Semi-OT: Reasons "The Man in the High Castle" couldn't happen

[jamesjohns]

Fatherland, that was it, thanks warspite1

[warspite1]

That was a gooooood book. [8D]

[pelthunter]

People speculate about Germany winning the war so much that they ignore the fact that USA is a fascist state in itself.

[warspite1]

Oh dear......

[Canoerebel]

Don't feed the troll. [:-]

[wdolson]

Please refrain from commenting on modern politics. Matrix doesn't allow it.

Thank you,
Bill

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Don't feed the troll. [:-]

warspite1

Not really feeding him - just showing disdain in a 'I can't ignore such a childish remark but I cannot be bothered to waste any time on you either - sort of way.

[CaptBeefheart]

Back to topic: "SS-GB" by Len Deighton comes to mind as a good book postulating a German Sea Lion victory.

Cheers,
CC

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Commander Cody

Back to topic: "SS-GB" by Len Deighton comes to mind as a good book postulating a German Sea Lion victory.

Cheers,
CC

warspite1

+1

Strange - I only read SS-GB a couple of years before Fatherland, but unlike the Robert Harris novel, I cannot remember a thing about it. I do know I enjoyed it at the time - as it was this that got me into other Deighton books.

I should re-visit it but there are just toooo many books out there begging to be read for the first time.

[Leandros]

ORIGINAL: warspite1]Strange - I only read SS-GB a couple of years before Fatherland, but unlike the
Robert Harris novel, I cannot remember a thing about it. I do know I enjoyed it at the time - as it was this that
got me into other Deighton books.

Could it be a case of "total denial""....[;)]...Maybe I should read it? I just bought Leo McInstry's "Operation
Sealion" (strange how dully all those books are named), but it was simply too much of the "good" so I've never finished it.
Yes, I'll give it another try.

But, please don't let this derail into another Sea Lion discussion...[:-]..

ORIGINAL: warspite1]I should re-visit it but there are just toooo many books out there begging to be read for the first time.

So true...

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: jamesjohns

Fatherland, that was it, thanks warspite1

I remember the movie of this after I read the book. I think Rutger Hauer was the lead. Don't know if it was theatrical or made-for-TV. I remember it following the book pretty closely.

[pontiouspilot]

"Fatherland"..both book and movie very good.

The premise here is far fetched. One of the great US conservative idles, (not spelled wrong), Newt, wrote 1 or 2 novels with the same premise. My recollection is that Len Deighton is a much better writer of such things!!

I wouldn't place much weight on a flock of partisans. Partisans may make an occupation painful but they would not determine the military outcome....at least not against a ruthless enemy. To think that US partisans would have been any more effective than anybody else's is the sort of myth that makes a Patrick Swayze movie and not much else.

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: pontiouspilot

"Fatherland"..both book and movie very good.

The premise here is far fetched. One of the great US conservative idles, (not spelled wrong), Newt, wrote 1 or 2 novels with the same premise. My recollection is that Len Deighton is a much better writer of such things!!

I wouldn't place much weight on a flock of partisans. Partisans may make an occupation painful but they would not determine the military outcome....at least not against a ruthless enemy. To think that US partisans would have been any more effective than anybody else's is the sort of myth that makes a Patrick Swayze movie and not much else.

We'll agree to disagree in a nation as large as the US and with a population as small as Germany's.

[warspite1]

Could it be a case of "total denial"".....[;)]..Maybe I should read it? I just bought Leo McInstry's "Operation
Sealion" (strange how dully all those books are named), but it was simply too much of the "good" so I've never finished it.
Yes, I'll give it another try.

But, please don't let this derail into another Sea Lion discussion.....[:-]

Hee hee, very good Leandros [;)]

Although this thread could – and indeed has - veered into other countries experience (UK, Japan) I have not brought up Sealion. Although two books have been mentioned that bring up a German victory in Europe, I did not bring up Sealion.

But you do bring up Sealion, and you give me the waggly finger warning me not to….

So please Leandros, no more bringing up Sealion please [:-]. Oh and please tell me why Sealion would be verboten but not The Heroes of Telemark? Jus' askin'.

I have no reason to be ‘in denial’ – I can enjoy Fatherland and SS-GB in the same way an American can enjoy TMITHC. It’s a bit of harmless fun – it does not mean the events depicted were possible.

As far as this topic is concerned, it’s a bit of a strange one that quickly went off at a tangent about partisans and stuff as if that was even relevant.

But anyway…. For the story to be true the US needs to have installed an isolationist President before the war (not impossible). Thereafter, as the Axis powers steamroller through Europe, no one in the US is clever enough to realise what Roosevelt understood all too well. But, it goes on - as the Japanese then roll up south-east Asia and then China, India, Australia, New Zealand and the Eastern Soviet Union, the US (and think of the personalities alive at that time) still buries its collective head in the sand and does nothing. As the knock-on effects of a Fascist victory starts to be felt firmly in many South American countries, the US still don’t react. Really? What has happened to the peoples of the US in this imaginary world?

Even if such a scenario was imaginable, and that involvement in overseas matters(!) is still not of interest to this strange administration (even when considering the nature of these regimes taking over the free world), is it really possible to believe that the US would not build up their own defences at least? Once the US put their mind to it, how quickly were carriers and battleships built? How quickly was the Manhattan Project brought to a successful conclusion? Even with a head start is Germany going to beat the US to the bomb?

And as for an amphibious landing? An amphibious landing! Against the US….. Er right……of course....

[bomccarthy]

Although not an account of an invasion/occupation, Philip Roth’s The Plot Against America (2004) presents an interesting alternative history based on an isolationist U.S. president. It posits Charles Lindbergh defeating FDR in the 1940 election on an isolationist platform. Lindbergh then proceeds to enter into an “accord” with the Nazi government to remain neutral, while implementing a “Jewish policy” in the U.S.

Roth tells the story from his own viewpoint as an adolescent growing up in an American Jewish family in Newark. It’s been over 10 years since I read it, so I don’t recall many of the story details, but it’s a fascinating take on the U.S. political and social environment in 1940. In the appendix, Roth provides details on his research, including Lindbergh’s personal papers (some of which Lindbergh excluded from the 1970 publication of his Wartime Journals).

[Leandros]

ORIGINAL: warspite1Hee hee, very good Leandros [;)]

Please don't overdo it now....[;)]

Oh and please tell me why Sealion would be verboten but not The Heroes of Telemark? Jus' askin'.

Gladly. It's because ******* is the mother of all derails. I simply haven't time for it, too busy "saving MaArthur"
these days. Hmm, Telemark.?...Could it be the nuclear connection?

Fred

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Leandros

Oh and please tell me why Sealion would be verboten but not The Heroes of Telemark? Jus' askin'.

Gladly. It's because ******* is the mother of all derails. I simply haven't time for it, too busy "saving MaArthur"
these days. Hmm, Telemark.?...Could it be the nuclear connection?

Fred

warspite1

Re Telemark - fair point.

Sealion - The mother of all de-rails? You clearly haven't been on this interweb thingy for very long [;)] Have you never heard of 'the 2nd Amendment', 'was Bismarck sunk or scuttled?' or 'which was better the Zero or the Sherman?' [:D]

I would have to say though that it is quite difficult to see how the Sealion operation could be brought into this discussion. Sure it was an invasion that never happened and of course, like the one in TMITHC, it was an impossible operation. But there the similarity ends and adds nothing to this discussion.

But to be clear, it was you - and only you - that brought Sealion up so there really was no need to bring up Sealion for the purposes of telling me not to bring up Sealion [:-]

[Leandros]

ORIGINAL: warspite1
Sealion - The mother of all de-rails? You clearly haven't been on this interweb thingy for very long [;)] Have you
never heard of 'the 2nd Amendment', 'was Bismarck sunk or scuttled?' or 'which was better the Zero or the
Sherman?'[:D]

Hmm...when did this interweb thingy start...?...I had my first PC in...was it 1980's something. A beautiful
machine - Dynabyte - US-made, of course. At that time everything was made in the US. The Norwegian distributor was
a friend of mine. It had the keyboard, disk drives and screen built together in a nice, "spacey"-looking cabinet.

Then came the MacIntosh Plus, a machine I acquired specifically for a magazine editor job. I hooked up a 20-inch
screen to it. Quite advanced at the time, actually, cost me a fortune! After that, back to the stone age with my
first 286-machine, MacIntosh was losing ground - too special.

No, don't think I've heard of that Bismarck problem. How could that be a discussion? If it didn't sink by enemy
action, surely a scuttling was caused by the same. I suppose there was no discussion whether Hood was sunk or
scuttled?

My reference for "mother of derails" was the TTTSNBN thread on Armchairgeneral.com. It went on for several
years with 15.000 postings. It was also very helpful for my book to put it all in perspective. A problem with all
******* discussions.

ORIGINAL: warspite1But to be clear, it was you - and only you - that brought Sealion up so there really
was no need to bring up Sealion or the purposes of telling me not to bring up Sealion [:-]

The wonderful last word. You can have it...[:)]

Fred

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Leandros

ORIGINAL: warspite1
Sealion - The mother of all de-rails? You clearly haven't been on this interweb thingy for very long [;)] Have you
never heard of 'the 2nd Amendment', 'was Bismarck sunk or scuttled?' or 'which was better the Zero or the
Sherman?'[:D]

Hmm...when did this interweb thingy start...?...I had my first PC in...was it 1980's something. A beautiful
machine - Dynabyte - US-made, of course. At that time everything was made in the US. The Norwegian distributor was
a friend of mine. It had the keyboard, disk drives and screen built together in a nice, "spacey"-looking cabinet.

Then came the MacIntosh Plus, a machine I acquired specifically for a magazine editor job. I hooked up a 20-inch
screen to it. Quite advanced at the time, actually, cost me a fortune! After that, back to the stone age with my
first 286-machine, MacIntosh was losing ground - too special.

No, don't think I've heard of that Bismarck problem. How could that be a discussion? If it didn't sink by enemy
action, surely a scuttling was caused by the same. I suppose there was no discussion whether Hood was sunk or
scuttled?

My reference for "mother of derails" was the TTTSNBN thread on Armchairgeneral.com. It went on for several
years with 15.000 postings. It was also very helpful for my book to put it all in perspective. A problem with all
******* discussions.

ORIGINAL: warspite1But to be clear, it was you - and only you - that brought Sealion up so there really
was no need to bring up Sealion or the purposes of telling me not to bring up Sealion [:-]

The wonderful last word. You can have it...[:)]

Fred

warspite1

The wonderful last word. You can have it...

Thank-you [:)]

No, don't think I've heard of that Bismarck problem. How could that be a discussion? If it didn't sink by enemy action, surely a scuttling was caused by the same.

You'd be surprised how many don't understand that concept....

I suppose there was no discussion whether Hood was sunk or scuttled?

Well no of course not. The mighty Hood was obviously scuttled [:D]

[anarchyintheuk]

Just me, but instead of surprised I'd use words like confused, stunned or appalled.