Yeah, pretty much. I had thought up plans for a second, lower-intensity phase of the conflict immediately following this one (the 'American Troubles' mentioned in the results) but didn't get around to writing much for it before burning out. All I have for that phase is a few barebones concepts: that it'd have been centered on libertarian factions fighting the military junta now controlling the States (with the far-left and Naziesque guys having already been destroyed in this previous round) and that it'd follow the trend of the late-stage rebels of the '2ACW' in being less about 'rising' and holding cities, or at least their urban cores, against the feds for extended periods of time, and more about subterfuge.So something between the Troubles and the Dirty War?
A shame, this would have been quite the interesting ATL.Came across a really old wikibox I made for a timeline I'd toyed with back in 2016-17 before giving up on it, centered around a hotter Cold War and much more intense unrest in America due to an unfortunate string of presidents who were either rather weak on Jim Crow or outright segregationists themselves. What follows, well, I think this longass wikibox can speak for itself - all the major story beats I had sketched out are in the results.
Wasn't particularly realistic in hindsight, but it proved a good learning experience. That and I've mined some of my old notes for ideas for Dewey Defeats Truman (not the segregationist Dixiecrat presidents or 2ACW part obviously, but things like the Soviet Union & PRC having more hardline leaders, for example).
You know, in recent weeks I've grown more tempted to go back to try & make a proper timeline out of that Wikibox (or rather out of its core concept, I can already detect some stuff I should be changing/refining even if I were to keep the basic story beats), now that I've gotten back in the groove of AH writing and am reasonably sure that I've improved my skills since I first came up with it. Maybe one of these days, after I complete Vivat Stilicho first...A shame, this would have been quite the interesting ATL.
K.If you write it I'd love to read it.You know, in recent weeks I've grown more tempted to go back to try & make a proper timeline out of that Wikibox (or rather out of its core concept, I can already detect some stuff I should be changing/refining even if I were to keep the basic story beats), now that I've gotten back in the groove of AH writing and am reasonably sure that I've improved my skills since I first came up with it. Maybe one of these days, after I complete Vivat Stilicho first...
Thanks for the interest, and the follow! I prefer to avoid using people who got famous IRL in high-profile roles for my timelines, with rare exceptions - and the Clintons certainly wouldn't qualify. So definitely I'd like to avoid getting Bill or Hillary (then Rodham) anywhere near the White House in favor of more obscure & out-of-the-box candidates, maybe give them a few passing mentions but that'd be it.K.If you write it I'd love to read it.
I'd love to see what might happen with such a timeline once it reaches the late 70s and early 80s.
The Clintons' political ambitions for starters will get dashed since Hillary represented a bunch of black panthers that burned an alleged police informant alive, and since that Byrd guy is president I suppose that LBJ got removed from history in some way.
I'd say that something happened to discredit a lot of the more liberal/progressive democrats.
Like maybe a big scandal involving the events that led up to the 1960 presidential election.
Most plausible situation is:
1) LBJ dies early and there is a falling out between more conservative and more progressive Democrats.
2) Byrd is selected as his alternate running mate.
3) JFK resigns later in his presidency, let us say because of a sex scandal and his escalating health issues.
EDIT: The fact that 3 happens pisses off the more extreme liberals even further, with some fringe faction deciding to off the new president.Maybe he wins in 1964, only to have his Watergate moment and other scandals.That would plausibly leave Byrd as the president.
Looking everywhere for this.>control F 'wikibox'
>no results
I think it's about time we get wikibox thread for this forum, so to start us off....
Hmm; interesting thread.
Never created Wikibox before, so I don’t suppose anyone could enlighten me as to how I’d do it? For obvious reasons, I’m assuming you don’t actually submit it as an actual Wiki article, though it looks to me like there’s either an option to screen-cap Wiki edits before submitting them or some other software that enables users to create Wikiboxes themselves.
Wikipedia Military Box Editor
Create your own Wikipedia Battle Box with a wide range of customizable options.n.bellok.de
Exactly what it says on the tin. I'll elaborate later, but as of now I'm tired and logging off.
My one problem is that it asks for you to pay money if you sign up when making edits, etc.,Thanks; format's a bit "confusing" to me, but I appreciate the tip-off.
Been meaning to comment on this, though wasn't sure exactly what to say until now.
For one, it's pretty striking to me how this time, the "good guys" (more specifically, theWestern Alliesthe UN) took way less losses than the Allies during World War II, while this time, the "bad guys" (the Warsaw Pact and other "eastern" communist regimes) bore the brunt of the butcher's bill, over 64 million dead and whatnot. Would assume mass-deployment of nukes and bioweapons is the main culprit here, especially since even IOTL, the US's nuclear stockpile trumped the Soviets' until much later in the Cold War. That made itself brutally clear by how World War III ended here, I'm guessing.
Second, while I'm not sure if you've had a chance to flesh out the background since posting, I don't suppose the catalyst had something to do with someone making a bug-fuck crazy gamble in the late '40s? Because I can certainly imagine the Soviets — namely, under the leadership of an elderly, increasingly senile Stalin who's rapidly losing his marbles and whose paranoia is going into overdrive — throwing off their restraints and pulling a "Hitler invades Poland!" that makes Der Führer's ghost grimace. Maybe even against a Twilight of the Red Tsar-style backdrop of the Communist Bloc going straight to Hell along the way — which again, starts with Uncle Joe losing his shit via surviving the stroke that killed him IOTL. Granted, it could also be the West getting cocky and bellicose if hotheads like Patton or MacArthur are any indication, though I certainly wouldn't rule out a mutual fuck-up in which both blocs lose their composure and begin to exchange fire.
Lastly, and as more of a quizzical aside: I'm not really sure I understand why anyone in their right mind would come up with World War III scenarios where only a million or two people die in total? At the very least, I don't recall coming across anything like that myself, though that could easily be because I'm not as "well-acquainted" with the shark-jumping side of AH as you or @Circle of Willis probably are. Frankly, if the prequels each culminated in tens of millions dead in just a few short years — and with way less advanced weaponry at the belligerents' disposal, at that — then I can easily imagine World War III being anywhere from a few notches deadlier (as is depicted in your outline) to "Holy worldwide nuclear holocaust, Batman!" levels of destructive and all-around horrible depending on when, how, and by whom it's fought. But that's just me.