now. (10.41 GMT).--HAD 09:41, September 18, 2009 (UTC)

MC Prank 16:48, September 17, 2009 (UTC)

I dont know much about Embraer's shareholders, but it was founded in 1969 as a Public sector company and with the halt of democracy in Brazil post-DD, I dont think its plausible for it to become private. And I dont think there would be this sort of economic relations b/w the SAC & CANZ. They are virtually on the brink of a Cold War, as seen in the case of the Indian subcontinent. CANZ supports India whereas SAC supports Pakistan. SAC has been hostile to the use of English, and its the main language of Australia. MC Prank 12:04, September 18, 2009 (UTC)

which is why i have changed the article to aircraft sourced from Pilatus. --HAD 12:38, September 18, 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, its good -- MC Prank 13:04, September 18, 2009 (UTC)

do you mind if i do some work on the Celtic Aliance military? i assume they would have a strong navy, particulary in amphibious warfare and marines, along with air mobile infantry and air force ground support/fighter aircraft? --HAD 08:59, September 23, 2009 (UTC)

I dont have any problem, ask the seniors -- MC Prank 08:57, September 27, 2009 (UTC)

Also, I think the USA would transfer at least an F15 to the CANZ and a possible design of the F22. -- MC Prank 09:06, September 27, 2009 (UTC)

F-15, possibly. F-22 No. it was an idea at tthe time, a concept for the future. --HAD 12:46, September 28, 2009 (UTC)

How about New Britain? I should imagine British weapons are the same as tyhey are in 1983, albeit a bit cannabalised and with some South African influences.

Middle East
I'd actually propose that instead of the Middle East getting nuked by East or West, I'd suggest that they nuked themselves into oblivion, so that most of the Levant is a slag-heap.

I'd like to say that as far as Libya and Tunisia is concerned they're "countries that time forgot."

And Mr. Xeight and I are working up Egypt as I type this. Louisiannan 21:57, 10 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Specifically, who nuked whom? Israel was the only Middle Eastern country to actually have nuclear weapons, and it's safe to assume they attacked somebody.  Iran and Iraq certainly had chemical WMDs and were busily using them against one another, and possibly their neighbors.  I agree that a regional plan is probably needed for the Mideast, as opposed to our normal country-by-country process.  Benkarnell 15:46, 13 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Alright, here’s what I had in mind for what I wrote on my Middle East pages.

With most of Turkey blown up, the Kurds in the southeast manage to establish an independent Kurdistan without much resistance. Wanting to reunite with the rest of the Kurdish populated areas they join in the Iran-Iraq war (which in this timeline is still called the gulf war) on Iran’s side. Although reluctant because of its own Kurdish population, Iran decides to help them in exchange for dropping its claims on Iranian Kurdistan. Iraq eventually collapses because of the now 2 front war, as well as lack of foreign support from the US and Soviet Union. Saddam becomes unpopular because of his use of Scorched Earth tactics in Iraq and is eventually overthrown by an extremist Shia dictator. Like OTL Iraq decides to invade and annex Kuwait, but with none to stop them they soon invade Saudi Arabia and capture the oil fields there. I haven’t worked out what happens from here, but I would imagine things would go south from here and that another war would soon break out.

But this was just my idea of what could happen. Fell free to change what ever you need to with it, because I won’t be working on these pages for awhile.--ShutUpNavi 22:16, 14 July 2009 (UTC)


 * That's a good beginning, I think. Chemical weapons were probably used more indisriminately, right?  And what about that Assyria place?  What is that?  Benkarnell 22:51, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

If I may; I have another problem to add to this mix. We both have pages on Kurdistan and an Assyrian Republic. The problem; the areas they respectably claim are exactly the same. Plus, I don't the Shi'a dictator of Iraq would last long. Mr.Xeight 01:25, 15 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Ayatollah Khomeini planned on expanding Radical Islam across the Middle East. Any alliance with Kurdistan would be short-lived. At the same time, Iran would have more likely absorbed Iraq than allow its continued independence. From there, it would have marched on Kuwait and the Arabian states. The result would be a devastating war between the Fascist governments of the Arab World, against the Islamic Republic of Iran. Israel would finally find itself in an uneasy peace with its neighbors. At the same time, they could easily launch a nuclear attack upon the Iranians, either if asked by the Arabs, or if the Iranians get too close for comfort. Lahbas 03:58, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

When exactly would Israel launch its nuclear attacks against his neighors? Also how about a new article for the attack: ? Mitro 15:55, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

I don't think it's likely that Israel is just going to nuke its neighbors right away (i.e. the first few years post DD). Here's a more plassable version I had in mind. With time I would imagine Israel would be severally weakened after DD from lack of forging aid as well as fighting constant wars with its neighbors. As Hellerick put it earlier "OTL's Israel is not a self-sufficient country, it's fed by the United States and the Jewish diaspora. No civilized country can survive a perpetual war on its own."

After a while perhaps the Arabs see this as a chance to finish off Israel and start another Arab-Israeli war. This time they nearly succeed until Israel uses its nukes. While this saves the Jews for the time being, it causes them to be seen as a mass murdering state by the rest of the world. This would give the Greeks/LON/anyone else the perfect opportunity to intervene in the Middle East and take over the countries there.

Again feel free to use as much or as little of my idea as you like.--ShutUpNavi 17:45, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Just my two cents: nuked cities aside (if any), The bottom half of the Middle East would probably stay largely intact politically (possibly realignment?). Going from ideas above, an independent Kurdish nation, and Iran winning a war against Iraq would probably leave Iraq in a mess. Northern Iraq joins Kurdistan, Eastern Iraq gets annexed or puppet'ed with its Shia population to Iran, and the rest including Baghdad ends up much like how Iraq is now in 2009; civil conflict. As for Israel randomly nuking countries, unlikely unless attacked first and probably more of a tactical military use rather than aiming at cities; with Iraq, Egypt and Syria fending for themselves that is the main anti-Israel body of the 20th century removed. If Israel survives, it might jump at the chance to extend its borders as far as possible, including full control of the Palestinian Territories, and any land that has water sources and chances for irrigation. And depending on how right wing you want to go, kick or kill all the Arabs out. Its unlikely Iran and Israel would goto war, they are surprisingly chummy despite the retoric both back then and now, and would be too busy dealing with their own areas of influence to bother each other. Mikebloke 00:40, 18 August 2009 (UTC)


 * In any event of a third world war, Iran would have been nuked by the Soviet Union, so as to allow a push to the Persian Gulf to secure its oil reserves, and disrupt oil shipments to the Western World. Therefore, it is hard to exactly judge how the Iran-Iraq War would have proceeded (My previous judgment was bad, that much I know from the info which supports my current view.) Iraq is the big question mark, as I am not sure Baghdad would be the recipient of a nuclear weapon, being an ally of both the Soviet Union and the United States. Therefore, it is possible that Saddam Hussein continues to exist in this world as a fascist dictator in the Middle East, with expansion throughout the region in all directions. At the same time, Iran’s government could have largely escaped the destruction of its cities, and managed to overrun Iraq, and then proceed into Arabia. There is no easy way to tell what the situation would become. Israel is the only state that would definitely exist, as its nuclear armament would prevent a successful invasion of its territory even with a coalition of nations. Again, there is a question mark on if the Soviet Union would launch a nuclear attack upon the Israelis. Though they sympathize with the Arabs in the Arab-Israeli conflict, they were among the first nations to recognize Israel’s existence. I can imagine a conventional attack, but the nuclear option is the uncertainty. Lahbas 20:37, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

I would like to know the article that said that. I know the Soviets planed on invading the Middle East in the event of a conventional war, but I have never herd about them nuking Tehran. Besides taking over the oil fields of these countries would have been of little use in the case of an all out nuclear war.--ShutUpNavi 23:22, September 15, 2009 (UTC)

Anway, why don't we have Kurdistan in the Kurdish parts of Turkey and northern Iraq, and Assyria in Southern Iraq and Kuwait. Maybe give Kurdistan some Syria and Iran as well. --Yankovic270 15:15, September 24, 2009 (UTC)

As a first time contributor I would like to say I have enjoyed reading the various articles written here since I first discovered the website earlier this year. As someone who was a 19 year old college student in 1983, I had, and still have, a major interest in world events. That said, I was interested in seeing how the Middle East would be treated, given the events which were taking place at the time. Since I had not seen anything, I decided to try my hand at penning several articles on the region. My focus at this point is on Lebanon; the multi-national peacekeeping force (MNF) posted in Beirut, Lebanon in 1983; and Syria. Having read a number of the thoughts posted on the fate of the Middle East I do not believe the region would have been wiped out. At the time, the US had military relations with Israel and Egypt and to a lesser extent Lebanon and Jordan, but did not have bases (unless I am wrong) or substantial prepositioned forces, where as Syria was firmly in the Soviet camp and part of their defense network. Since the Soviet attack would not have been preplanned, essentially a knee jerk reaction to what they believed was a sneak attack, I believe the intent would have been to knock out, rather than destroy, non-NATO countries who could supply assistance. To accomplish this I could see limited attacks against capitals and sites of countries which could provide military assistance in places like Egypt, Jordan, and Israel. However, in the case of Syria, because of its unique military relationship with the Soviets, I could see it getting plastered by nukes. As for Lebanon, I do not see it offering much in the way of a target for either side. Since Lebanon was in a virtual tug of war between Syria, the US, USSR, and Israel, removing these parties from the table wholly or partially, could be a boon to it in that it has a chance to deal with its secular problems and perhaps become a strong nation in the region. Further, I look upon the MNF as being forgotten in all of this and coming up as bit of a wild card with the potential to place a role in the country’s future. All this said, I have thoughts about creating a new nation in western Syria and Lebanon going through its share of problems, including evicting Syrian troops and a coup. Please take a look at what I have written and let me know your thoughts. As I have said, I have done a great deal of research, so much of what I reference was going on at the time. I have tried to stay within canon history, but since this is a bit of a gray area due to the lack of articles, please let me know if I have slipped up  in writing these articles. I have also generated some thoughts as to what Israel’s and Jordan’s future would be and would be interested in writing something on them as well. However, I do not want to intrude if someone is already writing one. Thanks. --Fxgentleman 18:55, September 25, 2009 (UTC)

Welcome to the Altnernate History Family Fxgentleman! How do you like my compromise? The Kurdish areas for Kurdistan, the Southern part of Iraq, Kuwait and maybe even parts of Iran for Assyria. --Yankovic270 22:35, October 2, 2009 (UTC)

//
I figured I would bring this up because Yugoslavia (or what became of it) is going to have a large impact on the countries left in Southern Europe. Being a leading member of the Non-Aligned Movement it’s unlikely to be nuked, but all of its blown up neighbors are sure to cause trouble. There are a lot of things that could have happened here. Instead of trying to map out what happens to it all at once, let’s start from the immediate effects of the disaster and work ourselves from there. I just wrote down what the likely effects of the fallout would be as well as the government’s response. Lets try to figure out what happens from here.--ShutUpNavi 16:52, 9 July 2009 (UTC)


 * added this to the proposals...I feel general okey about it... MR.Xeight, this is yours?? --Xi&#39;Reney 10:48, 9 August 2009 (UTC)


 * -Hello. No, actually, mine. Read through Doomsday and loved it, and though a Yugoslavia successor state could be a good thing to add (could be good if combined with the already existing stub for Yugoslavia Proper). If you find it worthy, I'll do some more edit. Cheers mate --Azazel voland 15:31, 9 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I put Yugoslavia and the SSU together as one, feel it being more appropriate. Should be more productive than having two parallel discussions. Yugoslavia could be quite complex, given the ethnical conflicts and atrocities...with repercussions on surrounding states... Sicily, Alpine Confed, Greece... --Xi&#39;Reney 17:17, 9 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Sounds good. Given that the ethnic tensions first escalated during the Croatian Spring in 1971, which caused massive unrest in Croatia, asking for larger autonomy, and the issues with Kosovo at the time, the situation was resolved by the new Constitution in 1974 which grated almost state-within-state rights for the 6 republics and 2 provinces. With the death of Tito, situation was again resolved implementing rotational presidency from each of the republics. Doomsday would probably cause massive secession at first, however, being that all the surrounding countries surviving population would probably flock into the country, the differences would have been overcome in the attempt to preserve the country from "outsiders". Isolation and focus on self-preservation seem like the appropriate answer.--Azazel voland 19:01, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Ethnic tensions in the Balkans run too high. The Muslim Bosniaks and any Muslim Albanian refugees would no doubt be targets for the Orthodox Serbs and Skopians. The Catholic Croats would equally be in conflict with both groups so after Yugoslavia (which has already been claimed by someone) there would no doubt be a mosaic of nations in the former Yugoslavia just as there was in our world. Plus radiation coming from Thessaloniki, Skopje, and Sophia would destroy the outer rim of Yugoslavia. The refugees that gave Hell to the Yugoslavians post-DD would also be a problem. I'm suspicious of a giant union of Southern Slavs. Mr.Xeight 03:21, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi Mr.Xeight. Good points. However, during the ages, South Slavic nations have always been able to unite in times of need (especially when a foreign enemy is at the gates) and immediately overcome all differences if there is nothing else to do. In this particular situation, given that the "enemy" is radiation and refugees, their main concern would be closing the borders down. The ethnic torn in teh 90s could not have succeeded without foreign back up to some of the countries. Croatia and Slovenia had support from Germany and Austria, while Bosnians had the support of the US and the Arab countries. Without them in the picture, the funding, support and logistics, Yugoslavia would most probably survive the Fall of Communism. In the late 70s, to quote wikipedia, "The JNA (Yugoslav National/Peoples Army) enjoyed an international reputation as a powerful, well-equipped, and well trained force." It had 620,000 active military personnel and 3,200,000 reservists. With that kind of power, the borders could have been closed and order maintained. One of the reasons for the dissolution of Yugoslavia OTL was that the army did not create a coup in 1991, and thus prevented the wars that followed. JNA was always viewed as the "Liberation Army" and serving in it was considered a thing of honour in the 60s, 70s and the 80s (any young male that did not serve the regular year, was generally considered as not worthy...and could even have difficulty finding someone to marry him :)). With the military taking control of the nation, shutting down the borders immediately after Doomsday, and moving into non-radiated territories (Sofia and Thessaloniki would not pose that much of a problem due to the geographical landscape. Serbia and Bulgaria are separated by a range of 2500+ meter mountains, as are Macedonia and Greece. Slovenia would probably get affected as would Zagorje in Croatia, and 95% of the Adriatic coast. Perhaps, the only coastal area that would escape that fate would be the Bay of Boka Kotorska in Montenegro, due to its peculiar position.)Now, refugees, that would pose a serious problem, that is true, and those that got into the country would most likely be put in camps (as a notion, Yugoslavia did already successfully close it's borders in 1948 during the Inform-bureau crisis and implemented martial law. My only concern is that the country would need a very capable general to take control but be benevolent and patriotic at the same time. I estimate at least 2 - 3 million refugees from the surrounding countries. But, with most of the army surviving, that could be overcome. A military dictatorship would have saved the country at first, them also being responsible for food distribution and peace keeping. Also, Yugoslavia had it's own oil rigs in South Banat, that, in peace times, provided fuel only for military usage (so that the army would not depend on foreign import). That would sustain military mobility and better the control over the country. In my opinion, this is a plausible scenario.--Azazel voland 07:22, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

I guess I was wrong. I am however opposed to "With amazing amount of luck, most of the harvested land in the province of Vojvodina and East Slavonia did not get affected by the radioactive dust". There is no luck in this TL, I've tried it with an iffy nuke not hitting Cyprus, it's been tried to save Britain, it's been tried to save Germany, and it's been tried to save West Virginia, only the second of my examples was deemed fair enough to pass to QSS. I would however appreciate if you asked before you drag the CoG into the mix. There is no love lost between the Greeks and Slavs of Yugoslavia, even Doomsday can't change that. As caretaker of the CoG I am opposed to any such alliance between the two nations. As such, I'd appreciate it if you pull the blurbs on Greece having open discussions with each other, free border crossings, a Joint Defense Agreement, and a trade union. Mr.Xeight 15:56, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Okay, this conversations sort of petered out without a conclusion, so I propose that the article be promoted once we address Mr. X's requests. Otherwise it looks like a sound addition. 70.26.54.188 13:01, 20 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I do not know how much damage this does to your plans, but Soviet Invasion plans of Western European included treating Yugoslavia as an enemy, including the deployment of nuclear weapons, notably the planned destruction of both Zagreb and Belgrade. Lahbas 20:37, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

I would like to know the article that said that. I know the Soviets planed on invading Yugoslavia in the event of a conventional war, but I have never herd about Belgrade getting nuked. If this is the case then Austria and Switzerland could have been nuked as well, since the Soviets planed on attacking these countries as well before moving on into Italy. Given that these targets were secondary and how sudden the nuclear war unfolded I could see these plans getting messed up and/or abandoned all together.--ShutUpNavi 23:22, September 15, 2009 (UTC)


 * What fate is drawing to Slovenia?, Will take the Alpine Confederation possession of territory or the South Slavic Union?, or does not form part of any of them?Tristanbreiker 17:21, September 24, 2009 (UTC)

The history needs some flushing out, a new flag is necessary and some new sections could be added. Mitro 19:06, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Okay, I though about this for a while and came up with some sort of draft set of proposals for South(ern) Africa. This proposal is done assuming that only New Britain, and the existence of the RZA is canon and everything else is open for discussion. The specific history of the latter, being a stub, is altered substantially by the proposal. I though I micht post this here as well, since it does evolve changes to a canon nation and deals with an entire region, and therefore cannot be executed without prior discussion. --Karsten&#160;vK (talk) 14:47, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
 * premise one: After Doomsday ans loss of contact with the Northern Hemisphere, authority in South Africa largely collapses

If there is going to be no futher discussion then could we make this canon? Bob 12:44, September 19, 2009 (UTC)

So this means that the last thing in the way of a new map is going to be made canon? I have been waiting for this discussion to end so as to see my creations on the world map. I shall not stand in its way. --Yankovic270 02:00, October 7, 2009 (UTC)

Eastern South Africa

 * To the east of the Cape province the Bantustans assume sovereignty over their own lands and try to establish control over the areas inhabited by their respective tribe. Lesotho and Swaziland do likewise.
 * Ciskei and Transkei ultimately merge to form KwaXhosa.
 * QwaQwa is absorbed by Lesotho.
 * KwaNgwane is absorbed by Swaziland.
 * The city of Johannesburg finds itself running out of supplies and ends up in a dire situation. The fighting is ceased when an uncomfortable marriage de raison is agreed on by ANC insurgents and those government troops remaining to keep the city as a whole from starving. Johannesburg militia join the Bantustans in search for arable lands and instantly clash with them.
 * The troops of the Bantustans beat the Johannesburgers decisively and start beleaguering the city.
 * After Johannesburg falls the rulers of the former Bantustans can't agree on who is to rule the city and ultimately accept a proposal by one of the 'stans' to place the city under joint control, which leads to the formation of the "Azanian League": a loose confederation of many of the Bantustans + Lesotho and Swaziland.
 * When Robert Mugabe managed to get parts of Rhodesia under his effective control, his Republic of Zimbabwe joins the League too.
 * The Xhosa and Zulu remain outside of this union. The latter ends up in a civil war between royalist and Inkatha party republicans.
 * As the Anglo-Africans leave the area for New Britain, the only convenient lingua franca comes to be Afrikaans, much to the annoyance of local rulers. --Karsten&#160;vK (talk) 14:47, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Can someone either resolve the Zulu Civl War or rename one of the Zululands?. I just don't see the point of two countries where there should be one. Royalist or IFP. It doesn't really matter as long as that needlessly complicated issue is resolved. I want all loose ends tied up in Southern Africa. And there are so many places not touched. There's Central Africa Indochina ,and South America. And what about European Russia? --Yankovic270 16:36, September 17, 2009 (UTC)

As New Britain has allied funded and armed the Royalist Zulus surely it would make sense for the Royalists to win. Bob 12:27, September 19, 2009 (UTC)


 * Bob, I seriously think you are overstating the importance of New Britain. Considering the fact that its population consists of recent immigrants unfamiliar with the land and former urbanites, NB is going to need Zulu aid a lot more than vice versa if it is going to have the agricultural economy described in the article. The fact that it has some of the Royal Navy on its side could mean that its able to deal a decisive blow to KwaXhosa early on and get control over the immediate vicinity of Port Elizabeth, but from then on its primary objective ought to be survival. Becoming a regional power just doesn't seem to be a realistic option to me. Needless to say that I'm not much of a fan of your recent additions to the article.
 * As for the Zululand civil war, the fact that the Drakensberg Range runs right through KwaZulu makes that it has a great amount of easily defendable places. In turn making that it is most "suited" to host a long lasting civil war with two factions exerting control over their respective sections. I don't see any necessity in ending the war just now just for simplicity's sake. Simplicity doesn't seem like something we should strife for if you'd ask me. --Karsten&#160;vK (talk) 14:50, September 19, 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry that I seem a little impatient, but I'd really prefer for all issues with Sothern Africa are resolved. Any solution is better to me than seemingly perpetual argument. --Yankovic270

Western South Africa

 * After the attacks the only part of South Africa to remain under effective government control is the almost wholly Europeanised part round Cape Town. As the central government finally collapsed, local authorities assume control of the area. In the end this lead to a state dominated by the Afrikaans speaking coloured population, which I suppose will be quietly emancipated in quite liberal Cape Town. Note: coloured denotes mixed race in South Africa. In many ways these people are closely related to the Afrikaners. They even voted mostly for the Afrikaner National Party in the 1994 election, possibly forming the majority of the party's electorate, presumable because they feared being ruled by the black majority even more than being ruled by their Afrikaner relatives. By that logic I'm letting them stay loyal to the regime. Ultimately they may even start styling themselves "Afrikaners" as well. The still functioning government starts referring to itself as the "RZA". An actual declaration of independence never takes place.
 * The Griqua community, centred round Griquatown in the arid north eastern part of the Cape Province, assume sovereignty over their area again.
 * A rather radical Afrikaner group does likewise with the western part of the modern province of the northern Cape. Forming the "Volksstaat". Popularly known by the name of its capital: the Bitterfontein Republic.
 * Meanwhile in South West Africa, a group of ethnic German leaders meet in Windhoek and proclaim that now that South Africa no longer exists its mandate on the country has also expired and South West Africa is terra nullius. After having ensured themselves of the support of the local Afrikaners and Basters they declare themselves sovereign over the whole of the area. They however only manage to take control of the southern and central part of the country. Neither is the new country, which has started using the name and flag of the former German colony in the area, exclusively a German state. One may well claim that the region is effectively more under the control of the more numerous Afrikaners than under that of the Germans.
 * Triggered by the establishment of the Azanian League, leaders of the western states form a Union of their own. Calling it the "New Union of South Africa". Memberstates are the RZA, Bitterfontein, Griqualand and the DSWA. --Karsten&#160;vK (talk) 14:47, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm supportive of this new history, though I would like to see it in its final form. Mitro 02:24, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Sure, presuming nobody objects against me interpreting the fact that this proposal didn't lead to a rush of comments as tacit approval for its general outline, I'll get to that as soon as I can. --Karsten&#160;vK (talk) 13:48, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I interpret your lack of response as agreement with me! (sorry -- had a flash of Eddie Izzard's "Sexie" stand-up routine. Heh.  It looks reasonable, as do most proposals you come up with Karsten. Louisiannan 14:44, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Your sporadic Izzard references bring joy to every forum you frequent!
 * Karsten, I think this is pretty sound, and it even manages to incorporate some older, tentative material (including ideas I put on the map purely out of my own head). The one thing is the RZA: it is definitely established that ANZC and South American troops set it up in the 2000s.  That's from one of the earliest versions of the Timeline; either XiReney wrote it before any of us joined, or else it was part of the raw material written even before he picked it up.  Either way, the occupation of Cape Town and establishment of the RZA is definitely canon.  The current  page mostly consists of canon material, with only a few bits of my own thrown in that are tentative, as far as I'm concerned.
 * As I see it, for them to even consider doing this in Africa (of all places!), life in Cape Town must have been increadibly, incredibly bad. So bad that there was popular support for invading a faraway continent.  The real reason, of course, was to conduct a kind of military/political experiment as a run-up to the creation of the League of Nations.  But there had to be something to prompt it.  Maybe a different town in the Cape Province could follow that history and be a Coloured-dominated, liberalizing sort of place?  Benkarnell 04:15, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

I must admit I'd never heard of Eddie Izzard before... and that I much regret that now that I do. Should seriously watch some more of this guy, genious! Thanks ;). To get back to the Cape, how does this sound to you?: I wasn't aware of the fact that the intervention had been included since it's very start, but I guess this could work to it to the basic outline. Feel free to criticise as much as you like though. --Karsten&#160;vK (talk) 15:36, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
 * After the attacks the only part of South Africa to remain under effective government control is the almost wholly Europeanised part round Cape Town. As the central government finally collapsed, local authorities assume control of the area.
 * To keep the support of the Coloured population, which was vital in beating down those riots that did occur in the Western Cape region, some Coloureds are appointed to government posts. The most important posts however remain in the hands of the Afrikaners.
 * One of the leaders of a Coloured militia created after Doomsday (I'm calling him Hendrikus van der Merwe for now, just to ease referring to him) grows dissatisfied by the relatively marginal posts given to his kinsfolk (or perhaps better said: grows dissatisfied by the fact that he wasn't among those appointed...) starts revolting against the Cape Town authorities and becomes an uncontrollable menace, ultimately taking over control over the state.
 * Van der Merwe streamlines the Cape into an authoritarian regime and starts some kind of personality cult.
 * Van der Merwe initially targets the Islamic Cape Malay population as a scapegoat for all problems of the RZA.
 * Ultimately, when this loses some of its effect, Van der Merwe also starts targeting another group that is somehow different from the norm: the local Anglophone population. Going as far as passing an edict that fully outlaws usage of the English language and forces people to use Afrikaans.
 * With Anglo-Saxons being actively persecuted, I guess international interference is only an inch away, regardless of the fact that it's happening in Africa...
 * After the interference the first truly free elections of the Cape are held.
 * The new democratic government chooses to remain a member of the New Union of South Africa. Which, being by far its largest member, the RZA has come to dominate.


 * I think that's a very strong storyline, and the totalitarian dictatorship is more or less what I had imagined for the region. I also like that it avoids the "All Afrikaaners are teh evil" trap, which the tentative plot line in my head did not do.  It opens the place up to some potentially fascinating stories.  I also love the idea of the personality cult!  I suspect there are a lot of those in the world of DD waiting to be discovered. My suggestions:


 * "RZA" should be the name only of the provisional government set up by the outsiders. The name itself has such a temporary, occupied-country feel to it - it's not even a name, just three letters that officially don't even stand for anything.  Van der Merwe's state as far as I'm concerned could be anything from "The Grand Imperial Realm of All Africa" to the "Free People's Democratic Republic of the Cape" to "Cape Town", but RZA is I think the name of the provisional government.  For a full history,  could be moved to.
 * I know you said it was a temporary filler, but I'd suggest finding an actual Coloured radical to stand in for Van der Merwe.
 * The persecutions of Malays and Anglos is a very nice touch. I'd suggest moving it earlier in time so it can become part of the story of the founding of New Britain.  The 2006 invasion doesn't have to be an immediate response to new persecution; its purpose can well be to stop ongoing, long term oppression.  (Remembering once again that both the Aussies and the Latins had ulterior motives.)
 * Depending on the makeup of the New Union, Cape Town may not be its largest member, especially if certain minority groups were "encouraged" to flee the area. KwaXhosa and Bophuthatswana could potentially be huge.
 * Benkarnell 17:21, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Well I only chose "Van der Merwe" because it rolls of the tongue nicely when pronounced with a thick Afrikaans accent, a real person would indeed be a lot better. From the seventies onward the Coloureds had their own parliamentary representation in South Africa, I guess our "Van der Merwe" would likely be among those people if he half-expected to attain a government position. Having a list and some bio's of the members of their House of Representatives would be great. I'm currently browsing the PiCarta central Dutch academic catalogue to see if I can find something, but sadly enough all potentially interesting hits thus far are not available in Groningen.
 * Moving the persecutions earlier in time seems like a great idea to me.
 * In my outline the New Union only consist of the western states of what used to be South Africa. Since all other states of the Union are in semi-arid zones, I guess the Cape would dominate a Union composed as such. Bophuthatswana would be a member of the Azanian League and KwaXhosa is documented as being independent from both blocs. But of course nothing is set in stone yet. --Karsten&#160;vK (talk) 19:25, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

I think I might have just found a suitable Van der Merwe: Peter Marais. Was a member of the Coloured parliament during the eighties for a relatively minor party and subsequently went on to hold seat in parliament for more than half a dozen parties, leaving a trail of destruction behind him. Opportunist if ever there was one so it seems. And incompetent enough to be in dire need of the described scapegoats. But nevertheless apparently quite popular among the Coloureds. --Karsten&#160;vK (talk) 12:58, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Discussion has been moved to article talk page due to size. See Talk:Brazil (1983: Doomsday) for details. Mitro 02:14, October 7, 2009 (UTC)
 * I know it's fairly quick, but this is clearly a great idea IMO. Does anyone object to removing the proposal tag?  Benkarnell 00:53, October 11, 2009 (UTC)
 * I like the Brazil article, but like Navi said three malfunctioning nukes hitting Brazil seems unlikely. One is plausible though.  Mitro 17:25, October 11, 2009 (UTC)

There are mentions of a "2004 Reopening" by Siberians based in Sakhalin. Considering how isolated and removed Japan became in this timeline, can this be plausible? Likewise, would there still be a Provisional Regency in 2009, with the Emperor lost in Doomsday?114.108.210.148 03:06, September 19, 2009 (UTC)

It makes a lot more sense than a Australian Captain playing Commodore Perry. I mean, Siberian Sakalin is naturally closer to Japanese territory. It also makes sense that, despite everything, the Japanese would bounce back. They did after WWII, they would after Doomsday. And maybe there is a totally different emperor, or some heir that escaped the captital's A-bombing. --Yankovic270 15:47, September 21, 2009 (UTC)

Possible Existent Micro nations

 * These are a bunch of micro nations that could possibly have developed well in the Post-Doomsday world.

The Conch Republic is the only one that I am sure would survive and expand. There is no way to ensure equality, without taking away equality. 00:40, September 3, 2009 (UTC)
 * Conch Republic
 * Hay-on-Wye
 * Llanrwst
 * Lundy
 * Republic of Saugeais
 * Seborgia
 * Sealand
 * I'll argue against the Conch Republic and several of the others because they are in no way self-sufficient prior to DD and they would either be awash in refugees and criminals or would starve to death. Louisiannan 14:23, September 3, 2009 (UTC)


 * The could be considered a micronation also. --DarthEinstein 02:25, September 3, 2009 (UTC)
 * Could and should, I agree, Darth. Louisiannan 20:35, September 10, 2009 (UTC)

Don'y forget the Kingdom of Cleveland (1983: Doomsday) and Mancunia (1983: Doomsday)--Owen1983 11:39, September 3, 2009 (UTC)
 * Mancunia was deleted some time ago because it was implausible for Manchester to survive. In all likelihood it would have been destroyed by Soviet nukes.  Mitro 15:14, September 3, 2009 (UTC)

I especially like the idea of a nation or micronation in the southern portion of Florida. Even more if the Conch Republic expanded past the Florida keyes. I could use an ally for Virginia. --Yankovic270 19:35, September 11, 2009 (UTC)


 * Do you mean that these develop as micronations: as unrecognized, semi-serious or unserious nation projects? Or do you mean that these become actual, viable states?  I'd object in a huge way to Hay, Conch, Saugeais, and possibly some of the others, because unlike in Ill Bethisad, those states were definitely started as jokes in OTL.  I would be curious to see what Sealand's prince would have done after Doomsday.  Benkarnell 02:40, October 5, 2009 (UTC)

He might establish a fiefdom in East Anglica or Suffolk. But he would probbably abandon Sealand itself. His fiefdom may either be named Sealand or New Sealand. --Yankovic270 01:45, October 7, 2009 (UTC)

Republic of Vermont
It's possible that the survivors from the fallout that hit Vermont would form their own country (there's already many Vermonters that want the state to become it's own country. There's a flag and everything).

I like the idea. But can "Anonymous" start working on the article. This idea has too much potential to just be "left hanging". And excuse me if I am being rude, but who are you "Anonymous". What is your username? And if you would start this article, I wouldn't object to it being adopted into the timeline. --Yankovic270 16:41, September 23, 2009 (UTC)

I like the idea as well. Has anything been established regarding Vermont in canon? And, one question I have is, being so close to Aroostook, Canada, Saguenay and the St. Lawrence raiders, has Vermont not made its presence known for so long because of isolationistic policies, or some kind of informal agreement w/Saguenay and the raiders, where they leave Vermont alone and vice versa?--BrianD 00:14, October 10, 2009 (UTC)

I hope this doesn't become like the Turkestan idea. You know, an idea posted by someone incapable of developing it, where it withers and fades into nothingness. Which, of course, wastes a perfectly good idea. --Yankovic270 00:21, October 10, 2009 (UTC)

Let me try my hand at fleshing out a proposal.

http://althistory.wikia.com/wiki/Republic_of_Vermont   --BrianD 06:24, October 10, 2009 (UTC)

I have good news and bad news about this page. The bad news is that if all the targets you mentioned were hit I could not see an independent Vermont. It simply would be too close to those targets to reasonably survive. The good new however is that not every state or state capitol was hit (thus explaining why West Virginia is still around). Thus Burlington and Montpelier seem unlikely targets for Soviet nukes. Your right that the air force base at Plattsburgh would have been hit. Radiation and shockwaves from there alone is enough to explain the damage done to Vermont, thus you won't have to greatly change your article.

So I would remove Burlington and Montpelier as targets, otherwise I have no problem with this page. Also if you get a chance check out these guys. I could see them gaining power in Vermont (or at least become influential) in the 83DD timeline. If not at least it will give you some ideas.--ShutUpNavi 16:03, October 10, 2009 (UTC)


 * Even if Vermont has some targets nearby, it seems like a good candidate for an emerging republic. The state's always struck me as having a high level of civic involvement, so plenty of people with a sense of "res publica" and a drive to create new institutions.  And the state's fairly isolated up in the mountains, almost like a miniature Alpine Confederation. New Hampshire has similar conditions, actually.  Suppose a rump New Hampshire that recently formed a confederation with Vermont?  Benkarnell 16:46, October 10, 2009 (UTC)

Excellent ideas. I based the hits on Plattsburgh, Montpelier and Burlington on this page:

http://www.ki4u.com/webpal/d_resources/states/vt.htm

I'm not sure how much stock you would put into it, but it came up first when I googled vermont nuclear targets.

I have no issue with sparing Burlington and Montpelier, especially given that Charleston, WV and Lincoln, NE survived in this timeline. I would propose that the radiation from Plattsburgh caused the government to evacuate the central part of the state, and evacuate to the south for a period of several years. How long would it take for the radiation to die down, so everyone could return?

The other question I have is that such a state - especially considering the presence of the Vermont National Air Guard - would be a power in the region. While I realize that the concept hasn't been developed yet, what would be a plausible reason for such a state to go unnoticed for so long? The best reason I can come up with is a strong isolationistic streak among the populace and its leaders, even on the regional level; Vermont would be making itself more known now on the regional and international scene because things are so different now than after the bombs hit; Vermont has to reach out to its neighbors, and the international community, because the world is finally becoming inter-related once again. Also, Vermont sees neutrality as its most desirable option, given its good relations with the neighboring states.

Let me look at the Second Vermont Republic idea, as well, and give me a day or two to rewrite the article to reflect all the changes.--BrianD 19:13, October 10, 2009 (UTC)

I looked at the list of targets for New Hampshire. There were only two: the naval shipyards in Portsmouth, and the state capitol in Concord (Nashua would have suffered damage from the Boston-area blasts). I also researched wind patterns for Burlington on the 26th and the next several days afterwards, and the wind patterns were coming from the east and southeast, blowing radiation from the Plattsburgh and New York state blasts away from the state. So, now a question I have is what happened to Concord, and would Vermont possibly try to enter into some kind of union with New Hampshire? And, are Portsmouth and Concord (if we decide it survived) viable cities today?--BrianD 01:42, October 11, 2009 (UTC)

Canon thus far has never really indicated that New Hampshire exists as any sort of political entity, so I'm leaning towards some type of Vermont control. Perhaps the state government there fell apart admist the chaos and the surviving city-state of Manchester and townships looked to the Montpelier government for stability.--BrianD 13:01, October 11, 2009 (UTC)

World Economy Guidelines
Hi all,

I began my work on Brazilian economy post-Doomsday, but I ran into a dead end.

Let´s get this straight:

In 1971, US unilaterally terminated convertibility of the dollars to gold (which was the base of the Bretton Woods system). This action caused considerable financial stress in the world economy and created the unique situation whereby the United States dollar became the "reserve currency" for the states which had signed the agreement(from Wikipedia).

Being the US Dollar the "reserve currency", and being US basically levelled down by Doomsday, and with all the gold stored in Fort Knox to keep the dollar-gold balance probably going radioactive, what would be the convertible factors for currencies of the surviving nations? Oil? Food? Water? An artificial flat currency system?

Should it be oil, what happened to the Middle East? No mention is made about OPEC, Arab countries and Israel on the timeline. It would be an interesting point of controversy regarding economic or even geopolitical issues.

Ubiratamuniz 16:16, September 13, 2009 (UTC)

IMHO I think the main priority would be maintaining Agriculture oe growing crops for human consumption --Owen83 17:34, September 13, 2009 (UTC)

I see.

in my point of view, some things happened to Brazil because of Doomsday:

- At the time of Doomsday, Brazilian economy was in a proteccionist state. Imports were largely restricted, but exports (specially of food and some manufactured goods, specially cars, trucks and coach buses) were thriving - Brazil wasn´t much dependant on oil, since at the time nearly 50% of the car fleet was running on ethanol due to the success of the Proálcool program started on 1975 (the first ethanol-powered car went to the market on 1979). In fact, Brazilian energy matrix was composed primarily of renewable power sources: ethanol for cars, hydroelectric plants for energy generation. Fossil fuels were used primarily by industries and cargo transportation. - being Brazilian largest cities spared from the nuclear blasts, Brazilian industrial centers were able to become the largest on the surviving world.

all these factores somehow partially shielded Brazilian economy from the massive breakdown that occured around the world.

Brazil being a large food exporter (specially soy grains and meat) redirected the production to feed its own population in order to avoid unrest, latter reversing to exports again. This allowed Brazil to be one of the largest food exporters in the post-Doomsday world and one of the leaders on humanitarian aid.

That´s the scenario I´m working with right now. I plan even to add company profiles to the wiki. For now, I have a six-page word document where I am registering my thoughts prior to publishing them. :-) EDIT: Please check the Brazil page. I´ve added some thoughts on Brazilian economy immediately before Doomsday and after. Of course, I plan to develop those ideas further.

Ubiratamuniz 17:52, September 13, 2009 (UTC)

more info on Armed forces
Embrenar of Brazil and Pilatus of the Alpine Confed are still in buisness. they could be the main Military Avation companies. maybe a reestablished Commonwealth Aircraft Coparation in CANZ? Pilatus and emrenar build trainers, cargo aircraft,and Mirage 3's. CAC build FA18's. is Saab still business? if they are and are selling, the ADC might have acess to top quality stuff, like Viggen jets. from HAD.

League of Nations - Celtic Alliance
How would people feel about a formal unification between a new state and the leauge of Nations? Given the major problems faced by divergant and disperate populationsthrough depopulation, death and starvation. I think we may need to see a greater movement to some formal recognition of the League as the final port of call e.g. Internatial Court, Assembly with law making and enforcement powers? Military wing, and greater powers for ?
 * Personally, I don't think it's a good idea. There are no nations in real life that have unified with the UN in this way, and besides, the LoN was just founded. Why would the Celts relinquish their independance to such a young organisation? --DarthEinstein 16:06, September 24, 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree with Darth. There really is no precendent for this in history.  However you may want to look into allowing the ADC evolving into an EU like organization.  Possibly cooperation between the states over Sicily and Saugenay led to them considering bringing themselves closer politically.  Mitro 17:15, September 24, 2009 (UTC)

Sicily War?
By the way, what happened to Sicily? We're not really hearing about it anymore. --DarthEinstein 17:29, September 24, 2009 (UTC)
 * I split this off so we don't go off-topic. Honesty the whole war with Sicily kind of just stopped happening.  Whoever was working on it originally stopped.  I believe the ideas happened before I started editing the TL, so I was not there to see it be left unfinished.  From what little there is on it, it seems that Sicily backed off (maybe?).  If anyone wants to bring the crisis to its conclusion that would be great.  Mitro 17:50, September 24, 2009 (UTC)
 * Looking at the history of the page, Xi'Reney wrote most of it, and I haven't heard from him lately... seems to me like someone should pick it up and get it finished. (Not me - I'm already working on the war with Saguenay) --DarthEinstein 19:50, September 24, 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that was definitely XR's story, and alongside the creation of the League of Nations itself was the first major news cycle ever written for the timeline! I think that part of its purpose was to galvanize the LoN into action and show that the new organization could and would act boldly.  It was also written long before we knew anything about most of Europe, and we might be in a better position to write about it now.  Benkarnell 13:11, September 26, 2009 (UTC)

Alliance?
How about we have an alliance of the more Tyrannical nations. You know, the nations denied membership in the LoN due to their government. Sicily, my Virginia, Thunder Bay. Any other dictatorships that may be in the world. --Yankovic270 02:30, September 27, 2009 (UTC)
 * Virginia and Thunder Bay might make sense if they're in contact, but Sicily is too far away I think.--Oerwinde 02:44, September 27, 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree with Oerwinde, alliances are only effective if the nation is close by geographically or else one of the nations is powerful enough to make its presence felt across the world. Virginia and Thunder Bay are landlocked post-apoc survivor states and Sicily is surrouded by enemies.  Mitro 14:25, September 27, 2009 (UTC)

I concede on Siciliy, but Thunder Bay and Virginia would know of each other via Superior. --Yankovic270 23:58, September 27, 2009 (UTC)

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

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


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

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

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


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

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


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

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


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


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


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

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


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

Republic of New Caledonia
I'm going to start working on the Prince George region of BC. The name comes from the old Hudson's Bay Company name for the region, but like the Republic of China(Taiwan), it won't be commonly known by its official name. Most people will just call it Prince George.--Oerwinde 10:06, October 2, 2009 (UTC)

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


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


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

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


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

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


 * A couple things to consider.


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

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


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

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

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

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

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

Kingdom of the Cocos Islands
This basic storyline has been in my head for over a year now, and I've finally started writing it. Benkarnell 17:18, October 6, 2009 (UTC)

Has anyone read it yet? Benkarnell 22:27, October 9, 2009 (UTC)

I did. I'm a fan of micronations (maybe it's because who wouldn't want their own?) so I of course liked the article. When do you see the ANZC absorbing into into their nation? Mr.Xeight 22:34, October 9, 2009 (UTC)


 * If they can pull it off, I think they're going to try to become an autonomous territory of Indonesia. The family is pretty much despised in Australia and would be left with nothing; their best bet is to seek protection from somebody else.  Of course, Indonesia would rather not risk provoking the ANZC.  Maybe Aceh would be a better protector?  Benkarnell 22:46, October 9, 2009 (UTC)

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

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

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

Zanzibar (1983: Doomsday)
An article of mine, not finished but I am looking for any comments or ideas. Mitro 18:46, October 6, 2009 (UTC)
 * So far, so good. It definitely needs a new flag, though: if it's independent, there's no reason to keep Tanzania in the canton.  Benkarnell 18:56, October 6, 2009 (UTC)
 * Good point. I replaced the flag.  Mitro 02:20, October 7, 2009 (UTC)

I'm pretty much done with this article. What do you guys think? Mitro 22:38, October 8, 2009 (UTC)

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

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

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


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


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

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

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

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

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

War in the Mediterranean!
As of 9:33 PM (Eastern European Time) men from a Sicilian ship attempted to board a Greco-Libyan oil-freighter. Fortunately, the Greeks, Egyptians, and Libyans on the freighter (with 2 casualties) were able to fend off the attack, killing 3 and capturing 2. The other four men were able to flee back to their own vessel. Originally the crew believed them to be pirates, until the flag of Sicily was seen hanging from their stern. The oil-tanker was able to sail to the Greek-mandate of Cyrenaica, and the government in Skyros was radioed, alerted to the violence. At midnight, Saturday October 10th, an emergency meeting was convened of the different delegates of the new Confederation (I've decided to strengthen Greece into a Confederation, if that's okay) of Greece. At 12:30 the Confederation of Greece declared war on Siciliy, giving it 24 hours to apologize and meet the earlier demands given to it, to which they did not respond. The Atlantic Defense Community at its member states were alerted. Mr.Xeight 20:26, October 10, 2009 (UTC)

Since Sicily is such a fascist and presumably militaristic, nation, I believe the Greeks would have their hands full. I can definitely see the Greeks, who I think are overextended, franky getting, the tar, stuffing and snot beaten out of them. --Yankovic270 00:49, October 11, 2009 (UTC)
 * Overextended is right! Maybe not so badly as you say, since they've probably got the sea power to maintain themselves, but Sicily will probably be able to resist anything they can throw at them on the land.  Benkarnell 00:52, October 11, 2009 (UTC)

Because the Alpine Confederation, Egypt, Pais del Oro, Celtic Confederation, and Portugal won't also take on Sicily right, Yankovic? Let's see Sicily defend its northern borders from the Austro-Swiss and its southern borders from the Greeks, Egyptians, and Spanish. Mr.Xeight 02:27, October 11, 2009 (UTC)


 * Now this is the second big war going on right now. I think the Saguenay War's being done right - discuss it on its own page, and talk about likely outcomes before posting news events.  What shall we call it?  Benkarnell 03:24, October 11, 2009 (UTC)

Since the Saugenay War is going on right now, should we wait to iniate the war so as not to steal the spotlight of the North American War? Mr.Xeight 03:29, October 11, 2009 (UTC)


 * Hey, history marches on. If the inhabitants of 83DD are to have their war, there's precious little we can do to stop them, here on this side of the dimensional divide. I think we can handle it.  (It might be a good idea to clear out some old discussions and proposals right now, however...)  Benkarnell 03:32, October 11, 2009 (UTC)

It's funny how both countries' national teams are in the same group trying to qualify for the World Cup, and war breaks out. I believe protocol would be to suspend play until hostilities cease, even though I don't have them going head to head in the final week of group play.--BrianD 03:45, October 11, 2009 (UTC)

Who even put Sicily as a team in the world cup? They're a pariah state who's remained totally silent when asked why they're terrorizing the Med. I doubt they'd even be in any inter-European soccer league what with being the monsters of the Mediterranean. Mr.Xeight 03:50, October 11, 2009 (UTC)

I don't know who put together the list of "European countries invited to the event". I decided to build on what little had been posted about the World Cup, and had all the European nations listed competing (albeit putting them into qualifying rounds). I thought about leaving them out, but North Korea is as close to a pariah in the real world as I can come up with, and it regularly competes in international sporting events. I figured Sicily was in a similar situation, and that FIFA and the other European member nations would allow them to compete, if for no other reason than to open lines of communication between the two sides. If Sicily's participation isn't realistic, however, I can easily switch them out, perhaps with Prussia.--BrianD 04:01, October 11, 2009 (UTC)

Oh, well then I suppose you're right. But how would fans react to the temporary suspension of their game? Has this happened in our world? Who do you see winning the 2009 FIFA world cup? Mr.Xeight 04:07, October 11, 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm glad you brought up the point, Mr.Xeight. It's worthy of discussion. Fans would be disappointed, obviously. Sicily would probably use suspension of its match for propaganda purposes. As far as has it happened, I need to investigate that. Brazil tops the current FIFA World Rankings, and would be even more of a powerhouse in 83DD. Italy is fourth, by the way...Sicily probably wouldn't be 4th in our world, but in 83DD it might be one of the top sides. But as far as winning its group, I haven't decided yet.--BrianD 04:15, October 11, 2009 (UTC)