Techno-dystopian Cold War on steroids?

[MRig]

I'd like to write some AH science fiction, and I was wondering what sort of timeline might bring about the following scenario by about the year 2000. I have some ideas of my own, but I'm less interested in the specific problems with the sketched timeline as I am in finding better ways to get to this overall scenario, or as close to it as reasonably possible:

-Strongly authoritarian, militaristic, anti-Communist United States
-World-of-tomorrow technology largely bound up in greater use of atomic power
-Surviving Soviet Union that controls most or all of continental Europe
-Orion drive warships
-Different MAD doctrine, where limited nuclear war is occasionally practiced, especially in extralunar space, and perhaps also in proxy wars
-Counterculture/civil rights movement driven underground, becoming steadily more radical with each failed attempt to effect change. Mainstream 60s-style culture still dominant, but increasingly under attack.

Below is my rough outline. I'm sure there's plenty wrong with it, so I'd appreciate some helpful alternatives (rather than just a litany of problems). I was thinking an interwar PoD, but earlier or later works too.

Assassination of FDR in 1933, failed assassination of Huey Long in 1935, who is elected in 36 or 40. U.S. stays neutral in WWII in Europe but fights Japan largely as OTL (though maybe the Manhattan Project is delayed, forcing an invasion or endless bombardment of the Home Islands). British invasion of France fails or is never attempted (though perhaps they liberate Greece and Italy). U.S. elects someone like MacArthur or Nixon or McCarthy after three or four terms of Long. Civil rights and anti-war demonstrations fail to garner sympathy when they are violently suppressed, thanks to greater censorship and/or a less sympathetic populace which considers them witting or unwitting tools of international Communism. Soviet Union accepts market reforms in the European bloc and later the USSR itself. Soviet Union wins the space race to the Moon thanks to getting all or most of the Nazi rocket scientists, and the U.S. turns most of the space program over to the Air Force, which creates Orion Drive warships in the 1970s, which the Soviets soon copy. They are swiftly weaponized and sometimes nuke each other in deep space to resolve earthbound crises.

Thoughts, ideas, constructive criticisms?

 

[Grey Wolf]

Some of your ideas would more or less be the cause of other of your ideas so that part works perfectly, eg :-

-Surviving Soviet Union that controls most or all of continental Europe

leads to

-Strongly authoritarian, militaristic, anti-Communist United States

results in

-Counterculture/civil rights movement driven underground, becoming steadily more radical with each failed attempt to effect change. Mainstream 60s-style culture still dominant, but increasingly under attack.

Best Regards
Grey Wolf

 

[Grey Wolf]

Assassination of FDR in 1933, failed assassination of Huey Long in 1935, who is elected in 36 or 40. U.S. stays neutral in WWII in Europe but fights Japan largely as OTL (though maybe the Manhattan Project is delayed, forcing an invasion or endless bombardment of the Home Islands). British invasion of France fails or is never attempted (though perhaps they liberate Greece and Italy). U.S. elects someone like MacArthur or Nixon or McCarthy after three or four terms of Long. Civil rights and anti-war demonstrations fail to garner sympathy when they are violently suppressed, thanks to greater censorship and/or a less sympathetic populace which considers them witting or unwitting tools of international Communism. Soviet Union accepts market reforms in the European bloc and later the USSR itself. Soviet Union wins the space race to the Moon thanks to getting all or most of the Nazi rocket scientists, and the U.S. turns most of the space program over to the Air Force, which creates Orion Drive warships in the 1970s, which the Soviets soon copy. They are swiftly weaponized and sometimes nuke each other in deep space to resolve earthbound crises.

Thoughts, ideas, constructive criticisms?

Regarding this, if the US is truly neutral in the war in Europe then the Allies are screwed for it would mean no Lend Lease, and no breaks for the UK and no supplies for the USSR

What might well work better for you is if the US is a combatant but not directly involved, having put the defeat of Japan as its priority - thus stuff like Lend Lease and aid can go ahead, but there would be no US presence in N Africa or Italy, and no D Day in 1944.

Once Japan has been defeated then the US looks at Europe but by this time the USSR is pressing inexorably against the Axis front.

The problem with this is without N Africa and Italy the Germans are not as hard pressed against the Russians as they were in OTL, but things can actually be sorted out for your timeline - after all it was US aid in weapons and equipment which helped the British defeat Rommel and drive him into Tunisia.

We can then see instead of invasion of Algeria and Morocco and US forces in Tunisia from the West, simply a continuation of the dessert war with Montgomery pushing up from the South.

- - - >

Best Regards
Grey Wolf

 

[Riain]

I don't know about deep space by 2000 using outgrowth WW2 technology, unless by deep you mean the asteroid belt. I don't know about the practicality of Orion drive when they can't even get nuke thermal rockets working. As a result I think you're stuck with chemical rockets and maybe nuke thermal which limits you to Venus and Mars or so.

I'm not overly chuffed by limited nuclear proxy war either, to commit to nukes is a result of limits being removed and I don't think it could be could be done on a semi-regular basis.

Otherwise go nuts, there's some good (if overly American) themes to play with.

 

[Grey Wolf]

- - - >

One can assume that in time Montgomery would breach the Southern defence line and push on North towards Tunis, probably eventually enveloping it. This would take time and give the British and Commonwealth armies a lot of experience.

Presumably the US is helping supply Britain with strategic bombers, probably some crews too, and the Allies are putting more pressure on Germany through bombing than Germany is able anymore to put on the UK, though aircrew losses would continue to be high.

Italy would remain reluctantly in the war with its army in N Africa, and some in the USSR. When Tunis finally falls is when Italian morale hits a low ebb, but if they didn't give up in OTL facing American forces as well, it seems unlikely they would here.

It is however later (mid 1944 maybe) so they can probably see how things are going elsewhere. Kursk has been fought and lost, and though the German position in the East is probably marginally better (with no Italian front) its becoming obvious they've lost.

Would Stauffenburg's plot occur? The Atlantic Wall continues to look impregnable (because nobody has tried breaching it) and the war in the East though a series of defeats and retreats is not yet lost completely.

Best Regards
Grey Wolf

 

[MRig]

Some of your ideas would more or less be the cause of other of your ideas so that part works perfectly, eg :-

-Surviving Soviet Union that controls most or all of continental Europe

leads to

-Strongly authoritarian, militaristic, anti-Communist United States

results in

-Counterculture/civil rights movement driven underground, becoming steadily more radical with each failed attempt to effect change. Mainstream 60s-style culture still dominant, but increasingly under attack.

Best Regards
Grey Wolf

Good to know I'm on the right track with some of this stuff.

Regarding this, if the US is truly neutral in the war in Europe then the Allies are screwed for it would mean no Lend Lease, and no breaks for the UK and no supplies for the USSR

What might well work better for you is if the US is a combatant but not directly involved, having put the defeat of Japan as its priority - thus stuff like Lend Lease and aid can go ahead, but there would be no US presence in N Africa or Italy, and no D Day in 1944.

Yeah this might make more sense. It's hard to imagine a Hitler smart enough not to declare war no matter who is running the U.S.

Once Japan has been defeated then the US looks at Europe but by this time the USSR is pressing inexorably against the Axis front.

How important is it how Japan is defeated? I'm toying with a delayed Atomic bomb (though this creates problems for the nuclear-themed world that ensues) to create more uncertainties about the weapon's use in the postwar period, and to force the U.S. to have defeated Japan conventionally, whether by air or land. They might even have to fight a Vietnam-style conflict if Japan refuses to surrender and some Japanese refuse to submit to the invader.

The problem with this is without N Africa and Italy the Germans are not as hard pressed against the Russians as they were in OTL, but things can actually be sorted out for your timeline - after all it was US aid in weapons and equipment which helped the British defeat Rommel and drive him into Tunisia.

We can then see instead of invasion of Algeria and Morocco and US forces in Tunisia from the West, simply a continuation of the dessert war with Montgomery pushing up from the South.

- - - >

Best Regards
Grey Wolf

Yeah, this is what I was thinking. The question is how far will the British get before the Soviets have completely overrun the Germans? I'm sure they'll win the North Africa campaign, but will they be able to liberate Greece and Italy?

I don't know about deep space by 2000 using outgrowth WW2 technology, unless by deep you mean the asteroid belt. I don't know about the practicality of Orion drive when they can't even get nuke thermal rockets working. As a result I think you're stuck with chemical rockets and maybe nuke thermal which limits you to Venus and Mars or so.

According to this article, the level of funding Dyson expected to need (much less than they actually received) would have amounted to about 1/20 that spent on Apollo IOTL. In TTL NASA would be gutted as soon as the Soviets reach the Moon, and much of the funding, resources and personnel moving to the Air Force.

I'm sure they were overestimating, but the Orion team expected to get to Saturn by 1970. If the resources they poured into this was comparable to OTL Cold War space programs and military platforms I think it is possible to Saturn 20-30 years behind schedule. For thematic reasons this is the planet I want them to reach. Too much of a conceit?

I'm not overly chuffed by limited nuclear proxy war either, to commit to nukes is a result of limits being removed and I don't think it could be could be done on a semi-regular basis.

What about this: one side uses nukes in a proxy war (for the first time ever if Japan has not been nuked). After this point the limits become much stronger on Earth and MAD as we know it develops, but for whatever reason these limits do not extend to extralunar space because both powers feel that a "steam valve" of sorts is necessary.

Or, when the U.S. nukes Hanoi (or Pyongyang, or Tehran, or the Chinese force invading Korea or Taiwan...) the Soviets don't want to let it stand but they also don't want to start a ground-based nuclear war, so they nuke an American orion ship somewhere between Earth and Mars, with a ship of their own. The Americans, not wanting to lose any more, refuse to escalate. Subsequent treaties ban use of nukes in proxy wars, but the precedent of deep space as a more lawless frontier has been set.

Otherwise go nuts, there's some good (if overly American) themes to play with.

Indeed I will. And the rampant 'Murricanism is sort of the point

- - - >

One can assume that in time Montgomery would breach the Southern defence line and push on North towards Tunis, probably eventually enveloping it. This would take time and give the British and Commonwealth armies a lot of experience.

Presumably the US is helping supply Britain with strategic bombers, probably some crews too, and the Allies are putting more pressure on Germany through bombing than Germany is able anymore to put on the UK, though aircrew losses would continue to be high.

Italy would remain reluctantly in the war with its army in N Africa, and some in the USSR. When Tunis finally falls is when Italian morale hits a low ebb, but if they didn't give up in OTL facing American forces as well, it seems unlikely they would here.

It is however later (mid 1944 maybe) so they can probably see how things are going elsewhere. Kursk has been fought and lost, and though the German position in the East is probably marginally better (with no Italian front) its becoming obvious they've lost.

Sounds good. So you seem to be saying that without American boots on the ground, Britain will only be able to wage an air and sea war in Europe before the Soviets finish the Germans off?

Speaking of the Soviets, do they have the logistical train to take out Spain as well? I don't think they'd stop until they ran out of food and fuel. And if so, what will happen when the Red Army reaches Gibraltar?[/QUOTE]

Would Stauffenburg's plot occur? The Atlantic Wall continues to look impregnable (because nobody has tried breaching it) and the war in the East though a series of defeats and retreats is not yet lost completely.

Best Regards
Grey Wolf

A good question...I could see it going either way, and not mattering in the larger scheme of things--even if the coup succeeds, the Russians are not going to negotiate and the Prussians are not going to pull it off in 1944. On the other hand, it might change the narrative in the West: look, the Germans dealt with that madman themselves, but was that enough for the ruthless Red menace? Of course not, the Communist juggernaut will not stop until it controls the entire world, etc. etc.

Another possibility is that the coup is delayed until later: the Soviets are approaching Berlin and Stauffenberg and co. kill Hitler in the Fuehrerbunker (no windows!). Attempts to negotiate peace are a failure--or, the Soviets say they'll agree to a negotiated settlement and then execute the junta before getting an official surrender from the highest-ranking survivor who got the message. Which would also feed into the evil-Commies narrative that will be so popular in the States.