Starting in January 1, 1900. Your mission is to create the absolute most numbers of great/super powers possible. You can use any means (outside of asb intervention) to succeed.
Last edited by a moderator:
So, basically, avoid the World Wars, and stabilize China...That said, our empires will all need reform of some kind....The Gunslinger said:Starting in January 1, 1900. Your mission is to create the absolute most numbers of great/super powers possible. You can use any eans (outside of asb intervention) to succeed.
Now, give them all nukesElidor said:Well, if the central powers win WWI, without seriously hurting the entente, then we could possibly have 8 powers: USA, British Empire, Germany, Austria-Hungary, Russia, French Empire, Ottoman Empire and Japanese Empire.
Maybe, a regional power will rise in South America, too... Brazil, perhaps, and maybe also China as a competion to Japan (propped up the anti-Japanese powers)
whew... 10 powers
Or, we get an "Indo-Aryan" Union between India and PersiaElidor said:Iraq was pretty much an artificial state created by the Allies after WWI, so basically, we can have Suuni parts of Iraq joing Syria, Levant States and Eqypt while the Shi'ite part joins Persia. A Pan Turkic state will be more stable than the old ottoman empire, so yes, your idea works.
What of India? If it seceeds after WWI... it could rise as a power, too. 13?
And to me clear, I was not including in that Central Asia, but that might have the potential to be a powerful state in its own respect...Imajin said:I don't see why you assume a Pan-Turkic state would be more stable- I'd say it'd be less so.
Reminds of a timeline I'm going to write one of these daysImajin said:The Ottoman Empire never had any huge problems in the Arab Provinces, though. The Arab Revolt by the British in WW1 was really a dismal failure, but was expanded for propagandistic purposes... I'd say that if the Ottomans won WW1, they'd have no problems holding on to Mesopotamia.
Imajin said:I don't see why you assume a Pan-Turkic state would be more stable- I'd say it'd be less so.
I admit to not knowing much about the various Turkish ethnicities, but consider all the problems a, for example, Pan-Slavic or even Pan-Scandinavian state would have... would ethnically Turkish groups like the Uzbeks or Kazakhs really want to be under the control of far-off Istanbul?Elidor said:Well nationalism was pretty strong among the Turks, and they even tried to publicize an artificial language or "standardized" turk for this purpose. Anyway, to many Turks, union with other Turkic people would have made them more "European" than holding a great multiethnic empire as an oriental despot would.
In my conception for this thread, I merely meant Azeris, Dagestanis, and others, some nonturkic, in Transcaucasia....Imajin said:I admit to not knowing much about the various Turkish ethnicities, but consider all the problems a, for example, Pan-Slavic or even Pan-Scandinavian state would have... would ethnically Turkish groups like the Uzbeks or Kazakhs really want to be under the control of far-off Istanbul?
Imajin said:I admit to not knowing much about the various Turkish ethnicities, but consider all the problems a, for example, Pan-Slavic or even Pan-Scandinavian state would have... would ethnically Turkish groups like the Uzbeks or Kazakhs really want to be under the control of far-off Istanbul?
Possibly a democratic "Drakeia"?Wendell said:Maybe a power could emerge in non-Arab Africa?
I was thinkig Ethiopia, or a Greater Rhodesia.luakel said:Possibly a democratic "Drakeia"?