Of lost monkeys and broken vehicles

[Duke of Orlando]

Did Italy manage to keep Libya?

I believe we discussed this briefly and we decided that with the Italians already keeping the Julian March (or most of it, the specific are unclear) Italy had to lose basically everything else as they are still on the losing side of the war. I’ve made a case for maybe keeping Kotor as an exclave but I doubt the Yugoslavians go for that even though it was my idea. In a similar vein to that I could maybe see a case being made for an Italian Benghazi exclave or maybe a small piece of Cyrenaica if the Wallies are feeling particularly magnanimous but I doubt it. It doesn’t do them any good but it does probably alienate the new government of Libya from the start.

In this scenario, I think that for Abdullah, Jerusalem would be so or more importantly both symbolically and militarily, than OTL and considering that both would have more and better armed forces better armed and with more war veterans/experienced/competent NCOs and officers than OTL... I'd suppose that the battle/s for Jerusalem, would be likely to be longer and more hard-fought than OTL...

I honestly wouldn’t be surprised if the Israelis were able to leverage their superior numbers to encircle the city and cut off the legion. Having Lebanon be friendly or neutral is honestly a very big change and helps the Israelis immensely

Both the creation and maintenance of a nuclear weapon stockpile are an immense expense for any country, let alone one as war-torn as Greece. Between decades of on and off war, the integration of new territories, reconstruction of destroyed infrastructure and demobilization of the economy, I don't see where the state would find the money for a nuclear weapons program. It's not even like Greece could fend off the Soviets if the Soviets decided to invade, bomb or no bomb. A far better option is to just remain pro-west and be a founding member of alt-NATO to ensure you remain under the nuclear umbrella of the US-UK-France.

I'm not saying it couldn't happen, states make wasteful decisions with their national budgets all of the time. It just seems to me like a colossal waste of money when their are far more pressing matters at hand.

Yet another reason Greece could remain nuke free. Greece may be one of the first countries to share Nukes with the U.S. or others in NATO, but I don’t think they develop them on their own . Particularly if they’re offered a carrot or two.

 

[Lascaris]

Both the creation and maintenance of a nuclear weapon stockpile are an immense expense for any country, let alone one as war-torn as Greece. Between decades of on and off war, the integration of new territories, reconstruction of destroyed infrastructure and demobilization of the economy, I don't see where the state would find the money for a nuclear weapons program. It's not even like Greece could fend off the Soviets if the Soviets decided to invade, bomb or no bomb. A far better option is to just remain pro-west and be a founding member of alt-NATO to ensure you remain under the nuclear umbrella of the US-UK-France.

I'm not saying it couldn't happen, states make wasteful decisions with their national budgets all of the time. It just seems to me like a colossal waste of money when their are far more pressing matters at hand.

For comparisons shake Israel developed nuclear weapons between 1957 and 1967. It's GDP in 1967 was $4.03 billion. While we have no idea how much the program cost we know the Dimona reactor had cost $80 million so the entire program likely cost less than half a billion. By comparison OTL Greece had a GDP of $9.28 billion more than twice that of Israel.

So economic constraints if the political will and access to technology (hi France!) are there shouldn't be much of a showstopper by the late 1960s and this does not apply just to Greece.

 

[GrimmJow007]

For comparisons shake Israel developed nuclear weapons between 1957 and 1967. It's GDP in 1967 was $4.03 billion. While we have no idea how much the program cost we know the Dimona reactor had cost $80 million so the entire program likely cost less than half a billion. By comparison OTL Greece had a GDP of $9.28 billion more than twice that of Israel.

So economic constraints if the political will and access to technology (hi France!) are there shouldn't be much of a showstopper by the late 1960s and this does not apply just to Greece.

Thanksgiving in Greece will have stuffed Turkey.

 

[Lewndan]

For comparisons shake Israel developed nuclear weapons between 1957 and 1967. It's GDP in 1967 was $4.03 billion. While we have no idea how much the program cost we know the Dimona reactor had cost $80 million so the entire program likely cost less than half a billion. By comparison OTL Greece had a GDP of $9.28 billion more than twice that of Israel.

So economic constraints if the political will and access to technology (hi France!) are there shouldn't be much of a showstopper by the late 1960s and this does not apply just to Greece.

Precisely my thoughts on the matter. If i may add, Israel had also to fare with its own Independence War of 1948, which makes its becoming nuclear power even more difficult!

 

[GrimmJow007]

Precisely my thoughts on the matter. If i may add, Israel had also to fare with its own Independence War of 1948, which makes its becoming nuclear power even more difficult!

Being surrounded by hostile nations certainly does wonders for the advancement of military technology.

 

[Khan Doomy]

Besides that, how many have ended up married with Greeks after several years in Greece.


That's still about 2 to 3 decades into the future and dependent on politics a fair bit. But TTL Greece is liable to have a nominal GDP... 3 to 4 times higher than OTL hence investment on a civilian nuclear reactor program is rather more affordable.

National Technical University of Athens, experimental physics department presumidly just like OTL.

I think the obvious candidate TTL is Sweden given her OTL track record and now directly bordering Red Finland and having a territorial dispute with it. Now the next obvious questions is what side effects nuclear Sweden brings. Frex one of the reasons Switzerland decided against obtaining a nuclear arsenal was that Sweden had not. Then if you already have Sweden and Switzerland what happens with Italy which in OTL had very comprehensive plans including her own SLBMs and nuclear ballistic missile submarines? And one notes that pre De Gaulle has a joint nuclear weapons program with France... and West Germany?

If Greece goes for a nuclear program I would think the likely path would be similar to Israel (or India for that matter). Build a "research" reactor to produce and separate plutonium, the technology would likely be coming from France or Canada, go to France for something like Jericho missile, or work together with the Italians and their Alfa missile, for your deterrent not to be totally aircraft bound, build up from there....

I cannot see Greece going strategic nukes. It has such a conventional superiority over its local rivals it does not need it. But a tactical (really speaking Hiroshima bombs) program is possible and frankly more than enough to lock in security.