Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Add Reply
Quote from My in coming Story:; Harry Potter-Code Geass Crossover
Topic Started: Jan 6 2014, 01:29 AM (96 Views)
B-29 Bomber
Member Avatar
She is not amused at Fegelein. FEGELEIN!! FEGELEIN!! FEGELEIN!!!
The quote takes place during negotiations between my character, representing the United States Government, and Princess Cornelia, representing the Holy Britannian Empire as viceroy of Area 11(Japan).

"It is so very clear to me that you have absolutely no intent of accepting our(America's) existence as a state independent of the will of your empire and we have no intent of accepting the empire's overlordship of these United States. So why in hell am I here negotiating with you? Did you think that I would simply bend over and let you ram it in deep? So I Cornelia, would just like to tell you to please go to Hell and take that tinpot dictator of a so-called emperor Chuckles the clown, who wouldn't look out of place in a 18th century themed freak show, with you you fucking genocidal cunt."

Yes, my character is not the most diplomatic of sorts, is he?
Edited by B-29 Bomber, Jan 6 2014, 06:05 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Square
Member Avatar
Controversial
Indeed not so. She is not amused
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
B-29 Bomber
Member Avatar
She is not amused at Fegelein. FEGELEIN!! FEGELEIN!! FEGELEIN!!!
Squaretable22
Jan 6 2014, 05:56 PM
Indeed not so. She is not amused
I care not. As I've said, she is a Genocidal cunt from a family of genocidal maniacs. She deserves the gallows.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Square
Member Avatar
Controversial
The Murican? You?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
B-29 Bomber
Member Avatar
She is not amused at Fegelein. FEGELEIN!! FEGELEIN!! FEGELEIN!!!
Squaretable22
Jan 7 2014, 07:14 AM
The Murican? You?
Sort of my alter ego. Bare in mind that this story has been keeping me sane for the last year and a half.

And no, it's American. This is not the same America that you know and love(?). There was no Progressive era, thus no New Deal(incredibly overrated), and due to the fact that the Soviets were the enemy in WWII(no Nazis) there was no Cold War(so no Korean War, no Vietnam War or Brush fire wars at all). Also Decolonization went much better. The Third World is significantly better off, though... you really can't get worse than OTL Africa, can you?

Also due to the fact that the Third World is so much more stable there are many more scientists and inventors from that area, with the additional tech boost that goes with that. For example, the guy that discovered the theory that led to a viable Hyperspace drive in the latter half of the 22nd century was from OTL Mali.

As of 2013 technology is as a whole somewhere between OTL and Ironman.

Also bare in mind that my goal isn't a 100% plausible world, "rule of cool" plays a significant part as well.

Geopolitically the world is divided into a series of power blocs that are nominally friendly as a minimum. Well at the very least they're not ready to start shooting at each other. They'd much prefer to best each other in other pursuits instead, like space.

By 2013 many of the more wealthy nations have had Moon colonies since the early nineties, with several African nations planning a collaboration effort in the next decade.

In the field of Energy, with the infusion of large quantities of Helium 3, practical nuclear fusion has become possible and has started to come into vogue. The American Coalition of Nations holding 100 fusion reactors and 200 spread around the rest of the world.

In nuclear weapons the US holds about 400-500 warheads with about 2000 world wide. Not much considering the tens of thousands of the damned things we have OTL. The world is a lot more stable in the story than OTL.

If you want to know more about the history of this world just ask!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Square
Member Avatar
Controversial
What does otl mean?

And yeah, I have a backstory I wrote in summer '10 for my civ scenario. And power blocs are always and awesome thing. In this the worlld only had minor changes, and only from the 1980s onward. Russia and the former USSR remained communist, and the sino-Russian split never happened, meaning that diplomatic ties between then are far closer, and they eventually form a union, along with indochina and Cuba.

Anyway I won't hijack your thread but it seems really cool. I'd love to find out more o your backstory.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
B-29 Bomber
Member Avatar
She is not amused at Fegelein. FEGELEIN!! FEGELEIN!! FEGELEIN!!!
Squaretable22
Jan 7 2014, 05:07 PM
What does otl mean?

And yeah, I have a backstory I wrote in summer '10 for my civ scenario. And power blocs are always and awesome thing. In this the worlld only had minor changes, and only from the 1980s onward. Russia and the former USSR remained communist, and the sino-Russian split never happened, meaning that diplomatic ties between then are far closer, and they eventually form a union, along with indochina and Cuba.

Anyway I won't hijack your thread but it seems really cool. I'd love to find out more o your backstory.
OTL means Our Timeline. There are variations, like IOTL but that only tacks on a "in". There is also TTL, which stands for This Timeline. There's also PoD, which stands for Point of Departure or Point of Divergence. It means the point were a Timeline splits off from OTL.

Also, I'm sorry, but you just made the entire Post-1900 subforum of the Alternate History forum commit suicide with your story. Officially the Sino-Soviet split took place in the Sixties, and the root cause was the fact the until very late in the civil war Stalin supported Nationalist China as the legit successor to Imperial China. The Civil War ended in 1949 and Stalin threw in his support for the Nationalists in the 1930s.

Nevermind the idea of a union between the two would never happen. There's no way a Chinese would accept orders from Moscow, and no way a Russian would accept orders from Beijing. Adding Cuba makes even less sense. Say what you will about the Castro brothers, but they were definitely all about "Cuba for the Cubans". Same thing for Indochina. The Indo-Chinese HATED the Chinese.

Anyway, my story :ermm: .

My PoD goes waaay back to the Mexican-American War.

1848: End of the Mexican-American War. Mexico cedes the northern third of the country to the United States, recognizes the independence of Rio Grande and the Yucatan(the first ever aboriginal(Mayan) nation-state), and cedes territory to Guatemala.

1855: The War of 1855 starts between the United States and the British Empire. It lasts 6 months and ends with a crushing British defeat, primarily through the extensive deployment of wizards and guerrilla warfare.

July 1861- Oct. 1864: The American Civil War. Despite early Union victories the Confederacy crushingly defeats and routes a third of the regular Union army at the 2nd battle of Fredericksburg in the beginning of 1862. It would take months to recover from the defeat. Union Morale at its lowest point. Months of stalemate ensues, while the Union mobilizes it's forces. In the closing moths of 1862, what started as a limited offensive into eastern Tennessee as a morale booster, turned into one of the decisive battles of the war, taking place outside Knoxville, the other battle, taking place during the same time frame, taking place in Nashville, were the beginning of a great campaign that would move steadily westward into Texas, then finishing in Oklahoma.

It would take nearly another two years to reincorporate the south and track down the rebel leadership, ultimately being tracked down in a shack in the southern Floridian swamplands. After interrogations and investigations it would ultimately be found the British had supported, covertly, the entirety of the rebellion. Though the British denied it for decades, the American government and people were convinced of their duplicity. Every one cheered the end of the war, even the southerners, who grew more tired of the war as the casualties continued to mount. The Southerners would ultimately blame Jeff Davis and his ilk, first for the war, and secondly for losing it.

While segregation was an issue in the south for a time, it was ultimately overruled in the US supreme court case Plessy v. Ferguson, however it would take until the 1930s for the full weight of the case to be felt.

More later.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Square
Member Avatar
Controversial
That's a pretty interesting story. And for me, to be honest the POD is probably soon after the Second World War then, but the timeline only really diverges after the 1980s, it's mostly minor things, The Baltic states and Eastern Europe not having the same extent of occupation as OTL, and break free from the soviet grasp with relative ease. I have to agree it Definately isn't as well researched as yours, but in my defense, if Cuba was faced with a union commanded by fascist brazil (brazil stayed fascist after WWII in this TL) and the US, I'm pretty sure Castro would go running for even closer ties to the USSR, to garuntee their "independence" and If you take the PoD as WWII, the Soviets and the Communist Chinese may have had more in common with eachother than ever thought possible in this timeline. As for the indochina situation, considering the Vietnam war was heavily sponsored by the USSR (and we keep that) and the Sino-Russian "alliance" is heavily run by the USSR, sino-indochinese relations are somewhat better. (China Never becomes the superpower it is today, it remains a fairly powerless state, and is forced to cede Tibet over from international pressure)

Anyway, your timeline would indicate the scramble for Africa never happened, how do explain the colonisation process
Edited by Square, Jan 8 2014, 04:09 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
B-29 Bomber
Member Avatar
She is not amused at Fegelein. FEGELEIN!! FEGELEIN!! FEGELEIN!!!
Squaretable22
Jan 8 2014, 04:06 AM
That's a pretty interesting story. And for me, to be honest the POD is probably soon after the Second World War then, but the timeline only really diverges after the 1980s, it's mostly minor things, The Baltic states and Eastern Europe not having the same extent of occupation as OTL, and break free from the soviet grasp with relative ease. I have to agree it Definately isn't as well researched as yours, but in my defense, if Cuba was faced with a union commanded by fascist brazil (brazil stayed fascist after WWII in this TL) and the US, I'm pretty sure Castro would go running for even closer ties to the USSR, to garuntee their "independence" and If you take the PoD as WWII, the Soviets and the Communist Chinese may have had more in common with eachother than ever thought possible in this timeline. As for the indochina situation, considering the Vietnam war was heavily sponsored by the USSR (and we keep that) and the Sino-Russian "alliance" is heavily run by the USSR, sino-indochinese relations are somewhat better. (China Never becomes the superpower it is today, it remains a fairly powerless state, and is forced to cede Tibet over from international pressure)

Anyway, your timeline would indicate the scramble for Africa never happened, how do explain the colonisation process
Just no. The Chinese would never enter union with the Russians. What I mentioned would only prevent the split, thus they'd be a bit more friendly. An alliance nothing more. Also Brazil was never fascist. And either way Castro would not be fearful of Brazil. Brazil does not have the power projection to invade Cuba, nor would they have an interest to.

Castro would not be stupid enough to think giving up his sovereignty to the USSR would protect his independence. Besides after the Cuban Missile Crisis the USSR sees Cuba as irrelevant strategically and wouldn't risk antagonizing the west by annexing an irrelevant island.

On mine, don't assume that. I'm only up to the end of the civil war...
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Square
Member Avatar
Controversial
President Vargas was originally fascist, but a light one, and it was the only fascism outside Europe worth noting. They became a democracy with proper elections after WWII. In 1939 He was leaning towards Nazi Germany, but sponsorship and trade with the US and Britain encouraged Brazil to change sides, and entered the war in 1943, as an ally. He remained in power for a few terms after he introduced voting and eventually resigned in the 50s or 60s.

And I did say the earliest POD would be 1944. A lot happened postwar and while Communists came into power in Cuba and Indochina, they didn't necessarily have the mindsets they do today. The British empire stayed as it gave the regions with a lot of economic worth and native English speakers (Australia, Nigeria, South Africa, Canada, India, New Zealand, East Pakistan, and a few carribean territories ) a lot more rights (OK for India, I know the independence movement was ingrained far before the second world war but the British became highly liberal towards race and other things after WWII, in this timeline, as well as other countries.

As for the Brazil situation, It was a group of Latin American countries, which post WWII grew an allaince even closer than the modern EU. And Brazil was the main player in that (More so than Germany in Europe now) Considering that the only languages would be portugese and Spanish, there was a lingual bond as well. Free Trade and completely open borders opened, the Pan-Am highway was completed and tarmacked. And The Russians fearing that Cuba, one of the last Portuguese/Spanish speaking regions in the Americas to start the process of joining, (Including Puerto Rico, Mexico, Cape Verde and a few states with a link to the US like Panama) encouraged the Cuban leader (it rodent have to be Castro) to form closer ties with the USSR. Fearing the loss of Russia's only major ally in the Atlantic.

Anyway I should make my own thread for this, rather than hi-jack yours. Good day
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Fully Featured & Customizable Free Forums
« Previous Topic · General Discussion · Next Topic »
Add Reply