info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Re: OT: Could the World Wars Have Been Avoided?
26 views
Skip to first unread message
Stan Brown
Jul 6, 2015, 7:16:34 AM7/6/15
to
On Sun, 5 Jul 2015 18:18:09 -0700 (PDT), David Kleinecke wrote:
>
> On Sunday, July 5, 2015 at 7:38:37 AM UTC-7, Lewis wrote:
> > In message <c5a77056-61f4-4fe5...@googlegroups.com>
> > David Kleinecke <dklei...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > I am especially fond of Harry Turtledove's Sumerian Book ("Between
> > > the Rivers") but maybe that's not really alternative history.
> >
> > Is that a stand-alone book or part of a series?
>
> It's a stand-alone.
Anyone know a decent book where the US Civil War never happened --
where Lincoln either wasn't elected or was persuaded to "let our
erring brethren go in peace"?
There have been so many books set in a world where the South beat the
North, but I can't recall any where nobody beat anybody, where the
secessions just went peacefully into effect. I'd expect that in a few
years relations between the USA and the CSA would be about like those
between the USA and Canada, but France would keep its foothold in the
Empire of Mexico because the CSA would be too busy with internal
affairs. Would WW1 have turned out differently? I suspect not -- most
of the industry and most of the population were in the North.
--
"The difference between the /almost right/ word and the /right/ word
is ... the difference between the lightning-bug and the lightning."
--Mark Twain
Stan Brown, Tompkins County, NY, USA http://OakRoadSystems.com
>
> On Sunday, July 5, 2015 at 7:38:37 AM UTC-7, Lewis wrote:
> > In message <c5a77056-61f4-4fe5...@googlegroups.com>
> > David Kleinecke <dklei...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > I am especially fond of Harry Turtledove's Sumerian Book ("Between
> > > the Rivers") but maybe that's not really alternative history.
> >
> > Is that a stand-alone book or part of a series?
>
> It's a stand-alone.
Anyone know a decent book where the US Civil War never happened --
where Lincoln either wasn't elected or was persuaded to "let our
erring brethren go in peace"?
There have been so many books set in a world where the South beat the
North, but I can't recall any where nobody beat anybody, where the
secessions just went peacefully into effect. I'd expect that in a few
years relations between the USA and the CSA would be about like those
between the USA and Canada, but France would keep its foothold in the
Empire of Mexico because the CSA would be too busy with internal
affairs. Would WW1 have turned out differently? I suspect not -- most
of the industry and most of the population were in the North.
--
"The difference between the /almost right/ word and the /right/ word
is ... the difference between the lightning-bug and the lightning."
--Mark Twain
Stan Brown, Tompkins County, NY, USA http://OakRoadSystems.com
Stan Brown
Jul 6, 2015, 7:26:39 AM7/6/15
to
As long as I'm making these requests (which I've crossposted to
alt.history.what-if), what if the Central Powers won World War I?
Does anyone know a book that treats this possibility?
Kaiser Wilhelm was aggressively seeking Germany's advantage, but I
don't think he was aiming at world domination like Hitler, and he had
great admiration for Britain. I imagine he'd have taken a few French
and British colonies and otherwise left them alone. He's probably
have grabbed Poland, not for racial reasons but because (at the time)
it was part of Russia. If the war ended early enough, while Lenin was
still in exile, Would the Romanoffs have continued in power -- or
would they have genuinely worked with Kerensky and moved the Russian
Empire toward a Western-style parliamentary regime?
What about Austria-Hungary and the Ottoman Empire? Without the stress
of losing a war, might those regimes have continued on? The new
kaiser Karl was on record as favoring a federal organization of the
Empire, which might well have strengthened its internal bonds even as
it made them more elastic. Imagine the suffering that would have been
averted if Stalin never got his hands on Hungary, Czechoslovakia,
Romania, Bulgaria, Albania, Serbia, ....
alt.history.what-if), what if the Central Powers won World War I?
Does anyone know a book that treats this possibility?
Kaiser Wilhelm was aggressively seeking Germany's advantage, but I
don't think he was aiming at world domination like Hitler, and he had
great admiration for Britain. I imagine he'd have taken a few French
and British colonies and otherwise left them alone. He's probably
have grabbed Poland, not for racial reasons but because (at the time)
it was part of Russia. If the war ended early enough, while Lenin was
still in exile, Would the Romanoffs have continued in power -- or
would they have genuinely worked with Kerensky and moved the Russian
Empire toward a Western-style parliamentary regime?
What about Austria-Hungary and the Ottoman Empire? Without the stress
of losing a war, might those regimes have continued on? The new
kaiser Karl was on record as favoring a federal organization of the
Empire, which might well have strengthened its internal bonds even as
it made them more elastic. Imagine the suffering that would have been
averted if Stalin never got his hands on Hungary, Czechoslovakia,
Romania, Bulgaria, Albania, Serbia, ....
Peter Moylan
Jul 6, 2015, 9:16:28 AM7/6/15
to
On 06/07/15 21:26, Stan Brown wrote:
> As long as I'm making these requests (which I've crossposted to
> alt.history.what-if), what if the Central Powers won World War I?
> Does anyone know a book that treats this possibility?
Yes, but I can't remember the title. I'll try to do a search tomorrow.
> As long as I'm making these requests (which I've crossposted to
> alt.history.what-if), what if the Central Powers won World War I?
> Does anyone know a book that treats this possibility?
I'm reasonably certain that the author was Phillip Jose Farmer, and the
central character (an aviator who passed between worlds in the middle of
an aerial battle in the war) was called Two Hawks.
It might not be what you're looking for, though. The alternate world was
one where North America was under water, so had never been settled, and
the Amerindians were a European nation.
--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia
Message has been deleted
John Ritson
Jul 6, 2015, 3:27:14 PM7/6/15
to
In article <MPG.30042ff7...@news.individual.net>, Stan Brown
<the_sta...@fastmail.fm> writes
Regent' Admiral Horthy threw him out.
There is an alleged conversation between a journalist and a Hungarian
diplomat following the Hungarian declaration of war against the US
following Pearl Harbour:
Is Hungary a republic?
No. We are a monarchy.
So you have a King?
No. We have an Admiral.
So Hungary has a navy?
No. We have no seacoast.
Does Hungary have a territorial dispute with the US, the UK, or the
Soviet Union?
No.
Does Hungary have any territorial disputes?
Yes. With Romania.
So have you declared war against Romania?
No. Romania is our ally.
--
John Ritson
<the_sta...@fastmail.fm> writes
>As long as I'm making these requests (which I've crossposted to
>alt.history.what-if), what if the Central Powers won World War I?
>Does anyone know a book that treats this possibility?
>
>Kaiser Wilhelm was aggressively seeking Germany's advantage, but I
>don't think he was aiming at world domination like Hitler, and he had
>great admiration for Britain. I imagine he'd have taken a few French
>and British colonies and otherwise left them alone. He's probably
>have grabbed Poland, not for racial reasons but because (at the time)
>it was part of Russia. If the war ended early enough, while Lenin was
>still in exile, Would the Romanoffs have continued in power -- or
>would they have genuinely worked with Kerensky and moved the Russian
>Empire toward a Western-style parliamentary regime?
>
>What about Austria-Hungary and the Ottoman Empire? Without the stress
>of losing a war, might those regimes have continued on? The new
>kaiser Karl was on record as favoring a federal organization of the
>Empire, which might well have strengthened its internal bonds even as
>it made them more elastic. Imagine the suffering that would have been
>averted if Stalin never got his hands on Hungary, Czechoslovakia,
>Romania, Bulgaria, Albania, Serbia, ....
>
>
In 1921 Kaiser Karl tried twice to assert control over Hungary, but 'The
>alt.history.what-if), what if the Central Powers won World War I?
>Does anyone know a book that treats this possibility?
>
>Kaiser Wilhelm was aggressively seeking Germany's advantage, but I
>don't think he was aiming at world domination like Hitler, and he had
>great admiration for Britain. I imagine he'd have taken a few French
>and British colonies and otherwise left them alone. He's probably
>have grabbed Poland, not for racial reasons but because (at the time)
>it was part of Russia. If the war ended early enough, while Lenin was
>still in exile, Would the Romanoffs have continued in power -- or
>would they have genuinely worked with Kerensky and moved the Russian
>Empire toward a Western-style parliamentary regime?
>
>What about Austria-Hungary and the Ottoman Empire? Without the stress
>of losing a war, might those regimes have continued on? The new
>kaiser Karl was on record as favoring a federal organization of the
>Empire, which might well have strengthened its internal bonds even as
>it made them more elastic. Imagine the suffering that would have been
>averted if Stalin never got his hands on Hungary, Czechoslovakia,
>Romania, Bulgaria, Albania, Serbia, ....
>
>
Regent' Admiral Horthy threw him out.
There is an alleged conversation between a journalist and a Hungarian
diplomat following the Hungarian declaration of war against the US
following Pearl Harbour:
Is Hungary a republic?
No. We are a monarchy.
So you have a King?
No. We have an Admiral.
So Hungary has a navy?
No. We have no seacoast.
Does Hungary have a territorial dispute with the US, the UK, or the
Soviet Union?
No.
Does Hungary have any territorial disputes?
Yes. With Romania.
So have you declared war against Romania?
No. Romania is our ally.
--
John Ritson
Wayne Brown
Jul 6, 2015, 8:34:43 PM7/6/15
to
In alt.usage.english Lewis <g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
> In message <MPG.30042d98c...@news.individual.net>
> got involved and, IIRC, forced the civil war to either not happen or to
> end quickly in a stalemate. The Republic of Texas, The CSA, and the USA
> all existed and were under the thumb of the English who played the three
> nations against each other.
>
> But it was a rather minor part of the overall story.
>
> I doubt very much that a border with an independent CSA would be
> anything but an armed border along the lines of the Koreas, myself.
Here's a story with a bit of alternate history about another war.
I read a scifi novel many years ago in which government scientists
experimenting with high-energy physics accidentally created some
sort of dimensional rift. After they experimented with it for a
while terrible disasters started happening on Earth. It turned out
that there was another world inhabited by intelligent beings on the
other side of the rift, and their world was suffering disasters as
a result of the experiments. So they had built a similar device
and used it to cause some disasters themselves, in hopes of getting
someone's attention and stopping the experiments.
At the end of the book contact was made and communications were
established with the aliens. It was discovered that they occupied
another Earth with a parallel history. There were some differences,
though. For instance, in the alien world the colonists had won
the American Revolution and became a separate country, while in
the normal world America lost the war and had never broken away
from England.
--
F. Wayne Brown <fwb...@bellsouth.net>
ur sag9-ga ur-tur-še3 ba-an-kur9
"A dog that is played with turns into a puppy." (Sumerian proverb)
> In message <MPG.30042d98c...@news.individual.net>
> Stan Brown <the_sta...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>> On Sun, 5 Jul 2015 18:18:09 -0700 (PDT), David Kleinecke wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sunday, July 5, 2015 at 7:38:37 AM UTC-7, Lewis wrote:
>>> > In message <c5a77056-61f4-4fe5...@googlegroups.com>
>>> > David Kleinecke <dklei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > I am especially fond of Harry Turtledove's Sumerian Book ("Between
>>> > > the Rivers") but maybe that's not really alternative history.
>>> >
>>> > Is that a stand-alone book or part of a series?
>>>
>>> It's a stand-alone.
>
>> Anyone know a decent book where the US Civil War never happened --
>> where Lincoln either wasn't elected or was persuaded to "let our
>> erring brethren go in peace"?
>
>> There have been so many books set in a world where the South beat the
>> North, but I can't recall any where nobody beat anybody, where the
>> secessions just went peacefully into effect. I'd expect that in a few
>> years relations between the USA and the CSA would be about like those
>> between the USA and Canada, but France would keep its foothold in the
>> Empire of Mexico because the CSA would be too busy with internal
>> affairs. Would WW1 have turned out differently? I suspect not -- most
>> of the industry and most of the population were in the North.
>
> There was an alternate history in The Difference Engine where England
>> On Sun, 5 Jul 2015 18:18:09 -0700 (PDT), David Kleinecke wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sunday, July 5, 2015 at 7:38:37 AM UTC-7, Lewis wrote:
>>> > In message <c5a77056-61f4-4fe5...@googlegroups.com>
>>> > David Kleinecke <dklei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > I am especially fond of Harry Turtledove's Sumerian Book ("Between
>>> > > the Rivers") but maybe that's not really alternative history.
>>> >
>>> > Is that a stand-alone book or part of a series?
>>>
>>> It's a stand-alone.
>
>> Anyone know a decent book where the US Civil War never happened --
>> where Lincoln either wasn't elected or was persuaded to "let our
>> erring brethren go in peace"?
>
>> There have been so many books set in a world where the South beat the
>> North, but I can't recall any where nobody beat anybody, where the
>> secessions just went peacefully into effect. I'd expect that in a few
>> years relations between the USA and the CSA would be about like those
>> between the USA and Canada, but France would keep its foothold in the
>> Empire of Mexico because the CSA would be too busy with internal
>> affairs. Would WW1 have turned out differently? I suspect not -- most
>> of the industry and most of the population were in the North.
>
> got involved and, IIRC, forced the civil war to either not happen or to
> end quickly in a stalemate. The Republic of Texas, The CSA, and the USA
> all existed and were under the thumb of the English who played the three
> nations against each other.
>
> But it was a rather minor part of the overall story.
>
> I doubt very much that a border with an independent CSA would be
> anything but an armed border along the lines of the Koreas, myself.
Here's a story with a bit of alternate history about another war.
I read a scifi novel many years ago in which government scientists
experimenting with high-energy physics accidentally created some
sort of dimensional rift. After they experimented with it for a
while terrible disasters started happening on Earth. It turned out
that there was another world inhabited by intelligent beings on the
other side of the rift, and their world was suffering disasters as
a result of the experiments. So they had built a similar device
and used it to cause some disasters themselves, in hopes of getting
someone's attention and stopping the experiments.
At the end of the book contact was made and communications were
established with the aliens. It was discovered that they occupied
another Earth with a parallel history. There were some differences,
though. For instance, in the alien world the colonists had won
the American Revolution and became a separate country, while in
the normal world America lost the war and had never broken away
from England.
--
F. Wayne Brown <fwb...@bellsouth.net>
ur sag9-ga ur-tur-še3 ba-an-kur9
"A dog that is played with turns into a puppy." (Sumerian proverb)
ADPUF
Jul 8, 2015, 2:32:18 PM7/8/15
to
Stan Brown 13:26, lunedì 6 luglio 2015:
> As long as I'm making these requests (which I've crossposted
> to alt.history.what-if), what if the Central Powers won World
> War I? Does anyone know a book that treats this possibility?
I suggest you to post your questions also in the much more
active newsgroup
soc.history.what-if
--
AIOE ³¿³
> As long as I'm making these requests (which I've crossposted
> to alt.history.what-if), what if the Central Powers won World
> War I? Does anyone know a book that treats this possibility?
active newsgroup
soc.history.what-if
--
AIOE ³¿³
Brau...@verizon.net
Aug 2, 2015, 3:36:40 PM8/2/15
to
On Monday, July 6, 2015 at 7:26:39 AM UTC-4, Stan Brown wrote:
> As long as I'm making these requests (which I've crossposted to
> alt.history.what-if), what if the Central Powers won World War I?
> Does anyone know a book that treats this possibility?
> Kaiser Wilhelm was aggressively seeking Germany's advantage, but I
> don't think he was aiming at world domination like Hitler, and he had
> great admiration for Britain. I imagine he'd have taken a few French
> and British colonies and otherwise left them alone. He's probably
> have grabbed Poland, not for racial reasons but because (at the time)
> it was part of Russia. If the war ended early enough, while Lenin was
> still in exile, Would the Romanoffs have continued in power -- or
> would they have genuinely worked with Kerensky and moved the Russian
> Empire toward a Western-style parliamentary regime?
> What about Austria-Hungary and the Ottoman Empire? Without the stress
> of losing a war, might those regimes have continued on? The new
> kaiser Karl was on record as favoring a federal organization of the
> Empire, which might well have strengthened its internal bonds even as
> it made them more elastic. Imagine the suffering that would have been
> averted if Stalin never got his hands on Hungary, Czechoslovakia,
> Romania, Bulgaria, Albania, Serbia, ....
"1920: America's Great War" by Robert Conroy. He's also done a number of other AltHist books centering on the various wars that America's been in. Look him up on Amazon.
> As long as I'm making these requests (which I've crossposted to
> alt.history.what-if), what if the Central Powers won World War I?
> Does anyone know a book that treats this possibility?
> Kaiser Wilhelm was aggressively seeking Germany's advantage, but I
> don't think he was aiming at world domination like Hitler, and he had
> great admiration for Britain. I imagine he'd have taken a few French
> and British colonies and otherwise left them alone. He's probably
> have grabbed Poland, not for racial reasons but because (at the time)
> it was part of Russia. If the war ended early enough, while Lenin was
> still in exile, Would the Romanoffs have continued in power -- or
> would they have genuinely worked with Kerensky and moved the Russian
> Empire toward a Western-style parliamentary regime?
> What about Austria-Hungary and the Ottoman Empire? Without the stress
> of losing a war, might those regimes have continued on? The new
> kaiser Karl was on record as favoring a federal organization of the
> Empire, which might well have strengthened its internal bonds even as
> it made them more elastic. Imagine the suffering that would have been
> averted if Stalin never got his hands on Hungary, Czechoslovakia,
> Romania, Bulgaria, Albania, Serbia, ....
Regards,
John P. Braungart
0 new messages