I'm really sorry, I don't want to be mean to the flag, but... it's awfully "busy" and would be difficult for somebody to make, draw, or recognize. With all the many French territories in the RTA, why wouldn't they simply use the Tricolore, or perhaps a tricolore with a symbol (a star, a fleur-de-lis) for each of the different territories? There just seem to be too many flags trying to combine themselves in this one. Alternative History:Vexilology#Basic design has a couple of typical guidelines for flags and says, "Often people try to include a little bit of everything that they feel represent the nation. You are probably better off using a single symbol or partition shape (that can of course be repeated or combined)." Benkarnell 20:35, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

You are not mean by saying that! i know myself it's hard to understand all because "everything" is in there ^^ Will think about what to do with this... perhaps instead of the flag itself this sould be the symbol (Coat of Arms?) of a "Communauté Francaise / Francophone" rather then the flag of the sovereign nation. Let me think about that ok? :) still having one big problem with the french territories as I cant figure out a realistic way how hey should communicate even govern a widespread country like this without internet and virtually no satellite communications... postponed that by pushing the foundation of the R.T.A away in the 2000's...gimme a bit time to rethink that ^^. Or in case you got any ide please tell me :) --Xi'Reney 21:05, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, here's an idea for a less busy flag. The 8 fleurs-de-lis are for Polynesia, New Caledonia, Corsica, St. Pierre/Micquelon, Guyana, Reunion, Mauritius Mayotte, and the Antarctic islands. Benkarnell 05:44, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

I rather like the flag... at least, the one shown on this page --Louisiannan 22:22, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
As to your other question on communication, there's nothing to stop the 1999 establishment IMO because the page says that at that point it consisted of nothing but the Pacific Ocean territories. I'd think that Tahiti and New Caledonia would have come together long before that... but maybe 1999 was the year they announced their intention to unite all the French territories. Probably some French diplomats rode as passengers on WCRB expeditions to Guyana, St. Pierre, and Corsica and persuaded some people that this idea could work. My guess, though, is that it won't last. I see Fr. Guyana joining the other Guyanas rather soon, St. Pierre joining Canada, etc.: it just makes more economic sense. In the meantime, the process could take years and be a lot of fun to watch. Benkarnell 05:32, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

What are the Effects of Doomsday?

Was France hit _everywhere_? Could there be some sort of coalescing government of sorts? --Louisiannan 22:21, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

It's hard to imagine very much surviving... I remember me reading a book called "World War III" (german title)-author former NATO General Sir John Hackett- which describes a mainly conventional war ravaging in Europe in July 1984 ended only by conventional exchange destroying Minsk and Birmingham... A large part describes the French politics at that time regarding the French Nuke Arsenal...I could imagine the Soviets placing France on top of the list of European targets, after Britain and NATO HQ's etc. So main centers should be down...and giving the centralised government I... difficult.
my favourite would be regional governments in the Basque and especially Catalunya Region as Barcelona should be a surviving city giving the relative low strength of Spain of that time... So maybe the regional groups see there chance and both cross-country communities should be able to flourish.
Also maybe based on the Monaco government a Cote D'azur thing is possible. and of corse Corsica as this island was always very proud and would take a chance to become national.
The French Alps region is already described as being "protected" by the Alpine Confederation. Xi'Reney 22:06, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Some early work shows Corsica as part of this federation. But I don't think that's "official" yet. Benkarnell 22:26, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
And given the penchant for the Corsicans to try bombing their way to freedom (big in the 80's) I wouldn't be surprised if the Alpine Confed just said, "Good luck, buckos -- don't let the door hit you on the way out!"
I'll have to think about it. Do we have, ANYWHERE a list of the cities that were hit? At least then I could figure out a rough nuclear zone and go from there... Louisiannan 23:00, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Click on this to make it bigger.

I don't have a list, but here is a rough map I made of the nuclear strikes. It pretty rough, as I wiped it up quickly in my free time. A few targets are way off, and I may have missed a few military targets. But it should give you a general idea of the regions that were hit.--ShutUpNavi 23:43, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
It does -- how "set in stone" is this? In another project that Ben and I both work on, we have the principal of Quod Scripsi, Scripsi, meaning that whatever's been laid down is set in stone, unless really good reasons exist to change it. It looks to me, focusing in on France I see marks on/near the following cities:
  • Caen
  • Paris (I can only assume since it really got pounded. It's a little west of Paris, though).
  • Toulouse
  • Bordeaux
  • Lyon
  • Marseille
  • Monaco (?)
I think you may have meant Montpelier, which would be a more likely target. Am I right? Were they all hit or were they all potential targets? --Louisiannan 16:32, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
Nevermind -- Benkarnell answered me elsewhere...

There's also the "Doomsday Report" - this is supposed to be a list of the sort you're looking for. But it "needs love" before it can be useful. Benkarnell 02:54, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Effects of Doomsday

The following were nuked:

  • Caen
  • Paris (I can only assume since it really got pounded. It's a little west of Paris, though).
  • Toulouse
  • Bordeaux
  • Lyon
  • Marseille -- bomb actually plunged into the water and exploded, tidal waves and radiation poisoning.
  • Montpelier
that list is legal? aprobed for the "comitte"? autors agree? is not more longer? or more short? a final true is very welcome, and must be add in the article, i think --Fero 02:44, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
Doing my best to understand what you're saying here, Fero, I haven't heard of any complaints from anyone about the list, and I figure that's sufficient damage to France, given that it effectively wipes the largest cities of the country from the map (along with tens of millions of the population...), so I think that's enough. I figure Russia's goal was to nuke out as much of western culture as possible. Louisiannan 17:34, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Arising from the ashes by 2000 will be Bourgogne (Burgundy), the Monegasque Kingdom and Auvergne. More to come later.

Post-Doomsday Proposal

I'd like to propose:
  • Brittany has joined up with the Celtic Alliance, just like Normandy.
  • The gray areas on the map are the co-claimed areas by the competing entities.
  • The Fluorescent green is of course where the nukes hit and the deeply affected areas. The strip running NNE to SSW from Lyon to Montpelier is the Rhône River that I figure is pretty heavily radioactively polluted. The Seine runs from Paris toward Caens, but that whole region is irradiated.
  • The darker colors with the names signify the actually controlled areas. Some, like B&FC and The Poitevin Republic and others have nominally controlled areas -- some roving brigands, but otherwise relatively lawful.
  • The pastel shades are the claimed areas, but they are really only "under control" when the army happens to be in the neighborhood.
  • White areas have no known government.
  • Population figures are not yet known.
  • Some of this information is rumor and hasn't been substantiated. My work in the region has been largely focused on the Monegasque Kingdom. I anticipated voyaging to Greater Andorra soon for further investigation.

Feedback? --Louisiannan 18:39, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Wow, that looks great. You obviously put a lot of effort into this. The only thing you need to keep in mind is that the French government in exile (the one controlling all of the overseas French areas) might not like the idea of having several different countries claiming territory it considers its own. Then again, it's not like there is anything they could do about it. With that in mind I say you should go ahead and do what you are suggesting.--ShutUpNavi 19:52, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Navi -- I think you're spot on the money here -- and I think that once contact is restored with the French government in exile, there may be some rapprochement, leading to a semi-reintegration of France. We'll have to see how it pans out, won't we? Louisiannan 20:06, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
I've updated the map. Does anyone have anything to say? If not, I'm putting this at the proposal section. --Louisiannan 17:11, 10 June 2009 (UTC)


How many territories does this France actually claim? There are many that are not on the list:

  • St. Martin & St. Barthelemey
  • Martinique
  • Guadeloupe
  • St. Pierre & Miquelon
  • Mayotte
  • Reunion
  • Wallis & Futuna

I'd think that W&F is definitely part, since it's in the Pacific. The Indian Ocean islands are likely as well. Maybe the Caribbean islands joined the East Caribbean Federation, and since Canada's now largely based on Newfoundland, probably St. P & M is dependent on Canada. Benkarnell 22:30, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, St.Pierre&Miquelon is a protectorate of Canada right now, though that's disputed with France now. I don't know about the other islands. DarthEinstein 05:15, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
Thinking about this, maybe there were two RTAs to begin with, one in the Pacific and one comprising Guiane and the Caribbean islands, and maybe they entered into some kind of cooperation recently. Because a globe-spanning federation makes no sense earlier than c. 2000.
[EDIT] OK, I actually read the page again. 1999 is a good date for the French territories in the Pacific to come together. Probably Guiane and the Caribbean islands re-formed a national government much earlier - 1990? 1988? - since they are so close to one another. It may have been even more recently that the Pacific-based RTA formed an organization to coordinate their activities with those of the French Caribbean. Thoughts? Benkarnell 13:17, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
I think they would all get together in their local sphere before 1990, likely (although St. Pierre et Miquelon may be a late comer to the caribbean France), and I think that 2000-2005 is a good reconnection date for the "whole" of surviving non-metropolitain France. Louisiannan 14:22, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Sixth Republic?

Do you think that eventually some of the states in France could someday band together (perhaps in response to the Sicily threat) and create a Sixth Republic? It's just an idea I had. DarthEinstein 18:01, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

If you'll wait a bit, I would get to that point... --Louisiannan 19:19, 19 June 2009 (UTC)


It seems like this nation would have been discovered earlier, especially by the Celtic Alliance and the Nordic Union. Mitro 18:05, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Well, you never know. They didn't discover Cleveland for a while (97, if I remember correct). DarthEinstein 18:07, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
True, I guess its one of the problems inherit in creating new nations in an established TL. Mitro 18:09, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
You can always amend the other articles to include a passing mention of this place. DarthEinstein 18:11, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
No -- not really. IMHO they stayed away from the oceans, fearing pirates and such, and any contact with peaceful folk was treated as a survivor to survivor thing, and not something they broadcast. In times of barbarism, it pays to pretend you're not really civilized when you live on the fringes. --Louisiannan 19:21, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Nuked points in France

hello, see Canada (1983: Doomsday) and you see a easy readable list of 11 eleven nuked Point in the older country, i dont fine that in France, can we write a clear list, or can you tell me how many nuclear bomb fall in the older France Republic--Fero 02:38, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

We don't know how many total fell, but we know that Paris, Bordeaux, Toulouse, Marseille, Lyon and Caen were all nuked to varying degree. It is believed that Paris received 5 hits (not counting MIRVs). Reports are spotty since most Parisian refugees died in the riots that followed Doomsday. Louisiannan 14:38, October 12, 2009 (UTC)

there seems to be alot of nations in waht used to be mainland france. --HAD 14:29, October 11, 2009 (UTC)

Most are probably just clusters of villages with a stable government between them, which is probably true in most former countries. Benkarnell 16:36, October 11, 2009 (UTC)
They started out as clusters of villages and have coalesced in the last 26 years into larger governments. Louisiannan 14:35, October 12, 2009 (UTC)

okay, then.--HAD 15:39, October 12, 2009 (UTC)

if anybody want's to do a nuked Paris i got a kool pic they can use.Wingman1 07:07, April 18, 2010 (UTC)
Paris nuked

Paris Nuked


Why is Mauritius a part of the RTA? They were an independent nation pre-Doomsday. Mitro 20:49, April 13, 2010 (UTC)

Good question. Maybe Mauritius and the French Islands of Indian Ocean formed an union after Doomsday and later joined the RTA when the French Pacific contacted them. --Grand Prince Paul II. 20:56, April 13, 2010 (UTC)
Possibly, but it seems to me that the French islands would just join Mauritius, similar to how how that one French island joined Canada post-Doomsday. Mitro 20:58, April 13, 2010 (UTC)
Not likely, because Reunion & Mayotte are too big and populous to be absorbed/incorporated like Saint Pierre and Miquelon. Besides, the French overseas territories in the post-Doomsday world seem to stick together, unless they are too small, and Reunion is the most populous of them. --Grand Prince Paul II. 21:08, April 13, 2010 (UTC)
GPP2 - you'll want to come up with a compelling back story for the merger - I agree with Mitro, it's somewhat of a stretch. Present your proposal idea for what lead to the union, and we'll go from there. Louisiannan 14:50, April 14, 2010 (UTC)
I think a union between Mauritius and Reunion isn't a stretch. Two nations trying to survive the post-Doomsday by merging their resources. However I think having this Mauritius/Reunion union join the RTA is where we enter the realm of implausibility.
By the way, guess who the genius was that added these two islands to this Looking back on it now I have no idea why I added them. Mitro 16:23, April 14, 2010 (UTC)
I do not favor an union of Mauritius & Reunion or Mauritius as a part of the RTA. I just thought that both would not be out of question. Anyway, I think the most likely outcome would not be union but a close alliance. Mauritius would be the main partner of the Reunion & Mayotte after Doomsday and later maintain a "special relationsship" to the RTA after R & M joined the political France outremer. Its role would be similar to the CANZ and the SAC. What do you think? --Grand Prince Paul II. 16:48, April 14, 2010 (UTC)
I could get behind that. Louisiannan 18:38, April 14, 2010 (UTC)
Me too, I also wrote a short speel on the relationship for the article. Feel free to edit it. Mitro 19:05, April 14, 2010 (UTC)

Quick comment on "the French territories in the post-Doomsday world" - I tend to think that each place should be looked at on its own terms. The French West Indies had compelling reasons to federate almost immediately, and in the Pacific the French islands did as well (to avoid becoming Australian, essentially). We may find that the situation was different in Reunion-Mayotte. They certainly are in a different kind of place from the others: isolated in a relative backwater, not a competitive hot-spot. Their story could well be a little different from their countrymen's on the other side of the world. Benkarnell 19:18, April 14, 2010 (UTC)

You mean proclaiming independency like Guyane did? Possibly, but on the other hand, unlike Guyane, they would fairly early resume contact with the French Pacific via Australia-New Zeeland. --Grand Prince Paul II. 20:24, April 14, 2010 (UTC)

Split article

This article currently serves as both the page on the RTFA and post-Doomsday mainland France. I was wondering if anyone minds if split the article into two to cover both subjects? Mitro 17:49, April 22, 2010 (UTC)

Nuke hits

Do you think that there are too few nuke hits in mainland France? the UK, USA, Germany and USSR all got hit by numerous nukes but France (who fired 250 missiles at the USSR on DD) only gets hit by less than 10? Do you think this is realistic? Wouldn't the USSR have had more missiles aimed at France, if only to stop the French launching theirs at them?--Smoggy80 17:28, September 22, 2011 (UTC)

Have looked into this in the past for one reason or another. Most French nukes were at sites already hit, more or less - near cities (Paris and Lyon), etc - or in more remote areas.

The base at Plateau d'Albion, the base at Mont-de-Marsan, and the base at Istres would all have been hit, and none would have had any impact overall. Brest could be argued, being the land headquarters of the boomers - really though, it should have been a target all along - and the base at Landivisiau as well. Both would have minor effects.

Lordganon 00:03, September 23, 2011 (UTC)

I've added these hits to the lists. Strasbourg as well. Lordganon 08:12, December 29, 2011 (UTC)

There are some cities which I believe should be nuked.

  • Toulon - Main base of the French Mediterranean Fleet
  • Toulouse - Large aerospace industry

Jnjaycpa 17:20, December 29, 2011 (UTC)

Heh. Toulouse, funny enough, is on the map as being hit, but not listed. Thanks for noting that. And agreed with Toulon. Lordganon 02:22, December 30, 2011 (UTC)


I'm considering a proposal of a survivor state in the regions of Alsace and Lorraine. The main question is whether I should nuke Strasbourg. Anybody have any ideas? Jnjaycpa 22:16, November 12, 2011 (UTC)

There's really no doubt as to it having been nuked. Lordganon 07:38, November 13, 2011 (UTC)

Sort-of adoption

I should like to add an infobox like other former countries (like UK, US) and so am putting in an adoption request, though its more of a edit request, as this is a reference pageBryce3 (talk) 08:49, April 18, 2016 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.