Zen Redneck on March 18, 2007, 09:48:03 am
Australia was pro-German, deciding to side with the new British gvt.  Can't say about the Bahamas, but I think the gvt in exile decided they'd be safest in territory protected by the US.  The map is a mistake in that respect.

Frankly, I can't remember what I meant about the map.  It's been too long.

What map?

Quote
You can see a VERY rough map here:
http://homepage.mac.com/rmay/Tex1947.jpg

Well, shows North America, but not the rest of the globe. Did I miss it? Looked through the entire series to date and all of the comments here, to no avail.


Dredging thru my memory, I was probably referring to the small map somewhere that shows New York State and part of Canada. Ah — it's here
http://www.bigheadpress.com/roswell?page=73

And which doesn't show Quebec as a separate country.

FWIW, I was thinking of Churchill as a Pétain type figure, who had to decide what to do when Britain got blitzkrieged — keep fighting or make accomodations with force majure?  I may very well have blundered there.

But do keep in mind that in Tex history, this is Naziism-sub-one, led in the beginning by Röhm, not Hitler, much more brownshirt in emphasis.  And that with the nuking of Berlin, the power actually passed to British leadership, and I'm counting on knee-jerk loyalty to Britain itself pulling most of the Empire into the Nazi camp.

And what with all this, I expect that Wodehouse, if he got out, spent his life writing novels about the Lone Ranger and Jeeves.

wdg3rd on March 19, 2007, 03:06:43 pm

And what with all this, I expect that Wodehouse, if he got out, spent his life writing novels about the Lone Ranger and Jeeves.

Depending on the timing of the invasion of France, he might not have been there when it was overrun.  He alternated residence between Long Island and France in OTL since at least the early 1920s.  After the war he was pretty much full-time in the US.
Ward Griffiths        wdg3rd@aol.com

Men will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest.  --  Denis Diderot

garthspencer on March 20, 2007, 12:10:38 am
Dear Guys,

The honourable member who last spoke is correct; the Maple Leaf flag was not thought of (in our timeline) until the mid-1960s, and Canadians fought under the Red Ensign in two world wars.

So, in another timeline, what would the delay factors be? If anyone got around to changing the flag, that is, would they change it to the flag shown on the Lancaster, and if so, when?

Personally I'm used to people not knowing better than to use the Maple Leaf flag out of period. That's the sort of thing Canada gets for not doing as much self-promotion as, say, the United States, even in North America, until recent decades. This is why people actually think the United States won the second World War, single-handed.

Yours,

Garth Spencer
Vancouver, BC
editor, BCSFAzine

archy on May 01, 2007, 10:46:35 am
But do keep in mind that in Tex history, this is Naziism-sub-one, led in the beginning by Röhm, not Hitler, much more brownshirt in emphasis.  And that with the nuking of Berlin, the power actually passed to British leadership, and I'm counting on knee-jerk loyalty to Britain itself pulling most of the Empire into the Nazi camp.


There'd be the example and diplomatic intercession of Vidkun Quisling in Norway and of Carl Gustaf Emil Mannerheim in Finland, Britain having been a major supplier of arms and materiel to Finland following their November 1939 invasion by the expansionist Soviet Union.

Promises of independence from Britain or at least semi-autonomy would have been a powerful attraction for Nationalists in Ireland, Scotland and Wales as well. 
Ah'm just a lowly salesman for the Deef Smith Greeting Card Company....

wdg3rd on May 03, 2007, 09:10:56 am
This is why people actually think the United States won the second World War, single-handed.

Nah, we used both hands.
Ward Griffiths        wdg3rd@aol.com

Men will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest.  --  Denis Diderot

nick012000 on May 13, 2007, 07:27:37 am
As for Australia, we were sliding towards being closer allies to the Americans than the British at that point in time, anyway. In the OTL, it was the American assistance against the Japanese that really pushed us over the hedge there, but the fall of Britain to Nazis could well have much the same effect in the new time line (but probably towards Texas, seeing as the US went Commie).

Honestly, the Australian people would never accept Nazi-ism. We pride ourselves on our individuality and disrespect for authority; if the Nazis took over, there would probably be open rebellion.

Frank B. on May 13, 2007, 10:23:24 pm
Honestly, the Australian people would never accept Nazi-ism. We pride ourselves on our individuality and disrespect for authority; if the Nazis took over, there would probably be open rebellion.

Yeah, I've wondered about that.  And I mean no disrespect, but, how is it that Australian's pride individuality so much, yet allow a government that regulates as much as it does?   The US has lost that aspect of its frontier heritage.  Though we still have individualists, they are so much in the minority, we've built a substantial nanny-state.

wdg3rd on May 13, 2007, 11:12:48 pm
Well, we haven't (yet) let the government to disarm us as thoroughly as the Strines have allowed their government to.  (Level of disarmament varies by US state, of course, and some in "disarmed" states may not be complying with local statutes).
Ward Griffiths        wdg3rd@aol.com

Men will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest.  --  Denis Diderot

Rocketman on May 14, 2007, 04:34:07 am
  Which brings up an important question.  In England and Australia why haven't at least some of the people had enough of the socialist claptrap and created their version of the American Libertarian Party?  It can't be because it hasn't got that bad there yet because it clearly has.   ???