lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,366 
Likes: 48,838
|
Post by lordroel on Aug 24, 2024 20:06:48 GMT
Mixing Red Dawn and Tomorrow, When the War Began and we get Red Tide over Asia. In 1997 the Asian financial crisis saw a financial crisis that gripped much of East and Southeast Asia, as a result several Asian countries in 1998 formed the People's Coalition of Asian Nations (PCAN) made up of People's Republic of China, North Korea, Indonesia, Myanmar (Burma), Laos and Vietnam, by 2000 PCAN had manged to recover from the Asian financial crisis and began to put pressure on neighbor countries that had not join them, however most of those countries where backed by the United States and they refused to join them. On 24th Augusts 2001, PCAN made its move, by invading Taiwan, Singapore, Brunei, Philippines, Cambodia, Papua New Guinea, South Korea, Japan, Malaysia, Australia and the United States (state of Alaska, Washington and California), World War III had begun. OOC: lets try to keep it realistic as much as possible, if it does not work, then let me know and i close this thread and will work out a different scenario. |
|
|
|
Post by lukedalton on Aug 30, 2024 7:30:00 GMT
Well in 97 China was not the economic giant that we know today, was still in her building phase and just coming out of the diplomatic doghouse due to Tienammen and just out of the third taiwan crisis, so the creation of the Plan will create a lot of diplomatic wave, from neighbouring nation being worried from Australia to Japan and passing through the Philippines; basically investment in PRC will be very probable lower than OTL and there is the strong possibility that the Philippines decided to offer subic bay back to the US Navy even before 2000
Edit: another red flag will be Vietnam as the little love lost between her and China getting in the PLAN will be while possible well difficult causing riots and some change of government but this can be covered by a worse economic crisis that really hit hard the nation and the pro china faction is able to take power by keeping order
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,366
Likes: 48,838
|
Post by lordroel on Aug 30, 2024 8:00:01 GMT
Well in 97 China was not the economic giant that we know today, was still in her building phase and just coming out of the diplomatic doghouse due to Tienammen and just out of the third taiwan crisis, so the creation of the Plan will create a lot of diplomatic wave, from neighbouring nation being worried from Australia to Japan and passing through the Philippines; basically investment in PRC will be very probable lower than OTL and there is the strong possibility that the Philippines decided to offer subic bay back to the US Navy even before 2000 Edit: another red flag will be Vietnam as the little love lost between her and China getting in the PLAN will be while possible well difficult causing riots and some change of government but this can be covered by a worse economic crisis that really hit hard the nation and the pro china faction is able to take power by keeping order Thanks, for the respondse. |
|
|
|
Post by lukedalton on Aug 30, 2024 12:43:24 GMT
Well in 97 China was not the economic giant that we know today, was still in her building phase and just coming out of the diplomatic doghouse due to Tienammen and just out of the third taiwan crisis, so the creation of the Plan will create a lot of diplomatic wave, from neighbouring nation being worried from Australia to Japan and passing through the Philippines; basically investment in PRC will be very probable lower than OTL and there is the strong possibility that the Philippines decided to offer subic bay back to the US Navy even before 2000 Edit: another red flag will be Vietnam as the little love lost between her and China getting in the PLAN will be while possible well difficult causing riots and some change of government but this can be covered by a worse economic crisis that really hit hard the nation and the pro china faction is able to take power by keeping order Thanks, for the respondse. No problem, the premise look interesting just that if you want to keep realistic an invasion of Alaska, Washington and California is not possible due to not only the presence of the US navy but the sheer logistic strain that will cause to anyone...unless you decide to go for the original Red Dawn way so 'rule of cool' prevail (personally both way are good for me) If you want to be realistic, except from some raid on Alaska, the Hawaii are the most probable and frankly only target achievable to PLAN. Plus there is the factor of Europe, Russia and NATO, for WWIII to happen need to be distracted or at least neutral but here RL can help with the EU busy in dealing with Russia invasion of Ukraine to really give her full support to the USA in the pacific (as is not covered by the NATO treaty) |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,722
Likes: 13,115
|
Post by stevep on Aug 30, 2024 12:50:40 GMT
I agree that Vietnam would have been distinctly unlikely member of the PCAN. Also a lot might depend on how clearly and tightly China dominates/controls the smaller nations. Even NK could be an issue here given how much emphasis the Kim dynasty has on its control and independence of NK from anyone else. Just noticed Indonesia is also on the list of PCAN members and given the historical tension between Indonesia and China especially after the purges of communists - with a strong impact on the Chinese minority in the nation. It would however make a number of the other invasions far more practical given the bases that Indonesia could provide.
China was not as great a giant in the 1990's although it was making considerable progress by the end of the decade. This could be boosted by getting a larger 'internal' market if it has free access to those nations and even more so if that's reciprocated and even cheaper labour in those countries helps with a larger boom in development. However OTL also China didn't spend a lot on the military and if in this scenario its planning on military expansion it would probably have to do a lot more compared to OTL, especially in upgrading its equipment.
On the other hand ~2000 might be a decent time for such a move as Russia is feeling increasingly isolated from the west and much of the peace dividend has been spent with a significant reduction in western forces, although there could be a reaction due to developments in E Asia especially and the US with somewhat of a build-up as a result.
Also I would say that the initial 'attacks' are far too optimistic. i.e.
Actually landing forces in western US is far beyond China's capacity now let alone in ~2000. Not to mention that you could see a very quick war with a nuclear response from the US given that the Chinese 2nd strike capacity would be very weak I suspect. Similarly so many targets at the same time, especially fairly distant locations such as Papua New Guinea and Australia and probably also Japan - 1st two stated before I realised Indonesia was a PCAN member but even so that would be a stretch. Furthermore China is desperately vulnerable to the destruction of its overseas trade, especially in terms of oil but probably also a number of other factors. Also what is the status of Thailand as its not mentioned as either a PCAN member or a victim? I assume its one or another as I can't see it being able to stay outside the war. However given the power of the monarchy, as displayed in recent events I doubt it would fit easily into PCAN.
I think PCAN [i.e. China] would probably be far better off a single fairly vulnerable target, say Cambodia and seeing how many powers are willing to respond either economically or militarily. Then possibly after a pause if there's not a strong reaction before moving onto another target. Say encouraging incidents on the DMZ in Korea. Or a revival of the Confrontation between Indonesia and Malaysia - now I've noticed Indonesia is also a PCAN member. If America is willing to respond militarily who else will actually join them and those countries might then be vulnerable to 'counter-attacks' without the diplomatic costs of immediate strikes. Gradually heating up things until the US enters a conventional conflict. Then seeing where to take it from there. Trying to take over such a vast area and also attack continental US is too big a step both in terms of capacity and also the reaction to it by both the US and much of the rest of the world.
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,366
Likes: 48,838
|
Post by lordroel on Aug 30, 2024 13:13:15 GMT
Thanks for the comments, as noted by me in the first post i will close the thread if it not possible, seems it is the case.
|
|
gillan1220
Grand admiral
I've been depressed recently. Slow replies coming in the next few days.
Posts: 12,514
Likes: 11,227
|
Post by gillan1220 on Sept 1, 2024 12:38:13 GMT
OOC: This seems to be a stereotypical premise of China being the villain in 1990s technotriller. There's a similar stories released between 1997-2000, specifically Invasion by Eric L. Harry, Dragon Strike: The Millennium War* by Humphrey Hawksley, Fatal Terrain by Dale Brown, and SSBN by Tom Clancy.
*This one predicted a South China Sea War in 2001 and has somehow predicted China's expansion in the SCS by the 2010s.
Anyways going back to the discussion, China in 1997 or in this time periods could not invade Asia. I'm also wondering why the U.S. is abandoning treaty allies like Taiwan, Japan, the Philippines, South Korea, and Thailand. It's the typical "We're going back to isolationism or America First" type of trope.
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,366
Likes: 48,838
|
Post by lordroel on Sept 1, 2024 13:01:46 GMT
OOC: This seems to be a stereotypical premise of China being the villain in 1990s technotriller. There's a similar stories released between 1997-2000, specifically Invasion by Eric L. Harry, Dragon Strike: The Millennium War* by Humphrey Hawksley, Fatal Terrain by Dale Brown, and SSBN by Tom Clancy. *This one predicted a South China Sea War in 2001 and has somehow predicted China's expansion in the SCS by the 2010s. Anyways going back to the discussion, China in 1997 or in this time periods could not invade Asia. I'm also wondering why the U.S. is abandoning treaty allies like Taiwan, Japan, the Philippines, South Korea, and Thailand. It's the typical "We're going back to isolationism or America First" type of trope. Well i wonder that myself, toughed several countries banding together into PCAN could make a good base for a villain, seems there are some holes here inducing the United States suffering from the Stupid Virus i seem to have make. |
|
gillan1220
Grand admiral
I've been depressed recently. Slow replies coming in the next few days.
Posts: 12,514
Likes: 11,227
|
Post by gillan1220 on Sept 1, 2024 15:40:22 GMT
OOC: This seems to be a stereotypical premise of China being the villain in 1990s technotriller. There's a similar stories released between 1997-2000, specifically Invasion by Eric L. Harry, Dragon Strike: The Millennium War* by Humphrey Hawksley, Fatal Terrain by Dale Brown, and SSBN by Tom Clancy. *This one predicted a South China Sea War in 2001 and has somehow predicted China's expansion in the SCS by the 2010s. Anyways going back to the discussion, China in 1997 or in this time periods could not invade Asia. I'm also wondering why the U.S. is abandoning treaty allies like Taiwan, Japan, the Philippines, South Korea, and Thailand. It's the typical "We're going back to isolationism or America First" type of trope. Well i wonder that myself, toughed several countries banding together into PCAN could make a good base for a villain, seems there are some holes here inducing the United States suffering from the Stupid Virus i seem to have make. OOC: That's similar to the Greater Korean Republic from Homefront. |
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,366
Likes: 48,838
|
Post by lordroel on Sept 1, 2024 15:41:19 GMT
Well i wonder that myself, toughed several countries banding together into PCAN could make a good base for a villain, seems there are some holes here inducing the United States suffering from the Stupid Virus i seem to have make. OOC: That's similar to the Greater Korean Republic from Homefront. And Invasion by Eric L. Harry. |
|
gillan1220
Grand admiral
I've been depressed recently. Slow replies coming in the next few days.
Posts: 12,514
Likes: 11,227
|
Post by gillan1220 on Sept 1, 2024 15:59:09 GMT
OOC: That's similar to the Greater Korean Republic from Homefront. And Invasion by Eric L. Harry. OOC: There's also the Coalition of Asian States from Dragon Fury: World War Against The West. |
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,366
Likes: 48,838
|
Post by lordroel on Sept 1, 2024 16:28:20 GMT
And Invasion by Eric L. Harry. OOC: There's also the Coalition of Asian States from Dragon Fury: World War Against The West. Think we do not need to doo OOC at this point anymore. I wanted a scenario in the past so it would not be to current. |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,722
Likes: 13,115
|
Post by stevep on Sept 1, 2024 22:55:00 GMT
OOC: This seems to be a stereotypical premise of China being the villain in 1990s technotriller. There's a similar stories released between 1997-2000, specifically Invasion by Eric L. Harry, Dragon Strike: The Millennium War* by Humphrey Hawksley, Fatal Terrain by Dale Brown, and SSBN by Tom Clancy. *This one predicted a South China Sea War in 2001 and has somehow predicted China's expansion in the SCS by the 2010s. Anyways going back to the discussion, China in 1997 or in this time periods could not invade Asia. I'm also wondering why the U.S. is abandoning treaty allies like Taiwan, Japan, the Philippines, South Korea, and Thailand. It's the typical "We're going back to isolationism or America First" type of trope.
I think this was at least in part because authors of such novels needed a villain. With the collapse of the USSR and the view of Russia as a friendly nation and with Japan in economic doldrums while China was expanding rapidly economically and technologically it was probably the most obvious choice. At least if you wanted a high tech villain rather than a relative low tech one such as assorted Islamic groups or nations, or say Latino drug lords. - I remember both of those being the opponents, or partly so for Jack Ryan in some of Clancy's novels.
|
|
gillan1220
Grand admiral
I've been depressed recently. Slow replies coming in the next few days.
Posts: 12,514
Likes: 11,227
|
Post by gillan1220 on Sept 2, 2024 15:33:45 GMT
OOC: This seems to be a stereotypical premise of China being the villain in 1990s technotriller. There's a similar stories released between 1997-2000, specifically Invasion by Eric L. Harry, Dragon Strike: The Millennium War* by Humphrey Hawksley, Fatal Terrain by Dale Brown, and SSBN by Tom Clancy. *This one predicted a South China Sea War in 2001 and has somehow predicted China's expansion in the SCS by the 2010s. Anyways going back to the discussion, China in 1997 or in this time periods could not invade Asia. I'm also wondering why the U.S. is abandoning treaty allies like Taiwan, Japan, the Philippines, South Korea, and Thailand. It's the typical "We're going back to isolationism or America First" type of trope.
I think this was at least in part because authors of such novels needed a villain. With the collapse of the USSR and the view of Russia as a friendly nation and with Japan in economic doldrums while China was expanding rapidly economically and technologically it was probably the most obvious choice. At least if you wanted a high tech villain rather than a relative low tech one such as assorted Islamic groups or nations, or say Latino drug lords. - I remember both of those being the opponents, or partly so for Jack Ryan in some of Clancy's novels.
There was a brief courtship period with Russia during the Clinton and Yeltsin years. Japan's economy stagnated while Tiananmen was still fresh in people's minds so China becoming the next supervillain makes sense. Especially since the PLA had no regards for unarmed students and would use military force to maintain the CCP's hold on power. Another villain was either Saddam, Castro, or Kim Jong-il at this period, with cartoons like The Simpsons making satire out of them. Of course, 9/11 happened and the stereotypical enemies became Arabs or South Asians. |
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,366
Likes: 48,838
|
Post by lordroel on Sept 2, 2024 15:36:44 GMT
I think this was at least in part because authors of such novels needed a villain. With the collapse of the USSR and the view of Russia as a friendly nation and with Japan in economic doldrums while China was expanding rapidly economically and technologically it was probably the most obvious choice. At least if you wanted a high tech villain rather than a relative low tech one such as assorted Islamic groups or nations, or say Latino drug lords. - I remember both of those being the opponents, or partly so for Jack Ryan in some of Clancy's novels.
There was a brief courtship period with Russia during the Clinton and Yeltsin years. Japan's economy stagnated while Tiananmen was still fresh in people's minds so China becoming the next supervillain makes sense. Especially since the PLA had no regards for unarmed students and would use military force to maintain the CCP's hold on power. Another villain was either Saddam, Castro, or Kim Jong-il at this period, with cartoons like The Simpsons making satire out of them. Of course, 9/11 happened and the stereotypical enemies became Arabs or South Asians. Could make shared word thread about a 2nd Civil War due the Tiananmen crackdown, the Civil War could end up costing more lives than the 2nd Civil War and could involve more than one faction like India, North Korea and of course Taiwan. |
|
