Talk:Total War: 2006

I am not sure that classifying this as science fiction is a good move. Science fiction is a genre with at least some emphasis on science, often in the realm of outer space. What we're seeing in the case of Pearson's book is more in the way of a geopolitical exercise asking "what if". Prognostication would be an overstatement, because the author is not saying one thing or another is actually going to happen. Rather he takes a scenario that doesn't seem all that unlikely and develops it. This is more akin to something like serious war gaming than it is to science fiction. Another work of this type is The Third World War, August 2005 - a Future History by John Hackett. "Future history" is an entertaining thought. Sean Maleter (Sean Maleter 13:48, 25 January 2007 (UTC))


 * I agree. It should be classed as counterfactual history in my opinion.  I don't think there's any doubt about the neutrality of the article though - having read the book this seems like a reasonable summary - if you added the tag, could you explain a bit more? --Dave. 21:29, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Simon Pearson
Did Simon Pearson really write this novel? When I went to his article, it never mentioned anything about him writing this book or any other book for that matter! Either this article has the wrong Simon Pearson or that this article needs some major cleanup and reworking done to it and have proper sources added. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 20:20, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Source dump
&spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 17:03, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
 * 
 * 
 *