Exocet - the Effects of a different Falklands
- Thread starter Nevran
- Start date
First of all, I'll echo the sentiment that it's great to see this timeline back!
Second, while the exact nature of this was not unknown, it has been hinted at for a long time that some great tragedy would be a-coming to America. It's grim reading to be sure and I'm not sure where it goes next.
Forgive the following ramble, this came about because I have far, FAR too much time this Sunday.
Now as to the potential rally around the flag efforts for Gingrich. If I were someone living in this timeline I'd really rather the Democrat win the election than him, obviously. I do worry that bringing up that Anthony Weiner is the NYC Mayor will mean that he might consider making a run for the top office here because if that happens then...well, I can see things going poorly is all I'm saying. Curiously enough, you've been light on details as to how Gingrich's reaction has been taken by the American public which is good because honestly? I know about Gingrich the rabble rouser, Gingrich the shit stirrer, Gingrich the policy maker. Gingrich the comforter is...not something I can ever describe him as.
To elaborate, the obvious OTL comparison is Bush. I'm not getting into the particulars of that whole can of worms but one thing that Bush did have in the aftermath of 9/11 was the ability to seem like he really cared about the people affected. Call it the truth, an affectation, somewhere in the middle but he was able to present himself as truly presidential in that moment. It also helped that he had a strong House Majority and a very narrow Senate Minority (with plenty of Dems who were willing to help out). He was also able to articulate his concerns in a way that basically prevented a considerable amount of dissent from the others in the mainstream. Newt doesn't strike me as the kind who would be able to basically gather all the flock into the barn, for lack of a better term, to ensure fealty to the mission at hand. It also helped that Bush seemed to have better relationships with most of his foreign contemporise than Gingrich has here (For one thing, there was no literal fistfight going on!) which means there'll be less of a world wide pull here. Lastly, think the choice not to tell us here is part of a proper cliffhanger and so it's not meant to be read as "War is inevitable" here. I'm particularly intrigued that there's a lack of description of how Newt's remarks are being reacted to. So there are three likely events here that I can see occurring.
One, Gingrich gets his rally around the flag effort and does the War thing, wins the election and gets a second term.
Two, Gingrich gets a war and does so with some sort of backing for revenge, but he is geopolitically a lot less secure in this campaign, there is no rally around the flag which leaves him open to possibly losing the race.
Three, Gingrich's nature means that he can't muster up any kind of decent response to any of his problems, in which case he almost certainly fails to win the next election.
Those are just the three likeliest solutions in order of likelihood, with my particular belief being on number two. But I'll take anything offered from you because your writing is bang on point!
Second, while the exact nature of this was not unknown, it has been hinted at for a long time that some great tragedy would be a-coming to America. It's grim reading to be sure and I'm not sure where it goes next.
Forgive the following ramble, this came about because I have far, FAR too much time this Sunday.
Now as to the potential rally around the flag efforts for Gingrich. If I were someone living in this timeline I'd really rather the Democrat win the election than him, obviously. I do worry that bringing up that Anthony Weiner is the NYC Mayor will mean that he might consider making a run for the top office here because if that happens then...well, I can see things going poorly is all I'm saying. Curiously enough, you've been light on details as to how Gingrich's reaction has been taken by the American public which is good because honestly? I know about Gingrich the rabble rouser, Gingrich the shit stirrer, Gingrich the policy maker. Gingrich the comforter is...not something I can ever describe him as.
To elaborate, the obvious OTL comparison is Bush. I'm not getting into the particulars of that whole can of worms but one thing that Bush did have in the aftermath of 9/11 was the ability to seem like he really cared about the people affected. Call it the truth, an affectation, somewhere in the middle but he was able to present himself as truly presidential in that moment. It also helped that he had a strong House Majority and a very narrow Senate Minority (with plenty of Dems who were willing to help out). He was also able to articulate his concerns in a way that basically prevented a considerable amount of dissent from the others in the mainstream. Newt doesn't strike me as the kind who would be able to basically gather all the flock into the barn, for lack of a better term, to ensure fealty to the mission at hand. It also helped that Bush seemed to have better relationships with most of his foreign contemporise than Gingrich has here (For one thing, there was no literal fistfight going on!) which means there'll be less of a world wide pull here. Lastly, think the choice not to tell us here is part of a proper cliffhanger and so it's not meant to be read as "War is inevitable" here. I'm particularly intrigued that there's a lack of description of how Newt's remarks are being reacted to. So there are three likely events here that I can see occurring.
One, Gingrich gets his rally around the flag effort and does the War thing, wins the election and gets a second term.
Two, Gingrich gets a war and does so with some sort of backing for revenge, but he is geopolitically a lot less secure in this campaign, there is no rally around the flag which leaves him open to possibly losing the race.
Three, Gingrich's nature means that he can't muster up any kind of decent response to any of his problems, in which case he almost certainly fails to win the next election.
Those are just the three likeliest solutions in order of likelihood, with my particular belief being on number two. But I'll take anything offered from you because your writing is bang on point!
The follow up to the 2008 SOTU suggests to me that as a “joint session address” rather than SOTU, we’ve got a new POTUS in place.
One advantage Bush had of course is that 9/11 happened only eight months into his first term, rather than two and a half years in. While there was a *lot* of anger over Florida still, and there were signs the wheels were about to come off on tax reform when Jeffords jumped ship in July 2001, he had not managed to run his popularity into the shitter. He wasn’t *that* popular on 9/10, but he wasn’t nearly as unpopular as Gingrich has made himself, nor nearly as aggressive a partisan figure in that early stretch of his Presidency (see: No Child Left Behind and It’s legislative history throughout 2001)
Yeah, exactly! The point about it being really early into Bush's term was a point I was going over in my head. It also helps that being the age I am, I've only ever known Bush as the 9/11 President. There's a reason that the term "Have a beer with him" is still associated with Bush in that like your average drinking buddy, you can project A LOT of your own biases onto the guy so long as he doesn't get too loud or rowdy. He can be as liberal or conservative, as flexible or rigid as you can imagine....but that's not Gingrich. By this point, people know who Newt is and so there is no surprise for a better term. To perhaps go back after old ground here, Bush was very good at making it seem like America, not George Bush, NEEDED to do this for the sake of their soul and to make things better. It's a fundamentally different thing to hear it from Newt's mouth because he's not a guy I could ever accuse of being easy to sympathize with. It might even be the case that they'd settle merely for killing the little weasel as opposed to combat.
Which brings me to a point with regards to the logistics of actually waging the war itself. Having a three year gap in which to wage a war (and a two year gap to actually capture Saddam) and make a significant enough amount of progress is a lot different than, like, eleven months at best? Presumably if they don't capture Hussein Jr in that time period then they've got goals they want to hit, but are those goals the kind of things the American public will find all that impressive? Even in OTL it took about a year and half to kill Qusay but that a result of him being the 'son' of the regime leader, not the leader himself. Point being that while there will be a bounce in approval ratings, I doubt it'd be significant enough to hold in place or indeed to be that high in the first area.
Great points.
Newt was not just a partisan pit Bull, he was *the* partisan pit Bull. Whatever else you can say about him, Bush never really was that way, and left the dirty work to surrogates
Something interesting to note are the secretaries of the DHS. Pete King most likely refers to Peter King, who in real life was a US representative for New York from 1993 to 2021, meanwhile Pam Bondi was the attorney general of Florida between 2011 to 2019, both were also Republican, which most likely means that the current administration in Exocets 2024 is Republican. In my opinion the most likely course of events is that the Democrats win in 2008 and have the white house until 2020 when the Republicans take it back, though i do admit this is mainly my theory because it would bring the number of terms for both parties to their OTL levels (5 for the Democrats and 6 for the Republicans since the pod in 1982)
Thanks everyone and its really good to be back!
There's a lot of interesting theories out here and honestly, as I left it so long some of my original ideas might be changing *slightly* but the main jist has stayed the same.
While 7/17 is bad, it's not 9/11 bad, both in terms of the complexity, the attack and the aftermath. Everything above re Gingrich's character, foreign affairs and relationship management and timescale (both where he is in his term and how close the potential end of it is) is working against him.
Politically though, in this TTL, intervention is seen to have worked in Korea and Rwanda. Northern Africa (Libya moreso) is a different kettle of fish, which you'd imagine would be glossed over by hawks. The next update is Korean unification and all its boondoggles, so that'll give a bit more context into such things.
You can expect immediately airstrikes, more demands at the U.N. and a ramping up of calls for action.
I ain't spoiling anything though post what is already in the boxes and what I've said though. That sort of political symmetry would be very pretty though.
There's a lot of interesting theories out here and honestly, as I left it so long some of my original ideas might be changing *slightly* but the main jist has stayed the same.
While 7/17 is bad, it's not 9/11 bad, both in terms of the complexity, the attack and the aftermath. Everything above re Gingrich's character, foreign affairs and relationship management and timescale (both where he is in his term and how close the potential end of it is) is working against him.
Politically though, in this TTL, intervention is seen to have worked in Korea and Rwanda. Northern Africa (Libya moreso) is a different kettle of fish, which you'd imagine would be glossed over by hawks. The next update is Korean unification and all its boondoggles, so that'll give a bit more context into such things.
Hahaha I did see that... I always said I planned on coming back after I finished Who Governs?, and after a while of me sort of spinning my wheels on other stuff, I wanted to actually get back to this TL, and give it a (fourth) go.
Gingrich is pretty incompetent, (as alluded to him leaving multiple positions across the executive branch and government departments unfilled) so that's probably a bit ambitious for them.
You can expect immediately airstrikes, more demands at the U.N. and a ramping up of calls for action.
Good spot.
I ain't spoiling anything though post what is already in the boxes and what I've said though. That sort of political symmetry would be very pretty though.
Well, speaking just for myself, this is one of my favorites and I’m glad we’re gonna get to see these “Sunny Tens” and what you have lined up!