The Nucliad - A 1983 Nuclear Apocalypse timeline

[General_Urist]

Depends on where you draw the line between initial strikes and secondary strikes, but around 40 I think.

Click to shrink...

Ouch, that is a LOT. Were all of those meant to decapitate a reformed/surviving national government, or did some strike other targets? In general, how do boomer submarines get orders for these strikes? I figured high command that would normally authorize them would be dead, and international communication would be too wrecked to reliably learn "hey a new stable American government has formed in town so-and-so" just from surfacing and sniffing the airwaves.

 

[Silent Runner]

The Australian Prime Minister during the start of the war, Bob Hawke, opposed US missile testing in Australia and it seems possible that he refuses to join the war. As for New Zealand, they would have an even stronger anti-nuclear stance under Muldoon's successor. We'll just say that he gets pushback from Parliament and ends up losing power a year earlier. Although I'd have to look into it more, there will be an update on the Commonwealth as a whole at some point.

Click to shrink...

Even if Australia and New Zealand were opposed to the US stationing nukes in their territory, there were still generally anti-communist and it's unlikely that the Soviets would simply let them sit out the war unscathed.

 

[Rah!?]

Ouch, that is a LOT. Were all of those meant to decapitate a reformed/surviving national government, or did some strike other targets? In general, how do boomer submarines get orders for these strikes? I figured high command that would normally authorize them would be dead, and international communication would be too wrecked to reliably learn "hey a new stable American government has formed in town so-and-so" just from surfacing and sniffing the airwaves.

Click to shrink...

Largely though - with the exception of the Federal Government that broadcasted their location to a large area - the Soviet submarines didn't know where new state governments were headquartered, they were just guessing.

Click to shrink...

Some of the secondary strikes, especially in the first weeks, were coordinated, although those largely targetted countries that had been spared in the original attacks.

But after that it was largely guesswork, based off what major cities had survived and targets that missed/were shot down, other than the first 3 federal governments.

Even if Australia and New Zealand were opposed to the US stationing nukes in their territory, there were still generally anti-communist and it's unlikely that the Soviets would simply let them sit out the war unscathed.

Click to shrink...

The first strikes mostly targetted NATO and China, it's not worth it to target every country that might join the war immediately when some might not. So the Soviets (and Americans) held off on attacking those countries immediately to see if they would get involved or not. And it's not like Australia and New Zealand would be a major threat to the Soviets. (Pine Gap isn't that important)

It's one thing to get involved in a proxy conflict like the Vietnam war where the effects on the country were minimal, its something else entirely to get involved in a nuclear war that would devastate the country.

So Australia and New Zealand declared neutrality.

 

[Rah!?]

So I had a realization that a lot of Mexican migrant workers would likely end up in an powerful position in a lot of the U.S, since they make up the main labour force in farming and generally have experience with working with agriculture.

And I realized that poorer communities would adapt better to the apocalypse since its less of a change in quality of life.

Now most of they time they didnt own the farms but I imagine governments wanting to more control over agriculture would ally with the farm workers against the land owners.

I also found out there was pretty notable labour movements with farm workers at the time, especially in California.

While the region had been quite Republican pre-war the political parties had shifted a lot in the past few years even if they kept their names.

Click to shrink...

Given that, I think I will have to retcon the California election, as the rural farmer vote would be pretty different.