StarDestroyer.Net BBS

MKSheppard wrote:I noticed that if you read some TBOverse stories, then plotted 'role Demons play in story', and 'amount story sucks' on a GRAEPH they'd be in synch pretty much.

His stories set in WW2-proper feel much tighter and realistic to me (closer to the point of divergence?) and they don't have demons quite as prominent.

Stuart used to talk a lot about how you should think the ramifications of something through as you're plotting it out, which is why it's so frustrating to read later TBOverse -- he stopped following his own advice.

Give you an example:

How can someone born in 342 BC effectively integrate an understanding of a battle in which the units move at five miles a minute (300 MPH cruising speed), much less a half a mile each second (1,720 knot cruising speed of a B-70A)?

By the Napoleonic era, their understanding of military strategy would be fracturing and not working so well, but they would still be very good at working the political machinery in the background.

Backstabbing and political manouvering doesn't change that much over the years; it just mutates to text messages via crackberries versus secret messages bound under seal.

Even then...by the 1920s, they'd be starting to get a bit out of their depth; since by then the modern media landscape is forming; meaning scandals can explode *nationwide* in the space of less than 24 hours (e.g. LINDBERGH BABY KIDNAPPED, etc).

They'd have *some* experience with fast moving political backstabbing, but it'd be limited to a very concentrated area, like say Paris itself during say Richelieu.

They'd meet their match in Howard Hughes, I daresay; given that Hughes was insane enough and rich enough to fund a near full time operations center to keep on top of things and quickly provide hush money whenever the Hughes empire was threatened.

It's why I feel sticking them in the budget office works the best. Things always move slowly with the budget, even with computers.

MKSheppard wrote:
More seriously, why is Carter even in politics? He left the Navy only because his father died IIRC and he had to go put the family affairs in order, and this in turn led him into politics.

With all the butterfly flapping, it's more plausible that Jimmy Crater never leaves the Navy, and rises to become ADMIRAL James Earle Carter, Jr; Chief of Naval Operations 1 July 1970 to 1 July 1974 instead of Elmo Zumwalt. The Senior Chief can now rant about that damn Carter

Then Bart Blade could've written about how Carter's PT boat gets hit by a turban-shaped sea mine off the Gulf of Aden or something, and then he gets devoured by Mohammedian sharks or something. Hah.

Demons? Wait, wha..?

From what I understand (I'm lucky not to have read those books), they're immortal humans that he threw in for some reason I can't possibly understand (same as the talking bombers). On another note, if this dreck can get published I certainly think my own stuff can be, so it's kinda hopeful in that respect.

Lord_Of_Change 9 wrote: On another note, if this dreck can get published I certainly think my own stuff can be, so it's kinda hopeful in that respect.

It's self-published, so it doesn't matter how terrible it is. I could self-publish a book that was nothing but the words "In 1908, W. H. Taft was elected President", repeated over five hundred pages.

DO IT

LoC9: Oh, but it's not published. At least not in the traditional sense. He is going through lulu.com - a Print-on-Demand service pretending to be a publisher. Basicly, he is paying Lulu to offer his books on Amazon. When someone orders one of them, Lulu prints and ships it. Its a pretty cheap and easy way to get your manuscript turned into a book; more and more writers are doing it.
If you want to self-publish your work, you should be thinking about eBooks first. While POD offers a higher profit-margin, sales aren't going to be that high in the first place. And once you feel confident enough to do make the extra investment in time and money, go through CreateSpace.

Although I haven’t fully read Stuart’s fan fiction, in his more popular Hell Legions vs. Earth fan fiction I gather that he already got into the bad habit of making the straw-man baddies both counter intuitively strong and weak, depending on what the plot demands. Hell’s demons have the supernatural power to enter our reality then get curb stomped with contemptuous ease by the US Military, Hell’s demons have the supernatural power to project false images into people’s heads but then get stopped by tinfoil hats, etc.

Talking bombers?

Frank Hipper wrote:Talking bombers?

Crusade p. 44 wrote:And also tell me more about the relations with your aircraft? I would like to know more about you and your Marisol, she is very beautiful indeed.”

Why thank you Miss Loren.” Marisol’s voice came out of the intercome speakers on either side of the seat.
Sophia Loren’s eyes went wide and danced with incredulous delight. Kozlowski and his crew raised eyebrows-for Marisol to speak to somebody outside their tight little circle was unique, unheard of.

Talking bombers.

Lord_Of_Change 9 wrote:From what I understand (I'm lucky not to have read those books), they're immortal humans that he threw in for some reason I can't possibly understand (same as the talking bombers).

IIRC, he introduced the "demons" as a way to steer policy (via immortal bureaucrats, more or less) and keep character continuity. They were not originally planned. Talking bombers is sort of an extension of how some people think that their vehicles or machines "speak" to them, with a dash of animism thrown in.

Coiler wrote:I’ll take advantage of this scene to say that having OTL designs, even never-built ones, is just another example of the lack of butterflies in TBO. It’s either OTL designs or butterfly wings that only flap towards never-built OTL designs that Stuart and his fans would like to see.

Stuart has the Nakajima B10N Shuka (HARRY) essentially be the F-111 Aardvark. This is not as absurd as it sounds.

The F-111 arose out of USAF Tactical Air Command requirements for a follow on to the F-105 put down in 1959. TAC's requirements were:

• Carry a compact weapons load (tactical nuclear weapons) internally.
• Fly across the Atlantic Ocean without refueling.
• Operate from 3,000~ ft airfields with little surface preparation.
• Top Speed of Mach 2.5 for high-altitude engagements with enemy fighters.
• Capability of high subsonic speeds at low altitude for an extended range.

A lot of these drivers will be present in TBOverse for the Japanese -- they need long range and in that time period, everyone was enamoured of VTOLOL/STOLOL aircraft with shorter takeoff runs; as they appeared to be a tactically viable solution to the inextricable problem of large airfields being prime targets in a nuclear war, for example; the F-100 needed 9,000~ feet of runway for takeoff/landings, and the F-105 needed 10,500~ feet.

The desire for transoceanic range + STOL capability dictate a long unswept wing. But the high speed requirement (to penetrate US ADC) dictates a short, sharply swept wing.

Solution: SWING WING!

But even with that, you are still going to need an engine with low specific fuel consumption in order to meet the specifications given within a reasonable gross weight. That means a new technology called turbofans.

From there on, a lot of the aerodynamics start to fall into place.

Stuart originally had the G10N look very similar to the General Dynamics TFX (F-111) design; but I suggested that he use the competing Boeing design.

I'll let The TFX Decision: McNamara and the Military say it for me, lest me be suspected of MCNAMARA!MCNAMARA!MCNAMARA!MCNAMARA!MCNAMARA!MCNAMARA!MCNAMARA!MCNAMARA:

The Navy-Air Force Source Selection Board unanimously recommended the selection of Boeing, since Boeing's design promised greater attention to individual service requirements (through less commonality between Air Force and Navy versions) and also proposed certain technical innovations the services found attractive. But McNamara overruled the Source Selection Board. He contended that the General Dynamics proposal was less risky in technical terms, more realistic on costs, and more productive of a truly common aircraft than the Boeing proposal. For him, these factors allegedly were decisive and, in any event, the services had judged the proposals of both contractors to be acceptable.

Here are some of the other competing designs for TFX, in case anyone is interested; lifted from SecretProjectsForum: -- notice how they largely resemble each other pretty much:



As for the B-70...it's worth noting that the requirements of Mach 3 cruise over extended ranges force you to a specific shape -- unless you're going to accuse the Soviets of stealing the B-70 arrangement for the Sukhoi T-4?

With THAT said...

I don't like his Space program after much thinking about things:

If his Demons are truly farsighted and interested in making us a multi-planetary species to create their own bolthole, and if they have the amount of internal control he claims for them...they would have intervened with NASA and pushed for Earth Orbit Rendevous Incrementalism and against a deadline such as "MAN-MOON-DECADE", which requires Direct/LOR.

This would mean APOLLO breaks down like this:

Command/Service Module: This would look very much like OTL's CSM; since the three man parameter was decided really early, because everyone assumed the trip to the moon would take three days and thus you'd need to run the craft in shifts with one guy awake at any time flipping switches. Increased automation and communications with mission control ended that need fast, but the size parameters had been set by the crew size.

Lunar Module: The arguments for a lunar module in some form are just too attractive, because otherwise, you are stuck trying to land an ATLAS-sized rocket on the moon, and then launch it again.

Launch Mode: Without the MAN-MOON-DECADE deadline, you can afford to develop EOR, which was von Braun's favored mode. This means Apollo 11 would be launched by three Titan IIICs; one for the CSM, one for the LEM, and one for the Earth Departure Stage.

Maybe a fourth Titan IIIC would have been required to put fuel into orbit to tank up the CSM and EDS fully; since Titan IIIC could only put 28,900 lbs into LEO, compared to 46,000 lbs for Saturn IB.

Additionally, using Titan IIIC saves money; since you'd share the rocket production line with the X-20 Dynasoar test program and MOL/Blue Gemini.

You could also use the Titan IIIE, which was the IIIC with a Centaur high energy upper stage to send moon rovers, habitats and supplies to the moon ahead of time, where they'd be used by the Apollo 11 astronauts to stay two weeks, instead of staying only 21.5 hours on the surface.

Finally, why Armstrong?

If he hadn't died in the fire; Slayton would have made Gus Grissom the prime commander for the first lunar landing attempt -- look at how he bumped Alan Shepard ahead of everyone else to command Apollo 14; he made a promise to himself that at least one Mercury astro would walk on the moon, and since he controlled the crew picks...

...he also said as much in his memoirs, co-authored with Michael Cassutt.

There's also the fact of astronaut deaths affecting the crew rooster; look at how Stafford and Cernan got a leg up towards Apollo flights when they got promoted to prime crew for Gemini 9 following the death of the prime crew in a T-38 crash.

Later in Space[tm]; Stuart stated long ago on HPCA that TBO Shuttle is effectively the same one as we get in OTL, but that makes no sense.

The Shuttle in OTL got a lot backloaded onto it with the death of USAF space.

With USAF space not dead, and actually producing things like MOL and X-20 Dynasoar becoming an operational bomber; why does the USAF need to demand such a large payload bay, high crossrange, and polar orbit capability from Vandenberg?

To help you understand things a bit more, this is what NASA was looking into for Shuttle:


Max Faget's DC-3 Concept

• 300 mile cross range (straight wings)
• 8 ft diameter, 30 foot long payload bay
• 12,300 lb payload capacity
• Fully reusable booster
• Flyback booster and "once around" capability for the shuttle via jet engines in case of a missed landing

The DC-3 was not exactly optimal -- NASA wanted a 450 mile cross range capability to be safe; and early aerodynamic tests of it showed leading edge heating problems with the straight wings, which means some sort of modified delta would have to be adopted in the end.

But then the USAF walked in and messed everything up, because USAF Space [tm] was now dead.

When McNamara cancelled the X-20 DYNASOAR, he gave the USAF the Manned Orbital Laboratory as a consolation prize. But that was later killed in 1969.

So the USAF said that they'd fund part of Space Shuttle development if they were allowed to set some requirements.

What did they want?

• 65,000 lb into a polar orbit (Spy Satellites)
• 60~ foot long payload bay (Spy Satellites)
• 1,500 mile crossrange (So the USAF Shuttle could overfly USSR and return to Vandenberg in a single orbit.)

All these demands fed into the Shuttle design in an exceedingly catastrophic spiral -- the crossrange requirement alone dictated Shuttle's very large delta wing; which added significant parasitic mass by itself, and needed a very lightweight thermal protection system to cover the large area.

The USAF's requirements weren't impossible technically; but they required metric tonnes of money, which a cost-constrained NASA didn't have for development.

(SRBs were picked because they were cheaper than LRBs, for example.)

If his immortal bureaucrats (demons) are so afraid of what they foresee ahead for humanity, and want to have an off-world bolthole in case of things getting horrible; shouldn't they have interfered and:

• Told USAF to butt out of STS; they have their Dynasoar based orbital bomber coming soon, as well as MOL.
• Gotten NASA all the monies it needed via blackmail of Kongresscritters.

Instead, we got stock Shuttle, so that it can crash and burn twice in the 1980s and get NASA killed and transferred to SAC.

NOTE: We actually did have a Shuttle almost flame in during the 1980s -- go read up the Wiki on STS-27; the second post-Challenger flight. Link; go to TILE DAMAGE.

Coiler wrote:The next “this happened” is a show-off of the F-108, a fighter designed in OTL but never built. I’ll take advantage of this scene to say that having OTL designs, even never-built ones, is just another example of the lack of butterflies in TBO. It’s either OTL designs or butterfly wings that only flap towards never-built OTL designs that Stuart and his fans would like to see.

In the near term post-TBO, it's probably reasonable to see such designs. It's also deliberate; Stuart wanted a world (IIRC) in which we saw some of these never-built, high-performance aircraft.

MKSheppard wrote:More seriously, why is Carter even in politics? He left the Navy only because his father died IIRC and he had to go put the family affairs in order, and this in turn led him into politics.

That's not to mention the extreme unlikeliness of him becoming President at the same time that he did, or as a President with the same type of positions that he held IRL. Carter was actually a rather obscure governor at the start of the primary season in the 1976 Election, who used the caucuses and primaries to get himself the Democratic Nomination. There is no reason for Carter to become President when he did in the TBOverse, except that Stuart wanted him as a strawman to make "Ronaldus Magnus" look greater in comparison (who also got elected at the same time as he did IRL).

It's that, plus a lot of little things that chipped at my suspension of disbelief when reading Crusade. Like the abysmal dialogue (and the scene with Sophia Lauren made me wince), or the fact that nobody ever calls "The Seer" by any name other than "The Seer".

This should be interesting when Coiler finds out what ultimately happens to Ramsay "Chaulk" in TBO.

I remember when TBO first came out on HPCA, and generated massive amounts of buzz. I'll admit, the original WW2 story was pretty decent, if only because it was an original attempt at a decent WW2 counterfactual. Everything else is literally a right wing wankfest-his description of post war society and politics is pretty damn fascist. In a way, it all seems sorta dated-it reeks of the "America fuck yeah" school of thought prevalent from 9/11-2004-ish. Which, given the fuckedupness of the Bush years, is sorta remarkable. I mean, Jimmy Carter has done more damage to the US than Bush has? The same guy who started two land wars in Asia and cut taxes at the same time?

I also seemed to remember that Stuart got pwned when it came to the topic of the Caliphate itself; seems that he didn't quite grasp the difference between Shia and Sunni, and (IIRC) he simply referred to some unnamed Muslim expert who supposedly vetted everything.

Guardsman Bass wrote:That's not to mention the extreme unlikeliness of him becoming President at the same time that he did, or as a President with the same type of positions that he held IRL. Carter was actually a rather obscure governor at the start of the primary season in the 1976 Election, who used the caucuses and primaries to get himself the Democratic Nomination.

There was also the issue of post-watergate Nixonian fallout with the general populace -- Carter marketed himself as a clean, honest politican.

Cecelia5578 wrote:I also seemed to remember that Stuart got pwned when it came to the topic of the Caliphate itself; seems that he didn't quite grasp the difference between Shia and Sunni, and (IIRC) he simply referred to some unnamed Muslim expert who supposedly vetted everything.

Coiler pointed out his usual fall-back position when criticized about the un-realism of the Caliphate: claim that it's actually super-dysfunctional, and only held together by hatred for the rest of the world. That unfortunately doesn't explain why it arose in the first place, or why the whole thing resembles the Taliban.

I think Stuart just had a harder and harder time resisting the urge to put straw-men and RL events in the books as time went on. Aside from the Carter and Reagan presidencies occurring at the same time, we also get 9/11 in the exact same way (except done by an entirely different group from South Asia), and the Falklands War at about the same time.

Guardsman Bass wrote:

Cecelia5578 wrote:I also seemed to remember that Stuart got pwned when it came to the topic of the Caliphate itself; seems that he didn't quite grasp the difference between Shia and Sunni, and (IIRC) he simply referred to some unnamed Muslim expert who supposedly vetted everything.

Coiler pointed out his usual fall-back position when criticized about the un-realism of the Caliphate: claim that it's actually super-dysfunctional, and only held together by hatred for the rest of the world. That unfortunately doesn't explain why it arose in the first place, or why the whole thing resembles the Taliban.

I think Stuart just had a harder and harder time resisting the urge to put straw-men and RL events in the books as time went on. Aside from the Carter and Reagan presidencies occurring at the same time, we also get 9/11 in the exact same way (except done by an entirely different group from South Asia), and the Falklands War at about the same time.

I've made it a policy for the last view years to avoid the discussion of these stories, but since the arguments I used may be relevant for this debate I'm the guy who utterly schooled him on Islamic and middle eastern matters. As a consequence he ran away to HPCA and I quote:

By the way, not related to the main thread, but it seems that "Norseman" has a hang-up about Islam and is one of their apologists. He described Khomeini and Osama bin laden as "heroes" and "brilliant strategists" and takes violent offense at any suggestions that Islam may be anything other than perfect. Hence the objections he expresses to The Caliphate.

So yeah, he's not too good at dealing with criticism or being revealed as an ignoramus. If you read the thread in question you might notice that this description of it does not entirely match reality.

Another thing I notice about the fans is that they never seem to have heard of the great internet sport of sporking or mocking bad online fiction. Indeed most of the criticism of his stories come from the sporking brigades, who are always looking for new material and are willing to spend considerable effort making fun of it. Instead of accepting that they've been hit with this internet phenomena they always claim that it's religious fundamentalists and people obsessed with Stuart and his stories who are responsible. It's like something out of Animal Farm where every act of sabotage is due to the malicious schemes of Snowball.

phongn wrote: In the near term post-TBO, it's probably reasonable to see such designs.

The weapons butterflies are far from the biggest problem in the timeline. The lack of weapons butterflies isn't really as bad as the lack of political butterflies, with LBJ's inclusion as president seeming to me to be a combination of laziness and a way to beat up on members of his cabinet Stuart didn't like.

And I'd prefer a story with no weapons butterflies that was interesting and dramatic to one with plausible weapons butterflies that was dull and predictable.

It's also deliberate; Stuart wanted a world (IIRC) in which we saw some of these never-built, high-performance aircraft.

Gee, you think?

Coiler wrote:The weapons butterflies are far from the biggest problem in the timeline. The lack of weapons butterflies isn't really as bad as the lack of political butterflies, with LBJ's inclusion as president seeming to me to be a combination of laziness and a way to beat up on members of his cabinet Stuart didn't like.

LBJ is both politically savvy and hungry - I could see that remaining. Plus, it lets Stuart show a competent and reasonable Democrat (as opposed to a certain later President). Butterfly effects will almost certainly be longer-term: you still have to deal with the tranche of politicians coming up.

And I'd prefer a story with no weapons butterflies that was interesting and dramatic to one with plausible weapons butterflies that was dull and predictable.

Can't we have a story with weapons butterflies that is interesting and dramatic? But in here, yes, the US as such an early hyperpower - and without peer competitor - makes it challenging to write an interesting story. His WW2 ones are better.

Gee, you think?

No, I mean, he's explicitly stated it!

Coiler wrote:The lack of weapons butterflies isn't really as bad as the lack of political butterflies, with LBJ's inclusion as president seeming to me to be a combination of laziness and a way to beat up on members of his cabinet Stuart didn't like.

Politically speaking, I can buy his timeline up to the 1960s.

Whoever is President when TBO goes down is going to be re-elected for having 'won the war', and then during the 1950s, both political parties are going to be looking for people with war records to run as their candidates.

Historically, the Republicans/Democrats both courted Eisenhower; and Curtis LeMay was actually courted by the Governor of Ohio in September 1945 for a vacant Senate seat via Gubernatorial appointment; he turned the seat down.

Then in the 1960s, you have a whole clutch of ambitious politicans who matured in the late 1940s/1950s making their play for higher political office:

• LBJ
• JFK
• RMN

However, past that point; it becomes increasingly fuzzier and less certain -- because so much of the late 1970s and 1980s was affected by Watergate, and other factors, such as the decline of US manufacturing relative to the rest of the world; which would occur later than in OTL, because the extended WWII means the US is even more dominant over the rest of the world post-WW2.

Give you an example of fuzziness:

Reagan went into politics for specific reasons which may not apply in this changed timeline, and even if he ends up being Governor of California, there's a lot of influental politicans who became important Governors, but never managed the jump to the national level, like George Romney to look at as examples.

Another example is George H.W. Bush. Maybe he decides during the 1970s that he likes being a low level operator (UN Ambassador / Envoy to China / CIA Director) more than being a politican itself.

etc.

EDIT:

Hell, if you want to be real awesome, have:



Joseph Kennedy, Jr survive the war; and run for office (as was the family's plan); and he ends up being very cordial to the BOMBER BARONS, due to his experience in flying a B-17 for a special ops program.

Chapters 5-epilogue:
Even though there are over a hundred pages left in the book, I’m covering it all in one fell swoop because I want to highlight just how little substance there actually is.

The first few pages of Chapter 5 are taken up by, (sigh) the Asian plot. Pirates, Gnat fighters, you’re not missing much.
The Caliphate plot continues, first with clunky “foreshadowing” aboard the Marine ship in the Mediterranean, then to the Caliphate Ruling Council in Jerusalem.

In Jerusalem, Walther Model sits and listens to the raving idiots that are the Caliphate Ruling Council. They spend hours cheering about destroying the Sphinx (which they really did), and how they shot down dozens of American fighters while only losing one FAC (which they didn’t).

Even if one can ignore the literal blasphemy of a Caliphate being ruled by a council rather than one absolute caliph, anyone who could make their way to the top of a political system as bloody as this would have more cunning than the idiot strawmen we see here.

It’s back to Asia for a while, and then we return to the Mediterranean, where we get an infodump on missile designation systems, an infodump on anti-ship missiles, and another infodump on American warships, before the chapter is over.
Chapter 6 starts with McNamara and Clark, with monocles and top hats implied, finalizing their evil plan. Clark gets his “Rules of engagement”, which McNamara thinks he can use as a win-win situation-either the bombers get shot down and he can push missiles, or the high performance is proven unnecessary and he can push missiles.

The crew of Marisol the Talking Bomber gets the “Rules of Engagement” (No nukes, must be subsonic and below a certain height, you get the idea), and reluctantly follows them as they proceed to their mission.
After a brief scene in Moscow that serves to show the Russian woman from the beginning again, and also serves to tell us that Ford Mustangs are flying off the lots in Russia, letting Stuart indulge in his car fantasy for a bit as well as his aircraft fantasy, we got back to Marisol, with the crew constantly saying how bad the rules of engagement are.
Then we go to a Caliphate missile base, which locks onto Marisol. The German actually manning the missile controls tells off the mullah who wants to shoot it the moment it reaches the maximum range of the missile, and yes, we get the following cliché strawman in his reaction:

Crusade page 162 wrote:The Mullah stamped away, pacing the command post with his frustration. SAC’s bombers were an offense against divine will, they were the tools of Satan, they needed to be destroyed at every opportunity.

So, Marisol gets shot down. The crew ejects safely, and the beginning of the final battle begins. In the White House, LBJ is furious at the “rules of engagement”. He orders a response, sacks the attorney general, transfers McNamara to the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and moves Dean Rusk to Defense. Ramsey “Chalk” is taken into the basement of the National Security building by a demon named Namaah.

We get commanders talking, another interlude to the Asian plot that breaks up what little tension may have existed, and we get back to the Middle East, where the Marines and SEALs land, the latter to find and rescue Marisol’s crew, and the former to secure a beachhead where they can be moved from.

A command and control platform for the operation is “Buffy”, a C-133 modified into a gunship. We get a three-paragraph description of it and its weapons. Then we get a description of a mechanized company of Germans approaching the beach site. Before the only land action begins, they get rid of their attached Caliphate officer by getting him to move his car ahead of their pack, where it naturally gets blown up by Marines.

Meanwhile, the aircrew of Marisol is saved by SEALs with no danger except them mistaking the SEALs for pursuers.
Chapter 8 ends with another scene in the plot that shouldn’t be there, than the final clash begins.

Chapter 9 begins with the Marines fighting the Germans. Basically, the gist of it is that the Marines are skilled but inexperienced, and the experienced Germans are able to exploit said inexperience. Not only is this implied through the description of the battle (though it takes a special person to make burning MBTs boring), but it’s outright stated multiple times through the battle.

This is another problem with Stuart’s action scenes. He either tells instead of shows, or shows but still tells, leaving nothing to the reader’s judgment.

There are heavy casualties on both sides of the engagement. Stuart may have thought it clever to have the commanders on both sides think that the other was “wiping the floor with them”, but any attempt to show that as an example of differing perspectives in the heat of battle is lost when you robotically recite each side’s assets in their entirety prior to the battle. Doing that makes it look more like a game of Steel Panthers than an actual literary battle.

Buffy flies to the rescue, and the ground battle gives way to the Air Force Saving the Day. The AC-133, facing no threat greater than gun crewmen being burned by spent round cases flying around, and with its commander worrying about getting busted for deviating from the mission plan and sent to a dead-end post in Alaska rather than being shot down, wipes out the Germans, save for a survivor who exists so he can have a “poignant” scene later.

The ground battle ends and the naval battle begins. The ground battle at least had both sides taking casualties, and couldn’t involve weapons namedropping and naval fetishism. If the ground battle was dull, the naval battle is really, really, dull. Even though the American missiles don’t work as well as expected and there are instances of malfunctions, they don’t matter, as the Americans still wipe the Caliphate fleet out with no losses, making it like a football game where the quarterback throws a ton of incomplete passes, but his team still wins 30-0.

Naturally, there’s a discussion of the battle in Washington, and we find that Ramsey “Chalk” was discovered in a “comatose yet highly disturbed condition.”

After the “poignant” scene with the German recovering and learning that what he’d been told about the treatment of Germans (that every single German was executed and that every single German died in The Big One itself, for starters), was a lie, and also of him learning that his fiancée who he feared killed turned out to be alive and famous.

Then we cut to Ramsey “Chalk”, his brain totally destroyed. He was drinking coffee sweetened with LSD-doped sugar in large quantities while reading a report on a town being destroyed by nuclear bombs, creating a massive bad trip that led to him being stuck in a delusion that he was in hell being tortured for the rest of his life.

Then LBJ launches the bombers. Stuart clumsily tries to portray this as an advantage that bombers, unlike missiles, can be turned back and recalled, giving more flexibility. This falls flat partly because such a “catch” wouldn’t be needed as badly if the US didn’t have such a nukes-only response to begin with, and partly because-well, I’ll show you the quote when it comes.

After the usual military-speak regarding the raid, we see Model in the Ruling Council room, where he’s frightened at how they don’t understand what’s coming towards them. The council themselves, is, led by Yasser Arafat, doing nothing but repeatedly chanting “To Washington we are marching, martyrs by the millions!” The US has issued an ultimatum that Model sees as, finally, his way out.

Then we get F-108s effortlessly brushing aside the Caliphate fighters, before the Ruling Council, witnessing the initial strikes against the defenses, stupidly dismisses them.

A base at Yaffo is nuked, and the council still just repeatedly says “To Washington we are marching, martyrs by the millions”, until Model shoots Arafat and persuades the Council to accept the ultimatum.
Now, the quote:

Crusade, page 260 wrote:LBJ looked at the map. “Turn the bombers around, bring them home.” Then he paused. “I get the feeling this is a mistake, we should bomb them anyway. We’re going to have to fight them some time or another, it might as well be now when we are so incomparably stronger.” He shook his head. “We made our demands, they groveled. Its enough for now. Bring our bombers home.” Another pause. “I’m making a terrible mistake aren’t I?”
“Yes, Mister President.”

So, deciding not to kill millions of innocents who just happen to live under a bad regime, just so you can utterly wipe out a threat, is a “mistake.” It’s not like there aren’t any other options against the Caliphate. Stuart kept saying that they were very loose and only held together by hatred for the outside world, meaning they should be easy to topple even if the defeat and the loss of their German “janissaries” didn’t cause them to be toppled already. Say what you will about CIA dirty tricks, but not even a staunch good-government leftist would consider them worse than nuclear destruction.

Chapter 11 is noted only for more aircraft descriptions and the Seer saying that the whole thing is about a series of mistakes and bad decisions (which is Stuart says the story is about, rather than about forcing those dirty Muslims to grovel at the feet of Uncle Sam and show off fleets of military equipment.)
After a boring and undistinguished epilogue, Crusade is over.

It's almost like he wrote backwards from his hilariously one-sided, dead boring 'battles'. Impossible!

The real joke about TBO (and I guess Crusade specifically) is that people who believe themselves intelligent actually recommended it to people. Like, normal people. People who aren't Stuart's buddies.

Based on the mention of the Seer here, I asked Zak the other day if it was true - he basically burst out laughing and described it. The excuse offered (and repeated above, amusingly) is a pretty thin disguise for shameless self-insertion, and definately highlighted his desire for fan response above all. That turned out real well with TSW, of course.

But in short, crappy, unimaginative worldbuilding is fine (and probably good) if it's deliberate.

Then we cut to Ramsey “Chalk”, his brain totally destroyed. He was drinking coffee sweetened with LSD-doped sugar in large quantities while reading a report on a town being destroyed by nuclear bombs, creating a massive bad trip that led to him being stuck in a delusion that he was in hell being tortured for the rest of his life.

Yeah, parts of his writing seems over the top sadistic. Though, if you've read HPCA over the years, (really, it was better when it was the POW forum on warships1) you'll find lots of pent up right wing anger against the left, much of it rather nasty and sadistic. I'm thinking of the time a jet carrying Marines fresh from overseas got delayed at Oakland, and you had people there calling for Oakland to be bombed...

The thing is, Stuart's Russian Front in TBO supposedly causes massive amounts of American Army casualties. I'm not so sure if some of the people who made it big in the 60s as politicians might even be alive in TBO. With more of the country mobilized for a longer period of time, Reagan, LBJ and Nixon might not get away with easy assignments, like making movies.