"Extending the Tuffleyverse history 2049 - 2072" Topic

link timeline in question.

link full timeline.

I'm planning to expand the timeline for this period (i'm planning on picking up some modern QRF/Peter Pig americans to represent the various National Guard State Armies) any suggestion for factions, one i'm planning is the Republic of Texas, which would later be reformed into the Free CalTex. The Hawaiian Free State could be another (providing a haven for the US Pacfic Fleet), Alaska might become a safe haven from the fighting with refugees fleeing into Canada and being transported through to Alaska.

Title should have been expanding, DOH!!!

The whole "US collapses and joins the British Commonwealth" scenario is about as silly as it gets, but assuming we accept it as written there are a few things to think about.

Firstly, the "pacification" of the former US by an self-declared, unelected military government allied with interventionist UK/Canadian forces should leave the fledgling NAC bogged down in a guerilla war on American soil for decades. Jon doesn't say anything about that happening though, so you need to explain why it didn't. Possibilities include:

1) The US armed forces have become utterly dominated by a cult of personality revolving around this Parham clown, perhaps in reaction to inept civilian politicians mishandling a series of wars earlier in the 21st century. This is almost mandatory if we're supposed to believe that any US General could get away with declaring himself a de facto President.

2) In the decades leading up to 2049, increasing civil unrest wracks the country as the economy worsens and scandals involving both major political parties are revealed. The Feds respond with totally over-the-top "anti-terrorism" measures that are actually aimed at controlling an unruly population. Citizen rights to privacy, fair trial, and ownership of firearms are greatly curtailed, and channels of communication are extensively monitored for treasonous activity. Leaders who oppose these measures are jailed for "supporting terrorism" and similar charges. This will leave potential resistance to Parham's coup in a much weaker position initially, as well as putting a "secret police" infrastructure in place to assist in locating and disabling guerilla activity.

3) Some new technologies to further assist the British conquest can be assumed to be in place. It's not implausible that the US public might willing adopt a nationwide system of implanted "security chips" or other ID measures, perhaps aimed at identifying legal versus non-legal citizenry. Widespread DNA "fingerprinting" of citizens is another possibility, and might be sold to the public as part of a progressive health care program. Both would obviously be useful in tracking dissenters and rebels.

I think with the three of those in place the UK just might be able to put a military dictatorship in charge of the country, and then quietly usurp power from Parham by either bribery, blackmial or threats. Heck, you might even be able to replace Parham with a double or somesuch.

I'm not sure it's all that silly, more powerful countries/empire than the USA have collapsed in the past..but since i'm working from the basic set up of the Tuffleyverse history I can't really change that.

Maybe it's not just the President who's assassinated (the details are very sketchy), add in the loss of most of the political leaders of both parties (terrorist attack on the Capitol maybe) and the Packman (Chief of Staff?) attempts to hold the shaken USA together. Packman declaration of a military government might be mean't to be a temporary measure that is blocked by individual State Governors attempting to claim power.

There is nothing to suggest that Packman is trying to set up a military dictatorship (under UK control), after all he goes to the UN first and is rebuffed. I assume over the following year the civil war (with various factions battling for control) breaks out and then Packman goes to the UK and Canada (seperate countries at this point and the USA strongest allies) for aid. There are probably UK and Canadian troops guarding the northern border and Mexicans guarding the southern border at this point, and the UK/Canadian plus US troops recalled from overseas would be brought into to aid the offical US government (legal or not).

Your assumption is that the mass population of americans (after suffering through a year of bloody civil war including the use of nukes) would see the formation of the three seperate countries into one stable super state as a bad thing.

I assume any population that could would be fleeing into Canada and Mexico during the first year of the civil war and most of the troops being used to support Packman would either be overseas American Forces or American units raised by the UK/Canadian Governments.

There might be a demand for this after all:

TMP link

CC

Which brings us to my second point, one I've mentioned elsewhere. Assuming that, miraculously, the UK manages a de facto takeover without triggering a mass uprising, there are still going to be a lot of very, very unhappy people when the Constitution is overthrown. Harsh security measures may keep them from active rebellion in-country, but an awful lot of them are likely to pack up and leave for someplace more hospitable. The AC doesn't have much reason to keep them from going, either, since just shooting them outright is a little risky.

Conveniently, the timeline gives us an obvious spot for many of those expatriates to go. By 2057, the League of Latin American Republics has declared war on the AC over parts of the former USA. Is that a coincidence, or a result of bribes from exiled US millionaires with intersts in those border states? Regardless, the LLAR's public hostility towards the AC will make it a very popular destination for former US citizens who still hope to re-establish the Union. Expatriate communities will burgeon throughout South America, and they'll bring economic pressure to bear on their new hosts to support their goals.

In the long run, this is a disaster for the LLAR, pure and simple. They lose all their territory to on Earth to the NAC over the course of several wars, and wind up as a minor colonial power. But in this time period, you could milk all this for some interesting fights.

Consider, the 2050's version of the LLAR military is fresh, and apparently (now that South and Central America are a unified government) has no major internal pressures. The former US military has just been through a civil war, and the AC has just helped them conquer a continent. In addition, no matter how draconian "Homeland Security" is, there are still going to be ongoing concerns about local uprising in North America…*and* the US economy had crashed less than a decade before, which means money and resources are tight, and chunks of the military must be tied up on humanitarian relief.

The AC forces would have an edge in experience and quality of equipment. The LLAR would likely have better morale initially, and probably a quantitative advantage, at least initially. Either force could easily find themselves fighting "irregulars" composed of former US citizens, since many folks won't be any happier to see Mexicans invading than they were to see the British.

There probably would be a hard core of Republicans unwilling to allow the UK/Canadian/United States Alliance at any price, but I assume that they would be divided amongst the various factions and that the later creation of the Free CalTex is allowed (in part) by the NAC because it allows that hard core a state outside the of the NAC's control.

It also isn't the Uk taking control of the USA as such, it's UK and Canada in a peace keeping role, finding a nuked/devastated USA (with most of the Northern USA civilian population probably in Canada at this point) unable to function.

I'm not sure it's all that silly, more powerful countries/empire than the USA have collapsed in the past

There haven't *been* any more more powerful countries, in terms of ability to destroy all life on the planet in a death spasm. At best, the USSR and PRC are equals. No pre-atomic civilization really matters by today's standards of power.

Regardless, the silly part is the idea of the UK being in any kind of shape to dominate a continent even with Canadian assistance (remember Australia is going OU, and won't be playing in this war). The manpower just isn't there, and if the US economy has crashed, the UK and Europe aren't going to be healthy either.

I also think Jon's predictions on our collapse are set about 30 years late, but that's another issue. :)

I don't see the UK as politically dominating the AC and then the NAC, I see the UK Military forming the basis of the NAC military as it's the most intact at the formation of the AC.

The Monarchy card is played as a means to rally the intact countries of the UK and Canada into a state that can dominate the continent, I'd expect that the AC and then NAC Goverment would be hybrid of the three political systems.

Most of the manpower probably would be Americans supporting the Canadian/UK forces.

There is nothing to suggest that Packman is trying to set up a military dictatorship

Parham. His name is Parham. If you're going to be an apologist for him, at least get his name right.

Take a look at how Presidential power transfers in the event of death. The process is elaborate, and very strict about who's next in line. You could pack all of Congress into the White House alongside the Prez and VP and one bomb still doesn't decapitate us. Generals don't *ever* get to "declare the formation of a military government" under the Constitution, and that's what he did. Which makes it a coup, and asking the UN for help doesn't make it any better.

You aren't, by any chance, a collaborator, are you? Anglophile is a dirty word to a true patriot in 2050. :)

A lot off early action's could be other states crossing into the US Civil war to take out/capture the nukes in air raids/commando raids.

Oh, and note that the formation of the NAC in 2057 coincides with the LLAR's declaration of war. More support for my contention that US expats were influencing League political decisions…or did the League just see a window of opportunity to claim territory ethnically "theirs" closing, and struck while they could?

First i'm a Brit, second your right it is Parham (I don't feel the need to apologise for a fictional charachter), third lets say Washington DC a crater at this point would most people really care who's in control at that point, Fourth calm down.

A lot off early action's could be other states crossing into the US Civil war to take out/capture the nukes in air raids/commando raids.

Yep, lots of small unit stuff early on, as Parham and his competition (the State governments? the legitimate Federal government forces?) scramble to secure the nukes.

Later on, well, Iraq today is a good example. Street fighting, security sweeps, ambushes, assassinations. Not pleasant.

I'm playing with the idea that the 'assassination' might be a Nutty State Governor using state troops to seize a nuclear silo and launch a nuke at the captial.

First i'm a Brit, second your right it is Parham (I don't feel the need to apologise for a fictional charachter), third lets say Washington DC a crater at this point would most people really care who's in control at that point, Fourth calm down.

My apologies if I've offended, but I *was* joking…or at least speaking in character for, say, a Big Oil executive expat sitting in my mansion somewhere in South America and plotting to use the League's military to take "my" oilfields back from Parham and his foreign allies.

OTOH, either Jon's understanding of Presidential succession is flawed, or he really is trying to cast the man as a traitor of the worst type. You don't (or at least shouldn't) get to be a General without knowing those rules, and the thought of any military figure declaring himself to be in charge of the country is…well, it's a hot-button topic for me. And hopefully for most US citizens.

One thing I like about the Tuffleyverse is there are no real good guys, Parham might be a traitor (from a US point of view), but it seems he is just trying to save his country as it collapses around him.

Oh, and no offense taken, I knew from previous tuffleyverse topics how you feel about this, if I was writing this verse from scratch i'd probably have the UK joining the US and Canada rather than the way Jon wrote it..

I'm playing with the idea that the 'assassination' might be a Nutty State Governor using state troops to seize a nuclear silo and launch a nuke at the captial.

But you're hamstrung by the timeline. It says "President Amy Koslowski is assassinated in the bombing of the White House" not "Washington DC is was reduced to ashes" there. Doesn't even say the VP bought it, which is part of why the Parham thing bugs me so much.

That doesn't rule out a Nutty State Governor trying to grab a silo and *failing* and then getting the Prez with a conventional explosive he had in place as a backup plan, of course. I rather like that idea.

That would be a pretty darn Nutty State Governor, though, and the National Guard units that took his orders would have to be borderline insane too. May I nominate Texas for this scenario? They're touchy about states' rights in general, and with a real lunatic at the helm I suppose they might have some seccession scheme in place that would make nuking the capitol vaguely plausible to the citizenry.

But I like the nuke idea, maybe I can ask Jon If I can offically rewrite that bit.

Republic of Texas perhaps, most of whose forces join the LLAR once the civil war ends and trigger the next war.

The Hawaiian Free State could be another (providing a haven for the US Pacfic Fleet

I like that idea a lot, especially if it leaves the Pacific Fleet permanently out of AC/NAC hands. With a big chunk of the fleet gone (and maybe a lot of the rest downsized into oblivion by budget cutbacks), the LLAR is much less vulnerable to seaborne invasion in the time period we're talking about. That makes the multiple NAC/LLAR land wars more plausible, since there's less possibility of the NAC somehow decapitating the League government (wherever it is…Brazil? Argentina?).

Of course maintaining the fleet in the long term is probably beyond Hawaii's means, especially with tourism disrupted. Be interesting to see how they'd handle it.

Can't mothball everything, you need it for security, especially with the Indonesian Commonwealth getting all expansionist.

The OU might be willing to buy some of the ships outright. Same for Japan.

Or you could be really silly, and have the Hawaiian Free State Mercenary Fleet. Best of all worlds, you get to keep some ships around for defense at all times and the bidding between the OU, IC, Japan and maybe even the LLAR will keep your rates up. :)

I assume the UK jumps into help and as usual find it's self up to its neck, rather than a deliberate plan to take over the US…Parham of course shouldn't be trying to take over if there is a existing line of succession ready to take over, so there has to be a reason Parham's able to rally enough support to hold off the State forces.

May I nominate Texas for this scenario?

Mind you, I live in New York, so I may be biased here… :)

reading the timeline – who are the ESU – I couldn't find a reference to them other than as the ESU

Ok, found them – for some reason I couldn't delete my post?

I do like the space map of new Israel – shades of Masters of Orion there? :-)

ESU = Commies in Space! :)

Note that we're only seven years from Spain invading Gibraltar, nine years from Russia returning to Tsarist rule, and a mere two decades from the destruction of the state of Israel. I'm guessing Jon's got at least one of those is a little early…

The idea that Texas would ally itself with California is unpalitable at best…..

Actually, New York became a UN protectorate during the unrest and collapse of the US; peackeepers form around the world were brought in to keep the city functioning and safe from outside influence. Many of the corporations based there became firm supporters of the UN due to recieving this physiacl protection and threfore surviiving intact, and eventually this support became finacial and technical in nature, leading to the UN as it stands in 2135 – A political force with its own independent armed forces, and two colony worlds for refugee and displaced persons from other conflicts.

Just stirring the pot. :)

UN PROPAGANDA!!!, what ever Parham's faults, he went to the UN for aid in the first year of the war and was rebuffed. It was Parham's forces that held the eastern seaboard for a year before the allies arived to aid their brave american allies against the forces of disorder.

Oh and rereading the timeline it says 'The US economy collapses, followed by the Federal Government as President Amy Koslowski is assassinated in the bombing of the White House. General Parham declares the creation of a military government. Many states ignore the military proclamation, violently opposing the armed forces attempts to assume control.'

It doesn't say what sort of bomb, so 'The US economy collapses, followed by the Federal Government as President Amy Koslowski is assassinated in the nuclear bombing of the White House. General Parham declares the creation of a military government. Many states ignore the military proclamation, violently opposing the armed forces attempts to assume control.'

Lets say that President Amy Koslowski following the collapse of the US economy, declares marshall law and appoints Parham her VP (putting him in the position of being the legal president when Koslowski is wacked), then the goverment itself collapses and then Parham tries to set a 'Military Government' like the US set up in aftermath of WW2 in many countries.

Um, guys, the timeline us whacked in soooo many ways that it's totally irrelevant except to the game having a 'fluff' so just write your own and be non-canonical… <grin>

Gracias,

Glenn

Lets say that President Amy Koslowski following the collapse of the US economy, declares marshall law

That's "martial" there. The other spelling(s) are all sorts of things, one of which is a heavy metal band from Birmingham:

link

and appoints Parham her VP (putting him in the position of being the legal president when Koslowski is wacked), then the goverment itself collapses and then Parham tries to set a 'Military Government' like the US set up in aftermath of WW2 in many countries.

Under the Constitution (and the 25th ammendment, in particular) the elected VP would have to have resigned from office or died, and both houses of Congress would have to approve such a nomination for it to be legal. If this had happened, Parham wouldn't have needed to declare a "military government" (an oxymoron in Constitutional terms in the US) and would have been foolish to do so, since it would invalidate his legitimate claim to the office of the President.

One possibility suggests itself: The elected VP resigned from office (or suicided?) in response to the economic collapse and ensuing civil unrest. General Parham might have been nominated for VP by Koslowski (probably with the understanding that he would resign his commission when confirmed) but Congress hadn't completed the approval process before the assassination. This *might* lead to the "military government" declaration by Parham, who could regard himself as the heir apparent in this case. It still wouldn't be legal though, since he hadn't been confirmed by Congress, and the former Speaker of the House would be the next legitimate President.

Parham's decision is slightly more credible if we assume a nuke in Washington (which I still think is a stretch), but there are rules to prevent all the Presidential successors from all being together at once. In time of crisis (ie widespread civil disorder) those rules would be more likely to be enforced, not less. It's pretty implausible that the whole list here:

link

would ever be in a spot where all of them could be killed by a single bomb, atomic or otherwise.

Mind you, if all but the one "out of town" person on that list bought the farm alongside Koslowski, Parham might find it very simple to kill, imprison, or just refuse to obey the sole survivor. That would be illegal too, of course, since whoever it was would legally be his Commander-in-Chief at that point. But really, if some no-name Secretary of Agriculture suddenly became President, there might very well be some ambitious military types (or state governors) willing to contest the throne, as it were.

Um, guys, the timeline us whacked in soooo many ways that it's totally irrelevant except to the game having a 'fluff' so just write your own and be non-canonical…

But trying to justify Jon's insane timeline is so much fun… :)

Until Jon decided to make the (former) US part of the UK it was actually kind of interesting.

And no, the White House was not nuclear bombed. Praetor's addition of that word completely changes the meaning of that paragraph. Conventional bombings happen all the time, but they're not labeled as such; it's unspoken, but still understood to mean that they're conventional. And that's exactly what happened to Koslowski.

Yeah, martial law ;-) never a good idea to type stuff of a evening while relaxing (different time zone to you).

General Parham might be a retired general (and a member of the President's party) given the job after a scandal featuring the VP, wasn't there a Tom Clancy novel where the main character gets the VP job because of a scandal around the VP and then the Capitol building gets destroyed leaving him the unelected president.

Just had a thought, what if the bomb was planted by the VP does he/she still get to be president or is that a no no.

The collapse of federal goverment might mean Parham can't set up a civilian government and has to use the military (hence Military Goverment) to establish control with fighting going on between the different states across the US.

Of course Parham could just be a rogue ed of General sick of politicians who by this time have ran the US into the ground and setting himself up a president for life, but how then does he get enough support to hold his own for a year before the UK/Canadian forces arrive.

Works well in the 3rd world…

If the VP commits a criminal, murderous act in order to gain power, and its known by others (as your question implies), do you think he'd get to stay in power?

Other VPs have become President because of the untimely death of the Pres, but Gerald Ford was the only one unelected at any level (he became VP after Agnew resigned in 1973). Note he still had to be confirmed as VP; he was just appointed and that's that.

And there's simply no way Parham would be able to set up a military government. The vast majority of soldiers would turn on him if he tried, and that's assuming he could even get to that point. As soon as any of the Joint Chiefs figured out what he was on about, they'd have him removed (military colleagues) or Removed (NSA).

This is the problem with foreigners writing future histories, y'all just understand the way things are done here and keep looking for froggy ways to do things.

It takes a whole lot more than an assassination to cause the Federal gov't to collapse (as illustrated by the four occasions a sitting US President has been assassinated). I'd wager that most States would welcome the Executive and Legislative branches taking a lesser role in day to day governing and would be quite content to fight their battles in the Courts. I see no reason why the States would resort to physical violence. Indeed, I see no way they could. The Guard and Reserve units would basically refuse, the police don't have the training and there are so very, very people that refer to themselves as citizens of a particular State that there's no State-level nationalism to stoke the fire.

I just don't see Jon's time-line being even remotely plausible for anything regarding the US.

(2049)
The US economy collapses, followed by the Federal Government as President Amy Koslowski is assassinated in the bombing of the White House. General Parham declares the creation of a military government. Many states ignore the military proclamation, violently opposing the armed forces attempts to assume control.

-As far as I can tell General Parham did not gain control of the majority of the U.s. Maybe he only got control of the Northeastern U.S.

(2050)
Parham requests UN military involvement to restore order in the US. The request is refused. The military government turns towards Britain and Canada for help. The "Pacification" of the former USA begins.

-This just says the "Pacification" begins. I'm betting that this was overblown in old news reports, and I'm also betting that the majority of the U.S. was not under the General's control.

(2057)
Britain, Canada and the United States unite under the Crown and create the Anglian Confederation. Admiral Dewsbury is appointed Lord Governor of the territory previously known as the United States of America. In the confusion of the end of the 2nd Civil War, the LLAR declares that the AC has no mandate to rule over the ex-Hispano-US peoples and decrees California, New Mexico and Texas as LLAR territory under foreign occupation and launches an invasion of these areas. The fifteen year War of the Americas starts.

-So apparantly it's now 7-8 years later and the AC is "claiming" that the U.S. in under control of the Crown. It makes me wonder where this news story originates from. If the AC had control of the U.s., why weren't they able to stop the LLAR from annexing the South Western U.S.?

(2049)
The US economy collapses, followed by the Federal Government as President Amy Koslowski is assassinated in the bombing of the White House. General Parham declares the creation of a military government. Many states ignore the military proclamation, violently opposing the armed forces attempts to assume control.

'-As far as I can tell General Parham did not gain control of the majority of the U.s. Maybe he only got control of the Northeastern U.S.'

Probably right I assume Parham's reinforced by US troops from overseas and is able to take and hold some of the eastern seaboard.

(2050)
Parham requests UN military involvement to restore order in the US. The request is refused. The military government turns towards Britain and Canada for help. The "Pacification" of the former USA begins.

'-This just says the "Pacification" begins. I'm betting that this was overblown in old news reports, and I'm also betting that the majority of the U.S. was not under the General's control.'

The timeline isn't really written from any factions point of view so it probably means what it says. UK/Canadian forces offically join up with Parham's troops, althrough they would probably have been active inside the US for the last year.

(2057)
Britain, Canada and the United States unite under the Crown and create the Anglian Confederation. Admiral Dewsbury is appointed Lord Governor of the territory previously known as the United States of America. In the confusion of the end of the 2nd Civil War, the LLAR declares that the AC has no mandate to rule over the ex-Hispano-US peoples and decrees California, New Mexico and Texas as LLAR territory under foreign occupation and launches an invasion of these areas. The fifteen year War of the Americas starts.

-So apparantly it's now 7-8 years later and the AC is "claiming" that the U.S. in under control of the Crown. It makes me wonder where this news story originates from. If the AC had control of the U.s., why weren't they able to stop the LLAR from annexing the South Western U.S.?

The AC is a democracy so once formed, the majority of the AC/NAC are probably ex-americans citzens, 8 years of war binding the three nations together? I assume the South Americans have been supplying the rebel factions through this time and then declare war in an attempt to seize the Hispanic areas under AC control. The AC is able to stop the LLAR annexing the South Western US and then begins a drive south threw the rest of LLAR territory.

2072

The LLAR sues for peace in the War of the Americas and cedes all territories in North and Central America to the Anglian Confederation. The LLAR looks to space as a means of expansion.

15 years to conquer central and southern america so completely that there is never a word of trouble from the area again, at the same time as rebuilding it's main population centre on earth and beginning the building of the largest spacefleet in Human space, Not that bad considering.

I also assume at first its Parham Vs the Various State Factions (who are also fighting each other) and then as the UK/Canadian/Parham's forces begin to pacify the states one at a time, the Central/South Americans begin supporting the rebel states covertly (supplies) and then militarily.

Just had a thought, what if the bomb was planted by the VP does he/she still get to be president or is that a no no.

'If the VP commits a criminal, murderous act in order to gain power, and its known by others (as your question implies), do you think he'd get to stay in power?'

I think that should pretty obviously be seen as a joke.

'And there's simply no way Parham would be able to set up a military government. The vast majority of soldiers would turn on him if he tried, and that's assuming he could even get to that point. As soon as any of the Joint Chiefs figured out what he was on about, they'd have him removed (military colleagues) or Removed (NSA).'

Probably true, but as i've said I didn't write the timeline, I assume the collapse of the economy and government was a long drawn out process, with the last President holding on threw martial law (not Marshall law) and as such the US Military/National Guard is active on the streets of the US for some time (more than long enough for the US military to get used to the idea of being in control), once the Federal Government collapses, there is no offical in charge except for Parham (assuming he is the most senior military officer) or the various generals in charge of the state militias.

And there's simply no way Parham would be able to set up a military government. The vast majority of soldiers would turn on him if he tried, and that's assuming he could even get to that point. As soon as any of the Joint Chiefs figured out what he was on about, they'd have him removed (military colleagues) or Removed (NSA).

Playing Devil's advocate here: That's true today (I hope), but in forty years, a lot could change. It's not too hard to envision a near-future military that's become fed up with the politicos and started to think they can do a better job. Maybe there was a war (or a string of wars) where the military could have won, but was hamstrung by Washington. Maybe Parham made his name by managing to win one despite that, maybe through luck, maybe through skill. It would need to be a widespread (nearly universal) corruption of the system, and it might need a cult of personality around Parham as well, but it's barely plausible.

The civilian government would have to be screwing up big time for years for that to happen, but…well, the real 21st century is making a fair start on it so far. In Tuffley's timeline our economy has "collapsed" which I assume means something as traumatic as the 1929 stock market failure. Combine that with some other political idiocy (mistreatment of vets? State versus federal rights issues? an unpopular new ammendment?) and the armed forces might finally be fed up enough to support a Parham.

I see no reason why the States would resort to physical violence. Indeed, I see no way they could. The Guard and Reserve units would basically refuse, the police don't have the training and there are so very, very people that refer to themselves as citizens of a particular State that there's no State-level nationalism to stoke the fire.

Ah, but the Tuffleyverse Parham *did* declare a military government, and that *would* trigger resistance from the States (and hopefully the citizenry in general) if it looked like the military was going along with it. It might not be very strong resistance, but there'd be something. I like my scenario from a few posts back (Parham as VP designate, but unconfirmed, assassination leaves an inept or corrupt secretary as legitimate Prez, maybe in Parham's reach) for explaining this. It still assumes a really corrupted or insular version of today's armed forces for it to happen in the first place, but that's not quite inconceivable.

If it couldn't happen, there wouldn't be so much emphasis on making sure that it doesn't, after all. A generation of sloppy indoctrination of new recruits, hard wars, and political mistreatment of the military class just might do the job.

Heh. For real fun, add a conspiracy theory twist and have Parham turn out to be a British version of the "Manchurian candidate" meme, one that succeeded beyond their wildest dreams.

I just don't see Jon's time-line being even remotely plausible for anything regarding the US.

Sure, it's just plain silly. That's the fun of it. As absurd as the NAC is, does the ESU strike you as any more likely? Or the UN as an independent military power?

Or a united Africa, Or the LLAR for another, or any other main factions…it's fun isn't it.

How about the make up of the states, i'm thinking the Republic of Texas (annexing California and New Mexico) supported through Mexico. The Hawaiian Free State (with the Pacfic Fleet), the Peoples Repubic of Alaska? getting support from the chinese.