YaATW2KT: The Second Mexican-American War

[sglancy12]

As part of my love of all things Red Dawn-ish, I like the idea of a Mexican-American War as part of the Twilight War.

Why? Obviously because I like a good foreign invasion... Getting impersonally nuked by some guy in a silo thousands of miles away just doesn't have the role-playing game entertainment value of enemy soldiers fighting through your neighborhood house-to-house. But are the Mexicans up for it?

Okay... much like the Soviet invasion of Alaska, there are giant technical and logistical hurtles for a Mexican invasion to get as far as it's supposed to... not to mention political hurtles. Mexico has to have the will to do this, but I think they can find it.

Mexico has always harbored a certain amount of resentment against the United States. After all, in 1848 we stole the 1/2 of their country that has all the cities and highways and industry in it. Then after that we have consistently treated Mexico as a source of cheap labor, cheap vacations and cheap vice. Our prosperity is seen as only possible because we made off with their prosperity. So it wouldn't take much propaganda to whip the Mexican population up. Not to mention, when is Mexico ever going to get a better time for some payback against the "Colossus of the North" than after we've been nuked? We're down, the time to put the boot in is before we get back up.

In the canon, the invasion takes place after an alliance of leftists and communists seize power in Mexico City during the chaos following the November 1997 limited strategic exchange. They invade because US citizen militias have declared open season on any Mexicans crossing the border into America.

Okay... a couple of problems here:

If America is nuked and Mexico isn't, why are there Mexican's trying to get into America?

If both Mexico and America are nuked, how does Mexico muster the logistical strength to mobilize their army and invade the American Southwest? Not to mention how do the Mexicans get the Soviet "Division Cuba" into Mexico if they have suffered a nuclear strike on their oil refining capacity?

I have one simple fix built into my my timeline:

Mexico is not nuked by the USSR in 1997. Their extraction and refining capacity is undamaged. So their access to fuel will give them a huge advantage over the US military which is fuel poor and spread out in 1998 doing disaster relief, food distribution, and attempting to impose order through martial law.

Instead, Mexico gets nuke by the United States. After they invade, we kill their oilfields and refineries which results in a complete logistical breakdown in their army and a political breakdown as the 8 million people living in Mexico City have to go without lights, water and food. Civil order breaks down and the civil war re-ignites. Invasion over, Mexican Army stranded across the southwest.

But what about the casus belli? The massacre of Mexican refugees in America? If Mexico is not nuked in 1997, why are Mexicans into a nuked America from Mexico?

In the canon, Mexico is in a low-grade civil war BEFORE the nukes fall. The PRI/PPS alliance that launches the invasion seizes power in early 1998, AFTER the nukes fall, so maybe the refugees that supposedly get massacred are people who fled the civil war in the mid-1990s and were living in refugee camps along the south west border. After the nukes fall, those camps aren't going to get any more shipments of food. At first they go asking for food. Then they tool up and start demanding the food or else. Then the Southwestern American (well known for their embracing of the 2nd Amendment) start fighting these marauder bands, or even running off refugee groups that haven't turned marauder yet, and now you've got your bloodbath, with the refugee/marauders getting the worst of it.

On the other hand, maybe the PRS/PPS alliance just invented the stories of "massacres" of refugees? Maybe they also whipped up the population with stories (ala Hugo Chavez) that the Americans were about to invade to seize Mexico's oil industries. Maybe they sell the invasion as a "pre-emptive" attack?

There are some other ways Mexico can be assisted in their invasion.

Maybe "Division Cuba" is larger than a division? Maybe they bring some undamaged air assets beside Mi-28 Hind Ds? Some Mig-23s or Su-27s could make things easier for the Mexicans.

Maybe the Cubans and Nicaraguans are providing troops, advisers, or equipment disguised by wearing Mexican uniforms and sporting Mexican livery? In my timeline the Sandinistas regain power in 1996. They could be helping the Mexicans, and then quickly regret sending some of their military out of the country when Hurrican Mitch plows through in October of 1998. By then, after the US has nuked the Mexicans energy reserves, any Sandinistas in Mexico are marooned there.

After Hugo Chavez is elected President of Venezulea in December of 1998, he can throw some fuel and other assistance at the Mexicans. He'll probably be sending aid to his ideological brothers in Nicaragua too.

Any other suggestions on how the invasion can be made more plausible? Certainly the Mexican OOB from Red Star/Lone Star and Challenge Magazine needs to be revamped to include units that were left out. But that only amounts to a few thousand more men. There are some very good OOBs available on this site right now.

There's also the possibility that Mexican Drug cartels might be looking to move into the Warlord business now that their market for cocaine has dried up. These groups might be interested in acting as privateers... seizing American territory while claiming to be acting in the name of Mexico? The Tiajuana Cartel reinventing itself as a modern Division del Norte?

What other events or factors could be knit into the alternative history to make the Second Mexican-American War more plausible... or rather, making the Mexican's temporary successes more plausible.

A. Scott Glancy, President TCCorp, dba Pagan Publishing

[Mohoender]

[QUOTE=sglancy12;12786]
If America is nuked and Mexico isn't, why are there Mexican's trying to get into America?
[QUOTE]

They don't. Mexicans living in US cross back into Mexico and they are soon followed by US citizens fleeing to what they think is a safer area.

[QUOTE=sglancy12;12786]
Mexico is not nuked by the USSR in 1997. Their extraction and refining capacity is undamaged. So their access to fuel will give them a huge advantage over the US military which is fuel poor and spread out in 1998 doing disaster relief, food distribution, and attempting to impose order through martial law.
[QUOTE]

agree

[QUOTE=sglancy12;12786]
Instead, Mexico gets nuke by the United States. After they invade, we kill their oilfields and refineries which results in a complete logistical breakdown in their army and a political breakdown as the 8 million people living in Mexico City have to go without lights, water and food. Civil order breaks down and the civil war re-ignites. Invasion over, Mexican Army stranded across the southwest.
[QUOTE]

Agree again, but that nuking could be limited and part of the Mexican oil facilities might survive.

[QUOTE=sglancy12;12786]
But what about the casus belli? The massacre of Mexican refugees in America? If Mexico is not nuked in 1997, why are Mexicans into a nuked America from Mexico?
[QUOTE]

They are not and the massacred refugees are US citizens living in refugee camps into Mexico. The Casus Belli is provided by small US units crossing the border in an attempt to relief them.

[QUOTE=sglancy12;12786]
On the other hand, maybe the PRS/PPS alliance just invented the stories of "massacres" of refugees? Maybe they also whipped up the population with stories (ala Hugo Chavez) that the Americans were about to invade to seize Mexico's oil industries. Maybe they sell the invasion as a "pre-emptive" attack?
[QUOTE]

That's what some in the US do.:D

[QUOTE=sglancy12;12786]
Maybe "Division Cuba" is larger than a division? Maybe they bring some undamaged air assets beside Mi-28 Hind Ds? Some Mig-23s or Su-27s could make things easier for the Mexicans.

Maybe the Cubans and Nicaraguans are providing troops, advisers, or equipment disguised by wearing Mexican uniforms and sporting Mexican livery? In my timeline the Sandinistas regain power in 1996. They could be helping the Mexicans, and then quickly regret sending some of their military out of the country when Hurrican Mitch plows through in October of 1998. By then, after the US has nuked the Mexicans energy reserves, any Sandinistas in Mexico are marooned there.
[QUOTE]

Division Cuba is enough but you can count on some air support. Yes cubans could be involved and may be Venezuelian. Cubans can be quite numerous with veteran troops previously located in Angola.

[QUOTE=sglancy12;12786]
After Hugo Chavez is elected President of Venezulea in December of 1998, he can throw some fuel and other assistance at the Mexicans. He'll probably be sending aid to his ideological brothers in Nicaragua too.
[QUOTE]

Why would Chavez be elected in 1998? Isn't it easier to have him elected in 1993 after a successful coup in 1992?

An important point that can explain the Mexican success would be the relative weakness of the US 4th Fleet. IMO the US navy lacks any carrier in the area and if successful it remains unable to fully control the carribeans.

[pmulcahy11b]

Just a little note -- your HTML code for quotes are missing the opening and closing slashes. (That's why I don't dare hand-code my site; I already have enough problems with keeping info current and accurate to have to worry about a missing character in my HTML code. How Antenna manages to hand-code his entire site is beyond my comprehension!)

[pmulcahy11b]

Maybe "Division Cuba" is larger than a division? Maybe they bring some undamaged air assets beside Mi-28 Hind Ds? Some Mig-23s or Su-27s could make things easier for the Mexicans.

In Red Star, Lone Star, Kelly AFB and Ft. Sam Houston are relatively undamaged, as is San Antonio International Airport; that would give plenty of room for aircraft (or at Ft. Sam, helicopters -- there are no runways there). Just south of San Antonio there is a small civil airfield called Stinson Field, which is big enough for helicopters and light aircraft and also serves as an emergency landing field for Randolph AFB's T-37 trainers.

[pmulcahy11b]

Mexico is not nuked by the USSR in 1997. Their extraction and refining capacity is undamaged. So their access to fuel will give them a huge advantage over the US military which is fuel poor and spread out in 1998 doing disaster relief, food distribution, and attempting to impose order through martial law.

Here's a thought: Neither side nukes the Mexican oil, because both sides want it. Sounds like a good reason to have Soviet/Mexican-on-US action in the Gulf and the east coast of Mexico -- a nasty little special ops war. Sounds tasty!

[Targan]

Previous threads related to this topic.

Florida/Cuba http://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.php?t=312

Latin America in the Twilight War http://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.php?t=379

Red Star, Lone Star http://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.php?t=658

Mexican Army Sourcebook http://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.php?t=837

Mexican Army Sourcebook complete http://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.php?t=894

Lead up to the Mexican Invasion http://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.php?t=846

[jester]

Mexico:

Division De Cuba is not just the division but all the other Technical Specialists and several Sailors and Airmen whose vessels were grounded there, due to enemy action making it impossible for them to escape and survive. Vessels damaged that could make port but could not go much further, they couldn't cross the Atlantic let alone cross it and deal with a fight should they encounter Nato assets. However, they could make for the mainland! <Think of a Russian Version of Going Home> And thus you have a force of a Division of regular combat troops plus a second Division of technical specialists, civilians and naval and air personel as well.

We toss in other Russian Refugees who were given the word to go to Cuba or Mexico when hostilities began, so they now have a group of say 100k consisting of about 30 or 40K military, another 20k of civilian specialists and government workers and the rest would be their families or families, freinds, supporters and servants.

I would also toss in the whole civil war in mexico as a good thing plotwise.

As for getting involved without Nukes,

Add a Division sized group of specialists and military and their family to help the mexi's develope and protect their oil assets so they can supply the russians with oil, maybe even a naval and air instilation as well so that adds another 10 or 20k people.

The US not wanting to stand for that sends in some light forces to sieze or damage some of their oil assets. After all times are desperate, and that oil would do ALOT to aleivate the problems at home. However, the mexi's are not thrilled with the idea even if they are to be paid, so they respond, Ivan joins in <although their housing russians forces in the region could make them an ally and combatant>

And also, mexican forces begin raiding the US Southwest taking advantage of the chaos, locals defend themselves so the mexi's get bigger and bolder, the US sends forces and before long the two sides are clashing, some of the bandits are actual mexican army forces, and here we are! Then, there could be a series of expeditions on either side going deep across the boarder conducting raids. This culminates in some full scale battles on both sides of the border, however the mexis manage to muster forces spearheaded by russian forces and they make their move into the US SW. This is also coordinated with the russian forces in Alaska, a few long range patrols comming S. to open lines of communication and link up. The actual link is minimal, but the whole idea of being able to contact freindly forces is a huge moral builder. From there, my concept is they manage to link up somewhere and either establish a self sustaining defendable catonment, and/or plan a way to get back home. \

Here is an idea, the Sovs head for the mothball fleet at Sussion Bay S. of Frisco and want to bring a couple of the larger vessels online to sail home in. A little far fetched but it would make for a good campaign, russian colony in the middle of the West or Pacific Northwest would be wild.

[Webstral]

As a preamble to my reply, I want to acknowledge that as a group we’re a still a bit touchy about the incident a while back involving Chico’s work. I want to acknowledge publicly that I very much appreciate the hard work Chico and the DC Group put in, even if I don’t agree with everything they create. I also want to acknowledge that my previous assumption that we were trying to build a more-or-less cohesive vision of a fleshed-out Twilight: 2000 world was off-base and led to some vigorous disagreements in which I had a hand. I’m now operating under the assumption that what we’re doing here is more of a show-and-tell that is not intended to lead to a cohesive vision among the Board’s members, regardless of however much I might like a cohesive vision.

Mexico has always harbored a certain amount of resentment against the United States. After all, in 1848 we stole the 1/2 of their country that has all the cities and highways and industry in it. Then after that we have consistently treated Mexico as a source of cheap labor, cheap vacations and cheap vice. Our prosperity is seen as only possible because we made off with their prosperity. So it wouldn't take much propaganda to whip the Mexican population up. Not to mention, when is Mexico ever going to get a better time for some payback against the "Colossus of the North" than after we've been nuked? We're down, the time to put the boot in is before we get back up.

I like your answer to this question. I agree that the causes belli can be whatever the powers-that-be believe will work. The ruling party will need a unifying factor that will supersede internecine strife and make the Mexicans forget that some of them really hate each other. Foreign adventures have been attempted since there were groups of humans to compete over things.

If America is nuked and Mexico isn't, why are there Mexican's trying to get into America?

I believe the Soviets would nuke Mexico’s oil because the Soviets are arch conservatives. Imagine the situation from the Soviet point of view. The US is full of Mexican-Americans. Suppose that those conniving Yankees find a way to use all of those Mexican-Americans to gain access to Mexico’s oil? Suppose an American-supported coup or revolution in Mexico overturns the nationalist government and replaces that government with a regime far more friendly to the US. The Mexicans who emigrate to the US are the people most likely to want regime change; they were so unhappy with the state of things that they left their native land. There are millions of them in the US. The Soviets’ ability to influence this state of affairs is not going to be very great, the presence of Division Cuba notwithstanding. It would be hard for the Kremlin to say how likely a US-led revolution in Mexico would be, or whether such a revolution would succeed. However, to deeply conservative and paranoid people, the possibility of a pro-US revolution or coup in Mexico would be real. This would give the US a significant boost during the recovery stage, if access to oil means anything. Better by far to use the missiles already available to knock out the Mexican oil, then blame the US. Set the neighbors against each other. Succeed where the Germans failed.

Provided one can buy off on a Soviet strike on Mexico’s refineries, things get worse in Mexico very quickly for the dark-skinned Mexicans. We should bear in mind that for all the US is racist, Mexico is much worse. Mayans and other dark-skinned Mexicans who clearly have a good deal of Aztec, Mixtec, or other non-European blood are second-class citizens. The Zapatistas of the Yucatan Peninsula didn’t appear out of nowhere. The ruling elites are going to use the assets of the state for their purposes, whether Mexico’s refineries are nuked by the US or the USSR or not nuked at all. The disruption of foreign trade will have an enormous impact on Mexico’s economy, again regardless of the situation with the refineries.

Once the nukes start flying, I believe Mexico will go to full mobilization. Who knows how far such a thing will go? One never knows what will cause those unwashed mestizos to try to grab a slice of the pie, so better to have the Army mobilized during the nuclear exchange than not. Stockpiling supplies (like fuel) can begin during this period. After all, Mexico must have some sort of contingency planning. Not having nukes doesn’t mean immunity from nukes.

Once Mexico’s refineries are hit, the ruling elites will try to keep everything for themselves. The triage plan in post-Exchange America will look benign by comparison. Better for the dark-skinned types to die off and leave Mexico for the Europeans. Thus the flood of refugees across the US-Mexico border. The ruling party is glad to be rid of the refugees; massacres in the US are of interest only if they can be used to sucker the starving Indians and Indian-heavy mestizos into starving to death with patriotic fervor.

As a consequence of all of the above factors taken together, millions of Mexicans have a high degree of motivation to take their chances across the border. They might be screwed in America, but they’re screwed for sure at home. The Army is already mobilized as of 01/01/98. Supplies (food and fuel) have been stockpiled ahead of time, although they were originally stockpiled to help the Army maintain internal order. The Mexican elites decide to invade the US to kill two birds with one stone: revenge against the US while the window is open and the unification of public opinion behind the state.

Yes, I’m painting a pretty grim picture of the national leadership of Mexico. It’s pretty grim today. It was worse twelve years ago when the same party had enjoyed control virtually since the Mexican Civil War (which killed ten million Mexicans, I might add). One doesn’t need to dig very far to discover the intensity of race consciousness in Mexico. The dark-skinned Mexicans, who presumably have the least European blood, are at the bottom of the heap. To one degree or another, it’s that way across Latin America. Ugly, but true.

People are free to do with my interpretation of events as they see fit.

Webstral

[Raellus]

Mexico has always harbored a certain amount of resentment against the United States. After all, in 1848 we stole the 1/2 of their country that has all the cities and highways and industry in it. Then after that we have consistently treated Mexico as a source of cheap labor, cheap vacations and cheap vice. Our prosperity is seen as only possible because we made off with their prosperity. So it wouldn't take much propaganda to whip the Mexican population up. Not to mention, when is Mexico ever going to get a better time for some payback against the "Colossus of the North" than after we've been nuked? We're down, the time to put the boot in is before we get back up.

I agree with you that many Mexicans harbor resentment towards the U.S., resentment that can be traced back to the 1848 war and even earlier to the Texas War of Independence. But the 1/2 of Mexico "stolen" by the U.S. did not have "all the cities and highways and industry in it". In fact, most of Texas, New Mexico, and Arizona were very sparsely populated with Mexican citizens and their distance from the Mexican national capitol in Mexico City made administering and controlling said territories extremely difficult for the Mexican government. Furthermore, the territories in question were extremely underdeveloped when the U.S. decided to attempt to take them by force. In fact, the Mexican government originally invited U.S. settlers into Mexican Texas in order to "civilize" it (i.e. suppress hostile Native American tribes and develop the region economically). This was easier for the Mexican government than trying to settle and control the region itself. Of course, this turned out to be a bad idea for the Mexican government as soon the American settlers in Texas far outnumbered the Mexican population there and began agitating for independence.

I'm not justifying the 1848 Mexican War or the annexation of Mexican territory that followed, but I wanted to clear up the misconception that the region annexed by the U.S. was a particularly "rich" prize, at the time.

[pmulcahy11b]

I'm not justifying the 1848 Mexican War or the annexation of Mexican territory that followed, but I wanted to clear up the misconception that the region annexed by the U.S. was a particularly "rich" prize, at the time.

I do understand that viewpoint, to a point. But let me put it this way:

Down in the Southeast corner of my backyard, there is an area which, despite all attempts to remedy it, will grow no grass. It doesn't matter what mulch, fertilizer, or grass seed I put down there, or how much I water it. I can fence it off from the dogs so they don't trample on it. The grass will not grow down there.

But do I want someone to look and say, "That land sucks; he won't miss it anyway."? No! It's my land, and one day I might find a way to grow grass on it!

[weswood]

I do understand that viewpoint, to a point. But let me put it this way:

Down in the Southeast corner of my backyard, there is an area which, despite all attempts to remedy it, will grow no grass. It doesn't matter what mulch, fertilizer, or grass seed I put down there, or how much I water it. I can fence it off from the dogs so they don't trample on it. The grass will not grow down there.

But do I want someone to look and say, "That land sucks; he won't miss it anyway."? No! It's my land, and one day I might find a way to grow grass on it!

Or the reason grass doesn't grow is there's oil down there! Start diggin!

It's odd to talk about a Mexican invasion. I hear La Raza is saying Texas and the southweatern states were basically stolen from the Mexican government.

[Raellus]

But do I want someone to look and say, "That land sucks; he won't miss it anyway."? No! It's my land, and one day I might find a way to grow grass on it!

I'm not saying that the Mexicans don't have a right to be upset or that the land doesn't have sentimental value, just that, at the time, the land itself was not a particularly rich prize. Even today, I wouldn't necessarily consider Arizona (my home state) or New Mexico industrial or agricultural power houses. Heck, Arizona didn't meet the criteria for statehood until 1912, over half-a-century after most of it was taken from Mexico (not including the portion acquired by the Gadsen purchase).

[sglancy12]

I agree with you that many Mexicans harbor resentment towards the U.S., resentment that can be traced back to the 1848 war and even earlier to the Texas War of Independence. But the 1/2 of Mexico "stolen" by the U.S. did not have "all the cities and highways and industry in it".

How dumb do you think I am that I really believe the southwest of 1848 was filled with cities and highways and industry?

I was being sarcastic. When we "stole" the south-west it was a desolate wasteland, filled with hostile Indian tribes and governed in name only by Mexico City. Which means when we stole it is was STILL a desolate wasteland, filled with hostile Indian tribes, except now governed in name only by Washington D.C..

In my opinion, if Mexico had held onto the North American southwest, then the illegal immigrants would just be crossing the Arkansas River to get to the jobs and health care and education, instead of the Rio Grande.

What I was trying to point out is that some modern Mexican resentment over the 1848 war also stems from the fact that we developed our desolate wasteland and their desolate wasteland is still just... well, desolate wasteland. There is a serious inferiority complex that comes into play during relations between Mexico and the USA. In any TW2K alternative history, that inferiority complex could be manipulated into a popular political push for war (particularly AFTER the US has been nuked) so that Mexico can right all the wrongs it has suffered for the past 150 years! Hell! Maybe they push to start the war on the 150th anniversary of the War of 1848!

Hmmm... just checked.... war starts in 1846 and ENDs in 1848... of course maybe the date that holds the emotional impact is the date the humiliating Treaty of Guatalupe Hidalgo was signed: Feb. 2, 1848... 150 years later it's 02/02/98 and the US is nuked, soviet troops are in Alaska... maybe that's the date the Mexican government picks to release the report of Mexican refugees being killed on the US border? If they start getting people angry in February, that gives the Mexicans plenty of time to get the war rolling by summer.


A. Scott Glancy, President TCCorp, dba Pagan Publishing

[Fusilier]

How dumb do you think I am

Wut?

[Mohoender]

How dumb do you think I am

Cool down guys. I don't think any offense was intended from both side.:)

By the way Raellus what you say about industries is right but when you report it to history, it is equally false.

You forgot one thing. In 1848, industries were rare all over the union anyway as the economy was still focusing on raw materials and agriculture. When California (along with "1/2 Mexico") was taken over by the future USA it brought along things that were as valuable as industries and technologies today:
- Very fertile areas, rich forests, mineral ressources including gold and many other things (These lands were potentially rich).
- Several spots that would soon become major ports on the Pacific and the first step toward US development in Asia.
- Similarly, a valuable connection to the entire American West Coast (the Panama Canal was not even dreamed of and the Cape Horn was a tricky route). That will prove more than important in 1876 with rail development.
...

However, I don't think it was stolen (of course, I understand that some Mexicans might feel that way).

Texas might indeed have been stolen (Ouch! I should be careful, there are plenty of Texas boys around, probably ready to bite at a small bouncing froggy :p:D) as I have the feeling that anglo-saxon settlers did something similar to what the Albanian just did with Kosovo (with a main difference, nonetheless: Kosovo has been part of Serbia for centuries, not true for Texas with Mexico). Whatever, it was 200 years ago and it worked (What is a shame for Kosovo can be seen as brilliant for Texas IMO and depending on your point of view): nowadays, no doubt that Texas is to the Texans (with close ties to Mexico or we would not be eating Tex-Mex;)). In fact, these lands were never stolen from Mexicans, they were stolen from several American Indian People (by Mexicans and Anglo-saxons alike).

California (+Arizona, New Mexico...) is an entirely different matter and I retain the feeling that internal tensions within Mexico greatly favored its loss. Of course, Anglo-saxon settlers were again more than deeply involved into it but corrupt Mexican officials greatly helped them (also I'm not a specialist of that period). By the way, funny, I just found out that the Russians established a military outpost in northern California at that time. It didn't bring them far but it could have been interesting if things had turned differently.

Whatever, I have no doubt that without the taking over of the entire northern part of Mexico with no consideration for the Adams-Onis treaty signed in 1819 (but Spain was no more the actor two years later) allowed US to become what it is today. I'm convinced that without this political move, US would never have become a great power.

Best wishes from the Froggy:)

[Targan]

How dumb do you think I am that I really believe the southwest of 1848 was filled with cities and highways and industry?
Be cool Mr President. No one here thinks you are dumb.

[Mohoender]

Taking distance from Canon and using our various exchange, I wrote this. It might not please everyone but I hope you'll find some ideas interesting. Several elements remain vague but that is on purpose and, in addition, I didn't want to develop the final outcome. Constructive suggestions are more than welcome as this is very foreign to me

Late in the Twilight War, after US was subjected to nuclear strikes, people starts to flee and cross the border into Mexico. Among these people, you find Anglo-saxons but most are US citizens of Mexican descent.

They are expecting a warm welcome but the Mexican government, also still untouched by the war, is experiencing difficulties of its own. A political crisis just brought up a socialist coalition to power and the destruction of world exchange has reduced income. Nevertheless, Mexico is still exporting a lot to the weakened US, generally for outrageous prices (vehicles, oil products and ammunitions). Else, growing unemployment, ethnic tensions (Chiapas…), drug cartels and internal corruption are slowly resulting in internal unrest.
The refugees are not that welcome and they are soon directed toward camps along the border. The Mexican government does its best to treat them well but it is lacking in supply and the situation soon decays. Then, words are brought to the US (by rogue journalists) about mistreatment of the refuges. These accusations have no real ground outside of isolated events but US has no means of verifying them and they are sufficient to trigger the machine. General Chief of Staff, order the army to gather what it has left (a few lightly mechanized national guard units, some newly formed cavalry border regiments, little air support, and a majority of under equipped infantry units, often closer to local militias) and send these troops into Mexico to help US citizens and bring them relief.
Outraged by this sudden violation of its sovereignty the Mexican government orders its own army to move against the US troops. Under normal conditions, the Mexican Army is, of course, no match for US but this is far from a normal situation and the still well organized Mexican armoured cavalry units, benefiting from air support and well supplied in fuel meet with outstanding success. Within a week the US invaders have been repelled and several Mexican units have crossed the Rio Grande and established outpost on US soil. The situation could have gone no further but the US General Chief of Staff (now aware that the first intervention was far from being justified) decide to order a counter attack, this time officially declaring war to Mexico.
For the first time, the war is on the Latin American continent and within days the most anti-US government in the region grants their support to Mexico (Bolivia, Cuba, Ecuador, Nicaragua and Venezuela). For a fairly long time, the US 4th Fleet (largely under strength because of the war) remains unable to control the Caribbean and the western Mexican coast. As a result, reinforcements are coming from Latin American countries and Mexico is soon capable of pushing its advantage.
- Venezuela (which received Russian T-90 before the war) delivers its stored AMX-30 to Mexico (as a result Mexico is capable of fielding an armored brigade) along with light infantry units and combat squadrons (among them, a number of Su-30). In the meantime, supported by Ecuador attacks are conducted on Columbia.
- Nicaragua doesn’t send any troops but it launches an attack through Costa Rica in an attempt to seize the Panama Canal. This fails when Guatemala and Honduras enters the war on the side of the US.
- Division “Latin America” (“Cuba” if you prefer) is assembled and sent to Mexico.
- Cuba is the country to send the most important number of troops to Mexico (Armored, Infantry, Air support). Cuban troops also attempt to land in Florida but this is countered and meets with a dramatic failure (almost no Cubans escape).
However, while the Mexican population widely supported the counter offensive directed toward the first US invasion, it seems that the people are quickly growing tired of the full scale war now underway. Despite new but more limited military success, unrest is growing in the country and the Mexican Army quickly loose spirit. For the second time, the war could have come to its end.
Again peace fail to come as an ambitious Mexican politician succeeds in giving war a second breath. Refering to past history and stating that the borders of Mexico (designed by the Adams-Onis treaty) should be that of 1819, he gather a wide support from the population and the Latin American coalition soon finds itself on the push again. Now the US 4th Fleet has gathered enough strength to disrupt regular shipping in the Carribean and the US is facing this new push with better organized troops but they are still outmatched. After a few months (several weeks) of regular fighting, the US is still unable to stop the Latin American progression and unrest is growing oll over the USA. Faced with the potential full destruction of the state, the General Chief of Staff orders several nuclear strikes on the Latin American countries involved. Mexican and Venezuelian oil facilities are targeted along with Mexico City, Managua, La Havana and Caracas.
As a result, most operations come to an end, civil chaos appear everywhere and the Mexican Civil War is triggered….

[Raellus]

Cool down guys. I don't think any offense was intended from both side.:)

By the way Raellus what you say about industries is right but when you report it to history, it is equally false.

You forgot one thing. In 1848, industries were rare all over the union anyway as the economy was still focusing on raw materials and agriculture. When California (along with "1/2 Mexico") was taken over by the future USA it brought along things that were as valuable as industries and technologies today:
- Very fertile areas, rich forests, mineral ressources including gold and many other things (These lands were potentially rich).
- Several spots that would soon become major ports on the Pacific and the first step toward US development in Asia.
- Similarly, a valuable connection to the entire American West Coast (the Panama Canal was not even dreamed of and the Cape Horn was a tricky route). That will prove more than important in 1876 with rail development.
...

Good point, Moh. There certainly was/is economic potential in the regions annexed from Mexico. The problem was that the Mexican government was doing very little to exploit and develop that potential. To the Mexican government, AZ, NM, TX, CA, etc. were bothersome frontier areas, difficult and costly to manage and administer. They took the easy way out by allowing/encouraging American settlers to move into the areas and ended up paying the price once the settlers became entrenched and started considering the region to be an American suzereignty.

It's sort of ironic because in a sense, the opposite is happening now. American citizens tend to disdain certain lines of work (agricultural and landscaping, construction, service industries, etc.) and so basically invite Mexican nationals to migrate, legally and illegally, in order to fill those jobs. Then many American citizens complain about the social and economic costs associated with this migration, feeling that the Mexicans are "taking over" parts of the country. I guess that's Karma.

And SGlancy, please, I was not trying to insult your intelligence. I simply did not detect your intended sarcasm.

[weswood]

-
Texas might indeed have been stolen (Ouch! I should be careful, there are plenty of Texas boys around, probably ready to bite at a small bouncing froggy :p:D)



Yeah, well, it wasn't nailed down or anything...

[Legbreaker]

Yeah, well, it wasn't nailed down or anything...

And they did just leaving it laying around where pretty much anyone could find it. The US did them a favour by moving in and keeping an eye on the place...

:D

[pmulcahy11b]

Yeah, well, it wasn't nailed down or anything...

Well, how do you think Rhode Island got it's name? Someone stole it, and it got rowed back!

(You guys didn't watch SuperChicken when you were kids, did you...)

[jester]

Well, how do you think Rhode Island got it's name? Someone stole it, and it got rowed back!

(You guys didn't watch SuperChicken when you were kids, did you...)


When you find yourself in danger, when you're being threatened by a stranger, CALLLLLLLLLLL on Super Chicken!


You knew the job was dangerous when you took it Fred.

[pmulcahy11b]

You knew the job was dangerous when you took it Fred.

I used to drive my troops, fellow soldiers, and superiors nuts with that one. "You knew the job was dangerous when you took it (insert name or rank here)!"

[jester]

I used to drive my troops, fellow soldiers, and superiors nuts with that one. "You knew the job was dangerous when you took it (insert name or rank here)!"

I used to say that all the time too.

I also would sing the superchicken song around one of my men/freinds who was known for his "chicken" legs. Although he could do the three mile run in under 17 minutes on those chicken legs of his the freak!

[sglancy12]

And SGlancy, please, I was not trying to insult your intelligence. I simply did not detect your intended sarcasm.

When you gently corrected the obvious fallacy in my statement, it came off to me like you were talking down to the village idiot. That was just my interpretation, not how you wrote it.

Clearly I have a chip on my shoulder about being a FNG on this site.

A. Scott Glancy, President TCCorp, dba Pagan Publishing

[Raellus]

I've been thinking about the Mexican invasion scenario...

On the Causes and Provocation

A reverse Zimmerman Note- after many of the U.S.'s refineries are nuked, and Mexico refuses to sell oil at below market rates, there's some loose talk of forcefully acquiring Mexican oil- it's not a serious plan, but the idea is bounced around. The Soviets catch wind of this and pass it along to the Mexican gov't, along with some incriminating decrypts.

Impoverished Mexicans, meanwhile, continue to cross the border, drawn by the tens of thousands of jobs abandoned by American draftees. Unlike WWII, there's no Bracero guest laborer program (conservative state governments shoot down the idea, fearing an influx of pro-communist Mexican agitators). American border militias, infiltrated by elements of New America, flock to the border to stop illegal immigrants, using the Red Scare as justification for their increasingly aggressive border policing. In several instances, deadly force is used.

With these twin provocations, and needing to distract the restive Mexican populace from the country's crumbling economy, the gov't/military plans and executes an invasion of the American southwest, stating that they are simply taking back what was stolen from them. Given the various massive deployments to Europe, the Middle East, and Asia, the U.S. military has a relatively small footprint in CONUS.

To Nuke or Not to Nuke [Mexico]

AFAIK, canon makes no mention of nukes being used against Mexico. But wouldn't the U.S. resort to nukes to stop the initially successful Mexican invasion of American soil? Well, not necessarily. Conventional strikes, by aircraft and cruise missile, could temporarily knock out Mexican fuel production while avoiding the kind of damage that would rule out the U.S. ever getting its hands on Mexican oil in the future. Assuming that the U.S. in '98 could scrounge up enough airframes and munitions, the Mexican Air Force- the weakest element of its armed forces- couldn't stop determined air raids. The U.S. gets to keep its cake (Mexican oil) and eat it too (deprive the MAF from using it).

[kato13]

To Nuke or Not to Nuke [Mexico]

AFAIK, canon makes no mention of nukes being used against Mexico. But wouldn't the U.S. resort to nukes to stop the initially successful Mexican invasion of American soil? Well, not necessarily. Conventional strikes, by aircraft and cruise missile, could temporarily knock out Mexican fuel production while avoiding the kind of damage that would rule out the U.S. ever getting its hands on Mexican oil in the future. Assuming that the U.S. in '98 could scrounge up enough airframes and munitions, the Mexican Air Force- the weakest element of its armed forces- couldn't stop determined air raids. The U.S. gets to keep its cake (Mexican oil) and eat it too (deprive the MAF from using it).

Not sure from context if you only mean American Nukes, but Mexico was nuked (most probably by the Soviets) during the Neutrals phase.

From Big Yellow Book

Mexico: Pemex refineries were among the first to be hit by nukes (as part of the destruction of neutral nations' refining capacities, to deny their use to the enemy). In an attempt to distract domestic critics from internal problems, the ruling PRI (el Partido Revolicionario Instilucbnal, the Institutional Revolution Party) and PPS (el Partido Popular Socialists, Popular Socialist Party) coalition in Mexico took advantage of the alleged American mistreatment of Mexican refugees as an excuse to start a war with the gringos.

The intended distraction did not work, and as the war ground to a standstill, the army and internal opposition revolted against the coalition in Mexico City. Mexico is now divided into various regions, each loyal to one of four different contenders in the Mexican Civil War of 1999. The large cities, the mountain regions, and the jungles are in a state of anarchy. Army units of mixed (or no) political loyalty occupy cantonments in Mexico and in the United States, surrounded by disputed regions. Insular communities are strung out along the Pacific and Caribbean coasts, eking out a sparse existence by subsistence agriculture and deep-sea fiishing.

[Matt Wiser]

In one of those threads, I had an exchange between General Cummings and the acting CINC-SAC, about the use of low-yield nukes on logistics targets in Northern Mexico to stop the invasion. General Cummings basically said, "Let the historians fifty or a hundred years from now debate whether or not this is the right decision. We don't have the conventional forces to stop the invasion." He then orders CINC-SAC to release his aircraft and they strike targets along the main highways to the border (the B-61s are set on the low yield setting 10 to 20 KT), and the Mexican logistics system falls apart after that.

[Raellus]

I choose to ignore the BYB. For me, it's the v1.0 timeline all the way.

[kato13]

I choose to ignore the BYB. For me, it's the v1.0 timeline all the way.

Fair enough. It would help explain the initial success of the invasion.

[Raellus]

I was just trying to make a case for the U.S.A. using conventional means to temporarily cripple Mexico's oil industry. I envision great American reluctance to use nukes vs. their southern neighbor, primarily because predominant weather patterns pretty much guarantee that much of the fallout will cross the border and further contaminate the U.S. If the Soviets do the nuking, it makes a bit more sense.

[kato13]

I was just trying to make a case for the U.S.A. using conventional means to temporarily cripple Mexico's oil industry. I envision great American reluctance to use nukes vs. their southern neighbor, primarily because predominant weather patterns pretty much guarantee that much of the fallout will cross the border and further contaminate the U.S. If the Soviets do the nuking, it makes a bit more sense.

Yeah it never made sense to me.

If I was the USSR, as far as nuking refineries, after European and Middle East Neutrals, Mexico would be first on my list. But if the Soviets nuked Mexico why would they work with Division Cuba.

This has bothered me for over 30 years now.

[Jason Weiser]

Ok,
I am one of those who thinks the Mexican invasion makes little sense, but if you want to use it..here is a way to do it that is 1.0 compatible?

Mexico in 1995 was a nation on the brink. One way led to a moderately successful future with a moderate-left PRI government that had done much to roll back some of the more costly social programs and diversify the economy, as well as make some very public arrests of both corrupt officials and some Narcotrafficantes.

But Mexico's other way led to ruin, as her economy was still for the most part, based on the petrochemical riches she drew for the main basis of her economy. She was a victim of world-wide commodity prices, and in early 1996, with OPEC deciding it would not institute any price caps for oil production that year (this was a backhanded attempt to help China hold off the Soviets, and contributed to a worldwide drop in oil prices), Mexico's economy simply cratered. The price of tortillas, which was always a guide to how healthy the Mexican economy was, tripled in a space of 6 months, with other staples rising accordingly, as imports paid for by increasingly depressed Pesos became harder to come by (the war expanding to a world war in November made this even harder, as most of Mexico's trading partners were now belligerents). By January 1997, Mexico was on the verge of revolution.

On the night of February 19th, 1997, a strange mixture of Marxist PPS politicians, military officers, and students (who provided most of the muscle) overthrew the PRI government and instituted a "Government of National Salvation." While the government instituted a number of Marxist policies, not the least of which was a doubling down of government subsidization of the economy it could not afford (and increasing the inflation of the Peso to near worthlessness), it studiously avoided any outward alliance with the Soviet Union and instead, formed a quiet alliance with neutral Cuba, bringing in Cuban medical and technical teams in an effort to help stave off the oncoming economic ruin. This allowed Mexico to embrace Marxism, while avoiding being in the crosshairs of the United States, at least, until 1998.

Most of the Mexican oil industry was hit by Soviet nuclear weapons for two reasons, first was the fear the US might seize the facilities for themselves (the US had no such means left to do so, but the Soviets didn't believe that) and two, as a backhanded way of punishing Mexico for not joining the "internationalist cause". (To be fair, the PPS at the time were more euro-communist in outlook, than doctrinaire Marxist-Leninist, and some were even more in favor of the Chinese Communists, and as such detested the Soviets for their actions in China).

Mexico, barely under control domestically with the strains of an economy held together with baling wire and good intentions, snapped under the strain. 8 revolutions took place before a radical faction of the PPS (which was more nationalistic to the point of chauvinistic in it's views) took control. Fearing they would be the victims of a 9th revolution, and looking for a means to unify the country, they did what shaky radical regimes have done throughout history, they looked for a short, victorious war. And the actions of the United States, vis a vis Mexican refugees, gave them the perfect excuse. And with the arrival of Division Cuba, it seemed the Mexicans could not lose...at least that's what the politicians in Mexico City thought at the time.

[Raellus]

So, I noticed something curious, and more than a little illogical, but it gave me an epiphany.

Canon (Howling Wilderness AND the BYOB, v.2.2) has oil refineries in El Paso hit by a .25MT nuclear warhead. AFAIK, no date for the strike is given, but one assumes it took place sometime in 1997.

The Mexicans invade the U.S.A. in 1998.

Canon has the School Brigade located at Ft. Bliss, in El Paso, when the invasion begins.

Why would the SB stay in El Paso after it had been hit by a nuclear warhead? Ft. Bliss is only about 3 miles from the only refineries in El Paso. Using NUKEMAP, Ft. Bliss would be within the thermal radiation radius of a 25MT device detonating on the refinery. It doesn't make much sense, unless...

What if the refineries in El Paso were the target, but ground zero was actually in Ciudad Juarez, just on the other side of the border? Some Soviet nukes were notoriously inaccurate. CJ is very close to El Paso- the two cities basically one contiguous city straddling the border. But, a strike in S. Ciudad Juarez would be far enough away that Ft. Bliss wouldn't be damaged.

So, Mexican refugees flood across the border and the U.S., fearful of Soviet infiltrators among the throngs, takes a heavy hand. Mexico, blaming the U.S. for the nuclear destruction of part of Ciudad Juarez (even knowing that the Soviets were responsible- the reasoning would be, "if you weren't standing so close to me, I might not have been shot"), and alarmed at the harsh treatment of its citizens crossing the border, Mexico prepares to invade the U.S.A.

It ain't perfect, but it makes sense to me. Thoughts?

[Olefin]

The Soviets didnt even have a 25MT warhead - and why would you use a 25MT warhead to take out just a refinery - plus I think the use of such big warheads would have been way beyond what was considered a limited strike - a 25 MT warhead would have destroyed most of the city and the base

I am thinking we are looking more at a 250kt weapon and not 25MT - that could explain the survival of the base- along with the nuke detonating to the south of the refinery where it still takes it out but not the base along with it

[.45cultist]

I grafted the T2013 section here, The U.S. invading for Mexico's Industry and oil makes more sense. Even Division Cuba couldn't elevate a third tier internal defense structured army. I even threw in covert support from China.

[swaghauler]

As is typical for me, I completely changed the US-Mexican relationship by making Mexico become a Narco-Puppet state in 1995. The Cartels took over the country (through rigged elections) and then began buying loads of Russian tech in exchange for drug money (Russia DESPERATELY needed hard currency and the Cartels need weapons) to keep US backed rebels at bay. Russia then sends "Division Cuba" to train the Cartel's "Mexican Army" in order to stand up to the US. After war breaks out, the US takes control of several Mexican oil platforms, triggering the Second US-Mexican War. As things begin to deteriorate, the US nukes Mexico to keep her resources out of her Russian "benefactor's" hands. This how I justify the war.

[The Dark]

I grafted the T2013 section here, The U.S. invading for Mexico's Industry and oil makes more sense. Even Division Cuba couldn't elevate a third tier internal defense structured army. I even threw in covert support from China.

Invading for Mexico's oil would have problems. In the 90s, half of their production came from the Cantarell field in the Gulf of Mexico off Campeche (the southwestern part of the Yucatan). The next most important field is the Golden Lane, across the Gulf of Mexico from the Yucatan. The largest reserves are in Chicontepec, but they're technically unfeasible to exploit (even now). That's near Mexico City. The oil fields are pretty much all in the south of Mexico, either on land or in the coastal waters, so an invasion from the north will have to drive through the entire country to reach the fields.

Industry I know less about, other than that (in our timeline) it spiked from the mid-90s (when American demand increased) until around 2000 (when China undercut Mexican labor costs). I don't know if the same spike would have happened in the T2K timeline.

[mpipes]

The Soviets didnt even have a 25MT warhead - and why would you use a 25MT warhead to take out just a refinery - plus I think the use of such big warheads would have been way beyond what was considered a limited strike - a 25 MT warhead would have destroyed most of the city and the base

I am thinking we are looking more at a 250kt weapon and not 25MT - that could explain the survival of the base- along with the nuke detonating to the south of the refinery where it still takes it out but not the base along with it

The SS-18 Mod3 carried a single 25Mt RV. We believed it was intended for NORAD HQ at Cheyenne Mountain and other super hardened sites.

[.45cultist]

Invading for Mexico's oil would have problems. In the 90s, half of their production came from the Cantarell field in the Gulf of Mexico off Campeche (the southwestern part of the Yucatan). The next most important field is the Golden Lane, across the Gulf of Mexico from the Yucatan. The largest reserves are in Chicontepec, but they're technically unfeasible to exploit (even now). That's near Mexico City. The oil fields are pretty much all in the south of Mexico, either on land or in the coastal waters, so an invasion from the north will have to drive through the entire country to reach the fields.

Industry I know less about, other than that (in our timeline) it spiked from the mid-90s (when American demand increased) until around 2000 (when China undercut Mexican labor costs). I don't know if the same spike would have happened in the T2K timeline.

Yes it has problems too, what if one has one of the factions ask for aid, another asks the Soviets and that leads to the invasion?

[Olefin]

The SS-18 Mod3 carried a single 25Mt RV. We believed it was intended for NORAD HQ at Cheyenne Mountain and other super hardened sites.

actually I was right - its a .25MT not a 25MT - Raellus had both in his post

but he is right about where it had to hit - the only way that Fort Bliss is spared is if the warhead goes off over Ciudad Juarez and misses to the south, still taking out the refinery with the thermal pulse but leaving Fort Bliss intact

[The Dark]

actually I was right - its a .25MT not a 25MT - Raellus had both in his post

but he is right about where it had to hit - the only way that Fort Bliss is spared is if the warhead goes off over Ciudad Juarez and misses to the south, still taking out the refinery with the thermal pulse but leaving Fort Bliss intact

Looking at NUKEMAP, a direct hit on the refinery will put the HQ of Fort Bliss on the edge of the radius for broken windows from a 25kT warhead, with a 50 percent chance of first-degree burns up to the middle of the cemetery. Most of Biggs Army Airfield would be outside of all effect radii (a tiny portion of the airfield is within the "slight chance of first-degree burn" radius), as would the vast ranges up to the border and into New Mexico (recall that Fort Bliss has the largest maneuver area of any base, at 992,000 acres, and is the second-largest facility overall, with only the adjacent White Sands being bigger). If it misses by a mile to the east or south, the base would be pretty much completely unscathed, and in any case the ranges will be undamaged.

[Olefin]

FYI the new stuff I am working on is a possible trilogy looking at events in the summer of 2001 in California, Arizona and New Mexico as Milgov forces and the weather changes both begin to take their toll on the Mexican forces in those states - which was never really looked at by the original writers as they stopped the timeline in the US basically in mid-April

I plan to address one of the big issues in the post T2K canon - the idea of the Mexican occupation of areas on CA north of San Diego - which considering basically all the water for those areas comes from the US and from areas under Milgov control would make almost impossible - especially as there is no electricity to run the pumps that move that water over the top of mountains

[Olefin]

One of the big things I saw as completely unrealistic in the 2300AD timeline is Mexico not only keeping Texas for close to a hundred years after the war but also most of the American Southwest as well - even to the point of the US not assisting the California rebels to win their fight against Mexico.

There is no way that the US, by a hundred years plus after the war, isnt rebuilt to where it could easily beat Mexico in a war. Plus to add to that almost the entire area they took in Arizona and California is totally dependent on water from areas the US still has. There is no way you get Mexico keeping Los Angeles and Phoenix going without water from the Colorado or pumped from the north of California - certainly not as cities numbering in the multiple of millions.

That was a serious miss by the writers and one that really needs to be corrected.

Let alone the US allows Mexico to conquer all of Central America and Cuba long after the war? Sorry but not going to happen. Especially not Cuba - by that time the US has long built up again - and you are not going to see them let Mexico conquer Cuba and be able to possibly shut off access to the Gulf of Mexico.

And by then in the timeline the US was back in space as well - showing they are not some weakling of a country that Mexico could push around with ease.

[RN7]

One of the big things I saw as completely unrealistic in the 2300AD timeline is Mexico not only keeping Texas for close to a hundred years after the war but also most of the American Southwest as well - even to the point of the US not assisting the California rebels to win their fight against Mexico.

There is no way that the US, by a hundred years plus after the war, isnt rebuilt to where it could easily beat Mexico in a war. Plus to add to that almost the entire area they took in Arizona and California is totally dependent on water from areas the US still has. There is no way you get Mexico keeping Los Angeles and Phoenix going without water from the Colorado or pumped from the north of California - certainly not as cities numbering in the multiple of millions.

That was a serious miss by the writers and one that really needs to be corrected.

Let alone the US allows Mexico to conquer all of Central America and Cuba long after the war? Sorry but not going to happen. Especially not Cuba - by that time the US has long built up again - and you are not going to see them let Mexico conquer Cuba and be able to possibly shut off access to the Gulf of Mexico.

And by then in the timeline the US was back in space as well - showing they are not some weakling of a country that Mexico could push around with ease.


The Mexican invasion of the American southwest was I think one of the great escapes from realties in the Twilight War. I can see why GDW included it and the Mexicans could pull of an invasion in the scenario were the US is heavily damaged from nuclear attack. But invading the entire southwest and then holding and keeping it are two completely different things. Once US regular forces turn up after the Mexican invasion then its game over. The Mexicans are not well equipped enough to take on veteran US forces even with the Soviet Cuba Division helping them. Also the US civil population is as well armed as your average Mexican soldier.

Even if this was not the case once the rest of the US gets back on its feet then they are going to want their territory back, and without outside help (aka the French) the Mexicans wont be able to hold the southwest for long.

There are some alternative versions of 2300AD which place Cuba outside of Mexican control. Ben Levy's site even has Cuba as a US state. I think Puerto Rico is also now a US state in some versions. I've seen another scenario which has America retaking control of the southwest fairly quickly after Texas wins its independence from Mexico, and then invading and incorporating the whole of Baja California into the US.

[Olefin]

The Mexican invasion of the American southwest was I think one of the great escapes from realties in the Twilight War. I can see why GDW included it and the Mexicans could pull of an invasion in the scenario were the US is heavily damaged from nuclear attack. But invading the entire southwest and then holding and keeping it are two completely different things. Once US regular forces turn up after the Mexican invasion then its game over. The Mexicans are not well equipped enough to take on veteran US forces even with the Soviet Cuba Division helping them. Also the US civil population is as well armed as your average Mexican soldier.

Even if this was not the case once the rest of the US gets back on its feet then they are going to want their territory back, and without outside help (aka the French) the Mexicans wont be able to hold the southwest for long.

There are some alternative versions of 2300AD which place Cuba outside of Mexican control. Ben Levy's site even has Cuba as a US state. I think Puerto Rico is also now a US state in some versions. I've seen another scenario which has America retaking control of the southwest fairly quickly after Texas wins its independence from Mexico, and then invading and incorporating the whole of Baja California into the US.

Just the fact that most of the water going to Southern CA comes from water pumped over the mountains from areas under US control means Mexico could never hold that whole area. If you really want to stretch it if they can keep control of the Yuma area they could keep the water flowing (it moves by gravity) to San Diego and the Imperial Valley. Other than that once the US cuts off the water thats the end of the Mexican occupation of any sizeable area.

And I dont see France supporting a country occupying parts of the US no matter what - thats pretty much an act of war that the US would not have forgotten. No way does the US help the French at all in the Kafer War. They would have let the French spin in the wind after that.

[RN7]

Just the fact that most of the water going to Southern CA comes from water pumped over the mountains from areas under US control means Mexico could never hold that whole area. If you really want to stretch it if they can keep control of the Yuma area they could keep the water flowing (it moves by gravity) to San Diego and the Imperial Valley. Other than that once the US cuts off the water thats the end of the Mexican occupation of any sizeable area.

And I dont see France supporting a country occupying parts of the US no matter what - thats pretty much an act of war that the US would not have forgotten. No way does the US help the French at all in the Kafer War. They would have let the French spin in the wind after that.

The French didn't, but the only way that Mexico could keep control of the American southwest after the Twilight War would be if they did support Mexico.

[Olefin]

Its one of the things I am writing new modules about - to correct the situation in the Southwest and California to show a more realistic summer to early fall of 2001 that shows the US taking back some territory and the Mexicans having to fall back due to logistics and drought conditions taking their toll on their ability to hold ground - as well as having the Civil War sap any chance they have of reinforcing their people on the ground

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Before people get much hotter under the collar and hopefully to curtail further claims that the GDW writers missed the mark/didn't know what they were talking about/screwed up/etc. etc. about certain aspects, it's well worth remembering that the entire Twilight history was a backstory to the history they created for 2300AD. Specifically the "Great Game" that they played out to decide how the 2300AD world came about. The Twilight:2000 game grew from that backstory.

If it appears that they missed the mark on something it's more likely to be because they were writing in the details that they created from the Great Game and less likely that they were trying to create a real world flow of events for WW3.
I'm not saying that their events list is "right" and I'm not even saying it's "good" but it is a product of it being retroactively created to make a second game from an existing game.

[RN7]

Before people get much hotter under the collar and hopefully to curtail further claims that the GDW writers missed the mark/didn't know what they were talking about/screwed up/etc. etc. about certain aspects, it's well worth remembering that the entire Twilight history was a backstory to the history they created for 2300AD. Specifically the "Great Game" that they played out to decide how the 2300AD world came about. The Twilight:2000 game grew from that backstory.

If it appears that they missed the mark on something it's more likely to be because they were writing in the details that they created from the Great Game and less likely that they were trying to create a real world flow of events for WW3.
I'm not saying that their events list is "right" and I'm not even saying it's "good" but it is a product of it being retroactively created to make a second game from an existing game.


There have been similar questions/criticism's of the backstory history made on the 2300AD forums.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

There have been similar questions/criticism's of the backstory history made on the 2300AD forums.

Yeah, I've seen some of the critiques and for what it's worth, I do not disagree. I just find it a little irritating that the game designers get slagged off for getting something "wrong" when it's entirely likely they were not actually intending to get it "right" in any real world sense, in the first place. That seems to get forgotten in the rush to "correct" their "mistakes".

[kato13]

Yeah, I've seen some of the critiques and for what it's worth, I do not disagree. I just find it a little irritating that the game designers get slagged off for getting something "wrong" when it's entirely likely they were not actually intending to get it "right" in any real world sense, in the first place. That seems to get forgotten in the rush to "correct" their "mistakes".


Wrong is a VERY loaded term that I don't think I have ever used in this context and I would discourage others from using it as well.

For me objections to the T2k canon can be based on real world facts far more than other games as it is actually based on the real world. If the Greyhawk backstory had a reference to a river's flow being reversed by an actual God it is hard to say it is wrong. If T2k said a nuclear strike made the Mississippi River flow north we can ask with much more vigor , "How?". And attempt to look deeper.

I have been thinking about this game for 33 years. I try really hard to make canon work. The equipment for the 8th Mech from the Eastern Europe sourcebook is REALLY stretching logic for 1000 people to handle (Given they now have to cover every element of logistics). So i make the back story they had 4000 but lost over 2500 to both combat and the flu (possibly bioweapon). This paralyzes them with more equipment than they could possibly move. This is nowhere in canon but it works for me. Others could strip equipment or add more men or simply ignore the logical problems with such a small group having so much. There is no "right" answer.

Even with the original design team and our group's followup thought and effort, I am sure everyone of us comes across some facts from the backstory where we go. "Hold on a second, what happened???" For some it is 1% for others it is maybe 25% plus.

Most often the biggest objections come from our own personal areas of knowledge and expertise (One of the reasons i replace RESET in Krakow). That is why I encourage discussion here, I know a lot about many things, but no one person knows everything and some people have details or opinion I would have never thought of or been able to research.

Of my tweaks to my timeline and my adjustments to canon probably over 75% came from others sharing. Often an idea I had for 20 years gets replaced with something I read here (or other T2k sources) that simply makes more sense to me. Doesn't make canon wrong, or my prior thoughts wrong, just shows things can evolve. Especially as more information and opinions come to light.

As always I am worried about canon wars here so I feel the need to drop in once in a while and try to keep things cool.

I personally still like the idea of canon 1.5 for all new stuff based on updating V 1.0 with new information. It was suggested for the DC group stuff but things got so bitter then it never really took of.

People seem to respect "oh you are V2? I do V1 as my players like the cold war aspect, but hey the game is still 85% the same and maybe 5000 people still play so lets be bros". I really hoped that 1.5 could have been the same but Arch Duke Ferdinand was already long dead and the trenches were already dug.

Perhaps in any movement forward words like "not canon", "wrong", "incorrect" and "replace" would be lessened and "different version", "alternate", "updated" and "enhanced" used. This small change might make any Us vs. Them mentality a little less strong.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

And I pretty much agree with all you've said here Kato, I am complete agreement that canon material suffers from problems, misunderstandings, lack of knowledge and contradictions, some minor, some glaringly bad.

There is absolutely nothing wrong in having your own opinion on how the game history could, would or should have gone down and there's absolutely nothing wrong with wanting to change it to make it more suited to your game group or to your own tastes or to your own beliefs.
As mentioned, I just get a little irked when the efforts of the original designers are belittled by people who have their own opinions about how it would really have happened when it seems they never stop to consider what the original design goals were.

The original designers were not striving for a perfect simulation of WW3, they were retroactively creating the history from the basis of another game. They did this so that they could create a military style game without constraining the PCs to total military control, they were trying to make a game where the PC group could go off on adventures like other RPGs and were also trying to make a game world that would still have the opportunities for adventure once the PCs left Europe for North America.
They weren't trying to create a game where the players play out the Cold War of NATO versus WTO in a fight to the death. They already had boardgames for that.
Given those three known concepts, I find criticizing the lack of realism misses the point of what they were creating.

I do not particularly advocate for changing people's use of words to convey their beliefs however. If someone feels that a particular aspect is bad or even wrong, there is nothing wrong or incorrect in that, I just find the statements that the GDW designers dropped the ball misses the point of what they were trying to achieve and by inference even feels like a bit of an insult towards them.

[Olefin]

And now we have a chance to finally correct that canon with the ability to issue new modules and sourcebooks. And we can correct many of the mistakes that were made not by wholesale changes but by making tweaks here and there.

And frankly correcting the 2300AD timeline as it pertains to the US and Mexico isnt going to disrupt that timeline in any huge way. Mexico is a VERY MINOR player in that timeline - and I suspect that moving the border between then two back to a more realistic location would in no way suddenly disrupt the game to the point that players throw their hands up and never play it again.

GDW's original authors made a lot of mistakes - that's pretty obvious (i.e having the Corpus Christi sink the freighter bringing the Cubans home in Gateway to the Spanish Main when other modules clearly have that sub in the hands of the UBF by that time jumps right up in my mind). And one of the biggest is the US leaving the Southwest , half of CA and Texas in Mexican hands - with dates saying that they annexed those areas long after the T2K war dates - and then saying that they would not have supported the rebels in CA when they rose against the Mexicans?

Sorry but no way in heck - and that needs to be fixed. Not explained away as "well no one expects a perfect game". No but a game needs to be believable as well - and there is no way the US goes out to conquer the stars and leaves a huge amount of its country under Mexican rule for THREE CENTURIES

that is one thing I will be working on with my new modules by the way - to enhance and in some ways correct canon - just as I did in the East African Sourcebook with the 2nd Armored Division - and I am thinking of looking at what happened to the units that came home after Omega as well

[Raellus]

Perhaps in any movement forward words like "not canon", "wrong", "incorrect" and "replace" would be lessened and "different version", "alternate", "updated" and "enhanced" used. This small change might make any Us vs. Them mentality a little less strong.

SSC, I share many of your sentiments. Kato, I agree with you on all counts. We're really quite spoiled, compared to the original T2K writers, with our easy access to information on the interwebs. We also have the luxury of time. Many of use have had 30+ to parse the published materials- plenty of time to find "mistakes" and mull over potential "fixes". The original authors had neither the web, nor a tiny fraction of that time (in fact, they were under deadline pressures), while they were creating their modules and sourcebooks.

Anyway, I really do think we should cut the creators some more slack. They did the best they could with the resources they had and they still managed to create something great (if they didn't, we wouldn't still be talking about it).

Olefin, has Marc Miller explicitly assented to "corrections" of material published in T2K canon? Is your approach a RETCON of HW or creating events by which HW can be reversed? In my mind, the former would create a dangerous precedent, whereas the latter gives ref's/players a powerful way to influence events in the game world.

[kato13]

We're really quite spoiled, compared to the original T2K writers, with our easy access to information on the interwebs.

At least once a month I try to do something the old ways. With paper and books and legwork.

Like yesterday my sister wanted to know how far away her sister in law's family was from the California Wild fires. I listened to the nightly news for reports on where the fires were and mapped them out on a road atlas and figured she was about 60 miles from the nearest fire. Had to wait for information and draw on acetate sheets and use a ruler, but I got it done.

Post North Korean EMP attack I will still be able to function for odd research projects ;)

I probably Could have done the same on the internet in about 45 seconds, but once in a while it is good to see just how far we have come.

[Olefin]

"Olefin, has Marc Miller explicitly assented to "corrections" of material published in T2K canon? Is your approach a RETCON of HW or creating events by which HW can be reversed? In my mind, the former would create a dangerous precedent, whereas the latter gives ref's/players a powerful way to influence events in the game world."

To answer you Raellus the answer is yes - but those corrections have to be run past him and approved. Can you or I or any other potential author just rewrite things whole hog - no. He made that clear to me when I proposed a rewrite of City of Angels and the UK Survival Guide to make them more realistic (i.e. actual gangs that were in LA instead of the cartoon figures that are in City of Angels for instance)

So for instance moving the 2nd Armored Division to Kenya as I did in the East Africa Sourcebook was run past him and is now canon - i.e. that is where they went after Omega in the canon- which he approved. Same with the nuclear attacks that happened in Africa as I depicted.

As he told me the canon was is open to interpretation and in some ways correction - but again as he said "in some ways". Thus HW as it stands to late April of 2001 is pretty much set in stone. However he is open to re-interpretation of events after that date.

And he has stated elsewhere that changes to the 2300AD timeline, as long as they dont change it too much, are possible as well. And if I remember right with the various changes to the 2300AD timeline I am not sure if it is still linked to the Twilight 2000 game per se - i.e. V1 was directly linked to 2300AD - but now I am not so sure

[.45cultist]

An ill-advised Mexican invasion, a U.S. counter offensive pushing into north Mexico and a broad swath of the SW in chaos, City of Angels Mexican army forces are a multinational brigand force. Division Cuba are actually Cubans from Africa or Middle East with Venezuelan and Chinese mixed in. The Oakland Flu stops most military action like the Spanish Flu of WWI. A mish-mash of V1/2 and T2013 items shoe horned together. Any incorrect things or imperfections add to the impression of fevered rumors and lack of fact
s, news.

[Olefin]

I am actually coming up with a very logical explanation that details how the Mexicans got Russian equipment in City of Angels and also explains what the heck a Russian task force was doing in the Gulf of California for the the USS Virginia task force to run into. Hopefully you guys will like it

[.45cultist]

I am actually coming up with a very logical explanation that details how the Mexicans got Russian equipment in City of Angels and also explains what the heck a Russian task force was doing in the Gulf of California for the the USS Virginia task force to run into. Hopefully you guys will like it

Cool! I'm not planning on publishing so anything more plausible than canon is fine by me.

[RN7]

I am actually coming up with a very logical explanation that details how the Mexicans got Russian equipment in City of Angels

This might not be that hard to explain. In the later stages of the Cold War the Soviets has a very large military presence in Cuba. The Lourdes SIGINT facility near Havana was the largest Soviet communications and SIGINT facility outside of the Soviet Union, used to relay transmissions to Soviet military units around the world and to monitor and collect American military transmissions. In the early 1990's Soviet military forces in Cuba stood at 7,700 personnel, including a motor rifle brigade of 2,800 troops organised into one armoured battalion, three motor rifle battalions, one artillery battalion, and one air defence units plus support. There were also 2,800 Soviet "advisors" and 2,100 Soviet troops assigned to signal intelligence. There were also as many 6,000 Soviet citizens in Cuba working in an advisory or technical role. There were further small detachments of Soviet troops/advisors in Nicaragua and Peru.

Cuba also providing landing bases for Tu-95D Bear bombers configured for reconnaissance, but capable of carrying nuclear bombs or launching nuclear missiles. The supersonic Tu-22 Backfire strategic bomber could also fly to Cuba, and at least three and maybe six Cuban airfields can handle the Backfire. The Soviets also supplied Cuba with a wing of Mig-27 fighter-bombers in addition to Mig-23 fighters, capable of carrying nuclear or conventional payloads up to 1,500 miles and believed to be frequently flown by Soviet and Warsaw Pact pilots. The Soviets also sent twenty-four AN-26 transport planes to Cuba, which are capable of carrying troops anywhere in the Caribbean region including Florida and Mexico. Batteries of modified SA-2 anti aircraft missiles were also based in Cuba. These large missiles, often equipped with nuclear weapons, can be employed in a surface-to-surface mode by the simple addition of a booster. They have an operational range in excess of 150 miles and could be used against ground targets in Florida.

Soviet warships also frequently called at Cuban ports, to train with the Cuban Navy, and patrol the southern and eastern coasts of the U.S. after replenishment in Cuba. Soviet warships seen in Cuba included missile cruisers, destroyers and submarines. The Punta Movida complex, a Soviet built facility linked by rail to Cienfuegos, was used to service nuclear weapons from Soviet submarines. Soviet marine research and space support ships also operated from Cuba, and intelligence collection ships based in Cuba operated off the east coast of the U.S.

Once war breaks out between NATO and the Warsaw Pact then Cuba will become very isolated, but before the Twilight War it would have been quite normal for Soviet ships and aircraft to visit Cuba. From when the Soviets invade China in 1995 to the period of German Reunification up until December 1996, NATO was not at war with the Warsaw Pact. It would also be reasonable to expect the Soviets to reinforce their bases and units overseas during this period, as this was exactly what the Americans, British and French would be doing. It would not be difficult for the Soviet to ship armoured vehicles, artillery and other weapons to Cuba by sea or air. Although the Americans would be monitoring Soviet air and shipping movements at this time and would notice any Soviet ships or aircraft visiting Mexico, it could be sent from Cuba to Mexico aboard Cuban aircraft or cargo ships. It could even have been sent through Nicaragua or some other location via ships of another nationality, before the rest of NATO crosses into East Germany and starts the Twilight War.


and also explains what the heck a Russian task force was doing in the Gulf of California for the the USS Virginia task force to run into. Hopefully you guys will like it

This might be more difficult to explain, as I would expect most Soviet surface ships to have been sunk or moored at some remote Soviet port at this stage of the Twilight War.

[Olefin]

Actually my idea is that the Soviets send a task force thru the Pacific escorting freighters that have equipment that was supposed to go to reinforce Soviet Division Cuba. The ships get to Baja, where the Soviets hear that a US Task Force is in the area. The Soviets sortie and fight the US and both sides basically get wiped out with the Virginia barely making it to shore.

Meanwhile the Mexican Constitutionalists, who need equipment badly, and with the Soviet naval forces destroyed grab it and ship it to California where it goes to equip the 1a Brigada - their biggest force in the area - which is about the size of the four Forces described in City of Angels - and bingo you get why the Soviet ships were in the area and how the Mexican Army in City of Angels - or at least that particular unit- got Soviet vehicles and armor

[RN7]

City of Angels would not be my favourite sourcebook for many a reason.

[Olefin]

Oh I know - its not a very good book - but it does give a good reason for having the Soviet naval forces there to fight the Virginia in Satellite Down - thats how the Mexicans on the West Coast ended up getting Soviet equipment - i.e. why are a force of oil powered Soviet destroyers are all the way into the Gulf of Mexico - well that would explain it if they were delivering equipment for the Division Cuba and got into a losing gunfight in the process and the Mexicans stole the equipment to use it themselves

[RN7]

Oh I know - its not a very good book - but it does give a good reason for having the Soviet naval forces there to fight the Virginia in Satellite Down - thats how the Mexicans on the West Coast ended up getting Soviet equipment - i.e. why are a force of oil powered Soviet destroyers are all the way into the Gulf of Mexico - well that would explain it if they were delivering equipment for the Division Cuba and got into a losing gunfight in the process and the Mexicans stole the equipment to use it themselves

But the Soviets or Cuba could have delivered equipment to Mexico before the Twilight War starts as well. Certainly the Mexicans would have needed better or heavier armour and weapons than what they had in real life to have had a chance against American forces once they cross the U.S. border.

[Olefin]

There is no way that Mexico would have taken Soviet equipment before the war started with the US - that would have led to the US, who was at war with the Soviets, being much better prepared for war with Mexico, even most likely to the point of a pre-emptive strike against Mexico.

After Mexico invades the US thats one thing - but beforehand wouldnt have happened

Besides if you look at their army if they had gotten more equipment from anyone it would have been France - most of their APC's were French for instance as were their armored cars - and the Mexican logistics system was bad enough as is to incorporate material from another country's design practices and spare parts as well

Plus keep in mind that Mexico wasnt planning for war with the US - the war was very much a come as you are war - if you look at the Challenge Magazine article on the Mexican invasion you can tell that it was close to impromptu - i.e. lots of reinforcing units werent even in position yet when the invasion happened

plus by mid 1998 most of the US heavy armor is either in Europe, Iran or Korea - what they faced was mostly light infantry and security units - which is why they got as far as they did - basically Soviet Division Cuba stopped the 49th and saved their position in Texas and the 40th only had a grab bag of armor and that was enough to stop them in CA - its why I said that the chances of them holding onto the American Southwest, or at least as much as 2300AD said they did is nil

as in nada, zilch, zero

however holding onto a smaller area might be possible - but there is no way the US just sits there and lets them keep half of CA, over half of AZ and NM and all of Texas - sorry but that is completo sin sentido - i.e. complete nonsense - and the fact the the US controls the water is the big factor - I have a feeling the original authors never took the time to research that fact

[RN7]

There is no way that Mexico would have taken Soviet equipment before the war started with the US - that would have led to the US, who was at war with the Soviets, being much better prepared for war with Mexico, even most likely to the point of a pre-emptive strike against Mexico.

Unless Mexico was getting weapons that would be a real threat to U.S. forces such as jet fighters, ballistic missiles and long ranged air defence missiles, the Americans would not be that concerned about Mexico buying a few Soviet tanks and artillery. Many other countries bought weapons from the Soviets and they were not aligned with the Soviet Union. Also the Americans could only stop Mexico from buying American or NATO weapons.

After Mexico invades the US thats one thing - but beforehand wouldnt have happened

Besides if you look at their army if they had gotten more equipment from anyone it would have been France - most of their APC's were French for instance as were their armored cars - and the Mexican logistics system was bad enough as is to incorporate material from another country's design practices and spare parts as well

Plus keep in mind that Mexico wasnt planning for war with the US - the war was very much a come as you are war - if you look at the Challenge Magazine article on the Mexican invasion you can tell that it was close to impromptu - i.e. lots of reinforcing units werent even in position yet when the invasion happened

It would be a lot easier getting Soviet weapons before the Twilight War starts. Afterwards it would be very hard to get Soviet weapons to Mexico. The fact that the Soviet Division Cuba was even deployed to Mexico is one of the mysteries of T2K.

Mexican forces at this time used a mixture of American and French equipment, much of it older. But City of Angels has the Mexican occupation force equipped in its entirety with Soviet armoured vehicles. This fact stands out like a sore thumb, but here we have it. How did they get it? Who knows, but there is obviously not an awful lot of it. Maybe Division Cuba transferred some of their vehicles to the Mexicans to stiffen them up on the front line in Southern California.

I don't know what the Mexicans were planning before the war, maybe it was an opportunistic land grab. But it clearly hasn't worked out to well for them even in canon T2K. All of their forces are over extended, and many units have split into rival factions or just fallen apart and turned to marauding.

plus by mid 1998 most of the US heavy armor is either in Europe, Iran or Korea - what they faced was mostly light infantry and security units - which is why they got as far as they did - basically Soviet Division Cuba stopped the 49th and saved their position in Texas and the 40th only had a grab bag of armor and that was enough to stop them in CA - its why I said that the chances of them holding onto the American Southwest, or at least as much as 2300AD said they did is nil

as in nada, zilch, zero

however holding onto a smaller area might be possible - but there is no way the US just sits there and lets them keep half of CA, over half of AZ and NM and all of Texas - sorry but that is completo sin sentido - i.e. complete nonsense - and the fact the the US controls the water is the big factor - I have a feeling the original authors never took the time to research that fact

I don't think all of the U.S. armoured forces were deployed overseas, although there probably wasn't much in the southwest when the Mexicans crossed the border. I am not disagreeing with you over the facts of the Mexican invasion of the American southwest. I think the Mexicans could have crossed over and overran some disorientated and badly prepared lighter U.S. forces in the early stages of the invasion. But I would not expect then to hold U.S. territory for too long afterwards.

[mpipes]

Here is my take on Mexican military power buildup. I have never believed Mexico could mount a successful invasion with some major pre-war developments.

MEXICAN MILITARY BUILDUP NOTES

Mexico discovered and began earnest development of extensive deposits of oil and gas, titanium, gold, and silver in the late 1970s and early 1980s. By 1979, with the US economy suffering through oil shortages and other disruptions to energy and other needs, the Mexican government became increasingly concerned about its country’s ability to forestall a possible invasion should the US become desperately short of energy supplies. Mexico was also increasingly becoming a “rich” nation, but its reputation suffered on the world stage because of its lack of participation in international affairs.
As Mexico pondered its future in the world, it seemed obvious that one avenue was to expand participation in world affairs through peace keeping missions with the UN. First, Mexico amended its constitution to permit deployment of up to a battalion without a declaration of war to support UN missions. Second, Mexico embarked on a program to markedly expand its military forces. Finally, its diplomatic service and foreign minister became more vocal and assertive in promoting foreign business and trade with oil sales increasingly aimed at European and Pacific rim countries.
Mexico approached Israel to purchase Merkava Mk II, M50, and M51 tanks and Kifir fighters in 1980. However, the US moved in to block sales of the Kifir and pressured Israel to not sale the advanced Merkava tank to Mexico. The US also offered to sale retired USN frigates to Mexico and more F-5E fighters. The US also deemed the sale of Israeli M50 and M51 tanks as sufficient to cover Mexico’s defense needs, but did offer to sale a quantity of M48A3s to Mexico. The Mexican government considered the offer patronizing and insulting, viewing the Americans as trying to dictate Mexico’s force structure and defense needs. It rejected the offer out of hand, although Mexico operated 18 F-5E contracted for in the 1970s.
In 1985, Mexico approached France and Germany, which were both very willing to sale weapons to the Mexicans and not worried about irritating the American government. From France, Mexico concluded a deal to purchase 54 Mirage F-1E multi-role fighters, 60 ex-French Jaguar A attack fighters, and 300 AMX-30S tanks as well as APCs and light armor. The deal called for re-manufacturing surplus AMX-30S tanks with French assistance into TAB-30s. Mexico also purchased AMX Mk F3 L30 155mm, AMX Mk F3 L22 155mm, and AMX VCA artillery support vehicles. Upgunned AMX-13s and ERC-90s were included as well. Mexico also negotiated to buy 28 Mirage 4000 fighters and 100 AMX-40 tanks along with a license to build AMX-40 tanks. It also had an option to buy 20 more Mirage 4000 fighters, 20 AMX-40 tanks, and 100 AMX-30 tanks, which Mexico exercised in 1986.
From Germany, Mexico purchased five MEKO 360 destroyer/frigates, seven MEKO 140 frigate/corvettes, and four MEKO 200 frigates. Mexico also bought 30 M-48A3s from German stocks as an interim measure till the TAB-30s entered service. The M48A3s entered service in 1987 (later returned to Germany after war broke out). Mexico also managed to buy a few Merkava II tanks for evaluation and followed through with buying obsolete M-4 Sherman variants from Israel.
After German reunification, as Germany initially sought to dispose of East Germany’s military equipment, Mexico entered negotiations to purchase additional arms. In 1992, a deal was struck with the Germans purchasing 3 Kolin-class frigates, 9 minesweepers, 58 MiG-21M Fishbed-Js along with 7 MiG-21UM trainers, as well as 400 BTR-70s APCs, and 12 Mil-24D attack helicopters. However, by the end of 1992, Germany re-evaluated its decision to essentially de-mobilize the bulk of the East German military. The reality of the Soviet’s behavior post-coup was rapidly dispelling belief in the end of the “Cold War,” and it became increasingly evident that the Cold War was only paused. Although the frigates, minesweepers, helicopters, and MiGs were delivered as planned, the BTR-70 sale was canceled. Instead, 300 BTR-60s and two additional Mil-24Ds were delivered. Mexico also managed to purchase 112 SO-122 self-propelled howitzer and 96 D-30 122mm and 104 L118 105mm towed howitzers. Mexico also purchased a number of MiG-23s (18 MiG-23BN, 9 MiG-23MFs, and 2 MiG-23UBs) from Germany. Germany also included a number of MiG-21F-13s still held in their reserve stocks. Over 400 air-to-air missiles were also included (AA-2s, AA-7s, AA-8s, and AA-11s). A number of ex-Cuban Air Force pilots and personnel were successfully recruited to aid the Mexican Air Force’s integration of the new equipment
Despite the outbreak of war in 1995, Mexico received its purchases on time from France and even managed to purchase additional fighters. However, one MEKO 140 and one MEKO 200 were never delivered by Germany, with both diverted to German needs. By 1995, Mexico was producing the AMX-40 at a rate of 120 tanks a year as well as APCs. Its military was considered well trained and formidable in its overall power and competence by Latin American governments. Although the US government was aware of the build-up, most US officials, and the military, continued to view the Mexican military with relative disdain. That did not last long as the Mexican army steam rolled onto the central plains and into California and Texas in 1998. By 1999, the Mexican army was rightly regarded as the best trained military force in the Americas; better on average than the Russians and the National Guard units in that theater. Forcing them out was going to be a challenge.
By 1998 and the start of the war with America, Mexico had in service the following MBTs:
TAB-30 358
AMX-30 16
AMX-30S 22
AMX-40 503
Leopard 1A6 60 (with French GIAT 120mm guns)
Merkava II 12
M50 136
M51 322
TOTAL 1429
The Mexican Air Force in 1998 included the following combat aircraft:
Mirage F-1E 130
Mirage F-1S 14
MiG-21F-13 36
MiG-21M 58
MiG-21UM 7
MiG-23BN 30
MiG-23MF 10
MiG-23UB 3
Mirage 4000 70
Jaguar A 76
L-39Z 27
F-5E 28
TOTAL 470
The MiG-21Ms, MiG-23BNs/MFs and L-39Zs had been updated to use Magic II IRMs, which the Mexican’s possessed in considerable numbers. The Israelis also updated a number of MiG-21M to use the Python-4. The MiG-21F-13s continued to use AA-8 and AA-11 missiles, but they were for the most part retained for air defense in Mexico, though the pilots primarily trained for the attack role (armed with a pair of rocket pods and two 1100-lb bombs) and used that training during the civil war, hitting rebel ground forces advancing on Mexico City. A few of the F-13s (about 12) could use the Magic II as well. Mexican combat squadrons numbered between 12 to 20 aircraft. A few foreign “contractors” were available as well, including Russian, Cuban, French, and Spanish pilots – between 40 and 50. The Mirage pilots were considered the best, but the top scorer was a Mexican MiG-21M pilot, Jose Chevas, using mostly Python-4 IRMs (47 confirmed kills by 2000) and flying over the California and New Mexico fronts.
Still, the Mexican Army in 1998 really comprised a motley assortment of both WWII era light armor and more modern armored vehicles ranging from upgunned 1950s AMX-13s to modern AMX-40 tanks. Despite this (and the logistics challenge that inevitably followed) Mexico proceeded to overrun much of the US southwest and Great Plains.
After the invasion, Mexico also captured over 250 intact M-60A1 and M-60A3 awaiting upgrade, and a further 57 M-60A4s, as well as over 450 M113s. These were placed into service along with 84 captured M-48A5s. By late 2000, maintaining all these varied tank types was challenging to say the least, and many were sidelined by maintenance and repair issues, not to mention lack of fuel.

[Olefin]

If you look at what engaged them when they invaded there wasnt much in the way of armor

49th Armored - biggest armored division that directly engaged the Mexicans - they never sent the two training brigades which to me makes no sense - they did well against the Mexicans and then ran into Soviet Division Cuba and got their butts handed to them

40th Mech - a new unit that had a grab bag of armor attached to it - meaning that they never had their full complement or even close to it - which can be seen by how many engineering "tanks" they used

46th Infantry - got overrun when stretched out badly and wasnt exactly a armor heavy unit to begin with

then you have two MP formations in CA and light infantry divisions that basically had no armor except M113's

and remember Mexico started the war with 500 or so APC's, many of them armed with 20mm cannons, as well as a good amount of armored cars that had a 90mm anti-tank gun - so against most of those units I just described they actually were close to one on one or better - and with the numbers involved they had numerical superiority as well - and most likely had gas and diesel when a lot of US units had already converted over to alcohol

and the date of the invasion - June of 1998- means that what was left of the US Air Force in the states was probably very limited indeed

[Olefin]

Here is my take on Mexican military power buildup. I have never believed Mexico could mount a successful invasion with some major pre-war developments.

MEXICAN MILITARY BUILDUP NOTES

Mexico discovered and began earnest development of extensive deposits of oil and gas, titanium, gold, and silver in the late 1970s and early 1980s. By 1979, with the US economy suffering through oil shortages and other disruptions to energy and other needs, the Mexican government became increasingly concerned about its country’s ability to forestall a possible invasion should the US become desperately short of energy supplies. Mexico was also increasingly becoming a “rich” nation, but its reputation suffered on the world stage because of its lack of participation in international affairs.
As Mexico pondered its future in the world, it seemed obvious that one avenue was to expand participation in world affairs through peace keeping missions with the UN. First, Mexico amended its constitution to permit deployment of up to a battalion without a declaration of war to support UN missions. Second, Mexico embarked on a program to markedly expand its military forces. Finally, its diplomatic service and foreign minister became more vocal and assertive in promoting foreign business and trade with oil sales increasingly aimed at European and Pacific rim countries.
Mexico approached Israel to purchase Merkava Mk II, M50, and M51 tanks and Kifir fighters in 1980. However, the US moved in to block sales of the Kifir and pressured Israel to not sale the advanced Merkava tank to Mexico. The US also offered to sale retired USN frigates to Mexico and more F-5E fighters. The US also deemed the sale of Israeli M50 and M51 tanks as sufficient to cover Mexico’s defense needs, but did offer to sale a quantity of M48A3s to Mexico. The Mexican government considered the offer patronizing and insulting, viewing the Americans as trying to dictate Mexico’s force structure and defense needs. It rejected the offer out of hand, although Mexico operated 18 F-5E contracted for in the 1970s.
In 1985, Mexico approached France and Germany, which were both very willing to sale weapons to the Mexicans and not worried about irritating the American government. From France, Mexico concluded a deal to purchase 54 Mirage F-1E multi-role fighters, 60 ex-French Jaguar A attack fighters, and 300 AMX-30S tanks as well as APCs and light armor. The deal called for re-manufacturing surplus AMX-30S tanks with French assistance into TAB-30s. Mexico also purchased AMX Mk F3 L30 155mm, AMX Mk F3 L22 155mm, and AMX VCA artillery support vehicles. Upgunned AMX-13s and ERC-90s were included as well. Mexico also negotiated to buy 28 Mirage 4000 fighters and 100 AMX-40 tanks along with a license to build AMX-40 tanks. It also had an option to buy 20 more Mirage 4000 fighters, 20 AMX-40 tanks, and 100 AMX-30 tanks, which Mexico exercised in 1986.
From Germany, Mexico purchased five MEKO 360 destroyer/frigates, seven MEKO 140 frigate/corvettes, and four MEKO 200 frigates. Mexico also bought 30 M-48A3s from German stocks as an interim measure till the TAB-30s entered service. The M48A3s entered service in 1987 (later returned to Germany after war broke out). Mexico also managed to buy a few Merkava II tanks for evaluation and followed through with buying obsolete M-4 Sherman variants from Israel.
After German reunification, as Germany initially sought to dispose of East Germany’s military equipment, Mexico entered negotiations to purchase additional arms. In 1992, a deal was struck with the Germans purchasing 3 Kolin-class frigates, 9 minesweepers, 58 MiG-21M Fishbed-Js along with 7 MiG-21UM trainers, as well as 400 BTR-70s APCs, and 12 Mil-24D attack helicopters. However, by the end of 1992, Germany re-evaluated its decision to essentially de-mobilize the bulk of the East German military. The reality of the Soviet’s behavior post-coup was rapidly dispelling belief in the end of the “Cold War,” and it became increasingly evident that the Cold War was only paused. Although the frigates, minesweepers, helicopters, and MiGs were delivered as planned, the BTR-70 sale was canceled. Instead, 300 BTR-60s and two additional Mil-24Ds were delivered. Mexico also managed to purchase 112 SO-122 self-propelled howitzer and 96 D-30 122mm and 104 L118 105mm towed howitzers. Mexico also purchased a number of MiG-23s (18 MiG-23BN, 9 MiG-23MFs, and 2 MiG-23UBs) from Germany. Germany also included a number of MiG-21F-13s still held in their reserve stocks. Over 400 air-to-air missiles were also included (AA-2s, AA-7s, AA-8s, and AA-11s). A number of ex-Cuban Air Force pilots and personnel were successfully recruited to aid the Mexican Air Force’s integration of the new equipment
Despite the outbreak of war in 1995, Mexico received its purchases on time from France and even managed to purchase additional fighters. However, one MEKO 140 and one MEKO 200 were never delivered by Germany, with both diverted to German needs. By 1995, Mexico was producing the AMX-40 at a rate of 120 tanks a year as well as APCs. Its military was considered well trained and formidable in its overall power and competence by Latin American governments. Although the US government was aware of the build-up, most US officials, and the military, continued to view the Mexican military with relative disdain. That did not last long as the Mexican army steam rolled onto the central plains and into California and Texas in 1998. By 1999, the Mexican army was rightly regarded as the best trained military force in the Americas; better on average than the Russians and the National Guard units in that theater. Forcing them out was going to be a challenge.
By 1998 and the start of the war with America, Mexico had in service the following MBTs:
TAB-30 358
AMX-30 16
AMX-30S 22
AMX-40 503
Leopard 1A6 60 (with French GIAT 120mm guns)
Merkava II 12
M50 136
M51 322
TOTAL 1429
The Mexican Air Force in 1998 included the following combat aircraft:
Mirage F-1E 130
Mirage F-1S 14
MiG-21F-13 36
MiG-21M 58
MiG-21UM 7
MiG-23BN 30
MiG-23MF 10
MiG-23UB 3
Mirage 4000 70
Jaguar A 76
L-39Z 27
F-5E 28
TOTAL 470
The MiG-21Ms, MiG-23BNs/MFs and L-39Zs had been updated to use Magic II IRMs, which the Mexican’s possessed in considerable numbers. The Israelis also updated a number of MiG-21M to use the Python-4. The MiG-21F-13s continued to use AA-8 and AA-11 missiles, but they were for the most part retained for air defense in Mexico, though the pilots primarily trained for the attack role (armed with a pair of rocket pods and two 1100-lb bombs) and used that training during the civil war, hitting rebel ground forces advancing on Mexico City. A few of the F-13s (about 12) could use the Magic II as well. Mexican combat squadrons numbered between 12 to 20 aircraft. A few foreign “contractors” were available as well, including Russian, Cuban, French, and Spanish pilots – between 40 and 50. The Mirage pilots were considered the best, but the top scorer was a Mexican MiG-21M pilot, Jose Chevas, using mostly Python-4 IRMs (47 confirmed kills by 2000) and flying over the California and New Mexico fronts.
Still, the Mexican Army in 1998 really comprised a motley assortment of both WWII era light armor and more modern armored vehicles ranging from upgunned 1950s AMX-13s to modern AMX-40 tanks. Despite this (and the logistics challenge that inevitably followed) Mexico proceeded to overrun much of the US southwest and Great Plains.
After the invasion, Mexico also captured over 250 intact M-60A1 and M-60A3 awaiting upgrade, and a further 57 M-60A4s, as well as over 450 M113s. These were placed into service along with 84 captured M-48A5s. By late 2000, maintaining all these varied tank types was challenging to say the least, and many were sidelined by maintenance and repair issues, not to mention lack of fuel.

here is the problem - given the US forces left in the country you would either need to completely change them over to armor heavy forces - or the Mexican Army wouldnt have been stopped at all - basically if they had that force level they would have taken the entire American West and deep into the South - i.e. basically its game over unless the US starts to use nukes on its own soil

So either you need to scrap the US Army Guide and bring a lot more armor home - or have the Mexicans take all of Texas, OK, Kansas, AZ, NM, CA, UT, CO, AK, NV and maybe even MO before they are stopped after a series of nuclear strikes on our own soil

[Raellus]

Anders Larsson (aka Turboswede) created a pretty good Mexican Army sourcebook. IMHO, he did a good job beefing up the Mexican Army without making it too strong. His added armor is mostly up-gunned Shermans and AMX-30s, which makes sense to me.

http://www.pmulcahy.com/PDFs/Mexican_Army_Sourcebook.pdf

My issue with the Soviet AFVs being delivered after the U.S. and U.S.S.R. at war is that the USN would really have to have dropped the ball, or been severely degraded, to allow a large merchantman or two to cross the Pacific from the U.S.S.R.. That's not to say that it couldn't happen, but I just don't see the Soviets risking something like that.

The idea that the equipment was transshipped via Cuba before the U.S. and U.S.S.R. were officially at war makes a bit more sense to me. Perhaps the AFVs were originally intended for Division Cuba but then given to the Mexicans shortly after they invaded the SW?

Could the equipment have come south from the Soviet forces in Alaska and/or the Pacific Northwest? Highly unlikely, IMO, but it's another option to consider.

Overall, I am one who can see how a surprise Mexican invasion, fueled by gasoline & diesel, and using civilian trucking to transport troops and supplies, could swiftly overrun the U.S. Southwest while the bulk of U.S. forces were dispersed to Europe, Korea, and the Middle East- even without an injection of more armor. That said, I like the idea of adding a bit of heavy armor- it makes the scenario more plausible from a macro perspective, and interesting from a micro (i.e. player playing in a CONUS campaign) perspective.

[Olefin]

You dont really need the heavy armor to make it work - not when you have Soviet Division Cuba along for the ride - you basically have one heavy armored division fighting another one in Texas - and then a bunch of mechanized units with armored cars and APC's, some with TOW's fighting a single mech division that isnt even close to full strength, a very weak mech inf division, and a bunch of light units in CA - and AZ and NM basically left holding the bag trying to fight what they sent with reservist and NG units

and how do the Soviets send that armor across the Pacific - answer - the destroyer task force that took on the Virginia in Satellite Down - basically sent to escort three to four freighters with equipment and then destroyers lost against the Virginia - explains the Soviet equipment that was in City of Angels - i.e. 1a Brigada takes huge losses and gets re-equipped - by 2001 timing most of what they received is either gone from fighting or out of action due to maintenance issues associated with lack of spare parts and lack of trained maintenance personnel

[Rainbow Six]

If you look at what engaged them when they invaded there wasnt much in the way of armor

17tth Armoured Brigade was based at Fort Irwin, California in the V1 timeline. I'm well aware that it wasn't a heavy armoured brigade but it did have a number of M551 Sheridans which might have been bad news for any Mexican forces riding in unarmoured vehicles (requisitioned pick ups, etc)

And if you were a Mexican scout and you saw one of these would you know the main gun is a mock up?

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:M551_Sheridan_vismod_T-80.jpg

The idea that the equipment was transshipped via Cuba before the U.S. and U.S.S.R. were officially at war makes a bit more sense to me. Perhaps the AFVs were originally intended for Division Cuba but then given to the Mexicans shortly after they invaded the SW?

This strikes me as the most plausible explanation.

The idea of a Soviet merchant convoy making a pacific crossing at a late stage in the War to deliver equipment to Division Cuba makes zero sense to me. I'd suggest that if the Soviets were in a position to send such a convoy its most likely purpose would be to repatriate Division Cuba back to the Soviet Union.

[Olefin]

in the new module I am working on I actually have the 177th engaging them as they came across the border and buying time for them to try to get reinforcements to stop the attack - but being overwhelmed due to sheer numbers - keep in mind this isnt a bunch of guys in trucks - the 1a Brigada and the Cav unit that came in had a bunch of APC's and armored cars with 90mm guns - taking them on with old Sheridans is not going to be fun

and I think the convoy is very realistic - it completely explains the reason Soviet destroyers were in the Gulf of Mexico - why were they there - they were escorting a shipment of equipment that was supposed to go to Division Cuba - and instead it got taken by the Mexicans - i.e. it wasnt enough to form a whole new unit- just reinforcements to make the unit stronger and fill in holes in their TOE -

i.e. Satellite Down is canon saying the Soviets sent that destroyer task force - so the question is why - I highly doubt it was just to hunt down the Virginia - thats a lot of scarce oil to burn for a ship that was leaving the Pacific

[RN7]

What the Mexican Army had at this time in real life.

45x Light Tanks (45x M-3/5)
310x Reconnaissance (50x M-8, 120x ERC-90F, 40x M11 VBL, 70x DN-3/5, 30x MOWAG,)
135x APC (40x HWK-11, 30x M-3 Halftrack, 40x VCR/TT, 25x VAP 3550) (* Marines had 25x VAP 3550)
5x SP Artillery (5x M-8)
126x Towed Artillery (118x 105mm M116, M2A1, M3 & M101) (* Marines had 8x 105mm)
30x Anti-Tank Guns (30x 37mm M3)
1,500x Mortars (60x 120mm, 1,440x 81mm)
40x Air Defence Guns (30x M-55)
? Anti-Tank (Milan)
? Recoilless Rifle (106mm M40A1)

The Air Force had........

11x F-5E/F
70x PC-7
12x AT-33
10x IAI-201
25x Armed Helicopters

plus and assortment of very old transport aircraft, a few modern light transport and patrol aircraft, and some VIP jets. They also had about 40 medium and light helicopters, some new, some old and many of them commercial grade.


According to Paul Mulcahy's Mexcan Army Sourcebook.........

Under a modernization program initiated in the late 1980s, the Mexican government intended to substantially upgrade its mechanized capabilities. In 1988 SEDENA purchased 300 AMX-30 main battle tanks from the French government which had been held in reserve since the late 1970’s. Part of the agreement involved the local upgrading of the tanks to B2 standard with replacement diesel power packs by SNECMA and new GIAT 105mm guns. With the backing of the Mexican government, a joint venture (Tecnologías de la Defensa Nacional - “TDN”) was formed by Grupo Bocar and Grupo KUO to remanufacture French AMX-30s to AMX-30B2 standard, the refurbished tanks known as the TanqueMedio de Batalla-30 or TAB-30.

Along with tanks, SEDENA purchased France’s remaining inventory of AMX-13 series armored vehicles including the AMX-13 light tanks, AMX-VCI armored personnel carriers and Mk F3 self propelled howitzers. Throughout the 80’s and 90’s DieselNacional produced various versions of the “DN” series armored wheeled vehicle for the Mexican Army. Diesel Nacional was appointed the task of remanufacturing the French vehicles, many of which had not been operated in more than 20 years. In addition to domestic production, the Mexican army purchased a significant amount of new equipment, in many cases replacing equipment that dated from the World War II period. The army's inventory of missile systems was expanded and updated. Both the Milan and Eryx anti tank guided missile systems were acquired from France. In the air defense role Mexico purchased over 1,000 Mistral man portable surface to air missile systems from MBDA missile systems.

Since the 1950’s Mexico had been a major operator of the World War II vintage M7 self propelled 105mm howitzer. In 1990 Mexico purchased Israel’s stock of M7s. In addition to the M7 purchase, Mexico acquired over 200 Mk F3 155mm self propelled guns along with support vehicles from France and Belgium

[Olefin]

Actually you left out the 409 AMX-VCI APC's that were converted to DNC-1 and armed with a 20mm cannon - and which would been much more than a match for the M113's the Army light divisions were equipped with

and the Mexican Army Sourcebook is a fan canon piece not official - I tend to go with actual equipment - and like I said against what the US had left the Mexicans would have been able to do a lot of damage - this isnt a well equipped US Army that they were facing - you are looking at units short on fuel, with almost all their modern missiles and ammo sent overseas and low on spare parts and replacement vehicles

whereas the Mexican Army hadnt done any fighting as of yet - and keep in mind that the units taking on the Soviets in Alaska probably sucked up most of what there was in the US as to anti-tank and anti-air missiles and modern artillery ammo

you dont need an uber Mexican Army to do what they did in the canon as far as the initial invasion

because if you do make them that well equipped then they end up occupying half the US based on what was left here by mid 1998

and much of the fighting in places like California would have been done initially in built up areas - i.e. perfect places to ambush a modern tank with infantry - and except for the cadre they brought home for the 40th there were almost no combat vets in the US - a lot of the troops fighting them were training troops thrust into combat against armor - and even old armor can be damn impressive if you dont have any armor backing you up

Give the Mexicans whats in the fan canon sourcebook and they end up washing the dirt off their tanks using water from the Mississippi River and San Francisco Bay

[RN7]

Actually you left out the 409 AMX-VCI APC's that were converted to DNC-1 and armed with a 20mm cannon - and which would been much more than a match for the M113's the Army light divisions were equipped with

And were these in service during the Twilight War period?

From what I've seen Mexico bought the AMX-VCI after the end of the Cold War and they bought them from Belgium. In 1992 the Belgian Army has 510 AMX-VCI listed under its army, and with the Cold War in full swing I couldn't see them selling any to Mexico until they had started building a replacement.

and the Mexican Army Sourcebook is a fan canon piece not official - I tend to go with actual equipment - and like I said against what the US had left the Mexicans would have been able to do a lot of damage - this isnt a well equipped US Army that they were facing - you are looking at units short on fuel, with almost all their modern missiles and ammo sent overseas and low on spare parts and replacement vehicles

whereas the Mexican Army hadnt done any fighting as of yet - and keep in mind that the units taking on the Soviets in Alaska probably sucked up most of what there was in the US as to anti-tank and anti-air missiles and modern artillery ammo

you dont need an uber Mexican Army to do what they did in the canon as far as the initial invasion

because if you do make them that well equipped then they end up occupying half the US based on what was left here by mid 1998

and much of the fighting in places like California would have been done initially in built up areas - i.e. perfect places to ambush a modern tank with infantry - and except for the cadre they brought home for the 40th there were almost no combat vets in the US - a lot of the troops fighting them were training troops thrust into combat against armor - and even old armor can be damn impressive if you dont have any armor backing you up

Give the Mexicans whats in the fan canon sourcebook and they end up washing the dirt off their tanks using water from the Mississippi River and San Francisco Bay

Its the only extra material available relating to Mexican forces in the Twilight War. You can disagree or agree with it, but Mexican forces in real life were woefully outgunned by even the U.S. National Guard. They would need to upgrade their army to some degree to even have half a chance of invading American territory.

[The Dark]

And were these in service during the Twilight War period?

From what I've seen Mexico bought the AMX-VCI after the end of the Cold War and they bought them from Belgium. In 1992 the Belgian Army has 510 AMX-VCI listed under its army, and with the Cold War in full swing I couldn't see them selling any to Mexico until they had started building a replacement.According to Jane's, the first delivery of the DNC-1 was in 1993, the same year as the DNC-2/BDX. They're vulnerable to M2 bullets everywhere except possibly the glacis (the AMX-13 that the DNC-1 is based on is proof against 12.7mm on the front, but the DNC-1's armor is only 30mm instead of the AMX's 40mm).

[RN7]

According to Jane's, the first delivery of the DNC-1 was in 1993, the same year as the DNC-2/BDX. They're vulnerable to M2 bullets everywhere except possibly the glacis (the AMX-13 that the DNC-1 is based on is proof against 12.7mm on the front, but the DNC-1's armor is only 30mm instead of the AMX's 40mm).

Deliveries of AMX-VCI started in 1994 when 33 were registered as sold to Mexico. This was followed by 18 in 1995 and 22 in 1996. After that Belgium sold no more to Mexico, and other AMX-VCI's were later obtained from France.

However this in real life not the Twilight War. The AMX-VCI constituted one third of the Belgian Army's stock of tracked armoured personnel carriers. The rest were M113's, Spartans and AIFV-B's, and all the French Army's stocks of tracked armoured personnel carriers were AMX-10P's or AMX-VCI's. In the Twilight War timeline the Cold War is at 1980's levels and the Soviets are belligerent to the West. Belgian and French companies might be willing to sell new armoured vehicles to Mexico, but I cannot see Belgium of France transferring any armoured vehicles from their own armies to Mexico.

[Rainbow Six]

In the Twilight War timeline the Cold War is at 1980's levels and the Soviets are belligerent to the West. Belgian and French companies might be willing to sell new armoured vehicles to Mexico, but I cannot see Belgium of France transferring any armoured vehicles from their own armies to Mexico.
Agreed. You can't use a V1 timeline and real life inventories from the mid 1990's - the two are mutually exclusive. As an example, the British Army in the mid 1990's was around 18% smaller than it was in 1989 as a result of post Cold War cuts, with armoured Regiments particularly hard hit - halved from sixteen to eight. There is no way that it could have fielded the five Divisions that are listed in the v1 NATO Vehicle Guide / SGUK - a number of the Regiments listed no longer existed in real life.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Whoa whoa whoa... so let me get this right. Someone complains about the lack of proper research done by the original authors and then uses poor research himself to "correct" somebody's inventory for Mexico?
Like it's been pointed out already, using the post-Cold War inventory is bad, it screws up the inventories of other nations etc. etc. and for a Cold War game scenario, you can't get away with robbing Peter to pay Paul.

[.45cultist]

The implosion of the Mexican coalition could pull more units back home for a civil war. A campaign to offer the Soviets their own Omega could change things and stay close to canon.

[dragoon500ly]

If you look at what engaged them when they invaded there wasnt much in the way of armor

49th Armored - biggest armored division that directly engaged the Mexicans - they never sent the two training brigades which to me makes no sense - they did well against the Mexicans and then ran into Soviet Division Cuba and got their butts handed to them

40th Mech - a new unit that had a grab bag of armor attached to it - meaning that they never had their full complement or even close to it - which can be seen by how many engineering "tanks" they used

46th Infantry - got overrun when stretched out badly and wasnt exactly a armor heavy unit to begin with

then you have two MP formations in CA and light infantry divisions that basically had no armor except M113's

and remember Mexico started the war with 500 or so APC's, many of them armed with 20mm cannons, as well as a good amount of armored cars that had a 90mm anti-tank gun - so against most of those units I just described they actually were close to one on one or better - and with the numbers involved they had numerical superiority as well - and most likely had gas and diesel when a lot of US units had already converted over to alcohol

and the date of the invasion - June of 1998- means that what was left of the US Air Force in the states was probably very limited indeed

49th Armored Division is problematic at best, they did have the NATO reinforcement mission so why are they still in the U.S. It would have been more likely that the 50th Armored Division would be sent south, while they did have the NATO reinforcement mission as well, they were always regarded as the weaker of the two NG armored divisions.

Another big question is why the 194th Armored and 197th Mechanized Brigades were left stateside, again both are NATO reinforcements with POMCUS sites.

The 40th Mechanized Infantry Division was one of the Guard’s better divisions, true they were in search of a mission, being either a NATO reinforcement, a Korea reinforcement or a CENTCOM reinforcement. Of the three, it would have been more likely that they went CENTCOM, at least in the mid 1980s.

[Olefin]

Certain arms transfers would most likely have taken place irregardless of the timelines

For instance the Mexican BDX (4 × 4) APC, which they designated the DNC-2. The BDX (95 of them) were all delivered to Mexico between 1993 and 1994 and most likely would have been supplied irregardless of timeline as they really werent front line vehicles for the Belgians.

As for how the Mexicans go the AMX from the Belgians - keep in mind that the Belgians did have an option to replace the AMX in their inventories, which was the real life and canon AIFV-B and M113 (improved version) - given the fact that the AIFV is much newer and more capable (as was the improved M113) over the AMX vehicles given the V1 timeline (where its still the Cold War and fighting the Russians is a huge concern) they would have continued to procure them and thus taken the much older AMX out of service (assuming that they increase their army size in any way to make use of the older vehicles once they had sufficient numbers of the new ones) - and selling them to Mexico gives the Mexicans the APC's they needed to make the invasion a success without giving the Mexicans a huge amount of new armor, that frankly the units still in the US wouldnt have been able to stop given the dispositions that were in canon

i.e. the 194th and 198th sure as hell would have been needed to stop them and would be in California and Texas and not in Cairo and Memphis if the Mexicans had had a large amount of main battle tanks and not just whatever the Soviets brought with Division Cuba

As for my research and your comments about it - frankly I wont even dignify that by responding

As for the choice of units I have - keep in mind that list is from canon - I personally dont agree with the canon reasoning about the two training armored units never going to Europe - if anything they should have went in 1998 when MilGov was trying to make it look like they could still support the war effort

and given the balance of forces in Europe by 1998 those two training units could have possibly given NATO a decisive advantage if they had shown up intact

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Olefin, you make some mighty big assumptions that cannot be claimed as fact, they are supposition based upon your opinion. You cannot claim that anything is "most likely would have been" when you base your information on the real world situation after the Cold War was officially ended. If you could produce legitimate sources from before 1990 (i.e. before the end of the Cold War and the start of the "Peace Dividend") that back up your claim that these transfers would "most likely have happened", then I'll happily stop arguing your claim.
Until such time as you can produce those sources, all you have is wishful thinking and that ain't research.

[mpipes]

Olefin is certainly more on base than GDW ever was. The discussions on the board have highlighted quite accurately on various problems with canon. I have never accepted as gospel numerous items in canon as accurate or believable. In GDW's defense, there was no Internet and the designers were, in my opinion, more interested in providing a gaming world where a small group of adventurers could be a significant military force than an accurate reflection of realistic events. The designers were more interested in creating a "workable" atmosphere, and in this I think they did masterful.

I've always regarded GDW's, and other RPG, products as providing a base to be tweaked, modified, ignored, and incorporated. I've never accepted a historical Mexico as having a chance in hell of overrunning the southwestern US without having a lot more military power. The returnees from Operation Omega would never have been discharged; they would have gone south and north to clean the invaders out.

In short, there are a lot of problems with canon. We all have our views and ways we addressed it. I for one greatly appreciate the comments of Olefin and others on their thoughts and views on the problems with canon and things to "fix" the problems.

[Olefin]

Olefin, you make some mighty big assumptions that cannot be claimed as fact, they are supposition based upon your opinion. You cannot claim that anything is "most likely would have been" when you base your information on the real world situation after the Cold War was officially ended. If you could produce legitimate sources from before 1990 (i.e. before the end of the Cold War and the start of the "Peace Dividend") that back up your claim that these transfers would "most likely have happened", then I'll happily stop arguing your claim.
Until such time as you can produce those sources, all you have is wishful thinking and that ain't research.

Sorry but the canon as a whole is all about might have beens. My suppositions are based on real world events. The Belgians were in the process of adding new vehicles to replace the old AMX vehicles when the Cold War came to an end. Those old AMX vehicles would have been surplus to their needs and thus would have been transferred. The new APC's they were getting were much more modern and thus effective.

Mexico was in the market for new APC's and thus the transfer that occurred in the 90's of the old AMX vehicles is a very likely occurence whatever the timeline. Especially given the fact that the Mexican Army was already operating French equipment and lots of it

Including 120 ERC-90 armored cars that arrived in the 1980's (i.e. during the Cold War) as well as Milan missiles (also during the Cold War), as well as 40 VBL (Cold War in the 80's), and 48 VCR-TT APC - thus given that level of equipment already from France getting even more French designed APC's would be of great interest to Mexico

Thus my supposition is based on real world facts - and I have legitimate sources from before 1990 - which by the way are the same ones the canon authors had that the Mexican Army would be operating French equipment - to back up the sale of those ex-Belgian Army APC's to Mexico - ones that they would have no longer needed once they had the more modern equipment to replace them

And also backed up by the canon writers who said specifically that the Mexican Army had no main battle tanks - that what they had were French armored cars and French APC's - which is exactly what I am saying was sufficient enough for the canon invasion to have occurred

especially against a US Army that by mid 1998 was low on fuel, low on spares and had most of its armor overseas and no easy way to get it back home

[RN7]

Certain arms transfers would most likely have taken place irregardless of the timelines

For instance the Mexican BDX (4 × 4) APC, which they designated the DNC-2. The BDX (95 of them) were all delivered to Mexico between 1993 and 1994 and most likely would have been supplied irregardless of timeline as they really werent front line vehicles for the Belgians.

The BDX is an Irish design wheeled APC built under license by Beherman Demoen. A total of 148 were built in Belgium but none were supplied to the Belgian Army, 63 went to the Belgian Air Force, 80 to the Belgian Gendarmerie and 5 to Argentina. The transfer of the Belgian BDX to Mexico occurred after the end of the Cold War. 95 were transferred between 1994 and 1995.

As for how the Mexicans go the AMX from the Belgians - keep in mind that the Belgians did have an option to replace the AMX in their inventories, which was the real life and canon AIFV-B and M113 (improved version) - given the fact that the AIFV is much newer and more capable (as was the improved M113) over the AMX vehicles given the V1 timeline (where its still the Cold War and fighting the Russians is a huge concern) they would have continued to procure them and thus taken the much older AMX out of service (assuming that they increase their army size in any way to make use of the older vehicles once they had sufficient numbers of the new ones) - and selling them to Mexico gives the Mexicans the APC's they needed to make the invasion a success without giving the Mexicans a huge amount of new armor, that frankly the units still in the US wouldnt have been able to stop given the dispositions that were in canon.

The AMX-VCI was an older vehicles, but it's highly unlikely that Belgium transferred any to Mexico in the Twilight War timeline. The Belgian Army was considered the weakest of the NATO European armies that formed the component corps of CENTAG and NORTHAG in West Germany before the war, and the Belgians needed all the equipment they had.

The regular Belgian Army was I Corps of 1 armoured brigade, 3 mechanised brigades plus 1 para-commando regiment, 3 combat battalions and 15 artillery and support battalions. The Belgian Army reserve included 2 mechanised brigades and 17 infantry battalions. Both Belgian reserve mechanised brigades were outfitted with AMX-VCI and the Belgians had ittle else.


i.e. the 194th and 198th sure as hell would have been needed to stop them and would be in California and Texas and not in Cairo and Memphis if the Mexicans had had a large amount of main battle tanks and not just whatever the Soviets brought with Division Cuba

As for my research and your comments about it - frankly I wont even dignify that by responding

As for the choice of units I have - keep in mind that list is from canon - I personally dont agree with the canon reasoning about the two training armored units never going to Europe - if anything they should have went in 1998 when MilGov was trying to make it look like they could still support the war effort

and given the balance of forces in Europe by 1998 those two training units could have possibly given NATO a decisive advantage if they had shown up intact

Olefin if you don't agree with canon that is your own choice. But canon does state that the 194th and 197th brigades are in CONUS, and I am happy to stick with canon.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

And again you make suppositions without anything other than what you think would have happened. Where is the proof that the Belgians would have sold those vehicles rather than put them into war-stores?

My argument here is not about how correct or how wrong the original material is, it isn't about how overwhelmingly unrealistic some of it is, it is not even about what fixes Olefin, Buddha, little green men from Mars or anyone else in the universe chooses to apply to the game.

It has always been about the belligerant & insulting manner in which the original authors have been criticized for being unrealistic when the person supplying that criticism is himself making some claims that fall into that category.

For instance, the BDX vehicles belonged to the Belgian gendarmerie (aside from about 60 or so used by the air force for airfield defence units) and not the army. The gendarmerie was a paramiltary police force with some military duties. The BDXs were for rear area defence and internal security, they were not subject to the same use or replacement policies as the army's APCs.
The claim that they "most likely would have been sold to Mexico regardless of T2k timeline" based upon the post-Cold War reality that they were sold in the real world is entirely speculative and not supported by any official Belgian source from before the 1990s (i.e. the period of time before the Peace Dividend was in effect and the vehicles were declared surplus to requirements).

[Olefin]

"It has always been about the belligerent & insulting manner in which the original authors have been criticized for being unrealistic when the person supplying that criticism is himself making some claims that fall into that category."

Sorry but no one is being either belligerent or insulting of the original authors.

And the claims that I am making are totally realistic

Fact - the Belgians were in the process of replacing their old APC's with new ones, many of them built in Belguim

Fact - the Mexican Army was operating a lot of French equipment as was trying to get more to modernize their army - and was buying mostly from the French so that it wouldnt strain their logistics system which already sucked

Fact - the Belgians would have most likely wanted to get rid of their older APC's now that they had new ones - which is indicated by the real world draw down in the 1990's

and also the canon - the three day stand in Texas by a bunch of military cadets, the fact that the School Brigade - with basically anti-aircraft weapons used against armor and the very nature of the Mexican Army who had never bought main battle tanks previously in the history of their armed forces except a few Stuarts that were used as recon armor and not tanks all add up to a Mexican military that would not have suddenly bought hundreds of tanks

and canon - the forces that were left in the US could not have stopped a Mexican Army as depicted in the fan canon sourcebook backed up by a Soviet Motor Rifle Division from taking a hell of a lot more territory unless every unit left in the US went to engage them - which THEY DID NOT - especially two armored brigades that for sure would have engaged them -
that alone shows that they could not have had that much heavy armor

in fact the canon saying that when the 197th did enter Texas it only did so to fight the Texian Legion and marauders tells you that the Mexicans didnt have any heavy armor of their own along for the ride

and my objection to canon comes down to the Mexicans being able to hold what they took for any length of time past 2000 considering the amount of new veteran US troops brought back to the country, considering that many of the areas they held would have had almost no water when the US cut off the supplies and that they were fighting a Civil War and had almost no logistical support of any kind

So am I objecting to the invasion itself - no - what I am objecting to is a very obviously flawed fan canon sourcebook that adds so much in the way of overall TOE to the Mexican Army that you would have to not just rewrite canon you would have to literally tear it up and ignore it - including Frank Chadwick's Mexican Army post in Challenge, the US Army Vehicle Guide and its dispositions of US forces after the invasion and Red Star Lone Star - in fact the only Mexican force with tanks is in City of Angels and its considered apocrypha mainly because of the sudden appearance of so much Russian equipment and almost no Mexican

if the Mexicans had built up a force with that many tanks the US would have only had one way to stop it - and basically that would have meant multiple nukes on both the US and Mexico in places like Texas, California, AZ and NM - and again thats a big time rewrite of canon history

You are looking at a Mexican Army with literally almost 1500 tanks plus Division Cuba against one armored division, one reforming mech division fitted with whatever tanks they could grab and two tank brigades that never even engaged the invasion - all low on gas and ammo - good luck stopping that short of Kansas or Oregon

[StainlessSteelCynic]

You might have edited your post to remove it, but you did make the claim that when writing the sections on Mexico the author must have been suffering from a tequila fever dream. The tone certainly wasn't humorous and along with the rest of the comment, was quite insulting.

And again, you make claims based on supposition. When you state that "the Belgians would have most likely wanted to...", it is in no way a "fact". It never will be a fact. It is assumption. While the Belgian army might have been planning to get replacement APCs, there has never been a single source produced to indicate that the Belgian gendarmerie was going to get rid of their BDX APCs at the same time. By all accounts the gendarmerie got rid of their armoured vehicles because the end of the Cold War made them unnecessary for their future needs.

There were other mitigating factors that resulted in the gendarmerie being completely reformed in the 1990s but it's quite telling that although the public scandals that resulted in the shakeup occured in the middle of the 1980s, the gendarmerie still kept their rear-area and internal security duties until the 1990s. That being so, they would have most likely retained their wheeled armour rather than replace it with tracked armour as tracks usually make the general public feel a whole lot more nervous.

And I'll say it again, using the real world draw down that removed the need for these vehicles is in no way indicative of what would have happened to those vehicles if the Cold War had continued. The most significant premise of the game is that the Cold War did continue which also implies that the Belgians would be quite concerned with maintaining sufficient reserves of the older vehicles until every unit was completely outfitted with the replacement vehicles. It's also more than likely that they would have been interested in maintaining a decent war reserve.

The more likely outcome of any fleet upgrade would have been retaining the older vehicles as a war reserve. The Belgians still had stocks of the C.A.T.I. tank destroyer into the late 1960s, this was a WW2 Lloyd Carrier upgraded with a 90mm Mecar AT gun. They kept those Lloyd Carriers for 20 years since the end of WW2 even though they had obtained better vehicles.

Based on that fact, it could be realistically supposed that the AMX vehicles would likely be retained for a war reserve for a reasonable length of time before being disposed of. But I'm not going to try and claim my supposition on that matter as a "fact".

[Olefin]

And notice that I removed that comment

but left in this one - which I stand by

however holding onto a smaller area might be possible - but there is no way the US just sits there and lets them keep half of CA, over half of AZ and NM and all of Texas - sorry but that is completo sin sentido - i.e. complete nonsense - and the fact the the US controls the water is the big factor - I have a feeling the original authors never took the time to research that fact

doesnt take much research at all to see that holding San Diego, LA and Phoenix let alone smaller areas is impossible without access to the Colorado River - and all those access points with the exception of one- the one that feeds the All American Canal and gives water to the Imperial Valley (and recreated the Salton Sea in the process) - are in areas the US holds and never lost at any time during the Twilight War and afterward

you dont need the internet to know that - my in-laws have a very old set of encyclopedias from 1982 that spell that out talking about California and Arizona and where their water supplies come from

[RN7]

"It has always been about the belligerent & insulting manner in which the original authors have been criticized for being unrealistic when the person supplying that criticism is himself making some claims that fall into that category."

Sorry but no one is being either belligerent or insulting of the original authors.

And the claims that I am making are totally realistic

Fact - the Belgians were in the process of replacing their old APC's with new ones, many of them built in Belguim

Fact - the Mexican Army was operating a lot of French equipment as was trying to get more to modernize their army - and was buying mostly from the French so that it wouldnt strain their logistics system which already sucked

Fact - the Belgians would have most likely wanted to get rid of their older APC's now that they had new ones - which is indicated by the real world draw down in the 1990's

and also the canon - the three day stand in Texas by a bunch of military cadets, the fact that the School Brigade - with basically anti-aircraft weapons used against armor and the very nature of the Mexican Army who had never bought main battle tanks previously in the history of their armed forces except a few Stuarts that were used as recon armor and not tanks all add up to a Mexican military that would not have suddenly bought hundreds of tanks

and canon - the forces that were left in the US could not have stopped a Mexican Army as depicted in the fan canon sourcebook backed up by a Soviet Motor Rifle Division from taking a hell of a lot more territory unless every unit left in the US went to engage them - which THEY DID NOT - especially two armored brigades that for sure would have engaged them -
that alone shows that they could not have had that much heavy armor

in fact the canon saying that when the 197th did enter Texas it only did so to fight the Texian Legion and marauders tells you that the Mexicans didnt have any heavy armor of their own along for the ride

and my objection to canon comes down to the Mexicans being able to hold what they took for any length of time past 2000 considering the amount of new veteran US troops brought back to the country, considering that many of the areas they held would have had almost no water when the US cut off the supplies and that they were fighting a Civil War and had almost no logistical support of any kind

So am I objecting to the invasion itself - no - what I am objecting to is a very obviously flawed fan canon sourcebook that adds so much in the way of overall TOE to the Mexican Army that you would have to not just rewrite canon you would have to literally tear it up and ignore it - including Frank Chadwick's Mexican Army post in Challenge, the US Army Vehicle Guide and its dispositions of US forces after the invasion and Red Star Lone Star - in fact the only Mexican force with tanks is in City of Angels and its considered apocrypha mainly because of the sudden appearance of so much Russian equipment and almost no Mexican

if the Mexicans had built up a force with that many tanks the US would have only had one way to stop it - and basically that would have meant multiple nukes on both the US and Mexico in places like Texas, California, AZ and NM - and again thats a big time rewrite of canon history

You are looking at a Mexican Army with literally almost 1500 tanks plus Division Cuba against one armored division, one reforming mech division fitted with whatever tanks they could grab and two tank brigades that never even engaged the invasion - all low on gas and ammo - good luck stopping that short of Kansas or Oregon


"Fact - the Belgians were in the process of replacing their old APC's with new ones, many of them built in Belguim"

Belgium had a small defence budget and a small army that was committed to NATO. In fact almost the entire Belgian regular army was committed to NATO and its main function was to commit the I Belgian Corps to CENTAG in West Germany. Belgium had two reserve mechanised brigades to reinforce the I Belgian Corps and defend Belgian territory, and both brigades were equipped with the AMX VCI. Belgium shares a land border with Germany and if I Belgian Corps failed to whole the line then the Soviets would be marching on Belgium, and all the Belgian Army would have to defend Belgium would be the two reserve mechanised brigades and some territorial infantry battalions. But you believe Belgium would ignore its own very real defence needs and strip its army of over 500 APC's (AMX VCI and BDX) and sell them to Mexico for the price of second hand surplus.

Fact - the Mexican Army was operating a lot of French equipment as was trying to get more to modernize their army - and was buying mostly from the French so that it wouldnt strain their logistics system which already sucked.

This is basically what Paul Mulcahy proposed in his Mexican Army Sourcebook, but you dismissed it out of hand. You may not agree with the level of equipment that Mexico bought or licence built from France, but he was certainly on the right path and Mexico would need to beef up its army with tanks to take on U.S. forces. A few battalions of AMX-30's plus some Soviet tanks from Division Cuba would at least give the Mexicans a fighting chance against U.S. forces, and explain why they were able to defeat better armed U.S. forces and hold American territory for longer than they would be expected to do so once U.S. forces come after them.

In the 1980's Mexico bought the following from France. 120 ERC-90, 48 VCR-TT, 40 VBL including 8 with Milan anti-tank missiles, 32 MO-120 RT 120mm Mortars and 80 MILAN anti-tank missile. They also bought 6 FIROS -51 Self propelled MRL from Italy. This is a fairly moderate arms purchase but nonetheless upgraded Mexican forces, and all of these arms were bought new.

In the 1990's Mexico bought 401 Belgian AMX VCI including mortar carriers and ARV's that were modified as the DNC-1 in Mexico, 95 BDX that were designated as DNC-2 in Mexico, and also bought 28 Commando V-150 from the U.S. All of these were bought after the end of the Cold War and were bought second hand from surplus Belgian and U.S. stocks.

The rest.

GDW didn't write a perfect Orbat or history for the Twilight War, but it's still damn good considering the source material they had available in the 1980's. GDW listed U.S. divisions, brigades and armoured cavalry regiments only. There were some omissions in U.S. Army forces regards to brigades and battalions that were not roundout's, and this has been pointed out many times. Also GDW only lists tanks, there is little or no reference to the number of lighter armoured vehicles and artillery of all types, and there must have been a lot operated by U.S. forces.

If you don't like canon go and type up your own alternative version and post it up, but I like canon and will stick with it.

[Rainbow Six]

My issue here - which others have already mentioned - is the way that one person's opinions are being presented as facts.

Also if you have issues with something that another fan has put together (and, as far as I know has never claimed to be any sort of canon, fan or otherwise) I think there are far more constructive ways to do so than referring to it as 'very obviously flawed' (which again is an opinion, not a fact - other opinions may vary).

[Olefin]

The Mexican Army Sourcebook had a lot more than just a few battalions of AMX-30 tanks added to their TOE - sorry but it would have given them an overwhelming force that was way way above anything Mexico could have ever fielded and supported.

As for the 401 Belgian AMX VCI including mortar carriers and ARV's that were modified as the DNC-1 in Mexico and the 95 BDX that were designated as DNC-2 in Mexico were actually in their inventory for the canon - I definitely think very much that Belgium, who was modernizing with new APC's at the time, would have definitely sold a bunch of older APC's that didnt have a hope in hell to face top of the line Warsaw Pact armor to Mexico so that they could buy a lot more newer APC's that could - instead of them just sitting around depots gathering rust and not getting any more money for them to use for their defense budget

And that gives Mexico a heck of a lot of French APC's that support the canon as to what they were equipped with per canon - its not the right vehicle (Red Star Lone Star mentions the VAB instead of the AMX-VCI) but its definitely the right country for the source of those APC's

and if it would make everyone feel better they also could easily have gotten them from France instead - who still had a lot of them sitting around as well

And GDW actually does mention how well equipped the US units were with stuff other than tanks - you can see it in the US Army Vehicle Guide as to what the units were equipped with

For many of the US training divisions it shows what they would have had to face the Mexicans with - and frankly they had very little to stop any kind of armored attack, no matter how old the vehicles were

As for the canon - past mid-April of 2001 (i.e. HW timing) Marc is open to changes and improvements upon his approval- and there is where I plan to release new canon material as I already have done so for Africa - i.e. for events in May -September 2001 in California and elsewhere

so to answer your last point- yes I do plan on creating and releasing new canon material that hopefully will show a more logical approach to what would have really happened with the aftermath of the canon Mexican invasion - and i hope you do enjoy the new canon material when its released

[Olefin]

My issue here - which others have already mentioned - is the way that one person's opinions are being presented as facts.

Also if you have issues with something that another fan has put together (and, as far as I know has never claimed to be any sort of canon, fan or otherwise) I think there are far more constructive ways to do so than referring to it as 'very obviously flawed' (which again is an opinion, not a fact - other opinions may vary).

Ok flawed by my meaning is so overpowering that there is no way the US forces in the canon could have stopped them with what they had and with the deployments in the canon - and if they had all those tanks where did they all go to? There is a very detailed order of battle for the Mexican forces in Texas in Red Star Lone Star - and not one single Mexican tank to be found anywhere - and GDW was very good at making sure that vehicles like tanks were accounted for as they were so rare.

If they had been there in their formations there would have been some survivors for sure- and would have been very easy for GDW to say "the Mexican unit in Laredo has two of the last surviving AMX-30 tanks from those they bought from France".

They werent there because the only tanks they ever operated were Stuarts because they never needed tanks.

And they werent plotting for years to invade the US - it happened almost on the spur of the moment per the canon. And given the very bad nature of the roads and rail system in Mexico in the mid-1990s' and how tight their military budget was if anything they would have spent the money on vehicles their army was built around - i.e. APC's and light armored cars which by the way their defense industry was ready to support and maintain

By the time they knew they were going to do it there was no time to prepare to fight the US by getting a lot of tanks and other vehicles - it was a come as you are kind of war - per the canon

If you want the Mexican Army Sourcebook then the canon would need some serious rewriting (moving the 194th and 197th to stop that huge amount of Mexican armor let alone Civgov having to cooperate with Milgov for sure to stop that kind of armored force instead of Civgov trying to not get units sent to the 5th Army) - versus not having it and it reads pretty well even given just the DNC-1 and DNC-2 additions to their army

[Olefin]

My issue here - which others have already mentioned - is the way that one person's opinions are being presented as facts.

Also if you have issues with something that another fan has put together (and, as far as I know has never claimed to be any sort of canon, fan or otherwise) I think there are far more constructive ways to do so than referring to it as 'very obviously flawed' (which again is an opinion, not a fact - other opinions may vary).

and one last point - I am only saying its flawed as a way to say how canonically the Mexican Army was equipped - It does not agree with what Red Star Lone Star or Frank Chadwick's Challenge article have - which are the canon sources we have (and if you come up with a good reason for the Soviet armor the only other canon source being City of Angels)

[Rainbow Six]

I have no particular opinion on the fan produced Mexican Army sourcebook. I don't think I've ever done any more than skim through it and I certainly don't regard it as canon - quite the opposite, as I said, it's fan produced material, so is strictly non canon as far as I'm concerned. So as it's not canon in my opinion I really don't care if it contradicts Red Star, Lone Star or the Challenge article on the Mexican Army.

[Olefin]

keep in mind that my statements on the Mexican Army Sourcebook, as it currently stands, is only as a response to those who would use it to try to represent the canon status of the Mexican Army and the canon response of the US Army to the invasion

So let me state for the record as to what I think of it as a piece of stand alone fan canon and how you could extract info from it to support a canon campaign

As a piece of fan canon, that provides an alternate to the canon or canon material, it as an excellent piece of writing that can easily be used by those who want to have an alternate version of the canon Mexican invasion to both bring in many new vehicles and units for their campaign. One where the Mexican Army is much better equipped than it would have been per the canon dispositions as to size of the Army and what vehicles it was equipped with.

It also provides detailed information on both the history of the Mexican Army for those looking for a very good read on that history and also detailed information on small arms and other things you could encounter from a canonical Mexican unit.

Also in my opinion it adds an impressive amount of information on real life Mexican Army vehicles that were not presented in the canonical material but definitely would have been encountered in the US or Mexico by players using it to support the canon. As such it could easily be used to support and expand a canonical campaign if you ignore the anti-canonical vehicles and expansion to the Mexican Army TOE and units

And with rewriting to have it match the current released canon as to the size of the Mexican Army and what vehicles it would have had in the canon releases like Red Star Lone Star (i.e. where the Mexican Army lacked main battle tanks and thus had to bring in Soviet Division Cuba to be able to support them), in my opinion, it would be an excellent new canon release if the author wanted to go thru the effort and time to edit it as such and also corrected for photos and such that are not ok for releases for profit (versus fan canon) as I had to do with the original fan canon release for Africa

[Raellus]

My issue here - which others have already mentioned - is the way that one person's opinions are being presented as facts.

This. Very much this.

Let's face it, guys. Like it or not, we're a small community. Schisms are particularly damaging. A lot of people who used to be fixtures here now show up here seldom or never. Have they just lost interest or have they been repulsed by the tone of some of the discussion here? It's hard to say, but I suspect a good proportion of our "lost" members fall into the latter category.

One person's T2KU need not be everyone's. Hubris is a big turn-off. Slagging someone else's work (canon or not) because you see things differently is not cool.

From our very own forum guidelines.


Keep It Civil

We can all agree to disagree but let's make sure to do so respectfully. No name-calling, sarcasm, or other childishness is appropriate or welcome here. If you are upset with someone and want them to know about it, send them a PM and try to work it out privately. If another member is really getting on your nerves, you can use the forum tools to place that person on your ignore list. We don't tolerate flame wars here.

Please don't attempt to incite internecine forum conflict with deliberately provocative and/or inflammatory posts. In interweb parlance, please don't be a troll.

Keep It Constructive

Folks post a lot of original T2K material here, most of it of the highest quality. Many contributors invite and welcome constructive criticism. If, however, they do not solicit feedback, then it's poor form to pipe in give it anyway. And please, don't post just to tear down the hard work of others. If you really don't like something that someone else has posted, and can't express this respectfully and with the intention of creating a constructive dialogue with the poster, then you should probably just keep it to yourself.

Thanks, and enjoy!

[Olefin]

Heard what you said Raellus and noted

as for those who arent posting here anymore - sorry but please dont make it sound like that is my responsibility - frankly if anyone loves and encourages discussion its me - as long as it discussion - however posts like this I dont see as as meeting the decorum of the board either

"Whoa whoa whoa... so let me get this right. Someone complains about the lack of proper research done by the original authors and then uses poor research himself to "correct" somebody's inventory for Mexico?"

That sort of violates both the Keep it Civil and Keep it Constructive precepts of the board.

and FYI the AMX-VCI that I was saying was in the Mexican Army inventory that I was getting hammered for - its also in the Mexican Sourcebook as them having it as well - i.e. I was agreeing there with what was in the Sourcebook as being accurate for what they actually had for the canon invasion

I love this board and the freedom of discussion it has - and if anyone really doesnt want it to descend into "in your face" facebook style comments its me - and if I made those then I apologize big time

[RN7]

Canon is what was published by GDW. Everything else is alternative fan fiction no matter how much you like or dislike canon or fan created alternative versions of Twilight 2000.

There are five main issues with the Mexican invasion of the American southwest.

1) Real world Mexican forces in the 1990's are not well armed enough to be capable of successfully invading and holding American territory, or defeating U.S. forces in the southwest even in the aftermath of a nuclear attack. I think everyone agrees with this.

2) The GDW sourcebooks do have large amount of information about the invasion, battles and conditions in the American southwest. However the sourcebooks do not give enough information about the combatants, particularly the Mexicans, to make it believable.

Red Star-Lone Star sourcebook has a Mexican orbat on page 12-13, but it's too vague in regards to the type of vehicles they are operating. There is a more information on pages 29-44 about the Soviets and the marauder groups in Texas.

City of Angels sourcebook goes into more detail on page 9 about Mexican forces in Los Angeles. There is more information on page 33-36 and on page 43. The Mexicans are exclusively armed with Soviet arms which has caused some debate about why the Mexicans are using Soviet equipment when they didn't in real life.

Soviet Combat Vehicle Handbook (2nd edition is better) gives an orbat for Soviet Division Cuba. There is also some related information in the Satellite Down sourcebook

3) GDW gives more detail about U.S. forces in the southwest. American Combat Vehicle Handbook (US Army Vehicle Guide for 1st edition) are particularly useful for the southwest. But obviously there is not enough information. There is information about U.S. tanks and light tanks, and the pages on organisation and composition do list other vehicles such as IFV's, APC's, artillery, AD systems and light armed vehicles. But this does not show up in the unit history and current status, with maybe the exception of the Cadet Brigade and some unit descriptions for U.S. forces in other theatres in V2.

4) GDW wrote Twilight 2000 in the 1980's from the source material they had available. They did a very good job, but without access to the internet they obviously missed a lot of information. It's enjoyable to fill the gaps.

5) The Twilight War is the Cold War turned into a hot war and then into a nuclear war. To fill in the gaps it's best to keep Twilight 2000 to Cold War history and developments as closely as reasonably possible.


The main fan fiction alternative versions of the Twilight War related to the Mexican invasion of the American southwest are...

Mexican Army 1998-2000 by Frank Chadwick in Challenge Magazine
Mexican Army Sourcebook by Paul Mulcahy
California Dreaming by Orrin J. Ladd
South America Order of Battle posted on Chris Callaghan's Twilight 2000 page by unknown
US Order of Battle for 2003 by Steve Charlton

I don't have the Mexican Army 1998-2000 from Challenge Magazine. If anyone has it could they post it up.

[Olefin]

I have it -and there arent any tanks - ERC90 armored cars and VAB APC just like Lone Star Red Star

Before the war, the Mexican Army consisted
of 100,000 active troops and 60,000
reservists. Active forces comprised a
Presidential Guard Brigade, two
mechanized brigades, three armored
cavalry regiments and 36 regional
brigades.

The Presidential Guard Brigade
consisted of three infantry regiments.
Each mechanized brigade consisted of
two mechanized infantry regiments, one
armored recon regiment, and one selfpropelled
artillery grupo (battalion). The
armored cavalry regiments were
battalion-sized groups of armored cars
and infantry carried in wheeled armored
personnel carriers.

The 36 regional
brigades varied in strength, but their
average strength was one motorized
cavalry regiment, two infantry regiments,
and one battery of artillery. The
mechanized brigades and armored
cavalry regiments were numbered. (All
regiments were organized as a single battalion.)
The artillery for the regional
brigades were provided by detached batteries
of three numbered artillery
regiments.

Regional brigades themselves
were designated by the city or town that
constituted their peacetime station, and
their component regiments also carried
a variation of that as a designation. (For
example, the Monclova Brigade consisted
of the Monclova Cavalry, the 1st
and 2nd Monclova Infantry, and the 6th
Battery of the 2nd Artillery.)
Reservists were intended to bring
prewar units up to full strength and to
provide replacements. In actuality, they
were used to form additional infantry
regiments.

These regiments were referred
to as Activo regiments and
generally carried the designation of the
city or state from which they were
recruited. In many cases, these were
recruited from the same cities as the
peacetime stations of regional brigades,
in which case they assumed the next
available number for infantry regiments
from that region. For example, Brigada
Mexicali had two infantry regiments
before the war. An additional regiment
of reservists was raised from Mexicali
and designated the 30 Regimento Infanteria
Activo Mexicali. One additional
light artillery battalion of three batteries
was formed from reservists as well.

EQUIPMENT
Artillery: Each mechanized brigade had
6 MI09 SP 155mm howitzers and 12 MI08
105mm SP howitzers. All artillery batteries
in the regional brigades were
equipped with 105mm howitzers.
Mobilized reservists manned three batteries
of antique 75mm pack howitzers
that had seen duty with the 4th Army in
southeastern Texas.

Armored Vehicles: Armored cavalry
regiments and armored recon battalions
included a squadron of seventeen
ERC-90 armored cars and two squadrons
of infantry in VAB armored personnel
carriers (both of French manufacture).

Some motorized cavalry regiments included
a mixed squadron of VABs and
ERC90s (trucks and jeeps carried the
other squadrons of the regiment).
Mechanized infantry regimeqts included
forty VAB APCs.

Support Weapons: Each regiment included
eighteen 60mm mortars (6 per
company) and six jeep-mounted TOW
systems. However, many regiments of
regional brigades had not received TOW
by the outbreak of hostilities. A variety
of obsolete light antitank systems were
also in use, the most common being the
2.75" M9 Bazooka of World War I1 vintage.

A small quantity of modern light
AAA guns were also received prior to the
war, and 8 such guns were attached to
each of the three regular brigades. In the
Presidential Guard these were twin
30mm guns, while in the l a and 2a
brigades these were twin 20mm guns. In
all cases the guns were towed.

You want the rest - I have it - details the invasion forces and where they went and gives ORBAT - and again no tanks

And RN - frankly you can keep your opinions of whether or not I like fan canon or canon to yourself.

As for your post - you are the one calling canon into question - not me.

I could go thru your post and argue the details with you - but frankly its not worth the effort to do so.

I have better things to do with my time and my talents than waste it on this subject.

I was planning on writing at least one if not several modules on that area - but now not sure frankly that its worth one more minute of my time.

Have a good evening.

[Olefin]

Canon is what was published by GDW. Everything else is alternative fan fiction no matter how much you like or dislike canon or fan created alternative versions of Twilight 2000.

There are five main issues with the Mexican invasion of the American southwest.

1) Real world Mexican forces in the 1990's are not well armed enough to be capable of successfully invading and holding American territory, or defeating U.S. forces in the southwest even in the aftermath of a nuclear attack. I think everyone agrees with this.

2) The GDW sourcebooks do have large amount of information about the invasion, battles and conditions in the American southwest. However the sourcebooks do not give enough information about the combatants, particularly the Mexicans, to make it believable.

Red Star-Lone Star sourcebook has a Mexican orbat on page 12-13, but it's too vague in regards to the type of vehicles they are operating. There is a more information on pages 29-44 about the Soviets and the marauder groups in Texas.

City of Angels sourcebook goes into more detail on page 9 about Mexican forces in Los Angeles. There is more information on page 33-36 and on page 43. The Mexicans are exclusively armed with Soviet arms which has caused some debate about why the Mexicans are using Soviet equipment when they didn't in real life.

Soviet Combat Vehicle Handbook (2nd edition is better) gives an orbat for Soviet Division Cuba. There is also some related information in the Satellite Down sourcebook

3) GDW gives more detail about U.S. forces in the southwest. American Combat Vehicle Handbook (US Army Vehicle Guide for 1st edition) are particularly useful for the southwest. But obviously there is not enough information. There is information about U.S. tanks and light tanks, and the pages on organisation and composition do list other vehicles such as IFV's, APC's, artillery, AD systems and light armed vehicles. But this does not show up in the unit history and current status, with maybe the exception of the Cadet Brigade and some unit descriptions for U.S. forces in other theatres in V2.

4) GDW wrote Twilight 2000 in the 1980's from the source material they had available. They did a very good job, but without access to the internet they obviously missed a lot of information. It's enjoyable to fill the gaps.

5) The Twilight War is the Cold War turned into a hot war and then into a nuclear war. To fill in the gaps it's best to keep Twilight 2000 to Cold War history and developments as closely as reasonably possible.


The main fan fiction alternative versions of the Twilight War related to the Mexican invasion of the American southwest are...

Mexican Army 1998-2000 by Frank Chadwick in Challenge Magazine
Mexican Army Sourcebook by Paul Mulcahy
California Dreaming by Orrin J. Ladd
South America Order of Battle posted on Chris Callaghan's Twilight 2000 page by unknown
US Order of Battle for 2003 by Steve Charlton

I don't have the Mexican Army 1998-2000 from Challenge Magazine. If anyone has it could they post it up.

FYI - if there ever was a post that basically complained about the canon or presented personal opinions as fact I think this one would qualify for that designation for sure.

[RN7]

I And RN - frankly you can keep your opinions of whether or not I like fan canon or canon to yourself.

As for your post - you are the one calling canon into question - not me.

I could go thru your post and argue the details with you - but frankly its not worth the effort to do so.

I have better things to do with my time and my talents than waste it on this subject.

I was planning on writing at least one if not several modules on that area - but now not sure frankly that its worth one more minute of my time.

Have a good evening.


Olefin I wasn't directing any criticism at you whatsoever, if I was I would have named or quoted you. I was trying to make the issues on this thread clearer to stop further bickering, and I wasn't criticising anyone.

I stated that "Canon is what was published by GDW. Everything else is alternative fan fiction no matter how much you like or dislike canon or fan created alternative versions of Twilight 2000" because that is what it is. It wasn't a jibe directed at you. If you dislike canon go and post an alternative version like I asked you in an earlier post.

I like debating canon not trying to change it, and if I didn't like debating it I wouldn't respond to your posts. In fact if you have read what I have said on many earlier posts on this thread you will find that I am in agreement with you on a number of things.

I think you probably took more than your fair share of criticism today on this topic, but then you do like to argue things don't you?

[mpipes]

Olefin,

Hope you continue contributing. Really want to see new material.

I've always seen Olefin's comments as very constructive and passionate. Never out and out arrogant. And I have always seen the comments as a valuable contribution to the fan base.

As for all the back biting, cattiness, and plain arrogance as to the sacredness of canon that many seem to have....we all need to KNOCK IT OFF!!

Take all the comments tweaking things for what it is....a person's views of their version.

[Olefin]

"I think you probably took more than your fair share of criticism today on this topic, but then you do like to argue things don't you?"

No actually I like to discuss things - but looks like discussion is the last thing this board wants.

And yes canon is what GDW publishes - which includes what I have had published as canon recently - and what I hope to get more of published one day if I can muster the interest to do so anymore.

And if you guys had actually read what I posted you would have seen that the canon I have the issue with is not the 2000 canon - its the 2300AD one.

And RN7 - there is more than enough material in the canon to show why the Mexican invasion succeeded. But you miss the point of what I was saying about the alternate fan canon

You dont need a huge increase in the Mexican Army to succeed in the invasion that occurred in 1998. They could have done it with what they had already - which includes either the real life AMX-VCI or the canon VAB

But what I am saying is that the chances of them holding it for any length of time especially with what is going on in Red Star Lone Star and HW and bringing to life the 300 year Mexican occupation of the American Southwest and southern California is completely unrealistic - meaning I agree with you totally

and if the board was one that actually encouraged discussion and not "my fair share of criticism" I might feel free to go on with this thread and others - but right now that is not the environment on this board.

[Olefin]

Olefin,

Hope you continue contributing. Really want to see new material.

I've always seen Olefin's comments as very constructive and passionate. Never out and out arrogant. And I have always seen the comments as a valuable contribution to the fan base.

As for all the back biting, cattiness, and plain arrogance as to the sacredness of canon that many seem to have....we all need to KNOCK IT OFF!!

Take all the comments tweaking things for what it is....a person's views of their version.

Thank you very much for saying that. I definitely appreciate hearing that.

[Raellus]

All, if there are any more uncivil or destructive (as opposed to constructive) posts in this thread, it will be locked. Please, take a step back, a few deep breaths, and if you still feel agitated with other posters here, maybe avoid this thread. I don't think "winning" an argument is worth the diminution of this community.

Thank you.

The Mods

[Olefin]

Constructive post

I was thinking about where Mexico could get vehicles from as alternatives to the AMX-VCI and the BDX (assume the Belgians only sold them a few and then war clouds stopped any further transfers) and I was looking at my copy of the RDF

Not sure if these were mentioned before (and I cant see the Mexican Sourcebook at work so I apologize if they are in there already) but there is one place Mexico could get armored vehicles that would fit right in their force structure and they would be effective vehicles for an invasion - and could even get them after the war broke out

i.e. Brazil - EE-9 Cascavel and EE-11 Urutu - both are wheeled vehicles and both are described for both V1 and V2 (so that makes it easy to use them in the game) - and fits right in with the canon as well (i.e. wheeled APC and wheeled Armored Car) for either V1 or V2 (i.e. could be delivered pre-war or after war start even with the V2 Brazil Argentina war because it happens in 1998 if I remember right)

and Brazil might have even restarted production to sell them to the Chinese and then when China got nuked had vehicles ready to sell and no customer - and there is Mexico nearby

and there are countries in Latin America already operating them so there would even be Spanish language manuals and maintenance documents for them (versus trying to figure out a manual written in French tucked into an old AMX-VCI)

[Raellus]

I like that idea.

[Olefin]

I was remember what Red Star Lone Star said i.e. that the Mexicans were equipped almost universally with either wheeled APC's or wheeled armored cars - and those two vehicles immediately came to mind.

And you could easily use them elsewhere and just say that the units that were in Texas didnt have those vehicles issued to them - i.e. the Texas Mexican units are only a fraction of the Mexican Army not the whole thing after all

[Webstral]

Given the state of the game and the community, I think everyone welcomes enthusiasm. That much said, consistency in communication goes a long way towards setting expectations.

frankly if anyone loves and encourages discussion its me - as long as it discussion -

And RN - frankly you can keep your opinions of whether or not I like fan canon or canon to yourself.

Picking a story and sticking with it will help everyone involved make informed decisions about interacting with the other [few] remaining fans.

[Olefin]

There are lots of fan here and elsewhere still. Otherwise no one would have bought either my book or Raellus's book. I have been totally surprised and so has Marc by the strong positive reaction to them and the desire for more new releases.

And I got the hint - every post made in the past few hours has been totally to the forum guidelines and will continue to be that way.

[RN7]

Thought I'd have a go at what U.S. ground forces would be in the southwest in 2000

Part 1. Major U.S. Army and Marine units in the American southwest

The south-western theatre cover the U.S. states of Arizona, California, Colorado, Kansas, New Mexico, Nevada, Oklahoma, Texas and Utah, and also by default western Louisiana. Before the start of the Twilight War the following U.S. ground forces were based in this theatre.

1st Cavalry Division: Based in Texas, shipped to Europe in November 1996
2nd Armored Division: Reformed in Texas in 1995, shipped to November 1996
3rd Armored Division: Based in Texas, shipped to Europe October 1996
4th Infantry Division (Mechanized): Reformed in Colorado in 1996, shipped to Europe in October 1996
5th Infantry Division (Mechanised): Based in Louisiana, shipped to Europe December 1996
7th Infantry Division (Light): Based in California, shipped to Korea in January 1997
8th Infantry Division (Mechanized): Based in Colorado, shipped to Europe February 1997
6th Air Cavalry Combat Brigade: Based in Texas, shipped to Saudi Arabia in March 1997
75th Field Artillery Brigade: Based in Oklahoma, location unknown but likely shipped to Europe
212th Field Artillery Brigade: Based in Oklahoma, location unknown but likely shipped to Europe
214th Field Artillery Brigade: Based in Oklahoma, location unknown but likely shipped to Europe
6th Air Defence Artillery Brigade. Based in Oklahoma, location unknown but likely still in Oklahoma
11th Air Defence Artillery Brigade: Based in Oklahoma, location unknown but likely shipped to Europe
31st Air Defence Artillery Brigade: Based in Oklahoma, location unknown but likely shipped to Europe
69th Air Defence Artillery Brigade: Based in Texas, location unknown but likely shipped to Europe
89th Military Police Brigade: Based in Texas, location unknown but likely shipped to Europe
36th Engineer Brigade: Based in Texas, location unknown but likely shipped to Europe
3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment: Based in Texas, shipped to Europe in November 1996 but left heavy equipment at Fort Bliss, Texas
10th Special Forces Group: Based in Colorado, location unknown but likely in Europe. Possibly some units still in Colorado
1st Marine Division: Based in California, shipped to Saudi Arabia in March 1997


During the Twilight War the following units were raised in the southwest.

44th Armored Division. National Guard division formed in Texas in February 1997, shipped to Europe in May 1997
49th Armored Division: All Texas National Guard division formed in Texas in November 1996. Oklahoma
40th Infantry Division (Mechanised) (two brigades only): All California National Guard division formed in Oregon in July 1996. California
91st Infantry Division (Light): Army Reserve division formed in California in July 1998. California
98th Infantry Division (Light) (2nd Brigade only): Army Reserve division formed in Oklahoma in July 1998. 2nd Brigade in Louisiana
69th Infantry Brigade (Mechanised): Kansas National Guard brigade attached to 35th Mechanised Division. Europe
256th Infantry Brigade (Mechanised): Louisiana National Guard brigade attached to 5th Mechanised Division. Europe
45th Infantry Brigade: Oklahoma National Guard brigade activated as part of 45th Infantry Division in Arkansas in January 1997. Korea
45th Field Artillery Brigade: Oklahoma National Guard brigade. Location unknown but likely still in Oklahoma
65th Field Artillery Brigade: Utah National Guard brigade. Location unknown but likely still in Utah
153rd Field Artillery Brigade: Arizona National Guard brigade: Location unknown but likely still in southwest
169th Field Artillery Brigade: Colorado National Guard brigade: Location unknown but likely still in Colorado
111th Air Defence Artillery Brigade: New Mexico National Guard brigade, location unknown but likely still in southwest
49th Military Police Brigade: California National Guard brigade formed in August 1996. California
221st Military Police Brigade: Army Reserve brigade formed in California in July 1996. California
225th Engineer Brigade: Louisiana National Guard brigade, location unknown but likely still in Louisiana
420th Engineer Brigade: Army Reserve brigade based in Texas. Location unknown but likely shipped to Europe
19th Special Forces Group: Utah National Guard. Location unknown but likely in Korea and Asia. Possibly some units still in southwest
Cadet Brigade: Formed in January 1998 from USAF academy in Colorado. Colorado
The School Brigade: Former army training unit. Formed in Texas in 1998. Oklahoma
4th Marine Division: Marine Reserve division based in Louisiana. Formed in October 1996 and shipped to Korea
6th Marine Division: Marine Reserve division based in California. Formed in November 1997 and shipped to Korea


During the Twilight War the following units were sent to the southwest

46th Infantry Division: National Guard division formed in Florida in March 1997. California
85th Infantry Division (Light) (1st Brigade only): Army Reserve division formed in Chicago in July 1998. Louisiana
95th Infantry Division (Light): Army Reserve division formed in Michigan in July 1998. Oklahoma
100th Infantry Division (Light): Army Reserve division formed in Kentucky in July 1998. Colorado


Major U.S. ground forces still in the American south-western theatre in 2000
49th Armored Division: Oklahoma
40th Infantry Division (Mechanised): California (two brigades)
46th Infantry Division: California
85th Infantry Division (Light): Louisiana (1st Brigade only)
91st Infantry Division (Light): California
95th Infantry Division (Light): Oklahoma
98th Infantry Division (Light): Louisiana (2nd Brigade only)
100th Infantry Division (Light): Colorado
10th Special Forces Group: Possibly some units in Colorado
19th Special Forces Group: Possibly some units in Utah
45th Field Artillery Brigade: Oklahoma
65th Field Artillery Brigade: Utah
153rd Field Artillery Brigade: Possibly in California/Nevada
169th Field Artillery Brigade: Colorado
6th Air Defence Artillery Brigade: Oklahoma
111th Air Defence Artillery Brigade: Possibly in Colorado/New Mexico
49th Military Police Brigade: California
221st Military Police Brigade: California
225th Engineer Brigade: Louisiana
Cadet Brigade: Colorado
School Brigade: Oklahoma

[Olefin]

Good list for sure - but keep in mind many of those units had been very roughly handled especially the light infantry divisions that faced the Mexicans (and the 46th really didnt fare well either)- I see the US military forces that were in the Southwest by 2000 sort of like what the German Army was in 1945 - still a lot of divisions left but a lot of them were basically formations in name only - more groupings of survivors versus effective units

The 91st for instance - which started out per the US Army Vehicle Guide with 9 foot infantry battalions and three towed 105mm artillery battalions - had only 900 men left and was reduced to just the 3rd Brigade and the division was described as virtually annihilated - meaning morale was probably big time in the toilet

[mpipes]

One thing to keep in mind, none of the canon discusses airpower at all. Canon implies in several places that at least some aircraft were still active even in 2000. In 1998, there would still be considerable supplies of fuel for aircraft. Using Paul's suggestion for F-20As and other aircraft notations, as well as historic combat squadrons in 1990, I put at least 10 squadrons of F-20As, two squadrons of F-4Ds, one squadron of F-4E, a F-105 squadron (training), six F-16ADF squadrons, two squadrons of F-4Ss, one squadron of F-14s (training), one squadron of F-18Cs and F-18Es (training), three squadrons of F-100s, at least three squadrons of A-10s, an A-37 squadron (training), at least three squadrons of B-52s, two A-7Fs squadrons, a B-1A wing, and a B-2A wing as available.

And guess where at least two B61 nuclear weapons plus a couple of ALCMs went?

I see the Mexican invasion as a major blunder. The Mexican army was/is primarily a defensive force with logistics tied to moving supplies over limited distances....a couple of hundred miles at most. Even with a buildup, it would be defensive in orientation with limited logistic capability optimized for supply over short distances. They would be invading over a front hundreds of miles long in the face of several hundred American aircraft supported by AWACs. Even with the buildup of aircraft I contemplate, there are no AWACs, and the US gains air superiority fairly quickly. Logistics targets are heavily targeted by aircraft and nukes, and the offensive runs out of steam as their combat units run out of supplies and they have to garrison every town they capture.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Here's an interesting little bit of history that could be used to allow Soviet infiltration of Mexican society & government (and in real life maybe it was? There doesn't seem to be much info about it on the net).
There was modest sized Russian community living in Mexico beginning in the 1920s. All of the families involved were Russian jews escaping persecution and the original 50 families established a colony in Guadeloupe. The Mexican government had maintained fairly good relations with the USSR since that time and still has good relations with the Russian government of today.

It's possible that the early Soviet government infilitrated the community to keep a watch on them, how likely that was is obviously open to debate as is how effective such surveillance might have been.
What little I've read about them indicates that the wider world generally didn't pay the Russians in Mexico much, if any, attention. Particularly as they chose to locate themselves in a fairly isolated area that didn't attract non-Russian Mexicans until the late 1950s-early 1960s. However this isolation may have also rendered them as less threatening to the Communists as well maybe? I really haven't delved deeply into this so I'm simply speculating here.

During the Cold War era it's also possible that the Soviets monitored & infiltrated these Mexican Russians. Again, how likely that would have been and how much influence they might have tried to exercise over them is open to debate. But it could provide an opening in the history of Mexico for efforts to reconcile some of the more "far out" elements of T2k Mexican and Soviet history perhaps?

[kato13]

There was modest sized Russian community living in Mexico beginning in the 1920s. All of the families involved were Russian jews escaping persecution and the original 50 families established a colony in Guadeloupe.

8<---- Snipped ---->8

During the Cold War era it's also possible that the Soviets monitored & infiltrated these Mexican Russians. Again, how likely that would have been and how much influence they might have tried to exercise over them is open to debate. But it could provide an opening in the history of Mexico for efforts to reconcile some of the more "far out" elements of T2k Mexican and Soviet history perhaps?


It is an interesting theory but I grew up in an area which was the focus of Russian Jewish Immigration during the time frame in question (23000 in the years from 1969 -1989). There was serious HATRED of the USSR among Russian Jews I was friends with (even more so among their parents). If a red dawn scenario happened (The 14 year old me seriously considered the possibility) I expected them to fight harder than most natural born US citizens.


A couple of sleeper agents could have been snuck in of course, but as a whole I expect the USSR would get little sympathy among Russian Jews in North America

Edit
Another little tidbit from my childhood. I also knew quite a few Lithuanian immigrants to the us. Every year many of the boys 13 to 18 that I knew would go away to Lithuanian camp for 2 to 4 weeks in the summer. While part of it was about keeping the heritage strong they spent some time doing drills and training in what I can only describe as partisan preparation. Minor explosive training, sentry take-downs, paint ball to train cover teams, SEER training, etc. Yeah it was mostly fun, but there was some serious expectation among a few that if the balloon went up they were going to go back to fight for their homeland's freedom. Could be the background of a US NPC with some useful language skills that went special forces.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Thanks for the insight Kato, some interesting info there particularly the part about Lithuanian Americans. Even without the PC/NPC going into USSF it still makes an interesting character background.

What you've mentioned is the same sort of thing that's being going on in Poland recently with their worries about Russia. Not that that's particularly useful for a T2k game (more useful for a 2013 game) but it's interesting to see the continuation of the Russians as a "bogieman".

So what chance do you think there would be for a successful Soviet infiltration of the Russian-Mexican population? Not that they probably need to do it anyway, the Soviet relationship with Mexico was always pretty friendly most of the time but it makes for some interesting speculation.


Edit: Just been reading about the assassination of Trotsky when he was living in Mexico, Stalin certainly seems to have spared no expense trying to get Trotsky killed. Apparently the NKVD set up three different networks of agents to accomplish the task in which they finally succeeded in August 1940. Notable was the use of Spanish communist Ramon Mercader. So I'm now wondering how extensive the Soviet spy network was in Mexico during the rest of the Cold War.

[kato13]

Thanks for the insight Kato, some interesting info there particularly the part about Lithuanian Americans. Even without the PC/NPC going into USSF it still makes an interesting character background.

What you've mentioned is the same sort of thing that's being going on in Poland recently with their worries about Russia. Not that that's particularly useful for a T2k game (more useful for a 2013 game) but it's interesting to see the continuation of the Russians as a "bogieman".

So what chance do you think there would be for a successful Soviet infiltration of the Russian-Mexican population? Not that they probably need to do it anyway, the Soviet relationship with Mexico was always pretty friendly most of the time but it makes for some interesting speculation.

My point of historical point of deviation is 1974 and the oil crisis. Perhaps the USSR, Mexico, and Venezuela (maybe a few others) could form a counter to OPEC. Leading to closer ties between all three nations.

Could a hurricane force a shipment of Vehicles on its way to Venezuela to go to Mexico? Maybe the ship was delivering sample vehicles (Jeeps and Trucks?) for the Mexican Army to test, and Caracas (with 12 T-72s and 36 BMP1 - spit-balling the numbers here) was the next stop. American forces in the Caribbean kept the ship in port after the German war started. A stretch I know, but it feel like there might be an answer somewhere in here.

[RN7]

Here's an interesting little bit of history that could be used to allow Soviet infiltration of Mexican society & government (and in real life maybe it was? There doesn't seem to be much info about it on the net).
There was modest sized Russian community living in Mexico beginning in the 1920s. All of the families involved were Russian jews escaping persecution and the original 50 families established a colony in Guadeloupe. The Mexican government had maintained fairly good relations with the USSR since that time and still has good relations with the Russian government of today.

It's possible that the early Soviet government infilitrated the community to keep a watch on them, how likely that was is obviously open to debate as is how effective such surveillance might have been.
What little I've read about them indicates that the wider world generally didn't pay the Russians in Mexico much, if any, attention. Particularly as they chose to locate themselves in a fairly isolated area that didn't attract non-Russian Mexicans until the late 1950s-early 1960s. However this isolation may have also rendered them as less threatening to the Communists as well maybe? I really haven't delved deeply into this so I'm simply speculating here.

During the Cold War era it's also possible that the Soviets monitored & infiltrated these Mexican Russians. Again, how likely that would have been and how much influence they might have tried to exercise over them is open to debate. But it could provide an opening in the history of Mexico for efforts to reconcile some of the more "far out" elements of T2k Mexican and Soviet history perhaps?

On a side note Leon Trotsky was exiled from the Soviet Union by Stalin and ended up in Mexico in 1937. He was assassinated by NKVD agents in Mexico City in 1940.

[Rainbow Six]

Mexico purchasing armoured vehicles from Brazil at some point sounds fairly plausible to me.

If we’re looking for valid reasons why the Mexicans would have Soviet armour as per City Of Angels I still think any of the following are possible

1. They were part of a shipment that were delivered to Cuba, either for use by Cuba’s own armed forces or the Soviets, and somehow or other they ended up getting shipped to Mexico. Maybe the Cubans were worried that the Americans might see them as some sort of threat (a possible invasion force?) and take pre-emptive action (i.e. nuke them) so struck a deal to give / sell them to the Mexicans.

2. A Soviet Op OMEGA. I think someone mentioned this up thread and it fits with my own opinion as to why Soviet freighters might be sent across the Pacific late in the War – Soviet High Command has decided that the Division Cuba troops could be of more use shoring things up back in the USSR so the freighters are sent to bring them home but there’s not enough room for all of their heavy gear so they agree to leave it for the Mexicans, unintentionally mirroring what the Americans did at Bremerhaven. Somewhere down the line maybe the whole thing gets called off (maybe the freighters all get sunk), but not before some armour has been handed over and possession, as they say, is nine tenths of the law.

2B. A less official OMEGA. Maybe a Soviet commander goes rogue, deserts his post in Texas and heads west with a number of a loyal troops (and their armoured vehicles). Their plan is to head for the west coast, commandeer a ship, and repatriate themselves to the USSR. Somewhere along the way they make friendly contact with a Mexican Army unit. The Soviets are ultimately successful (somehow) in taking over some sort of vessel but, as per 2 above, there isn't enough room for their vehicles so they leave them with their Mexican comrades in arms and sail off back to the Motherland.

[Olefin]

Mexico purchasing armoured vehicles from Brazil at some point sounds fairly plausible to me.

If we’re looking for valid reasons why the Mexicans would have Soviet armour as per City Of Angels I still think any of the following are possible

1. They were part of a shipment that were delivered to Cuba, either for use by Cuba’s own armed forces or the Soviets, and somehow or other they ended up getting shipped to Mexico. Maybe the Cubans were worried that the Americans might see them as some sort of threat (a possible invasion force?) and take pre-emptive action (i.e. nuke them) so struck a deal to give / sell them to the Mexicans.

2. A Soviet Op OMEGA. I think someone mentioned this up thread and it fits with my own opinion as to why Soviet freighters might be sent across the Pacific late in the War – Soviet High Command has decided that the Division Cuba troops could be of more use shoring things up back in the USSR so the freighters are sent to bring them home but there’s not enough room for all of their heavy gear so they agree to leave it for the Mexicans, unintentionally mirroring what the Americans did at Bremerhaven. Somewhere down the line maybe the whole thing gets called off (maybe the freighters all get sunk), but not before some armour has been handed over and possession, as they say, is nine tenths of the law.

2B. A less official OMEGA. Maybe a Soviet commander goes rogue, deserts his post in Texas and heads west with a number of a loyal troops (and their armoured vehicles). Their plan is to head for the west coast, commandeer a ship, and repatriate themselves to the USSR. Somewhere along the way they make friendly contact with a Mexican Army unit. The Soviets are ultimately successful (somehow) in taking over some sort of vessel but, as per 2 above, there isn't enough room for their vehicles so they leave them with their Mexican comrades in arms and sail off back to the Motherland.

Ok I officially love these ideas - and all have a limited amount of equipment involved so its not the whole Mexican Army with it - its just maybe one or two units

Getting material from Brazil obviously has one complication post war start - which is getting it thru the Caribbean to Mexico's Atlantic ports - but since most if not all shipments would have occurred prior to Mexico invading that probably wouldnt be an issue - and even afterward its possible - i.e. if they can transport Soviet Division Cuba to Mexico after the invasion then the USN presence in the Gulf must have been very minimal

[Olefin]

Deliveries of AMX-VCI started in 1994 when 33 were registered as sold to Mexico. This was followed by 18 in 1995 and 22 in 1996. After that Belgium sold no more to Mexico, and other AMX-VCI's were later obtained from France.

However this in real life not the Twilight War. The AMX-VCI constituted one third of the Belgian Army's stock of tracked armoured personnel carriers. The rest were M113's, Spartans and AIFV-B's, and all the French Army's stocks of tracked armoured personnel carriers were AMX-10P's or AMX-VCI's. In the Twilight War timeline the Cold War is at 1980's levels and the Soviets are belligerent to the West. Belgian and French companies might be willing to sell new armoured vehicles to Mexico, but I cannot see Belgium of France transferring any armoured vehicles from their own armies to Mexico.

RN - question - where did you get your data - this is what I have using http://armstrade.sipri.org/armstrade/page/trade_register.php as the basis for the AMX-VCI deliveries

But I dont have access to a Jane's

Supplier/ No. Weapon Weapon Year of No.
recipient (R) ordered designation description of order delivery delivered Comments


Belgium
R: Mexico (401) AMX-VCI APC (1994) 1994-1996 401 Second-hand; incl some or most modernized before delivery; incl VTT/PM mortar carrier and ARV version; Mexican designation DNC-1

(95) BDX APC (1994) 1994-1995 (95) Second-hand; Mexican designation DNC-2

That would support that they all came from Belgium and not a mix of Belgium and France - per that site there was no transfers to Mexico from France of any equipment from 1993 to 1997 - that last such transfer was in 1993

4 AS-355/AS-555 Fennec Light helicopter (1992) 1992-1993 (4) AS-555AF armed

another source I have shows 40 AMX-VCI (i.e. as the DNC-1) in service in the Mexican Army in 1996 which shows at least that many would have been delivered and gone thru the conversion process both at SABIEX and at SEDENA

Would definitely love to see where you got the numbers above - would be very helpful indeed for further research


thank you very much

[Olefin]

FYI I was doing some research over lunch and found a very intriguing tank that would fit perfectly in the Mexican Army - ever heard of the X1A and X1A2 light tanks - they were Stuart tanks that were modified by Brazil with a new engine, an improved suspension, new upper hull armor, modern fire controls and a 90 mm gun in a brand new turret - with the X1A2 going even further

and the Brazilians were finally phasing them out right about the time the Mexicans would have been looking for vehicles

they could have either:

a) just bought as many as they could get (which would up to 80 as the Brazilians were still using the X1A2's)

or

b) they had 45 Stuarts of their own - and they could have done the mod themselves under license or sent them to Brazil to get modified

that turns a bunch of elderly Stuarts with a pop-gun into a decent anti-armor vehicle with a gun that the South Africans were using to take out T54/55's in Angola

[RN7]

RN - question - where did you get your data - this is what I have using http://armstrade.sipri.org/armstrade/page/trade_register.php as the basis for the AMX-VCI deliveries

The same source. You just need to look harder

IMPORTER/EXPORTER TIV TABLES
Hit Export then Belgium
Hit Year: 1990-2016 (although in the first post I only put 1990-1996)
Hit Weapon category
This table shows general armored vehicle exports and not destination, but Belgium didn't sell armored vehicles to anyone but Mexico between 1994 and 1996. But then again on closer inspection Belgium also sold 87 Leopard 1A1 tanks to Brazil between 1997 and 1999 so maybe we can subtract that from Belgian exports to Mexico between 1997 and 1999.



Supplier/ No. Weapon Weapon Year of No.
recipient (R) ordered designation description of order delivery delivered Comments


Belgium
R: Mexico (401) AMX-VCI APC (1994) 1994-1996 401 Second-hand; incl some or most modernized before delivery; incl VTT/PM mortar carrier and ARV version; Mexican designation DNC-1

(95) BDX APC (1994) 1994-1995 (95) Second-hand; Mexican designation DNC-2

That would support that they all came from Belgium and not a mix of Belgium and France - per that site there was no transfers to Mexico from France of any equipment from 1993 to 1997 - that last such transfer was in 1993

You would think, but when you look at Belgian yearly exports of armored vehicles for this period this is not the case is it.

[Webstral]

One factor we should bear in mind when considering the correlation of forces in the American Southwest is the fact that the war was fought in a conventional mode by US forces in Europe, East Asia, and the Persian Gulf for seven months before the first nukes were used. As regards aircraft, losses among US airframes in those theaters would have been staggering. Losses would have exceeded replacement by a huge margin. I say this not to disparage the USAF in any way, shape, or form. I don’t doubt that the USAF would have achieved a splendid exchange rate once the lessons learned by the People’s Liberation Army Air Force on the Far Eastern Front and the Luftwaffe over Europe were fully digested and put into practice.

Still, if we work with General Sir John Hackett’s proposition of an exchange rate of 2:5 in combat airframes in Europe as a starting point for the discussion, we are left with a massive load for the USAF to carry. We should consider several salient factors:

By the time the USAF gets directly involved on or about 12/1/96, the Soviets have been fighting an air war for 15-16 months. While they will have suffered serious losses, they will have had the time to ramp up production to offset those losses—at least partially. More importantly, their air crews will have two years of invaluable combat experience. In the air, this means the average number of flying hours for the surviving pilots will be very considerable indeed. Multiply that value times whatever factor flying those hours under combat conditions can be expected to yield, and we may find that that Soviet air crews at the end of 1996 are dramatically superior to what we might have expected in July, 1995 (before the start of the Sino-Soviet War).

Of course, not every pilot in the SAF (a blanket term to cover the various commands employing fixed wing combat aircraft) is going to have rotated through the Far East by the time the West Germans cross the border in October, 1996. But I would expect some effort by the senior leadership to rotate air crews and ground crews through the Far Eastern Front on some basis so that the benefits of operating in combat could be more widely distributed. By the same token, the Soviets would have good reason to rotate individual pilots or even whole regiments out of the Far East for rest, retraining, and refitting. Morale would suffer if the Far Eastern air regiments began to get the idea that they were doing all the heavy lifting for the nation while their comrades in Europe lived the easy life.

If we dig into the details, we may find that the experience of the SAF in the Far East might not translate perfectly evenly to Europe (or the Middle East) in every particular. The early air dominance of the SAF means that the institutional experience gained in air-to-air operations will be less than the experience gained in air-to-ground operations. The Chinese won’t allow the PLAAF to be wiped out entirely in unequal air-to-air fighting during 1995. They will do their best to keep a force in being that can challenge Soviet air supremacy at moments the Chinese will hope to choose. The Soviets definitely will have the chance to practice bomber escort and counter-air operations on an ongoing, if sporadic, basis during the first ten months of 1996.

The Soviets will get plenty of practice flying air-to-ground missions. I suspect these pilots will be the first to suffer combat fatigue. CAS, interdiction, and other strike missions are highly dangerous against any defended target, as US pilots who fought over Vietnam can attest. Stand-off munitions will run short long before requests for air support do, meaning that Soviet air crews are going to have to fly into the teeth of the Chinese ground based air defenses to deliver bombs and rockets.

Ground based air defense systems will be at or near the top of list of materiel the Chinese request from the West. It’s hard to say where the Western powers will draw the line regarding provision of these items. I rather suspect that the United States will be inclined to be conservative, not wanting state-of-the-art systems to fall into Soviet hands. The French may be more willing to risk having their gear fall into Soviet hands in order to turn a profit in the short term and increase their influence in China over the long term. That’s all politics, which is a whole separate area for speculation. Suffice to say that I think that the fact that there are multiple Western suppliers who will be competing for money and post-war influence will cause the Chinese to receive more and better systems generally than if a single Western power were supplying them.

Consequently, the Soviets will be exposed to Western ground based air defenses in combat before the fighting starts in Europe. Conditions won’t be exactly the same, of course. Still, the Soviet pilots who survive their encounters over China will have dearly-purchased experience in how to deal with some of the same systems they will be facing in Europe and the Middle East once the fighting starts there.

Soviet ground crews will gain enormously, as will the air controllers. A year is a long time in an air war—long enough for procedures and training to be modified to fit real world circumstances. By the time the West Germans attempt to liberate East Germany, the Soviets will have the time and the motivation to rewrite their book on air operations from the air control and ground support standpoint. They will be highly motivated to ensure that these hard-won lessons are incorporated into every air regiment, whether that regiment fights in the Far East or not.

Going forward to the involvement of the USAF in WW3, the Americans are going to find themselves up against a foe in the air who is leaner and meaner than anything they might have encountered in July of 1995. The SAF definitely will be much smaller than it was at the start of the Sino-Soviet War. The personnel and aircraft will be better managed. Although the benefits of experience in the Far East will not be evenly distributed, the Americans are likely to find that the quality of Soviet tactics, battle management, and ground support are considerably superior to what might have been found two years prior. In Europe, the Americans are going to be up against the winners of the defensive air battle against the Luftwaffe.

So while the SAF the USAF encounters from 12/1/96 forward will be quantitatively inferior to the SAF of early 1995, the SAF will definitely be qualitatively superior to the SAF of 1995. Room exists for considerable speculation on how these two factors translate into overall combat power or combat power in a given theater. Historically, a relative handful of pilots have made a highly disproportionate percentage of the air-to-air kills. It’s hard to say who these pilots are going to be in peacetime, though history tells us that many of these guys are not the command’s favorite officers in peace time. By December 1996, the Soviets will have gone through the process of having peacetime troublemakers transition into wartime heroes. The transition may not be complete—look at how the Soviet military treated the Afghanistan veterans. However, the scale of the Sino-Soviet War may cause the senior leadership to have an attitude closer to that of the leadership in the Great Patriotic War than during the war in Afghanistan.

One thing I feel comfortable in asserting is that the pilots who are likely to become real achievers in the air are also likely to request reassignment to the Far East once the fighting starts and once the need for more pilots becomes clear. Air commanders in Europe and the Caucasus may see this as an opportunity to get rid troublesome officers for a time or maybe even permanently. In this sense, the cream of Soviet pilots probably ought to rise to the top. Though this process probably won’t be complete by December 1996, the Soviets certainly will be much further along than the Americans.

By the same token, the Pact air forces will be fewer in number of aircraft but much stronger in terms of experience by the time the West Germans cross the border in October 1996.

All this has to be taken into account when we assess the loss rate of US aircraft from 12/96 through 8/97. We also have to bear in mind that NATO will not enjoy the participation of French, Belgian, or Italian aircraft. The Luftwaffe will have been very badly damaged. The USAF will go into the fight with the experience of Operation Desert Storm under its belt, but this will not be anything like the kind of experience the Soviets will have gained in the Far East. Qualitatively and quantitatively speaking, the USAF and the SAF will be much more evenly matched in early 1997 than they would have been in early 1995. We should expect the exchange rate to reflect this reality. It may cost the USAF 1,000 aircraft to knock out 1,500 Soviet and Pact aircraft in 1997.

Once the Allies decide to attempt the knock-out blow General Hackett describes in The Third World War and which seems to inform the invasion of Poland, both the loss rate among US aircraft capable of ground attack missions and the demand for those missions will explode. We should bear in mind that the US is on the offensive in Korea and the Middle East during this time. The USAF is going to be deployed forward to the greatest extent possible to support the strategic decision to knock the USSR out of the war in 1997.

At the risk of putting too fine a point on the matter, I find it highly unlikely that there will be hundreds of American combat aircraft left in the United States by Thanksgiving 1997. Like the Army, the Air Force will have pushed almost everything forward, leaving just enough here to mind the store and train replacements. Those air units that remain as of late November 1997 will endure six months of post-apocalypse conditions before the Mexican Army crosses the border in the Southwest in June 1998. It should go without saying that such conditions are not conducive to unit readiness—especially for high-maintenance machinery like modern combat aircraft. While the American Southwest may not be entirely devoid of serviceable aircraft in mid-1998, the air situation probably will much more closely resemble that of the fighting in the Congo over the past couple of decades than that of pre-war American circumstances.

[pmulcahy11b]

49th Armored Division: All Texas National Guard division formed in Texas in November 1996. Oklahoma


In the Twilight 1 and 2.2 timelines, this division already exists, and has existed since WW2. (It was my division when I was in the National Guard, BTW -- A Co 1/141st INF) It was reflagged as the 36th ID (or AD?) in the mid 00s.

[RN7]

FYI I was doing some research over lunch and found a very intriguing tank that would fit perfectly in the Mexican Army - ever heard of the X1A and X1A2 light tanks - they were Stuart tanks that were modified by Brazil with a new engine, an improved suspension, new upper hull armor, modern fire controls and a 90 mm gun in a brand new turret - with the X1A2 going even further

and the Brazilians were finally phasing them out right about the time the Mexicans would have been looking for vehicles

And Mexico could also have obtained a couple of battalions of AMX-30 tanks from France. They were a lot better than Stuart tanks and the French were finally phasing them out right about the time the Mexicans would have been looking for vehicles. And the French will sell anything to anybody, excluding nuclear weapons.

[RN7]

In the Twilight 1 and 2.2 timelines, this division already exists, and has existed since WW2. (It was my division when I was in the National Guard, BTW -- A Co 1/141st INF) It was reflagged as the 36th ID (or AD?) in the mid 00s.

Just quoting from GDW American Combat Vehicle Handbook Paul. But thanks and the T2K history has it in Oklahoma in 2000.

[Rainbow Six]

Minor piece of trivia that doesn't affect the bigger picture - it is possible that American units in the south western United States might include a small number of (West) German military personnel - the Luftwaffe ran an air defence school for its personnel at Fort Bliss since the 1960's. Presuming all personnel weren't immediately pulled back to Germany at the start of the War (and I see no reason why it should - training would still have to take place) some Luftwaffe personnel might have linked up with US units after Fort Bliss was overrun (the School Brigade is probably the most likely).

(IRL the Luftwaffe also had a permanent presence at Holloman AFB, NM, between 1996 and September this year but that was very much a post Cold War thing so I think unlikely to feature in the V1 timeline)

[RN7]

Minor piece of trivia that doesn't affect the bigger picture - it is possible that American units in the south western United States might include a small number of (West) German military personnel - the Luftwaffe ran an air defence school for its personnel at Fort Bliss since the 1960's. Presuming all personnel weren't immediately pulled back to Germany at the start of the War (and I see no reason why it should - training would still have to take place) some Luftwaffe personnel might have linked up with US units after Fort Bliss was overrun (the School Brigade is probably the most likely).

(IRL the Luftwaffe also had a permanent presence at Holloman AFB, NM, between 1996 and September this year but that was very much a post Cold War thing so I think unlikely to feature in the V1 timeline)


Its possible as there was a German Budesheer unit still listed in Canada with some British Army training units in one of the Canadian variant write-ups.

[Olefin]

The AMX-30 is an idea but again it may come down to the Mexican transport systems - and if NAFTA occurred or not

Keep in mind that much of the improvement in Mexican roads, railroads and airports came about because of NAFTA - which would definitely allow them to better operate heavy tanks and armor

now that's not a big factor once they are in the US with its better roads and rail networks - but it is a factor pre-war - i.e. you dont buy equipment you cant operate in your own country

One of the reasons they went with the lighter armor wasnt just that they didnt expect to fight a foe equipped with heavy armor - it was because their road and rail network would never be able to sustain heavy armor using it

Actually if I had to go with a tank buy for Mexico I would be looking at the AMX-13 - much lighter than than the AMX-30 and perfect for Mexico's road and rail network - and still has a decent punch

and obviously the AMX-13 would fit in with the real life Mexican Army - i.e. the AMX-VCI that they did end up buying is the infantry carrier variant of the AMX-13 tank - so that plays right into the same general tonnage

remember they werent expecting to fight anyone armed with M1A1 tanks - their main foes were countries like Guatemala or Honduras or internal rebels

Also keep in mind who they initially faced - the light divisions and MP units they faced would have had very little in the way of armored vehicles and may have had almost no anti-armor weapons - i.e. by mid 1998 most stateside anti-tank missiles and launchers would probably have long ago been sent to Iran or Korea or Europe or Africa

I would hate to be facing a platoon of AMX-13 or X1A tanks with nothing but possibly a battery of 105mm howitzers to back me up and my heaviest weapon being machine guns

the other reason they may have had such success - if you read up on the 46th it says they were dispersed big time doing stuff like security and disaster relief and supporting food distribution - they may not have even had heavy weapons on them when the Mexicans came storming across the border -

i.e. those 50's and anti-tank weapons and even most of their armored vehicles (because of fuel shortages) that they did have may have been sitting safe back at their base area and not even in place when suddenly it went from distributing food to trying to fight Mexican armored vehicles

[Olefin]

And not having heavy tanks definitely gives them a great reason to bring in Soviet Division Cuba in my opinion - i.e. hey the US is sending in an armored division - we arent equipped to fight them

but Soviet Division Cuba - which is basically a motor rifle division - had heavy armor for sure - and I would like to tie this to what Webstral said - they also had helicopter gunships and fuel for them (i.e. Red Star Lone Star even mentions they are grounded now for lack of fuel) - and there is a good possibility the 49th didnt have any air support or very limited anti-air weapons by the time of the battle with Soviet Division Cuba

I would not want to be the commander of the 49th if that was the case when those gunships started making their runs and all they had was the 50's mounted on the tanks when they ran out of AA missiles

[Raellus]

@Olefin: I like your idea of up-gunned Stuart tanks. They would give the Mexican Army a bit of an advantage against the armor-poor U.S. forces in CONUS without being overpowering (a .50 HMG firing AP rounds could still kill a Stuart). It also has a certain exotic factor that I like. Add those up-gunned Stuarts to the Brazilian wheeled APCs and you have a formidable- but not too formidable- AFV force to lend punch and mobility to the MA invasion force. I haven't made up my mind yet, but I almost like that idea better than the idea of transfers of French and/or Belgian AFVs. Plus, it doesn't mess with the continuing Cold War alternate history of the v1.0 timeline.

@Web: Your eloquent and well-reasoned treatise on comparative air-power would fit really well in my In Defense of the Red Army thread. Would you mind if I copied most of it over there (attributed to you, of course)?

[Raellus]

It may have been mentioned before, but have any of you considered the West German-designed, Argentinian-made TAM as a candidate for Mexican MBT of the Twilight War?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tanque_Argentino_Mediano

I would classify it more as a medium tank than a true MBT (at least compared to its contemporaries) but it's definitely got more hitting power than a Stuart. Argentina was shopping it around in the 1980s but didn't get any buyers. Still, if the Mexicans made an offer in the early 1990s, I'm sure cash-strapped Argentina would have reopened production lines. And I think that the Mexicans historically had an APC built on a similar, German-designed chasis, so there could be parts compatibility there.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sedena-Henschel_HWK-11

[Olefin]

@Olefin: I like your idea of up-gunned Stuart tanks. They would give the Mexican Army a bit of an advantage against the armor-poor U.S. forces in CONUS without being overpowering (a .50 HMG firing AP rounds could still kill a Stuart). It also has a certain exotic factor that I like. Add those up-gunned Stuarts to the Brazilian wheeled APCs and you have a formidable- but not too formidable- AFV force to lend punch and mobility to the MA invasion force. I haven't made up my mind yet, but I almost like that idea better than the idea of transfers of French and/or Belgian AFVs. Plus, it doesn't mess with the continuing Cold War alternate history of the v1.0 timeline.

@Web: Your eloquent and well-reasoned treatise on comparative air-power would fit really well in my In Defense of the Red Army thread. Would you mind if I copied most of it over there (attributed to you, of course)?

I also think that the upgunned Stuarts have that Mad Max kind of tank idea that fits in well with a post-apocalyptic game - i.e. its like the kind of tank that Tank Girl would have had (especially since the one she had in the movie was a supposedly upgunned Stuart with a 105mm cannon on it)

and it sure adds surprise - "hey Sarge isnt that a Stuart?"
"Yup but that sure as heck isnt a 37 on her. Never seem anything like that. What the heck is she armed with? The Mexicans actually think an old Stuart can do us any harm?"

Followed by laughing and a then a loud boom - and even a louder boom when the 90mm round blows the M113 that is parked behind them apart.

[Rainbow Six]

What are the chances of Mexico buying tanks from the United States in the early 90's? Would the US potentially sell something like surplus M47's or M48's to the Mexicans? Or maybe the CG Stingray?

Just a thought...

[Olefin]

Actually the Stingray was the first tank that came to mind - i.e. they were looking for buyers big time - but not sure they would allow them to be sold to Mexico

[Webstral]

@Web: Your eloquent and well-reasoned treatise on comparative air-power would fit really well in my In Defense of the Red Army thread. Would you mind if I copied most of it over there (attributed to you, of course)?

It's there to be used, sir.

[Raellus]

What are the chances of Mexico buying tanks from the United States in the early 90's? Would the US potentially sell something like surplus M47's or M48's to the Mexicans? Or maybe the CG Stingray?

Just a thought...

That's a cool twist, and certainly thickens the fog of war, but, personally, I'd like to take every opportunity to incorporate uncommon weapons and equipment into the T2KU. You just don't see up-gunned Stuarts, Argentinian TAMs, and Brazilian wheeled AFVs in any of the standard T2K settings.

[Draq]

That's a cool twist, and certainly thickens the fog of war, but, personally, I'd like to take every opportunity to incorporate uncommon weapons and equipment into the T2KU. You just don't see up-gunned Stuarts, Argentinian TAMs, and Brazilian wheeled AFVs in any of the standard T2K settings.
Any and every Frankenstein vehicle, and patch work moth-ball vehicle upgrade. It just wouldn't be t2k otherwise.

[Olefin]

That's a cool twist, and certainly thickens the fog of war, but, personally, I'd like to take every opportunity to incorporate uncommon weapons and equipment into the T2KU. You just don't see up-gunned Stuarts, Argentinian TAMs, and Brazilian wheeled AFVs in any of the standard T2K settings.

All of them are good ideas for Mexico - I especially like the up-gunned Stuarts and the Brazilian AFV's - and considering they already have 40+ Stuarts its the perfect fit for their Army

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Olefin here's something else for you to have a peek at, as mentioned by Raellus, Argentina did produce some of its own armour but they also had a large quantity of tanks that were surplus to requirements after they got the TAM into service.

While they probably tried to dispose of them in the normal manner they didn't succeed and they were still in Argentina as of 2002. These tanks are Shermans, they had about 450 initially and then upgraded 250 of them with more modern engines and other systems but also with... a 105mm main gun.

They remained in service until 1994, probably too late for a version 1 timeline but kinda about the right time for v2.
This article gives a lot more detail https://www.warhistoryonline.com/war-articles/happened-argentina-shermans-forty-images-may-just-tell-us.html/3

Now that would be a hell of a surprise, the X1 light tanks and the Sherman Repotenciado mediums as the basis for a battle group. That 105mm would give the Mexicans some hitting power without the unbelievable totally Soviet armoured force proposed by City of Angels.

[Olefin]

I will take a look for sure

FYI for those wanting to see stats for the X1A and X1A-2 tanks Paul already has them on his site

http://www.pmulcahy.com/tracked_lcv/brazilian_tlcv.htm

[RN7]

What are the chances of Mexico buying tanks from the United States in the early 90's? Would the US potentially sell something like surplus M47's or M48's to the Mexicans? Or maybe the CG Stingray?

Just a thought...

The U.S. sort of didn't sell much in the way of heavy or modern equipment to Latin American countries because most of them have unstable political histories. They might use them against their neighbours or even U.S. forces if they had to intervene.

They did sell the M48 and M60 tanks to Brazil, but not to any other Latin American country except for one M60 to Argentina for evaluation. I think the only reason they sold tanks to Brazil was because other Latin American countries were buying West European and Soviet tanks, or in Argentina's case building the German designed TAM medium tank.

However they might sell the Stingray to Latin America including Mexico. It wasn't really a full sized tank and was designed for export. It was a modern design with a decent gun but had weak armour, and it would be only a limited threat to U.S. armoured forces.

[RN7]

Actually if I had to go with a tank buy for Mexico I would be looking at the AMX-13 - much lighter than than the AMX-30 and perfect for Mexico's road and rail network - and still has a decent punch

I would have no issue with Mexico using the AMX-13. It was largely obsolete in French service due to the demanding combat environment that would be expected in a European War. But it would suit Mexican defence priorities before the Twilight War.

[Raellus]

While they probably tried to dispose of them in the normal manner they didn't succeed and they were still in Argentina as of 2002. These tanks are Shermans, they had about 450 initially and then upgraded 250 of them with more modern engines and other systems but also with... a 105mm main gun.

They remained in service until 1994, probably too late for a version 1 timeline but kinda about the right time for v2.

Good find! I was unaware that Argentina had any number of modernized Shermans. I really like this idea, and I think it would work just as well for the v1.0 timeline.

So, as I envision it, by the time of the invasion, Mexico's pre-existing army AFV fleet would have been bolstered by:

Ex-Argentinian Up-gunned Shermans*
Ex-Brazilian X1A & X1A-2 light tanks
Newer make Brazilian EE-9 Cascavel and EE-11 Urutu wheeled AFVs

They could probably acquire these on the cheap, prior to, or even after the Soviets go to war with the PRC.

This would improve the MA's firepower, helping to explain their impressive initial gains, without making them unstoppable or un-ejectable.

Now, if we could just come to a consensus on how the Mexican Army gets its hands on some Soviet armor...

*Turboswede's MASB already had the MA using up-gunned Shermans but I can't recall the provenance- I think they may have been acquired from the Israelis.

[Raellus]

Here are some sites that I found when I was running a brief New Mexico-based T2K PbP a few months back. The first site has pics of several IRL Mexican AFVs. The second has lists of said, including the numbers fielded (I can't vouch for the accuracy of the figures, but it's a start).

https://aw.my.com/en/forum/showthread.php?48830-Mexican-Armored-Vehicles

http://www.armyrecognition.com/mexico_mexican_army_land_ground_forces_uk/mexico_mexican_army_land_ground_forces_military_eq uipment_armoured_vehicle_pictures_information_desc .html

[RN7]

obviously the AMX-13 would fit in with the real life Mexican Army - i.e. the AMX-VCI that they did end up buying is the infantry carrier variant of the AMX-13 tank - so that plays right into the same general tonnage

I have little problem with Mexico using the AMX VCI in this period, but I don't think it's possible that they got them from Belgium due to the on going Cold War in Europe. France would be a much better source.

As part of the Paleme-4/6/7 deals France delivered 120 ERC-90, 48 VCR-TT, 40 VBL including 8 with Milan anti-tank missiles, 32 MO-120 RT 120mm mortars and 80 MILAN anti-tank missiles to Mexico in the 1980's. I see no reason why this arms trade would not continue into the 1990's, as we know that France delivered 4 AS-555 Fennec armed helicopters in 1993.

At this time France was in the process of upgrading its land forces with new equipment such as the LeClerc tanks, AMX-10RC, AMX-10P, VAB, GCT SF artillery and towed field artillery, anti-tank and air defence missiles etc. GDW also lists the AMX-40 tank. A whole generation of French military equipment was becoming obsolete in French usage in the later stage of the Cold War, including the AMX-30 tank, AMX-13, AMX-VCI, F3 SP artillery etc. France has a greater arms manufacturing capability than Belgium, and it could produce new vehicles far quicker than Belgium making it plausible that older vehicles could be replaced and become surplus. France and Mexico could agree to another Paleme deal in the 1990's to transfer second hand military vehicles and some new arms to Mexico.

The Mexican Army Sourcebook basically implies that this happened. I don't believe that the numbers listed in the Mexican Army Sourcebook that include hundreds of AMX-30 tanks would be possible, due mainly to the fact that Mexican forces and defence spending could not accommodate or afford these numbers. It would also lead to even bigger problems with the Americans who would not be happy with Mexico massively increasing its armed forces and capabilities south of the border, and would probably lead to major American political and trade problems with France and Mexico. However reduce those figures to dozens rather than hundreds and it would be less noticeable and more manageable. A few dozen AMX-30's, more AMX-13 and AMX-VCI and some F3 and towed artillery, along with some new French anti-tank missiles and SAM's etc and a dozen helicopters would not alarm the Americans that much as it would still be very modest in comparison to the numbers that U.S. forces have pre-war. It would also explain how Mexican forces were able to invade and hold American territory.

[Olefin]

I agree with RN7 on the AMX-13 - for one the Mexicans in real life bought the AMX-VCI which is the APC version. And its light enough that it would be something that would actually work with Mexico's pre-war needs - i.e. they werent looking to take on the US - so they werent thinking M1A1 they were thinking more like what do we need to take on rebels and possibly Guatemala or Honduras

The AMX-13 has got a good punch for a light tank as well. And I also agree with RN7 on the probable fact that the French wont be looking to sell them hundreds of anything - looking at the composition of the Mexican Army even a battalion worth of AMX-13 tanks and a battalion or two of AMX-VCI APC's gives them better combat power than before and its line with the size of previous French sales to Mexico.

Given the inherent weakness of American forces left in the US by the time of the invasion they may have been able to pull it off without even MBT's - even light tanks and armored cars may have been enough. And they did bring in Soviet Division Cuba for the muscle when they did need it to stop the charge of the 49th.

If you want to stay in line with canon then there should be at least a couple of battalions of the VAB as well if not more - Red Star Lone Star has that as the primary Mexican APC.

They are the canon APC - but the question is how many did they have - i.e. sure they had them in Texas - but that doesnt mean they had a lot of them. (and the ones I am thinking about would be the basic version equipped with either a machine gun or the 20mm cannon and most likely ones that are already 15 or so years old - i.e. from the original deliveries and about ready to be refitted)

[dragoon500ly]

Interesting, by the early 1980s, most of the French AMX-13 tank production was the 90mm and 105mm variants with many mounting quad SS-11 ATGMs.

Not only were there APCs but also self propelled howitzer and guns, and ADA variants.

One can almost see a Mexican Army purchase of 1-2 brigades worth from the French. Keeping the initial purchase at this level would give the Mexican Army a nice modifier against the light infantry/MP units that were fielded during the invasion as well as a useful force against what ever tanks the US could died in response.

[Olefin]

If you look at the biggest armored vehicle buy the Mexicans had (in reality not the canon) it was the buy of approximately 500 vehicles (all APC's) from Belgium in 1994-1996 - given that you can assume that is about how many they would have been looking for in the canon timing as well with most of the buy leaning towards APC's

however some kind of light tank is a definite possibility as part of this mix for the canon versus the real life buy

again it comes down to Mexican behavior in the canon versus real life

if real life Mexico never saw the US as a serious enemy they had to arm themselves against and thus never looked at tanks as a need for their army

in the canon this changed - but the question is when did it change? After the nuclear strikes on Mexico - in that case its too late to really arm themselves with new weapons like heavy tanks - or did it change years earlier - and the canon in many ways doesnt really address that.

Again the nature of the US forces that were in the border areas (keep in mind the 49th was deployed on peace keeping duties a long way from their native Texas when the invasion occurred) tends to suggest to me that this transformation in attitude happened after the nuclear strikes as the civil situation in the US and Mexico deteriorated and the Mexican government needed some way to rally their people around the flag. In other words the first inkling the US had of the invasion was seeing those Mexican APC's crossing the Rio Grande and striking over the border from Tijuana.

You would think if they had added a lot of heavy tanks to their arsenal the US would have been paying a lot more attention to that border at the least for the potential threat. Especially considering the only real country to buy those tanks to use against was us. Now a small number could be possible - ie.. they could be seen as an offset to the Nicaraguan Army which did have tanks (old T-54/55 and PT-76 light tanks). I could easily see Mexico telling a nervous US general in 1993 that the AMX-13 tanks they are getting are to take out the Nicaraguans if they ever come across the border - and thus they are never figured into US strategic decisions until they encounter them in Texas or CA

[RN7]

The main problem with Mexican versus US forces in the Twilight War is that U.S. forces have a whole load of weapons that can defeat all Mexican armour, but the Mexicans have none that can defeat the M1 Abrams tank.

The ERC-90 and AMX-13 armed with a 90mm gun can defeat lighter U.S. vehicles and older tanks, but not modern tanks. An AMX-13 armed with a 105mm gun can defeat the M48 and M60 tanks, but only if it is using HEAT or APFSDS rounds. It cannot defeat any variant of the M1 Abrams tank or an M60A3 with reactive armour. The ERC-90 and the AMX-13 are also very lightly armed vehicles and vulnerable to all U.S. tanks and anti-tank weapons. In fact they would also be vulnerable to the Bradley's 25mm canon.

Mexican forces also use the Milan missile. France supplied 80 Milan 1 missiles to Mexico in mid-1980's. The Milan 1 missile can defeat the M48 and M60 tank, but cannot realistically defeat any variant of the M1 Abrams tank or an M60A3 with reactive armour. The Milan is also wired guided and short ranged. The Milan 2 missile is a bit more powerful but the French kept this missile for themselves in this period, and it couldn't penetrate an M1 Abrams either.

[dragoon500ly]

The main problem with Mexican versus US forces in the Twilight War is that U.S. forces have a whole load of weapons that can defeat all Mexican armour, but the Mexicans have none that can defeat the M1 Abrams tank.

The ERC-90 and AMX-13 armed with a 90mm gun can defeat lighter U.S. vehicles and older tanks, but not modern tanks. An AMX-13 armed with a 105mm gun can defeat the M48 and M60 tanks, but only if it is using HEAT or APFSDS rounds. It cannot defeat any variant of the M1 Abrams tank or an M60A3 with reactive armour. The ERC-90 and the AMX-13 are also very lightly armed vehicles and vulnerable to all U.S. tanks and anti-tank weapons. In fact they would also be vulnerable to the Bradley's 25mm canon.

Mexican forces also use the Milan missile. France supplied 80 Milan 1 missiles to Mexico in mid-1980's. The Milan 1 missile can defeat the M48 and M60 tank, but cannot realistically defeat any variant of the M1 Abrams tank or an M60A3 with reactive armour. The Milan is also wired guided and short ranged. The Milan 2 missile is a bit more powerful but the French kept this missile for themselves in this period, and it couldn't penetrate an M1 Abrams either.

The actual armor thickness ranges from 40mm to 10mm, flank and rear of the AMX-13 is actually vulnerable to .50 BMG armor piercing and 40mm HVHEDP rounds.

The 75mm version was an adoption of a WWII German gun, it can fire AP, HE, Canister and Smoke. The 90mm is the same lightweight version as mounted of the AML-90 armoured car, it fires HEAT, HE and Canister. This was why the French started mounting SS-11 missiles in an effort to counter T-62 tanks.

Perhaps the greatest weakness of the tank is its autoloader, the two six round drums have to be loaded from the outside of the tank and they must load the same type of ammo, the left drum could be loaded with HEAT and the right drum with HE for example.

The usual tactics involved creeping up on target, firing off as many rounds as possible (the 12 rounds could be fired in about 1.5 minutes) and retiring rapidly back, and getting out of the turret and reloading the drums.

[Olefin]

And that is why they brought Soviet Division Cuba along for the ride - i.e. to have people who had the tanks and the ability to take out M1A1 tanks

also keep in mind that they most likely used the terrain to their advantage when it came time to take on US tanks (i.e. avoided fighting any kind of long or mid-range fight where their guns had zero chance of doing anything) - much like the US did when they took on superior tanks in WWII - and they may have fought M1 tanks using infantry tactics if the US actually sent tanks into the cities or built up areas (i.e. took a page out of the Russian Stalingrad book on fighting tanks)

one reason I am highly doubting, in my opinion, they had MBT's in any numbers at all is the description of two battles in the canon - the one in Texas where a bunch of military cadets held off the Mexican Army for three days and finally had to be beaten by massed artillery - and the stand of the School Brigade at El Paso (which was armed basically with anti-air weapons and not anti-tank) which eventually only retreated because they were about to be enveloped

either of those stands make good sense against light armored vehicles

but MBT's would have made short work of either force (definitely the military cadets and most likely the School Brigade as well)

That makes me lean to either them depending on Soviet Division Cuba (which wasnt in either battle) or a possible small silver bullet force that they would only use after all else failed and after US tanks numbers had been degraded as much as possible beforehand instead of attempting to engage in tank on tank battles first

[Olefin]

FYI has anyone else read Trial By Fire - Harold Coyle's book about a US Mexico war?

[RN7]

The actual armor thickness ranges from 40mm to 10mm, flank and rear of the AMX-13 is actually vulnerable to .50 BMG armor piercing and 40mm HVHEDP rounds.

This is the problem with the AMX-13. Its not a tank, and it could be defeated by even a heavy machine gun.

[Olefin]

Which does make the AMX-13 a possible light tank that the Mexicans did have and engaged the School Brigade with (to their detriment) - ie.. they would have had ammo like that which would have stopped the Mexican attack cold

Whereas an MBT most likely may have have shrugged that off and overran them almost immediately

[kato13]

The school brigade would have had some ADATS (tracked and wheeled) and FOG-Ms correct?

In open terrain they are not the most useful, but with some shoot and scoot even MBTs would need to think twice going against those.

[RN7]

And that is why they brought Soviet Division Cuba along for the ride - i.e. to have people who had the tanks and the ability to take out M1A1 tankst

What type of tanks and ATGM's was Soviet Division Cuba using? A T-72 tank with a 125mm gun cannot defeat the frontal armour of an any M1 Abrams, even with an armor piercing fin stabilized discarding sabot with depleted uranium round. Only the very latest Soviet anti-tank missiles would even damage yet alone defeat an M1A1.

[Rainbow Six]

This is the problem with the AMX-13. Its not a tank, and it could be defeated by even a heavy machine gun.

I think that's a point in its favour in this particular scenario where we're looking for something that's not overpowered and that the Mexicans might plausibly have bought.

FYI has anyone else read Trial By Fire - Harold Coyle's book about a US Mexico war?

Yes, but it was a long, long time ago so I don't really remember any of the details.

[Olefin]

The school brigade would have had some ADATS (tracked and wheeled) and FOG-Ms correct?

In open terrain they are not the most useful, but with some shoot and scoot even MBTs would need to think twice going against those.

Have to look at my US Army Vehicle Guide when I get home - I think the ADATS but not sure on the FOG-M

[Olefin]

What type of tanks and ATGM's was Soviet Division Cuba using? A T-72 tank with a 125mm gun cannot defeat the frontal armour of an any M1 Abrams, even with an armor piercing fin stabilized discarding sabot with depleted uranium round. Only the very latest Soviet anti-tank missiles would even damage yet alone defeat an M1A1.

Per the canon they had T-72's (Red Star Lone Star) - but if I remember right the 49th wasnt an all M1 unit - again have to look at my US Army Vehicle Guide when I get home (unless you have one handy)

[RN7]

Per the canon they had T-72's (Red Star Lone Star) - but if I remember right the 49th wasnt an all M1 unit - again have to look at my US Army Vehicle Guide when I get home (unless you have one handy)

Both 1st and 2nd edition has the 49th armored division with five tank battalions (2 M1A1, 2 M1 and 1 M60A3). The orbat for 2000 has them with 1 M1A1, 8 M1, 4 M60A3, 7 Stingray and 3 LAV-75.

[RN7]

The school brigade would have had some ADATS (tracked and wheeled) and FOG-Ms correct?

In open terrain they are not the most useful, but with some shoot and scoot even MBTs would need to think twice going against those.

From American Combat Vehicle Handbook

"With the outbreak of hostilities with Mexico in 1998, the brigade was activated as a troop unit, using its available mix of weapons to create unorthodox operational units. Infantry was drawn from basic training camps at Fort Bliss and attached to ADA gun batteries (PIVAD and Diana) to create heavy machinegun combat teams. Because the brigade had no organic field artillery, it relied heavily on infantry mortars and developed its own doctrine for employment of ADA gun systems in the indirect fire role.

The School Brigade was able to hold the Fort Bliss area against repeated attacks, but was soon surrounded. Fighting its way free of the encirclement, the brigade retreated north, evacuating its equipment, personnel, and dependents through New Mexico. Once across the Canadian River, the brigade linked up with elements of the XC U.S. Corps in Oklahoma. In January of 1999, the School Brigade was attached to 49th Armored Division, with which it has served since."

[kato13]

Have to look at my US Army Vehicle Guide when I get home - I think the ADATS but not sure on the FOG-M

It is actually in the 2nd ed Heavy Weapons Sourcebook. So it is not listed in unit assignments but it is US army weapon.

[Olefin]

Thank you for the information RN7!

One thing that the Soviets did have was helicopter gunships - they are mentioned in Red Star Lone Star (if I remember they didnt mention exact numbers or types but it was definitely plural as in more than one or two) - one of the prime reasons to get the refinery was that it could produce avgas -and put those grounded gunships back into the air

That could explain how the Soviets beat the 49th - i.e. they had gunships with anti-tank weapons and fuel to put them in the air - and the 49th may not have had any by the time helos of their own by the time they encountered the Soviets - which if I remember right was in 1999 sometime

definitely would make the T-72's more survivable if the 49th is getting their heads handed to them by gunships and is busy maneuvering to engage them or throw off the missiles and as a result allows the Soviet tankers to get into position to not take on the M1's frontally

thus possibly explaining how a single Soviet Motor Rifle Division stops a five battalion armored division cold

The Cubans has armed Mi-24 and Mi-8 gunships - those definitely could have tipped the odds for the Soviets if the US ones are grounded from lack of fuel

[kato13]

From American Combat Vehicle Handbook

"With the outbreak of hostilities with Mexico in 1998, the brigade was activated as a troop unit, using its available mix of weapons to create unorthodox operational units. Infantry was drawn from basic training camps at Fort Bliss and attached to ADA gun batteries (PIVAD and Diana) to create heavy machinegun combat teams. Because the brigade had no organic field artillery, it relied heavily on infantry mortars and developed its own doctrine for employment of ADA gun systems in the indirect fire role.

The School Brigade was able to hold the Fort Bliss area against repeated attacks, but was soon surrounded. Fighting its way free of the encirclement, the brigade retreated north, evacuating its equipment, personnel, and dependents through New Mexico. Once across the Canadian River, the brigade linked up with elements of the XC U.S. Corps in Oklahoma. In January of 1999, the School Brigade was attached to 49th Armored Division, with which it has served since."

The DIana battalions (will double check PIVAD) also had ADATS. 2ed also mentions 4 of the M1 based laser ADA system being at fort bliss.


Edit PIVAD equipped units had the Roland. so not useful as anti armor.

[Olefin]

Ok how many people think that this subject may be one of the most fascinating and challenging ones there is on the board as to coming up with a realistic OOB for the Mexican Army at the time of the invasion?

I would vote yes for sure

[Raellus]

I don't think that you need tension between the U.S. and Mexico to justify a major arms purchase, even one including light tanks. And I don't think that the U.S. would be particularly troubled by the purchase of a few dozen, older, practically obsolete models. Yes, the U.S. might be upset that Mexico isn't buying American, but if the purchases take place after the Soviets invade China, the U.S. (gov't and arms corporations) would be too preoccupied with providing weapons to the Chinese to care.

I haven't heard much about its status lately, but in the '90s, Mexico was fighting an insurgency against a guerrilla group called the Zapatistas in its Chiapas state. Perhaps the arms buy was part of an attempt to quash this rebellion. Perhaps, Guatemala was believed to be aiding and abetting said rebels. Perhaps the Mexican government was trying to pick a fight with Guatemala in order to distract its own population from various domestic issues (poverty, corruption, etc.).

And tanks- especially light tanks- wouldn't necessarily make it that much easier for the Mexicans to overrun the School Brigade, for example. There are lots of historical examples of well-trained, experienced, well-led infantry, without its own armor, of holding off a force equipped with armor for a couple of days or three.

[dragoon500ly]

This is the problem with the AMX-13. Its not a tank, and it could be defeated by even a heavy machine gun.

Actually the AMX-13 is a perfect example of a light tank from the post WWII era.

When you consider a tank design, picture a triangle, one point is maneuverability, the second is firepower and the third point is protection.

The AMX-13 has excellent maneuverability and decent firepower, protection is poor. But it was designed for a reconnaissance role. When I was stationed in Germany, during the maneuvers that light tank could run rings around a M-60A1, and if it could get close enough it's cannon was a decent threat against flank armor. The turret also gives this tank an advantage, the cannon is mounted fairly high, and from the front it is a narrow design. This allows the AMX-13 to occupy a hull down position and reveal very little of its turret, coupled with good camouflage, makes the blasted thing very hard to detect.

It's ability to pour a burst of 3-6 rounds and then run away, does make it a threat.

But remember, it was designed for the European battlefield.

During the Six Day War, the IDF fielded three battalions of AMX-13s, due to the shortage of MBTs, they used the -13s as main battle tanks and they suffered heavy losses when used outside their designed role.

So the Mexican Army buying light tanks, very possible, equally possible is their suffering heavy losses, especially when going up against TOW/Dragon/Tank Breaker/Hellfire. Toss in M-48A5/M-60A3/M-1, and you have a nasty little surprise for the Guard and Reserve units, but one that would be quickly worn away by battlefield and maintenance losses.

[dragoon500ly]

Yes, but it was a long, long time ago so I don't really remember any of the details.

If I remember correctly, didn't the author use a Nicaraguan armor brigade equipped with T-72s?

[Raellus]

So the Mexican Army buying light tanks, very possible, equally possible is their suffering heavy losses, especially when going up against TOW/Dragon/Tank Breaker/Hellfire. Toss in M-48A5/M-60A3/M-1, and you heavy a nasty little surprise for the Guard and Reserve units, but one that would be quickly worn away by battlefield and maintenance losses.

This. Even early-model M72 LAWs and old recoilless-rifles just taken out of mothballs would be able to defeat any of the tanks we've mentioned so far, including the AMX-30 and TAM.

What these AFVs do is give the Mexicans increased firepower and mobility. Coupled with surprise, this upgraded Schwerpunkt explains the dramatic early success of the Mexican invasion, and goes a little way in explaining why the Mexicans still hold territory in the U.S. in 2000 and beyond.

[dragoon500ly]

This. Even early-model M72 LAWs and old recoilless-rifles just taken out of mothballs would be able to defeat any of the tanks we've mentioned so far, including the AMX-30 and TAM.

What these AFVs do is give the Mexicans increased firepower and mobility. Coupled with surprise, this upgraded Schwerpunkt explains the dramatic early success of the Mexican invasion, and goes a little way in explaining why the Mexicans still hold territory in the U.S. in 2000 and beyond.

Concur, by the time of the invasion, you would have the bottom of the barrel scraping to defend the U.S. southwest.

This is why I argue that the 49th Armored gets shipped to Europe, this leaves no significant armor force to cover the New Mexico, Arizona, Texas front until the 50th Armored gets shipped down from Ft Knox, Ft Drum to act as reinforcement, and since the 50th AD had so many problems with its training...now the Mexicans get a slim edge over the American armor.

[Olefin]

This. Even early-model M72 LAWs and old recoilless-rifles just taken out of mothballs would be able to defeat any of the tanks we've mentioned so far, including the AMX-30 and TAM.

What these AFVs do is give the Mexicans increased firepower and mobility. Coupled with surprise, this upgraded Schwerpunkt explains the dramatic early success of the Mexican invasion, and goes a little way in explaining why the Mexicans still hold territory in the U.S. in 2000 and beyond.

I would agree with you there Raellus - and keep in mind that the Germans broke thru the French in 1940 and achieved victory using tanks that in many ways were inferior to the ones the French had both in terms of quantity and quality.

And one big reason for the success may be who they are facing - i.e. a bunch of light infantry divisions converted from training divisions, military police units, a widely scattered National Guard infantry division that hadn't seen any fighting yet (i.e. the 46th), a rebuilt National Guard division that was equipped with a grab bag of armor including Engineering tanks masquerading as the real thing (the rebuilt 40th minus one of its brigades) and a single National Guard tank division that wasnt there to face the initial attack (the 49th) and hadnt seen any combat yet

and most likely with very limited air support due to fuel shortages and lack of aircraft

probably the best units they initially faced were the School Brigade and the 177th (which isnt even in the canon) and they were heavily outnumbered

all of whom would be facing fuel and ammunition shortages and major communication and logistics issues from the effects of the nuclear attacks

i.e. in other words they didnt face the best the US had at the top of their game - if they had that invasion would have been stopped cold in its tracks

[Olefin]

One other factor that might have also lead to their success may have been the Americans underestimating them

I.e. that it was just the Mexican Army how hard can they be?

Very hard to quantify that for us with what we are doing but if the writers took that approach you could see them figuring the US units would be too confident and approach a fight without really considering that the Mexican Army might be better equipped and motivated than they gave them credit

If you look at Trial by Fire (the book I mentioned earlier) the US units feel that way when they encounter Mexican units - and as a result take much heavier casualties than anyone expected

[StainlessSteelCynic]

On a side note, I've been trying to get better info on those Argentinian upgraded Shermans.
Even looking through Jane's for the relevant years there's not a lot of information but I do have the following for the powerpack that was used.

Paraphrasing from Jane's Armour and Artillery 1986-87, page 950

Poyaud 520 series engines developed to a requirement of the French army although weren't used by the French army. Based around a common cylinder of 135mm bore and 122mm stroke. The modular construction of the engines allowed them to be offered in many configurations for many different vehicles (including Soviet) chiefly naturally aspirated (NS suffix), turbo-charged (S1 suffix), turbo-charged with charge-air intercooling (S2), turbo-charged with oil-cooled pistons and intercooling (S25) and turbo-compounded using the "Hyperbar" process (S3).
All variants were apparently direct injection and water cooled.
It seems as though the engines could be supplied to a buyer in kit form for assembly at their point of destination.

The Argentinian upgraded Shermans were fitted with the 520 V8 S25, meaning they used the turbo-charged, oil-cooled piston, intercooler version. This developed 2500rpm at 570HP (420kW). It looks as though this engine was designed for US vehicles of the post-WW2 era e.g. M4 Medium, M36 and M41.

I haven't found anything to state these were petrol/gasoline or diesel except for the article I originally linked. I'm inclined to think diesel because they were all direct-injection but that's just a guess. I'm hoping someone with a better knowledge of engines than me (which pretty much means just about everybody!), can make a better assessment of that.
What all of that means for game stats I'll leave (again!), to people with a better understanding of engines.

I haven't found anything specific about the 105mm gun except for the article I linked that states it was a French gun. Given that the French had tested a 105mm on the AMX13, they certainly would have had the tech knowledge for designing one suitable for refitting to the Shermans.

[The Dark]

On a side note, I've been trying to get better info on those Argentinian upgraded Shermans.
Even looking through Jane's for the relevant years there's not a lot of information but I do have the following for the powerpack that was used.

Paraphrasing from Jane's Armour and Artillery 1986-87, page 950

Poyaud 520 series engines developed to a requirement of the French army although weren't used by the French army. Based around a common cylinder of 135mm bore and 122mm stroke. The modular construction of the engines allowed them to be offered in many configurations for many different vehicles (including Soviet) chiefly naturally aspirated (NS suffix), turbo-charged (S1 suffix), turbo-charged with charge-air intercooling (S2), turbo-charged with oil-cooled pistons and intercooling (S25) and turbo-compounded using the "Hyperbar" process (S3).
All variants were apparently direct injection and water cooled.
It seems as though the engines could be supplied to a buyer in kit form for assembly at their point of destination.

The Argentinian upgraded Shermans were fitted with the 520 V8 S25, meaning they used the turbo-charged, oil-cooled piston, intercooler version. This developed 2500rpm at 570HP (420kW). It looks as though this engine was designed for US vehicles of the post-WW2 era e.g. M4 Medium, M36 and M41.

I haven't found anything to state these were petrol/gasoline or diesel except for the article I originally linked. I'm inclined to think diesel because they were all direct-injection but that's just a guess. I'm hoping someone with a better knowledge of engines than me (which pretty much means just about everybody!), can make a better assessment of that.
What all of that means for game stats I'll leave (again!), to people with a better understanding of engines.

I haven't found anything specific about the 105mm gun except for the article I linked that states it was a French gun. Given that the French had tested a 105mm on the AMX13, they certainly would have had the tech knowledge for designing one suitable for refitting to the Shermans.


The Poyaud 520 is a V-8 diesel engine. The Sherman Repotenciado's gun was a license-built version of the 105mm from the AMX-13, the coax was a MAG-58, and the pintle MG an M2HB. Many of them were rebuilt Sherman Firefly, since England repaid some of its debt to Argentina by giving them Shermans at scrap metal cost. To make room for the gun upgrade and increased shell size, it had no radio operator (not a big deal with modern radios) and no loader (big deal, since it didn't have an autoloader). It's not really relevant to this discussion, but a lot of the Shermans in Saving Private Ryan were Repotenciadoes.

Paraguay is (or was, as of 2015) still using three of them as ceremonial vehicles for the Presidential Escort Regiment. The three in use are SN 15919 (built by Baldwin in September 1943), SN 40351 (built by ALCO in November 1943), and SN 6057 (built by Chrysler in November 1942).

There were also Chilean Shermans (which Paul has listed under the Israeli tanks, since they're modified Israeli Shermans). They bought Israeli M-50 and M-51 Shermans and re-engined them with Detroit Diesel 8V71T engines. The M-51 (105mm) was kept with its existing armament, but the M-50 (75mm) was re-armed with IMI's 60mm HVMS cannon (which was also used in Chilean Chaffee tanks).

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Update re: Argentina's upgraded Shermans. And I've just noticed The Dark posted while I was compiling all this! :(
According to the following site, the French 105mm gun was the CN-105-57 L/44
https://aw.my.com/us/news/general/eternal-warrior-75-years-sherman
Right down but not quite the bottom of the page.

Some more info that may or may not be helpful because the poster has English as a secondary language and his translations are a little tricky to understand for me (being unfamiliar with the way Spanish grammar works). Lots of images though including photos of operating Shermans in the celebration parade of Argentina's 200 years of independence (2016 I believe).
http://tank-encyclopedia.org/Forum/showthread.php?tid=42366&pid=46838

This page has some more info and states that the crew was reduced to just three men.
https://m.facebook.com/TheArmorJournal/posts/628587243927757

Some minor history of three upgraded Shermans given by Argentina to Paraguay but mentions the new tracks fitted to the tanks (T49 type track and drive sprocket). What this means for game stats regarding speed, travel move and so on I'll leave to wiser heads than mine.
http://www.blitz72.com/2012/01/paraguayan-army-sherman-firefly/

Model vehicle site with some extra info, specifically new radio gear and auxillary fuel tank. Speculating on my part, guess that means fuel economy is not much better than original Shermans?
http://www.track-link.com/gallery/5133
http://www.track-link.com/gallery/4169

Even if the lower number is used for the total number of upgrades (120 versus 250), that still leaves a healthy number of 105mm gunned tanks if we're going to use them to bolster Mexican forces. Some idle speculation: if the three-man crew is accurate, that would also fit into the idea of early initial success for Mexican forces (when the Sherman force is at full strength), but later they aren't so effective as they suffer attrition and extended supply lines and therefore making the surviving three-man crews have to carry more of the burden.

Edit: According to the following site, the French 105mm had an auto-loader hence a human loader was not required. Right down the bottom of the page, under the image of the Sherman with the Argentine flag flying behind it.
http://the.shadock.free.fr/sherman_minutia/manufacturer/m4a4/m4a4_variants.html

[RN7]

Actually the AMX-13 is a perfect example of a light tank from the post WWII era.

When you consider a tank design, picture a triangle, one point is maneuverability, the second is firepower and the third point is protection.

The AMX-13 has excellent maneuverability and decent firepower, protection is poor. But it was designed for a reconnaissance role. When I was stationed in Germany, during the maneuvers that light tank could run rings around a M-60A1, and if it could get close enough it's cannon was a decent threat against flank armor. The turret also gives this tank an advantage, the cannon is mounted fairly high, and from the front it is a narrow design. This allows the AMX-13 to occupy a hull down position and reveal very little of its turret, coupled with good camouflage, makes the blasted thing very hard to detect.

It's ability to pour a burst of 3-6 rounds and then run away, does make it a threat.

But remember, it was designed for the European battlefield.

During the Six Day War, the IDF fielded three battalions of AMX-13s, due to the shortage of MBTs, they used the -13s as main battle tanks and they suffered heavy losses when used outside their designed role.

So the Mexican Army buying light tanks, very possible, equally possible is their suffering heavy losses, especially when going up against TOW/Dragon/Tank Breaker/Hellfire. Toss in M-48A5/M-60A3/M-1, and you have a nasty little surprise for the Guard and Reserve units, but one that would be quickly worn away by battlefield and maintenance losses.


The tank design philosophy of the 1950's and 1960's was for tanks to be designed with the firepower of a heavy tank, the speed and mobility of a light tank and the protection of medium tank. These tanks were known as the universal tank or the MBT, a trend opposed to the heavy tanks of the Second World War and early post-war years. Light tanks such as the AMX-13 were still in fashion as they acted as scouts for the heavier tanks. The Leopard 1, AMX-30 and most Soviet tanks were built to this design philosophy. The U.S. also went with this philosophy and developed the M47, M48 and M60 from the Second World War era M26 Patton with a bigger gun and a more powerful engine.

The British Army who had plenty of negative experiences against heavy German tanks in the Second World War didn't follow this philosophy. In 1966 they introduced the Chieftain tank which was the first newly designed mass produced British tank since the Second World War. The Chieftain was built like a block of iron with a 120mm rifled gun. All of the fast mobile tanks could outrun it, but they could not outrun the range of its rifled gun and the second this English bruiser got you in its gun sight you were dead and there was nothing your tank could do about it.

Then the Yom Kippur War broke out in 1973, and the Soviet supplied the Arabs with AT-3 Sagger anti-tank missiles and nearly shot the Israeli tank fleet to pieces through destroying or damaging 800 Israeli M48's, M60's and Centurions, as well as many other light tanks. The Israelis who know a thing or two about tank warfare wanted to buy hundreds of Chieftain tanks from Britain and even licence build it, as it was the only Western tank that new Soviet anti-tank missiles could not defeat and it was greatly superior to every tank in the world. The Israelis never got the Chieftain because the Arabs would likely cut off oil supplies to Britain. North Sea Oil had not yet come on line. But the next generation of Western tanks (Challenger 1/II, Leopard 2, LeClerc, M1 Abrams and the Israeli Merkava and Japanese Type 90) closely followed the attributes of the Chieftain because on the battlefield the heavy tank is king

The Soviet uniquely kept with their baseline MBT design, but did so out of necessity and not because they wanted to. Soviet tanks were transported by railway over vast distances, and the rail gauge of Soviet railway tunnels restricted the dimensions of Soviet tank design. They can't make them any wider, which is why later Soviet and Russian tanks look longer and have remained lighter in weight than Western tanks as they cant increase the tonnage or protection without making the tank wider. Earlier Chinese tanks also followed this philosophy as they are basically copies of Soviet tanks.

[RN7]

Thank you for the information RN7!

One thing that the Soviets did have was helicopter gunships - they are mentioned in Red Star Lone Star (if I remember they didnt mention exact numbers or types but it was definitely plural as in more than one or two) - one of the prime reasons to get the refinery was that it could produce avgas -and put those grounded gunships back into the air

That could explain how the Soviets beat the 49th - i.e. they had gunships with anti-tank weapons and fuel to put them in the air - and the 49th may not have had any by the time helos of their own by the time they encountered the Soviets - which if I remember right was in 1999 sometime

definitely would make the T-72's more survivable if the 49th is getting their heads handed to them by gunships and is busy maneuvering to engage them or throw off the missiles and as a result allows the Soviet tankers to get into position to not take on the M1's frontally

thus possibly explaining how a single Soviet Motor Rifle Division stops a five battalion armored division cold

The Cubans has armed Mi-24 and Mi-8 gunships - those definitely could have tipped the odds for the Soviets if the US ones are grounded from lack of fuel


On paper you would have expected a U.S. armored division equipped with M1 Abrams to have obliterated Division Cuba and whatever Mexican forces were fighting with them in Texas. But this did not happen, and part of the reason why the 49th Armored Division wasn't more successful might have something to do with its war history rather than the capabilities of the Soviets.

From American Combat Vehicle Handbook

" A national guard division consisting of the 1 st, 2nd and 3rd Brigades (all Texas NG). The division was brought into federal service on 1 November 1996 and moved to Chicago, Illinois in early 1997 in preparation for transit to Europe. Due to a shipping shortage and concerns as to the safety of shipping in the north Atlantic, the division remained in the Chicago area through out the spring and summer. In late 1997, the division was deployed in a disaster relief and emergency security role in the northern Illinois and Indiana area,
but soon was moved out of the Chicago metropolitan area. The division's 1st Brigade moved to Fort McCoy, Wisconsin, the 2nd Brigade to Camp Atterbury, Indiana, and the 3rd Brigade and division headquarters to Springfield, Illinois.

With the outbreak of hostilities with Mexico in mid-1998, the division moved south by road and river barge to Fort Sill, Oklahoma and came under command of the newly formed XC Corps. By autumn, the division was involved in sporadic and confused combat on a broad front against elements of the Mexican Army, marauder bands, and numerous paramilitary organizations. In 1999, the division was used to spearhead the 5th U.S. Army's drive to clear Texas of hostile armed bands, and suffered heavy vehicle losses in central Texas when the division was counterattacked by the Soviet "Division Cuba." By late 1999, the division had withdrawn to southern Oklahoma where the front was stabilized."


The division was sent all over the mid-west and then dispersed on security and relief duties before it was sent south. Then it was involved in numerous skirmished with the Mexicans, bandits and paramilitaries even before its got into a fight with Division Cuba. It must have lost vehicles through combat, attrition and having its units transferred all over the place before it even got to Texas. What was left of the 49th division may not even have all been in Texas when they clashed with the Soviets. Its supply train was also probably running through a couple of states by the time of the battle, and no doubt fuel shortages effected its effectiveness and tactical deployment.

American Combat Vehicle Handbook mentions it suffered heavy vehicle losses in central Texas when the division was counterattacked by the Soviet "Division Cuba." But its doesn't state what those losses were. I doubt they were M1 Abram's as neither the Mexicans or Soviets had much that hand handle them in a head on clash. More likely lighter vehicles and M60's.

[The Dark]

Edit: According to the following site, the French 105mm had an auto-loader hence a human loader was not required. Right down the bottom of the page, under the image of the Sherman with the Argentine flag flying behind it.
http://the.shadock.free.fr/sherman_minutia/manufacturer/m4a4/m4a4_variants.html

Good catch on this. I knew the AMX-13 had an autoloader, but none of the sources I found mentioned one in the Argentinian Shermans. That would make the Shermans a bit more useful, since it would give them a much better rate of fire with a gun capable of defeating M60 frontal armor at 2+ kilometers.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Good catch on this. I knew the AMX-13 had an autoloader, but none of the sources I found mentioned one in the Argentinian Shermans. That would make the Shermans a bit more useful, since it would give them a much better rate of fire with a gun capable of defeating M60 frontal armor at 2+ kilometers.

The Argentine Shermans are an interesting branch in armoured vehicle history and one that I'd never really heard much about before. It really caught my curiosity so I spent an entire evening typing into the search engine any combination of Argentina, Sherman, upgrade and tank! Perhaps I was a little obsessed :D

I really expected Janes or at least Bart Vanderveen to have some reference to them (Vanderveen made a lifetime hobby for many people out of his own interest in military vehicle history) but none of Vanderveen's Wheels & Tracks magazine I checked had any mention and Janes was minimal at best (with most of the relevant info being found in the Armour & Artillery yearbooks for 1986-87 and 1987-88 yearbooks).
I was surprised by Vanderveen' lack of info as his Historic Military Vehicles Directory (compiled from Wheels & Tracks in 1989) includes the Argentine DL43 Nahuel Medium tank which was itself ousted by Shermans but no mention of the upgraded Shermans.
This is one time when the internet really put the books to shame.

It was fascinating to read the background and history but also to see that Argentina (and Paraguay too) still had some in operating condition into the 2000s where they were using them to test a new mine plough (and of course, having them feature in the 200th anniversary parade).

[RN7]

A list of major U.S. units in the southwest in 2000 by pre-war composition. This would exclude some additional units attached to corps HQ's, and also army helicopter units which are likely to be grounded due to a lack of fuel. This does not include current losses from combat, attrition and other factors.

49th Armored Division: Oklahoma
2 M1A1 battalion
2 M1 battalion
1 M60A3 battalion
1 M113 CAV battalion
2 M2 battalion
2 M113 battalion
1 MLRS battalion
3 SP 155mm battalion
1 M998 Roland AD battalion

40th Infantry Division (Mechanised): California (2 brigades only)
2 M1 battalion
2 M60A3 battalion
1 M113 CAV battalion
2 M2 battalion
4 M113 battalion
1 MLRS battalion
3 SP 155mm battalion
1 M998 Roland AD battalion

46th Infantry Division: California
1 M60A3 battalion
2 M113 battalion
7 Light Motorized battalion
1 MLRS battalion
1 SP 155mm battalion
2 Towed 155mm battalion
1 M741 Chaparral AD battalion

85th Infantry Division (Light): Louisiana (1 brigade only)
9 Foot Infantry battalion
3 Towed 105mm battalion

91st Infantry Division (Light): California9 Foot Infantry battalion
3 Towed 105mm battalion

95th Infantry Division (Light): Oklahoma
9 Foot Infantry battalion
3 Towed 105mm battalion

98th Infantry Division (Light): Louisiana (1 brigade only)
9 Foot Infantry battalion
3 Towed 105mm battalion

100th Infantry Division (Light): Colorado
9 Foot Infantry battalion
3 Towed 105mm battalion

45th Field Artillery Brigade: Oklahoma
3 Towed 155 or 105mm battalion

65th Field Artillery Brigade: Utah
3 Towed 155 or 105mm battalion

153rd Field Artillery Brigade: California/Nevada
3 Towed 155 or 105mm battalion

169th Field Artillery Brigade: Colorado
3 Towed 155 or 105mm battalion

6th Air Defence Artillery Brigade: Oklahoma
3 M998 Roland or M741 Chaparral AD battalion

111th Air Defence Artillery Brigade: Colorado/New Mexico
3 M998 Roland or M741 Chaparral AD battalion

49th Military Police Brigade: California
Light motorized or foot infantry only

221st Military Police Brigade: California
Light motorized or foot infantry only

225th Engineer Brigade: Louisiana
Light motorized infantry with some engineer vehicles

Cadet Brigade: Colorado
Light motorized or foot infantry with a few tanks, AFV and air defence vehicles

School Brigade: Oklahoma
Light motorized or foot infantry only

10th Special Forces Group: some units Colorado
Company sized light motorized or foot infantry only

19th Special Forces Group: some units in Utah
Company sized light motorized or foot infantry only

[Raellus]

RN7, I'm not clear on your source for those figures. IRL, a lot of those units existed only on paper. According to the U.S. Army Vehicle Guide, some them had attached armor, for example, the 95th LID lists some M60s but your list omits these. Is it a hybrid list? (i.e. part RL, part canon) I hope I don't sound cranky, because I'm not. Just curious.

[Raellus]

I'm trying to come up with a concept that will unify the ideas upon which the Mexican invasion and subsequent occupation of the American Southwest are predicated on. Here's what I've come up with.

Suppositions:


In a alternate timeline (v1.0 is the way to go, IMHO), NAFTA doesn't happen, or if it does, in a somewhat modified format.

Oil markets are bullish and Mexico receives an influx of petro-dollars.

Mexico has to deal with a resurgent insurgency in its southern states. Fairly or not, Guatemala is accused of collusion with the guerillas.

Ergo:

There is a minor trade dispute with the U.S. Not enough for either nation to feel threatened by the other, but enough to make them both grumpy with one another.

Instead of taking a progressive approach, spending those petro-dollars on building badly-needed infrastructure and helping the impoverished peasants that support the rebels, the Mexican government, succumbing to pressure from its military establishment, decides to spend the money on armaments instead, so that it can finally "pacify" the restive southern states.

Because of the trade dispute with the U.S., Mexico conscientiously decides not to buy American. But because of American diplomatic clout, they can't buy current generation armor (and the Mexican government isn't foolhardy enough to try to buy Soviet). So, they look to buy used from non-aligned nations. France is upgrading its MBT fleet from the AMX-30 to the Leclerc, so Mexico approaches the French to buy retired AMX-30s. The French aren't necessarily non-aligned, but they always try to do their own thing, so they agree to sell the Mexicans a regiment's worth of AMX-30s, and to throw in a bunch of retired AMX-13s as well. A deal is struck.

OR

Mexico and Argentina broker a deal for the former to purchase a fleet of new-build TAM tanks from the latter, and Argentina offers to throw in its upgraded Shermans to sweeten the deal.

AND (regardless of which of the two above alternatives you select)

In the meantime, Mexico looks into upgrading its existing armor force. It makes a deal with Brazil for the latter to upgrade its fleet of M3 Stuarts to the X1 status. Brazil offers to sell some of its own upgraded fleet of X1A-2s to Mexico as well. A preliminary agreement to buy some Brazilian EE-11 Urutus and EE-9 Cascavels is reached as well.

This unified theory explains some of the tension between Mexico and the U.S. and justifies/explains Mexico's acquisition of non-American AFVs in the run up to the invasion.

[The Dark]

A couple other possibilities would be Peruvian or Nicaraguan T-54/55. Peru had 375 and Nicaragua had 156 (136 from the Soviet Union and 20 probably from Libya). Nicaragua in particular has had trouble maintaining theirs, so they might have been willing to trade vehicles for other equipment.

[Olefin]

The only problem with the T-54/55 is that they really arent that much better than the AMX-13 or even the 90mm armed armored cars they have. Against M1's they pretty much would be target practice. Still better than nothing though

[StainlessSteelCynic]

The only problem with the T-54/55 is that they really arent that much better than the AMX-13 or even the 90mm armed armored cars they have. Against M1's they pretty much would be target practice. Still better than nothing though

While I agree with you there, I think there's something to be said for the psychological impact when the US units first come into contact with Mexican forces.
If the Mexicans were able to keep the deal low key, the importance of such a deal could end up lost in the confusion of the third world war and so when US units first encounter the Mexican force, they could be thinking, "Well it's not like the Mexicans really have any tanks... wait a minute, what's that? OH CRAP!"

So yeah, the psychological impact of being confronted with an enemy force that's very different to how the US troops imagined them to be can go some way to helping explain initial Mexican successes.

[RN7]

RN7, I'm not clear on your source for those figures. IRL, a lot of those units existed only on paper. According to the U.S. Army Vehicle Guide, some them had attached armor, for example, the 95th LID lists some M60s but your list omits these. Is it a hybrid list? (i.e. part RL, part canon) I hope I don't sound cranky, because I'm not. Just curious.

Its a bit of a hybrid list.

The divisions and some of the recognisable known brigades are canon from the composition of army divisions and selected non-divisional units list in the American Combat Vehicle Handbook 2nd edition. Just basic pre-war organisation to show what type of equipment these units would likely be using in 2000. None would be at any way near full strength.

The other artillery and AD brigades are regional based National Guard brigades that are likely to have remained behind in the area after regular army artillery and AD brigades from the southwest were sent overseas or elsewhere. The two special forces groups were also regional based and a company or two from either unit are likely to be still in the region. I gave each brigade 1 battalion of artillery or SAM's instead of 3. I'll change that.

GDW does list the 95th ID having 3 M60A3, but it was still a light infantry division.

The 98th light infantry division also had 4 M60A3, and the 100th light infantry division had 1 M1A1, 1 M1 and 4 M60A3.

[RN7]

The French Eryx ATGM might penetrate the frontal armour of an earlier M1 Abrams with a lucky hit, but not the M1A1. The Eryx was also used by Canada, Malaysia, Norway and Turkey,

According to Paul Mulcahy's page: The Eryx was also used during the Twilight War by the Swiss and Austrians, as well as special operations units of the US, Great Britain, Mexico, Israel, and Jordan.

Other missiles which might do a number on an M1

Franco-German HOT-2. The earlier HOT-1 was widely exported. The more powerful HOT-2 wasn't exported much until after the Twlight War period.

Soviet AT-14 Kornet. From Paul's page it was available from 1994. But I think it was probably kept with elite Soviet units in Europe.

Soviet AT-15 Springer: From Paul's page it was not in widespread as it was first used in the Ukraine in 1997. Again not likely to be sent to Mexico.

Soviet AT-16 Scallion: New air launched missile used by Su-25, Su-27 and latest Soviet attack helicopters (not Hinds). Not in widespread service.

Also the Hellfire (AGM-114L, K and L), the TOW-2B and C and the TOW-3 missiles could do the job.

[Olefin]

Its a bit of a hybrid list.

The divisions and some of the recognisable known brigades are canon from the composition of army divisions and selected non-divisional units list in the American Combat Vehicle Handbook 2nd edition. Just basic pre-war organisation to show what type of equipment these units would likely be using in 2000. None would be at any way near full strength.

The other artillery and AD brigades are regional based National Guard brigades that are likely to have remained behind in the area after regular army artillery and AD brigades from the southwest were sent overseas or elsewhere. The two special forces groups were also regional based and a company or two from either unit are likely to be still in the region. I gave each brigade 1 battalion of artillery or SAM's instead of 3. I'll change that.

GDW does list the 95th ID having 3 M60A3, but it was still a light infantry division.

The 98th light infantry division also had 4 M60A3, and the 100th light infantry division had 1 M1A1, 1 M1 and 4 M60A3.

I would think that the most likely ways the light infantry divisions got their hands on tanks would probably be either tanks that were in storage at various depots or ones that were originally supposed to be in other units - i.e. like the grab bag of armor that the 40th got when it was reformed in the US. The small number of heavy tanks that ended up in Kenya for instance came from a shipment that was supposed to be going to Turkey but got re-purposed to go to Kenya instead. You could see the light divisions getting tanks in a similar fashion - especially considering when they were formed I am betting that they were grabbing anything they could find to give themselves some armor.

[kato13]

I would think that the most likely ways the light infantry divisions got their hands on tanks would probably be either tanks that were in storage at various depots or ones that were originally supposed to be in other units - i.e. like the grab bag of armor that the 40th got when it was reformed in the US. The small number of heavy tanks that ended up in Kenya for instance came from a shipment that was supposed to be going to Turkey but got re-purposed to go to Kenya instead. You could see the light divisions getting tanks in a similar fashion - especially considering when they were formed I am betting that they were grabbing anything they could find to give themselves some armor.


There were tons of ships returning empty from Europe (and I guess the Middle East and Korea) throughout the war. Could some of the Armor be tanks that were deemed too hard to fix in theater perhaps requiring total rebuilds.

Now that I think about it. Given how compressed the Korean theater would be, if there is territory loss there simply might not be room for a tank that would be out of commission for 30+ days. Sending it back to the US might be more likely there than other theaters.

[dragoon500ly]

There were tons of ships returning empty from Europe (and I guess the Middle East and Korea) throughout the war. Could some of the Armor be tanks that were deemed too hard to fix in theater perhaps requiring total rebuilds.

Now that I think about it. Given how compressed the Korean theater would be, if there is territory loss there simply might not be room for a tank that would be out of commission for 30+ days. Sending it back to the US might be more likely there than other theaters.

At the height of the Vietnam War, it was standard practice to ship damaged/worn out armored vehicles back to the States to one of the Army Depots for rebuilding. The main depot for this work was Anniston AD in Alabama. Even the Vietnam War ended in 1973, Anniston still had large numbers of M-48s and M-113s that were being rebuilt as late is 1989.

[Olefin]

FYI looking at possible SPG's for the Mexican Army as well

In real life at that time what they had were five still operational M8 Howitzer Motor Carriage with 75mm howitzers

They could have gotten more of them (by then probably from collectors only) or possibly retrofitted some of their M5 tanks to M8's - but I think there is a better source for them

Frank Chadwick has them outfitted with M109's and M110's but I dont see that happening - they just dont fit the overall motif of the Mexican Army - but I have a pretty good idea what they might have for SPG's if they did get more in time for the invasion - which would be Spain

Spain by 1989 had fully transitioned to M109 and M110 howitzers - but they had a lot of older ones that were still functional - i.e.

24 M-44AA 155mm SPG
4 M-55 203mm SPG
48 M-108 105mm SPG
8 M-52A1 105mm SPG

All with Spanish language operational and repair manuals

Thats a nice little haul of SPG's that would be available for sale - even if say only half of them were still operational and OK for sale

And while not as capable as an M109 or M110 they are a heck of a lot better than a handful of old M8 Howitzer Motor Carriages

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Yeah I think M109s strains the credibility a bit but M110s? I really can't see the US selling them to Mexico for any reason whatsoever.
The US might not allow Spain to sell their surplus 155 and 203mm SPGs to Mexico but I imagine they would have less objection to the sale of the 105mm SPGs. Even just the M108s would be a significant boost for the Mexican forces.

[RN7]

Spain by 1989 had fully transitioned to M109 and M110 howitzers - but they had a lot of older ones that were still functional - i.e.

24 M-44AA 155mm SPG
4 M-55 203mm SPG
48 M-108 105mm SPG
8 M-52A1 105mm SPG

All with Spanish language operational and repair manuals

Thats a nice little haul of SPG's that would be available for sale - even if say only half of them were still operational and OK for sale

And while not as capable as an M109 or M110 they are a heck of a lot better than a handful of old M8 Howitzer Motor Carriages


By 1992 Spain had disposed of some of these units.

Spanish artillery stocks in 1992.

12 M110A2 SP 203mm
102 M109A1 SP 155mm (6 Marines)
48 M108 SP 105mm
12 M52A1 SP 105mm (12 Marines)

24 M115 203mm
84 M114 155mm
160 M1931/37 122mm
182 Mod 56 105mm (12 Marines)
284 M-26 105mm

[Olefin]

By 1992 Spain had disposed of some of these units.

Spanish artillery stocks in 1992.

12 M110A2 SP 203mm
102 M109A1 SP 155mm (6 Marines)
48 M108 SP 105mm
12 M52A1 SP 105mm (12 Marines)

24 M115 203mm
84 M114 155mm
160 M1931/37 122mm
182 Mod 56 105mm (12 Marines)
284 M-26 105mm

Correct - so the question is would some of those possibly be disposed by transferring them to Mexico?

And that still leaves a good amount of M108's to possibly transfer to Mexico - maybe not all of them - but even as few as 16 of them would greatly add to Mexico's capabilities as to SPG's

[RN7]

Correct - so the question is would some of those possibly be disposed by transferring them to Mexico?

And that still leaves a good amount of M108's to possibly transfer to Mexico - maybe not all of them - but even as few as 16 of them would greatly add to Mexico's capabilities as to SPG's

I think it would be possible but probably dependent on if Spain didn't want to keep them for its own army. In real life Spain still had the M108 in service in 1992, but had already scrapped the M55 and M44. Spain had now acquired the M110 and M109 and had likely relegate the M108 to the reserves. If Spain didn't want to keep them in service, Mexico would have to had shown a keen interest in acquiring them before Spain scrapped them. That would be a number of years before the start of Twilight War. Otherwise the M108 would be completely de-militarised by Spain and sold for scrap, and Mexico would have to get what it could from thrawling through scrapyards and rebuilding them.

[Olefin]

I think it comes down to when you would think Mexico would start to rebuild their forces - i.e. if you look at real world they had two big buys of armored military equipment - the buy from France that went mid-80's to early 90's and the buy from Belgium in the mid-90's to late 90's

that could give you a complete difference as to what equipment could be out there to acquire based on those dates

Thus if you go with increasing the 1980's buy the older equipment is in play versus going for an early to mid 90's buy to get SPG's

second question - if the Cold War continues V1 vs it doesnt V2 does Spain keep their M108's in reserve or do they sell them to generate cash for the military to get newer equipment

also - does anyone have any idea when the Tunisian army replaced their M108's - they had 48 but from what I understand they are now using M109's - again another possible place to get SPG's -

and I agree the 105 mm is the best bet I can see for them as they really dont need the 155 unless it was a planned war against the US - which isnt really the canon in its current form (and by that I mean a pre-planned effort by Mexico to prepare for war with the US predating the Russo-Chinese war start)

[pmulcahy11b]

Yeah I think M109s strains the credibility a bit but M110s? I really can't see the US selling them to Mexico for any reason whatsoever.
The US might not allow Spain to sell their surplus 155 and 203mm SPGs to Mexico but I imagine they would have less objection to the sale of the 105mm SPGs. Even just the M108s would be a significant boost for the Mexican forces.

Most 203mm barrels were chopped up and modified starting just before the 1st Gulf War to make the bodies of 5000-pound bunker buster smart bombs. They are still in construction at a low level, but I don't know if they are still using 203mm barrels.

[RN7]

I think it comes down to when you would think Mexico would start to rebuild their forces - i.e. if you look at real world they had two big buys of armored military equipment - the buy from France that went mid-80's to early 90's and the buy from Belgium in the mid-90's to late 90's

that could give you a complete difference as to what equipment could be out there to acquire based on those dates

Thus if you go with increasing the 1980's buy the older equipment is in play versus going for an early to mid 90's buy to get SPG's

second question - if the Cold War continues V1 vs it doesnt V2 does Spain keep their M108's in reserve or do they sell them to generate cash for the military to get newer equipment


The two big Mexican arms buys were basically new equipment bought from France in the 1980's, and second hand equipment bought from Belgium and the U.S. from the mid-1990's. But remember in the post-Cold War 1990's the market was flooded with weapons of all types from both NATO and former Warsaw Pact countries and others, and Mexico if had a bit of cash to spare could have got anything it wanted quite cheaply from multiple sources. But Mexico chose to buy clapped out second hand French built armoured personnel carriers from the Belgian Army. This may have been because they were already using French equipment, but more likely because they were dirt cheap to obtain as Mexican financial resources were limited.

Mexico is supposed to have received 401 AMX-VCI and 95 BDX delivered from Belgium 1994 and 1996, all second hand including some modernised before delivery and rebuilt in Mexico and designated DNC-1 and DNC-2. However the record also only shows that only 74 vehicles were delivered from Belgium between 1994 and 1996. This is because these were the only actual Belgian military vehicles exported to Mexico, the rest were demilitarised vehicles or hulls and parts taken from scrap yards in Belgium and probably France and rebuilt and rearmed in Mexico well into the 2000's.


also - does anyone have any idea when the Tunisian army replaced their M108's - they had 48 but from what I understand they are now using M109's - again another possible place to get SPG's -

Sometime in the early 1990's I believe as in 1992 they had 18 M109s but still had 10 M108s.

[mpipes]

Paul is incorrect to a point. Relatively few 203mm barrels have been used to date. These bombs are designated GBU-28 and made from stockpiled, shot out barrels. No guns were decommissioned to make the bombs. I seem to recall recently reading somewhere that about 500 have been produced and are stockpiled.

[Olefin]

Been looking at Challenge 27 (came out in 1986 after Red Star Lone Star came out that same year) and the article that Frank Chadwick wrote and figured I would post it here for those who dont have that article so they could see what people are referring to when they talk about it

The totals he had in his article for the Mexican Army as to possible armor and mech vehicles they had are as follows

Mechanized Infantry Brigades - 2

Each with two mech inf regiments with 40 VAB APC, one armored recon regiment (which was the size of a battalion) with 17 ERC-90 and 34 VAB APC and one SPG battalion of 6 M109 and 12 M108's

Thus the total he had for SPG's was 12 M109 and 24 M108 for the whole Mexican Army (i.e. betting he didnt know they had the 5 M8 Scott's)

There were also:

Armored Cav Regiments (sized as a battalion) - 3

Each with 17 ERC-90 and 34 VAB APC

Regional Brigades - i.e. Inf Brigades - 36 regional brigades

Each averaging one motorized cav regiment (really a battalion - see below), two infantry regiments and one battery of artillery

The armor would be concentrated in the single motorized cav regiment that either had two squadrons of truck/Jeep born infantry and one mixed squadron of ERC-90/VAB of 17 total vehicles or was three squadrons of truck/Jeep born infantry (he mentioned "some" had armor but no other details)

Frank was one of the designers for the Red Star Lone Star module as well so his Challenge Magazine article gives an insight as to what the canon authors has as the OOB for the Mexican Army had at the time of the invasion using what they had in 1986 when both were written.

I have looked thru his article and there are a lot of omissions obviously- i.e. the APC's and other vehicles the Mexican Army had in reality in 1986 for one, for another units like their parachutists and Marines - hopefully this info will further stimulate this thread and the discussion here - which is one of the best we have had in quite a while

[The Dark]

Paul is incorrect to a point. Relatively few 203mm barrels have been used to date. These bombs are designated GBU-28 and made from stockpiled, shot out barrels. No guns were decommissioned to make the bombs. I seem to recall recently reading somewhere that about 500 have been produced and are stockpiled.

The BLU-113/B warheads for the GBU-28 are made from retired M110 barrels; the vehicles were already out of service, and the barrels were awaiting a disposal disposition, since nothing else used a 203mm barrel. BLU-113A/B and (to the best of my knowledge) all BLU-122 variants are new-build, not from artillery barrels. AFAIK, somewhere between 100 and 125 BLU-113/B warheads were built before they switched over to the A/B.

[Olefin]

The BLU-113/B warheads for the GBU-28 are made from retired M110 barrels; the vehicles were already out of service, and the barrels were awaiting a disposal disposition, since nothing else used a 203mm barrel. BLU-113A/B and (to the best of my knowledge) all BLU-122 variants are new-build, not from artillery barrels. AFAIK, somewhere between 100 and 125 BLU-113/B warheads were built before they switched over to the A/B.

Thought they were built using excess barrels that were originally meant for navy cruisers - but considering my recollection is based on news reports of the time (and we all know how accurate the news can be) I am probably off there

[Olefin]

FYI - an important consideration for V1 versus V2 versions of the game is the implementation of the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe

V1 has the Cold War continuing - so this treaty never occurs

V2 was published in 1990 and I dont think this treaty was part of it but I may be wrong

V2.2 as published in 1993 - and if it includes that treaty then you would have had a big draw down in vehicle stocks in Europe that would let countries like Mexico have a shot at armored vehicles, SPG's and other things that most likely they wouldnt have in V1

Example - Belgium kept ancient M44 SPG's in their emergency war stocks right up to the end of the Cold War and only finally disposed of them when the Treaty was signed along with M108's that had also been assigned to their war stocks - thus both vehicles are much more likely open to Mexico buying them in V2.2 than in V1

The invasion of the US by Mexico is in both versions - but all the canon material we have for that area (and if I am wrong please point it out) was V1 timing - but the Mexican Sourcebook was written in the V2.2 era - thus there is much more equipment available for a V2.2 game in terms of surplus from Europe versus in a V1 timeline

so the real question as to what the invasion force and the Mexican Army may have been is are we looking at a V1 timeline or a V2?

[Olefin]

I would also like to say I can now officially see RN7's point about Belgium and the 500+ APC's that went to Mexico in real life - there is no way, if its V1 timeline, in any shape or form that they would have disposed of that many APC's - maybe some old decrepit ones sitting in their emergency war stocks - but 500? Nope.

Point officially acknowledged and agreed to.

[RN7]

FYI - an important consideration for V1 versus V2 versions of the game is the implementation of the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe

V1 has the Cold War continuing - so this treaty never occurs

V2 was published in 1990 and I dont think this treaty was part of it but I may be wrong

V2.2 as published in 1993 - and if it includes that treaty then you would have had a big draw down in vehicle stocks in Europe that would let countries like Mexico have a shot at armored vehicles, SPG's and other things that most likely they wouldnt have in V1

Example - Belgium kept ancient M44 SPG's in their emergency war stocks right up to the end of the Cold War and only finally disposed of them when the Treaty was signed along with M108's that had also been assigned to their war stocks - thus both vehicles are much more likely open to Mexico buying them in V2.2 than in V1

The invasion of the US by Mexico is in both versions - but all the canon material we have for that area (and if I am wrong please point it out) was V1 timing - but the Mexican Sourcebook was written in the V2.2 era - thus there is much more equipment available for a V2.2 game in terms of surplus from Europe versus in a V1 timeline

so the real question as to what the invasion force and the Mexican Army may have been is are we looking at a V1 timeline or a V2?


Without going into personal preferences or the positives or negatives of V1, V2 and V2.2, I think stating which version you are referring to when discussing aspects of Twilight 2000 would prevent a lot of confusion. Mixing and matching details from very different timelines just doesn't work.

[Olefin]

Without going into personal preferences or the positives or negatives of V1, V2 and V2.2, I think stating which version you are referring to when discussing aspects of Twilight 2000 would prevent a lot of confusion. Mixing and matching details from very different timelines just doesn't work.

AMEN

[Raellus]

I avoid this issue by completely ignoring the v2 timelines. ;)

v1.0 is the original, and the one I grew up with. I left the country in 1987 and didn't even know there was a second version until about ten years ago. I can't imagine why anyone whose originally exposure to T2K was with v1.0 would willingly use the v2 timelines. :confused:

IMHO, the timeline didn't need revamping. They should have declared it an alternative history game, instead of trying to rehash it around RL events. But, that's just me.

[Olefin]

I avoid this issue by completely ignoring the v2 timelines. ;)

v1.0 is the original, and the one I grew up with. I left the country in 1987 and didn't even know there was a second version until about ten years ago. I can't imagine why anyone whose originally exposure to T2K was with v1.0 would willingly use the v2 timelines. :confused:

IMHO, the timeline didn't need revamping. They should have declared it an alternative history game, instead of trying to rehash it around RL events. But, that's just me.

and again

AMEN

need some kind of meme to go with the AMEN

[The Dark]

I avoid this issue by completely ignoring the v2 timelines. ;)

v1.0 is the original, and the one I grew up with. I left the country in 1987 and didn't even know there was a second version until about ten years ago. I can't imagine why anyone whose originally exposure to T2K was with v1.0 would willingly use the v2 timelines. :confused:

IMHO, the timeline didn't need revamping. They should have declared it an alternative history game, instead of trying to rehash it around RL events. But, that's just me.

I avoid this issue by completely ignoring the v1 timeline (since my first copy was v2.2). ;)

However, I suspect I'm one of the youngest members of this board, since I'm barely older than v1 and was 10 when v2.2 was released.

[Raellus]

I totally get it, Dark. It's like Star Wars. I love the originally trilogy and can't stand the prequels. My kids, however, love the prequels. It's about what you grew up with. I don't think that I would have rediscovered and reconnected with T2K if it weren't for simple nostalgia. Sometimes, your first love is your most enduring love.

[RN7]

I totally get it, Dark. It's like Star Wars. I love the originally trilogy and can't stand the prequels. My kids, however, love the prequels. It's about what you grew up with. I don't think that I would have rediscovered and reconnected with T2K if it weren't for simple nostalgia. Sometimes, your first love is your most enduring love.

Cant beat the Empire Strikes Back, just the best!

[Draq]

I avoid this issue by completely ignoring the v2 timelines. ;)

v1.0 is the original, and the one I grew up with. I left the country in 1987 and didn't even know there was a second version until about ten years ago. I can't imagine why anyone whose originally exposure to T2K was with v1.0 would willingly use the v2 timelines. :confused:

IMHO, the timeline didn't need revamping. They should have declared it an alternative history game, instead of trying to rehash it around RL events. But, that's just me.

V1 has the setting and ambiance perfect. The system takes a bit of getting used to, but does the job

[Rainbow Six]

V1 has the setting and ambiance perfect. The system takes a bit of getting used to, but does the job

I think it's pretty common to combine the V1 timeline with the V2.2. rules. That's certainly been the case in any game I've played in - I can only one recall one PbP game that tried to use the V1 rules and it never got out of the blocks.

[The Dark]

V1 has the setting and ambiance perfect. The system takes a bit of getting used to, but does the job

It does take some getting used to having an 11-year-old Special Forces Weapon Specialist who weighs 100+ kilograms. It's extremely unlikely, but just barely possible to have EDU 1 and high enough other stats to get an extremely low MEB. With a MEB of 12 or less (again, lower is better), it's possible to get less than 1 year in combat. Per the age section, that means age is 1 (MEB) + 1 (EDU) + 8 + 1d6. Roll a 1, and the character's 11 years old. Since none of the service branches require EDU, they could roll Special Forces or Ranger, though they can't be anything higher than a Spec 4.

Edit: Being fair, though, 2.2 has its own problems. IIRC, elephants are as common as sniper rifles for Warsaw Pact characters, which suggests a rather bizarre alternate universe with a secret Siberian elephant-breeding program to...uh...have heavy draft animals in case of a nuclear war?

[Olefin]

FYI found some interesting information on the BDX armored personnel carrier that in real life Mexico bought from Belgium. They may actually be a real contender for a canon APC. They were originally designed by Timoney Technology as the Mark IV and VI for the Irish Army and then licensed for manufacture by Beherman Demoen in Belgium as the BDX.

The production of the BDX was completed in 1981 in Belgium and they were delivered from 1978-1981. There was a supposed to be a follow ons, including a 6x6 version of the Timoney Mk V and a new vehicle made by Vickers called the Valkyr but neither ever went anywhere (for one reason there was the big draw down in global purchasing due to armies reducing in size). Only two Valkyr's were ever delivered both to Kuwait before the invasion.

I could see in V1 the Valkyr going into production as the improved BDX and then seeing Belgium making the older version available for export. Or alternatively Mexico buying them new as their APC since export orders was one of the big reasons for it being developed.

link to the information on the vehicle - https://www.forecastinternational.com/archive/disp_old_pdf.cfm?ARC_ID=1190

[Olefin]

One other idea might be that they buy more VCR-TT from France and that is the canon APC instead of the VAB. I.e. they had already bought 48 of various versions in reality by the mid-80's and that vehicle was a pure export only vehicle. Meaning that in a V1 world they wouldnt have to rely on vehicles that might not have been surplused as they were in the real world.

And the VCR-TT is definitely a good match for them for an APC - i.e. they would already have spare parts, manuals, etc. and familiarity with the vehicle

and there is a version of it that could definitely help the Mexicans with US armor - i.e. there was a tank-destroyer version of the VCR/TT, designated the VCR/TH, fitted with an antitank missile turret for launching the HOT wire guided ATGM (antitank guided missile).

The VCR/TH mounts four HOT missiles on the turret ready to fire with ten reloads inside the vehicle.

The other interesting fact is that there was a less expensive version of the VCR/TH with the MCT copula that fired the MILAN. No one ever ordered it but it sounds tailor made for Mexico

So have Mexico order 100-150 plus of the standard version plus a couple of dozen tank-destroyer versions in say 1992-1993 timing to add to the 48 they had already and bingo - you have the canon APC (but with it being the VCR-TT instead of the VAB) for the mech and cav units and they can use the other APC's they already had spread out thru their infantry brigades

so a good possibility or not really?

[The Dark]

The VCR was unpopular because of its expense, but I could see Mexico acquiring a few more because it's mechanically very similar to the ERC-90. Since they use MILAN but not HOT, they'd would probably go with the Milan version if they picked an ATM launcher. Possibly the Armored Reconnaissance Regiments use the VCR, since they're the units with the ERCs, while other units use less expensive APCs?

[pmulcahy11b]

they could roll Special Forces or Ranger, though they can't be anything higher than a Spec 4.

Edit:

The Rangers will take any rank, even an E-none out of AIT, but the Special Forces will only take an SP4 if he's "promotable" (ie, has already the OK from his superiors and has been before the promotion board). Of course, this will all fall by the wayside in a T2K timeline (any of them).

[Olefin]

The VCR was unpopular because of its expense, but I could see Mexico acquiring a few more because it's mechanically very similar to the ERC-90. Since they use MILAN but not HOT, they'd would probably go with the Milan version if they picked an ATM launcher. Possibly the Armored Reconnaissance Regiments use the VCR, since they're the units with the ERCs, while other units use less expensive APCs?

Now that makes a lot of sense - i.e. would mean logistics, support, maintenance issues reduced accordingly - so lets say you use the canon numbers of 34 APC per regiment for the three cav regiments and the two recon regiments attached to the mech brigades - thats a total of 170 - meaning they would need to buy around 120 or so - not that big a number considering the numbers of ERC-90 they bought mid-80s'

I looked at prices I found and it appears the VCR-TT is about 20-25% less in cost than the VAB depending on options but I couldnt find an apples to apples comparison with the same US year dollars

VCR-TT Unit Price. In equivalent 2003 United States dollars, the
unit price of the base Véhicule de Combat à Roues 6x6
vehicle is $327,600; for the 4x4 version, the price is
$287,900. The unit price for the TT2 version is
$333,400, and the newest Véhicule de Combat à
Roues-2 has a projected unit price of $352,000.

https://www.forecastinternational.com/archive/disp_pdf.cfm?DACH_RECNO=398

VAB - Price Range. In 2009 U.S. dollars, the 6x6 VAB
Improved reportedly maintains a unit price of $397,000.

https://www.forecastinternational.com/archive/disp_pdf.cfm?DACH_RECNO=106

[The Dark]

Now that makes a lot of sense - i.e. would mean logistics, support, maintenance issues reduced accordingly - so lets say you use the canon numbers of 34 APC per regiment for the three cav regiments and the two recon regiments attached to the mech brigades - thats a total of 170 - meaning they would need to buy around 120 or so - not that big a number considering the numbers of ERC-90 they bought mid-80s'

I looked at prices I found and it appears the VCR-TT is about 20-25% less in cost than the VAB depending on options but I couldnt find an apples to apples comparison with the same US year dollars

VCR-TT Unit Price. In equivalent 2003 United States dollars, the
unit price of the base Véhicule de Combat à Roues 6x6
vehicle is $327,600; for the 4x4 version, the price is
$287,900. The unit price for the TT2 version is
$333,400, and the newest Véhicule de Combat à
Roues-2 has a projected unit price of $352,000.

https://www.forecastinternational.com/archive/disp_pdf.cfm?DACH_RECNO=398

VAB - Price Range. In 2009 U.S. dollars, the 6x6 VAB
Improved reportedly maintains a unit price of $397,000.

https://www.forecastinternational.com/archive/disp_pdf.cfm?DACH_RECNO=106

2003-2009 is a 16.6% increase in the dollar, so the 6x6 would go from $327,600 to ~$382,000, about a 4% difference in price between the 6x6 VCR and the VAB. The 4x4 would be ~335,700, the TT2 $388,700, and the VCR-2 $410,400.

[RN7]

One other idea might be that they buy more VCR-TT from France and that is the canon APC instead of the VAB. I.e. they had already bought 48 of various versions in reality by the mid-80's and that vehicle was a pure export only vehicle. Meaning that in a V1 world they wouldnt have to rely on vehicles that might not have been surplused as they were in the real world.

And the VCR-TT is definitely a good match for them for an APC - i.e. they would already have spare parts, manuals, etc. and familiarity with the vehicle

and there is a version of it that could definitely help the Mexicans with US armor - i.e. there was a tank-destroyer version of the VCR/TT, designated the VCR/TH, fitted with an antitank missile turret for launching the HOT wire guided ATGM (antitank guided missile).

The VCR/TH mounts four HOT missiles on the turret ready to fire with ten reloads inside the vehicle.

The other interesting fact is that there was a less expensive version of the VCR/TH with the MCT copula that fired the MILAN. No one ever ordered it but it sounds tailor made for Mexico

So have Mexico order 100-150 plus of the standard version plus a couple of dozen tank-destroyer versions in say 1992-1993 timing to add to the 48 they had already and bingo - you have the canon APC (but with it being the VCR-TT instead of the VAB) for the mech and cav units and they can use the other APC's they already had spread out thru their infantry brigades

so a good possibility or not really?

Mexico getting these vehicles is a possibility but the problem that I see if the type of anti-tank missile that the Mexicans would be using.

The Milan missile has an armour penetration (HEAT) of 350mm.
The HOT-1 missile has an armour penetration (HEAT) of 850mm
The HOT-2 missile has an armour penetration (HEAT) 900-1,250mm

The frontal armour protection of a baseline M1 is estimated at 350-470mm against armour piercing kinetic energy rounds fired from a tank gun, and between 650-700mm against chemical rounds such as HEAT ammunition or anti-tank missiles

The frontal armour protection of the M1A1 is estimates at 600-900mm against armour piercing kinetic energy rounds fired from a tank gun, and between 1,320-1620mm against chemical rounds such as HEAT ammunition or anti-tank missiles. The 120mm M256 gun on the M1A1 can penetrate the armour of any Soviet or Chinese made tank of this period (1990's) with APFSDS-T, APFSDS-DU and HEAT rounds.

The Milan will not penetrate the frontal armour of a baseline M1 tank. The HOT-1 will penetrate the frontal armour of a baseline M1 tank but it will not penetrate the armour of a M1A1, and even the HOT-2 will not penetrate the frontal armour of a M1A1.

[Olefin]

Mexico getting these vehicles is a possibility but the problem that I see if the type of anti-tank missile that the Mexicans would be using.

The Milan missile has an armour penetration (HEAT) of 350mm.
The HOT-1 missile has an armour penetration (HEAT) of 850mm
The HOT-2 missile has an armour penetration (HEAT) 900-1,250mm

The frontal armour protection of a baseline M1 is estimated at 350-470mm against armour piercing kinetic energy rounds fired from a tank gun, and between 650-700mm against chemical rounds such as HEAT ammunition or anti-tank missiles

The frontal armour protection of the M1A1 is estimates at 600-900mm against armour piercing kinetic energy rounds fired from a tank gun, and between 1,320-1620mm against chemical rounds such as HEAT ammunition or anti-tank missiles. The 120mm M256 gun on the M1A1 can penetrate the armour of any Soviet or Chinese made tank of this period (1990's) with APFSDS-T, APFSDS-DU and HEAT rounds.

The Milan will not penetrate the frontal armour of a baseline M1 tank. The HOT-1 will penetrate the frontal armour of a baseline M1 tank but it will not penetrate the armour of a M1A1, and even the HOT-2 will not penetrate the frontal armour of a M1A1.

Keep in mind that frontal armor numbers dont tell the whole tale - i.e. just because you cant penetrate the frontal armor doesnt mean that you cant engage the tank successfully - thats why many tanks that are successfully engaged with anti-tank missiles are hit on the side or the rear or go for the bogies and tracks. Blow the track off a tank and its not going anywhere - still deadly but only within the radius of its gun and only for so long.

And if you look at the armor that was left in the US there were a lot of tanks that at HOT-1 could definitely engage - i.e. older M48 and M60 tanks

and the MILAN would be definitely useful against Bradley's, M8's and Stingrays

I am thinking of a mix of MILAN and HOT-1 missiles for the Mexicans being fired from VBL and VCR vehicles and them finding out very quickly that you had better not shoot for the frontal armor if you want to stay alive

[RN7]

Keep in mind that frontal armor numbers dont tell the whole tale - i.e. just because you cant penetrate the frontal armor doesnt mean that you cant engage the tank successfully - thats why many tanks that are successfully engaged with anti-tank missiles are hit on the side or the rear or go for the bogies and tracks. Blow the track off a tank and its not going anywhere - still deadly but only within the radius of its gun and only for so long.

And if you look at the armor that was left in the US there were a lot of tanks that at HOT-1 could definitely engage - i.e. older M48 and M60 tanks

and the MILAN would be definitely useful against Bradley's, M8's and Stingrays

I am thinking of a mix of MILAN and HOT-1 missiles for the Mexicans being fired from VBL and VCR vehicles and them finding out very quickly that you had better not shoot for the frontal armor if you want to stay alive

MILAN and HOT-1 can engage lighter U.S. military vehicles and older tanks, but not the Abrams. I know a tank can be hit from the rear or sides, but if the Mexicans were successfully able to disable M1 and M1A1 tanks that way it would imply that U.S. forces were tactically inept i.e. tanks charging in without any following infantry support and walking into ambushes.

[Olefin]

and that might be the possibility for how the 49th got nailed and how the 40th took losses - the 49th was a National Guard unit with no combat experience and the 40th was rebuilt using new recruits - in neither case were they experienced - and they may have been overconfident - again I think that factored a lot into the Mexican success

"its just the Mexicans they dont have anything that can hurt us" - followed by the three lead M1's blowing up as the missiles hit them in the sides

and keep in mind that neither of the units equipped with M1 tanks were part of the initial response to the invasion - it took a while for them to be re-deployed due to fuel shortages and disruptions in the rail network and by then the Mexicans had already come in quite a ways

[Rainbow Six]

Once the invasion has started you could always have the Mexicans managing to seize US vehicles and put them into service - give them an M1 of their own.

[RN7]

and that might be the possibility for how the 49th got nailed and how the 40th took losses - the 49th was a National Guard unit with no combat experience and the 40th was rebuilt using new recruits - in neither case were they experienced - and they may have been overconfident - again I think that factored a lot into the Mexican success

"its just the Mexicans they dont have anything that can hurt us" - followed by the three lead M1's blowing up as the missiles hit them in the sides

and keep in mind that neither of the units equipped with M1 tanks were part of the initial response to the invasion - it took a while for them to be re-deployed due to fuel shortages and disruptions in the rail network and by then the Mexicans had already come in quite a ways

The 49th Armoured Division was the key U.S. armoured force in the southwest following the Mexican invasion. I recall that Soviet Division Cuba was mainly responsible for the 49th Armoured Divisions losses in Texas and retreat to Oklahoma.

From City of Angels we also know that Mexican forces in Los Angeles are uniquely using Soviet arms and vehicles.

The MILAN missile will not defeat the Abram's, although HOT-1 in the right conditions might get a result, But I think looking at what type of anti-tank missiles the Soviets had or could have sent to the southwest might be the answer to why U.S. armoured forces were defeated and retreated.

[Olefin]

I actually like the HOT-1 combined with the MILAN for their vehicles - its a good mix and would be effective against everything but the heaviest tanks.

Now having the Cubans provide them with RPG's (along with Soviet Division Cuba) makes pretty good sense - but all they had was the RPG-7

Otherwise what they had was:

106 mm recoilless rifles, Carl Gustav recoilless rifles and RL-83 Blindicide

The US sold them the MK153 SMAW (not sure on the date) but not sure if they sold them any HEAA anti-armor rockets or not.

And remember the 49th was out of position on peacekeeping duties in the upper Midwest when the Mexicans invaded - so initially they wouldnt have had any tanks opposing them there (the 46th was in Texas as was the School Brigade but neither of them had any tanks)

and the 40th was still rebuilding and out of position as well - so they picked a good time to invade - i.e. the tank forces that usually would be there to stop them dead were all elsewhere

[Olefin]

FYI - the more I think about it the more it looks like the canon authors went out of their way to make sure that the Mexican invasion succeeded no matter what - i.e. moving the two divisions that had the best chance to stop it cold out of CA and TX, having the two training tank brigades that had enough tank firepower and experience to blow the Mexican Army away never really engage the Mexicans (i.e. one entered Texas but only to fight the Texian Legion - which they supposedly all but destroyed but then rebuilt enough to wipe out the 85th the following year), having Soviet Division Cuba join the fun because otherwise there was no way the Mexicans could have held the 49th, etc..

i.e. its way too many things going their way - and then having HW have the 90th Corps and the 40th fall apart?

sorry but frankly why are they so dead set on having the US lose the Southwest and Texas that it appears they went way way out of their way to have the Mexican invasion succeed as they did (and then the US never come to take it back even 300 years later)

I mean you can have a US that doesnt want to be a global superpower anymore without having them be reduced to a country so weak that they literally get pushed around by Mexico to where they never try to take back parts of their country that had been theirs for a 150 years and refuse to support their own people when they rebel to try to take back CA and AZ

Was someone that up for being able to play as a character who used to serve in the Texas Space Navy in 2300AD?

[Raellus]

i.e. moving the two divisions that had the best chance to stop it cold out of CA and TX, having the two training tank brigades that had enough tank firepower and experience to blow the Mexican Army away never really engage the Mexicans

I think that this is pretty easy to explain. It's simply because the invasion took the U.S. by surprise. The U.S. was preoccupied with the world war v. the Soviets/WTO; they weren't looking south. Why would they? All that armor was desperately needed elsewhere. Why keep in in the CONUS. I mean, even if you don't want to send it overseas, send it to Alaska.

sorry but frankly why are they so dead set on having the US lose the Southwest and Texas that it appears they went way way out of their way to have the Mexican invasion succeed as they did (and then the US never come to take it back even 300 years later)

I think this is about creating a playable setting. In order to make CONUS a place where T2K adventures can take place, the designers needed to have a shooting war in the U.S. They were trying to create a setting for a post-apocalyptic military RPG. There would be no CONUS campaign/modules if the U.S. just whooped Mexico in the opening rounds.

How else do you make the U.S. a battleground? A straight up civil war would be hard for a lot of players to swallow (killing virtual fellow countrymen)- that's why there's very few descriptions of combat between MilGov and CivGov. All things considered, the Mexican invasion is the most realistic option. It's much more realistic than a Soviet invasion of the mainland, a-la "Red Dawn", or a full-scale Cuban invasion of Florida and/or the Gulf Coast. Canada is the final option- would a Canadian invasion be more believable? That's a rhetorical question.

The bottom line is, to make CONUS a campaign site/major adventure setting, you need a Mexican invasion.

Don't give up on making the Mexican invasion work. We were making progress here.

[Raellus]

The MILAN missile will not defeat the Abram's, although HOT-1 in the right conditions might get a result, But I think looking at what type of anti-tank missiles the Soviets had or could have sent to the southwest might be the answer to why U.S. armoured forces were defeated and retreated.

The myth of the M1/MIA1 Abrams' invulnerability to second-gen ATGMs has been busted for quite some time. Most recently,

http://warisboring.com/what-destroyed-this-abrams-tank/

Spoiler: It was either a Milan or a relatively old Chinese ATGM.

Massed RPG fire killed an Abrams during the 2003 "Thunder Run" into Baghdad.

Bottom line, the Abrams was the best tank of its generation, but, even in its heyday, it wasn't unbeatable.

[RN7]

The myth of the M1/MIA1 Abrams' invulnerability to second-gen ATGMs has been busted for quite some time. Most recently,

http://warisboring.com/what-destroyed-this-abrams-tank/

Spoiler: It was either a Milan or a relatively old Chinese ATGM.

Massed RPG fire killed an Abrams during the 2003 "Thunder Run" into Baghdad.

Bottom line, the Abrams was the best tank of its generation, but, even in its heyday, it wasn't unbeatable.


Raellus you are aware that all current U.S. Abram's have depleted uranium (DU) armour, and that export Abram's don't?

Abram's exported to Egypt, Iraq, Kuwait, Morocco and Saudi Arabia do not have DU armour, but are fitted with the Chobham armour package. Chobham was cutting edge in the late 1980's, but is now considered fairly average. The British Challenger 2 tanks use the far more effective second generation Dorchester armour.

Officially the Abram's exported to Australia also lack DU armour, but is believed that Australian Abram's have been fitted with DU due to the 68 plus ton weight of their tanks.

The Chinese HG-8 is an amalgamation of technology copied from American TOW, Franco-German MILAN and British Swingfire anti-tank missiles. There has also been 12 improved models that followed the original HJ-8 missile of the 1980's, designated HJ-8A to HJ-8H, each incorporating improved features over the previous model. The later models of the HG-8 have an armour penetration (HEAT) of 800-1,100 mm, which is similar to modern versions of the MILAN (MILAN 3 and ER) missile but still not near enough to penetrate a U.S. M1A1/A2. The MILAN 1 used by the Mexicans had an armour penetration (HEAT) of 350mm.

Bottom line is the Abram's was never the best tank of its generation, but it was one of the best and remains so. The frontal armour of the baseline M1 was not unbeatable, but the Mexicans had nothing that could realistically penetrate its armour at the time in real life. The frontal armour of the M1A1 was to all intensive purposes invulnerable to anything Mexico had, and most things the Soviets had.

[mpipes]

And even if you do penetrate the armor, most Abrams can be repaired. To be completely destroyed, you usually have to detonate the ammo magazine, and that is truly a rare event in an Abrams.

From the video, its hard to tell. The turret looks mostly intact. I suspect a fuel fire, which likely means a rear or rear side hull hit.

[Olefin]

Raellus you are aware that all current U.S. Abram's have depleted uranium (DU) armour, and that export Abram's don't?

Abram's exported to Egypt, Iraq, Kuwait, Morocco and Saudi Arabia do not have DU armour, but are fitted with the Chobham armour package. Chobham was cutting edge in the late 1980's, but is now considered fairly average. The British Challenger 2 tanks use the far more effective second generation Dorchester armour.

Officially the Abram's exported to Australia also lack DU armour, but is believed that Australian Abram's have been fitted with DU due to the 68 plus ton weight of their tanks.

The Chinese HG-8 is an amalgamation of technology copied from American TOW, Franco-German MILAN and British Swingfire anti-tank missiles. There has also been 12 improved models that followed the original HJ-8 missile of the 1980's, designated HJ-8A to HJ-8H, each incorporating improved features over the previous model. The later models of the HG-8 have an armour penetration (HEAT) of 800-1,100 mm, which is similar to modern versions of the MILAN (MILAN 3 and ER) missile but still not near enough to penetrate a U.S. M1A1/A2. The MILAN 1 used by the Mexicans had an armour penetration (HEAT) of 350mm.

Bottom line is the Abram's was never the best tank of its generation, but it was one of the best and remains so. The frontal armour of the baseline M1 was not unbeatable, but the Mexicans had nothing that could realistically penetrate its armour at the time in real life. The frontal armour of the M1A1 was to all intensive purposes invulnerable to anything Mexico had, and most things the Soviets had.

Keep in mind that the Mexican invasion and the fighting that occurred during it was all conceptually finalized and written in 1986 - i..e two years before the introduction of depleted uranium armor. Meaning that as far as the authors knew the best armor the M1 tank would have (and any of its variants in the game) would have been the original armor for the M1 tank. I.e. if they had bought HOT-1 missiles they could have had a fighting chance against it.

The depleted uranium armor wasnt in the original version of the game.

However it was in Version 2 and 2.2 of the game. But the Mexican invasion including Red Star Lone Star and Challenge 27 were never re-described for that version - you have to wonder if they would have possibly added more weapons for the Mexican Army given the now much better armored M1A1 and M1A2 of V2 and 2.2

[RN7]

Keep in mind that the Mexican invasion and the fighting that occurred during it was all conceptually finalized and written in 1986 - i..e two years before the introduction of depleted uranium armor. Meaning that as far as the authors knew the best armor the M1 tank would have (and any of its variants in the game) would have been the original armor for the M1 tank. I.e. if they had bought HOT-1 missiles they could have had a fighting chance against it.

That's true but the armour protection of the M1 was still too strong for MILAN-1 missile, and the frontal armour of the M1A1 (before been fitted with DU armour) could survive HOT-1.

The depleted uranium armor wasnt in the original version of the game.

However it was in Version 2 and 2.2 of the game. But the Mexican invasion including Red Star Lone Star and Challenge 27 were never re-described for that version - you have to wonder if they would have possibly added more weapons for the Mexican Army given the now much better armored M1A1 and M1A2 of V2 and 2.2

True but DU was developed during the Cold War and U.S. tanks would have been fitted with it, and were in fact from 1988.

[RN7]

Although U.S. Abram's were been fitted with DU armour from 1988 I would not think all of them had DU armour by the Twilight War. Certainly baseline M1's with 105mm guns would not have had DU armour, and the M1A1's of national guard units like the 49th Armored Division would be among the last to be fitted with DU armour. So U.S. tanks in the southwest would in general not have the same armour protection as those on the front lines in Europe.

[Olefin]

Although U.S. Abram's were been fitted with DU armour from 1988 I would not think all of them had DU armour by the Twilight War. Certainly baseline M1's with 105mm guns would not have had DU armour, and the M1A1's of national guard units like the 49th Armored Division would be among the last to be fitted with DU armour. So U.S. tanks in the southwest would in general not have the same armour protection as those on the front lines in Europe.

I agree with you there as to what they would have been issued with - in fact with all the armor shipped to Europe that would explain the mix of armor they had - i.e. that they didnt have the most up to date versions, with most likely their M1 tanks being older ones without the latest improvements

I can see the Mexican's taking advantage of the inherent weakness a tank has in urban combat to hit them from the sides and the rear and even the top armor - similar to how the Iraqis took on the M1's during the fighting in Baghdad - to go after the M1 and M1A1 and M1A2 where they were at their weakest as to armor

I dont see them engaging those tanks in open combat out on the plains or deserts with much success - but nailing them with an RPG-7 on the roof armor in fighting in Santa Barbara - yup that I can see especially if the US units didnt have any air support to notice that they were about to get ambushed from roof tops (i.e. by late 1998 and 1999)

[Raellus]

Raellus you are aware that all current U.S. Abram's have depleted uranium (DU) armour, and that export Abram's don't?

Actually, I failed to take that into consideration. However, how do we know that DU makes the Abrams' frontal armor "invulnerable" to contemporary ATGMs, both NATO and WTO in origin?

[Olefin]

FYI - looking at Red Star Lone Star the Mexicans would have bought both the 4X4 and the 6X6 version of the VAB, at least per canon.

It was armed either with an M2HB machine gun or rarely a 25mm autocannon

So looking at actual versions you would be looking at either:

VAB 4x4 VCI T.20 - 4x 4 with a one man turret with a 20mm cannon or the VAB 6x6 VCI Toucan which is the 6X6 version - again both with a 20mm canon instead of the 25mm

The heavy machine gun version of the VAB carries a M2HB 12.7mm machine gun in an open turret; the light version sports the AA52 7.5mm machine gun in a similar arrangement

Thus they would appear to have bought the heavy machine gun version

The VCR-TT is a 6X6 which does have the 12.7mm heavy machine gun

The French do have a 25mm turret called the Dragar turret - it wasnt used on the VAB but it was used on the AMX-10P - they were sold to Singapore. Also they said the Mexicans had replaced the weapons on many of the VAB's with the Mk19 grenade launcher.

So now the question would be - VAB (per canon) or perhaps more VCR-TT to match what they had bought in the 80's?

[RN7]

Actually, I failed to take that into consideration. However, how do we know that DU makes the Abrams' frontal armor "invulnerable" to contemporary ATGMs, both NATO and WTO in origin?

The frontal protection of an M1A2 SEP is estimated at 940-960mm against armour-piercing fin-stabilized discarding sabot (APFSDS) rounds, and 1,320-1,620mm against HEAT rounds.

This is believed to be only matched by the Challenger 2 (and possibly the Leopard 2A7), and is considered at least equal and probably superior to the frontal armour protection of the new Russian T-14 Armada tank. So if an anti-tank missile can penetrate the estimated resistance of the frontal armour of the M1A2 SEP against a HEAT projectile then the M1A2 SEP is not invulnerable.

[Olefin]

Been looking thru information on NATO countries (1989 OOB info) as to possible sources of equipment for Mexico for either SPG or APC

Italy - has a lot of old M-44''s in storage and considered obsolete

Spain - six old M-44's that were in storage

Belgium - at least six old M-44's and 28+ M-108's as well as a lot (and by that I mean 400+) of old M75 APC's - meaning that the most likely APC they would be willing to possible sell would be M-75's or the BDX that were originally assigned to their gendarmarie which was pulled out of military functions due to multiple scandals in the 80's - (they had 80 vehicles and would not have needed to retain that many for civilian use)

[Raellus]

The frontal protection of an M1A2 SEP is estimated at 940-960mm against armour-piercing fin-stabilized discarding sabot (APFSDS) rounds, and 1,320-1,620mm against HEAT rounds.

This is believed to be only matched by the Challenger 2 (and possibly the Leopard 2A7), and is considered at least equal and probably superior to the frontal armour protection of the new Russian T-14 Armada tank. So if an anti-tank missile can penetrate the estimated resistance of the frontal armour of the M1A2 SEP against a HEAT projectile then the M1A2 SEP is not invulnerable.

Right, I get that. I guess what I meant to ask is whether DU has been combat tested.

There have been quite a few instances of manufacturers gaming the system and fudging test results. The proof is in the pudding. It's one thing to claim that DU armor can defeat X,Y,Z based on calculations and testing; combat is a truer indicator of a weapon's efficacy.

[Olefin]

Right, I get that. I guess what I meant to ask is whether DU has been combat tested.

There have been quite a few instances of manufacturers gaming the system and fudging test results. The proof is in the pudding. It's one thing to claim that DU armor can defeat X,Y,Z based on calculations and testing; combat is a truer indicator of a weapon's efficacy.

I will agree with you there - with the prime examples being US and German torpedoes during WWII - which supposedly were ready to go and completely tested - and then both failed miserably

[RN7]

Right, I get that. I guess what I meant to ask is whether DU has been combat tested.

There have been quite a few instances of manufacturers gaming the system and fudging test results. The proof is in the pudding. It's one thing to claim that DU armor can defeat X,Y,Z based on calculations and testing; combat is a truer indicator of a weapon's efficacy.

No Abrams in U.S. service has ever been lost due to an enemy penetration of its frontal armour.

Even in the First Gulf War when some Abrams had not been retrofitted with DU armour all tank losses were due to friendly fire or the deliberate destruction of disabled tanks to deny the Iraqi's from using the tanks as war trophies. There is one disputed tank loss that may have been destroyed by an Iraqi T-72, but it wasn't destroyed from the front and even in this case the damage assessment done by the DoD found the remains of a US air launched Hellfire missile nearby.

In the Second Gulf War there were many Abrams tanks damaged due to the invasion of Iraq and the nature of the urban warfare that was fought there, but the vast majority were not knocked out and many were simply abandoned due to being made immobile and later recovered. Nearly all tank losses were due to friendly fire incidents, the deliberate destruction of abandoned tanks by U.S. forces, or being rendered write offs due to heavy damage from powerful IED roadside mines. There are a few cases where it is has been claimed that Abrams were destroyed by Iraqi forces using ambush tactics and destroying them with multi anti-tank missiles and even anti-aircraft guns. But battle damage to the Abrams tanks was clearly found to be in the rear and top of the tank, and was not found in the frontal or barely even in the side armour of the Abrams. Certainly no Abrams were lost due to Iraqi tanks.

Regarding a more sophisticated enemy like the Russian Army, I will honestly say that I haven't researched what the Russians currently have in enough detail to claim that the Russian do not currently process anti-tank missiles or sabot shells that can penetrate the frontal or side armour of an Abram's. But I do know how powerful these missiles and sabot shells would have to be do be able to do that. Russian tank and infantry forces are far more capable than the Iraqi's were, but if they have munitions with the ability to penetrate the frontal armour of an Abrams I would say they are not widely distributed. Also for every Abrams the Russians could destroy the U.S. Abrams could probably destroy five or more of their tanks.

[RN7]

Been looking thru information on NATO countries (1989 OOB info) as to possible sources of equipment for Mexico for either SPG or APC

Italy - has a lot of old M-44''s in storage and considered obsolete

Spain - six old M-44's that were in storage

Belgium - at least six old M-44's and 28+ M-108's as well as a lot (and by that I mean 400+) of old M75 APC's - meaning that the most likely APC they would be willing to possible sell would be M-75's or the BDX that were originally assigned to their gendarmarie which was pulled out of military functions due to multiple scandals in the 80's - (they had 80 vehicles and would not have needed to retain that many for civilian use)


By 1992 Italy, Spain and Belgium had completely replaced the M44, and Belgium had completely replaced the M75 APC. No M44's or M75's were listed as being held in reserve.