Joe McCarthy (FTBW)
In this TL, I'm going to make McCarthy less right wing, though still tough on America's most dangerous enemy, this time being Sorelism. As such, I'm also going to change his death into something else, though possibly linked to past alcohol abuse (after all, I have way to many heart attacks and strokes for many of the people I've named, maybe liver failure would work instead, I don't know.) Lieut. Tbguy1992: Profile; Talk 01:28, January 4, 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, the AIF is the FTBW version of OTL's FIFA. Lieut. Tbguy1992: Profile; Talk 14:11, January 4, 2012 (UTC)
Re: Opinion about Russian America
Long time no see. I have been fine, you?
I am honored you have come for my opinion. I have skimmed through the your timeline (I may not speak Spanish, but I can make out enough to understand what is happening). If my understanding is correct, England becomes a republic, which by far would screw up the British Empire in the Americas. Mexico annexes Louisiana??? That sounds very far fetched to me, but this is coming from an American who is used to the fact that we won over Mexico (XD). And the US collapses? (*brain has just exploded*). Either way, that does sound intriguing. A little out of my league, but very interesting.
In my opinion, with the UK gone, Mexico acting as a big buffer state between the US and the Pacific, and peaceful relations between Mexico and Russia, than I would definitely say Russia would expand under those circumstances. How far Alaska would expand depends highly on Mexico. If Fort Ross remained Russian, than Russia has the possibility to expand as far south. Pretty much the same border as what I have for my timeline. So in the end, it highly depends on Mexico.
- Quick little note. I love it when you say "jejeje."
- I have been doing some thinking about it while at work, and I believe I have my answer for you. But let's start with the basics. I love the idea of a Republic of England. The only thing I will add is... if it became a republic as part of WWI, than Ireland would include the entire island. Northern Ireland only exists because that part of the island wanted to remain in the UK after Dublin declared independence. But either way, they would end up back in Ireland had they gained independence today.
- Now onto the main part... Mexico. First off... as a Sorry American who feels bad we annexed parts of Mexico, I support the idea of Mexico getting revenge and annexing parts of the US (XD). But as a historian, there is a BIG problem with this idea. When the US annexed California, the US was annexing underpopulated territories of Mexico (this doesn't include the annexation of the independent Republic of Texas, or the Gadsden Purchase). If Mexico were to have annexed the Louisiana Purchase area around the same time, they would be annexing well developed states. Here is a map showing what the US looked like at the start of the Mexican-American War.
- From what you are telling me, and from what I can make out, Mexico would gain international assistance in the Mexican-American War, leading to a Mexican victory. Aside from the territories, I doubt Mexico could gain a border on the Mississippi. Even if Mexico were to gain these regions, they would probably gain infighting from the region, potentially leading to a second Texan Revolution. If you want my guess, I would say Mexico's best chance at annexing any part of the US would be the Oregon Territory (since it once was part of Mexico [actually New Spain, but who's counting]), and maybe as far as the Missouri River (which would include only the "Unrecognized Territory" on the map I showed you).
- The next part is the CSA. I am sorry to say, but there is a HUGE problem that make the continuation of the CSA almost impossible for your timeline... no Pacific coast. One of the main reasons the Civil War broke out is because of how to expand slavery to the Pacific. With no Pacific, I doubt the CSA would last long. In fact, I came across this same problem in my Russian America timeline. What I came up with is that only the states south of Virginia and Kentucky join the Confederacy. With nothing to really gain, Virginia remains out of the CSA, which means General Robert E. Lee fights for the Union, and the Civil War ends sooner. I doubt this would change here, especially with a more powerful Mexico (which hated the CSA by the way).
- Now to Alaska. If the POD is 1838... we are in luck. Fort Ross was sold in 1841. But I doubt it would have any more luck here than OTL. But I can see an interesting idea for the Fort and surrounding region (if you don't mind me writing down my thoughts). Obviously, Mexico would have a positive relationship with Russia, so maybe they would allow the Russian culture and language to continue in the Russian River region. Over time, it could turn into a Cajun-like situation, in which the region would gain statehood in Mexico, creating a Russian-based state in Mexico. This was an idea I came up with long ago, it just seems to fit well here.
- But since the POD is 1838, this doesn't change the fact that the UK and Russia had already agreed on the present day border of Alaska. Along with the already large presence of the British in the Pacific Northwest by this time, I have do now doubt Russia would be able to expand at this point in time. However, since Alaska remains Russian, and the UK collapses, it could be possible that in the chaos in Canada after the collapse of the UK, and the chaos in Mother Russia during the Russian Revolution, it could be possible that Alaska (which I think would have declared independence by now) would expand their influence into the unpopulated portions of British North America. At my guess, the Yukon Territory and the former Stickeen Territories would be annexed quickly, while any attempt to annex British Columbia would be a waste. If anything, Alaska would expand eastward rather than southward.
- Well anyway, these are just my thoughts, but this is your timeline. Either way, I hope I was able to help out. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 03:25, January 5, 2012 (UTC)
- No problem, glad I could help. Sorry for getting the wrong idea, but it does take me a long time to understand the details of another timeline, plus the fact that I understand little about the CSA myself. The main reason Mexico (in OTL) hated the CSA is because they had support in northern Mexico (Sonora, Chihuahua, and the Rio Grande states) to the point that the CSA considered annexing them (which is what I have done in my timeline about the CSA. But if the Mexican population was still outraged at the USA, than I guess an alliance with the CSA wouldn't be out of the question. Also, I am glad you like my Russian America ideas. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 16:03, January 5, 2012 (UTC)
Oh sure, no problem at all. I love doing maps, and this should be a piece of cake. Sorry for the delayed response, my mind has been focused on another timeline of mine. So for the map, how did you want me to alter it? --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 06:02, January 8, 2012 (UTC)
- No problem. How's this (took me two minutes XD). --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 06:25, January 8, 2012 (UTC)
Yes, that's a good idea. It could have severely damaged the Chilean economy. I think I remember the part of the House of the Spirits by Isabel Allende where the earthquake happens.
KingSweden 00:00, January 6, 2012 (UTC)
Gracias por la ayuda. No hay problema que se hagan correciones de las plantillas u orotgraficas. JorgeGG 21:18, January 8, 2012 (UTC)
I would greatly appreciate the help with the football articles, as I'm not a sports person, so I would prefer if more knowledgeable people than myself work on them.
As for South America: I think they will be a model of stability in the world. Brazil will soon take the lead, and disassociate itself with France around 2006 or so, and create the "Third Way" for nations that do not want to be involved in the Dual-Powers conflict. It would be something along the lines of reforming the Brazilian Bloc, but instead of competing with the other two powers, they would become a way for nations to distance itself form France or America. I could see most of South America, as well as nations like Australasia, South Africa, India and maybe Palestine (they are going to try to remain aloof of the wars in the Middle East after the devastating conflicts they fought during the 70s and 80s) joining this new bloc. Lieut. Tbguy1992: Profile; Talk 17:33, January 11, 2012 (UTC)
- Yeah, the Non-Aligned Movement was what I was kinda thinking of. Lieut. Tbguy1992: Profile; Talk 18:35, January 11, 2012 (UTC)
- 1922 works alright. The world has mostly recovered from the immediate devastation from the war, and the desire to try to prevent it from happening again would convince the major football nations of the world to get together and host this tournament. I also added Bordeaux as the city the AIF is head quartered in. Lieut. Tbguy1992: Profile; Talk 06:18, January 14, 2012 (UTC)
I was thinking of placing it in Brazil (as Switzerland is, technically, part of the French Empire since the end of the Third Global War), and since it was founded in France, it would remain in France. This would, indeed, make Americans and Russians and other Juneau Pact nations nervous/unwilling to attend this competition, but they have, and will continue to do so. Lieut. Tbguy1992: Profile; Talk 07:03, January 14, 2012 (UTC)
- Well, it is 1922, so a country like France should be able to host it. I would say a larger country should host it until after the Third Global War, just due to the belief that the more powerful nations are indeed more capable of holding such events. And, as for Chile... I was running out of ideas for where to host the Winter Olympics. Besides the obvious choices of Alyseka, US, France, Scandinavia, Russia and Japan, I needed a different place, and a South American town in the Andes made sense for once. Yeah, I'm sure I can move it around. Lieut. Tbguy1992: Profile; Talk 15:51, January 14, 2012 (UTC)
- To be honest, I have no idea. I barely have the rudements of football/soccer down, so I'm the wrong person to ask. I'm going to let you do almost whatever you want with football in this world (make up the teams, the championships, tournaments, jersey's, whatever.) This is your ball, so run with it (literally :P) Lieut. Tbguy1992: Profile; Talk 04:56, January 18, 2012 (UTC)
I have heard of the Football War in OTL. I do not think that will be possible in FTBW, mostly due to the larger nations in Latin America. Riots and such will happen, but say a particularly devastating one in the 1980's over a screwed up call (which I believe the Football War was about). Lieut. Tbguy1992: Profile; Talk 06:06, January 18, 2012 (UTC)
You are right, I should have maybe expanded that more. I was thinking that the Emperor died without a heir, so it was decided to make it a republic. However, the republic soon became a one part democracy, before at last Emílio Garrastazu Médici takes over power as "President," though elections are still being held (just for approved candidates) until the end of the Venezuelan War, when Brazil becomes a Military dictatorship until Fernando Henrique Cardoso becomes President in 1998, at which point democracy is restored, though the executive still holds a lot of power in comparison to other democracies. Lieut. Tbguy1992: Profile; Talk 03:12, January 14, 2012 (UTC)
- Yeah, changing the flag and COA might be a good idea now that Brazil is a Republic. I haven't gotten around to that yet, though I was thinking of keeping them as a reminder of the past from Brazil. But maybe modernizing them would be a good idea as well. Lieut. Tbguy1992: Profile; Talk 13:47, January 18, 2012 (UTC)
I will say that after the original occupation (say 1946-1950 or so) that it was a joint occupation, but Brazil managed to eventually force its own man in charge, and it became a dictatorship after that. After the fall of Brazil in 1978, a coup will put a Sorelist in power. I'm also thinking that the Sorelist/French allied nations in South America will manage to overthrow French dominance like Brazil did in 2004, and they ultimately form some semblance of Democracy, though with some heavy handed measures continuing. Mexico and Texas will NOT turn, but remain loyal Sorelist states. Thought I would mention that, as I do have a plan for them in the near future. Lieut. Tbguy1992: Profile; Talk 03:21, January 17, 2012 (UTC)
- I meant a Brazilian supported Argentinean, my mistake. Sorry for nay confusion. Lieut. Tbguy1992: Profile; Talk 04:38, January 17, 2012 (UTC)
Alright, Katholico, I'm just about done the map, and now it's time for me to ask you the country names and some final touch ups and the map is yours :P.
P.S., I just had a quick question for you. I assume you know a little bit about the history of South America, and I was just wondering, were the Spanish colonies at the time were divided into smaller provinces? And at the time of revolution did those provinces unite and revolt or were boundaries just drawn up as some areas declared independence?
Regards, ChrisL123 00:07, January 12, 2012 (UTC)
- Ohh, yeah I see what you're saying, thanks so much. Also, I just finished up the map and I just wanted to know what you wanted to call the file, and if you wanted any type of title like "South America" or something on the side. ChrisL123 03:33, January 12, 2012 (UTC)
- Alright, here you are. Hope everything's right, and when you remember the Falkland Island situation I'll add them quickly to the map. Anything I got wrong I'll fix quickly. Any colour you might want changed I could do that also. Also, I couldn't exactly fit Argentina's name onto the continent so I apologize. If you want me to move it somewhere else I could fix it too. Other than that, enjoy! ChrisL123 03:54, January 12, 2012 (UTC)
- Alright, I fixed it. I changed the colours and I put Paraguay in brown just so you don't get confused with the boundaries. If you want me to change it back that's fine. You'll also notice I added a little box with the Falklands on the bottom left hand corner, that's so the viewer can see which island belongs to which country because you wouldn't be able to tell which country had them from far away. If you want me to remove it that's fine :P. ChrisL123 01:41, January 13, 2012 (UTC)
Basically, after World War II, Brazil took over most of northern Argentina. Southern Argentina then became Patagonia. Hope this helps CheesyCheese 23:37, January 16, 2012 (UTC)
Brazil would keep Buenos Aires and the capital would be be movied to Neuquén, which is in Patagonia. CheesyCheese 22:10, January 25, 2012 (UTC)
Re: Chile/Del negros
My thinking is that they'd be independent roughly around the same time as OTL, if not a little earlier with the collapse of Spain at Napoleon's hands. I'll defer to you on Spanish names, so if its not a believable name I will change it!
KingSweden 22:18, January 17, 2012 (UTC)
South Pacific War
I really like the Occupation of Chiloé article, I'll look over the spelling soon. For the battle of the Chacao Channel, what ships do the Chilean navy use? - Mister Sheen 20:13, January 19, 2012 (UTC)
- Alright, it seems like the Chilean navy is much bigger than the Santiagan navy (only 3-4 ships), so it would probably be a decisive victory for Chile. - Mister Sheen 17:36, January 23, 2012 (UTC)
Re: Electoral Maps
Hello again. Two more maps, eh? I would be happy to do them. It will take me a bit longer to do them. The first one was easy to do because the territories of the US were still based on the Adam-Onis Treaty lines (but not any more). So give me a bit, and I will note you when I am done. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 16:47, January 20, 2012 (UTC)
Alright, I'm getting too lazy to find the original messages and reply to them...
Anyway, for the Brazilian flag: I like the idea, but for me it does remind me too much of the US. I would think Brazil would want to do their best to show that they are their own country, and that they aren't dominated by either America or France. I'm not sure what to do about that, but I'm just stating my opinion.
As for the Portuguese colonies.... *facedesk*
I had completely forgot about them. But, yeah, I think they will become independent countries. Most likely will mean I will make them unstable African dictatorships like OTL. Lieut. Tbguy1992: Profile; Talk 16:44, January 25, 2012 (UTC)
- I know I'm going to start sounding really nit-picky, but I think it almost looks too French now...
- I'm wondering what the flag would look like with simply blue and green on the background, then a gold diamond in the center with the coat of arms in the center of it? Similar, yet not the same as the OTL flag? Lieut. Tbguy1992: Profile; Talk 17:29, January 25, 2012 (UTC)
You are the winner of the 2012 Stirling Award for Best Copyeditor. Congrats, and may next year's awards treat you just as kindly! Lordganon 08:44, January 26, 2012 (UTC)
You're very welcome, lol
Feel free to put it on your user page, fyi ;)
Lordganon 03:12, January 28, 2012 (UTC)
No purpose. Lordganon 05:00, January 28, 2012 (UTC)
NW Version of Althistory Wiki
Since KingSweden is not avilable, I thought I discuss to you about something.
I propose creating a page for a Napoleon's Wolrd version of the Althistory Wiki. It will also contain the alternate "bioraphies" of some of the people in this wiki.
What do you think? RandomWriterGuy 04:38, January 28, 2012 (UTC)
Ignore him, Kath. Lordganon 05:03, January 28, 2012 (UTC)
Request Deletion of Page
I've created a new page about my Greater Korean Empire. I'm not too sure of how the policies work on this wikia, as I wish to delete my page, Greater Korean Empire. I was hoping you could do this for me, and thank you in advance. Myeongseong15 17:02, January 28, 2012 (UTC)
Re: UCA Question
Thank you for that information. I actually will try to keep that information during editing, but after playing through the game a bit more (now up to 01/01/1916) and Peru has annexed the former Peru-Bolivian State, I'm going to change it back to the Republic of Peru (where-as I might make Chile into Chile-Bolivia)
I'm planning on manipulating events around a bit so that Chile will wage a war with Peru over Bolivia. I might do that while the USCA is involved in the Great War in Europe and Africa, since 4 of the 8 GP's are at war now in game (as of 1917)Razgriz 2K9 23:52, January 28, 2012 (UTC)
The very same. I'm using Victoria 2 to make the basis and once the game ends in 1936, I just make stuff up as I go along to fill in the next 65 years. I may consider making it an open timeline at that point. Razgriz 2K9 01:15, January 29, 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, I could use help with that. I deleted that bit becasue it was getting too detailed: I was going to start fresh and try to redo it in a very straight forward and simple way. Lieut. Tbguy1992: Profile; Talk 01:55, January 29, 2012 (UTC)
- You can start right now! Just stick with the few things I mentioned in the main articles, then the timeline can be fleshed out as the rest of the story is. That was my plan, but I would really like help to try to do it. Maybe this might even be something that I should get a bunch of people to help with and I stay out of the way, and work on the filler's that I have yet to talk about. This will allow people who want to help me, read the story, and help give some new ideas and such into FTBW. I could really use that. Lieut. Tbguy1992: Profile; Talk 05:15, January 29, 2012 (UTC)
- Start where you want to, though maybe with the first one here. If you want to simply focus on South American stuff, I won't stop you. If its not mentioned in the main article, feel free to add it or ask me, and I will do my best to answer any questions that may arise. Lieut. Tbguy1992: Profile; Talk 05:37, January 29, 2012 (UTC)
- I most likely will, though I have no objections if you simply want to make those yourself. After all, by now you know more about South American in FTBW than even I do. Lieut. Tbguy1992: Profile; Talk 04:52, January 30, 2012 (UTC)
Re: Chile (NW)
Yes absolutely! That'd be great!
KingSweden 04:36, January 31, 2012 (UTC)
The Peninsular War would have ended around that time, yes. I'm not 100% but I envisioned Joseph Bonaparte's efforts to keep the Spanish colonies going as badly, if not worse, than Spain's efforts to keep Latin America following the OTL Napoleonic Wars. No, I suppose Chile should not be a federation. We should change it.
KingSweden 00:14, February 2, 2012 (UTC)
Ah crud I forgot :P I was looking up OTL Presidents and Aylwin matched up with the time period! I could put Besa in as the 1994-1998 President or make him the transitionary President in 1989 and early 1990 after the fall of Communism?
KingSweden 05:45, February 5, 2012 (UTC)
I made Besa both! Transition president plus 1994-1998 (so he served two non-consecutive terms). On the Presidents page I put in the OTL political parties (for now) and we can change them later as you see fit!
KingSweden 06:00, February 5, 2012 (UTC)
I think the losses of Spain in the Peninsular War would have made them weaker in fighting in the New World. Napoleon would likely not have assaulted South America if the United States protested (a sort of Monroe Doctrine, if you will) to maintain the Spanish colonies, and depleted Spanish armies would have been defeated sooner, especially if demoralized by the idea of fighting for Joseph Bonaparte as opposed to a real Spanish king. I read that Chile became officially independent in 1818, so I would think this would have occurred earlier (maybe 1815 or 1816) in this TL because the Spanish would not have the same ability to fight.
KingSweden 06:14, February 5, 2012 (UTC)
Backwards Black Plague
Hola, Kath! Hace timpo que no te veía, jeje.
Sí, es sobre eso; básicamente, tras ver la centésima línea de "la Peste asola el 99% de Europa" Me cansé y puse en mi lista de ideas eso. Básicamente tras la Peste en Europa ella vuelve a Asia en una forma mutada. Ya asustados, los europeos cortan el contacto con el exterior hasta que la mayoría de los orientales (60-90%) están muertos. Va a ser un tipo de 'mi ASB personal', xD. Saludos! Fed (talk) 04:39, February 6, 2012 (UTC)
Re: Electoral Maps (again)
- Here is the map for 1952 that I just finished. Hope it is all correct. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 22:22, February 6, 2012 (UTC)
Re: Presidents and Wars
It looks good! To answer your question I was thinking maybe Bolivia was never formed... it could have been part of Peru? And then Chile defeats Peru in a war and annexes parts of what is today Bolivia.
KingSweden 02:40, February 7, 2012 (UTC)
I think that would be a great motivation for Bolivar, and could explain why Gran Colombia survived. In that case, probably in the 1840's or 1850's, there is a war (for whatever reason) between Chile and Peru (we could call it the Andes War, Atacama War or Peruvian-Chilean War, probably the third), where Chile wins convincingly and the treat forces the cessation of the southern third or so of Alto Peru (since it seems like thats about how much Chile controls, based off of the map...). I'm afraid I don't know anything about 19th century South American history, especially Chile's, so since its your home country I'll let you handle things for the most part.
KingSweden 04:31, February 7, 2012 (UTC)
KingSweden 05:06, February 7, 2012 (UTC)
That sounds like a valid reason for war in the 19th century. I like it!
KingSweden 00:47, February 8, 2012 (UTC)
Avenida does sound better. Well I figured eventually they would allow two terms instead of one, and I honestly just kind of picked Luco at random for the first guy to serve two terms.
KingSweden 16:12, February 8, 2012 (UTC)
Patria y Liberdad seems perfect for the anti-communist paramilitary.
KingSweden 19:17, February 8, 2012 (UTC)
I'd guess around 1925. And there'd be naval combat, yes, and then Chile may/may not contribute some soldiers to the Allied effort, probably in Hawai'i or Oceania.
KingSweden 03:33, February 9, 2012 (UTC)
I was thinking it'd be a right-wing government who is unpopular but which enjoys the full support of the military. So it'd be civilian, but the military would be what's keeping it in power, not the consent of the people.
KingSweden 04:08, February 9, 2012 (UTC)
Arturo Larrain for sure, Eastman would only have been 31 or 32 (depending on when in the year he was born) in the 1960 election which is a bit young.
KingSweden 06:07, February 9, 2012 (UTC)
Well like I've said, I know pretty much nothing about Chilean history except for what I read in Casa de Espiritus (House of the Spirits) four years ago, so it looks good to me haha. Though I have one question: the Radical Party... what does "Radical" mean in this case? Hard-left? Hard-right?
And what were your perspectives for post-communist Chile?
KingSweden 03:16, February 10, 2012 (UTC)
One thing - I noticed Montalva was in his late 30's when elected. Is this typical in Chilean politics? When Richard Van Dyke gets elected in America I treat it generally as a once-in-a-lifetime fluke that he was elected at the age of 39. Would it be wise, perhaps, to switch some of the Presidents around?
KingSweden 03:25, February 10, 2012 (UTC)
Okay, that makes sense about the Radicals - the name just kind of threw me off haha. And I suppose in his late 30's Montalva would be alright as a President, I just wanted to point it out. It all works for me.
KingSweden 04:20, February 10, 2012 (UTC)
I like the parties how you describe them. That sounds good. Is Chile's Congress more Parliamentary, since it has 8 parties, with a lot of coalitions? And do all 8 parties usually front candidates for the Presidency?
KingSweden 05:38, February 10, 2012 (UTC)
Well I meant to ask more if it resembles the British Parliament or the US Congress, and the relationship of the President to the assembly? These two bodies are very different, I'm wondering which one Chile's government is more similar to.
And I just was wondering if in a Presidential election, all 8 parties have a candidate, or if some parties team up (in a coalition)
KingSweden 06:53, February 10, 2012 (UTC)
Ok sweet. I figured there'd be coalitions but I wasn't positive.
KingSweden 17:10, February 10, 2012 (UTC)
Sounds good to me!
KingSweden 18:13, February 10, 2012 (UTC)
Since Pinochet does not come to power in this TL, I am thinking of using Pinochet's picture as the stand-in for Hugo Savala, dictator of Brazil. Their dictatorships occurred roughly the same time period and Pinochet always seems to be wearing military dress. I would just have to avoid using pictures of him wearing the Presidential Sash of Chile. What do you think of this idea?
KingSweden 07:00, February 10, 2012 (UTC)
Good question. Anyone from the late 1980's would do, I suppose.
KingSweden 19:42, February 10, 2012 (UTC)
Absolutely! Go ahead
KingSweden 23:35, February 10, 2012 (UTC)
I like them. I would add them on Alt Dest for now.
KingSweden 01:09, February 14, 2012 (UTC)
Which Isabel Allende do you think for President - the author (my first assumption on seeing the name) or Salvador Allende's daughter?
KingSweden 01:48, February 14, 2012 (UTC)
I think it was an anon... But do you think that a former Communist dictator's family would really be elected in Chile? I would assume Salvador Allende was hated by the end of his rule, sort of like Pinochet.
KingSweden 02:01, February 14, 2012 (UTC)
I think its fine if we leave it at just those two. Make being a two-termer be something special. I like it how it is! I do have a question though. What was your idea for the differences between the Social Christian Conservatives, Traditionalist Conservatives and Christian Democrats after their split in the 1940's?
KingSweden 14:21, February 14, 2012 (UTC)
That about sums it up!
KingSweden 21:56, February 14, 2012 (UTC)
It looks good! What type of authorities? I definitely use InfoBox:Person templates for politicians and royals and so on, if that's what you mean.
KingSweden 00:14, February 16, 2012 (UTC)
Yes definitely! That is good.
KingSweden 01:30, February 16, 2012 (UTC)
If you don't think Chile should have one due to the OTL government, I am in agreement with you. The key for me was having Varas having seen American trains and introducing it to Chile, Minister of Interior is still a good spot for him. What is the Chilean history of railroads, btw?
KingSweden 07:19, February 16, 2012 (UTC)
Re: World Cup
It looks really good! I'm going to try to get it to say 1984 if possible.
KingSweden 23:46, February 16, 2012 (UTC)
Haha its fine, I'll try to see if I can adjust it.
KingSweden 15:35, February 17, 2012 (UTC)
hi i was wondering if you had any ideas for map games, you see, i started a page where people post there proposals for map games, and since you edit a lot of the Britsh Waterloo pages, I thought you might have a few,
DeanSims 19:29, February 18, 2012 (UTC)
A Darker Place
hi im playing axis vs allies reloaded as Nueva Granada, ive started a new alt history and would like some help, the alt is A Darker Place
Thank you, how stupid of me! The Rio de Plata is a river.
I have noticed, on my trawling through this wiki, that people tend to write Althists about the country they come from. All my articles/map game countries are about Australia, and I live in Australia. And all your articles seem to be about Chile/ South America. Just a thought. Callumthered 07:52, February 22, 2012 (UTC)
In Napoleon's Australian Victory, Simon Bolivar died before he could liberate South America, so Jose de san Martin took up the mantle of El Liberator (hence Martinia). What would be a good alternative name for Sucre?Callumthered 00:28, February 23, 2012 (UTC)
I am playing. i'm just too occupied with Principia Moderni and other things out of the wiki to dedicate fully to it, so often i end up forgetting to post.and also, i'm usually out of ideas in what to post aside of "updates its military".--Collie Kaltenbrunner 18:50, February 23, 2012 (UTC)
That's a great picture! I like it.
KingSweden 01:32, February 24, 2012 (UTC)
Its a good pic we just need it to say 1984 instead of 1986.
KingSweden 02:06, February 24, 2012 (UTC)
That looks perfect. Do you know if there's a sporting event template?
KingSweden 20:23, February 25, 2012 (UTC)
I think the second one is more in line with specifically the 1984 Cup, and could be used in other sporting competitions if we can get the coding right.
KingSweden 20:50, February 25, 2012 (UTC)
There are a few code issues we'll have to take a look at but for the most part it works. Page has been updated!
KingSweden 22:02, February 25, 2012 (UTC)
UCA Great War
That does bring up a Great Question. Unfortunately, my save file, as well as all of my backup saves got corrupted in working on this so the answer to that question, would not be acquired in game. Razgriz 2K9 18:34, March 1, 2012 (UTC)
Good thing I still have my pictures. As of the last Screenshot I made (October 28, 1917), the Pro-British alliance was winning, but not by much. (More of a 4% in favor of their alliance) Razgriz 2K9 23:32, March 1, 2012 (UTC)
How I planned on ending the Great War was that it wouldn't be a total victory, and some nations from both sides of the conflict may see themselves in a more advantageous position at the end than they were in the beginning. (i.e. North Germany annexing the Southern German Kingdoms and forming the German Empire, Peru and Chile dividing Bolivia between the two, ecetera.) As for which alliance triumps over the end, I think the British alliance may very well triumph in this story.Razgriz 2K9 00:36, March 2, 2012 (UTC)
I don't know how I managed to fix my save file, but the game is back on, I'm gonna try to finally finish the game at 1935 like intended. Razgriz 2K9 18:48, March 31, 2012 (UTC)
Kath, si quieres, tú trata de hacer el acuerdo con Prusia, pues se lo dejé a Chile y RdlP, y estoy ocupado con una guerra que probablemente va a ser muy implausible y parcial hacia DeanSims, jeje. Fed (talk) 18:22, March 4, 2012 (UTC)
- Tranquilo, Kath. Si, las colonias ganaron su independencia pero el rey de España es rey de los países con poco poder. Fed (talk) 22:02, March 8, 2012 (UTC)
I was reading a little bit about how representation in the Chilean Congress/Parliament works and I think that it should be scrapped for Napoleon's World so that we get a past-the-post or simple majority system. Binominalism seems to have been a product of the Pinochet regime and since not only was he not in power, there was a Constituonal rewrite in the early 1990's. I think that if Chile were to emerge from a single-party dictatorship, it would prefer a more democratic system than one that guarantees two parties always have roughly equal representation. Just a thought I had.
KingSweden 06:25, March 10, 2012 (UTC)
I think the coalitions would absolutely still exist - in the National Congress. Each party could, presumably, still sponsor their own candidate, which is why there would be a runoff for the Presidency (or a constitutional provision for one).
KingSweden 06:59, March 10, 2012 (UTC)
No, lo dejé. Tengo la mala costumbre de dejar los Map Game justo cuando se van a poner buenos :P. ¿Por qué preguntas? --Galaguerra1 18:34, March 27, 2012 (UTC)
Hola Katholico! Mi nombre es Ianian58, pardona mi Español, no estoy adjustado ha escribir Español en mi propia computadora. Te quiero preguntar si quieres entrar a mi "Map Game" "Napoleonic Europe" si estas interesado; aqui esta la direccion: Europe (Map Game) - Alternative History#The_World_Before_the_Game_Started Napoleonic Europe Ianian58 01:53, April 2, 2012 (UTC)
Don't know if you've noticed or not, Kath, but Brian's said on his talk page that he's going to be taking a break for a while. Coupled with other Brass members being rather.... inactive, we need some new blood.
If you haven't already guessed, I'd like you to be that new blood. Would you be interested in a promotion to the Brass, Kath?
Lordganon 21:59, April 6, 2012 (UTC)
Chile Elections (FTBW)
Yep, go ahead. I'm trying to start to do the American elections, but running in the stumbling block that the parties I created seem to have been given colors that are not what I wanted. See here:1944 US Presidential Election (French Trafalgar, British Waterloo)
If you have any idea how to change the colors (becuase I want the Socialist Party to be Red, and the Nationalist Party Blue, not Orange and Purple respectfully) it would be greatly appreciated. If not, I guess I will change the format of the articles. Lieut. Tbguy1992: Profile; Talk 14:49, April 9, 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks, I never was good at coding things, so that helps a lot. I might need help when I try to organize other elections, both American and otherwise, but until then, thanks ^^. Lieut. Tbguy1992: Profile; Talk 20:07, April 9, 2012 (UTC)
Sí, jaja. Quería poner a un ultra-conservador en EEUU y después una Unión de Repúblicas Socialistas Latinoamericanas (URSOLA [ÚRSULA] en abreviación! xD) desde las protestas estudiantiles. Fed (talk) 03:53, April 22, 2012 (UTC)
Congratulations, you are now a Brass in the TSPTF. In addition to your previous abilities as a Lieutenant, you can now adjust user rankings along with other behind-the-scenes administrative duties.
You have been conferred the title "Speaker of the Maailma lõppu," but feel free to change it as you desire.
Lordganon 09:24, April 22, 2012 (UTC)
Welcome to the Brass. We look forward to working with you! SouthWriter 21:10, April 22, 2012 (UTC)
Roughly translated, it's Estonian for "ends of the earth." From one version of the origin story for name "Chile." Thought it fit you ^^ Lordganon 03:16, April 23, 2012 (UTC)
No Cross No Crown
Hi, Kath. I do not know if you have noticed, but Lordganon is in an edit war with me over a blog string that was up in the middle of 2010. LurkerLordB marked it for deletion, I took the template off explaining that blogs are not subject to deletion. I know that you do not read English very well, but could you read the deletion policy and the "No Cross, No Crown" guidelines? The second one is a bit more complicated, so let me know if it is unclear to you.
Basically, Lordganon deletes it and I "undelete" it. He will not stop at my word alone, but if the other Brass look into it, perhaps he will quit this action. If you think he is right, please let me know also. I do not want trouble, but I do not like injustice either. Thank you. SouthWriter 03:31, April 23, 2012 (UTC)
For the record, Kath, those places clearly state that the only things that it doesn't apply to is articles and timelines. South has no idea what he's talking about. Lordganon 03:35, April 23, 2012 (UTC)
Re: Alt Dest
You're one of the contributors on here I like the most, so you're always free to contribute to Alt Dest and really any Napoleon's World page you feel needs something different. The Kurt Cobain entry wasn't great but I see nothing wrong, and it's an open page.
I also started fleshing out some information about Argentina. Any advice/thoughts?
KingSweden 21:59, April 25, 2012 (UTC)
Well Peronism to me (and maybe I'm wrong, South American political ideologies are certainly not my strong suit) seems like a left-wing ideology. The Liberal Democrats here would be more of a right-center or just center party, not completely conservative but more in favor of social and economic liberalism in the classical sense. Sense Peronism does not seem to embody that, I figured a centrist liberal party would make the perfect second-largest party in Argentina.
KingSweden 23:14, April 25, 2012 (UTC)
Yes, I agree. The politics of most other countries make much more sense than Argentina's do. I updated Lavin to reflect his new ambassadorship.KingSweden 23:49, April 25, 2012 (UTC)
Hmm, I suppose. I figured that the coalitions are more reflective of Congress than of the Presidency, and that the elections themselves become primaries in and of themselves (I believe this is called a jungle primary), with several candidates from each coalition. This could be a natural advantage for the left (as is seen in 1998) since there are so many parties on the right, but if Chile prefers center-right governments after the communist debacle, it's probably a wash.
OR maybe the 2002 and 2006 elections had coalition candidates, but the parties were unhappy and so returned to multiparty balloting for 2010?
KingSweden 05:33, April 26, 2012 (UTC)
That would make sense. What could happen is that most years, the other parties decide not to field a candidate and endorse a candidate from within their coalition, and in other years, there might be a candidate from another party, but after 1990 never more than two... kind of like how you described 1998. By the way, out of curiosity, what exactly does Gremialism mean? What do they believe? Are they pro-dictatorship, because that is what Wikipedia would seem to indicate.
KingSweden 06:09, April 26, 2012 (UTC)
Fascist Parties Page
Chile in Map Game
Recently, Bolivia asked to join the Confederation of Latin America. It demanded access to the sea at Chile's expense and we know you do not want that. But what if we added a condition to their application? It would say : The Confederation of Latin America accepts Bolivia into the Union and grants their request for access to the sea, gaining that land from Chile. HOwever, if they ever leave/ secede from the Confederation, Bolivia must return the land given.
Let me know what you think! AwesomePeruvian 22:26, April 29, 2012 (UTC)
You made a good point. We'll deal with the Bolivian Issue after the war.
Its the River of Defeat, I got the two mixed up. Enclavehunter 01:29, May 11, 2012 (UTC)
Re: Colombia Changes
Hola. Great to hear from you again as well. I have been okay.
I hope I haven't disappointed you, but yes, I have decided to get rid of Gran Colombia and Central America from the timeline. I took a second look at the idea of a Gran Colombia, and I believe there isn't enough time for it to have worked in TTL. Plus the fact that I know very little about the history of Colombia in general, I couldn't figure out a proper way to divide the country, and I never took into account the fact that this Colombia would become a major rival to the US, which would require me to rewrite the timeline to incorporate this. For instance, I had no idea that OTL Colombia in the 1850s was just as interested in Cuba as the US was. So, I just decided to drop the idea from the timeline. After I do more research on the history of Colombia, maybe I will bring my interpretation of Gran Colombia in a new timeline. With GC gone, I also decided to get rid of Central America, but this is due more to my interest of these nations being states of Mexico.
- I just knew you were going to ask me about Chile. XD But unfortunately, since there is no Gran Colombia, there is no Colombian-backed Peru-Bolivia, no reason for Chile not to go to war, and enough time for Argentina to gain most of Patagonia. So for now, South America will look like OTL. However (since I know very little about South American history), I am open to any idea that can come out that is directly connected to the Russian's having a bigger presence in North America. If you don't mind me asking... any ideas? --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 23:39, May 19, 2012 (UTC)
Forgive me for trying to push an idea out of you (I feel so ashamed) T_T
But for the record, Russia isn't going to expand as far as it has. As far as Russia's influence in South America, might be increased commerce. I doubt the US would allow Russian expansion (especially after the Monroe Doctrine). Before I forget to mention, I have already begun the process of having Panama be annexed into the US, and it is now a state (TTL's Alaska, lol). But aside from angering the British, I don't think the US would go any further south.
The Russo-Mexican alliance is really only an alliance, not so much a political power base. I doubt it would influence the world, aside from causing the US to look elsewhere to expand.
Not that this could really expand, but one think I can't find is how the Russian Empire worked diplomatically with the South American nations. All I can find is that the nations of SA established relations with the USSR. Could Russia have been neutral and unhelpful to SA in OTL? This might be an interesting place to look at, the Empire working closer with SA. I will have to look into this later. TTFN --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 02:46, May 20, 2012 (UTC)
- There may be some good possibilities, but all in good time. Curious about Panama, eh? How I see it: when Theodore Roosevelt moves to create a canal on the isthmus, the situation would turn since the US has no Pacific access (excluding Cape Horn). The would move towards annexing the entire isthmus (rather than a canal zone). It would be somewhat a kin to OTL Philippines, where the region fights for independence, but only gets annexed to another power. Panama would remain a territory until the 1950s, when it becomes a state (like OTL Alaska). --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 16:43, May 20, 2012 (UTC)
I do remember you writing me a question a while ago. I guess I lost track of time and completely forgot. Please forgive me. What was your question, I will be happy give as much help as I can. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 20:54, May 21, 2012 (UTC)
- I am not 100% sure, but I believe I already gave my opinion on this timeline. But I could be wrong, and I am always happy to answer questions. If Reagan is elected in 1976, than he would likely win a second term in 1980. The only thing that comes to the top of my head is the Islamic Revolution in Iran. While I am not too sure what Reagan would have done differently, his presidency may look at loosing the once pro-American country as a greater loss. He may even spread a belief that the Soviets may attempt to take over the country (as they would with Afghanistan later in 1979). The US may take a direct action to prevent the rise of the anti-American regime, and bring the Shah back to power. If this happened, there would be no Iran-Iraq war (which could lead to either no invasion of Kuwait, or an earlier act of aggression on Saddam's part). I would really suggest reading into this before getting ideas, as this is only an idea of mine. Other than this, I don't believe I have anything else. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 16:47, May 22, 2012 (UTC)
Ironically, the Cuba idea I can answer very easily. On August 5, 1994, hundreds of Cubans protested in Havana for an end to the Castro dictatorship. The protest was crushed early on, but I believe it could be easy for it to work in favor of the protesters under the right circumstances. I have even incorporated this idea into my New Union timeline. I believe this is the best place to start. Hope this helps. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 17:48, May 22, 2012 (UTC)
South America in No Napoleon
Hey, Katholico, long time no talk! How've you been?
I just needed to ask this. I've adopted No Napoleon a while ago, a timeline where Napoleon dies just before the end of the War of the First Coalition, but I've been having problems with the South American part of the timeline. I'm sure as you know, without Napoleon having attacked Spain and Portugal, the South American colonies wouldn't have declared independence right away. I think you mentioned before that most timelines have them be independent by the 1820s or so.
Considering I have almost no knowledge of South American history (I'm Canadian :P), I've had trouble coming up with the future of the continent. What I originally had in mind was that the Viceroyalties would declare independence, but really, I don't know why the South American ones wouldn't just unite altogether, similar to the United States? Do you mind shedding some light on this? It'd be much appreciated. Thanks! ChrisL123 23:29, May 22, 2012 (UTC)
- I'm great, haha busy with school though recently. Oh, and sorry for not replying sooner, the website's been screwing up recently on my computer and I wasn't able to reply.
- Onto South America: that actually makes a lot of sense. I never really thought of that before, but it makes sense. So do you think that South America would end up pretty much like OTL in the ATL, or is it possible to have the individual viceroalties (New Granada, Peru, Rio de la Plata) gain independence and stay together? I really appreciate your help, thanks so much. ChrisL123 20:06, May 25, 2012 (UTC)
Hey again, I just want your opinion on this, and I have a quick question.
So, I've thought over the timeline, and what I think I'm going to have is an almost "Independence Era" in the Americas. It would start with the independence of Quebec by 1837, then Louisiana (apart of New Spain, since France would never be able to get it from them) declare independence to be annexed to the United States. Then, it would almost spread downwards, having New Spain declare independence for the lack of help from the Spanish, then Central America, then New Colombia and others, until the colonies are officially independent. Do you think this is feasible enough to happen?
Now, the United States would have helped the countries gaining independence, but like in the Spanish-American War, the Americans would take Puerto Rico and Cuba (along with the Dominican Republic in TTL.) But, I recently read that the US actually helped Panama declare independence from Colombia in 1903, and the US built the Panama Canal. But there are two things I have to consider: a) would the US annex Panama in order to have more land, just like with Cuba et al., or do you think in the 20 more years that Gran Colombia would exist, or b) is it possible that Panama would build stronger relations with Colombia and Venezuela to be able to stay united? I really appreciate your help, and hopefully this will be my last question. Thanks! ChrisL123 01:58, May 30, 2012 (UTC)
- Fair enough, I figured they would declare independence sooner. About the Panama part, sorry haha, I was kinda rushing to finish my homework and I guess I might have not been that clear XD. I'll try to be clearer:
- So, when it comes to the South American Independence Wars, I figured that the United States would help the colonies become independent. Let's say the war happens in 1824, a year after the Monroe Doctrine was introduced. I figure if the US would help, a sort of Spanish-American War would happen. In OTL, the US gained Puerto Rico, Guam and Philippines after that war. But in this timeline, the United States would only expand so far as the Louisiana Purchase, and without the Panama Canal being built yet, there would be no way for the US to have access to those two territories. If the US does help the South American colonies against Spain and it does gain possessions afterwards, I figure that they would instead get Cuba, the Dominican Republic and Puerto Rico. Does that make sense?
- Now, onto Panama: I learned recently that the US helped Panama gain independence from Colombia in 1903, and the US later helped build the Panama Canal. So, onto the question.
- Because the US had such little expansion and a lot less land, would it make sense that Panama be annexed along with Cuba and the others, or:
- Would Panama be more "attached" to (Gran) Colombia to stay united, or:
- Would Panama have enough national identity to stay independent?
- I hope this cleared some stuff up, and I really hate to bother you. Thanks again, ChrisL123 03:19, May 30, 2012 (UTC)
You are correct - Argentina should exclusively be cancelled nuclear weapons.
I figured Chile might be "suspected" in that intelligence on its program is unclear and it might still be outside of the Non-Proliferation Treaty, which may have elevated suspicions that it still has weapons, but nobody knows for sure.
KingSweden 21:58, May 23, 2012 (UTC)
Ooooh interesting. Maybe something from the Pinochet era.
KingSweden 05:10, May 24, 2012 (UTC)
I suppose we could just scrap him running for President in 1940 and maybe have him be Minister of Health under several successive administrations? Good catch.
KingSweden 03:28, May 30, 2012 (UTC)
Brazil in NAV
I've been planning on making the page for Brazil in my timeline for a while now, but I'm not sure what to call the country, and I thought you would be the person to go to.
In the ATL, the Portuguese stay in Brazil, since Portugal is permanently occupied by Napoleon. For now, I changed the otl United Kingdom of Portugal, Brazil and the Algarves to the United Kingdom of Brazil and Portugese Africa. Does that name make sense? Or should I just call it the standard Empire of Brazil?
Thanks, your fellow antipodean, Callumthered 08:00, May 28, 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the advice! I'll get to work. Callumthered 08:31, May 28, 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, Chile is pretty much the same as otl. It is the biggest power in the South-East Pacific, and has a good navy. Thanks for reminding me, I'll put it into the list of nations. Callumthered 02:16, May 29, 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for fixing those things up! You saved me some annoying work. Callumthered 02:44, May 29, 2012 (UTC)
I'm not sure if it's real or not... to confess, I have simply made up names that sound like the area they're from in the past. I've done my best with Spanish names, especially naming conventions with two last names, but I want to use some last names besides the common -ez (Gomez, Martinez, Rodriguez, etc.) since a lot of people, especially in South America, seem to have names that do not end in -ez (just like someone making a Scandinavian entry should look for more interesting last names than ones that end in -sson). I suppose Falevantes is probably something I cooked up on the fly because it sounded cool.
KingSweden 03:00, June 4, 2012 (UTC)
NAV Chile Map problem
Yes... My maps do have some descrepencies. I think the problem is that I often made the maps before I'd fully fleshed out some other points in my TL. I'll begin updating the maps.
Thanks for informing me, Callumthered 03:43, June 6, 2012 (UTC)
Napoleonic Europe Reloaded
This is an invitation to Napoleonic Europe Reloaded, and would appreciate if you joined; you also have the expirience to play as the nations of Spain and Brazil. http://althistory.wikia.com/wiki/Napoleonic_Europe_Reloaded_%28Map_Game%29#Rules
Offer of Secret Military Uprising and Political Unifacation
Brazil would like to form the Federated States of Latin America with Chile. I twould be a full political union with only one nation being controlled by every member state. We would take turns posting for our nation.
Or we can form the Confederated States of Latin America, which would essentaily be like the old CoLA but with more communication between the member states, which would still beindividualy controlled by each nation..
2012 World Cup
Not to make generalizations about South Americans, but you're probably more into international football than I am. How do you think the 2012 World Cup should go? I have all the Knockout stage teams selected with the group stage over.
KingSweden 02:50, June 28, 2012 (UTC)
Well I was going to use the same 1 vs. 2 and reversed formula as the real World Cup, but what kind of results would you like to see? I figure this type of Pick'em is more up your alley than the annual American college football version I subject the other editors of the wiki to haha
KingSweden 04:59, June 28, 2012 (UTC)
I have the matches in the Knockout stage written out in full to make the Pick'em easier. In the Americas, there is Alaska, Canada, the United States, Mexico, Haiti, Dominica, the Caribbean Confederation, Jamaica, Barbados, Trinidad and Tobago, the Bahamas, Bermuda, Aruba and Curacao, Antigua and Barbuda, Republic of the Cayman Islands, and then there are American possessions such as Cuba, Puerto Rico (which includes Vieques), the Danish West Indies (British and American Virgin Islands), and the French Antilles (all the French territories i.e. Guadeloupe, Martinique, etc.). Then, of course, you have Central America, Colombia, a very small French Guyana (maybe a sixth of its OTL size), Brazil, Paraguay, Peru, Chile, and Argentina.
That is the full Americas.
KingSweden 05:17, June 28, 2012 (UTC)
I have finished the group stage, using 7 of 8 of your suggestions. Let me know what you think, any picks you have for the next round, and I'll update after I feel that the next stage would have been totally played out in realtime.
KingSweden 06:01, June 28, 2012 (UTC)
Josef Mengele (Napoleon's World)
South America's your field of expertise right? I've got an idea for Josef Mengele's history in Napoleon's World. He is forced to flee France during the reign of Albert I, as he is falsely charged with treason. He flees to South America, where he finishes his medical studies. He then makes a name for himself as the finest doctor in Bolivia. He is selected as Bolivia's Minister of Health, and he reforms the Bolivian medical system (which I imagine being riddled with corruption, as the Bolivia article is still too stubby). He eventually steps down after a decade in power, and retires. When he dies his funeral is the grandest funeral ever given to anyone other than the former Presidents of Bolivia.
Yank 03:08, June 28, 2012 (UTC)
I just realized that in OTL Mengele spent most of his South American exile in Paraguay rather than Bolivia. The events surrounding the French Civil War provide a perfect opportunity to bring OTL Nazi figures to South America. I have more ideas with that effect.
- Erwin Rommel- A potential military figure in any country that takes him in. It could be that his military leadership could have been instrumental in some war not yet included in the timeline. I personally believe that a short war could have happened in South America before the Brazilian War.
Yank 04:43, June 28, 2012 (UTC)
And what would you think about the idea of a fictional son of Adolf Eichmann being elected Argentine President?
Yank 04:57, June 28, 2012 (UTC)
I have an idea for Adolf Eichmann. What if he was a former Churat agent who defected to Argentina and effectively created the main Argentinian spy agency? And what if the war was a conflict between Columbia and Peru over the possession of OTL Equador?
Yank 05:35, June 28, 2012 (UTC)
This is an invitation to play VLR, a map game that has been running for a while, but needs more active players. Its actually fun and has taken an interesting point, history-wise. Check it out , just search Vive La Revolution Reloaded! and browse the nations listed. The ones with the ^ by them mean they can be taken over. The United Republics of South America is available!(it contains Chile)AP (talk) 03:08, July 5, 2012 (UTC)
Oh sorry! The United Republics of South America is listed as the Viceroyalty of Peru because they just gained independence and i forgot to update the page! You may change it:)AP (talk) 04:37, July 5, 2012 (UTC)
Offer of Secret Military Uprising and Political Unifacation
Brazil would like to form the Federated States of Latin America with Venezuela. I twould be a full political union with only one nation being controlled by every member state. We would take turns posting for our nation.
Or we can form the Confederated States of Latin America, which would essentaily be like the old CoLA but with more communication between the member states, which would still beindividualy controlled by each nation..
Re:Americas Map (NN)
Haha, no, it does mean Chile. The others were Cuba, DR and Puerto Rico. The only reason I put them in the ocean is because there wasn't enough space in the land to put the dot in. But thanks for your input :P. I suppose I should change that a bit to avoid confusion. Thanks, ChrisL123 (talk) 04:38, July 14, 2012 (UTC)
Re: CHL Elections
That would be a very interesting development, though one that the US wouldn't particular condone as they would have previously due to warming relations with France, as the European Liberation War is over, and France seems to be backtracking many of the harsher measures established at the beginning of it. Since both the French-Japanese and the US-Russian alliance are both faltering, the geo-political boundaries will be changing in the next few years (though, not yet... it wouldn't be Alternate History! lol). So, Lets say the Chile elections are perhaps the first sign that France and America are moving closer together, and ignoring their former allies (remember: France and the US had been pretty much allies from after the First Great European War until after the Third Global War, over 140 years). Lieut. Tbguy1992: Profile; Talk 21:36, July 15, 2012 (UTC)
- I never really thought about that... I knew I gave the National Socialists an organization that became an alliance, but I never really thought about it for other nations. Though, I think Sorelism will be different: since each country is different, each Sorelist Party has to shift to those conditions. If there was a massive organization overseeing it, then they would force conformity, which would turn off other people. So, lets say "Sorelist" parties are given help by France, but there is no "Comintern" or anything like that. Basically anyone claiming to be Sorelist will be considered such. I think this could be a reason why Chile recieved high Sorelist support in this election, and why the US is starting to loose interest in fighting it: they don't see it as a big, monolithic conspiracy, and, in some cases, is actually good, even holding partly free elections and supporting a growing economy. About the only thing that started the Cold War may have been Premier Petain and President Marshall's hatred for each other and actions after the Third Global War of both powers. Lieut. Tbguy1992: Profile; Talk 05:30, July 16, 2012 (UTC)
Hello again haha. Well, I think that'll be alright. Is that the same timeline that I helped draw the South America map a little while ago?
Hello again :P Well you see, when I made the map, I heavily used this historical map of South America, and I figured that once Chile split from the Viceroyalty of Peru, it would keep those borders. Do you think I should change it to Chile's current border?
Also, I almost forgot about the orthographic map of yours. I will be gone vacationing this weekend, so is it okay if I get them to you by next week? Regards, ChrisL123 (talk) 19:40, August 2, 2012 (UTC)
Fronteras de Chile en Bolivar's Dream
Hola, Kath! Otra vez, hace mucho que no nos vemos, jeje. Quería preguntarte sobre las fronteras del Cono Sur en mi línea del tiempo, Bolivar's Dream. Como no sé mucho sobre la historia de Chile y los países rioplatenses, mi primer mapa de las fronteras de Colombia (basado en el de Nuke de hace dos años) te quería preguntar sobre las fronteras provinciales de Chile con Argentina (y en un menor nivel, Argentina con Uruguay, Paraguay y la nación brasileña). Por ejemplo, habría un estado patagonio en el sur? Y si existiera Patagonia, controlaría el sur de Chile también o Chile se estiraría hasta la Tierra del Fuego como en nuestra línea del tiempo? Gracias! Fed (talk) 21:07, August 2, 2012 (UTC)
He estado bien, gracias por preguntar :P.
Sobre el conflicto entre Argentina y Chile, todavía va a haber unos conflictos latinoamericanos, solo que serían resueltos por el gobierno en Las Casas. Mi plan hasta ahora era generalmente crear los estados que no son independientes en NLT como zonas con cultura especial (California, Mosquito, Libertadores y Guyana tienen muchos mas anglófonos que el resto de Colombia, aunque los hispanohablantes predominan), como centro contra otra nación (California y un Río Grande que estoy planeando contra Estados Unidos, además de Tejas, y Acre contra Brasil) o como solución neutral a una disputa internacional (Acre es entre Perú y Bolivia, y Chaco entre Bolivia y Paraguay). Patagonia iba a ir como un ejemplo de las primera y tercera opciones, pues como Argentina y Chile se la disputaban, y había una gran cantidad de mapuches, alemanes y galeses en el área, se decidió crear otro estado. Pero no estoy muy seguro de esta pues creo que su cultura siempre ha sido predominantemente hispánica, y, por lo que entiendo, Chile estaba a punto de tener soberanía sobre Patagonia pero se la entregó a Argentina por temor que esta entrara del lado de Perú a la Guerra del Pacífico, cambiando el curso de la guerra.
A Great world
hola, no estoy seguro si te interesara esto, Pero te gustaria jugar mi juego de mapas de A great world A Great World (Map Game), si es asi por favor entra, gracias
Haha thank you, I had the idea when I was contributing to Atlantic Islands and only thought about doing it recently. And yes, any contributions are always welcome, but I will need to know more about South American history to figure it all out. I might be going to my library in a few days, so I'll be sure to take out a book on it.
And don't think I forgot about your maps; I've done one or two, but I just want to fix everything and then I'll get them to you all at once. Do you also want ones for Suriname, French Guiana and Guyana? Regards, ChrisL123 (talk) 19:39, August 16, 2012 (UTC)
- Hola de nuevo, Katholico, haha. I've made some progress on your maps, but I've been on vacation for a little while and haven't been able to do a lot. I have a bit of free time, and I just wanted to know which colour scheme (see picture) you'd wish to have your maps in, dark grey or light grey. Regards, ChrisL123 (talk) 23:06, August 25, 2012 (UTC)
Hello there. I want to ask you a single question. First of all, in my TL, the French and Spanish thrones unite, allowing France to gain the American colonies. Now, the reason for the War of Spanish-American Independence was the invasion of Spain. But without any invasion, will the war still happen?
I mean here is the point: as unrest grows, Napoleon tries to make reforms, but is blocked by the colonial governors. Thinking that Napoleon is not helping, they declare war and fight for independence.
Well hello there. Great to hear from you. I have been doing quite well, thank you for asking. ^_^
Like I hopefully mentioned to you before, I am not an expert on Iran. But knowing Reagan, he may wish to do something like this (but I am not an expert on him, either). The US did support Saddam in the war, and I guess I could see the US joining them in an alliance (stranger things have happened). Ironically, I recently (by recently, I mean weeks ago) watched a special on TV which talked about the Iran-Iraq War. You may want to read up about the Nojeh Coup (Wikipedia isn't any help, though; try this). It was an attempted coup in 1980 by members of the air force. The goal of it was to overthrow the new Islamic government, and reinstall the Shah. It was found out well before it could happen, but I would say it is worth looking up and getting better details. Sorry I can't give any more information, but this is all I know. Hope it is enough. TTFN. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 05:26, September 16, 2012 (UTC)
Greenland 83DD Review
Hi, I am sending this to all the Brass, active and inactive.
This may be much ado about nothing, but I need your feedback on the most recent Review on the "1983: Doomsday" talk page. Please feel free to check the history to see the original Review, but I need to know what you think. The best place to present that is in the review itself. SouthWriter (talk) 02:48, October 8, 2012 (UTC)
I was blocked for several days
but I'm back now and trying to get caught up.
Oh. My. God. I totally forgot about them. I am so sorry, I feel terrible, I have just been so busy. I have finished the basic outline of South America, but I think I have only gotten Bolivia done. I shouldn't be too preoccupied this week so I promise I will get them done by next weekend. Sorry again! :( ChrisL123 (talk) 01:47, November 12, 2012 (UTC)
Hello again, Katholico! About the Logo, yes of course. It actually isn't 100% mine, I found the top part from the Wikipedia page (since France was a bid in the 2012 Olympics), and added the Olympic rings on the bottom. And about the maps, I've been having a it of trouble, Inkscape doesn't like me for some reason and now, in order to make the green filling for the countries, I have to trace it around every single border, instead of simply shaping it underneath the borders. Sounds complicated, yeah, but that's what Inkscape is, haha. I have Bolivia done and am about to finish Chile, so they should all be done before Friday. Sorry for any inconvenience! ChrisL123 (talk) 04:30, November 19, 2012 (UTC)
Hey again, Katholico. I just wanted to let you know that I've made progress on your maps, and so far I've completed Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, Peru, and am still doing Brazil and Ecuador. I plan on giving you them all at once when I'm completely finished, but would you also like me to do Venezuela and Colombia? Also, I assume the Falkland Islands are still British and not a part of Argentina or Chile, correct? Thanks! ChrisL123 (talk) 19:16, December 2, 2012 (UTC)
Greetings, how have you been? I have been well.
I was hoping to get your opinion on an idea I have had about South America in Russian America. I was thinking about having the Peru-Bolivian Confederation win the War of the Confederation, thereby allowing the Confederation to continue to exist. I don't have a POD at the moment (aside from the Russians offering aid to Santa Cruz or the Confederation winning key battles).
But one of the reasons I wanted to get your advice is because I am considering that a successful Confederation would expand its power beyond Peru and Bolivia. I was thinking about it expanding to be a confederation that includes Ecuador and Chile. Would have have any advice for me on this? Thank you, and I hope I haven't taken up your time. TTFN. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 00:03, November 13, 2012 (UTC)
- Oh no, is everything okay? :O I don't want to bother you if you aren't feeling well. I really hope you feel better. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 02:35, November 13, 2012 (UTC)
Well, I wish you luck, and I will be here if you need it.
Very funny that you mentioned Freire, I was also looking into this. However, my idea was focused on him succeeding in regaining power from his coup attempt, but you can probably tell why I gave up on this idea. But focusing on the Chilean Civil War may be interesting. I will look into this. On the top of my head: with Russia supporting and aiding Mexico in their independence, Russia develops connections in the remaining independence movements in Latin America. Maybe Freire develops relations with Russia or something. This give him credit and aid during the Civil War. Thanks for the idea.
As for my idea on Peru-Bolivia, I was thinking it would evolve into an equal confederation between its member states (making Limans somewhat happy), and maybe Freire could lead this? I was also thinking about adopting the name "Tawantisuyo" for this new nation (I remember you mentioning this for Central World). I am also thinking about having Ecuador joining (or maybe being forced to join). Peru did gain parts of Ecuador, so this is about where this idea came from. I was also thinking that the US (at some point) would gain the Galapagos from either Ecuador or this vast nation.
Glad to see you remember the Gran Colombia/Gran Chile idea I had a while back. I do intend to incorporate those two ideas into this new one. With Chile being a part, it would be this new government that would push into Patagonia. While I don't know if my initial idea would work (i.e., all of Patagonia) would be possible, but maybe more area for Chile. Also, thank you so much for correcting the links on my China page (I completely forgot about that).
- Greetings. I hope you have been well from the last time we talked. I thought you may be interested in my progress. I have made a continental map of how I see the continent. Tahuantinsuyo has expanded from Ecuador to Tierra del Fuego. Chile's claims to Patagonia allowed Tahuantinsuyo to expand into the region at the expense of the Argentine civil wars. Ecuador joins as part of border disputes and tensions from neighboring Colombia (I have an idea that Colombia becomes communist in the 1920s or so), with Ecuador selling the Galapagos to the US prior to which. I also came across another idea you mentioned to me long ago, in which Buenos Aires retains independence from the Argentine Confederation (this may also lead to the Argentine Confederation gaining connections with Tahuantinsuyo). Not much else, excluding that Guyana becomes part of the West Indies Federation, and Brazil doesn't expand as OTL. What do you think? --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 00:09, November 19, 2012 (UTC)
Glad you like it, and I am glad that you are feeling better. I would assume Paraguay and Uruguay would remain independent (seems more likely here), and I would believe Tahuantinsuyo would not expand to include Paraguay (Patagonia is enough). As for the Brazil-Tahuantinsuyo relations, I can't say. Thinking about it, I would assume it would resemble the early American-Canadian relations (i.e., cautious). I doubt conflict would develop. What would you think? --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 05:21, November 19, 2012 (UTC)
- Hello again. Sorry for the delayed response, but I ran into a snag. I received comments that this idea (as is) was not possible, stemming from the fact that Chile (despite a change in leadership) would not support a union with any country, and that the Peru-Bolivian Confederation was probably going to be difficult to retain in the long run. However, after two weeks of looking into this, I feel confident that a new idea I have would allow this confederation to still happen. Since the Viceroyalty of Peru (which during the wars of independence reclaimed Chile, "Bolivia", and "Ecuador") remained loyalist and only gained independence from outside help, the POD focuses on San Martin failing to liberate Chile, and Bolivar failing to liberate Ecuador, Peru, and Bolivia. I doubt Russia would assist in any potential liberation attempts in South America. Combined with Spain loosing Mexico, Colombia, and Argentina; Spain would work closer with Peru to assure its survival as a Spanish colony. Peru becomes a dominion (grated greater autonomy), and would remain part of Spain until the 1870s (when Spain goes through revolution and turmoil). After this, Peru gains independence as a united Tahuantinsuyo (which includes Chile, Bolivia, Ecuador, and Patagonia). Not sure what you would think of this, but it seems interesting to look into.
- As for your questions (again, sorry for the delay); I doubt Paraguay or Uruguay would become united with any of the Argentinas. If I remember correctly, Paraguay was isolationist (meaning it wanted to be left alone); and Buenos Aires fought to become its own centrist state, which I think would defeat the purpose if uniting with Uruguay (which I think would require a federation, if not for the fact that there would be no physical connection between the two [unless you count the Rio de la Plata]). As for Argentina gaining parts of Brazil, not to sure. I do say it would be a clever idea (giving Argentina a coastline and eliminating its need to travel through Buenos Aires), but I believe it would depend on the time that such a war would take place. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 17:23, December 1, 2012 (UTC)
Lol. To be honest, I was quite surprised that you were so calm and willing to look into my idea, but now I know that you secretly disliked it. XP If it's any consolation, you wrote me a while back and wanted my advice on what parts of the US would Mexico annex upon their victory in the Mexican-American War, and that it also had the CSA side with Mexico during the American Civil War. As an American (and a New Yorker to boot), that made me feel weird about that scenario. Lol. I do hope I am not upsetting you about my ideas for Chile.
As for Argentina becoming stable and united because of a Loyalist state existing west of the Andes, I have to disagree. From what I have read about Argentina over the past few weeks, it seems more likely that there would be little to no change in comparison with OTL. My thoughts:
- I doubt that Peru/Tahuantinsuyo would be anymore a threat to Argentina than what they faced in OTL. Spain would be lucky to retain these regions here, and I believe they would have their hands full just to keep them in the long run. Because of which, I doubt Spain would see any benefits of trying to regain Argentina any more than the British saw any benefits of regaining the US. Granted, Peru would become a regional power, but so would Brazil (and it alone had no affect in uniting Argentina).
- Based on the geography of South America, I believe Argentina would not need to worry about any hypothetical invasion from Peru (the Andes assure that). Even so, I believe Argentina would have enough to worry about from the Atlantic. Brazil was a major threat to Argentina (they even went to war and lost Uruguay to them), and even the British and French were a threat (with both blockading Buenos Aires, twice). If these three powers didn't lead Argentina to unite OTL, I doubt Peru would be any more of a catalyst.
- Nothing against San Martin, but I doubt the loss of Chile would lead him to move towards Argentine unity than what happened OTL. After all, he also failed to liberate Bolivia (at least twice IIRC). And wouldn't have loosing Bolivia been a bigger blow for San Martin, since Bolivia was actually part of Argentina (while Chile was a separate entity).
- Based on the political atmosphere of Argentina (as well as OTL Colombia, Central America, and Mexico), it doesn't appear that Argentina was going to remain united without some sort of civil war. Throughout Latin America, the leadership of the early nations were divided between those who supported the establishment of a unitary state (which has the central government retain full control over the nation), and those who supported a federation (which gives the provinces/states regional say). These differences were too far apart to end peacefully, eventually leading to the dissolution of Gran Colombia, the splitting off of Central America from Mexico (not to mention also dividing those states later on), and leading Argentina into civil war.
While Argentina did end up in a better position in OTL, I would believe that it would be here that Peru/Tahuantinsuyo would make things worse for them. While I would say it would be 50/50, I have grown interesting in a divided Argentina.
As for Patagonia, Argentina didn't achieve real say in the region until the 1880s, while OTL Chile had established forts by the 1840s. Since Spain would still have say here, I would believe they would attempt to reassert control in the region (especially if Argentina is in Civil War, and since the British had there eyes on the region as well). I would also suspect that the natives of the region would support Peru more than Argentina (as they did OTL [but with the Chileans]), giving Spanish-backed Peru more reason to move in. When Tahuantinsuyo gains independence, it would be around the same time that Argentina begins to stabilize, and a final border would be established.
I will agree that maybe I went a little overboard on the amount of Patagonia that I took. I thought the Colorado River would make a good border, as this would also include the Cuyo region (which you have informed me had some support in joining Chile). I will take a relook at the border between Tahuantinsuyo and Argentina. Also, to clarify: would you believe the people of Cuyo would be as interested in joining Peru ATL (or was this solely an interest towards Chile OTL)?
- Lol, glad to hear it. No need to worry about that (Mexico question), I was just comparing. XD
- Thank you for your input on Cuyo. But again, not too sure if I see it as you described. From the little bit I was able to dig up on Wikipedia, the region (which had only recently been divided) showed interest in joining Chile because of the chaos of Argentina's civil war and the rise of warlords across that region. If Peru could offer peace for the people of the region, there may be a chance the Cuyo people would go for it (regardless of them returning to Spain).
- In comparison, this seems to remind me a lot about the New England states in the US (especially Vermont). During the American Revolution, many Vermonters were willing to return to the British (rather than remain a part of New York [T_T]). After the revolution, pretty much all the New England states still had support for the British, even opposing going to war with them. When the War of 1812 broke out, New England attempted to leave the US (and hopped for British backing), but this obviously never happened.
- So in conclusion, I would say it depends. However, I am not able to find any more sources for this piece of history (aside from you and Wikipedia). Do you know of any other pages where I can get more details about this? --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 18:19, December 2, 2012 (UTC)
Sorry to hear that. If you can't find it, I will continue to look through Google. That is usually how I see history (events that happen over and over again, and you must learn from the past to succeed in the future). While I understand there is a huge difference between New England and Cuyo, I also take into account that the Cuyo region was once part of Chile (maybe going as far as being an irredentist goal of Peruvian Chile). The move towards reintegration was in the 1830s, leave little time for the Cuyo people to really develop a definite pride towards Argentina. I also read somewhere that Chile could have had strong influence over western Argentina had the Civil Wars continued (or something along those lines). It could also be argued that Mendoza would develop closer ties towards Chile (if not being annexed at the time), and could be de facto part of Peru to the point that it would be included when the borders are finalized. It would also be worth noting that I have no intention of the entire Cuyo region going to Peru/Tahuantinsuyo, but only the regions west of the Desaguadero River. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 20:16, December 2, 2012 (UTC)
- Lol, glad I could be convincing. ;P I have also made an updated map. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 00:30, December 3, 2012 (UTC)
Re: National Party
Hey man, pretty good! Just busy with work and so on. I made Lily Perez Party Leader in the Senate.
One mistake (I presume) that I noticed - on the Hernan Larrain page, Isabel Allende is his predecessor as President of the UG.
I was also curious: in the OTL Chilean election in 2013/14, who do you think will/run win? Does Pinera have a successor or will the left win again?
I know what you mean. We just had our election here in the US. I voted for Obama though i'm not the biggest fan of his Presidency (I think he's been dissapointing and kind of a bum). If you haven't noticed, a big theme of Napoleon's World is a cynical attitude towards all political ideologies, parties and politicians (i.e. nobody is perfect). I always think the politics of other countries is interesting (whenever i get my copy of hte Economist, I always read the section on South America because Brazil, Chile and Colombia are so interesting to me)
Ah no, anytime the Communists get involved... maybe thats just my American bias shining through haha.
Hola Kath, y perdón por no haberte respondido antes. Estoy bien, y tu?
Are you going to do more work on the Mexican Empire timeline?
Yank 19:49, December 1, 2012 (UTC)
That's good to know. The Mexican Empire timeline is too interesting to let stagnate. The fact that Mexico, a nation traditionally known for being rather poor, has effectively replaced the United States as the leader of the Free World is so enjoyable. Plus there's the fact that I subscribe to the theory that monarchs can be very good for a nation if the right people wear the crown.
Yank 22:54, December 1, 2012 (UTC)
2012 College Football Pick'em
Its that time of year again:
NCAA Division I National Championship (Citrus Bowl)
1 Cuba (13-0) vs. 2 Texas (13-0)
16 Kahokia (10-3) vs. 8 Texas A&M (11-1)
Manhattan Bowl 12 Iowa (10-2) vs. 13 Pittsburgh (10-2)
4 Washington (12-1) vs. 7 Ohio State (11-2)
13 San Diego (10-2) vs. 6 South Carolina (11-1)
18 Huron (9-3) vs. 3 Sequoyah (12-1)
14 Alabama (10-3) vs. 19 Virginia (9-4)
5 Pacifica (11-1) vs. 10 Massachusetts (10-2)
11 Notre Dame (10-3) vs. 15 Louisiana (10-2)
17 Fresno State (13-0) vs. 9 Peninsula (11-2)
Disney and the Theme Parks (Mexican Empire)
Considering that both OTL sites of the first Disney theme parks are in the Mexican Empire, I was wondering where you would put the theme parks. Considering Disney was born in Chicago I think he'd still be Disney in the Mexican Empire timeline. I have some ideas I want to bounce off of you.
- Disneyland: Gary, Indiana. It's close to Disney's hometown and it;d really save the community from going down the toilet like in OTL.
- Walt Disney World: St. Louis. They had a project there that was cancelled.
- Tokyo Disney: Mexico City. Because they're litterally the largest American ally.
- Euro Disney: A tie between Berlin, Athens and Madrid. Because France is a Confederate ally and off-limits.
- Hong Kong Disneyland: Hanoi. Because of the alliance and the irony of an American theme park operating in the OTL Communist Vietnamese capital.
- Shanghai Disneyland: I've got a few ideas. Bagdad, Bankok, Saigon or Harbin.
Yank 02:54, December 4, 2012 (UTC)
Viola! I have finished them! I've decided not to do Venezuela, Colombia, Paraguay and Uruguay just so you don't wait, but I promise I will get them done in the near future. Enjoy, and sorry for the long wait! :)
Re: Sin Destino
Hello again. I am quite familiar with that timeline, as it is one of those timelines that scare me (a la Mexican-backed CSA, lol). Aside from that, I'm not too sure I am of big help; as the timeline seems quite confusing to me (Quebec and Canada gain Independence?). As for the presidents, I don't see anything wrong with what your friend has up. But as time progresses, the list may be very different. In my opinion, stay away from OTL Republican candidates between 1860-1940ish), as they were quite imperialist. Hope that helps. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 03:49, December 15, 2012 (UTC)
- Glad I can help. And yes, I am quite confused about Canada and Quebec being independent. If ignoring the fact that they were one entity during the American Revolution, than the obvious reason would be that they were loyalist during the war. Think of Quebec being like Peru, they aren't going to gain independence unless the US plays like Argentina/Colombia (which would be even more impossible if the US is alone). So yes, I am quite confused, lol.
- However, if mapping is your question, then you have come to the right man (I happen to be an expert on mapping). So forgive me if I rant. The USA would have the same borders it did after the war, just now Louisiana is not going to be taken (see here). I have no idea about this "Wisconsin Republic," but my guess is that this would not exist. The Floridas could very well be purchased later on (the British controlled them prior to the Revolution), but only the Floridas. I have no idea how the Maritime Provinces got into the US, but I think they probably wouldn't (unless they too are "liberated" like Quebec). New Orleans would not be part of any USA.
- An independent Louisiana seems like a much better idea than a Texas (which would not exist without Americans who settled in Mexico). However, it depends. I would assume that Napoleon still comes to power (otherwise Louisiana would have remained Spanish). While Napoleon had ambitions to establish New France, this wouldn't happen unless France continues to control Hispaniola (i.e., Haiti and the Dominican Republic). They were the real treasure for the French. When they secured independence, Louisiana was mostly worthless for Napoleon (which is why he sold it to Thomas Jefferson). But I guess that with a weaker US not wanting it, Louisiana would remain French until it gains independence (or the French loose it in the Napoleonic Wars, but yeah).
- To clarify Quebec and Canada, I have done some reading on the timeline, and I think I will make some corrections. Canada ATL didn't gain independence during the revolution, but gained independence later on (during the 20th century I assume). Quebec does gain independence during the war. What confused me was that Quebec didn't join the US (which the US did want), but I guess it would remain a French-speaking nation allied with the US. As for the Maritime provinces, my guess would be that they do not join the US (especially if Canada remains loyalist). Also a note for Quebec, it would not be like OTL Quebec, but much smaller. See this map, this is what ATL Quebec would be like (with the inclusion of Labrador).
- As for the rest, seems okay-ish. Pacifica would probably be called Columbia instead (just a larger version of British Columbia). California makes sense (especially if Mexico is chaotic as OTL). Not to sure about Deseret (but I am not too sure about Mormonism in general, so ignore me).
- Aside from that, that's all I can think about. To simplifly things, I have made a quick map of what I believe North America may look like (from what I can make out and what I know). It's not much, but I believe this can help out. Feel free to use it. If you need any more help, feel free to write. ^_^ --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 05:06, December 16, 2012 (UTC)
Glad I can help. I do not believe Quebec (or Canada and the Maritime Provinces) would gain independence during the Revolution. I only included it in the map because I thought this is what your friend wanted. In all likelihood, it would be a part of Canada (like OTL). The Floridas could be purchased from Spain like OTL (Spain had little interest in them), but I doubt the US would go any further. Columbia and California can indeed become independent. Californians (especially under Mexico) sought independence from the growing centrism in Mexico, and they got lucky when the US sided with them. Here, they could probably due so on their own (especially when gold is discovered), or you could (just a wild guess) get the British to support them. Columbia would just be a greater version of British Columbia. As for Napoleon and Europe, I can't help you out there. Why not ask ChrisL123, I believe he would be your source for this area. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 23:43, December 16, 2012 (UTC)
Project Agawin: saving Fire Wiki
I have come across a wiki that is in desperate need of a major clean and reboot. None of the Admins have been active for some time. The wiki is all but dead. I have tried contacting Wika to request full rights as an admin and maybe even adopt it (If that is possible) but have not been answered. Could you provide a contact who will reliably answer?
Re: Sin Destino
Hmm well from his President of the united States list the only suggestion I can see that I would make is for George Washington to serve more than one term (he was a national hero after all, even during the war) and for John Tyler to not serve at all. Tyler only became President because his predecessor died after a month in office and was kicked out of his own political party. He is generally known as one of the worst US Presidents ever, which is saying a lot since we've had 44 to pick from as an all-time "worst."
The reason Tyler was not liked is because he was the first to have to take over after the death of the president. He insisted that the constitution made him "President," and would answer to no other title ("Vice President" or "Acting President"). They said it was a curse on Harrison by a Native American chief - continued every twenty years until Reagan survived the attempt on his life. Anyway, Harrison had been a hero in the War of 1812 -- a war which did not go as well in this time line. Consequently, he would not have become president either.
By the way, the constitution was not changed to clarify the succession question until 1967 (after the last death of a president and before the next one would leave by resignation). So, yes, I agree, Tyler is out. As for Washington, Guierro exlains the decision to leave the work of consolidating the new nation" to other men. I guess a longer war wore the man out. SouthWriter (talk) 04:18, December 17, 2012 (UTC)
^^^ What South said about Tyler. Explained it much better than I could have.
Its your friend's (Guierro?) TL, though, so he should make the decision. I was just stating my opinion.
RE: Sin Destino
Hello again, Katholico! I'd be more than glad to help. Though, considering we are three different people with three different opinions, we may have some very different opinions. Worth a shot, though!
First off, there's a few factors that come to play. First, why would nations like Spain, France and the Netherlands avoid helping the Americans? While this could vary, one interesting thought could be that perhaps the different European monarchists would think that sending money to aid a bunch of rebellious Englishmen would be futile, and would not bother to.
Though, what would happen to that thought when the US gets independence, even under their restriction? Maybe the European citizens would realize that a republican revolution might actually work better than a monarchy. Though, their thoughts could go either way; the French may realize that a British imposition on the Americans would mean a democratic revolution is futile and would lead to problems (e.g. restriction on foreign nations), or maybe the revolutionaries would see what tyranny the British can inflict upon other nations, even upon their own people, and cause more uprisings and revolutions in Europe.
Before I get into Napoleon, a few things come in mind for the Americas:
- Quebec was generally happy with the terms forced upon them by the British, which is why the Quebecois aided the Americans but never revolted against the British themselves. However--if the revolutionary thoughts spread among the Europeans concerning British tyranny and that republicanism is better than monarchism, they may join a mass revolution that could happen in Europe.
- I'm sure you're aware of the French gaining control of Louisiana, and how the US cannot purchase it in OTL due to their ban
- Canada was not a country at the time, and OTL Canada was composed of Rupert's Land, Lower Canada (Quebec), Upper Canada (Ontario), the Martimes, and the North West Territories. OTL British Columbia was only explored in the coming years. The only two well populated states were Upper and Lower Canada, and Upper Canada was created with the help of the British that retreated after the American Revolution. They would not need independence from the British.
Now let's consider Europe.
Let's assume that a stronger revolutionary concept would triumph. While I cannot be totally sure, I find it likely that France, the Dutch, Spain, and maybe Portugal and Poland (which was being divided by Prussia and Russia) would gain these revolutionary views. While I cannot be sure on the specifics, it'd be likely that France would be as expansionist like OTL, and would geographically have all of western Europe (other than the UK of course) under a democratic government. However, I am probably not the best educated on the Napoleonic Wars (I mostly learn of Canadian history), so that may not be very reliable.
However, let's assume that the revolutionaries do win to some extent. That would be a big slap in the face to the monarchies and especially to the British. So I find it likely that, in the wake of this possible larger revolution, the Americans may find it the best opportunity to fight against the ban and against the British imposing them in Upper Canada (Ontario), as well as aiding the Lower Canadians (Quebec). Perhaps in that instance, Quebec (and even Ontario) would be joined to the US, and the US would no longer have to face the harsh ban, eventually annexing most of the British territory. They may even be able to send aid to the revolutionaries in Europe. How ironic would that be, the ban that kept them from expanding would be the very reason for them expanding.
Nope, Peru and Chile are not as important to the US or Russia with their geopolitical location. They escape with one on each capital. If you would like to start planning how the Southern nations would react to the war and what nations can form then that would be great. Scandinator (talk) 01:46, December 22, 2012 (UTC)