Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Add Reply
Application Center
Topic Started: December 14, 2014, 10:36 pm (5,104 Views)
JustinVuong
Member Avatar
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
Before your country can officially take part in the Altverse community, you must first go through the application process. Before you apply, make sure to read the Rules and the official page. In addition, you must provide a link to the main article of the country you plan to be using. Although strongly encouraged but not required, the article should be of decent length that provides sufficient information about the country. Be prepared to make the necessary changes to your country before it can be deemed a part of Altverse. Under no circumstance may you add your nation, claim your nation is part of, or otherwise insert information that may give the impression that your country is in any shape or form connected to Altverse and/or its material until you have been given explicit approval from the community consensus/moderator.

Code:
 
[center][b]Your Country Name[/b][/center]
[list]
[*][b][url=http://www.conworld.wikia.com/wiki/Your_Country_Name]Link[/url][/b]
[*][b]Real World Countries and Land Claimed[/b]:
[*][b]Why you want to join[/b]:
[*][b]Have you read everything concerning Altverse?[/b]: (Y/N)
[*][b]Do you agree to comply to all rules and policies?[/b]: (Y/N)
[*][b]Other[/b]: Your additional comments here.
[/list]


Example
Kingdom of Sierra

  • Link
  • Real World Countries and Land Claimed: California, Nevada, Arizona, Baja California, Baja California Sur, Sonora, Hawaiian Islands, American Samoa, Easter Island, Kiribati
  • Why you want to join: I really enjoy collaborating with others and I want to have fun.
  • Have you read everything concerning Altverse?: Y
  • Do you agree to comply to all rules and policies?: Y
  • Other: This is just an example but I'd like to point out that you can also provide links to other important pages related to your country to enhance understanding. Links to the government page, flags, or military are great.
Edited by JustinVuong, January 3, 2015, 6:49 pm.
| Kingdom of Sierra (main) | Mexican Social Republic | Great Korean Empire | Republic of Vietnam |
Posted ImagePosted Image Posted Image Posted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted Image
(ง ͠° ͟ل͜ ͡°)ง
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Replies:
Dog of War
Member Avatar

Israel's may be unconfirmed, but c'mon - they have them.

You could do South Africa I guess - make them not disarm. But Justin is right, you don't need nukes to be powerful.
Posted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted Image
Left<--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->Right
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dev271
Member Avatar

JustinVuong
January 9, 2015, 1:26 am
All of the nuclear-possessing states that would fit your preferences are all claimed except for Israel. Keep in mind that Israel's program is alleged, not confirmed. To be honest, having nuclear weapons should be irrelevant for the sake of roleplay. You can control a powerful state without the need of nuclear weapons. Take for example, countries such as Japan or Brazil which wields considerable power in spite of their lack of nuclear weapons.
I wanted to have a nation which could have produced nukes before 1985, without alternating the history much, so can you suggest now and what about the Nordreich Union, I will probably have to cancel Germany then.
Edited by Dev271, January 10, 2015, 2:03 am.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Zabuza825

Dog of War
January 8, 2015, 11:23 am
Ah, well, my German history is sketchy. The super power thing should read as "the US would never allow a country in their sphere of influence to gain enough power to actively challenge them." The USSR was never in the US's sphere, and neither was China.

As for the nuclear weapons - well my knowledge is not up to scratch, and I apologise for that (although yes the treaty of Brussels is what I was referencing when I said they couldn't). That said Germany would be unlikely to manufacture nuclear weapons unless they were in immediate danger from a major power. The only ones who have nukes are those of UNSC, India, Pakistan, Israel and North Korea. However the reason why they do is because they are in immediate danger from their enemies - India and Pakistan hate each other and fought several wars against each other, and Israel - well, do I need to explain? Also each of those nations unlike NATO and Warsaw pact members were not part of a military organisation that would allow them to share nukes meaning they are more on their own. There's North Korea as well, but North Korea's capabilities are poor on a global scale and would be vastly outmatched by the US. South Africa used to have nukes for similar reasons to Israel.

Germany is in no situation where they would need to manufacture nukes immediately (as Germany is a member of NATO and Russia is the only one who would realistically invade). While you could argue that East Germany was a dangerous neighbour the Soviets were careful to make sure their allies in East Europe were of no threat to them, so they would only give them Soviet nukes provided by the Warsaw pact.

The fall of communism couldn't happen in 1968 as a Gorbechev like politician wasn't in power. If we do then the fall of communism woud happen in 1968 and the whole timeline would change.
Those are actually really good points. That said, I do have a way for Germany to have maybe gotten nuclear weapons.

Now trust me, this is a HUUUUUUUGE stretch, but bear with me.

During the Cold War the Soviet Union was really good at misinformation. Now I'm sure that's not all they were good at, but for what I'm about to suggest it's the only real thing that is relevant. I mean the Soviet Union was so good at misinformation that they got the US to build massive amounts of long-range bombers. At it's height, the US had 2000+ long-range bombers because they thought the Soviet Union had a massive number of them. In actuality the Soviets at the time only had around 160. The Soviets tricked America into thinking they had more than they actually did in by cleverly flying the same formation of bombers over the same strip of land over and over again while recording a video of a military parade to make it look like they had more. The US took the bait.

Perhaps some campaign of misinformation by the USSR could result in East Germany looking more threatening than it actually was, resulting in West Germany gaining nuclear weapons with the support of the US. Now mind you I don't expect US support to come no-strings-attatched (I mean c'mon, we're talking about nuclear weapons here, the US will at the very LEAST ask for a copy of all information regarding the West German nuclear initiative, though they'd probably ask for more than that).

Now I don't expect this misinformation to be intended at tricking the US - I mean I doubt they would want the US to think they're too strong because then they might think the US would preemptively strike them for being too powerful. It would probably be more directed towards the local populace in a "LOOK HOW POWERFUL WE ARE! THE PUNY AMERICAN IMPERIALISTS ARE NOTHING BUT PAPER TIGERS COMPARED TO US!" propaganda blitz. A side effect of that, however, could be that they in turn also misinform the Americans into thinking they are more strong and threatening than they actually are.

As I said it's kind of a stretch - but I don't think it's completely unfounded.

EDIT AND SIDENOTE: Berlin Wall would have to fall at around the same time it did IRL for this to work though.
Edited by Zabuza825, January 9, 2015, 7:10 am.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dev271
Member Avatar

Can I take Japan having its own nukes, it is not necessary for the Japanese having the scare of or disliking nukes, the can also want to have revenge by making their own nukes, supported by the Soviets, because the Soviets would have liked having an ally near it, wanting to take revenge on the States. Yes it can happen. Even if the Soviets wont let them have nukes, the can still have a huge inventory of Russian weapons and be a Russian ally with India.
Edited by Dev271, January 10, 2015, 3:47 am.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Zabuza825

Dev271
January 10, 2015, 3:24 am
Can I take Japan having its own nukes, it is not necessary for the Japanese having the scare of or disliking nukes, the can also want to have revenge by making their own nukes, supported by the Soviets, because the Soviets would have liked having an ally near it, wanting to take revenge on the States. Yes it can happen. Even if the Soviets wont let them have nukes, the can still have a huge inventory of Russian weapons and be a Russian ally with India.
Alright, having been to Japan and being half-Japanese, I can tell you that there is no way that it is possible that the average Japanese person will support nukes. The average Japanese person despises nukes, and you'll see this everywhere in Japan.

The Japanese hate of nukes is so engrained in them that when a politician so much as hints that Hiroshima was justified, the public outcry forced him to RESIGN.

There is a town in Japan that has banned the manga version of "Barefoot Gen", which has an anti-nuclear theme, for portraying "innacurate depictions of Japanese soldiers". That town has been forever stigmatized in Japan as the "pro-nuclear town".

Hell, Japan has ALWAYS refused to allow the United States to place their nuclear weapons on Japanese soil. Now, that didn't stop the US from putting nukes in Japan, which is why for a long time it was a area of diplomatic tension between America and Japan.

This is the level of hate that we are talking about here, talking about changing that to a desire for revenge against America means changing the very nature of what Japan is today AND having to change a HUGE number of historic events that made it this way. Pretty much the only way for Japan to not have the utter despise of nuclear weapons that they have right now is if Hiroshima and Nagasaki never happened, and the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were such major historic events that I'm sorry but I don't see any way to realistically get rid of them without changing Cold War history completely. I don't mean we'll need to change the Cold War a little bit, I mean we will probably have to rewrite the Cold War from the beginning if we do that.

Also, don't give me the "but a number of Japanese politicians have proposed Japan get nukes" thing. Yes, a small minority of Japanese politicians actually want Japan to get nuclear weapons. However, the general population is STRONGLY against ANY and ALL moves towards nuclear weapons. Hell after Fukushima the public is leaning against nuclear power. Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has an uphill battle ahead of him in switching Japan's nuclear reactors back on.

Secondly, there is no way that the US would have allowed Japan to become an ally of the USSR. It just is NOT going to happen. Part of the reason why America was pushing so hard to get Japan to surrender quickly was because they didn't want the USSR to invade Japan and occupy it. And really the US didn't even want Russia to occupy all the territories that Japan occupied, there's a reason why Russia continued attacking Japanese positions even after Japan had surrendered.

In the years immediately following World War 2, the US demanded that Japan deindustrialize. Now this, alongside other US policies, had disastrous effects on the Japanese economy, causing widespread starvation. As a result, communism started becoming popular. When this happened, the US kinda went "OH SHIT" and changed their policy and allowed Japan to reindustrialize and allowed Japan's economy to recover.

You know the Northern Territories (Kuril Islands if you will, I just don't like using the term "Kuril Islands" to describe the disputed territories between Russia and Japan because that implies that Japan claims the entire Kuril island chain when it does not) that is disputed between Russia and Japan today? Well, during the Cold War, Russia and Japan had actually reached a settlement on the dispute. If Russia and Japan reached an agreement, why is there still a dispute? Well the US saw that and told Japan that if Japan went through with that settlement, it would mean that Okinawa would become and American territory because apparently in settling the dispute without consulting the USA first Japan was violating the terms of it's surrender. As a result, Japan backed away from the agreement, and the dispute continues to this day. Not only that, because of this Japan and Russia have never signed a peace treaty. World War 2 is technically ONGOING because Russia and Japan are technically still at war.

Seriously, this is the level of determination from the US to keep Japan and Russia enemies (at least during the Cold War) that we are talking about here. There is NO way that America would have allowed Japan go become a friend of Russia during the Cold War. America just won't let it happen.

While I don't have objections to you taking Japan, you're talking about changing two things that define Japan as it is today. These are two things that I just don't see being able to justify a change for without rewriting a LOT of modern history.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dog of War
Member Avatar

As a sidenote, India is much more aligned with the USA then the USSR in Altverse, as they maintained a much more market economy.
Posted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted Image
Left<--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->Right
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dog of War
Member Avatar

To be honest, if you want nations with nuclear weapons without messing around with history, the only place to realistically look to is Africa, as many of those nations have more flexible histories then anywhere else in the world. When I say nukes though they would likely either be like Israel who officially don't have nukes, like North Korea who have the capabilities to make nukes but have been unable to do so or South Africa when they had them as they only maintained a small stockpile. That said for an African nation to have nukes it is likely it is not a Arab nation like Libya, Algeria or Egypt and more a Sub-Saharan nation like Nigeria, Kenya or South Africa. Bear in mind this nation probably wouldn't be an utopia, and still have a lot of internal problems, but that maybe its government isn't completely corrupt.
Posted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted Image
Left<--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->Right
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dev271
Member Avatar

So can I now have a Germany without nukes, what about the Nordreich Union. Otherwise I am taking the Republic of Japan.
Edited by Dev271, January 10, 2015, 8:02 am.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dog of War
Member Avatar

For Germany there is still the issue of the Berlin Wall. It can only fall in 1989 due to the weakening of the USSR and the ousting of Honecker. Now from the fall you an have Germany be more flexible (give it better economic growth, keep it split, whatever) but beforehand it is tougher. You could tweak history to have East Germany get a piece of Poland for example.

As for Japan - its a republic? Details?
Posted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted Image
Left<--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->Right
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dev271
Member Avatar

What about the Nordreich Union, I will probably have to drop it then?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
DealsFor.me - The best sales, coupons, and discounts for you
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Alt-Verse Discussion · Next Topic »
Add Reply