The Union Forever: A TL

[Mac Gregor]

I didn't realize or notice that there was fighting going on in Papua. I assume it's primarily Japanese units fighting there?

Indeed, here is the clip from the March 19 update.

Papua

In early September, Japanese forces made hotly contested landings at Wewak and Port Edward on the northern coast of Papua. The Royal Australian Air Force did their best to intercept the invaders but Japanese carrier based jets managed to win local air superiority. By mid-October, roughly 40,000 Japanese troops had made it ashore. On the southern portion of the island, Commonwealth forces under Australian Lieutenant General Sir Peter Carter began to mass for what would surely be a horrific fight in the island’s jungles and central highlands.

 

[Mac Gregor]

Does Canada have access to American pacific ports? It's just we don't have very many of our own, so sending supplies that way would be a bit of a bottleneck.

Also, forgive if I missed this, but how to the populations of the combattants stack up vs. OTL?

Canadian warships do not have access to American ports. And yes, Vancouver is becoming a bottleneck of sorts.

As for the population of the combatant nations that is a tough one. India and Japan rank 1st and 5th. The UK and Madras are 10th and 8th. If you were to add up all the other belligerents I have no idea the total number but needless to say it is well into the hundreds of millions on each side. If anybody wants to take a guess I would be interested to hear it.

 

[jeckl]

Indeed, here is the clip from the March 19 update.

Papua

In early September, Japanese forces made hotly contested landings at Wewak and Port Edward on the northern coast of Papua. The Royal Australian Air Force did their best to intercept the invaders but Japanese carrier based jets managed to win local air superiority. By mid-October, roughly 40,000 Japanese troops had made it ashore. On the southern portion of the island, Commonwealth forces under Australian Lieutenant General Sir Peter Carter began to mass for what would surely be a horrific fight in the island’s jungles and central highlands.

Kakoda in the 70's?

Nice

 

[Beedok]

Canadian warships do not have access to American ports. And yes, Vancouver is becoming a bottleneck of sorts.

As for the population of the combatant nations that is a tough one. India and Japan rank 1st and 5th. The UK and Madras are 10th and 8th. If you were to add up all the other belligerents I have no idea the total number but needless to say it is well into the hundreds of millions on each side. If anybody wants to take a guess I would be interested to hear it.

Well numbers directly I didn't care about, I was wondering mostly if Canada and Australia had more people or less, and such. Like if a lack of WWII had meant there were more Japanese or Brits and such forth.

 

[Mac Gregor]

Well numbers directly I didn't care about, I was wondering mostly if Canada and Australia had more people or less, and such. Like if a lack of WWII had meant there were more Japanese or Brits and such forth.

In that case, yes there are more Brits, Canadians, and especially Japanese because of the lack of WWII

 

[Luminous]

It might be curious to see the ratio between the various allied Indian states and India proper. In OTL 1976, there were just over 613 million people. 8 million Indians, thereabout, died during the independence war. Population growth would have been near 0 for the entire length of the war as well. We might be looking at a population of around 500 million at the worst to 550 million at best.

Then there is the matter of population density. With most of people populated in OTL in Bengal and along the Himalayan rivers or the southern peninsula's western half, I'd lean heavily toward saying that majority of the population is still in the North. (which was more battle-scarred than the south) But excluding Bengal and Assam, along with the southern states, Kashmir, and Baluchistan, the ratio might dip as low as 2:1 in favor of India.

Then the question comes to the conquered territories and how many of them end up rebelling or supporting the Indian regime. I think an optimistic number might be half supporting and half against, but I wouldn't be surprised if only 10 percent support the Indians because of their aggressive methods.

I'm not sure how enthusiastic the rest of India is for this war as well. The enthusiasm will be, in the end, the key. Indian generals are already worried what will happen if they give the Commonwealth too much time to reinforce. Even then, a 4:1 or a 5:1 advantage can be overcome, and a 2:1 or 3:1 is nearly an even fight considering that Britain has better technology and a larger navy to be brought to bear. The farther south they are pushed, the more the Indian army comes into range.

http://www.populstat.info/Asia/indiac.htm
http://www.wrsc.org/sites/default/files/images/2011/india_population_densities_est._1995.gif
Links I used for both.

On a side note, what would the naval disposition be of the various major combatants? (India/Japan and Great Britain/Canada/South Africa/Australia/New Zealand/Portugal et. al) There hasn't been any naval combat to prove the viability of carriers over battleships. There definitely would be a transition, but carriers might be treated more akin to floating ironclad batters of the Crimean War, slow but carrying large amount of aircraft, instead of a faster vessel to spearhead attacks. Would that come into play, and would we see latter-day battleships (successors to OTL Yamato/Lion/Montana) being built, integrating guns and armor with the missiles of the period? Just a thought, and I'm probably completely wrong.

 

[Mac Gregor]

It might be curious to see the ratio between the various allied Indian states and India proper. In OTL 1976, there were just over 613 million people. 8 million Indians, thereabout, died during the independence war. Population growth would have been near 0 for the entire length of the war as well. We might be looking at a population of around 500 million at the worst to 550 million at best.

Then there is the matter of population density. With most of people populated in OTL in Bengal and along the Himalayan rivers or the southern peninsula's western half, I'd lean heavily toward saying that majority of the population is still in the North. (which was more battle-scarred than the south) But excluding Bengal and Assam, along with the southern states, Kashmir, and Baluchistan, the ratio might dip as low as 2:1 in favor of India.

Then the question comes to the conquered territories and how many of them end up rebelling or supporting the Indian regime. I think an optimistic number might be half supporting and half against, but I wouldn't be surprised if only 10 percent support the Indians because of their aggressive methods.

I'm not sure how enthusiastic the rest of India is for this war as well. The enthusiasm will be, in the end, the key. Indian generals are already worried what will happen if they give the Commonwealth too much time to reinforce. Even then, a 4:1 or a 5:1 advantage can be overcome, and a 2:1 or 3:1 is nearly an even fight considering that Britain has better technology and a larger navy to be brought to bear. The farther south they are pushed, the more the Indian army comes into range.

http://www.populstat.info/Asia/indiac.htm
http://www.wrsc.org/sites/default/files/images/2011/india_population_densities_est._1995.gif
Links I used for both.

On a side note, what would the naval disposition be of the various major combatants? (India/Japan and Great Britain/Canada/South Africa/Australia/New Zealand/Portugal et. al) There hasn't been any naval combat to prove the viability of carriers over battleships. There definitely would be a transition, but carriers might be treated more akin to floating ironclad batters of the Crimean War, slow but carrying large amount of aircraft, instead of a faster vessel to spearhead attacks. Would that come into play, and would we see latter-day battleships (successors to OTL Yamato/Lion/Montana) being built, integrating guns and armor with the missiles of the period? Just a thought, and I'm probably completely wrong.

Hey Luminious,
.
Good points concerning the population and thanks for the links. Concerning Carriers and Battleships, most navies still use both. There are some large scale naval battles coming up which will show how important carriers have become. Cheers!

 

[Luminous]

You're welcome Mac. Just trying to help out a little. Love this timeline; it's the reason why I've stopped lurking on this website. Can't wait to see how this continue to unfolds!

 

[Mac Gregor]

Will you be able to restore the images to the earlier parts of the timeline.

No, I can't sadly.

 

[Mac Gregor]

You're welcome Mac. Just trying to help out a little. Love this timeline; it's the reason why I've stopped lurking on this website. Can't wait to see how this continue to unfolds!

Thanks. I hope to have the 1976 Presidential Election update up tomorrow evening. Cheers!

 

[Mac Gregor]

The 1976 Presidential Election​

During the early months of 1976, it was widely assumed that Sterling Gavin would easily win reelection. Gavin could point to a healthy economy, peace abroad, and success in the space race as reasons for deserving another four years in the White House. It was these reasons that kept many prominent Democrats from seeking their party’s nomination as few wanted to fight what looked like a hopeless battle against Gavin. As such the Democratic primaries were filled with relative unknowns and fringe candidates. By June, one of these unlikely candidates had pulled in front of the pack, Governor of California Margaret L. Stewart.

Margaret L. Stewart

Stewart was born Margaret Liesler Ingoldesby on December 5, 1928 to an upper middle class family in San Francisco, California. Margaret studied business at Princeton University where she would graduate near the top of her class. After returning home, Margaret was soon forced to take charge of the family’s construction business when her father died suddenly in 1957. Over the next several years, Margaret’s brilliant management saw the Stewart Construction Company grow by leaps and bounds eventually becoming a multi-million dollar enterprise. In 1964, Margaret married Jerry Stewart the son of a prominent Californian family with a long history of political involvement. A year later, Margaret gave birth to twin boys. In 1968, Margaret made national headlines when she successfully ran for governor as a political outsider for the Democratic Party. During her two terms as governor, Stewart balanced the state’s budget, overhauled the education system, and began several important infrastructure projects including the Golden Coast Express a high-speed rail line from Sacramento to San Diego. By the time she announced her candidacy for president, Stewart ranked as the most popular governor in the country.

During the primaries, Stewart was able to outfox here two chief opponents, the strictly conservative Governor of South Carolina Leonard Tranter and the doddering septuagenarian Senator from Minnesota Lucas Judd. As a political moderate, Stewart was able to bridge many of the left-right divides that separated the party, building a coalition of social and fiscal conservatives, businessmen, infrastructure supporters, and non-isolationist Democrats. On July 17, Stewart made history when she became the first woman to be nominated for president by a major party at the Democratic National Convention in Portland, Oregon. For her running mate, Stewart was paired with veteran Congressman Hudson Accardo of Florida.

The Campaign

The outbreak of the Asia-Pacific War in August radically altered the campaign. At first, it was thought that the war would help Gavin as voters would want a tested president manning the helm. However, as the country plunged into recession Gavin looked increasingly vulnerable. Stewart accused Gavin of neglecting the economy and the dangers posed by the Corporatist powers. While both candidates supported the fight against illegal drugs, Stewart maintained that Gavin’s government centric approach was wasteful and ineffective. Despite these attacks, most experts thought that Gavin would still emerge victorious. The decisive moment came during the candidates’ first televised debate where Gavin made a fatal error. Wishing to capitalize off the country’s uncertainty of electing a woman president, Gavin made several ill-advised comments hinting at Stewart’s gender. After Gavin insinuated that due to Stewart’s two young children a mother could not handle the workload that being president entailed Stewart retorted with her now famous remake “Mr. President, leave my family out of this.” At the second debate a few weeks later, Gavin fared little better coming off as out of touch and condescending.

Results
​

​

When the nation awoke the morning after Election Day, many were astonished to see that Stewart had won 50.4% of the popular vote and after Pennsylvania was finally called for the Democrats 317 electoral votes. Gavin was reported to be dumbfounded when the results were announced becoming the first sitting president to loose reelection since Vernon Kirkman in 1948. Margaret L. Stewart would soon become the 34th President of the United States. ​

Margaret L. Stewart
Democrat from California
34th President of the United States​

 

[The Uchronian]

The 1976 Presidential Elections​

During the early months of 1976, it was widely assumed that Sterling Gavin would easily win reelection. Gavin could point to a healthy economy, peace abroad, and success in the space race as reasons for deserving another four years in the White House. It was these reasons that kept many prominent Democrats from seeking their party’s nomination as few wanted to fight what looked like a hopeless battle against Gavin. As such the Democratic primaries were filled with relative unknowns and fringe candidates. By August, one of these unlikely candidates had pulled in front of the pack, Governor of California Margaret L. Stewart.
Margaret L. Stewart

Stewart was born Margaret Liesler Ingoldesby on December 5, 1928 to an upper middle class family in San Francisco, California. Margaret studied business at Princeton University where she would graduate near the top of her class. After returning home, Margaret was soon forced to take charge of the family’s construction business when her father died suddenly in 1957. Over the next several years, Margaret’s brilliant management saw the Stewart Construction Company grow by leaps and bounds eventually becoming a multi-million dollar enterprise. In 1964, Margaret married Jerry Stewart the son of a prominent Californian family with a long history of political involvement. A year later, Margaret gave birth to twin boys. In 1968, Margaret made national headlines when she successfully ran for governor for the Democratic Party as a political outsider. During her two terms as governor, Stewart balanced the state’s budget, overhauled the education system, and began several important infrastructure projects including the Golden Coast Express a high-speed rail line from Sacramento to San Diego. By the time she announced her candidacy for president, Stewart ranked as the most popular governor in the country.
During the primaries, Stewart was able to outfox here two chief opponents, the strictly conservative Governor of South Carolina Leonard Tranter and the doddering septuagenarian Senator from Minnesota Lucas Judd. As a political moderate, Stewart was able to bridge many of the left-right divides that separated the party, building a coalition of social and fiscal conservatives, businessmen, infrastructure supporters, and non-isolationist Democrats. On July 17, Stewart made history when she became the first woman to be nominated for president by a major party at the Democratic National Convention in Portland, Oregon. For her running mate, Stewart was paired with veteran Congressman Hudson Accardo of Florida.

The Campaign

The outbreak of the Asia-Pacific War in August radically altered the campaign. At first, it was thought that the war would help Gavin as voters would want a tested President manning the helm. However, as the country plunged into recession Gavin looked increasingly vulnerable. Stewart accused Gavin of neglecting the economy and the dangers posed by the Corporatist powers. While both candidates supported the fight against illegal drugs, Stewart maintained that Gavin’s government centric approach was wasteful and ineffective. Despite these attacks, most experts thought that Gavin would still emerge victorious. The decisive moment came during the candidates’ first televised debate where Gavin made a fatal error. Wishing to capitalize off the country’s uncertainty of electing a woman president, Gavin made several ill-advised comments hinting at Stewart’s gender. After Gavin insinuated that due to Stewart’s two young children a mother could not handle the workload that being president entailed Stewart retorted with her now famous remake “Mr. President, leave my family out of this.” At the second debate a few weeks later, Gavin fared little better coming off as out of touch and condescending.

Results

When the nation awoke the morning after Election Day, many were astonished to see that Stewart had won 50.4% of the popular vote and after Pennsylvania was finally called for the Democrats 317 electoral votes. Gavin was reported to be dumbfounded when the results were announced becoming the first sitting president to loose reelection since Vernon Kirkman in 1948. Margaret L. Stewart would soon become the 34th President of the United States.

​

Margaret L. Stewart​

Democrat from California​

34th President of the United States​

Nice to see a female President this early in the modern era.

P.S., what's the status of marijuana ITTL? I'm hoping the War on Drugs doesn't go to the absurd extremes it did in OTL.....

 

[FleetMac]

Wow, a female President already? Nice! I noticed she's from California, but she's not Dianne Feinstein so it's all good . Her business background and bipartisan compromising skills do manage to give me a warm'n'fuzzy, here's to a wonderful first in the White House!

 

[metastasis_d]

Outstanding election!

Looks like you're right to question about the status of drugs, if that was contentious enough to warrant mentioning in the update.

 

[ZincOxide]

Woot indeed A woman President in the 1970s

 

[Alternity9497]

Been lurking on this thread for over a month now, and I finally decided to join the party. This has to be one of the best TL's I've ever read. I was hooked from the moment I hit the first page...

And, I'm already subscribed.

 

[The Uchronian]

Been lurking on this thread for over a month now, and I finally decided to join the party. This has to be one of the best TL's I've ever read. I was hooked from the moment I hit the first page...

And, I'm already subscribed.

Welcome to AH.com.

 

[Alternity9497]

Welcome to AH.com.

Thanks....

 

[Mac Gregor]

Nice to see a female President this early in the modern era.

P.S., what's the status of marijuana ITTL? I'm hoping the War on Drugs doesn't go to the absurd extremes it did in OTL.....

Wow, a female President already? Nice! I noticed she's from California, but she's not Dianne Feinstein so it's all good . Her business background and bipartisan compromising skills do manage to give me a warm'n'fuzzy, here's to a wonderful first in the White House!

Outstanding election!

Looks like you're right to question about the status of drugs, if that was contentious enough to warrant mentioning in the update.

Woot indeed A woman President in the 1970s

Thanks guys, I'm glad you enjoyed the update.

As for marijuana, it is illegal ITTL. However as of 1976 the movement for legalization is gaining strength.

 

[Mac Gregor]

Been lurking on this thread for over a month now, and I finally decided to join the party. This has to be one of the best TL's I've ever read. I was hooked from the moment I hit the first page...

And, I'm already subscribed.

Thanks Alternity9497 and welcome! Let me know if there is something you want to see ITTL or if you have any questions. Cheers!