Talk: 1983: Doomsday/Former Proposals 6

NEW Republic of Lincoln

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)

Anyway, I am pretty much finished. Anyone want to comment on it? --Yankovic270 20:26, October 13, 2009 (UTC)

I still like most of it. And though I feel like kind of an ass doing it, here are still more bullets with the issues I still have:

• 1984 seems much to early for Lincoln to totally give up on the USA and l themselves a "republic". Until then, I'd imagine they'd just stick with "Nebraska" or "Government for the Greater Lincoln Area" or something just as temporary-sounding.
• They would hot have known about vents in Australia in 1996; it would have taken them at least until 2000 or later, ,IMO.
• ANZC, not CANZ.
• I agree that creating an exact replica of DC is unrealistic not just because they couldn't do it (basically they'll have to survive with almost no industry or modern technology, after the first few years), but because they wouldn't want to. Maybe a grid and a few bits inspired by DC, but by that time the Lincolnites would, probably and hopefully, be exploring their own identity and not just trying to copy the old USA. Benkarnell 21:41, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

You forgot to read my article I see. Until '96 or so (when the UPA was dissolved), the Republic of Lincoln was a provisional government, or "placeholder" for the US in the area. They did not give up on the US until then. Even now the Lincolnites are holding on to the increasingly hopeless dream that the United States would be ressurected. But again, as I said, the Lincolnites did NOT declare full independance until 1996. --Yankovic270 22:16, October 19, 2009 (UTC)

No need to get snippy. I read it. It gives 1984 as the date of independence and says, "It was not until April 8th, 1984 that a new government was organized. Calling itself the Provisional Republic of Lincoln, the new nation intended to act as a “place holder” for the US government until contact could be reestablished." They acknowledged their placeholder status (they still do, dont they?) but they still call themselves a "repulic" and a "new nation", something that would take longer than a few months, I think. At least they include the word "provisional" there, I suppose. But at that point I really would expect they'd still be calling themselves a "state"., especially since this is supposed to be the Nebraska state government assuming control. People like continuity in a crisis: in 1984, it would be more comforting to know that Nebraska was still functioning, than to hear them declare themselves a Republuc with a new constitution and everything. Benkarnell 22:42, October 19, 2009 (UTC)

I'm just saying, but though it called itself "independant" at the time, if there was any chance to rejoin a new USA, they would have tooke it like that (snap!). Though there has been a growing independant idenity in recent years,they had at the time considered themselves American citizens. Now they mostly refer to themeselves as Lincolnites (Chosen because I think too many common nationalities include the suffix -ian. eg: Virginian)

--Yankovic270 20:34, October 24, 2009 (UTC)

All I'm saying is that they wouldn't have used the word "independent" at the time, for all the reasons above. Did you see the other issues I raised, also? Benkarnell 22:40, October 25, 2009 (UTC)

Even these extremely loyal Americans could see that the Federal control of the area after DD was an illusion at best. There was no higher authority to answer to in the area. And contact to the American Provisional Administration was virtually impossible. Hell, the impossiblity of the task lead the governor to either shoot or hang himself (it isn't specified). They had noone to rely on but themselves. So the Republic of Lincoln became independant due to the lack of any leadership outside the state borders. They hoped for the US to re-establish itself, but in the mean time had to lead themselves to survive. --Yankovic270 17:03, October 27, 2009 (UTC)

If you're not budging on that, fine. It's a fairly minor thing, really, and I suppose Superior was declaring independence in that period. Maybe after a year with no government, people _would_ want somebody to call the President. But there's still no way they could have known what was happening in Australia in 1996, and no way, and no reason, to biuld a replica of Washington DC. Benkarnell 03:47, October 29, 2009 (UTC)

They found out about Australia via the technological marvel that is HAM radio. And I had wrote it so that armed gang attacks a few years before the APA's dissolving severely damage the city. Thus they take the opportunity to reform the city into an as-close-as-possible replica of Washington DC. There. Both of your problems explained. --Yankovic270 19:47, October 31, 2009 (UTC)

If the Ham operators were able to maintain contact like that., we need to rewrite the entire history of the world. The interior of North America was cut off, in most cases until the mid-to-late 2000s. It nees to be changed. And a replica of DC is impossible. Lincoln is a small survivor community. Even if they did have the industrial capacety and the technology to produce such a city, thery would have no reason whatsoever to do so. All that money, labor, and material is desperately needed elsewhere, and they would have very little to waste on a project like that. Benkarnell 20:31, October 31, 2009 (UTC)

Fine. Have it be a replica of the Lincoln Memorial and a street grid simmilar to that of DC's. And the HAM radio could have been sent from state to state to reach Australia, and not reach it directly. --Yankovic270 20:38, October 31, 2009 (UTC)

With all objections answered, graduated by Benkarnell 23:26, November 4, 2009 (UTC).

Multi-National Peacekeeping Force (1983: Doomsday) , Lebanon, Islamic Republic of Iran Syria, Jordan, and Israel

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)

As an offshoot of the articles I am already working on for the Middle East, I have created proposed articles for both Israel and Jordan. I have posted my arguements for these nations on the Asia Discussion page rather than taking space here. As always, I am interested in any thoughts. Thanks.--Fxgentleman 03:40, October 19, 2009 (UTC)

I still haven't read the old ones through yet (I'm still behind), but from what I can see they are based on solid facts and research and really add to our understanding of the world. Nobody's objected to them - I don't know if that's a silent endorsement, or if everyone else, like me, just hasn't had a chance to read them yet. Benkarnell 12:58, October 19, 2009 (UTC)

I've finally read them. They are definitely good, some of the best-researched stuff we have on the immediate aftermath, and well written to boot. I'm all for making them canon and letting you be caretaker, playing around with them to finish their history. I also am happy to see one person handle the entire region; it will make things more coherent and less fragmented. One question: you mention that Israel not only survived after the devastating nuclear attacks, but actually expanded. How are you going to get it there? Benkarnell 22:45, October 22, 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the kind critique. I am fortunate in that I enjoy doing research for fun and kind of thrive on it. I have and continue to do an enormous amount of research on the pages I am working, which is why I have not added further to Lebanon or the MNF for example. I guess a big problem is you have to go back and look at how things were in 1983 versus today, so in Lebanon’s case I am reading a book on their economy circa 1982. My intention was to do a few articles, but things sort of took on a life of their own. I am currently working on articles which will cover the rest of the Arabian Peninsula nations. As previously stated, I intend to post my thoughts on the area “hopefully” soon on the Asia page. As to your question on Israel, without going into great detail, I see them annexing the West Bank and Gaza and fully integrating them into the nation. This will involve massive changes as to how Palestinians are treated. They will become full citizens (i.e. no special ids); elect reps to the parliament and hold seats in the government; and have greater involvement in policing these areas and in the military. Imagine, all the big boys involved in the Middle East will be gone: US, USSR, Europe, Syria, Egypt, UN, etc. Without this interference and given the mutual suffering taking place post D-Day, I see both sides coming closer together and eventually making peace, although there will be extremists of both stripes who will be unhappy. As for the Sinai, with the collapse of the Egyptian government immediately following D-Day, Israel will be forced to reoccupy it to deal with refugees and lawless elements. Another factor to consider will be the existence of an oil field Israel found and developed there, which it later had to turn over to Egypt. With this “re-acquisition” they would ensure their future energy needs. I see the Sinai becoming a protectorate and "maybe" voting to join Israel in the distant future. Beyond this, I do not see Israel expanding further. I hope this helps to answers your question. --Fxgentleman 04:50, October 24, 2009 (UTC)

OK. If Israel is re-imagined as a a "unity state" instead of a "Jewish state", might it end up changing its name? Although I can't think of any neutral names for the region... Holy Land is too religious, Levant too dull.

Any objections to removing the proposal tags from these articles? Benkarnell 17:27, October 26, 2009 (UTC)

The issue about the name has been on my mind as well. I have been toying with the idea of the United States of Israel or USI. I had done some research about how Israel came to choose that name and given the historical and religious context behind it, my instinct tells me they would not be willing to walk away from it. I definitely see Palestine as a new name being a dead issue. So, what do you think, does USI sound cheesy? It would allow them to keep the name but indicate the nation was “new.” --Fxgentleman 17:40, October 27, 2009 (UTC)

This is a little banal, but how about "State of Israel and Palestine", along the lines of "Bosnia and Herzegovina" or "Austria-Hungary"? Like B-H and A-H, most (non-Arab) outsiders would probably shorten it to "Israel" in everyday speech. Benkarnell 18:41, October 27, 2009 (UTC)

I think your suggestion is excellent and I am going to run with it. I especially like the analogy to Bosnia. What I will do is call it Israel and Palestine, which would allow both sides to feel represented. I agree over time people would most likely come to use just Israel like we do with Bosnia today. I will leave the file name as Israel, but I will make the adjustment in the introduction. When I get to the point where I am talking about the unification, I will explain the name change. I appreciate the help. --Fxgentleman 00:37, October 29, 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! Anyone object to moving these pages into the canon? They have a fairly huge impact on the ATL as a whole, so it's important we have consensus. Benkarnell 03:51, October 29, 2009 (UTC)

OK. I say we give them one more day. Seriously, everybody, read them if you haven't! Benkarnell 03:10, November 4, 2009 (UTC)

I'm good with the proposals. Fxgentleman did a nice job on them, by the way! --BrianD 03:18, November 4, 2009 (UTC)

The only problem I have with these pages is that some of the ICBM’s are shot down too easy (as HAD pointed out on Israel’s talk page). But otherwise I like the general idea behind these pages. Most of the issues can be worked out on the talk pages, so I would press for graduation.--ShutUpNavi 17:12, November 4, 2009 (UTC)

Thoroughly excellent, a perfect example of what this althist can create. Bob 17:45, November 4, 2009 (UTC)

Navi will bring up his issues on the talk page; consensus was for graduation. Benkarnell 23:26, November 4, 2009 (UTC)

Greco-Sicillian War

With the war mentioned in the WCRB NewsHour, i though I'd start a page for it. Greco-Sicilian War‎ any ideas for the various battles, foreign reactions and other features of the war, please post here. (Is Greco right? or should i use a different word?)

--Das Taub 10:32, October 20, 2009 (UTC)

Actually, there's already a page for this. See Second Sicily War (1983: Doomsday). --DarthEinstein 00:34, October 21, 2009 (UTC)

I only have limited time to say this; but we really don't need two pages for the same war. I have no time to work on it, and I'm sorry.

Red vs. Blue, I'm so sorry I haven't responded to your nice comment. I tried two weeks ago but I had a spy-sweeper on my computer and I forgot I pressed "shutdown computer after sweep". Just as I was about to press send, the anti-virus finished, and well... I have a long, drawn out response about Greek culture in your world, and when I have time, I'd love to help!

Mr.Xeight 23:51, October 22, 2009 (UTC)

Wow didn't even realize there were two pages. Maybe we can combine them... Mitro 02:00, October 23, 2009 (UTC)

No point really, they just reiterate the same thing about that comment I put. Mr.Xeight 02:15, October 23, 2009 (UTC)

The pages were merged. Benkarnell 23:26, November 4, 2009 (UTC)

American Survival States

I have a question concerning development of a proposed story for an American survival state. Although my focus is primarily on the Middle East, I have also been working on a possible mini-state in my area of the former US. Having read a number of thoughts and concerns expressed about so many such nations popping up in this region of the world, should I outline my idea via this page under proposals and get feedback from the editors first or should I create a proposed article page and lay out my thoughts on the discussion page? I would like to get some guidance before I move forward on the idea. Thanks. --Fxgentleman 12:39, October 21, 2009 (UTC)

I would do exactly what I did with West Texas: create an article (make sure you put (1983: Doomsday) in the title, and put {{ddprop}} as the first line in the main text of the article), then list it on this page.--BrianD 22:55, October 21, 2009 (UTC)

This section was never really a proposal. Benkarnell 23:26, November 4, 2009 (UTC)

New Situation for Mexico: The Yucatan

Just a proposal. Chiapas and the Yucatan states fight for independence as free states, continuing to the present-day. They are armed by Cuba and a now Communist Guatamala, which has gone on to take over El Salvador and Belize. The insurgents have control over large parts of their claimed territory, but are largely unrecognized internationally (a situation similar to the conflict in Georgia). Everything else is as OTL, with the new district capital, and the jointly controlled Mexican-LoN Northern states. I have never done so much outlining in my life......Lahbas 22:18, October 14, 2009 (UTC)

Chiapas and Yucatan controlling Belize would put them into conflict with the East Caribbean Federation.--BrianD 22:21, October 14, 2009 (UTC)

Yeah Belize is a part of the ECF according to canon. Mitro 23:21, October 14, 2009 (UTC)

Interesting; a nation embracing a political ideaology that doomed the world. Not that I'm saying this is impossible, or implausible, or deplorable, just interesting. I'll be watching the debate and upgrading into canon. Mr.Xeight 22:29, October 14, 2009 (UTC)

By their view, it could be Capitalism that doomed the world, or just the conflict between them. --DarthEinstein 22:35, October 14, 2009 (UTC)

DarthEinstein's right. Though we know that the apocalypse was triggered by a Soviet mistake, for all the Cubans and insurgents know, it was Washington that launched the first missiles. I don't think they would hesitate to tell their people that, either. --BrianD 22:38, October 14, 2009 (UTC)

I gave Belize to Guatamala only because they historically have territorial claims to the territory. At the same time, I don't think that by the time Guatamala would invade, by the early 90's, there would be an international community to stop them. (The LoN would not exist until I believe 2008, and the ECF military I would think to be incapable of a counter-invasion). Lahbas 00:05, October 15, 2009 (UTC)

When I put the map together I imagined Guat. occupying parts of inland Belize, while the proper Belizean government is part of the ECF and controls most of the coast. We can adjust borders and give most of Belize to Guatemala, though, without disrupting canon, as long as Belize at least keeps a rump state on the coast, presumably centered on Belize City. Benkarnell 11:41, October 15, 2009 (UTC)

I just re-read the Mexico article, and any new states in southern Mexico will have to be harmonized with it. The far-right México Primero party, now illegal, was calling for Mexico to occupy Central America as late as last spring. This doesn't fit with the proposal, which assumes a weak Mexico and a strong Guatemala. I think we can interpret Yucatan and Chiapas as somewhat lawless, maybe filled with some rebels from the south, but not as full-blown Guatemalan puppets.

[edit] Also, League of Nations control in the northern states is a proposal that the Mexican government has made. I doubt the League has the resources to intervene in so large an area. It's basically still brand new organization, after all. Benkarnell 02:40, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

What if after Doomsday the Mexicans consolidated control over the more central territories, leaving the inhabited outer territories to their own machinations. --Yankovic270 02:52, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

There can't be a "what if" about it. What's there is there, especially since Guinesscap, the caretaker for Mexico, is more-or-less inactive right now. We have to be extra careful not to mess up his pages with material that contradicts what he wrote. And what's written is: "May 10, 1987 - The influx of Central American refugees and indigenous uprisings in Yucatán and Chiapas force president de la Madrid to federalize the the five southern border states of Chiapas, Tabasco, Campeche, Yucatán and Quintana Roo. These five states are dissolved and made into two federal territories, Istmo-Chiapas and Yucatán. Most of the Mexican Armed Forces are stationed here." And this year, "Right-wing extremists use the situation [food riots] to call for an end to immigration and closing the borders at Istmo-Chiapas and Yucatán. The "México Primero" party is formed with dozens of Catholic defectors from the PAN already in congress. They demand the annexation of the Central American states, the creation of reservations for all "Indian insurgents" and for Catholicism to be made the official religion."

IMO that _does_ leave room for guerrilla groups that control pieces of territory, maybe even sponsored by Guatemala. But Mexico has to have at least a good deal of control over things like border checks. How about making the Yucatan and Chiapas rebels something like the Taliban in Afghanistan right now - in control of some out-of-the-way parts of the country, able to cause a lot of trouble, and able to sneak back and forth across the border; but when you get down to it, not in any state to actually govern the territory they claim. Just an idea - it's one way to fuse the ideas together. Benkarnell 04:20, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

I like that idea. Question - how strong, or weak, IS Mexico?--BrianD 05:14, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

I don't think we know exactly. Benkarnell 14:05, November 2, 2009 (UTC)

Question: I want to begin developing a storyline for West Texas and Mexico to get back on good terms with one another. Is there anything I need to watch out for regarding Mexico? And, would it be possible for George W. Bush to play a role to bring that peace, perhaps by being a leader amongst the American interests in Mexico (who know of W's pre-DD association with Conaway and would like to see restored relations with West Texas)? --BrianD 20:38, October 29, 2009 (UTC)

I like that idea a lot! I'll try and get past my personal feelings about W and encourage him to rehabilitate his image in this alternate dimension ;-). Benkarnell 14:05, November 2, 2009 (UTC)

in 1983, belize was protected by a British military force, British Forces Belize (BFB). the BFB had a flight of 4 Harrier jump-jets raiper SAMs and about 1500 troops. --HAD 11:07, November 4, 2009 (UTC)

OK, this conversation has kind of stalled, which is too bad, since we realy have an interesting "socialism" storyline developing for Central America. Lahbas - looking again at the page you actually created, have you basically dropped the Chiapas idea but kept the Yucatan? I think that both can work, especially if Mexico's policies in the south have been so heavy handed for years. The main thing is that Mexico still has some ability to act in the area, if not actual control. But if Vladivostok writes his ideas about the USSR interfering in Nicaragua & Costa Rica, I think this can really fit right in there. Benkarnell 23:44, November 4, 2009 (UTC)

No, I haven't abandoned the Chiapas as a "nation", but I wasn't able to find a good way of representing them as such, including a flag. In my mind, the Chiapas is more like the Taliban in Afghanistan, having very weak control over their area, yet in this case popular among the native population, and thus leaving Mexico only in effective control of various areas. In the Yucatan, the Mayan people have almost complete control of the interior, following the Mexican government having given up attempts to pacify the region (similar to Warzistan in Pakistan). Therefore, while the Yucatan has a stable government, Chiapas does not. In a way though, I find it hard to believe the USSR intervening in Central America Post-Doomsday. If anything, I would think they would spend their resources trying to reassert their control over the former European Soviet. Lahbas 01:57, November 5, 2009 (UTC)

OK, then I'm all for removing the proposal tag and archiving this section. And flags, etc., while a big part of 1983DD, are secondary to actual text and writing, so that shouldn't keep you from writing! I think that the USSR now, like the SSR back then, meddles around in places where it can. Eastern Europe's probably a pit. Central America at least is accessible via the Pacific Ocean, and they have some governments still in control. I can see them sending support to states or movements that advance their agenda, whatever it may be. Benkarnell 02:12, November 5, 2009 (UTC)

NBC TV News Broadcast

This came about through an article I am currently working on. Having looked at it, I felt it would be more logical for it to exist as a separate item. It envisions what might have been broadcast on NBC concerning the nuclear launches on the night of DDay. I have tried to keep the times realistic in conjunction with the AP/UPI reports someone else created; however some times may not agree. I figure if NORAD did not detect the launch until 8:45 PM, I couldn’t see anyone knowing right away outside of the inner circle. You figure they have to tell the president first, before he gives the okay to release the information to the US. The time I chose seemed the best. If anyone thinks I should change them, please give me your thoughts. Thanks.--Fxgentleman 02:56, October 28, 2009 (UTC)

The article was incredible. Excellent work. Makes you feel like you were there, and it makes you feel the despair (it also reminds me of the closing scene of Countdown to Looking Glass). We can always fix the timeline, but this article needs to stay up.--BrianD 04:00, October 28, 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. It is nice to know I am not the only one familiar with that film. Since I can’t speak for everyone here, I remember watching such films as Special Bulletin (which ironically won the Emmy on the night in question), Looking Glass, and the Day After when they first aired and use them as inspiration when I am writing. As someone who was probably watching the Emmys that night in 1983, I can only wonder what would have gone through my mind.--Fxgentleman 04:36, October 28, 2009 (UTC)

Wow I am glad you put this here. I was just looking on YouTube when I came across this. It’s an emergency broadcast system message warning people about a nuclear attack on New York. Not sure how authentic it is but it’s perfect for the timeline.--ShutUpNavi 15:43, October 28, 2009 (UTC)

Does anyone object to graduating this article? Mitro 20:27, November 6, 2009 (UTC)

No. It's excellent.--BrianD 20:41, November 6, 2009 (UTC)

Graduating. Mitro 15:20, November 8, 2009 (UTC)

Albania

Enver Hoxha ordered the construction of some 750,000 bunkers (for a population of 3 million), in the OTL has been viewed as an example of dictatorial eccentricity but in the ATL may mean the saving of many lives. Coupled with the fact that there was only a nuclear explosion in Tirana, the Albanian capital, and that the Albanian territory is very mountainous, which it would preserve enough of nuclear contamination. The backwardness of the country would not be an obstacle in the post-nuclear world, however the population was accustomed to decades of famine and poverty. Ethnic persecution in neighboring Yugoslavia and its eventual successor, the South Slavic Union would involve a large influx of refugees from Kosovo and Macedonia to replace the population died. Finally the power vacuum in northern Greece allow Albanian expansion in this area Tristanbreiker 17:04, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

You have it the other way around. The island of Kerkyra (called "Corfu" in English) has actually been highly interactive on the Albanian coast, not so much colonizing so much as banding together with any surviving refugees, having tiny settlements fly the Kerkyran flag. Mr.Xeight 01:14, October 17, 2009 (UTC)

Also, I think Yugoslavia's been more-or-less presented as an island of stability. So likely the refugees would move in the other direction, from Albania into Macedonia and Kosovo. Although I do like the idea of a rural-based Albanian survivor state. Maybe it could move somewhat across borders, since mainland Greece (if not the islands) was/is a great mess after DD. Benkarnell 05:05, October 26, 2009 (UTC)

I take my ideas from the book by Robert D. Kaplan "Balkan Ghosts". The main idea is that the ethnic conflict that erupted in Yugoslavia in OTL came from more time ago. An influx of Albanian refugees to Kosovo, Macedonia and other parts further exacerbated latent ethnic tensions. Anyway I'm thinking another solution: Albania would be divided among various factions, among which would emphasize two, one in the north covered by South Slavic Union and one in the south puppet state of the Sicilian , perhaps chaired by King Leka (heir of the late King Albanian) who in the 80´s resided in South Africa surrounded by a weapons arsenal and a certain probability could have been saved.Tristanbreiker 13:26, November 9, 2009 (UTC)

Page was never created. Benkarnell 12:53, November 10, 2009 (UTC)

Corsica

Still have not said anything about Corsica, what suggestion you more attractive?, Power vacuum?, Independent Republic?, another French rival republic of the Republique Francaise des Terres Australes?, allied Republic to the Republic of Sicily?, puppet state of the Sicilians?, puppet State of the Alpine Confederation? or none of these options...Tristanbreiker 17:57, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

What if the Corsicans have their own republic, however there are many supporters for alliance or annexation with all of those that you mentioned, leading to lots of civil unrest, and perhaps becoming a warzone in the new war with Sicily.--DarthEinstein 19:33, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

The Republique Francaise des Terres Australes definitely claims it; that's been written already. How about - Corsica is a pawn in the rivalry between the Alpines and Sicily? Each side supports a faction in a long-drawn-out proxy war in Corsica. Benkarnell 21:57, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

I always envisioned an indepedent republic wary of the Alpinians and Sicilians, which is why I've never written anything on their involvement on the war. But a decision on the fate of Corsica would be very helpful for my Sicily War, which hasn't seen direct army-to-army fighting, and nothing bigger than spontaneous firing from ships encircling North Africa, but believe me, it's-a-comin'. Mr.Xeight 02:33, October 17, 2009 (UTC)

Then Corsica is disputed territory, supporting the Sicilians one faction and the Alpine Confederation the other.Tristanbreiker 18:12, October 20, 2009 (UTC)

Knowing the Corsicans, most of them would favor just keeping the two out of the area, because they want to be independent.I'll agree to it being disputed territory, but they'll likely favor the Alpines over Sicilians because the Alpines might let them go free. Louisiannan 17:36, November 4, 2009 (UTC)

Page was never created. Benkarnell 12:53, November 10, 2009 (UTC)

Communications and mass media

I'm interested in how mass media and communications works in the 1983:DD world, so I've started a page for it. Your input and help is greatly appreciated. http://althistory.wikia.com/wiki/Communications_and_mass_media_%281983:_Doomsday%29 --BrianD 22:55, October 21, 2009 (UTC)

I've read what's there. My only problem is that the REM/Internet seems to spread a bit too quickly. I would think that, though the SAC and the ANZC would be able to use it, as would countries associated with them, elsewhere it would not be available. Many people likely would not have personal computers, and large scale computer production seems unlikely outside of the SAC and ANZC. --DarthEinstein 01:13, October 22, 2009 (UTC)

I revised it to (hopefully) a more realistic scale.--BrianD 01:55, October 22, 2009 (UTC)

So from what I gathered it is in place in the SAC, ANZC, Canada, Singapore, Mexico, and the Celtic Alliance. That sounds good to me. --DarthEinstein 02:15, October 22, 2009 (UTC)

Exactly. They're building an infrastructure to expand their version of the internet worldwide. The only limit is funding and public/private initiative.--BrianD 02:27, October 22, 2009 (UTC)

We've discussed the Internet before. Last May, Hellerick proposed the idea of a coordinated (mostly private) international effort to retrieve, systematize, and share information. It would be called the International Information Preservation Project, but everyone would call it the Doomsday Library. The idea had huge potential, but it stalled somewhere, and no page was created for it. In the process of the discussion, we talked a lot about the Internet, so it might be helpful to read what was said: Talk:1983: Doomsday/Archive 3#Library project.

I also have one suggestion: when I summoned the "Alaska Broadcasting Corporation" into being (thanks for remembering!), I imagined it as Alaska's local affiliate of the ANZBC. Regarding public radio in the US (a topic I'm very interested in), NPR itself went nearly bankrupt in 1983 and had to take out an enormous loan from the CPB (see this document, especially the section "Transition Period from April 30, 1983 to October 31, 1983" - what a lucky find!). I'd imagine that the public stations would be some of the most crucial ones in the Aftermath era, their being so community-centered, so that's impotrtant to know. I also think that the local Alaska and Hawaii NPR stations, or their successors, would have become ANZBC affiliates upon annexation. Benkarnell 21:13, October 28, 2009 (UTC)

The only thing about that, Ben, is that I envisioned ANZBC as a merger of the ABC (Australian Broadcasting Corporation), Television New Zealand and Radio New Zealand, all owned by their respective governments. The best I understand from Wikipedia, their OTL equivalents are much more like the BBC or CBC than PBS and NPR. But that certainly isn't set in stone, at least as I am not the author of the ANZC. --BrianD 21:44, October 28, 2009 (UTC)

The ANZC does not have any one author. I figured that after years of dictatorship, civil war, rationing, military occupation, and unrest, what was left of Hawaii's public radio station would be glad to accept state sponsorship, and the change in status that would come with that. Same in Alaska, although the situation there remains unclear. But "Public radio evolves into BBC-like institutions, while keeping some American-ness" seems like a good scenario to me. Benkarnell 22:22, October 28, 2009 (UTC)

Easy enough to fix. I could add a "Channel Two" to Alaska, accounting for a station broadcasting programming from private ANZC networks. --BrianD 23:01, October 28, 2009 (UTC)

Graduated, Benkarnell 12:53, November 10, 2009 (UTC)

International Ice Hockey Federation

New page created for ice hockey's governing body in this timeline. http://althistory.wikia.com/wiki/International_Ice_Hockey_Federation_%281983:_Doomsday%29 --BrianD 04:09, November 1, 2009 (UTC)

How does this relate to the individual countries' hockey leagues, such as the CHL or the VHL? --DarthEinstein 16:25, November 1, 2009 (UTC)

Very little. The purpose of the IIHF, in this timeline, is to regulate international competitions and help regrow the sport globally, not to dictate how domestic competitions are governed.--BrianD 16:48, November 1, 2009 (UTC)

Graduated, Benkarnell 12:53, November 10, 2009 (UTC)

Commonwealth Special Air Service Regiment (CSASR)

If anyone has the time/knowhow, would they mind creating an article for the CSASR of the ANZC (it shold be CANZ, to be correct) the guy who did the Republican Guard article seems to have a knack for this. --HAD 13:01, October 22, 2009 (UTC)

that should start the ball rolling!--HAD 15:22, October 23, 2009 (UTC)

Tagged as stub. Benkarnell 12:53, November 10, 2009 (UTC)

MediFleet (1983: Doomsday)

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

Is there anyone who objects to graduating this and marking it as a stub? Mitro 14:40, October 19, 2009 (UTC)

I'm confused as to how the Celtic Alliance surrendering control of the medical institutions becomes surrender of political control to the United Nations? Louisiannan 19:39, October 19, 2009 (UTC)

Yikes! Missed this one. I object on several points:

1. The League of Nations' medical arm is the International Red Cross, re-established just last March with its headquarters in Geneva. It may be that MediFleet is an older organization, recently put under League control and not yet merged with the Red Cross (probably a good thing, since the Red Cross so far has mostly lacked things like actual doctors and ambulances and hospitals - it's all in the works).
2. The group just recently rejected the idea of the Celtic Alliance turning control of itself over to the League of Nations, because it made no sense. No nation ever has or ever would willingly relinquish its own self-government, certainly not to an international body run by who-knows-what country next.
3. Even the idea of turning all hospitals in the country over to the LoN makes no sense. Where's the money going to come from? And if the Celts are still going to pay for them, then what exactly are they handing over? Just decision making power? Why would they do that?
4. The UN/LoN administers territories and hospitals in places where the normal authorities cannot do so. The C.E., one of the world's wealthier and more successful countries, is a very odd choice for LoN takeover.

Benkarnell 21:57, October 19, 2009 (UTC)

Alright it doesn't seem people are acceptable about the idea. Unless Mjdoch or someone else makes some of the suggested changes I will mark this as obsolete. Mitro 23:56, October 19, 2009 (UTC)

I think the idea of a Celtic-based MediFleet is a good one. It's just that this page was written (I think) when Mjdoch was still considering the idea of ceing C.A. sovreignty to the League of Nations. Now that this idea was rejected, the idea of MediFleet has to be re-worked given what we know. It may be that the C.A. has turned MediFleet over to the LoN. Benkarnell 00:55, October 20, 2009 (UTC)

I have made some changes to the article. What do you think? Mitro 02:27, October 29, 2009 (UTC)

This article is fine; it's kind of like how the WCRB was originally and ANZC institution and was transferred to the LoN. However some expansion might be wanted because this article has barely any content. --DarthEinstein 02:34, October 29, 2009 (UTC)

I know its small but the idea was not mine originally. Mitro 02:42, October 29, 2009 (UTC)

I like it, but I'd like to hear from Mjdoch since he's the creator. Benkarnell 03:47, October 29, 2009 (UTC)

Never heard from Mjdoch, so Mitro's version of the page was graduated without his input. Benkarnell 12:53, November 10, 2009 (UTC)

New pages for specific sports

• Baseball http://althistory.wikia.com/wiki/Baseball_(1983:_Doomsday)
• American football http://althistory.wikia.com/wiki/American_football_(1983:_Doomsday)
• Football (aka soccer) http://althistory.wikia.com/wiki/Football_(aka_soccer)_(1983:_Doomsday)
• Rugby (one page for rugby union and rugby league) http://althistory.wikia.com/wiki/Rugby_(1983:_Doomsday)
• Football (other codes, specifically Gaelic and Aussie Rules) http://althistory.wikia.com/wiki/Football_(other_codes)_(1983:_Doomsday)
• Basketball http://althistory.wikia.com/wiki/Basketball_(1983:_Doomsday)
• Ice hockey http://althistory.wikia.com/wiki/Ice_hockey_%281983:_Doomsday%29

Purpose is to summarize status of each sport in the post-Doomsday world. Let me know any other sports that we need to concentrate on.--BrianD 03:58, October 28, 2009 (UTC)

Ice Hockey. Its the major sport of Canada and Victoria, would likely have a large presence in Soviet Siberia and Nordic Union, and probably the Canadian territory of the North American Union.--Oerwinde 08:19, October 30, 2009 (UTC)

Hockey would be big in Superior as well. Mitro 12:42, October 30, 2009 (UTC)

Page has been created.--BrianD 16:32, October 30, 2009 (UTC)

Everything graduated. Benkarnell 12:53, November 10, 2009 (UTC)

How about cricket, a big sport in countries that used to be British colonies such as Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, India, Pakistan and of course Britain itself

Verence71 10:24, December 26, 2009 (UTC)

All in due time. --BrianD 17:25, December 26, 2009 (UTC)

Operation Red Blood

A UIP operation to dissolve the communist break-away states -- MC Prank 17:34, October 27, 2009 (UTC)

Can you add a link? Benkarnell 13:17, November 2, 2009 (UTC)

Page was not created. Benkarnell 12:53, November 10, 2009 (UTC)

WCRB expedition into the southern U.S.

I've begun a page that will hopefully give some idea as to what is going on in the region, while allowing for editors to create future articles. http://althistory.wikia.com/wiki/2009_WCRB_report_on_the_southern_United_States_%281983:_Doomsday%29 In a nutshell:

• there were survivors, especially on the periphery (Texas, Kentucky, West Virginia).
• The deep South apparently was hammered by racial violence and the aftereffects from radiation.
• Every state listed in the article was explored, but not every part of each state was. For example, in Texas, West Texas was known to the WCRB, and explorers also took the time to investigate the ruins of Galveston and Corpus Christi.
• Florida is the most explored area, but even the Cubans haven't explored the entire state.
• Apparently there were dozens of micro-nations in the region at various times, including five black nationalist nations and no less than eight manifestations of the Confederate States of America (usually one, two or a few towns from neighboring states claiming their entire states, or the entire South, as their territory).
• Some of the nations had political and military power to back up their claims, but many of the states were in name only.
• Cuba is the only country that had independently gone on expeditions in the region, up through Florida into central Georgia. West Texas is now exploring central and eastern portions of the former state of Texas (and indeed has claimed the entire state as its own).
• Despite Cuban protests, in the areas NOT a part of canon or current proposals, the WCRB sent either non-Cuban scouts (including former Americans from Mexico) or, in the Florida/Georgia area, non-Cubans were assigned with Cubans.
• The reason for this was that the WCRB thought that locals would view Cubans as Soviet or Communist invaders continuing the war. It was thought that American, Mexican, UAR and Brazilian scouts would be better received.
• Much evidence regarding the fate of surviving cities and towns was found, but only 19 surviving communities were discovered. (I'm not sure yet where all they're going to be.)
• One of those communities, Portland, Tennessee, has an article. Contact was made with it, and another in Hattiesburg, Mississippi. The other 17 communities were observed only, as WCRB scouts had been instructed to be cautious.
• One community in South Carolina seemed to be predominantly black, with some white and Hispanic slaves; another, in Arkansas, was white-dominated, including Klansmen and black slaves. Scouts deemed both situations to be unsafe for contact, and it is thought that the scouts were able to get away unnoticed.
• The standard of living in each surviving community outside of Florida seems to be 19th century.
• Cuba got to lead the expedition into the South (and one of its officials as the head of the project), but the LoN, after pressure from Mexico and Puerto Rico, more or less took oversight of the project out of Cuban hands and into its own.
• After some diplomatic "discussion", and some pressure from certain Cuban officials to explore the entire region for "peaceful" purposes, Cuba finally relented, agreeing to an actual lesser role in the project.--BrianD 17:17, November 1, 2009 (UTC)

I kind of like the idea of Cuba already having a very established economic presence, at least in the Gulf Coast and/or Georgia. For many years, Cuban traders may have been those people's only reliable source of industrial goods. It would make for an interesting reversal of the world order heretofore - one of the main themes of this TL. (And one we sometimes neglect, since we've focused so many times on the few survivors of the USA and Western Europe and the influence they still exert.) In this way, I'd think that Cuba would be able to present itself as the country best-equipped to carry out League of Nations-sponsored activities in the region, kind of like how Greece maintains the Suez region in the name of the League. Benkarnell 00:50, November 2, 2009 (UTC)

Interesting idea. The key for that to happen is for the Cubans to gain a measure of trust (which they apparently did in Florida and Georgia); perhaps they did so partly by blaming the war on the Russians (and explaining away Siberia as another country separate from the 'warmongers'). Also, is Cuba's economy in this TL like communist China's in ours?--BrianD 01:40, November 2, 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure. And don't think I'm trying to force my ideas on you, because I'm not. I had just liked the idea, hinted at in the Cuba page, that Cubans were becoming economically dominant in the former Deep South. I don't think trust would be an issue - with all society shattered & destroyed, I think many Southerners would welcome anyone offering generous trade terms. And this would be a very recent phenomenon, since Cuba itself was very unstable until the mid 90s. So maybe Cuba is just beginning its ascendancy in the region, and isn't yet strong enough to dictate anything to the LoN. But Greece is similar - it was also a nuclear target and is only just recovering and making its influence felt in surrounding coast lands. I guess I kind of feel that we need some "reverse colonialism" to balance the regular colonialism we're seing in North (and South) Africa. So don't take my ideas too seriously, I suppose. Benkarnell 13:24, November 2, 2009 (UTC)

This article is very much in flux anyway, but all ideas are appreciated! I'm going to use the old map as a guide in regards to Cuban influence. And assume that somehow, Cuba and whomever locals remained were able to come to some sort of agreement: U.S. resources in exchange for help, with the alternatives being Cuba going in and killing everyone (and facing a potential war with an American-influenced Mexico), or facing a guerrilla-type scenario that would render any benefits to Cuba useless. I'm also going to establish Mexico as having some kind of presence and oversight over Cuban affairs in the Georgia/Florida region, which up to now has been considered territory "of Cuban influence" due to a total absence of local government. I also want to establish that in exchange for goods from the U.S., that Cuba (and Mexico, with the 'encouragement' of the LoN) have gone in at least to the Everglades and restored electricity. --BrianD 15:19, November 2, 2009 (UTC)

Since this deals with the southern US, I wanted to throw out a thought I have been contemplating. What would have happened to the off shore oil/gas platforms in the Gulf of Mexico belonging to US companies? Were they taken over by another nation, i.e. Mexico; were they destroyed on Doomsday, and if so, why about the resulting pollution it would have caused; or did they band together in some sort of micronation? As strange as the last thought may sound, I was thinking back to Sealand, an offshore British naval fort, which became an independent country back in 1967. It’s plausible some of the crews could have used boats to move families from places like Morgan City, Louisiana to the platforms to wait out the chaos. Of course the big problem would be where to get food and fresh water. Plus they would have to defend the platforms and there would be the question of how much EMP damage was sustained on Doomsday. --Fxgentleman 18:20, November 2, 2009 (UTC)

You raise a great point, Fxgentleman; I would think the Cubans and Mexicans have already laid claim on the oil platforms. But your idea regarding the people on the platforms deserves consideration. As far as them being targets, every list of targets I have ever seen never included oil rigs. Most reading I've done on the subject suggested that the Soviets expected to survive, and win, WWIII. One would think the Russians would have wanted to disable American capability to fight and defend itself, then come in (if possible) at some point and take any resources it could, not destroy them all.--BrianD 18:48, November 2, 2009 (UTC)

Since both Cuba and Mexico claim the oil platforms, I could see both of them recognizing whatever micronation on them to keep them out of the other's hands. Hypothetically speaking, what would they call this micronation? I definately can see it be rich from oil exports. --Yankovic270 17:26, November 4, 2009 (UTC)

It might be named after the person who founded it, though what his (or her) name would be I don't know. Or they might decide to name their country after a US president. Or they might have a boring official name such as the "Republic of the Gulf" or something. --DarthEinstein 17:40, November 4, 2009 (UTC)

The Republic of Roosevelt? The Republic of Washington? The Republic of Jefferson? Do any of these names sound good to you? --Yankovic270 19:32, November 4, 2009 (UTC)

Name it after the company that had ownership over most of the platforms of the time. It makes more sense that way, and could at least serve for a temporary name. Tha major problem however would be the hurricane seasons, since they are known could occasionaly cause severe damage to the platforms, and in TTL there is no effective way to repair them. IF there are any that are mobile, as I have heard might have existed. They likely would link them together into a giant floating island in order to prevent this, while also acting as the "capital". Lahbas 20:22, November 4, 2009 (UTC)

How did we get to people establishing entire countries on oil platforms? People might stay there for a time, but permanently? If anything, they would have abandoned the platforms after a period of time and taken their chances on shore. Anyway, if anyone stayed on those things and survived, by 2009 some nation would have cut a deal with them: we get you off this platform onto dry land where you can start a life, and we get the platform and rights to drill for oil.--BrianD 20:59, November 4, 2009 (UTC)

I'll submit this idea to the entire community regarding the oil in the Gulf of Mexico: there may have been survivors who evacuated to the platforms on DD, then went south to safer lands after it was clear that America had become a wasteland and unsafe to return to. By 2009, Cuba, Mexico, the East Caribbean Federation and the League of Nations are haggling over who has the rights to the oil, but all agree they're not recognizing any wingnuts living on the platforms who claim themselves as the "Kingdom of the Gulf" with sovereign control over the region and its resources. This is alternate history, not Waterworld.--BrianD 21:13, November 4, 2009 (UTC)

Your comment is Amazing, Brian :) taking this one step further brings me to creating this page: Waterworld-Movie (1983: Doomsday) --Xi'Reney 19:33, November 8, 2009 (UTC)

There were no movable platforms in the Gulf at the time, which previously I thought there were. They had been in developement at the time, and only two existed, both in the North Sea. I can imagine them acting as pirate vessels, though eventually being abandoned or sunk due to the actions of either nations or nature. Also, many of the platforms in the Gulf would collapse at this time, due to disrepair, the lack of proper materials from the mainland, etc. Most would be abandoned during the first year, while those few where the population could de-salt the water would probably maintain their presence for a longer period. Still, only those near the coast would probably remain populated, and would have fallen under government control. As a result, I think that only those two I mentioned in the North Sea would likely remain removed from national government control, or at least maintain independence. Lahbas 22:51, November 4, 2009 (UTC)

When I originally posed my pondering two days back on this subject, I had been wondering what might have been the future of these platforms in the DDay universe. As to the thought of some unified government encompassing all the platforms, I agree it is a bit of a stretch. I was thinking more in terms of a few platforms forming one or more micronations. As I mentioned, back in the late 1960s, the micronation of Sealand was established on an old British naval fort (which resembles an oil platform) about six miles off the English coast and in fact still exists to this day. Believe it or not, there have been attempts from time to time by groups to establish such micronations on offshore platforms; however, they were scuttled by nearby nations. I figure these rigs are normally manned all the time and more than likely would have had crews on DDay and “might”, and I stress this point, be seen as a lifeboat in a sea of chaos. As I previously mentioned, survivors would be facing some definite problems to make this viable and in the long run may depart, maybe to LA or Mexico. It is also to be expected by 2009 the global oil companies who would have survived would have reasserted control. However, another thought which did not occur to me originally, was whether some rigs might become part of some survivor nation located along the LA coast. I have no idea how many rigs were out there at the time, but this website I ran across shows how many were in the gulf as of 2008. http://maker.geocommons.com/maps/268 As has been discussed, there are still many open question marks about so many aspects of the post DDay world and this was just one of those I wondered what might of happened thoughts rather than a specific idea. --Fxgentleman 01:29, November 5, 2009 (UTC)

Fxgentleman, you made very good points. My concern here is that your ideas aren't explored in an unrealistic, B-movie-type manner. People could have survived on those platforms short-term, probably. Long term, those in the Gulf would have had to flee to Mexico or Central America (or maybe the Caribbean); anyone off the California coast probably would have fled into Baja California.--BrianD 02:55, November 8, 2009 (UTC)

I agree with your sentiments. There is no such thing as a bad idea per se, just those that are realistic and unrealistic. Some ideas are workable in the short term, but not the long term, and others which sound good originally, tend to fall apart once cold hard logic and reason are applied as has already been seen. I have to confess a bit of a surprise at how much air time this idea got from everyone and in retrospect it should have been posted under a new subject heading. As for myself, I have been ruminating over different what if thoughts about the DDay universe; however, being analytical by nature, I find it best to look at all sides of an idea as to its feasibility. I think what may be the best way to address this subject, is perhaps a future article on the state of the post-DDay oil industry in North America. What does everyone think?--Fxgentleman 14:50, November 8, 2009 (UTC)

Graduated; oil platform idea not (yet) given its own page. Benkarnell 12:53, November 10, 2009 (UTC)

Empire of Greater Germania

Hmmmm, I think we should add a Germania for the doomsday subject. u know, like a country that has territories of the German Empire (1871-1918), Modern Day Poland, Northern Italy, Croatia, Northern Serbia, and Denmark. I think it should also the land of inventions, in other words, the most advanced of the Post-Doomsday societies, as well as the most militarized. Its capital should be Berlin and that most of the city the Germans rebuilt looks similar to Ancient Rome and Berlin during the time of World War I. They should have these walkers similar to the ones on Star Wars, artillery, tanks, helicopters, robot spiders, and jets, along with an air-fleet of Zeppelins. It might need colonies in Africa, Latin America, and the Pacific, too. They should have a combination of futuristic and WW II technology and that their government is a Military-Monarchy under a Military Kaiser. They should also be the most richest and most eco-friendly. Their walls should be that of their borders to keep outsiders and disease from coming.

--GreaterReich33 6:16 PM, November 8, 2009 (UTC)

That sounds ridiculous enough that I am not sure if you are being serious. Mitro 03:47, November 9, 2009 (UTC)

Ditto. --DarthEinstein 04:16, November 9, 2009 (UTC)

I'm holding out for the Kingdom of New York led by Russ Kurtell myself.--BrianD 04:22, November 9, 2009 (UTC)

Implausible, the Kingdom of New York would be destroyed by Zombie Robot Richard Daley of Chicago! Mitro 04:25, November 9, 2009 (UTC)

I like the walkers, myself. Helpful for traversing das glowing ruins.--BrianD 04:30, November 9, 2009 (UTC)

Just make sure you find a way to stop someone from wrapping a long rope around them causing them to fall down. Seriously, such a giant weapons platform and all the weapons were in the front. Mitro 04:39, November 9, 2009 (UTC)

This makes me think of another question: would there be copies of Return of the Jedi in TTL, somewhere in South America or Australia? --BrianD 04:43, November 9, 2009 (UTC)

Maybe. It was released in May '83, and I'm sure that it would be released in Australia even if South America would have to wait for a dubbed version or something. Perhaps someone in the Australian film industry would pick up the franchise and make prequels, or even sequels if he didn't know what Lucas had intended for the series. I'll have to think about this a bit, as I am a Star Wars fan (as would seem obvious by my name). --DarthEinstein 20:33, November 9, 2009 (UTC)

According to IMDB, Return was not released until Oct 27, 1983 in Australia. It was released in parts of South America in November and December. Mitro 23:41, November 9, 2009 (UTC)

I'd hate to be the negative one for once, but they are right. This is a classic example of ASB. If they nixed the larger version of the Kingdom of Prussia, what makes you think they would accept your bloated, oversized empire? This is a rare idea, as it is the first idea presented that I want rejected. --Yankovic270 14:17, November 9, 2009 (UTC)

What? It'll be like a huge refuge of human kind. You know, like in the movie V for Vendetta, when Britain becomes neutral from a world war and ends up a dictatorship while other countries like USA burn down and reduce into tribes. it would also be like World War Z, when there are a few human inhabited countries left on the planet after the zombie invasion. --GreaterReich33 6:16 PM, November 8, 2009 (UTC)

Have you actually read the Timeline? What about the countries you have ignored like Prussia, North Germany, the Alpine Confederation, the Nordic Union, etc.? Also what even makes you think such a nation is plausible when Europe was destroyed in a NUCLEAR WAR. Sorry but your idea is way to ASB for this TL. Mitro 23:41, November 9, 2009 (UTC)

This project is, to the extent we can manage, a straight-up alternate history, as close to "speculative realism" as we can make it. You're bringing in pieces of science fiction and fantasy, which don't fit at all with it. Benkarnell

Maybe, but I'm just curious if they would've unify together and form a post-doomsday empire much like Rome's and that they would get the radiation out by using machines. You know, futuristic robots freeing central europe from radiation. Neat, huh? If only the current German nations in this TL would unite, then they would unify all of Germany, Poland, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Czechoslovakia, and Austria into the Germanian Empire. They should also annex the Alsace-Lorraine territory, Eastern Prussia, and the Memelland. That way, the Germans would be able to have a more peaceful post-doomsday society. Here's a map of what the empire should look like if the current German states were to unite.--GreaterReich33 6:16 PM, November 8, 2009 (UTC)

Robots?!? Who are you kidding?!? This idea should be voted down before it becomes any more absurd and Hollywood. I hate to be the bearer of bad news Reich, but your idea is completely and totally impossible. There is no way a nation can unify that much European territory in this timeline and be plausible. Much of the stuff you suggested is way to sci-fi for this timeline. I vote that we reject this garbage nation and make it obsolete. I would normally support new ideas, but that is when they have at least a grain of realism. The first plausible idea I read will be the first. --Yankovic270 02:36, November 10, 2009 (UTC)

I'm with Yank this is an insane idea! I vote NO on this idea--GOPZACK 02:38, November 10, 2009 (UTC)

What? It seems normal to see a whole nation in any timeline unify with other nations. Honestly, just because this timeline has to do with post-nuclear war doesn't mean that you can't make empires. All I se in the current map is that they all seem more like tribes than nations. I am NOT insane because most of these nations are poor, small, and are unable to stand unless they work together. For Example, Otto von Bismarck fought against the Austrians, French, and Danes in order to unite the German states into an empire, the German Nation!!!! Seeing only small states is obviously another dark age. I suggest that Germans fight off mutants and unify Central Europe. I have some realism in this, you know. --GreaterReich33 6:16 PM, November 9, 2009 (UTC)

Tell me this. Where do they get the TECHNOLOGY? Star Wars-esque walkers? Robot spiders? And the infrastructure to support such a nation! What would it take? Most of the major cities in the region are radioactive ruins. The richest nations in this timeline are the Australian-affiliated nations and the South American-affiliated nations, not Germany. I'm sorry but the Doomsday community is completely against your idea. You can take your idea and turn it into your own alternate history, but it does not fit here. --DarthEinstein 03:07, November 10, 2009 (UTC)

How to get tech? Its simple, you conquer territories, establish trade with nations, even with the richest ones, and then industrialize the nation. Are you telling me that european countries are now third world nations? Ha! ridiculous. Germany should be rebuild by now on this TL. But they can't unless they make trade with Australia and South America. Oh, and one more thing: you have to research really hard to build such devices. Germania must survive.

--GreaterReich33 6:16 PM, November 9, 2009 (UTC)

It cannot survive. It is way too implausible to survive. And if you are doing this out of patriotism for Germany, let me tell you that there are many German survivors states. And all of them are way more plausible than your idiotic Germania. --Yankovic270 03:35, November 10, 2009 (UTC)

Yes it is a dark age. This timeline is a dystopia! Much of Europe is either radiactive ruins or in chaos following Doomsday. It is not at all plausible for a nation to cover so much territory. There rules to this wiki and among them is aneed for plausibility and for nations in this timeline smaller is better. This piece of jingoistic scheiße pretty much violates every writen and unwritten rule of this wiki. At least when I tried to add the half-assed New Germany article I had the decency to try to make it plausible. This piece of trash does not even deserve to be a proposal, as it is an unrepentant mess of ridiculous sci-fi and fantasy material. Are you attempting to make this wiki into a blog? This has no business being on this timeline. I suggest that you cut your losses and abandon ship, Reich. As far as I can tell everyone is aggainst this idea. --Yankovic270 03:48, November 10, 2009 (UTC)

Yes, GreaterRich33, that is exactly what I am saying. Europe is mostly third world, though I think that phrase isn't used in the timeline. Are you telling me that Germany can take dozens of nuclear missles, and then become much more powerful than it is today? Though it might be sad for you, this world is, in many respects, a world turned upside down. Former powerful nations are now patchworks of weak countries, while the southern hemisphere nations were not nuked and thus were able to become the centre of this new world. That's just how it is. --DarthEinstein 03:52, November 10, 2009 (UTC)

Poor, simple minded creature. always believing that only Australians and South Americans will survive. Without Germany, then we would never communicate to each other cause we would not have computers, and that we would not have any national anthems, and that we would not have the sexiest cars in the 21st century. Since your ignorance to understand is too great, then maybe I would like to give you a deal. How about adding the Czech Rep. and the Polish Kingdom to the TL. Deal? Oh, and one more thing: this can't be a dark age forever. pretty soon, in this TL, the story will lead to a renaissance. Be Patient. Radioactivity will disappear soon There is still hope for Europe.

--GreaterReich33 6:16 PM, November 9, 2009 (UTC)

If you read George Orwell's 1984 and love it so much, then go to a hospital you nutcase! Don't even dare offend me and Europe with your Big Brother-Oceania shit. You how impossible it is to have Australia as an empire. --GreaterReich33 6:16 PM, November 9, 2009 (UTC)

I suspect this conversation is a case of a troll being fed. Reich33, knock it off or you're going to get a block from somebody. Benkarnell 06:23, November 10, 2009 (UTC)

Exactly,I mean,why are you trying to humor this guy by even talking to him?--Vladivostok 07:04, November 10, 2009 (UTC)

If we can find out this guy's real name, we should insert him as the party leader of the Großdeutschland Coalition party in Prussia --Oerwinde 07:55, November 10, 2009 (UTC)

I agree. this is litterally the worst idea in the world.--HAD 11:21, November 10, 2009 (UTC)

And what of big brother? Australia is the capital of Oceania, right? That's where Oceania is right? Rabbits are taking over that country. So no australian commonwealth then, unless you add Poland and czech rep. on this tl. And second, you cantry blocking, but you will never break the soul and heart of Germania for we are STRONG! United forever!!! Death to Big Brotha!!!--GreaterReich33 6:16 PM, November 9, 2009 (UTC)

Page never created, thank God. Benkarnell 12:53, November 10, 2009 (UTC)

Praise Jebus. --HAD 13:02, November 10, 2009 (UTC)

I don't know. It might still come into being in the distant future of this TL, like maybe a hundred years after Doomsday, but that's not in the scope of this wiki. Whoever thinks this is a serious possibility for this TL is probably (A) a neo-nazi, (B) seriously brain-damaged, or (C) both.--71.52.249.49 03:18, December 23, 2009 (UTC)Anonymous92

Bhutan and Nepal

A South Asian nation in the Himalayas. Still in the conceptual stages. --DarthEinstein 02:57, October 24, 2009 (UTC)

I'm done the history of Bhutan. I am by no means an expert in this region at all, in this timeline or out of it, so I probably made some mistakes. All comments are welcome. --DarthEinstein 21:36, October 26, 2009 (UTC)

I've begun a Nepal page as well. Comments welcome! --DarthEinstein 16:50, October 27, 2009 (UTC)

I like it.Makes the region seem a little less uneventful. I'm going to redo some of the history in my Tibet article proposal,to correspond to what you have written. If you have any plan on what role Tibet would play before it got involved,let me know,I'll write a few new things,see if you like the ideas.--Vladivostok 19:31, October 29, 2009 (UTC)

I think Tibet wouldn't want to involve itself in conflicts too early. It would want to keep good relations with its neighbours in the chaotic years immediately after Doomsday. However once it has established itself solidly it would then ally itself with Bhutan. --DarthEinstein 22:31, October 29, 2009 (UTC)

I've made some changes to my article,trying to fit the events in with your articles as best as I could. Did you have something like that in mind?--Vladivostok 22:33, October 29, 2009 (UTC)

Your changes go into quite a bit of detail about what was happening between Bhutan and Nepal before they had actually become involved, which might be out of place on the Tibet page. Perhaps a more consise account of what happened before Tibet was involved would be better. Other than that it is fine. --DarthEinstein 22:40, October 29, 2009 (UTC)

Yeah,I did use a couple of things that don't really seem to matter for Tibet. I'll redo a few lines tomorrow,leave out the parts which aren't important for Tibet,maybe add a few events. If you want the Battle of Kathmandu to have a specific date,just let me know--Vladivostok 22:46, October 29, 2009 (UTC)

Actually I'm a bit uncertain of the Battle of Kathmandu. I'm thinking that the final battle should be somewhere other than Kathmandu, perhaps more of a border city or even a city in Bhutan. If the Tibetans and Bhutanese won in Kathmandu, I'm not sure they would give it up. I don't know much about what other cities there are around there, so I'll have to do a bit of research to find the right city. But as for the battle itself, I think that when assigning a date we should pay attention to the climate in the area. I know that the area goes through monsoon seasons, though those might be disrupted by the climate altering effects of Doomsday. The time of the battle should be when it would be easiest to fight, so when no heavy monsoon weather is about. It's complicated, so we'll just keep it to the ambiguous "2004" for now. --DarthEinstein 23:31, October 29, 2009 (UTC)

It's always good to get information on regional wars that broke out. Why were the monarchists so much stronger in Nepal than in OTL? Benkarnell 14:16, November 2, 2009 (UTC)

I thought they would be more powerful because there's no USA around. Also the monarchist government had recently won a war, so that definitely increased their support. --DarthEinstein 17:01, November 2, 2009 (UTC)

I didn't see the bit about Kathmandu. Yes,your right,the Bhutan army would probably try to occupy them,but I don't think the Tibetans would allow that,I think they would act to propose an acceptable peace treaty after they won the war.--Vladivostok 20:38, November 2, 2009 (UTC)

Graduated, Benkarnell 14:27, November 10, 2009 (UTC)

Soviet Siberian Republic and East Turkestan

I was thinking of adding East Turkestan as a Republic in he SSR,because of Soviet historical support of East Turkestan's independence,there was no direct hit on the Chinese province of Sinkiang and because of the need to survive in a post-nuclear war world. Also,i was thinking of adding an article on the Alaskan part of Siberia,as well as making a few changes in the Siberian article,adding history,etc. --Vladivostok 06:27, October 18, 2009 (UTC)

Yes, and the Soviets would look to grab as much land as possible in lawless Mangolia and remnants of Japenese Islands nearby. -- MC Prank 17:30, October 27, 2009 (UTC)

Well for now just land in Central Asia,as you can see in the Siberian page,which is finished,mostly.--Vladivostok 19:20, October 29, 2009 (UTC)

Graduated, Benkarnell 14:27, November 10, 2009 (UTC)

International Rugby Board

Another day, another page: this one is for the 1983:DD version of the sanctioning body of the sport of rugby union. http://althistory.wikia.com/wiki/International_Rugby_Board_%281983:_Doomsday%29 --BrianD 18:14, October 29, 2009 (UTC)

Graduated, Benkarnell 14:27, November 10, 2009 (UTC)

Jim Douglas interview

Working on transcript now. http://althistory.wikia.com/wiki/ANZBC_interview_with_Vermont_President_Jim_Douglas_in_October_2009_%281983:_Doomsday%29 --BrianD 22:18, November 4, 2009 (UTC)

Graduated, Benkarnell 14:43, November 10, 2009 (UTC)

German South West Africa

There is currently an objection to this article being a part of canon. Please see Talk:German South West Africa (1983: Doomsday). Mitro 14:52, October 22, 2009 (UTC)

Talk/work on this article seems to have stalled. I think it should be marked as obsolete until someone decides to return to the article. Mitro 03:11, November 11, 2009 (UTC)

Marked as obsolete until changes are made to the article. Mitro 15:20, November 12, 2009 (UTC)

Darién

A part of Panama annexed by Colombia. Benkarnell 23:13, November 9, 2009 (UTC)

I am very supportive of graduating this article. Mitro 15:03, November 13, 2009 (UTC)

I would also give it the "graduation". Very well written and plausible in every aspect.!! Adjustments to the pending Panama Canal Zone decisoin can be made later.

Graduated. Mitro 20:51, November 13, 2009 (UTC)

Kingdom of Northumbria

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)

I love the idea of the Lord Lieutenant coming to the aid of his people as the Kingdom collapses - makes for a great story, one of many compelling ones to come out of this ATL. And the new kingdom couldn't ask for a better royal seat! A couple of minor points: first, that is a lot of bombs! How could anything survive that's caught between themm? Do you think their number should be reduced? I'm not sure; it may be that the towns are far enough away that there's a "safe zone" around Alnwick that can form the nucleus of the kingdom. Second, according to Wikipedia, Lord Hugh died in 1988 anyway; if he got premature radiation-induced cancer, that might have to move forward in time. Third, will a royal marriage really result in the unification of the two kingdoms? That feels so medieval - but then, this is a post-apocalyptic world. But while Northumberland feels very much like a medieval kingdom, formed by the personal initiative and influence of the King, Cleveland feels much more modern and constitutional. The Queen, after all, was more-or-less invited to the throne, wasn't she? The country of Cleveland itself seems to have been formed by the people rather than by one powerful person.

Then again, they might be looking to unite anyhow, and the marriage just provides a way to seal the deal. Oh - did Cleveland and Northumbria design their flags independently? They're very similar (both being based on the same old banner); has this caused confusion? Was it deliberate?

Finally, it appears that the Percy family are Dukes, not Earls, of Northumberland.

I think that Henry is the perfect sort of person to declare the re-creation of Northumbria. From what little I just read about him, he seemed like a flamboyant, unpredictable sort of peer, just the type to resurrect medieval Saxon imagery.

Final question: what is the relationship of the two kingdoms to the Celtic Alliance? The CA might very well see them the way Canada sees Saguenay, an inconvenient local power interfering with their resettlement of the country.

Wes hal! Benkarnell 00:54, October 20, 2009 (UTC)

It's been well over a month since Smoggy wrote this, and I think it's pretty clear that he has not been able to edit the page or answer to the comments I had. What do we do when someone makes a proposal but goes inactive without joining the discussion? I'd be against graduating the article as is, because of some unanswered questions of mine. But just tagging it "obsolete" seems too harsh, since I think we all agree that the basic plan for Northumbria is OK - it's just some of the details I have minor problems with. What does everyone think? Benkarnell 17:23, November 15, 2009 (UTC)

I would suggest just leaving it as a proposal and archiving this section. Also message Smoggy and hopefully he will show up. Anytime you leave a message on someone's talk page they get an email so he is bound to notice. Mitro 18:52, November 15, 2009 (UTC)

I left Smoggy a talkpage message a week or so ago. Benkarnell 23:30, November 15, 2009 (UTC)

Page was not updated. It has been tagged as

Nicaragua and Costa Rica

I was thinking of expanding the Costa Rican civil war,because it hasn't been expanded on recently and I'd also include a page on Nicaragua in the following week. I think it is time for the Soviet Bloc to meddle into foreign affairs,supplying the Nicaraguans and trying to unite the Sandinistans in their war in Costa Rica. I'd also like to write about other countries in the region,but I'll wait until there is a consensus on what to do about Guatemala and Yucatan.--Vladivostok 16:22, October 31, 2009 (UTC)

The current article, Nicaragua, is mostly a collection of already-known info and doesn't need to keep the proposal tag IMO. Benkarnell 00:55, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. Mitro 03:20, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

Graduated. Mitro 15:30, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

Tibet

This is an independant country in the Himalayas, authored by Vladivostok. --DarthEinstein 15:55, October 17, 2009 (UTC)

I am guessing that much of the PRC apparatus in Tibet was destroyed along with Lhasa - is this why the Dalai Lama was able to come back so early? Did he face opposition from PRC officials? It seems like the Tibetans made an awfully fast transition from "waiting for the PRC" to "inviting the Dalai Lama". Benkarnell 14:19, November 2, 2009 (UTC)

Well,Tibetans want to be free even now and I think they would quickly jump at the chance to become independent. Three months isn't really that short a time to figure out that help isn't on the way,they had plenty of chances to figure out what happened to the rest of the PRC--Vladivostok 15:02, November 2, 2009 (UTC)

But even with Lhasa gone, there would be oyal PRC officials, soldiers, party members, and functionaries. What happened to them? Benkarnell 14:13, November 10, 2009 (UTC)

Well,I tried to address this by having the military leader of the Chengdu military district attack the newly formed country. After fierce resistance by the Tibetans and seeing how hopeless the situation was,Fu Quanyou agrees to help the government and integrates his forces into the structure of the country--Vladivostok 09:27, November 14, 2009 (UTC)

And many of the diehards could have fled north, where Communist rule survived in Xinjiang. OK, that answers my only concern. Benkarnell 04:00, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

If there aren't anymore objections I think we should graduate this article. Mitro 16:07, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

Chile

I have been working on the Chile article. I am not an expert on the region so feel free to change or add things to it. Mitro 23:24, November 12, 2009 (UTC)

Does anyone object to this being added to canon? Mitro 17:49, November 14, 2009 (UTC)

More of a question than an objection: why did Chile democratoze in the late 80s, to the point where Pinochet willinly held a plebiscite on his retention and honored it by stepping down? What caused this democratization? Benkarnell 17:36, November 15, 2009 (UTC)

My original draft had it happen in the 1990s, but Jorge suggested that even Doomsday wouldn't have prevented democratization from happening in the 1980s. Since I'm not an expert on the region I decided to defer to him. Mitro 18:50, November 15, 2009 (UTC)

OK, then. I guess someone else can come along to add the whys and wherefores. But it's nice to have a basic frame to work with, to know when & how Pinochet was ousted. I think it can be graduated pretty safely.

I'm glad we're gradually getting a fuller picture of South America. We're still not sure exactly how democratic-as-of-1990 Venezuela became a People's Republic (canon!) that went around invading Guyana in the 2000s. Benkarnell 23:52, November 16, 20f09 (UTC)t if he lost and

Since the question is the air, the answer. Pinochet's Constitution called for plebiscite to be held in 1988, if he continued for another 8 years. His treated it has was mere a formality, he could win it easily. How ever he lost it. Basically because, has all latinamerican dictatorships, the supposed dangers of communism and cold war conflicts disappeared in 1988. The 1988 plebiscite, also makes a wonderful POD (what if he won, what if he lost and made an autocoup, what if..) For more details [here] and here. Besides in OTL it was already anomalous Pinochet's Dictadorship. --JorgeGG 03:01, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

OK. And it makes sense that he would have lost the vote in TTL as well. But with the rule of law generally weakened everywhere, this seems like the sort of TL where Pinochet would try an autocoup. It could be interesting to explore a story unfolding from there, unless you think it's unlikely in this world. Benkarnell 03:37, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

Rather unlikely. The countries in south america would more likely suffer an major economic crisis. Their main markets and suppliers (Europe and USA) are gone. Historically militar ydictadorships in the South are bad economic administrators and the business elite would become critical of their mismanagement and would look for others to solve the problems and build stabler corporate network, and new trading blocks. The weakness of despotic power is that it can't give an efective economic governance in the long run. It can control labor unrest, but not productivity. The rule of law could become a necessity, but has a shared (democratic) task. --JorgeGG 11:19, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

Afghanistan

Afghanistan has been described as a lawless region in this TL, but I have been wondering about what actually happened post-Doomsday. There were Soviet troops located in Afghanistan at the time of Doomsday, would they have tried to return home or would they remain behind and try to carve out their own territory? Also would the US lob any nukes toward Afghanistan to destroy these forces? Thoughts, comments, questions? Mitro 15:02, November 13, 2009 (UTC)

Given the scale of the war that was like a Vietnam for the USSR, I would try get out quickly (perhaps to Siberia or a planned rendezvous point - perhaps a military message sent from the surviving Army command in Siberia) with as much personal and equipment. That would toppled down the so called Democratic Republic of Afghanistan, government that only survived thanks to the Soviet forces. The vacuum of power wouldn't be necessary be filled by the Taliban. Perhaps a long civil war, with Pakistan ambiguous on whom to support. --JorgeGG 15:15, November 13, 2009 (UTC)

I have been pondering this point as well. I think it is likely the US would have attacked Soviet Middle East client states on DDay. I have already incorporated this thought into my work on Syria and the soon to be article on North Yemen. These weapons would have stuck key Soviet targets in the country and facilitated the collapse of the Soviet backed communist government, which was already being propped up. I would see this opening the door to Islamic rebels who were already fighting the communists at the time to eventually take control of the nation at some point and impose an Islamic government. However, there might be a distinct possibility some surviving Soviet forces and Afghan communists might try and create a smaller sub state, akin to something of a warlord, in an isolated section of the country. Though the arguement of trying to withdraw what was left is very logical, if the surviving Soviet command could reach them.--Fxgentleman 15:56, November 13, 2009 (UTC)

So what do you think the targets in Afghanistan would be? Kabul seems like as the capital of the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan, but would there be any other targets? Mitro 16:17, November 13, 2009 (UTC)

I would say main target Kabul (2.5 to 3 million of habs) and secondary one, Herat (it seems it was the main access route to USSR). The rest of the country has less then 500 thousand in the next major city. They had a guerrilla warfare so they spread along the country, but the command post is in Kabul. Soviet war in Afghanistan. --JorgeGG 16:34, November 13, 2009 (UTC)

My knowledge being limited in this area, I did some online research and one particularly helpful book was “Afghanistan: The First Five Years of Occupation” The writer stated the three principal Soviet military bases were Dasht-e-Kiligai in Baghlan Province astride the north-south highway; Bagram AFB, 45 miles north of Kabul; and Shindand AFB in Farah Province, 60 miles south of Heart. He also adds, “Soviet army contingents were in all major cities and provincial capitals; at all airfields, and at strategic points along major highways, such as the Salang Pass Tunnel on the main north-south highway. About one-third of the Soviet ground forces were based in the Kabul area….One section of the country, the 185 mile Wakhan Corridor in northeast Badakshan province, was occupied by the Soviets in 1980 and administered solely by them.” The book is very interesting and can found at Google books. Taking all of this into consideration, I would wager taking out Kabul and Herat, along with a number of major bases, especially airfields, might be enough to bring the whole system crashing down. Of course, this is speculation on my part. --Fxgentleman 16:57, November 13, 2009 (UTC)

I agree, Fx. And most survivors would had for Siberia fast as they could. But probably some troops were stranded in Afg, too - some interesting Soviet-tribal statelike entities might emerge. Benkarnell 00:58, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

I pretty much done with this article. Unless there are any objections is it alright to graduate it? Mitro 16:29, November 18, 2009 (UTC)

I'm fine with it. Good to have more info on that part of the world. --BrianD 16:31, November 18, 2009 (UTC)

Military of the Celtic Alliance

Contains mostly canon material that was already approved on the Celtic Alliance page. Any objections to quick graduation? Mitro 16:15, November 18, 2009 (UTC)

The Republic of Iowa

I object fiercely! I want a chance to give the doomed nation a makeover. I shall no longer be called New Germany. It shall be called the Republic of Iowa. I take the information in the article, and someone else changes the name of the page itself. --Yankovic270 01:20, November 9, 2009 (UTC)

I would rather New Germany died by my hand then by anyone else's. Though New Germany is dead, that doesn't mean my article is. --Yankovic270 01:42, November 9, 2009 (UTC)

I will adopt this article --Owen1983 15:53, November 18, 2009 (UTC)

Why? Its Yank's article and last time I check he hasn't put it up for adoption. Mitro 16:07, November 18, 2009 (UTC)

I am perfectly fine with him adopting it. I did not know where to go with it anyway. As long as I can approve of the changes, then I do nor care about them --Yankovic270 16:24, November 18, 2009 (UTC)

Article is under new management. Mitro 18:10, November 19, 2009 (UTC)

Micronesia

Federated States of Micronesia (1983: Doomsday) - I'm sorry to add to the tsunami of new articles, but I've been thinking about this one for a while. A lot of this has been established as canon or been assumed in discussion already. The biggest surprise is that annexation did not finally happen until 2001, not 1995 - the issue was too contentious in Micronesia. The other slightly unusual thing is that the FSM includes the Marshalls and Marianas. Benkarnell 19:57, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

I'm supportive of this article being graduated. Mitro 06:01, November 21, 2009 (UTC)

Graduated. Mitro 16:11, November 23, 2009 (UTC)

Portland, Tennessee

Proposal for survivor community north of Nashville, close to the Tennessee-Kentucky border. I'm going to develop it and hang onto this one for awhile, and tie it in to the WCRB article I've started.--BrianD 04:05, October 31, 2009 (UTC)

Any objections to graduating this article? Mitro 19:34, November 23, 2009 (UTC)

Graduated. Mitro 03:01, November 24, 2009 (UTC)

Owen1983's Catholic Church proposal

http://althistory.wikia.com/wiki/Catholic_Church_(1983_Doomsday) --BrianD 02:42, November 23, 2009 (UTC)

We already have an article covering this: Vatican (1983: Doomsday). Article should be either deleted or tagged obsolete. Mitro 19:35, November 23, 2009 (UTC)

No large issue IMO .. no need for this side in this form. Simply delete it. --Xi'Reney 20:18, November 23, 2009 (UTC)

Article deleted. Mitro 03:07, November 24, 2009 (UTC)