Succesful Lithuania state without union with Poland.If they beat Moscov,they could take Siberia later.
Alternate History Ideas and Discussion
- Thread starter AndrewJTalon
- Start date
Buba
A total creep
Do they even share a border? Doesn't Uzbekistan and/or Tajikistan separate them?
Yes, they share a long border.
Yeah, Tajikistan is the one with the Afghan border. Tajiks, like Afghans, are an Iranian people. Kyrgyz, like Kazakhs, are a Turkic people--and very closely related to Kazakhs, for that matter!
Anyway, how do we make my AHC happen? FWIW, Kazakhstan is currently much richer than Kyrgyzstan is.
Buba
A total creep
Sorry, beyond my ken.
All I know about the area that Uzbeks, Kirgiz, Kazakhs, Karakalpaks - all these and more were in large measure created by the Soviets in the 1920s.
So, simplest, although I suspect not what you were going for, is for Lenin or Stalin draw the borders differently and not spin Kirgistan off Soviet Turkestan.
As not to double post, here is a map for you @WolfBear
Last edited:
Sorry, beyond my ken.
All I know about the area that Uzbeks, Kirgiz, Kazakhs, Karakalpaks - all these and more were in large measure created by the Soviets in the 1920s.
So, simplest, although I suspect not what you were going for, is for Lenin or Stalin draw the borders differently and not spin Kirgistan off Soviet Turkestan.
As not to double post, here is a map for you @WolfBear
Weirdly enough, the territory that was known as Kirgizstan back then is actually present-day Kazakhstan. Present-day Kyrgyzstan is actually located to the southeast of the Kirgizstan on the map above.
TheRomanSlayer
Unipolarists are the New Subhumans
"Plausibility Check: American Civil War Ends in a Korea-like Stalemate"
Basically, have both the conflict between the Union and the Confederacy end in a stalemate, similar to the end of OTL Korean War, but both parties don't recognize the sovereignty of one another.
Basically, have both the conflict between the Union and the Confederacy end in a stalemate, similar to the end of OTL Korean War, but both parties don't recognize the sovereignty of one another.
There's a possibility of this is McClellan wins in 1864. AFAIK, he wanted to get the South to join the Union while protecting their right to keep slavery. But what if huge Northern opposition to this plan of his will block it? Then would Northerners actually be willing to fight the South up to the bitter end?
'PC (Plausibility Check): An eventual partition of the Ottoman Empire even without World War I?'
Doomsought
Well-known member
Succession crisis with multiple princes managing to get regional backing.
What about getting partitioned between the various European Great Powers?
Doomsought
Well-known member
Backroom dealings for funding the civil war with the princes going to different great powers for support. The promises that the princes make to get support vary, though the Suez Canal features prominently.
TheRomanSlayer
Unipolarists are the New Subhumans
I'm wondering if a McClellan victory in 1864 would have been spoiled by a more militant abolitionist faction that would spoil the South's chance of rejoining the Union with the institution of slavery.
Buba
A total creep
Which is exactly what Lincoln tried to achieve. So, what's the difference?
TheRomanSlayer
Unipolarists are the New Subhumans
The only thing is, how would Lincoln realistically lose the 1864 election when the successes of the Union Armies are contributing to his popularity?
---
"PC: World Hockey Association Becomes the Dominant hockey league instead of the NHL."
How do you get the WHA to not only survive, but absorb the teams from the NHL, instead of the other way around?
---
"PC: World Hockey Association Becomes the Dominant hockey league instead of the NHL."
How do you get the WHA to not only survive, but absorb the teams from the NHL, instead of the other way around?
What if they are less successful, though?