Possibly, but then it becomes difficult to balance things, particularly if you let players choose what, exactly, goes back in time.
For example, having Minot AFB (with several dozen Minuteman III ICBMs and B-52 compliments) would present a substantial advantage over Topeka, Kansas, regardless of what might actually be in Topeka of value.
Something that has to be considered is what's in the location (research, industry, and military being the biggest boons) and where it's located--if you pick a military base in the United States, or a city in Australia, and the setting is the Middle Ages, you have in many ways a strong advantage as you have a large empty area and even less technologically developed peoples over which to hold sway--whereas if you appear in Europe or Asia, existing states are around that might fight you. If you can take them over, you can leverage their greater resources to build up your base better, but that may take time, giving more isolated transfers potential advantages.
It's something that would have to be considered carefully when setting such a scenario up. Also of particular importance is what year you select the displacement to occur in--if it's near-future, and the people in question have say fuel cells or something, although their technology is going to be very difficult to replace or repair, it will be indefinite in operation, as opposed to oil-based machinery or what not.
Not that this criticism, really. All of us who play or played in LINES II are awesomely awed by it, like. Totally. 
