These American states get sent back to 1861

Quickdraw101

Beware My Power-Green Lantern's Light
On January 1st, 2020, a multitude of bright flashes are reported across the United States, both east and west. When the lightshow ceases, highway networks and rail lines are found severed throughout the country. Power lines and communications networks with a number of states are no longer working. Only certain states are still able to contact and communicate with each other. With a rapid mobilization of the National Guard and state police forces, its soon found out that much of the old America they knew is longer around. Some of the remaining states report being next door to each other, while others are well over 1,000 miles away. After a week of investigation, they soon find that 11 American states have been sent back in time to the November of 1861. The following states are:

Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, Maine, Mississippi, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Utah, Vermont, and West Virginia. With these following states being yanked from the modern day, and being sent more than 150 years in the past, how well can they handle being cut off from modern trade? How quickly can they end the newly born American civil war? How will both the governments of the USA and CSA react upon realizing they both lost territory, and are faced with their 21st century descendants? How will the empires of Europe react to these new developments once word reaches them?



Bonus Scenario: The 1861 versions of those states are places into modern America. How quickly will it take to bring them back into the Union, and how will states like Oklahoma be handled, given the situation with Native American tribes at the time?
 

Bear Ribs

Well-known member
Military these states are fine, there's several dozen bases in every branch between them. The most important are going to be Tinker in Oklahoma, one of the largest Air Force Bases; Gulfport in Mississippi which is home to the Seabees, the main naval construction group; and Portsmouth Naval Construction yards in Maine. Utah has Dugway, one of the largest and most horrifying military bases on the planet: 800,000 acres of chemical and biological weapon testing facility. Hopefully nothing there gets used. There's a wide range of other smaller bases all over.

Industrially, Oklahoma has large quantities of oil and five working refineries* so fuel is covered in the short term anyway. Utah supplies large amounts of raw metal and natural gas. Alabama has the largest steel plant in the country as well as producing paper and plastic. Louisiana has... um... Crayfish? Naw, they have a ship manufacturing industry. New Hampshire is a major, major manufacturing center and produces tons of stuff.

*Last time I checked anyway.

Being cut off from modern trade is going to be horrific for these states. Despite having many robust industries they're too interconnected and dependent on outside areas for supplies. There's a decent mix of producers and manufacturers here but all to often that one spare part is going to be made in some other state that's missing. Raw materials won't be much of a problem as the futurlings will be able to zero in on known mine sites in other states and simply zip to them and start digging, no actual search required. It's that one odd part here and there that's going to be a pain, especially if nobody knows how to make one. Machinists are going to be in high demand, churning out one-off oddities in their garages to keep the factories going until the chain of supply is restored. Electronics... hopefully the Seebeas will be able to make workarounds because Silicon Valley isn't going to be sending any stuff soon.

I expect the civil war will be over in a matter of days. A single weapons demonstration, without inflicting casualties, is going to deeply impress all who see it. It a lot of ways this will be much better for the US as they won't lose most of a generation of people. I suspect that most of the futurlings will side with Lincoln as a matter of course and the debate on that's not going to last more than a day at most.

Social changes are going to be the biggest issue. I suspect the future states are going to essentially semi-secede themselves anddemand much stronger "states rights" for themselves so they can keep a level of social order more familiar to modern people, without imposing the same on people in the past. In some ways they're going to be much more liberal (LGBT rights, the fact that people actually vote), in other ways the pastlings will consider futurlings ridiculous prudes (seriously you people outlawed marijuana? And you hate something as wholesome as tobacco? Next you're going to be telling us there's no opium dens left!).
 

Quickdraw101

Beware My Power-Green Lantern's Light
Military these states are fine, there's several dozen bases in every branch between them. The most important are going to be Tinker in Oklahoma, one of the largest Air Force Bases; Gulfport in Mississippi which is home to the Seabees, the main naval construction group; and Portsmouth Naval Construction yards in Maine. Utah has Dugway, one of the largest and most horrifying military bases on the planet: 800,000 acres of chemical and biological weapon testing facility. Hopefully nothing there gets used. There's a wide range of other smaller bases all over.

Industrially, Oklahoma has large quantities of oil and five working refineries* so fuel is covered in the short term anyway. Utah supplies large amounts of raw metal and natural gas. Alabama has the largest steel plant in the country as well as producing paper and plastic. Louisiana has... um... Crayfish? Naw, they have a ship manufacturing industry. New Hampshire is a major, major manufacturing center and produces tons of stuff.

*Last time I checked anyway.

Being cut off from modern trade is going to be horrific for these states. Despite having many robust industries they're too interconnected and dependent on outside areas for supplies. There's a decent mix of producers and manufacturers here but all to often that one spare part is going to be made in some other state that's missing. Raw materials won't be much of a problem as the futurlings will be able to zero in on known mine sites in other states and simply zip to them and start digging, no actual search required. It's that one odd part here and there that's going to be a pain, especially if nobody knows how to make one. Machinists are going to be in high demand, churning out one-off oddities in their garages to keep the factories going until the chain of supply is restored. Electronics... hopefully the Seebeas will be able to make workarounds because Silicon Valley isn't going to be sending any stuff soon.

I expect the civil war will be over in a matter of days. A single weapons demonstration, without inflicting casualties, is going to deeply impress all who see it. It a lot of ways this will be much better for the US as they won't lose most of a generation of people. I suspect that most of the futurlings will side with Lincoln as a matter of course and the debate on that's not going to last more than a day at most.

Social changes are going to be the biggest issue. I suspect the future states are going to essentially semi-secede themselves anddemand much stronger "states rights" for themselves so they can keep a level of social order more familiar to modern people, without imposing the same on people in the past. In some ways they're going to be much more liberal (LGBT rights, the fact that people actually vote), in other ways the pastlings will consider futurlings ridiculous prudes (seriously you people outlawed marijuana? And you hate something as wholesome as tobacco? Next you're going to be telling us there's no opium dens left!).
What do you think will hit the future states the hardest in this scenario? The lack of food imports or lack of available fuel? Do you believe it likely that uptime troops will enter the south and forcibly free the enslaved population? What would be the biggest impact regarding the bonus scenario?
 

Bear Ribs

Well-known member
What do you think will hit the future states the hardest in this scenario? The lack of food imports or lack of available fuel? Do you believe it likely that uptime troops will enter the south and forcibly free the enslaved population? What would be the biggest impact regarding the bonus scenario?
Most of those states are heavily agricultural and Oklahoma is the fifth highest oil-production state in the US, it can feed 11 states all by itself and it refines it's own oil. Additionally, stocks of wild fish will be significantly less overfished than they are today so the coastal states will be able to bring in some pretty heft catches compared to modern times. Neither oil nor food will be an issue, what will hit them will be things like semiconductors as there are no such plants in any of those states I'm aware of. If they'd gotten Missouri instead of Mississippi they would have the Diodes Inc. plant which would help a little, but as is, no such luck.

They can produce steel hulled ships with the heavy industry available but won't be able to make a computer to navigate it, and that's going to be a running theme with them for some time, their steel production massively outstrips their ability to put any electronics in it. I suspect there will be an effort to engineer simpler tanks and ships that turn back the clock a bit to simpler engineering solutions using WW solutions instead of electronics for things like targeting and detection.

Indeed unless they get lucky and there's some actual microchip engineers available, they may forget anything more than theoretical knowledge of how to make semiconductors, especially since they've lost internet access. Hopefully there's some detailed texts at colleges and libraries they can rebuild that base from.
 

ATP

Well-known member
What do you think will hit the future states the hardest in this scenario? The lack of food imports or lack of available fuel? Do you believe it likely that uptime troops will enter the south and forcibly free the enslaved population? What would be the biggest impact regarding the bonus scenario?

Isoted states would survive and quickly end cyvil war,and made USA world superpower - without computer making,with 1950 technology level.Still enough to rule world.
With future knowledge,they would probably:
1.Take over current Argentina and Chile - in OTL indians there were conqered after 1870 and either prosecuted/Chile/ or genocided/Argentina/.Made some bases and nation-building there.
2.Treat indians in USA fairly - many tribes in 1861 were still free.
3.End slavery quickly in USA.
4.Stop belgians from taking over Congo and genociding locals there.Bases and nation building,too
5.Stop Mahdi in Sudan.Nation building.
6.Take over Hawaii - but in cyvilised way.

Most important thing - do not let Wall Street take over Federal Reserve.ALL USA problems come from that.

Considering that Lincoln planned send all blacks to Africa,now he could do that - and South America,too.


Bonus scenario - USA are weakened,but Biden would still do not win there.
 

Quickdraw101

Beware My Power-Green Lantern's Light
Isoted states would survive and quickly end cyvil war,and made USA world superpower - without computer making,with 1950 technology level.Still enough to rule world.
With future knowledge,they would probably:
1.Take over current Argentina and Chile - in OTL indians there were conqered after 1870 and either prosecuted/Chile/ or genocided/Argentina/.Made some bases and nation-building there.
2.Treat indians in USA fairly - many tribes in 1861 were still free.
3.End slavery quickly in USA.
4.Stop belgians from taking over Congo and genociding locals there.Bases and nation building,too
5.Stop Mahdi in Sudan.Nation building.
6.Take over Hawaii - but in cyvilised way.

Most important thing - do not let Wall Street take over Federal Reserve.ALL USA problems come from that.

Considering that Lincoln planned send all blacks to Africa,now he could do that - and South America,too.


Bonus scenario - USA are weakened,but Biden would still do not win there.
I can't really see why the US would go conquering in South America, especially when nothing there would concern them. I'd imagine that the Native American population that gets brought back, numbering nearly 1 million, will almost certainly ensure that the various massacres across the west never happen. Or the uptime states will ensure that via the military assets they have. The Congo is going to be a problem is for no other reason to force Belgium to give the territory up, and garrison a force there to defend it. Although I'd imagine uptime knowledge will have the rest of Europe tell Belgium to fuck off. I can't see Hawaii being annexed though, because William McKinley is unlikely to ever take office in this timeline, and thus America will guarantee Hawaiian independence.
 

ATP

Well-known member
I can't really see why the US would go conquering in South America, especially when nothing there would concern them. I'd imagine that the Native American population that gets brought back, numbering nearly 1 million, will almost certainly ensure that the various massacres across the west never happen. Or the uptime states will ensure that via the military assets they have. The Congo is going to be a problem is for no other reason to force Belgium to give the territory up, and garrison a force there to defend it. Although I'd imagine uptime knowledge will have the rest of Europe tell Belgium to fuck off. I can't see Hawaii being annexed though, because William McKinley is unlikely to ever take office in this timeline, and thus America will guarantee Hawaiian independence.

Not conqering - saving indians in OTL from genocide,becouse that really happened there after 1870/Argentina/.And Mapuche indians from enslavement on their own land./Chile/
USA could save them with little cost/Chile and Argentina armies were good for indians with spears,but nothing more/
save people from being genocided,and get friendly countries there.

Congo and Sudan - republican from 1861 really wanted send freed slaves to Africa,so you need place for them.

All in all,i simply thought about places which USA could take with little effort saving people there,and profit from that later.
Sudan,Congo,OTL Argentina/Chile indian territories all could do that for USA.

What more?
Okinawa still have its own king,Hokkaido belonged partially to Ainu people,Taiwan were only partially chineese.
Madagascar had its own Queen.
USA should take all that places ,made strong nations there,and create Alliance.

Becouse USA need allies to be safe - and becouse in 1861 there were no countries who could do that/except maybe Sweden,Persia and Ethiopia/ USA must created such countries.
And if they save people from genocide in process,there is just another reason for doing that.

P.S Maybe help Taiping,too - from USA point of viev,2 China are better then one.Mexico - maybe help Habsburgs there? They were ill man of Europe arleady,and it is nice to have weak neigbours.Becouse Mexico under Habsburg certainly remain weak.
 

Bear Ribs

Well-known member
I can't really see why the US would go conquering in South America, especially when nothing there would concern them. I'd imagine that the Native American population that gets brought back, numbering nearly 1 million, will almost certainly ensure that the various massacres across the west never happen. Or the uptime states will ensure that via the military assets they have. The Congo is going to be a problem is for no other reason to force Belgium to give the territory up, and garrison a force there to defend it. Although I'd imagine uptime knowledge will have the rest of Europe tell Belgium to fuck off. I can't see Hawaii being annexed though, because William McKinley is unlikely to ever take office in this timeline, and thus America will guarantee Hawaiian independence.
Actually I can see that happening pretty easily. As I said before, I suspect the military is going to follow Abe Lincoln's direction, as he is the duly elected President of the United States (I expect Lincoln would get some letters strongly advising him to take several future leaders as cabinet members so he knows what to do). This is going to set the precedent that the President still commands the future states.

At this point in time the US is still expanding, Texas didn't join the States until then, f'rex, along with Florida, in fact there were only 26 states before the Civil War started and the rest were taken after. There's every chance that given so many advantages, such an aggressive world power would grab itself a bigger chunk of territory, especially if the rest of the country finds out how bad things will get in Middle and South America. It will be their Manifest Destiny to take over not only the West but the South as well. Even Canada will probably only go on existing if the future states can convince the rest of the country they'll be good allies and shouldn't become states.
 

Quickdraw101

Beware My Power-Green Lantern's Light
Not conqering - saving indians in OTL from genocide,becouse that really happened there after 1870/Argentina/.And Mapuche indians from enslavement on their own land./Chile/
USA could save them with little cost/Chile and Argentina armies were good for indians with spears,but nothing more/
save people from being genocided,and get friendly countries there.

Congo and Sudan - republican from 1861 really wanted send freed slaves to Africa,so you need place for them.

All in all,i simply thought about places which USA could take with little effort saving people there,and profit from that later.
Sudan,Congo,OTL Argentina/Chile indian territories all could do that for USA.

What more?
Okinawa still have its own king,Hokkaido belonged partially to Ainu people,Taiwan were only partially chineese.
Madagascar had its own Queen.
USA should take all that places ,made strong nations there,and create Alliance.

Becouse USA need allies to be safe - and becouse in 1861 there were no countries who could do that/except maybe Sweden,Persia and Ethiopia/ USA must created such countries.
And if they save people from genocide in process,there is just another reason for doing that.

P.S Maybe help Taiping,too - from USA point of viev,2 China are better then one.Mexico - maybe help Habsburgs there? They were ill man of Europe arleady,and it is nice to have weak neigbours.Becouse Mexico under Habsburg certainly remain weak.
I don't know about you, but telling millions of newly freed slaves "we're sorry about enslaving millions of you, now go back to ancestral homelands that you know nothing about" isn't going to work out to well with the modern States, especially the black Americans that come back with them. There's millions of black Americans in the southern states alone, and I doubt you can convince them that deporting millions of freedmen and women is a good thing. Not to mention how that plays into Jim Bob the Neo Confederate's plan of having less future opposition in the political arena. Millions of newly freed slaves could become quite the boon for the United States as a whole. As for the rest of what your saying, the main problem is the logistics of trying to even attempt half of that, while not actively pissing off everyone else in the world, or those in our own borders who are sick of foreign entanglements.
Actually I can see that happening pretty easily. As I said before, I suspect the military is going to follow Abe Lincoln's direction, as he is the duly elected President of the United States (I expect Lincoln would get some letters strongly advising him to take several future leaders as cabinet members so he knows what to do). This is going to set the precedent that the President still commands the future states.

At this point in time the US is still expanding, Texas didn't join the States until then, f'rex, along with Florida, in fact there were only 26 states before the Civil War started and the rest were taken after. There's every chance that given so many advantages, such an aggressive world power would grab itself a bigger chunk of territory, especially if the rest of the country finds out how bad things will get in Middle and South America. It will be their Manifest Destiny to take over not only the West but the South as well. Even Canada will probably only go on existing if the future states can convince the rest of the country they'll be good allies and shouldn't become states.
Aside from the logistical and manpower burdens of trying to take over the America's, or the already war weary population after 2 decades in the Middle East, Canada has Quebec which is staunchly Catholic, and the rest of Latin America is also Catholic majority. The United States is protestant majority and would not want millions of mestizo Catholics becoming citizens, and becoming a massive voting bloc.
 

Bear Ribs

Well-known member
I don't know about you, but telling millions of newly freed slaves "we're sorry about enslaving millions of you, now go back to ancestral homelands that you know nothing about" isn't going to work out to well with the modern States, especially the black Americans that come back with them. There's millions of black Americans in the southern states alone, and I doubt you can convince them that deporting millions of freedmen and women is a good thing. Not to mention how that plays into Jim Bob the Neo Confederate's plan of having less future opposition in the political arena. Millions of newly freed slaves could become quite the boon for the United States as a whole. As for the rest of what your saying, the main problem is the logistics of trying to even attempt half of that, while not actively pissing off everyone else in the world, or those in our own borders who are sick of foreign entanglements.

Aside from the logistical and manpower burdens of trying to take over the America's, or the already war weary population after 2 decades in the Middle East, Canada has Quebec which is staunchly Catholic, and the rest of Latin America is also Catholic majority. The United States is protestant majority and would not want millions of mestizo Catholics becoming citizens, and becoming a massive voting bloc.
You're taking a modernist perspective on the past. Voting blocs as you're thinking of them hardly existed and the patterns were very different than anything we'd see today, with voters being far more focused on local elections and the national-level political parties being far weaker than they are today. There were four solid candidates in the election Lincoln won, something that could never happen today. John Bell, the other conservative candidate, pulled in 12.5% of the vote and the two liberal candidates got 30 and 18% respectively. Today a non-GOP/DNC candidate pulling in 5% would be regarded as a catastrophe for the party closer to them.

For that matter even if said voting blocs existed, there's no reason to think the leaders of the time would let them vote in the first place. Blacks being allowed to vote wouldn't happen in the US until several years after the civil war, around a decade in the future from when the event happens in this ISOT.
 

ATP

Well-known member
I don't know about you, but telling millions of newly freed slaves "we're sorry about enslaving millions of you, now go back to ancestral homelands that you know nothing about" isn't going to work out to well with the modern States, especially the black Americans that come back with them. There's millions of black Americans in the southern states alone, and I doubt you can convince them that deporting millions of freedmen and women is a good thing. Not to mention how that plays into Jim Bob the Neo Confederate's plan of having less future opposition in the political arena. Millions of newly freed slaves could become quite the boon for the United States as a whole. As for the rest of what your saying, the main problem is the logistics of trying to even attempt half of that, while not actively pissing off everyone else in the world, or those in our own borders who are sick of foreign entanglements.

Aside from the logistical and manpower burdens of trying to take over the America's, or the already war weary population after 2 decades in the Middle East, Canada has Quebec which is staunchly Catholic, and the rest of Latin America is also Catholic majority. The United States is protestant majority and would not want millions of mestizo Catholics becoming citizens, and becoming a massive voting bloc.

Iknew - problem is,basically all republicans from 1861,including Lincoln,were racist.They would not welcome anybody but white protestants as equal.

And all that intervention would be cheap - 500 men with modern rifles ,few modern guns ,helicopters and drones would do.
Compared to what USA could get there,it would be crime not to try.
I do not say to liberate Ireland or Poland - but save arleady independent places hold by tribal people who would be slaughtered or enslaved in near future.
Politic gains,economical gains,cheap and almost no risk.
 

Quickdraw101

Beware My Power-Green Lantern's Light
You're taking a modernist perspective on the past. Voting blocs as you're thinking of them hardly existed and the patterns were very different than anything we'd see today, with voters being far more focused on local elections and the national-level political parties being far weaker than they are today. There were four solid candidates in the election Lincoln won, something that could never happen today. John Bell, the other conservative candidate, pulled in 12.5% of the vote and the two liberal candidates got 30 and 18% respectively. Today a non-GOP/DNC candidate pulling in 5% would be regarded as a catastrophe for the party closer to them.

For that matter even if said voting blocs existed, there's no reason to think the leaders of the time would let them vote in the first place. Blacks being allowed to vote wouldn't happen in the US until several years after the civil war, around a decade in the future from when the event happens in this ISOT.
I'm not talking about freedmen being a new voting bloc, I'm referring to the millions of black Americans in the uptime states who won't take kindly to the government deporting millions of people to Africa, ones that already don't have anything but the clothes on their back. The DC government will have to come to terms that all people have the right to vote, especially in the uptime states. There's no way they'll be able to suppress the votes of women and minorities, much to the displeasure of the rest of the country.
Iknew - problem is,basically all republicans from 1861,including Lincoln,were racist.They would not welcome anybody but white protestants as equal.

And all that intervention would be cheap - 500 men with modern rifles ,few modern guns ,helicopters and drones would do.
Compared to what USA could get there,it would be crime not to try.
I do not say to liberate Ireland or Poland - but save arleady independent places hold by tribal people who would be slaughtered or enslaved in near future.
Politic gains,economical gains,cheap and almost no risk.
The main issue with intervention is what. While there's a few ships already being built right now in Alabama and Maine, there's no naval vessels homeported in any states brought back in time. There's definitely a number of transport aircraft that could be utilized, but those require airfields to land on. Sure, we'll rule anywhere we get soldiers, but they need to get there first.
 

Bear Ribs

Well-known member
I'm not talking about freedmen being a new voting bloc, I'm referring to the millions of black Americans in the uptime states who won't take kindly to the government deporting millions of people to Africa, ones that already don't have anything but the clothes on their back. The DC government will have to come to terms that all people have the right to vote, especially in the uptime states. There's no way they'll be able to suppress the votes of women and minorities, much to the displeasure of the rest of the country.
First, this wasn't about Freedmen, I was directly responding to your claim that the US wouldn't annex any more territory because Catholics in Quebec and Mexico would form a Catholic voting bloc.

Second, you're presuming said African's don't want to go back. Lincoln's plan to send the ex-slaves back to Africa may not be nearly as ridiculous as it seems. A significant plurality of those slaves were taken directly from Africa and have families and homes to return to. For those that weren't their parents, or at most grandparents, were from Africa. The connections were much stronger compared to modern African Americans and I suspect a great majority would rather go back than try to make a go of it in the post-Civil War US.

If Lincoln presents a plan to return the ex-slaves to their homes, and said ex-slaves are on board and eagerly asking to return to Africa there's little reason for the uptime states to oppose their wishes under the circumstances.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ATP

Quickdraw101

Beware My Power-Green Lantern's Light
First, this wasn't about Freedmen, I was directly responding to your claim that the US wouldn't annex any more territory because Catholics in Quebec and Mexico would form a Catholic voting bloc.

Second, you're presuming said African's don't want to go back. Lincoln's plan to send the ex-slaves back to Africa may not be nearly as ridiculous as it seems. A significant plurality of those slaves were taken directly from Africa and have families and homes to return to. For those that weren't their parents, or at most grandparents, were from Africa. The connections were much stronger compared to modern African Americans and I suspect a great majority would rather go back than try to make a go of it in the post-Civil War US.

If Lincoln presents a plan to return the ex-slaves to their homes, and said ex-slaves are on board and eagerly asking to return to Africa there's little reason for the uptime states to oppose their wishes under the circumstances.
The United States didn't want more Catholic citizens than it already had. Look at how the Irish and Italians got treated in the late 19th and early 20th century. One of the reasons we didn't go further south after beating Mexico was not only had a messenger not arriving at the right time, but America didn't want to add millions of mestizo Mexicans to their nation. This also ignores the national identity that Mexico had formed at that point. Quite frankly, it wouldn't be worth the cost, or the openly hostile population we'd be dealing with for at least a generation on a best case scenario. In regards to the slaves, most were prisoners taken from tribes that sold them to western slave traders in exchange for firearms, rum, tobacco, clothing, and jewelry. The vast majority, especially those who were born in America, have literally nowhere to go. It'd be best to let them just go out west like many did originally, or migrate to the modern states, where they can receive modern education, and protection from confederates who want to lynch them.
 

IceWing_mk1

Well-known member
They can produce steel hulled ships with the heavy industry available but won't be able to make a computer to navigate it, and that's going to be a running theme with them for some time, their steel production massively outstrips their ability to put any electronics in it. I suspect there will be an effort to engineer simpler tanks and ships that turn back the clock a bit to simpler engineering solutions using WW solutions instead of electronics for things like targeting and detection.

Isoted states would survive and quickly end cyvil war,and made USA world superpower - without computer making,with 1950 technology level.Still enough to rule world.

I'm sorry, but neither of you are working with correct information.
  • Maine - ON Semiconduction and TI (both 200mm wafers)
  • New Mexico - Intel (300mm wafer)
  • Utah - IM Flash Technology (300mm wafer)
  • Vermont - Global Foundries (200mm wafer)
And that's not talking about small scale chip fabrication that is occurring at the universities.

I'm not saying that Chip Fabrication Facilities won't be strategic resources for a while, but it IS possible to bootstrap back up to at least early 2000 tech levels fairly quickly, although it will take time to get back up to the mass production and consumption levels today.

On the other hand, it will be possible to bypass a LOT of intermediate steps to get to modern day infrastructure levels, hopefully laid out in a BETTER way
 

ForeverShogo

Well-known member
Grab Canada. Grab what we today think of as Northern Mexico, because the population is still extremely low there given it's mostly desert. We'd also end up with a shorter border.

As an alternative to sending people to Africa, in less than a decade the option of annexing the Dominican Republic could become a thing. Historically it failed because the vote was tied, but President Grant thought it could function as a kind of pressure release valve for racial issues to not only have an almost entirely black US territory/future state . . . But that it could also be a place to send black Americans to ease tensions by essentially separating from those who would become Klansmen and think lynchings are a fun hobby.

Though this is mostly the ideal. A lot of people these days just don't have the stomach for territorial expansion.
 

Quickdraw101

Beware My Power-Green Lantern's Light
I'm sorry, but neither of you are working with correct information.
  • Maine - ON Semiconduction and TI (both 200mm wafers)
  • New Mexico - Intel (300mm wafer)
  • Utah - IM Flash Technology (300mm wafer)
  • Vermont - Global Foundries (200mm wafer)
And that's not talking about small scale chip fabrication that is occurring at the universities.

I'm not saying that Chip Fabrication Facilities won't be strategic resources for a while, but it IS possible to bootstrap back up to at least early 2000 tech levels fairly quickly, although it will take time to get back up to the mass production and consumption levels today.

On the other hand, it will be possible to bypass a LOT of intermediate steps to get to modern day infrastructure levels, hopefully laid out in a BETTER way
Ultimately the biggest problem is the lack of materials that will be flowing to the factories, unless they can find a new source of said materials, and quickly so they don't have to cannibalize equipment.
 

liberty90

Evil Neoliberal Cat
They can produce steel hulled ships with the heavy industry available but won't be able to make a computer to navigate it,

What prevents you from taking, like, literal used smartphone and reprogramming it?

Sure, modern electronics are optimised for at most few years of operation, but that is average. Some should work twenty years, even if one per ten; and in the modern society we have tons of used electronics.

The United States didn't want more Catholic citizens than it already had.

Baja California and Sonora wouldn't add many voters, these north-western parts could be annexed without issue.

Whether anyone would think about such things is a separate matter.

This ISOT event combined parts of the modern USA, life expectancy 78,5 with XIX century parts of USA life expectancy 40.

It's worse than annexing modern Nigeria or Ethiopia.

Uptimers may recognize downtime and uptime US as one nation out of patriotism, but I pity you teaching downtimers what showers and electric lights are.

West and East Germany were much more similar.
Hell.
North and South Korea have more in common.
 
Last edited:

Bear Ribs

Well-known member
What prevents you from taking, like, literal used smartphone and reprogramming it?

Sure, modern electronics are optimised for at most few years of operation, but that is average. Some should work twenty years, even if one per ten; and in the modern society we have tons of used electronics.
As you say yourself, said electronics won't last that long. There's also the issue that civilian electronics don't hold up well to the kind of abuse military equipment requires. Now some should keep working longer than others, but which ones? Do you want to be constantly swapping out old cell phones in mid-battle as your system fails because a shell glanced off the armor belt and the shock and vibrations broke the cell phone and also four of the spares?

Easier to go with more primitive and robust 1950s tech, after all this is an era when most warships are still made of wood and coal-fired steam boilers are the hot new tech in military ships. They don't need to use cell phones that are probably going to break so easily against that grade of enemy. Plus with @IceWing_mk1 pointing out there were far more semiconductor plants that I was aware of, they'll be able to work their way to modern computers in a relatively short timeframe rather than kludging together an old cell phone to a fire control system.
 

Lanmandragon

Well-known member
I can't really see why the US would go conquering in South America, especially when nothing there would concern them. I'd imagine that the Native American population that gets brought back, numbering nearly 1 million, will almost certainly ensure that the various massacres across the west never happen. Or the uptime states will ensure that via the military assets they have. The Congo is going to be a problem is for no other reason to force Belgium to give the territory up, and garrison a force there to defend it. Although I'd imagine uptime knowledge will have the rest of Europe tell Belgium to fuck off. I can't see Hawaii being annexed though, because William McKinley is unlikely to ever take office in this timeline, and thus America will guarantee Hawaiian independence.
Fly a couple of B52s over Brussels and theyd do what they're told.
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top