Alternate timeline Map of North America

[eliminat]

"Which raises the question, at least in Matthew White’s mind: “What is the most fragmented that North America could have been?” White’s website (from the mid-nineties, but still online) serves up several ‘alternate history’ maps, that use a POD (point of divergence) somewhere in the past to construct a present slightly (or wildly) different from ours. White’s Balkanised North America, with 1787 as the POD, is by far the most interesting exercise.

“In this alternate reality, the westward expansion of the Anglo-American people proceeded pretty much as it did in our reality,” White writes, “but the United States government just couldn’t keep up. Every national identity crisis resolved itself in favor of the separatists instead.”"

[a href=\"http://strangemaps.wordpress.com/2007/11/19/205-north-america-the-balkans-version/\" target=\"_blank\"]http://strangemaps.wordpress.com/2007/11/1...alkans-version/[/a]

[GRX Dragon]

Interesting, but it fails.

Had Texas not purposely be willing to annexed itself into U.S.A., I'd bet only either Texas or Mexico would be standing-but not both. But most likely it'd be Texas, because either or both the Union or Confederates would aid Texas, seeing as Mexico being a bigger threat. Thus, I think Texas (or Mexico) would own territory of current-day Mexico, Texas, and the entire south-west.

Then... later, Pearl Harbor would never be owned by the Americans. Alaska too. Japan would've been able to touch-down in present-day California with their superior fighting techniques, conquer Texas/Mexico. The Union and Confederates would be like "wtf?" and wonder why Texas/Mexico-the strongest nation they know of-got it's ass kicked. Then, with Japan realizing they have the most profitable mines in the world (Californian gold mines) would use the gold to advance themselves beyond Germany's power. Hitler realizes this, offers Europe a cease-fire (but easy enough to get out of) to get rid of Japan, including Stalin. With Japan ahead of everyone technologically, they eventually launch a few nukes-hitting Germany, England, and Russia.

So everyone calls on a cease-fire after the aftermath, Japan owning most of Asia and North America reluctantly agree. Afterwards, England takes this as a chance to try to take back the colonies in North America. Their reason for it? "We need to grow stronger to stop Japan from further attacks."

But the Union and Confederates have a different idea. They ally themselves then accept refugees from the Mexican/Texan lands, so long as the refugees that're able to fight are willing to fight. Canada still under control of the queen does nothing. Eventually, an uprising occurs. The Union/Confederate alliance makes war with Japan, using guerilla tactics to clean them out of the main-lands. Europe takes this as a chance to fight back against Japan again, since they'll be fighting on all sides. Japan's strength diminishes, but with their last breath they go suicidal, detonating their final nuclear bomb in their home land. Russia and Germany go to war afterwards, becoming similar to the cold war of our time. England decides to invade America, wanting their colonies back.


At least that's my general idea.

[Joker]

GRX, your time line is only slightly less improbable than the one producing this map, if only because Japan would never have a real chance to gain a foothold in the U.S. against an enemy actively resisting them. For all their superior fighting techniques, they count for nothing if they can't supply their troops - amateurs study tactics, experts study logistics  And getting troops and supplies across the Pacific fast enough and in the quantities needed to supply an army attempting to subdue a hostile toniculation and fight a conventional war simultaneously would be an almost impossible task.

And let's not forget that in the aftermath of World War II...hell, prior to World War II, colonialism was becoming a spent force. It simply wasn't worth it for Britain and France to have to fight to subdue Third World Africans and Asians that were supposed to have been conquered and under their heel for almost a century. How, realistically, could an England ravaged by World War II, let alone an ATOMIC World War II, conquer America? England WON World War II in our time line and continued rationing and conscription well into the 1950's.

Anyway, all I have to say about that map in the original post...Viva la Quebec libre!

[GRX Dragon]

GRX, your time line is only slightly less improbable than the one producing this map, if only because Japan would never have a real chance to gain a foothold in the U.S. against an enemy actively resisting them. For all their superior fighting techniques, they count for nothing if they can't supply their troops - amateurs study tactics, experts study logistics  And getting troops and supplies across the Pacific fast enough and in the quantities needed to supply an army attempting to subdue a hostile toniculation and fight a conventional war simultaneously would be an almost impossible task.

And let's not forget that in the aftermath of World War II...hell, prior to World War II, colonialism was becoming a spent force. It simply wasn't worth it for Britain and France to have to fight to subdue Third World Africans and Asians that were supposed to have been conquered and under their heel for almost a century. How, realistically, could an England ravaged by World War II, let alone an ATOMIC World War II, conquer America? England WON World War II in our time line and continued rationing and conscription well into the 1950's.

Anyway, all I have to say about that map in the original post...Viva la Quebec libre!

My reasoning is because none of the countries in North America would have the technology to fend off a Japanese invasion, or even the unity at first. As for the rest, you made your point I admit.