Twilight 2025

[ChalkLine]

If we were to make a time set seven years in the future, what would it look like?

How different would it be from a NATO vs USSR clash we know from T2K?

[Cdnwolf]

China Sea clash over Spratley Islands
Ukraine Russia clash
Potential South America clash involving Columbia and Venezuela
Economic crisis in Greece/Italy leading to civil war
Syria war expands drawing in the US vs Russia clashes
Mexico/US border clashes heat up
US economic boycott of Chinese products

Hey some of this sound like they came from TWL2013
Now just need some reason for Canada and the USA to .... ooops...

[Raellus]

Proxy war between Saudi Arabia and Iran in Yemen and Syria. By means of deliberate attack, mistake, accident, brinksmanship, or what-have-you, the Israelis, Americans, and Russians (and their respective allies) get dragged into the fight. Voila! Armageddon a-la Revelations. It's not as far fetched as it seemed even just a decade ago.

[ChalkLine]

True, but apart from the causes what else would be different?

The Satellite War would now have to be fairly involved and, as usual, possibly causing a Kessler Cascade where all the satellites in orbit are destroyed by debris. This means there will be no future satellite launches either for those 2300ad people. Goodbye GPS targeting, one of the most important artillery advances. Also good bye to instant map updating.

[Raellus]

Space force!

In all seriousness, the History Channel series Dogfights had a special near-future air/space warfare episode that was really great. This was 5-10 years ago. Unfortunately, it wasn't included on the DVD series. But the "special episode" had a "dogfight" between U.S. and Chinese space planes that seemed very realistic.

Found it! It's not in HD, but it's worth your time if you have an interest in aerial warfare c. 2025.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W9XgldnXb5s

[.45cultist]

A little tweeking of IRL get's these premise:
The state of some western Europe forces suggest a desperate rearming. I don't believe any would jump to nukes. The refugee shuffling may stretch infrastructure and inflame friction in Europe, and even less so in Canada, where they don't want to integrate. And in the U.S. social strife is a big business already.

[swaghauler]

I see Russia, China, Iran, North Korea, and their proxies (Lebanon, Yemen, Syria, and potentially India) engaged with NATO either directly or indirectly. The various "War On Terror" campaigns (Afghanistan, Nijer, Uganda, Pakistan, Kenya, Somalia, etc...) will also draw away precious resources from the NATO countries in question.

Couple this with the reductions in military strength that many NATO nations are experiencing and the fact that there is NO "reserve production capacity" in the West (thanks to "Lean manufacturing") and you have the "Mad Scramble" that .45Cultist was talking about. I too believe that this would be a "come as you are" war.

The big question is "What would be the Spark that ignites the Fires of War?" Will it be Syria, Yemen, or North Korea? Will there be some kind of "incident" in the Balkans? Will the State of Georgia (the one near Russia, not the US state) be the "Flashpoint?"

Then there are the added "unknowns" to consider. What role would organizations such as ANTIFA (who are just as "Fascist" as the "Fascists" they purport to oppose) play on US (and European) soil? How would minorities feel about a "draft?" The World is NOT anymore stable today than it was during the Cold War. In fact, I would venture the opinion that it is LESS SO now.

[Tegyrius]

Hey some of this sound like they came from TWL2013


Thoroughly implausible and poorly-researched. None of that could ever happen.

- C.

[ChalkLine]

What new weapons apart from drones have been developed since 2000?

[Legbreaker]

Quite a lot. Only got to trawl through Paul's site to see that.

[.45cultist]

I see Russia, China, Iran, North Korea, and their proxies (Lebanon, Yemen, Syria, and potentially India) engaged with NATO either directly or indirectly. The various "War On Terror" campaigns (Afghanistan, Nijer, Uganda, Pakistan, Kenya, Somalia, etc...) will also draw away precious resources from the NATO countries in question.

Couple this with the reductions in military strength that many NATO nations are experiencing and the fact that there is NO "reserve production capacity" in the West (thanks to "Lean manufacturing") and you have the "Mad Scramble" that .45Cultist was talking about. I too believe that this would be a "come as you are" war.

The big question is "What would be the Spark that ignites the Fires of War?" Will it be Syria, Yemen, or North Korea? Will there be some kind of "incident" in the Balkans? Will the State of Georgia (the one near Russia, not the US state) be the "Flashpoint?"

Then there are the added "unknowns" to consider. What role would organizations such as ANTIFA (who are just as "Fascist" as the "Fascists" they purport to oppose) play on US (and European) soil? How would minorities feel about a "draft?" The World is NOT anymore stable today than it was during the Cold War. In fact, I would venture the opinion that it is LESS SO now.

ANTIFA And their ilk will peel away units for civil disturbance duties, which is the downside to divisive politics as a business, those who profit will lose control. With economies in shambles and militaries trying to instantly correct years of budget neglect, nukes become more attractive in the tactical role, then the strategic. It's just a question of filling the blanks in. As for weapon advancement, even upgrades are impressive. Adapt RW stuff like the doubling range on the 120MM gun, field testing the EM shield for AFV's. ETC.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

I think an important aspect is that of the potential for modern Western society to break down under the strain of war. It's something that has been discussed in other threads but is particularly relevant to this one.
That is to say, the current Western practice of "just in time" deliveries will make the wartime civilian situation much worse than it was in the past.
Shops don't hold large stocks anymore, often what you see on the shelf is all there is because they expect a "next day" delivery to replenish anything they sold.

Military forces typically have a far more robust logistics system and so are unlikely to be affected by this but the situation in civilian organizations is likely to be very dire.
I'm not just talking about things like food delivery to your local store but such things as medical supplies to hospitals, equipment and/or ammunition deliveries to police units and so on. I don't know what sort of ammunition stocks an inner-city US police station is likely to hold but in many other countries it's really minimal.
In some Australia police stations, it amounts to about double the normal patrol issue of ammo per officer so for a small station of six officers (with the Glock or S&W semi-autos popular here, three mags per officer) we're talking approximately 300 rounds in total of handgun ammo.

I think the potential for societal breakdown is far greater now than in the timeline of the Twilight War of 1st and 2nd editions because these days for example, if we have a disruption at the fuel stations, all those "just in time" deliveries will stop, shops will rapidly run short of supplies with little hope of getting resupplied within the week.
In peacetime, these sorts of things get resolved by the government as fast as they are able but in wartime, the government's attention won't be able to focus exclusively on a civilian problem.
That one week of no deliveries could lag on and last two weeks or more.
By that time, some people will probably feel like taking the law into their own hands.

[rcaf_777]

I think an important aspect is that of the potential for modern Western society to break down under the strain of war. It's something that has been discussed in other threads but is particularly relevant to this one.

This is a topic keep coming up and is never really resolved. I would like to point out that in V1 and V2 the nuclear option is not used right away. The US and her allies have time to prepare. Historically the US have always been prepare to fight a war with the Soviets. This includes having a Continuity of Operations Plan (COOP) secure locations for member of the Government. It also includes many Executive Orders like Executive Order 11921. Which Allows the Federal Emergency Preparedness Agency to develop plans to establish control over the mechanisms of production, distribution, energy sources, wages, salaries, credit, and the flow of money. Both timelines don't tell of Government actions following the begin of the shooting war.

I don't think is unreasonable for the following to happen

1. US moves to DEFCON 2 or 1
2. Border Security is Tighten
3. Increased Security at Key Infrastructure (Nuclear Power Plants, Power Dams Bridges waterways)
4. Full Federalized of the National Guard and Army Reserve
5. Selective Service begins
6. Federal Emergency Preparedness Agency starts preparing the nation.

[Raellus]

I think the issue of societal breakdown and civil disorder is one that gets exaggerated in both directions. I don't quite buy the sheep, wolves, sheepdogs trope. I don't think the country would descend into Mad Max levels of lawlessness and depredation. On the other hand, I don't think that the Federal Gov't, even with a year or two to prepare, in earnest, for nuclear war, is going to be able to make provisions to shelter, feed, clothe, and provide medical care for tens of millions, if not hundreds of millions, of refugees (i.e. people evacuating potential nuclear target areas or fleeing the vicinity of an actual strike). Even if the Gov't could lay in adequate provisions, once fossil fuels are in short supply (and refineries are the priority target for nuclear attacks, according to v1 & v2 canon lists), it's going to be extremely difficult to get aid to the people that need it (or vice-versa). Millions will go hungry. Hundreds of thousands of refugees will die of starvation, exposure, or communicable diseases like cholera and typhus- maybe not right away, but over the first few years after the TDM, the death toll is going to be catastrophic. This doesn't even take into account victims of nuclear strikes (read Susan Southard's, Nagasaki: Life After Nuclear War) for a thorough description of what it was like to live through a relatively small nuclear bomb attack).

Seriously, aside from farmers and "preppers", how many citizens are going to know how to cope [well] when the lights go out, the water shuts off, gas pumps run dry, and the grocery store shelves are empty? 10%? I think that's a probably a generous estimate.

So, I think it's more likely conditions across the U.S.A. are going to become dire relatively quickly- not Mad Max dire, but pretty dire. I agree with SSC that people today, more reliant on digital aides than even 10 years ago, are going to be much less able to cope than folks could have back when T2K was first written.

Will surviving law enforcement, whether it be military or civilian, be able to cope with the apocalypse? I think the answer is, it will largely depend on a number of factors. To name a few,

Urban v. rural.
Was there a nuclear strike in the region?
Are/were there hostile conventional forces in the region?
Is there a strong military presence in the region?
How prepared and competent is local law enforcement?
Were there significant criminal elements in place before the war started?

So, there's no universal answer to the question, "how bad will it be?" As a GM, it's up to us to look at the above and make decisions about local conditions. It's quite a challenge, but it's a big part of the fun of T2K, IMHO.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Prompted by what Raellus said, I should point out that I didn't intend to give the idea that society would break down to complete lawlessness e.g. Mad Max or Tom Clancy's The Division. Nor give the idea that everyone would start bringing on the chaos in a few weeks because they couldn't get their morning cup of tea/coffee.

It was more to stress the idea that for a 2025 conflict, we are talking about Western societies that have a heavy reliance on electricity and petroleum fuels to keep their societies running. Once something interferes with that, most city dwellers are going to be sitting back waiting for the government to fix the problem. The government is unlikely to be able to respond to these problems as quickly as they have in the past for two reasons.

1. The way they deal with these situations has changed relative to the use of "just in time" deliveries.
2. There's a war going on.

I'm inclined to think that any country that is accepting lots of refugees is going to really feel the strain from this and will have a difficult time preventing societal breakdown from happening once rationing, blackouts and late deliveries become the norm.

[Legbreaker]

...start bringing on the chaos in a few weeks because they couldn't get their morning cup of tea/coffee.

You SURE about that?

4132

[swaghauler]

You SURE about that?

4132

I do believe that the "Combat Effectiveness" of any US unit would be reduced by 50% if you simply deprived them of Coffee. This is untested as no Army Command is willing to risk the consequences of testing this theory. There are three things you simply DON'T do in the Army...

1) You never screw with the Mail Clerk, Mess Section, or Pay Clerk.
2) You treat ALL pregnant females as "emotionally disturbed persons."
3) You NEVER F**K with the coffee.

[.45cultist]

Prompted by what Raellus said, I should point out that I didn't intend to give the idea that society would break down to complete lawlessness e.g. Mad Max or Tom Clancy's The Division. Nor give the idea that everyone would start bringing on the chaos in a few weeks because they couldn't get their morning cup of tea/coffee.

It was more to stress the idea that for a 2025 conflict, we are talking about Western societies that have a heavy reliance on electricity and petroleum fuels to keep their societies running. Once something interferes with that, most city dwellers are going to be sitting back waiting for the government to fix the problem. The government is unlikely to be able to respond to these problems as quickly as they have in the past for two reasons.

1. The way they deal with these situations has changed relative to the use of "just in time" deliveries.
2. There's a war going on.

I'm inclined to think that any country that is accepting lots of refugees is going to really feel the strain from this and will have a difficult time preventing societal breakdown from happening once rationing, blackouts and late deliveries become the norm.

It might be that way, but once folks believe the "Thin Blue Line" is gone, it is gone. And then people get stupid and vicious, the Government response won't be much better either if it believes it's survival is at stake.

[Marconi]

I do believe that this comprehensive review of ZQuiet (https://www.villagevoice.com/2022/10/13/zquiet-review/) would be reduced by 50% if you simply deprived them of Coffee. This is untested as no Army Command is willing to risk the consequences of testing this theory. There are three things you simply DON'T do in the Army...

1) You never screw with the Mail Clerk, Mess Section, or Pay Clerk.
2) You treat ALL pregnant females as "emotionally disturbed persons."
3) You NEVER F**K with the coffee.

I also believe you're right regarding the coffee thing. But soon enough the technology will allow us to test the heck out of theories like that one in VR.

[Heffe3737]

I also believe you're right regarding the coffee thing. But soon enough the technology will allow us to test the heck out of theories like that one in VR.

This isn't just in the US either. I do a lot of work in the outsourcing industry, and the number 1 thing employees at locations all over the world agree on, is that coffee is an absolute essential when it comes to productivity.

As a side note, if you run a business and don't offer free coffee to your employees, they very likely secretly hate you for it.

[CDAT]

This isn't just in the US either. I do a lot of work in the outsourcing industry, and the number 1 thing employees at locations all over the world agree on, is that coffee is an absolute essential when it comes to productivity.

As a side note, if you run a business and don't offer free coffee to your employees, they very likely secretly hate you for it.

I must have been in a different military than you all, yes we had our coffee drinkers, but with one individual exception we did not have anyone who was so into it that they even had a coffee pot in the unit. We did have the Army issued pot that got pulled out for official functions, but not day to day. When we were in the field no one that I can remember had to have their cup of Joe. The coffee at the warming stations always had some left when it was picked up, the soup on the other had was gone in no time.

[Legbreaker]

Coffee for us was important, and whenever were were halted for an hour or so (sometimes less) somebody always had a brew on, but in my section there was something even more vital.
BOOZE!
Every last one of us had a hip flask in their pack, each person with something different in it - bourbon, port, tequila, etc. Between us there weren't many cocktails we couldn't make! :p
Technically we were breaking the rules, but given the platoon sergeant and company sergeant major also carried....
Even the cook could be counted on to have a little something squirrelled away.

[pmulcahy11b]

Unlike almost all soldiers I knew, I hate coffee (though I love the smell -- go figure). But I quickly found that coffee was an important trade item -- depending upon the coffee I bought before leaving, I could get anything from cheese and crackers to a new extractor on my M16 before it was scheduled to get a new one. (My biggest problem with the M16 was extraction failure.) One time, I got two new matching units for my track from Commo for a jar of Folgers.

[.45cultist]

I was drinking coffee at Barksdale AFB, while we watch an ORI, the nuke laden B52's were taking off and the youngsters asked, "What do we do now?" I sipped and replied, "If this was real, we'd orbit the Earth for 10,000 years." "HUH?"
I then had to explain Nuke Warfare to the AB's while chugging Folger's.

[mpipes]

Watching a MITO simulating a scramble of the alert BUFFS and tankers is definitely an impressive sight!!


I hear that we now have an alert force again. About time. At least the alert pad at Barksdale was left relatively intact.
https://stevenmcollins.com/usa-preparing-247-nuclear-alert-b-52-squadron/

[swaghauler]

It might be that way, but once folks believe the "Thin Blue Line" is gone, it is gone. And then people get stupid and vicious, the Government response won't be much better either if it believes it's survival is at stake.

I tend to agree with you watching riots break out in New York City and Pittsburgh whenever there are power outages. I think the real issue is twofold;

1) How poor do you "perceive" yourself to be in comparison to your neighbors?
2) How WELL do you "know" your neighbors?

If you know all your neighbors and are on a fairly equal economic basis with them, you will often see mutual support and assistance from those communities. Such communities tend to be smaller with a more "integrated" social system (everyone attends the same schools, churches, and social functions).

On the other hand, if you don't associate with your neighbors regularly, or even know their names, it is easy to view them as a "resource" instead of as "people." Add to this the fact that cities usually have limited resources available (leading to competition for those resources) and you have a disaster in the making.

In addition, if you view yourself as "marginalized" by the vast majority of society, a major disruption could be your chance to not only acquire "resources" that are otherwise unavailable to you but also to "punish" those you feel have kept you in poverty. I think of the people in Baltimore looting and burning the CVS Pharmacy during the protests for Freddy Gray. What exactly did CVS do to cause Freddy Gey to die? NOTHING! It was a convenient excuse to loot that CVS.

This behavior is what will cause the most damage to major cities in the War.

[.45cultist]

I tend to agree with you watching riots break out in New York City and Pittsburgh whenever there are power outages. I think the real issue is twofold;

1) How poor do you "perceive" yourself to be in comparison to your neighbors?
2) How WELL do you "know" your neighbors?

If you know all your neighbors and are on a fairly equal economic basis with them, you will often see mutual support and assistance from those communities. Such communities tend to be smaller with a more "integrated" social system (everyone attends the same schools, churches, and social functions).

On the other hand, if you don't associate with your neighbors regularly, or even know their names, it is easy to view them as a "resource" instead of as "people." Add to this the fact that cities usually have limited resources available (leading to competition for those resources) and you have a disaster in the making.

In addition, if you view yourself as "marginalized" by the vast majority of society, a major disruption could be your chance to not only acquire "resources" that are otherwise unavailable to you but also to "punish" those you feel have kept you in poverty. I think of the people in Baltimore looting and burning the CVS Pharmacy during the protests for Freddy Gray. What exactly did CVS do to cause Freddy Gey to die? NOTHING! It was a convenient excuse to loot that CVS.

This behavior is what will cause the most damage to major cities in the War.

Yes, the best and worst comes out in people.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

I think these may have been discussed before on the forum but they fit in here well enough as a colour/background element of any post-apocalypse scenario.
Specifically I am talking about two ideas to get long-range comms back after the breakdown.

The first is a concept still in use by ham radio operators so is very much a proven idea. Earth-Moon-Earth communications, basically you aim your microwave transmitter at the Moon and someone somewhere else in the world can pick it up with their microwave receiver.
Quite a bit easier than trying to get a hold of working comms satellites, finding a suitable launch vehicle, fuelling said launch vehicle and then getting the satellite into orbit.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%E2%80%93Moon%E2%80%93Earth_communication

The second is a little more difficult and has a limited life span of a year or two. Difficult because it does require a rocket to deliver a package into orbit and the package itself needs some thought put into how it will deliver its contents but the concept itself is incredibly simple.
Essentially, a collection of short lengths of copper wire, placed in orbit, function like a giant antenna. It was a serious consideration in the 1950s when North America and Western Europe had either ionospheric radio or undersea cable as their only means of long-range communication with each other.
But their are issues with seeding near-Earth orbit with 20kg of copper wire, aside from finding a suitable rocket to get it there.
https://www.wired.com/2013/08/project-west-ford/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_West_Ford

Both concepts could be attractive solutions for rapidly re-establishing communication in a world that is very dependent on satellites for long-range comms these days.

[Legbreaker]

Hmm, putting even MORE shrapnel into orbit sounds like a wonderful idea.
What could possibly go wrong?

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Hmm, putting even MORE shrapnel into orbit sounds like a wonderful idea.
What could possibly go wrong?

Oh don't worry, there's soooo much space in space, there's plenty of room!
And anyway, it'll all fall back to Earth after about two years.

Or so they thought...
Apparently there's still clumps of copper wire floating around up there from their initial tests.
To be a little fair, it was conceived of and deployed in the 1950s, before they had developed any satellites and realized the problems of tiny objects smacking into delicate machines in orbit.

But still, what could possibly go wrong? :D :sagrin:

[Legbreaker]

With the undoubtedly billions of pieces already up there after the ASAT attacks during the war the Kessler syndrome is already probably going to prevent space flight any time in the next few generations (until somebody works out a way to clean up space). Might already be enough crap up there that additional wires would be unnecessary!:p

[Olefin]

actually that would depend on how many attacks are low orbit versus high orbit or geo orbit - the low orbit stuff would mostly be gone in a decade or so

[swaghauler]

Coffee for us was important, and whenever were were halted for an hour or so (sometimes less) somebody always had a brew on, but in my section there was something even more vital.
BOOZE!
Every last one of us had a hip flask in their pack, each person with something different in it - bourbon, port, tequila, etc. Between us there weren't many cocktails we couldn't make! :p
Technically we were breaking the rules, but given the platoon sergeant and company sergeant major also carried....
Even the cook could be counted on to have a little something squirrelled away.

In liquor there is courage,
In wine there is wisdom,
In beer there is strength,
In water there is bacteria...



... You Decide! :)

[swaghauler]

You SURE about that?

4132

Always remember that a yawn is just a silent scream for coffee.

[swaghauler]

I think these may have been discussed before on the forum but they fit in here well enough as a colour/background element of any post-apocalypse scenario.
Specifically I am talking about two ideas to get long-range comms back after the breakdown.

The first is a concept still in use by ham radio operators so is very much a proven idea. Earth-Moon-Earth communications, basically you aim your microwave transmitter at the Moon and someone somewhere else in the world can pick it up with their microwave receiver.
Quite a bit easier than trying to get a hold of working comms satellites, finding a suitable launch vehicle, fuelling said launch vehicle and then getting the satellite into orbit.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%E2%80%93Moon%E2%80%93Earth_communication

The second is a little more difficult and has a limited life span of a year or two. Difficult because it does require a rocket to deliver a package into orbit and the package itself needs some thought put into how it will deliver its contents but the concept itself is incredibly simple.
Essentially, a collection of short lengths of copper wire, placed in orbit, function like a giant antenna. It was a serious consideration in the 1950s when North America and Western Europe had either ionospheric radio or undersea cable as their only means of long-range communication with each other.
But their are issues with seeding near-Earth orbit with 20kg of copper wire, aside from finding a suitable rocket to get it there.
https://www.wired.com/2013/08/project-west-ford/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_West_Ford

Both concepts could be attractive solutions for rapidly re-establishing communication in a world that is very dependent on satellites for long-range comms these days.

Don't forget about Single Side-Band Radio.

While VHF and UHF are both basically limited to "line-of-sight" communications (about 50km to 75km with a VERY tall whip antenna) without prepositioned "Rebounders" (tall towers that amplify and redirect the radio signal to extend the signal range up to around 150km based on their position), SSB is NOT so limited.

For those who are unfamiliar with Single Side Band Radio, it is a radio that operates in the lower Megahertz band and uses the atmosphere to bounce a signal a LONG WAY off. While primarily used by sailing vessels, it can also be found on ground installations. It can be identified by its long (25ft+) whip antenna with an unusual metal "directional" dish at the bottom (a disk angled upwards). Significantly powerful radios (up to 1000 watts output) have transmitted CLEARLY at ranges exceeding 7000km. The signal is bounced off of the Ionosphere and the higher the Sun is, the lower the frequency range you need (3 to 5 MHZ) while a higher frequency (8+ MHZ) is needed in a lower "charged Ionosphere" (the sun is setting or down). Many of these units could have survived, being on board both merchant vessels and sailing cruisers (who even have their own radio nets to use) during The Exchange.

[.45cultist]

Don't forget about Single Side-Band Radio.

While VHF and UHF are both basically limited to "line-of-sight" communications (about 50km to 75km with a VERY tall whip antenna) without prepositioned "Rebounders" (tall towers that amplify and redirect the radio signal to extend the signal range up to around 150km based on their position), SSB is NOT so limited.

For those who are unfamiliar with Single Side Band Radio, it is a radio that operates in the lower Megahertz band and uses the atmosphere to bounce a signal a LONG WAY off. While primarily used by sailing vessels, it can also be found on ground installations. It can be identified by its long (25ft+) whip antenna with an unusual metal "directional" dish at the bottom (a disk angled upwards). Significantly powerful radios (up to 1000 watts output) have transmitted CLEARLY at ranges exceeding 7000km. The signal is bounced off of the Ionosphere and the higher the Sun is, the lower the frequency range you need (3 to 5 MHZ) while a higher frequency (8+ MHZ) is needed in a lower "charged Ionosphere" (the sun is setting or down). Many of these units could have survived, being on board both merchant vessels and sailing cruisers (who even have their own radio nets to use) during The Exchange.
I think the early Air Force used it.

[Ancestor]

I just saw this thread. I run a game set in 2030. I wrote the timeline in 2014. Some of it has come true, some not so much. I had the following:

-US/NATO war on ISIS changes balance of power in ME with Russia backing Iran and Syria and US backing the Gulf states (nailed that one)

-Renewed Cold War between US and Russia leading to US buildup in Europe and Western Europe rearming (on the way to nailing that one).

-Refugee resettlement driving Visegrad group into Russian camp (a stretch at this point)

-Chinese recession leads to increased unrest, more authoritarian govt, and increased militarization (swing and a miss)

-Russia rides high energy prices to rearm (strike two)

-The GOP controlled Congress overrides President Hillary Clinton's desire to cut military spending, instead voting to massively expand the US military to meet global threats ( Strike three!!!)

By the time the war starts in 2025 (just add 30 years to canon dates!) Poland splits between "white Poles" favoring NATO and 'red Poles' favoring Russia, Iran is in full revolution (pro Western and royalists backed by the US vs regime backed by Russia), France leaving NATO, anti-EU governments voted into power in Italy and Greece, and NK moving south and you have a fair semblance of the 2TK world updated and ready to run for your Gen Z sons.

They still laugh when I say "Soviet" though...

[Ramjam]

But some of your swings are not that far off.

China is having problems as their economy has slowed over the last few years. There has been some unrest but it's generally not on a scale to be noticed by the West.

As for Russia bumping the cost of fuel up to their foreign customers....Well they has sort of happened and they have been re-arming to a degree. With sending troops to both Syria and the Ukraine to get combat experience, the Red Army is back in the game for sure.

[ChalkLine]

Okay, here's my idea of where the differences between modern warfare and twilight warfare are plus some key events that will shape change in the T2k world.

Cold War gone Hot
The initial war is much like we expect and have planned for. Main force units meet in a series of clashes of mobility and firepower. Technological edges are used to their extreme limit. The destructive power of each combat arm is massively multiplied causing immense damage to the combatants.

Back to WW2 and The Missile Drought
The hectic pace of operations and the staggering losses to all facets of the armed forces starts to slow the pace of operations. The high tech weapons, carefully stockpiled before the war, are expended faster than they can be restocked as strategic warfare is practiced. Soon things like ATGMs start to become scarce when their field expenditure is many times higher than has been predicted. The initial Orbital War destroys the satellite system and GPS is only available via ground based towers. The trend swings away from high tech solutions to straight out military effort. At this point the mandatory conscription of combatants is practiced right across the globe.

Back even further to WW1 and The Fuel Drought
Soon strategic warfare has destroyed the upper end of prewar technological capability. Fuels become scarce and hard decisions are made to maintain production of lower rated fuels, lubricants and plastics at the cost of high rating fuels. Aircraft become rarer to extremely scarce. Air-mobility ends as a military concept while a new generation of fuel-efficient aircraft are introduced.
On the ground the lack of fuels means the two greatest breakers of the Trench Deadlock; tanks and aircraft, become scarce. With the difficulties supplying the troops static warfare starts to become the norm. Troops are incapable of moving more than 20km across the battlefield in a day. Still, command attempts to maintain manouevre warfare if at all possible. in some fringe theatres horse-drawn and horse mounted troops reappear.

The Collapse or Back to Vietnam
Bio-weapons, natural diseases, chemical and nuclear weapons thin out the troops to fractions of the numbers used in the height of the war. Static combat lines falter and break with the lack of troops to maintain them. Rather than long trench lines new 'fire base' cantons appear that try to project control around their surrounding areas. Command finally collapses under the strain of trying to feed the troops and the war is seen as not only unwinnable but possibly unsurvivable. Cantons start to protect local civilians and contract into small federations that occasionally undertake common objectives in the summer to acquire strategic stocks to better survive winter. Troops now protect civilians and may or may not be part of the small communities' health and education systems, if any.

[Legbreaker]

Okay, here's my idea of where the differences between modern warfare and twilight warfare are plus some key events that will shape change in the T2k world.

I LIKE it!!!
4142

[WallShadow]

I just saw this thread. I run a game set in 2030. I wrote the timeline in 2014. Some of it has come true, some not so much. I had the following:
<SNIP>
-Chinese recession leads to increased unrest, more authoritarian govt, and increased militarization (swing and a miss)
<SNIP>
-Russia rides high energy prices to rearm (strike two)
<SNIP>
By the time the war starts in 2025 (just add 30 years to canon dates!) Poland splits between "white Poles" favoring NATO and 'red Poles' favoring Russia, Iran is in full revolution (pro Western and royalists backed by the US vs regime backed by Russia), France leaving NATO, anti-EU governments voted into power in Italy and Greece, and NK moving south and you have a fair semblance of the 2TK world updated and ready to run for your Gen Z sons.

They still laugh when I say "Soviet" though...

China is undergoing some serious cultural problems with the fallout from the "One Child Policy"--demand for male offspring is causing a shortage of available women for marriage, even to the point of young girls being obtained (read "kidnapped" or "bought") from neighboring countries. This might lead to a basic instability in the Chinese civilization.

Russia's oil reserves are dwindling, few new fields are being found, and their shale-oil technology has not caught up. Just like Japan in 1941--being squeezed by the need for resources.

Love the idea about Poland splitting and the chaos politically.

And who knows what Uncle Vlad will do to consolidate power?

[Heffe3737]

7 years ehh? As recent events have shown us, that's time enough for quite a bit to take place. This is a high level outline of what I could imagine:

EurAsia:
Due to political will in the US, the US government scales back and potentially drops out of NATO altogether, leaving the EU scrambling to rebuild their militaries. In it's bid to gain additional fuel reserves and more access to continental Europe, and in the absence of serious western opposition after the changes to NATO, Russia invades and annexes the remainder of the Ukraine. Lacking sufficient military strength yet, the EU talk a lot about taking action against Russia but no significant actions are taken outside of some minor sanctions. Russia takes this as a nod and moves in to secure Georgia as well, followed by a quick acceptance of Belarus back under Russian political control.

Meanwhile, sensing Russia's growing aggression with America's increasing isolationism, the EU prepares for the worst and begin stockpiling weapons. Facing increasing internal and financial pressure, Greece and Turkey pull out of NATO and quickly thereafter join the SCO. A hard Brexit happens with the UK, further straining the EU close to the breaking point.

In the Middle East, tensions escalate as Israel and Iran continue fighting a proxy war using terrorist factions. Syria and Yemen sign a mutual defense agreement with Iran. Israel calls upon the US for aid which is slow to come.

India and Pakistan...just continue being India and Pakistan.

In the far East, China continues to build in the South China Sea, prompting fiercer denunciation from the Philippines, and after China decides to use the same tactics elsewhere in international waters, the Philippines is joined by Japan and South Korea. Malaysia and Vietnam also join in condemning Chinese actions, but to a lesser extent. China continues providing relief and begins sending arms to North Korea. Pressure builds.

North America
Relations between the US and Canada degrade somewhat, but the two countries continue to trade and communicate. The US political scene is in turmoil, with GOP and Dems fighting over competing ideologies. The GOP ideologies eventually win over when a bio weapon suddenly explodes over a major US city, and is sourced to a terrorist group with ties to Iran. This leads to the US adopting a near entirely isolationist stance similar to pre-WW2, though there is still a sizeble amount of unrest in the US's liberal coastal cities. Mexico, angry about the political machinations happening to the north and feeling used by the American government, elects a strong anti-American president.

South America
Brazil's corruption reaches a crescendo and the economy collapses wholesale, leaving millions in poverty which cascades out to other countries on the continent. Similar events take place in Venezuela. Soon, most of South America is reeling from the influx of refugees from those beleaguered states. The cartels use this as an opportunity to gain more power and start setting up regional districts of their own, slowly pulling the populace away from any modicum of central government.

Australia
Somewhat of a bulwark in the South Pacific, the Aussies pick up somewhat where the US leaves off, and signs a mutual security agreement with Japan, the Philippines, South Korea, and Malaysia. They sense a storm is coming and begin preparations.

Africa
As American isolationism deepens, Chinese influence starts to encroach. Most of the continent is still fairly unstable, outside of a few outliers (Egypt, South America, and Morocco).

Outcome
When the bio weapon hits American soil, the suddenly united US population lashes out in rage and agrees to a joint operation with Israel to attack Iran. Bombs fall. Iran declares war on the US and Israel and blockades the Gulf. Syria and Yemen soon join in, followed by Saudi Arabia. Turkey joins in on the side of Iran as well when the US starts flying sorties through their airspace.

This slowly and inexorably draws in the remaining members of the SCO. The EU gets rapidly pulled in as well when Turkish ships open fire on an EU aid flotilla heading to Israel.

Simultaneously, China begins limited hostile actions against the Philippines which rapidly escalates into full on war with the Philippines, Japan, South Korea, and Australia. North Korea crosses the 51st parellel.

Conclusion
From there, while the sides are somewhat different than legacy T2k versions, the rest of the story happens fairly as normal. Russia invades the EU, the EU fights back. The US puts troops in Europe to help protect an endangered Europe. Nukes begin to fall. Society collapses on a scale never before seen. Etc. etc.

Thoughts?

[Legbreaker]

China is undergoing some serious cultural problems with the fallout from the "One Child Policy"--demand for male offspring is causing a shortage of available women for marriage, even to the point of young girls being obtained (read "kidnapped" or "bought") from neighboring countries.

That makes me think their military will be less hesitant to use human wave type attacks. Men are plentiful, so keeping them alive and using more technically advanced and financially expensive solutions is somewhat less necessary...

[pmulcahy11b]

EurAsia:
Due to political will in the US, the US government scales back and potentially drops out of NATO altogether, leaving the EU scrambling to rebuild their militaries. In it's bid to gain additional fuel reserves and more access to continental Europe, and in the absence of serious western opposition after the changes to NATO, Russia invades and annexes the remainder of the Ukraine. Lacking sufficient military strength yet, the EU talk a lot about taking action against Russia but no significant actions are taken outside of some minor sanctions. Russia takes this as a nod and moves in to secure Georgia as well, followed by a quick acceptance of Belarus back under Russian political control.

Meanwhile, sensing Russia's growing aggression with America's increasing isolationism, the EU prepares for the worst and begin stockpiling weapons. Facing increasing internal and financial pressure, Greece and Turkey pull out of NATO and quickly thereafter join the SCO. A hard Brexit happens with the UK, further straining the EU close to the breaking point.

I don't think the US will pull out of NATO unless Trump (damn guy!) wins the 2020 election. If this happens, there will definitely be a run-up to a general European War, starting in the Ukraine and then trying to take back Former Soviet Republics in Europe, and possibly an invasion of Poland. I think that there will be enough political pressure on Trump (especially if the Democrats win back the House) that Trump will commit at least aid and AWACS and tanker support, and perhaps armed aircraft and small amounts of troops.

I think that the remainder of NATO will, after a delay to scramble for weapons, come down hard on Russia, particularly the Polish, Romanians, and Czech and Slovak Republics. They've been itching for a fight with Russia over their invasion of the Ukraine, and only NATO leadership has been holding them back.

I think that NATO will lose Turkey, possibly as early as late this year. They been going over more to the Islamic sphere, and the Turkish people are increasingly alarmed by the growing defense budget in Turkey.

When Trump pulls out of NATO, however, the US's ability to form a coalition about anything will basically be gone. and if he doesn't stop this trade war soon, we could have a global depression (read up about the Harding and Hoover presidencies), and that will turn the world dynamic into a free-for-all.

In the Middle East, tensions escalate as Israel and Iran continue fighting a proxy war using terrorist factions. Syria and Yemen sign a mutual defense agreement with Iran. Israel calls upon the US for aid which is slow to come.

The Saudis have been quietly building up their National Guard -- they basically have the latest weapons they can get, have been increasing their defense budget by large leaps, and have been taking active roles in the fight in Yemen, as far as they can go without actually committing troops on the ground. (And the US has been using drones and special ops troops staging from Saudi territory into Yemen.) The Saudis have gone as far as artillery duels across the Yemeni border and the occasional air strike. And their opponent is -- Iran, who have been sending arms and advisors to Yemen. Yemen is basically a proxy was between Saudi and Iran, with US help on the Saudi side. And it could easily spread out into the Persian Gulf and Gulf of Oman, where the Iranians have the edge in the naval theater, If that happens, and particularly if the Strait of Hormuz gets constricted or closed, the US will have no choice to intervene, along with China. Fun times there...


In the far East, China continues to build in the South China Sea, prompting fiercer denunciation from the Philippines, and after China decides to use the same tactics elsewhere in international waters, the Philippines is joined by Japan and South Korea. Malaysia and Vietnam also join in condemning Chinese actions, but to a lesser extent. China continues providing relief and begins sending arms to North Korea. Pressure builds.

In my mind, this is the single most volatile world flashpoint. The Chinese are being almost imperialistic in their use of artificial islands, and their getting to the point where they basically control the South China Sea and beyond. The PLA has always been huge, and they are technologically almost on par with the US. The PLAAF is also growing, with a large number of advanced aircraft (though many analysts doubt that they have the advertised effectiveness). The PLAN is growing by leaps and bounds; by 2025 they will have 5-8 actual carriers (though by no means the equal of a Nimitz or Ford-Class carrier) and a growing number of nuclear attack submarines and guided missile destroyers. They have the ability to shoot down satellites and even platforms like the ISS. Their nuclear forces are easily capable of decimating the US, Russia, the Middle East, and most of NATO. In Europe, it will be a regional war; if China really bares its fangs, it will go hot and nuclear fast, and I think this is where World War 3 will start, if it starts.

North America
Relations between the US and Canada degrade somewhat, but the two countries continue to trade and communicate. The US political scene is in turmoil, with GOP and Dems fighting over competing ideologies. The GOP ideologies eventually win over when a bio weapon suddenly explodes over a major US city, and is sourced to a terrorist group with ties to Iran. This leads to the US adopting a near entirely isolationist stance similar to pre-WW2, though there is still a sizeble amount of unrest in the US's liberal coastal cities. Mexico, angry about the political machinations happening to the north and feeling used by the American government, elects a strong anti-American president.

I don't want to get into this; I have STRONG feelings about current US government and I'll get too political and inadvertently start a flame war. The thread will end up locked, and I think it's too important to be put off limits.

South America
Brazil's corruption reaches a crescendo and the economy collapses wholesale, leaving millions in poverty which cascades out to other countries on the continent. Similar events take place in Venezuela. Soon, most of South America is reeling from the influx of refugees from those beleaguered states. The cartels use this as an opportunity to gain more power and start setting up regional districts of their own, slowly pulling the populace away from any modicum of central government.

Australia
Somewhat of a bulwark in the South Pacific, the Aussies pick up somewhat where the US leaves off, and signs a mutual security agreement with Japan, the Philippines, South Korea, and Malaysia. They sense a storm is coming and begin preparations.

Africa
As American isolationism deepens, Chinese influence starts to encroach. Most of the continent is still fairly unstable, outside of a few outliers (Egypt, South America, and Morocco).

Most of this is essentially possible, and I'll admit I don't know enough about the geopolitics of these parts of the world to contribute much. (For now. I am studying.)

I have often talked on this board and others about a "bump in the road;" if we don't get over it, we'll either go to the edge, with essentially a non-nuclear World War 3, or we'll take it to oblivion. This "bump" will happen somewhere between 2025 and 2035. If we get over it, mankind has a bright future for at least the next 100 years. Just my opinion.

[rcaf_777]

when did this become how Trump causes the end of western civilization as we know it thread?

Did I miss something, you give the man too much credit sir

[Heffe3737]

I don't want to get into this; I have STRONG feelings about current US government and I'll get too political and inadvertently start a flame war. The thread will end up locked, and I think it's too important to be put off limits.

I tried to walk that line somewhat delicately in my post, as I too have some pretty strong feelings on the current administration.

Most of this is essentially possible, and I'll admit I don't know enough about the geopolitics of these parts of the world to contribute much. (For now. I am studying.)

I'm not as familiar with some of these areas as well, so tried to keep the reasoning fairly open and generic.

I have often talked on this board and others about a "bump in the road;" if we don't get over it, we'll either go to the edge, with essentially a non-nuclear World War 3, or we'll take it to oblivion. This "bump" will happen somewhere between 2025 and 2035. If we get over it, mankind has a bright future for at least the next 100 years. Just my opinion.

Agreed completely.

[Heffe3737]

when did this become how Trump causes the end of western civilization as we know it thread?

Did I miss something, you give the man too much credit sir

Definitely not trying to imply anything about the current administration regardless of my personal political leanings. With that said, there have been certain chilling effects on international diplomacy that is leading to a more isolated US in geopolitics, and I attempted (perhaps in vain?) to capture those in my post. Regardless of political leanings of forum-goers, I think that's probably something everyone can agree on?

In any case, I'm also definitely not trying to hijack this thread with political stuff - just trying to write out what I believe to be a somewhat plausible lead up to a potential Twilight 2025 situation.

[.45cultist]

Trump aside, Europe must now choose between social spending and defense. China is 6-8 years past the point of peacefully leaving the South China sea, and faces a currency crisis. Actually most of the world has kicked various cans down the road, choose who trips while kicking. Mexico's cartel problem can easily turn to a Columbian style military action as well. The diplomats snoozed or hoped it wouldn't be their problem when things came to a head.

[Raellus]

Headline: Russian Armor Floods Toward Border With Ukraine Amid Fears Of An "Imminent Crisis"

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/40016/russian-armor-floods-toward-border-with-ukraine-amid-fears-of-an-imminent-crisis

In a sign of the changing times, it appears that a lot of the intel supporting these reports are images pulled from Russian social media (as opposed to the Cold War staples of ELINT, HUMINT, and satellite images).

[StainlessSteelCynic]

I recall reading an article a few years or more back where Russian military authorities were telling their troops not to post information about where they were involved in military operations to their social media accounts.
Not specifically because of the intel that could be farmed by Western agencies but because there were concerns that terrorist groups like Islamic State could use the information to target those soldiers (e.g. learn who they are, where their family is and then threaten their family) and force them to aid the terrorists.

[Raellus]

Interesting. That reminds me of the big to-do about Tik-Tok a year or two ago. US military personnel were ordered not to download/use it because, as a Chinese-made app, the PLA has access to all of the data. I haven't heard anything about it since, and I doubt military personnel aren't using it now.

[LoneCollector1987]

pmulcahy11b
I think that NATO will lose Turkey, possibly as early as late this year. They been going over more to the Islamic sphere, and the Turkish people are increasingly alarmed by the growing defense budget in Turkey.

As long as the Generals were some sort of control rod, Turkey stayed more or less democratic. But then somebody (whistling EU) decided the generals must be defanged. And nobody thought of the consequences.

.45cultist
Trump aside, Europe must now choose between social spending and defense. China is 6-8 years past the point of peacefully leaving the South China sea, and faces a currency crisis. Actually most of the world has kicked various cans down the road, choose who trips while kicking. Mexico's cartel problem can easily turn to a Columbian style military action as well. The diplomats snoozed or hoped it wouldn't be their problem when things came to a head.

Germany will spend all its money on refugees. To the cartels see my next comment.

swaghauler
Then there are the added "unknowns" to consider. What role would organizations such as ANTIFA (who are just as "Fascist" as the "Fascists" they purport to oppose) play on US (and European) soil? How would minorities feel about a "draft?"

I remember the 2005 riots in France. And that the area around Marseilles is in the hand of criminal gangs from the arabic area and they are shooting each other with AKs.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_French_riots

So, what if someone uses this to start some sort of civil war in France? Just imagine there would be a threatening situation between Russia and the EU and Putin / successor would try to stir up trouble in the EU. I would see four countries that would be used for this because of the high number of muslims in them: France, Germany, Belgium and England.
Yes, I too remember the visits of Erdogan to Germany where he was more then welcome by turkish citizens in Germany in soccer stadiums. Those were filled to the brim.

And what if the cartels would start and support riots in the southwest of the US?

And then think of the other side of the coin: Matthew Bracken`s "When the music stops: How Americas cities may explode in violence".
Now add Neo-Nazis and Antifa and voila, Fireball.
Of course there are less guns in Europe then in the USA.

[Rainbow Six]

I remember watching a documentary on the BBC about the British Army relatively recently (i.e. within the last two to three years). One unit was being deployed to Estonia on exercise and there was a scene in the programme where the troops were explicitly told not to take their personal mobile phones as the Russians would try and hack into them.

There’s a story about it here (yeah, I know, it’s the Daily Mail so apologies in advance. Similar stories are in the Daily Telegraph and the Wall Street Journal but they’re behind pay walls)

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4955836/Russians-hacking-NATO-soldiers-cellphones.html

[pmulcahy11b]

I remember watching a documentary on the BBC about the British Army relatively recently (i.e. within the last two to three years). One unit was being deployed to Estonia on exercise and there was a scene in the programme where the troops were explicitly told not to take their personal mobile phones as the Russians would try and hack into them.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4955836/Russians-hacking-NATO-soldiers-cellphones.html

There was a similar article in the Army Times about NATO troops having their cell phones confiscated in Iraq because insurgents could zero in on them and the next thing you know, you're the target of a mortar shelling.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Easy enough to do if you control the phone network, but still able to be done even if you don't control the network because the mobile/cellular phone is just a different sort of radio transceiver.
At their most basic level of operation, phones ping the surrounding area to locate phone towers (to ensure they can get a signal) and they generally like to have access to two or more towers. So your phone is essentially a small radio device that is constantly sending a signal to check it has comms, no radio silence here!

[Legbreaker]

The danger of being located by the radio signals from your phone aside, I believe social media and the increasing habit of soldiers posting selfies and other images is perhaps a greater threat.
One photo alone may not be too much of a problem, but a photo every few days will allow an analyst to glean quite a bit of useful information. Multiply that by several dozen soldiers from the same unit and you very quickly get a detailed picture, even if each individual is taking care in their posts not to show anything sensitive - all put together....

For this (and other reasons) I'm a supporter of the idea soldiers should not have personal, "private" electronic communications systems - communication with family and friends should certainly be encouraged, but no pictures sent electronically, and video comms only from a dedicated location which has been screened off to prevent ANY information being unintentionally transmitted.

Basically take 1940's era mail censorship into the electronic age.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

And a perfect example of this was Western analysis of selfies and other social media posts by young Russian soldiers to build up data on Russian military deployments into Crimea several years back.
While the Russian government and military denied Russian involvement, claiming instead that it was rebel/separatist groups, the social media posts pretty much proved beyond doubt that Russian regular army units were being deployed into the contested area.

[Southernap]

The danger of being located by the radio signals from your phone aside, I believe social media and the increasing habit of soldiers posting selfies and other images is perhaps a greater threat.
One photo alone may not be too much of a problem, but a photo every few days will allow an analyst to glean quite a bit of useful information. Multiply that by several dozen soldiers from the same unit and you very quickly get a detailed picture, even if each individual is taking care in their posts not to show anything sensitive - all put together....

For this (and other reasons) I'm a supporter of the idea soldiers should not have personal, "private" electronic communications systems - communication with family and friends should certainly be encouraged, but no pictures sent electronically, and video comms only from a dedicated location which has been screened off to prevent ANY information being unintentionally transmitted.

Basically take 1940's era mail censorship into the electronic age.

So there was a row a while back about fitness apps within the US Military.

Data point 1 - Fitness tracking app Strava gives away location of secret US army bases (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jan/28/fitness-tracking-app-gives-away-location-of-secret-us-army-bases)

Another article on the same topic (https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-42853072)

As we grow more and more dependent on electronics to do things like generate metrics on stuff like exercise. One has to ask, if we are paying attention to what is being harvested.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

So there was a row a while back about fitness apps within the US Military.

Data point 1 - Fitness tracking app Strava gives away location of secret US army bases (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jan/28/fitness-tracking-app-gives-away-location-of-secret-us-army-bases)

Another article on the same topic (https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-42853072)

As we grow more and more dependent on electronics to do things like generate metrics on stuff like exercise. One has to ask, if we are paying attention to what is being harvested.
I think a parallel question to that is: Are we paying so much attention to gathering metrics about military training that we are forgetting the point of the training?
It seems that in some organizations (military and civilian), there is more effort devoted to gathering metrics than there is devoted to the actual operations that are the whole point of the organization in the first place.

[Targan]

pmulcahy11bThen there are the added "unknowns" to consider. What role would organizations such as ANTIFA (who are just as "Fascist" as the "Fascists" they purport to oppose) play on US (and European) soil?

If you continue to post statements like that you're going to kick off arguments that this forum really doesn't need.

[Olefin]

I think a parallel question to that is: Are we paying so much attention to gathering metrics about military training that we are forgetting the point of the training?
It seems that in some organizations (military and civilian), there is more effort devoted to gathering metrics than there is devoted to the actual operations that are the whole point of the organization in the first place.

Amen to that - have seen people so dedicated to getting their metrics done that they forget that they actually have to solve the problems they keep documenting. Or they are more concerned with getting the proper form filled out than in doing anything.

[LoneCollector1987]

If you continue to post statements like that you're going to kick off arguments that this forum really doesn't need.

Please go to page 1 of this thread and look at the post of swaghauler of 07-09-2018, 11:43 PM.
I quoted him.

[Raellus]

Please go to page 1 of this thread and look at the post of swaghauler of 07-09-2018, 11:43 PM.
I quoted him.

We don't usually delete member posts unless they include egregious violations of forum guidelines. It's been nearly three years since Swag's post (that you quoted), so I don't remember for sure, but he may have received a private warning from a mod at that time. The point is, whether or not someone else got away with violating guidelines in the past, please follow them in the present. Thanks.

-

[Raellus]

More saber rattling from Russia?

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/40103/russian-gunboats-head-to-the-black-sea-to-join-troop-buildup-near-ukraine

The gunboats featured in the article would look great in an updated timeline version of Pirates of the Vistula. :cool:

-

[Olefin]

We don't usually delete member posts unless they include egregious violations of forum guidelines. It's been nearly three years since Swag's post (that you quoted), so I don't remember for sure, but he may have received a private warning from a mod at that time. The point is, whether or not someone else got away with violating guidelines in the past, please follow them in the present. Thanks.

-

FYI that is one thing that might occur Raellus from time to time when old threads get resurrected - i.e. what was ok years ago (and some threads on here are OLLLLLDDDD) is now not so good- is there a review process associated with bringing old threads back?

[3catcircus]

So, one thing that I find interesting is that, in the past, due to the relatively slow speed of communication, wars have broken out without the rest of the world knowing it. Additionally, events transpire that are slow enough that the observant can start to predict if war is coming to begin with. It took a month, for example, between the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand and the start of hostilities.

Now, with a 24/7 news cycle and the ease of TikTok, Instagram and Twitter, I wonder if wars could happen so suddenly that nations reactively join into the conflict before they've had a chance to actually process precursor events. I mean, we saw the recent Myanmar coup live on social media before the news networks picked it up and one can continue to see nightly video of antifa engaged in violence in Portland. Or, alternatively, will the focus be more on soft response - drones, network-centric warfare, cyber strikes, etc. without ever actually putting troops in the ground or getting to the point of launching nukes?

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Well... I'd like to believe that governments would be very careful in their analysis of a developing conflict but the reality is that we know some governments will do this while some won't. It makes it very easy for a less thoughtful government to over-react.
Which leads to some idle speculation over those nations that possess nuclear weapons and how they would react - I'm thinking particularly of countries like Pakistan, North Korea and Iran.

[Gunner]

Now, with a 24/7 news cycle and the ease of TikTok, Instagram and Twitter, I wonder if wars could happen so suddenly that nations reactively join into the conflict before they've had a chance to actually process precursor events. I mean, we saw the recent Myanmar coup live on social media before the news networks picked it up and one can continue to see nightly video of antifa engaged in violence in Portland. Or, alternatively, will the focus be more on soft response - drones, network-centric warfare, cyber strikes, etc. without ever actually putting troops in the ground or getting to the point of launching nukes?

This one of the issues talked about also with a potential 'incident' with either Russia or China - the need to be active and assertive on these social media platforms, especially the newer social media platforms, to "shape the narrative", because if we don't, they WILL. (we almost certainly won't be able to, in my humble opinion).

In some ways, the old Cold War was ever so much easier...

[Raellus]

https://warisboring.com/russian-ukraine-tension-prompts-sailing-of-2-u-s-warships-to-the-black-sea/

Ukraine is not a NATO member, but it will be interesting to see how NATO responds if/when the Russians attack Ukraine (again).

-

[pmulcahy11b]

https://warisboring.com/russian-ukraine-tension-prompts-sailing-of-2-u-s-warships-to-the-black-sea/

Ukraine is not a NATO member, but it will be interesting to see how NATO responds if/when the Russians attack Ukraine (again).

-

Ukraine was on the cusp of being accepted into NATO when the invasions occurred. We should have invaded then -- and the Romanians and Poles were practically champing at the bit to back up anything we did.

[3catcircus]

Soooo...

We could be looking at a Twilight:2021 or 2022 situation.

China's crackdown of Hong Kong has further emboldened them. They're disputing with Australia and other Asian countries.

The US has just told citizens to leave Russia, while operating USCG ships in the Black Sea (and backing off original plans to send USN ships).

India is in a full blown covid panic.

The power vacuum in Afghanistan is coming once the US leaves.

Massive civil unrest across multiple nations over covid lockdowns, illegal immigration, and "racism."

Governments and institutions continually revealed as vastly more corrupt than anyone could ever imagine.

EDIT:

Fighting in the middle east. Supporters on both sides clashing in NYC. Cyber hacks on a pipeline let's to shortages resulting in fist fights. Chick-fil-A rationing nuggie sauces...

[Raellus]

For anyone working up a near future land war in Eastern Europe (c/o Upinus):

https://www.gfsis.org/maps/russian-military-forces

-

[swaghauler]

So, one thing that I find interesting is that, in the past, due to the relatively slow speed of communication, wars have broken out without the rest of the world knowing it. Additionally, events transpire that are slow enough that the observant can start to predict if war is coming to begin with. It took a month, for example, between the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand and the start of hostilities.

Now, with a 24/7 news cycle and the ease of TikTok, Instagram and Twitter, I wonder if wars could happen so suddenly that nations reactively join into the conflict before they've had a chance to actually process precursor events. I mean, we saw the recent Myanmar coup live on social media before the news networks picked it up and one can continue to see nightly video of antifa engaged in violence in Portland. Or, alternatively, will the focus be more on soft response - drones, network-centric warfare, cyber strikes, etc. without ever actually putting troops in the ground or getting to the point of launching nukes?

Since I can't post a link right now, GOOGLE or YouTube "loitering munition."

Then look at the scifi YouTube video "SLAUGHTERBOTS" to see HOW "war" could evolve.

[.45cultist]

Well, this spring had me in a family health crisis, Dad had a cancer induced stroke, Mom had a heart attack while I was away tending to Dad's business. I have been fooling around with another PA game: FGU's Aftermath!. One campaign world I did was "Blackout!" an exaggerated future world where EMP blasts cripple electronics and only a few remember the older ways. Part of that inspiration was complaints about the younger ones dependence on their smart phones, armor not knowing the early way to bore site and GPS vs. map and compass. Young soldiers were amazed you could pinpoint your location with a military protractor!

[3catcircus]

Since I can't post a link right now, GOOGLE or YouTube "loitering munition."

Then look at the scifi YouTube video "SLAUGHTERBOTS" to see HOW "war" could evolve.

Oh, no doubt we've made it easier to deal death without getting out hands dirty. But, if you want to take territory, you need people on the ground. Until we invent robot soldiers or clone troopers, that is...

[3catcircus]

Well, this spring had me in a family health crisis, Dad had a cancer induced stroke, Mom had a heart attack while I was away tending to Dad's business. I have been fooling around with another PA game: FGU's Aftermath!. One campaign world I did was "Blackout!" an exaggerated future world where EMP blasts cripple electronics and only a few remember the older ways. Part of that inspiration was complaints about the younger ones dependence on their smart phones, armor not knowing the early way to bore site and GPS vs. map and compass. Young soldiers were amazed you could pinpoint your location with a military protractor!

Reminds me of the TV show Revolution, where no electricity exists anymore...

I'm surprised people now even know what a standalone calculator is, let alone a slide rule or theodolite...

When I was in college, all of the civil engineers focusing on surveying were all about the calculator... As were all of us studying engineering regardless of which concentration. My kingdom for a worthy HP48GX successor!

[3catcircus]

Current events, discussion of V4 being published, and my work on cleaning/consolidating T:2013 rules has me wondering how the v1 timeline can be pushed to the right so that it results in Death of a Division happening in, say, 2025, rather than in 2000.

[.45cultist]

Look at the status of western armies today, there would have to be some major repair programs for weapon systems. I think the same holds true to Russian forces. That buys some time as everyone fights at reduced levels. Now you need to make plausible geopolitical filler, the most difficult part as T2K V3 showed us and V4 is showing us now.

[Rainbow Six]

A few years ago (2014 I think) Raellus and I tried to spin up a timeline for Twilight: 2030. Detailed notes (at least from my end - Rae may have more info) are on a now defunct laptop but from what I recall the bullet points were

1. The US gets involved in the Pacific with China. As I recall proposed flashpoints were Taiwan or the Spratlys. A general War breaks out in the Pacific that gradually draws various regional players into either the main US / PRC event or other more localised conflicts (e.g. Australia / Indonesia). I can't remember what we decided about Korea but some sort of War between North and South seems highly likely.

2. With a proportion of the US military deployed to the Pacific Theatre, the Russian Federation makes a land grab for the three Baltic States, on the expectation that NATO is not to go to War over them, particularly when its largest member is significantly committed elsewhere. This turns out to be a miscalculation as NATO does respond in accordance with its treaty obligations (or rather some of NATO does - the intent at the time was to try and mirror the V1 timeline as much as possible, so a fractured NATO was included as that was a thing in V1).

3. Iran and Saudi Arabia go to War. As I recall we posited Iraq as the main battleground.

The idea was to try and get to a situation in 2030 that was akin to the V1 timeline in 2000. It got as far as an Rpol game which basically was the death of the 5th Division (Rae posited that the 5th Division was reformed at some point after the start of hostilities) but in western Belarus in the summer of 2030 rather than central Poland in the summer of 2000. It was a good game while it lasted - had a good crew.

I've said this before, but I think Free League missed a monumental open goal trying to rework the V1 / V2 timeline. They would have been vastly better served if they'd pushed things forward to a Twilight 2025 or Twilight 2030.

[.45cultist]

With the knowledge and passion for T2K here, there's no reason not to have multiple variants or even different worlds like post plague or Rage Zombies, or enviromental collapses like Cadillacs and Dinosaurs. All get their preferences for a campaign.

Your quick synopsis is what we need more of til we have a reference the size of Paul Mulcahy's Pages!

[Raellus]

I just posted the 12-page 2030 timeline (rough draft) that Rainbow Six mentioned here:

https://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.php?p=87960#post87960

-

[3catcircus]

I just posted the 12-page 2030 timeline (rough draft) that Rainbow Six mentioned here:

https://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.php?p=87960#post87960

-

All good stuff there.

Interestingly enough, I like going through the old timelines and comparing to actual events to see how close they came...

The challenge for me is trying to figure out how to apply old timelines to new dates to allow current era equipment.

[.45cultist]

All good stuff there.

Interestingly enough, I like going through the old timelines and comparing to actual events to see how close they came...

The challenge for me is trying to figure out how to apply old timelines to new dates to allow current era equipment.

use your year, then keep the month and day, alter the year. two years to catchup on maintainance, and folks fooling themselves that nukes won't be used.

[3catcircus]

use your year, then keep the month and day, alter the year. two years to catchup on maintainance, and folks fooling themselves that nukes won't be used.

It's not really that simple.

For example, the very first timeline item involving significant military action in both 1e and 2e is typically border clashes between Soviet and Chinese forces in 1995, five years before the "current" time of 2000. Canon sources indicate 17 Jun 1995.

Advance that for a TW:2025 setting, and we're talking right in the middle of 2020.

Fast-forward time to use that timeline in a future campaign, and one would reasonably decide that it should be China and India instead of Russia and China, considering that on 15-20 Jun of last year, 20+ Indian troops died in fighting with Chinese soldiers in the Ladakh region.

I think it only really works if you advance the fighting parts of the timeline ahead of current events. But what would be the impetus for former Pact countries and former Soviet states to get cozy, let alone east/west German sentiments?

[swaghauler]

It's not really that simple.

For example, the very first timeline item involving significant military action in both 1e and 2e is typically border clashes between Soviet and Chinese forces in 1995, five years before the "current" time of 2000. Canon sources indicate 17 Jun 1995.

Advance that for a TW:2025 setting, and we're talking right in the middle of 2020.

Fast-forward time to use that timeline in a future campaign, and one would reasonably decide that it should be China and India instead of Russia and China, considering that on 15-20 Jun of last year, 20+ Indian troops died in fighting with Chinese soldiers in the Ladakh region.

I think it only really works if you advance the fighting parts of the timeline ahead of current events. But what would be the impetus for former Pact countries and former Soviet states to get cozy, let alone east/west German sentiments?

You're right about India and China. The other "flashpoints" COULD be:
1) NK and SK... drawing China and Russia in on NK's side.
2) Iran and the US having China and Russia side with the Iranians and Saudi Arabia and The Emirates siding with the US.
3) Lebanon and Isreal with Syria and Iran drawing Russia and China into the conflict with the US.
4) Russia attacking The Ukraine with a delayed US intervention causing "the Bear" to decide it's ok to invade the Baltic states too and Belarus supporting operations on Polish soil.

I don't like the 4 or 5-year timeline for the war. Show me ONE conflict since the First Gulf War that didn't escalate and hit its peak in just MONTHS. True the War on Terror has been going on for a couple of decades AS AN OCCUPATION AND NATION BUILDING OPERATION but how long did the high-tempo military operations last? Just a couple of months. This tells me that IF you had India and China or NK and SK at war, the war would escalate to tactical nukes before the first year is over.

For a Twilight scenario, this is a good thing. Why? Because it justifies dusting off the older tech since nobody had time to build up their economy to a "wartime" production state. In essence, the war is a "come as you are war"... which favors Russia and China.

[3catcircus]

You're right about India and China. The other "flashpoints" COULD be:
1) NK and SK... drawing China and Russia in on NK's side.
2) Iran and the US having China and Russia side with the Iranians and Saudi Arabia and The Emirates siding with the US.
3) Lebanon and Isreal with Syria and Iran drawing Russia and China into the conflict with the US.
4) Russia attacking The Ukraine with a delayed US intervention causing "the Bear" to decide it's ok to invade the Baltic states too and Belarus supporting operations on Polish soil.

I don't like the 4 or 5-year timeline for the war. Show me ONE conflict since the First Gulf War that didn't escalate and hit its peak in just MONTHS. True the War on Terror has been going on for a couple of decades AS AN OCCUPATION AND NATION BUILDING OPERATION but how long did the high-tempo military operations last? Just a couple of months. This tells me that IF you had India and China or NK and SK at war, the war would escalate to tactical nukes before the first year is over.

For a Twilight scenario, this is a good thing. Why? Because it justifies dusting off the older tech since nobody had time to build up their economy to a "wartime" production state. In essence, the war is a "come as you are war"... which favors Russia and China.

There are a couple of others that come to mind.

China's ambitions in the S. China Sea involving Taiwan and Vietnam and their ambitions in Africa. Their saber-rattling with Australia.

That Mexican cartels effectively control the government and their interaction throughout central America.

India and Pakistan.

The various former Soviet 'stans that don't much love each other.

All of the various tribal disputes throughout Africa.

Iran and Saudi regarding Yemen.

All good things to explore, but the actual trend has been a lot more "slap-fighting" for a few weeks before coming to a peaceful stalemate amongst various regional belligerents.

[Raellus]

I don't like the 4 or 5-year timeline for the war. Show me ONE conflict since the First Gulf War that didn't escalate and hit its peak in just MONTHS. True the War on Terror has been going on for a couple of decades AS AN OCCUPATION AND NATION BUILDING OPERATION but how long did the high-tempo military operations last? Just a couple of months. This tells me that IF you had India and China or NK and SK at war, the war would escalate to tactical nukes before the first year is over.

That's an interesting point, and I'm having a hard time of thinking of a slow-burn war post-Desert Storm. The only one that springs to mind is Saudi Arabia's war in Yemen.

Before the Gulf War, 20th century wars usually took a while to spin up. One could argue WW2 started with the Japanese invasion of Manchuria in 1931, or German annexation of the Sudetenland in '38, or reoccupation of the Rhineland in '39 (or heck, with the Treaty of Versailles in 1918). I've seen a couple of historians claim that WW2 was simply a continuation of WWI. And the Vietnam War arguably begean with French recolonization in 1945, making it a nearly 30-year long conflict.

BTW, nearly all the flashpoints so far mentioned in this thread factor into Rainbow Six and my 2030 timeline (written back in 2014).

https://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.php?t=5514

-

[3catcircus]

That's an interesting point, and I'm having a hard time of thinking of a slow-burn war post-Desert Storm. The only one that springs to mind is Saudi Arabia's war in Yemen.

Before the Gulf War, 20th century wars usually took a while to spin up. One could argue WW2 started with the Japanese invasion of Manchuria in 1931, or German annexation of the Sudetenland in '38, or reoccupation of the Rhineland in '39 (or heck, with the Treaty of Versailles in 1918). I've seen a couple of historians claim that WW2 was simply a continuation of WWI. And the Vietnam War arguably begean with French recolonization in 1945, making it a nearly 30-year long conflict.

BTW, nearly all the flashpoints so far mentioned in this thread factor into Rainbow Six and my 2030 timeline (written back in 2014).

https://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.php?t=5514

-

Sooo...

Nowadays it seems that flashpoints are trending to fizzle out or become just-less-than-hot-war.

Attached is a framework of a timeline from 2020 - 2025, drawing on real events up through this May (early) and on events scheduled for the future - I'm still piecing together the Belarus airline forced landing...

As you can see, the only *really* juicy pieces to look at are Belarus and Myanmar, and some Russia-Ukraine squabbling. Everything else is relatively minor. What might be of import would be how the world ends up viewing the COVID-19 situation - what-if scenarios of China having purposely released the virus could help make things turn hot, as could European responses to Belarus or Taliban actions after the US pulls the last of its troops from Afghanistan.

[pmulcahy11b]

Wars can go slow-fast-slow-fast- etc. World War 2 did that -- fast in Hitler's early "acquisitions," and the invasion of Poland to the "sitzkrieg" when it was a couple of more months before the Nazi's moved against France and the Low Countries and then Britain, slow again while Hitler massed his forces against Russia, etc.

Afghanistan has been on a slow burn since about 2005, but before that was a quick action.

I would think that the Twilight War would be fast action until about a year into the war, when production of ammunition became important. About 6-8 months later, it would be quick action again until the countries' leaders began to think more and more of nukes, and tried to save as many of their troops as possible until the nukes had already fallen -- then for 4-6 months, more hot action. Then we are at the rulebook timeline.

[unipus]

The T2K timeline has never really matched up all that well with what most people have speculated about modern war, it seems.

I agree that most any prolonged war is only going to be prolonged because of major periods of low-intensity fighting, and WW3 could certainly be no exception -- especially when it gets to the broken-back aspect that makes up the meat of the setting.

It's up until then that's the problem. Soviet plans relied on taking the Rhine within 2-3 weeks. If the war in the Atlantic went on for more than a month or two, they knew they would not win. T2K settings usually flip the script on this somewhat and aren't about the usual Fulda offensive setup... nonetheless, we know that attrition rates of men and materiel would be astronomically high. Even by 6 months in there's not likely to be many if any planes left flying and all the good mech divisions will already be seriously depleted if not outright invalidated. Fuel is probably short by then. The smart munitions are all gone. Lots of other ammo is probably in short supply.

So on the one hand, yeah, that gets you into your slow phase of the war, while you wait for T-55s to show up from Kazakhstan and put every M48 left around into service. On the other hand the hand-waiving of "the first year of the war" has always seemed pretty silly to me. Even before the nukes it starts seeming absurd. Domestically it would probably be impossible to sustain. Etc. etc.

[3catcircus]

Wars can go slow-fast-slow-fast- etc. World War 2 did that -- fast in Hitler's early "acquisitions," and the invasion of Poland to the "sitzkrieg" when it was a couple of more months before the Nazi's moved against France and the Low Countries and then Britain, slow again while Hitler massed his forces against Russia, etc.

Afghanistan has been on a slow burn since about 2005, but before that was a quick action.

I would think that the Twilight War would be fast action until about a year into the war, when production of ammunition became important. About 6-8 months later, it would be quick action again until the countries' leaders began to think more and more of nukes, and tried to save as many of their troops as possible until the nukes had already fallen -- then for 4-6 months, more hot action. Then we are at the rulebook timeline.

The T2K timeline has never really matched up all that well with what most people have speculated about modern war, it seems.

I agree that most any prolonged war is only going to be prolonged because of major periods of low-intensity fighting, and WW3 could certainly be no exception -- especially when it gets to the broken-back aspect that makes up the meat of the setting.

It's up until then that's the problem. Soviet plans relied on taking the Rhine within 2-3 weeks. If the war in the Atlantic went on for more than a month or two, they knew they would not win. T2K settings usually flip the script on this somewhat and aren't about the usual Fulda offensive setup... nonetheless, we know that attrition rates of men and materiel would be astronomically high. Even by 6 months in there's not likely to be many if any planes left flying and all the good mech divisions will already be seriously depleted if not outright invalidated. Fuel is probably short by then. The smart munitions are all gone. Lots of other ammo is probably in short supply.

So on the one hand, yeah, that gets you into your slow phase of the war, while you wait for T-55s to show up from Kazakhstan and put every M48 left around into service. On the other hand the hand-waiving of "the first year of the war" has always seemed pretty silly to me. Even before the nukes it starts seeming absurd. Domestically it would probably be impossible to sustain. Etc. etc.

It seems that there are some real world things going on that I could possibly see resulting in some slow burn turning into a shooting war..

Belarus' forced landing of an airliner and claiming NATO massing of trips along they're border followed by Russia stating they'd defend them. Threats to NATO in response to troop movements along the border with Ukraine.

Chinese threats against Australia.

Israel and Gaza.

I could see some skirmish in Belarus/Ukraine/Poland.

Turkey and Iran invading Iraqi Kurdistan with some Syrian side action.

China naval duels with Vietnam, S. Korea, Australia.

Crazies turning protests into shooting wars with local LEO leading to federal involvement.

[unipus]

True enough. None of those things are "World War 3" though, at least not in the sense of "the balloon has gone up in Europe!"

They are points of tension that could, conceivably, somehow, lead to war. In the context of T2K though, it has always been about mass conventional-then NBC-then conventional warfare directly between superpowers. To put it even more clearly in T2k terms, you're talking about 1995-1996 events. I mean, right?

[pmulcahy11b]

There's also India vs Pakistan, probably with help from China. If China helps Pakistan, the US may help India. Which may lead China to launch against the US and vice versa. And of course the Indians and Pakistanis will also use their nukes. There's also a good chance the Russians will go to India's aid, leaving the Chinese to launch against Russia.

And then they see the US sitting pretty, and launch against the US (if they can) to put the US out of the conflict.

Or, Taiwan sees the chance to become independent and, with the help of the US and others, try to throw off their Chinese opponents. Then, you have the Chinese fighting three opponents -- and they basically expend all their remaining nukes on everyone they even think is an enemy. And those enemies who received Chinese nukes shoot back....and the world goes down in flames.

[3catcircus]

There's also India vs Pakistan, probably with help from China. If China helps Pakistan, the US may help India. Which may lead China to launch against the US and vice versa. And of course the Indians and Pakistanis will also use their nukes. There's also a good chance the Russians will go to India's aid, leaving the Chinese to launch against Russia.

And then they see the US sitting pretty, and launch against the US (if they can) to put the US out of the conflict.

Or, Taiwan sees the chance to become independent and, with the help of the US and others, try to throw off their Chinese opponents. Then, you have the Chinese fighting three opponents -- and they basically expend all their remaining nukes on everyone they even think is an enemy. And those enemies who received Chinese nukes shoot back....and the world goes down in flames.

Yep. But I don't necessarily see Russia aiding with India if it means going against China, although it does make it easier to play out the whole Sino-Russian exchange as in 1e/2e.

Unfortunately, China mops the floor with Taiwan if it's just a land invasion - a more likely regional skirmish nowadays is going to involve (initially) Aegis ships in S. Korea and Japan protecting sea lanes in S. China sea, backed by US 7th Fleet and Aussie Aegis ships. The whole "we're building artificial islands near your border and declaring sovereignty" is pissing off every one of the other nations in the region.

[Ewan]

Russian jets and ships target British warship https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-57583363

[3catcircus]

Russian jets and ships target British warship https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-57583363

Just one piece...

China threatened Australia and the US recently over "meddling in internal Chinese matters" over Taiwan, nine dash line, and belt and road.

Belarus's forced diversion of a flight to arrest an opposition journalist.

Ukraine raid on ransomware gang associated with Colonial Pipeline.

Iranian ships and facilities being mysteriously destroyed or disabled.

Lebanon military asking for foreign aid amidst EU threat of sanctions if they can't form a government.

EU sanctions on Myanmar.

North Korean edict to "housewives" to do fieldwork in rice paddies.

Naftali Bennett saying Israel's patience with Hamas has run out.

Canada-US border closures over COVID.

China crackdowns on Hong Kong.

Japan rejecting summit with South Korea at G7.

Turkish and Iranian attacks on Iraqi Kurdistan.

Russia in Syria.

Russia in Crimea.

Ongoing investigations into if/how China covered up origins of COVID - and any involvement from various private and governmental entities external to China.

Lots of tiny little things that, if they went just a little pear-shaped, could all contribute to Twilight 2025.

You could start with putting together a timeline starting last year (or earlier) of all the things that happened - and then tweak them...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_decades,_centuries,_and_millennia is a good starting point.

A few examples from 2020:

1. What if the Russia-Saudi Arabia price war ends differently and OPEC doesn't cut production?

2. What if the STC in Yemen doesn't accept a Saudi-brokered peace deal and doesn't end it's self-rule aspirations?

3. What if the attempt to remove Maduro from office in Venezuela was successful?

4. What if Greece bailed from NATO over the statements that they support the GNA in Libya,?

5. What if the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict blew out of control?

6. What if India/China clashes along the border escalated into a shooting war?

7. What if Trump supporters killed congress people on Jan 6th and took over govt?

I think the most likely of these as potential fuses worried be Nagorno-Kabarakh and India/China.

Azerbaijan has relationships with NATO and the EU. Saudi and Pakistan don't recognize Armenia. Armenia is in the Eurasian Union and has ties with China. Armenia recognizes Kashmir to be part of India. Armenia is friendly with Russia. India is friendly with Russia.

That big ball of twine can easily draw countries into conflict at the behest of allies...

[Raellus]

I'm not sure that I agree with the validity of this article's thesis, (essentially, "this is when/why China has gone to war in the past, so China will continue to follow this pattern in the very near future") but this piece is interesting nonetheless.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/11/us-china-war/620571/

-

[Olefin]

"China naval duels with Vietnam, S. Korea, Australia."

Add in Taiwan or Philippines as well - then US forces try to intervene to get China to back down and in the scrum a US ship gets targeted by the Chinese (possibly accidentally) - and the US ship fires back and sinks the Chinese ship

That could very rapidly build into one hell of a regional conflict - and you could see Putin or his successor taking advantage of that to go into Eastern Europe to settle old scores with the Ukraine and Baltic States - and bingo - WWIII

[pmulcahy11b]

I personally think we'll be at war with China by the end of the decade. It won't be nuclear -- neither side is that stupid -- but it will be primarily naval in nature, with the occasional special ops raids in mainland China. Taiwan -- well, as one earlier poster said, China will mop the floor with Taiwan after a tough fight that is ultimately lost. After that, it will be a matter of whether China can KEEP Taiwan.

Two items that will be war zones that have never been before -- cyberspace and the space above us. China's been experimenting with killer sats, we can shoot down satellites as well warheads, and well, just imagine the capabilities of the X-37. And what if had more of them? (Hunch: I'll bet we do!)

[bash]

True, but apart from the causes what else would be different?

The Satellite War would now have to be fairly involved and, as usual, possibly causing a Kessler Cascade where all the satellites in orbit are destroyed by debris. This means there will be no future satellite launches either for those 2300ad people. Goodbye GPS targeting, one of the most important artillery advances. Also good bye to instant map updating.

GPS satellites (of all varieties) are in MEO. They are not trivially destroyed as you need a launch vehicle with similar capability to the satellite's own launch vehicle to deliver a ASAT vehicle to it. There's a finite number of launch facilities in the world capable of handling such launch vehicles. The same goes for GEO communication satellites. If launch and construction facilities were disabled early in a conflict where ASAT warfare is a concern there's a lot of stuff out of reach.

What would be vulnerable to ASAT weapons would be LEO satellites. This includes things like IMINT and MASINT satellites. Lower altitude LEO satellites can be hit with some air and surface launched missiles.

The chances of a Kessler cascade are a bit overblown though. If a satellite is destroyed by an ASAT weapon it goes from being a solid hunk of satellite in orbit to a slightly less solid hunk of satellite in the same orbit. An ASAT weapon isn't going to provide so much energy as to majorly change the orbit of the mass of the satellite and definitely won't provide enough energy to send pieces into significantly higher orbits. Small bits of debris deorbit more readily than larger bits. They have less momentum and lose relatively more energy as they smack into molecules of the atmosphere.

Even if MEO and GEO satellites were successfully attacked, the surface of the Earth is a well measured place. INS navigation is also extremely advanced and accurate. Even without GPS there's lots of ways to accurately navigate (and target things). GPS is nice but not strictly necessary for a lot of things.

[Targan]

Taiwan -- well, as one earlier poster said, China will mop the floor with Taiwan after a tough fight that is ultimately lost. After that, it will be a matter of whether China can KEEP Taiwan.

China could devastate Taiwan right now if it wanted to. Invading and pacifying Taiwan is probably within China's capabilities right now too, but the buildup of forces couldn't be hidden and would invite intervention by the US and its allies. Every year that goes by though, China's ability to mount a large-scale amphibious invasion will improve.

Thing is though, it comes down to what China's priorities are with Taiwan. If the primary priority is gaining Taiwan's industrial base, smashing it to bits in the process of conquering it kind of defeats the purpose. If the primary priority is ideological/making a point, then all bets are off.

We in the western world talk up a good game about human rights and military aggression and all that, but the proof, as they say, is in the pudding. We will invade and intervene and violate human rights when it suits us, it just comes down to how well the media story can be massaged and how much criticism we're prepared to take internationally. Given that reality, and what massive hypocrites many of our countries have been, trying to lean on China not to invade Taiwan on a moral basis is farcical. So, just like the US and other powerful nations, China won't make its decisions on Taiwan based on moral imperatives (and morally they think conquering Taiwan is righteous anyway). All they'll care about is cost-benefit, and how much international pushback they'll have to manage.

[ChalkLine]

What would be more likely to precipitate a war would be if a nation changed the international consensus that Taiwan is part of China and called it an independent state. This would force the PRC to invade Taiwan.

Australian politicians are calling for just that.

[Raellus]

If you haven't already, I really recommend that you read the Atlantic article I linked to. It presents several scenarios for how war with China could begin, each focusing on a different region/flashpoint.

Taiwan (Taiwan Straits)
Japan (Senkaku Islands in E. China Sea)
Philippines (S. China Sea)

It also explains why China might feel like their window of opportunity to seize territorial claims by force could be closing soon, due to increased military spending by Australia, Japan, Vietnam, and Indonesia. Arms races in the name of national defense deterrence often result in armed conflict. It's a dangerous game.

-

[ChalkLine]

If you haven't already, I really recommend that you read the Atlantic article I linked to. It presents several scenarios for how war with China could begin, each focusing on a different region/flashpoint.

Taiwan (Taiwan Straits)
Japan (Senkaku Islands in E. China Sea)
Philippines (S. China Sea)

It also explains why China might feel like their window of opportunity to seize territorial claims by force could be closing soon, due to increased military spending by Australia, Japan, Vietnam, and Indonesia. Arms races in the name of national defense deterrence often result in armed conflict. It's a dangerous game.

-

I'm sorry but I didn't want to comment on that article, it's pretty awful. The author is writing some pretty sensationalist stuff and from a historical perspective he's on very shaky ground. I mean, his opening comments wish to frame a power as a real and present danger but the nearest phase of belligerence he can come up with was 50 years ago. In comparison I think every power arrayed against China has indulged in a lot more regime change, coups and outright illegal invasions since then :)
As for small scale actions, once again we're far more likely to pull egregious shit like shooting down airliners to make a point than China since then.

Don't get me wrong, China is no shrinking violet or choir of angels, like every large power they're a bully and can be a particularly nasty one. However they're up against a concerted alliance of bigger bullies. As Charles de Gaulle once said "Great Powers are Cold Monsters". However when we start shrilly pointing to China's very real abuses it asks the question why we aren't also doing it about places like Turkey and Saudi Arabia. It's obvious that our concerns aren't their behaviour or threat of expansion, it's due to the fact that the West will not tolerate a rival in any situation.

The reason I say this is because China is already winning and all it has to do at far less risk is continue what it is doing now; outproducing the West. In fact the West is doing one of the weirdest things in history in that they are strengthening an enemy while trying to contain it by continuously offshoring manufacturing to China and then rattling sabres like crazy. The logical assumption is they want to have their cake and eat it too.

The whole reason the USA was an unassailable superpower was that it contained the three key ingredients of modern power; a large population, a massive manufacturing base and large resource deposits. Inexplicably the entire West have decided to convert themselves to 'service economies', in essence middlemen, when the obvious fact is sooner or later middlemen get cut out was ignored in the face of big fat profits. Worse, they shifted that manufacturing to a potentially hostile power and assumed they could keep it in check through military threats. It was a losing 'diplomatic' assumption and we're paying for it now.

Worse, we've so gamed the WTO that no one trusts it. I'm afraid the US has blocked the appointment of every member of the World Trade Authority Appellate Body so now there is no body to mediate trade concerns. The West can hardly tout it's allegiance to a 'rules-based order' when we try and game it like this.

China is seeing what we're doing to it, 'containment', because it has both experienced this before earlier in its history and been part of the process when they pulled it on the USSR in conjunction with the West. Since then they've been quietly watching. In 2003 when we went and unilaterally invaded an admittedly despicable regime on trumped up charges and to China's concern suffered no repercussions it was then China started rapidly remilitarising from a power capable of bullying regional rivals to a power capable of defending itself against the West. Sure enough here we are.

So what do I think the flashpoints will be?

Well, none in that article although obviously we should prepare for them. The flashpoints will probably be the same dangers of the Cold War; some hawk bungling an action what he thinks the other side will tolerate and sparking a peer to peer war.

[Raellus]

You make some really good points, Chalk. I don't disagree that the west has been playing a dangerous game for far longer than the PRC, and that the west has been applying a double-standard to China when it comes to violations human rights and/or international law.

Inexplicably the entire West have decided to convert themselves to 'service economies', in essence middlemen, when the obvious fact is sooner or later middlemen get cut out was ignored in the face of big fat profits. Worse, they shifted that manufacturing to a potentially hostile power and assumed they could keep it in check through military threats. It was a losing 'diplomatic' assumption and we're paying for it now.

It's not inexplicable. It's the natural result of free market capitalism. Manufacturing shifted from the west to China because of lower labor costs in the latter. Similarly, China could charge less for its steel and heavy machinery because it spends less on labor. That trend began in the 1970s. Western corporations could/still can reap higher profits because they could/still can spend less on labor in China. We are seeing the geopolitical, as well as economic, consequences of that short-sighted, single-minded approach to business.

That said, labor costs are rising in China. It's going to be difficult to keep "winning" at heavy industry long-term, without artificially suppressing wages for their industrial workers. Doing so could lead to serious social unrest. Manufacturing is already much more dispersed in the developing world now than it was 20 years ago because other countries allow their factory workers to be paid even less. Today, China is being undercut by El Salvador and Bangladesh, the same way China undercut the West for most of the last four decades.

So what do I think the flashpoints will be?

Well, none in that article although obviously we should prepare for them. The flashpoints will probably be the same dangers of the Cold War; some hawk bungling an action what he thinks the other side will tolerate and sparking a peer to peer war.

I agree that a war sparked by clashes over the Senkaku Islands in E. China Sea (v Japan) is highly unlikely, ATM. That said, flashpoints in the S. China Sea have already seen threats and use of force in recent times.

China has clashed with Filipino fishermen and naval forces on multiple occasions over the past five years or so.

PRC intrusions in Taiwan airspace have increased dramatically as of late.

Articles about recent Chinese saber-ratting re Taiwan:

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/42620/a-record-setting-56-chinese-warplanes-flew-into-taiwans-air-defense-zone-today

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/42722/major-construction-underway-at-three-of-chinas-airbases-closest-to-taiwan

Yesterday, I read an article claiming that many Chinese are stocking up on essentials because they believe that recent government encouragement to do so indicates that a war with Taiwan is forthcoming.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/05/economy/china-food-security-mic-intl-hnk/index.html

-

[ChalkLine]

There's a serious situation that most people haven't thought of and that's 'taste of your own medicine' propaganda that goes afoul.

If China, with a vague possibility of cooperation with Russia (the Russians detest China due to their border conflicts and Chinese behaviour during The Cold War) start doing a "see how you like it" set of operations like freedom of navigation cruises just off the US coast. They might underestimate how it would be represented to the US people.

Goodwill trips to places like Haiti with serious naval assets would have sections of the US media go into frothing hysterics and it's not too hard to go into war in situations like that. This is largely what happened with the Cuban Missile Crisis; the Cuban missiles were a bargaining tool to force the removal of Pershing missiles from their Turkish bases near the Soviet Union and the Soviets massively underestimated the US response. However I think the Chinese have far too good an understanding of the US political and social dynamics to make that blunder.

Still, it's a possibility.

[Ursus Maior]

Cuba wasn't about Pershing missiles, those came long afterwards. The problem for USSR missile defense back then were Jupiter MRBMs in Italy and Turkey. Freedom of navigation trips on the West Coast certainly could be done by China, but it's not exactly an exact match for USN FON in the South China Sea, as there are hardly contested islands on the western seaboard or even around Hawaii. So it'd be an obvious scam.

[ChalkLine]

Ahh, Jupiters. I can never work out the US missiles. I also get the Platon/Hades mixed up often.

[.45cultist]

Ahh, Jupiters. I can never work out the US missiles. I also get the Platon/Hades mixed up often.

Russian missiles got the cool names, looking at the "Satan"....

[RN7]

Russian long ranged patrol aircraft (bombers) flying into congested air corridors over the North Atlantic could spark a major incident with NATO.

The Russians turn off their transponders with makes them hard to detect for civilian air control radars, and they are frequently observed on the edges of the sovereign airspace of European states and entering civilian air routes. The North Atlantic is the busiest oceanic air route in the world, handling most international air traffic between North America and Europe and beyond. An airliner out in the Atlantic flying at 600 knots and traveling 12 miles in little over a minute has little time to react if an unknown or hostile aircraft has entered its flight path, and there are hundreds of airliners using these air routes at any given minute of the day.

Every time the Russians do it it causes havoc in the air routes and delays and flight cancellations. NATO fighter aircraft, mainly British and Norwegian, are scrambled to intercept the Russians and escort them away. The worst area for it is now off the north and west coast of Ireland. Ireland has no long ranged military radar system and no fighter jets, and it is also provocative to British security interests and the Russian know it. Because of it neutral Ireland has been forced to make a secret deal with the British government to allow RAF fighter jets to cross over Ireland and patrol Irish air space when a Russian bomber is detected on NATO radars. The issue has embarrassed the Irish government into defending its own airspace through buying long ranged military radars and modern fighter jets for the first time. The F-16 or the Swedish Gripen seem to be the front runners.

[Ursus Maior]

Ahh, Jupiters. I can never work out the US missiles. I also get the Platon/Hades mixed up often.

Yeah, the French are a bit niche for me, too. But it's Pluton first (replacing Hones John) and at the end of the Cold War Hadès. In 1992 Hadès was introduced, Pluton went out of service the year after. But instead of the planned 120 Hadès, only 30 were ordered. They were announced to be put out of service in 1996 with final decommissioning in 1997.

So, all in all, Hadès was active only about 5 years.

[Ursus Maior]

Russian missiles got the cool names, looking at the "Satan"....

But those names were given by NATO or US DOD (variations of NATO reporting names). So there is a grain salt.

[.45cultist]

But those names were given by NATO or US DOD (variations of NATO reporting names). So there is a grain salt.

If one is immature, one can giggle at the Chinese "Dong Feng". However, stupidity has little to do with nuclear warfare with China. Callousness and calculations by the CCP might prevail over an y common sense. They have to know US estimates were we could nuke them 10 times and they'd still have enough people to form a larger army, granted one with little equipment.

[Raellus]

Tension between Russia-backed Belarus and Poland/the Baltic States.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/43147/heres-what-you-should-know-about-the-escalating-crisis-along-belarus-border

Between cyber-warfare and "weaponizing" refugees, I think the Russians have a significant edge on the West when it comes to fighting dirty (i.e. asymmetric warfare).

-

[pmulcahy11b]

If one is immature, one can giggle at the Chinese "Dong Feng".

IIRC, "Dong Feng" translates to "Ballistic Missile."

[Ursus Maior]

Dong Feng translates into 'East Wind' literally.

[pmulcahy11b]

You know, there's an Christian entire prophecy/conspiracy theory about the East Wind and the Apocalypse. I guess I could put an entire mega-post about it, but I'll let you guys look it up yourselves. Have fun, it's a real rabbit hole.

[.45cultist]

IIRC, "Dong Feng" translates to "Ballistic Missile."

OT, yeah it's not as funny as the Vietnamese currency," The Dong is rising against the US Dollar...."

However back to topic, The CCP has a lot of land, a lot of people and if convinced canned sunshine is their only option..... It doesn't have to be true, what is someone pulls the wool over the MSS' eyes? Bad intel and hasty decisions make a bad outcome.

[Olefin]

FYI one thing to keep in mind for 2025 is the militarization of the police and many federal agencies in the last few years. There are a lot more guns in the hands of people like the IRS then there was in the old timeline - i.e. thus more opportunities for surviving govt agencies to be very heavily armed (i.e. the old days of them having basically revolvers and shotguns are over)

Also you have police agencies that have A LOT of military equipment - meaning more opportunities for that marauder group that use to be the police having stuff like MRAP's, ex-armored cars, Hummers, etc.. - as well as military grade body armor and equipment

In Ohio between 2006 and 2014, almost 5,000 M16 rifles were distributed to local and state law enforcement agencies in Ohio under the surplus military equipment program

Example - from a 2019 GAO report for the IRS

The current 4,600-gun stockpile includes 621 shotguns, 539 long-barrel rifles, and 15 submachine guns.

According to the Government Accountability Office the ammunition breakdown is as follows:

Pistol and revolver rounds: 3,151,500
Rifle rounds: 1,472,050
Shotgun rounds: 367,750
Fully automatic firearm rounds: 56,000

and as of 2020 the number of non-Defense Department federal officers authorized to make arrests and carry firearms is 200,000

An example - in 1995 the VA had almost no one who was authorized to carry a firearm - they started to carry them in 1996 - as of 2020 they have over 3700 personnel authorized to carry firearms and make arrests that are armed with automatic pistols, body armor, ballistic shields, batons, etc. and a lot of ammo

Thus a federal agency building that still has its people there on duty may be very heavily armed indeed

[Ursus Maior]

You know, there's an Christian entire prophecy/conspiracy theory about the East Wind and the Apocalypse. I guess I could put an entire mega-post about it, but I'll let you guys look it up yourselves. Have fun, it's a real rabbit hole.
Christian, Judean and Judeo-Christian prophecies since Hellenism and especially in the first to second century CE as well as the medieval era are fascinating rabbit holes in general. Somewhere between TV shows like twilight zone and other absurd scifi or urban fantasy. I recommend a thorough read to everyone, especially aspiring authors of fantastic genres.

[ChalkLine]

Christian, Judean and Judeo-Christian prophecies since Hellenism and especially in the first to second century CE as well as the medieval era are fascinating rabbit holes in general. Somewhere between TV shows like twilight zone and other absurd scifi or urban fantasy. I recommend a thorough read to everyone, especially aspiring authors of fantastic genres.

For a good reference work on Christian Millennialism during the pre-modern period I recommend "The Pursuit of the Millennium; Revolutionary Millenarians and Mystical Anarchists of the Middle Ages." Cohn, Norman. 1970, London.

[Raellus]

"Fears are growing that the Kremlin could at least be prepared to launch a new, large-scale invasion of eastern Ukraine as early as January." (from the linked article)

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/43239/ukrainian-troops-have-been-firing-american-made-javelins-at-russian-backed-forces

-

[Raellus]

A correlation of military aviation assets on both sides of the Russian-Ukrainian border.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/43603/face-off-over-donbas-how-russian-and-ukrainian-air-forces-stack-up

-

[Raellus]

Moderators - would it be worth splitting this thread into two, one to discuss Putin's war and one for theoretical discussions about a Twilight 2025 setting?

Done. For discussion of the current conflict in Ukraine, please use:

https://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.php?t=6627

-

[swaghauler]

We can clearly see a pattern in modern warfare starting with the First Gulf War. In the digital age, we are seeing countries in conflict who lack sufficient material to fight a sustained war like we saw in WWII. From the India-pakistan conflict to the current conflict between Russia and Ukraine, we are seeing shortages in Tanks, Aircraft, and heavy weapons. Due to the complexity and cost of these systems, only a few examples of these weapons would be trickling out of the various defense plants.

In the Ukraine-Russia conflict, the Russians had 1300 MBTs staged and may have less than 500 left after just 1 WEEK of fighting. The Ukrainian Army had 1500 MBTs and are down around the same strength. That a loss of over 100 tanks a day. This rate of loss would literally WIPE OUT the armored forces of 9 out of 10 Armed Forces on the planet. The losses in Aircraft are even more significant. Ukraine is down to about a dozen operational jets in a week.

Now you can see WHY I have always said that the next war will be a "come as you are" war.

[Raellus]

Might be a repost, but in case I didn't share back in 2016...

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/5714/the-pentagon-envisions-a-horrible-and-dystopian-metropolis-of-the-future

-

[Spartan-117]

For those who have contemplated or run Twilight 20xx games set in 2025/2030, how will this attack on Ukraine inform your future campaigns? Will you gloss over the major issues Russia has had with wartime logistics or will those be incorporated in those settings?

[Jason]

For those who have contemplated or run Twilight 20xx games set in 2025/2030, how will this attack on Ukraine inform your future campaigns? Will you gloss over the major issues Russia has had with wartime logistics or will those be incorporated in those settings?

That is a tough one, considering things are changing on the ground every day, and many feel anxiety over nuclear sabre rattling.

However, the proliferation of anti-tank and anti-aircraft missles has obviously changed the battlefield; it looks like some Russian trucks may have been hit with Javelins,.suggesting the Ukrainian have large stocks.

Drones are a part of Ukrianian defenses, but that is something I know very little about. Recovering a downed enemy drone seems like a decent plot hook.

Cyber warfare is another area I just know very little about, but both sides in this conflict seem to have the capicity to launch attacks on one another.

Breached nuclear power plants could make parts of Europe unlivable. Ugh. Such plants could be targeted by conventional forces, which is a nightmare.

Fantasy scenarios (for now)

Russian Civil War.

Ukraine has a couple of nukes they secretly held back.

Full-scale proxy war between NATO and Russia in Ukraine/Baltic States. Maybe Merc; 2024?

Like I said, it is tough to imagine where this nightmare may lead.

[swaghauler]

A VERY GOOD video on Tradecraft in the modern age!

https://youtu.be/uAUcmweiQEw

[Rainbow Six]

For those who have contemplated or run Twilight 20xx games set in 2025/2030, how will this attack on Ukraine inform your future campaigns? Will you gloss over the major issues Russia has had with wartime logistics or will those be incorporated in those settings?

Hmmm. I don’t really know to be honest - i think current events open up a range of related questions, e.g. what effect any long term sanctions might have on future Russian military procurement. I imagine I’d try and incorporate as much as possible, maybe by positing some sort of ceasefire that ends up kicking the can a few years down the road, sanctions ease off a bit, the Russians rearm and things kick off again, possibly with the conventional period of the War shortened and things going nuclear more quickly if NATO steam rollers the Russians.

[Raellus]

One would definitely encounter this weapon in Ukraine in a 2025 scenario.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/44687/ukraines-indigenous-malyuk-bullpup-rifle-is-the-weapon-of-choice-for-its-special-operators

And the Russians would probably be fielding larger numbers of these by 2025:

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/44653/captured-ak-12-rifles-appear-to-be-the-trophy-weapon-of-choice-for-ukrainian-officials

-

[swaghauler]

I'm posting this here because Russia still has THOUSANDS of these.

https://youtu.be/5aNYPipsqOI

Swag

[swaghauler]

Peter Zeihan talks about The Changing Character Of War

https://youtu.be/l0CQsifJrMc





Swag

[.45cultist]

IRL Sweden and Finland maybe joining NATO offers possibilities for a campaign world.

[Raellus]

And the US Army will soon be rolling out it's first new standard-issue assault rifle in 65 years.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/heres-everything-we-now-know-about-the-armys-new-squad-rifles

In 6.8mm no less!

-

[pmulcahy11b]

And the US Army will soon be rolling out it's first new standard-issue assault rifle in 65 years.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/heres-everything-we-now-know-about-the-armys-new-squad-rifles

In 6.8mm no less!

-

Maybe. I'm not holding my breath. I remember the last two times they promised us new firearms.

[Vespers War]

For unit organization, this page (https://www.thefivecoatconsultinggroup.com/the-coronavirus-crisis/perspective-ukraine) has a good overview of how Russia's Battalion Tactical Groups are organized on paper. I suspect a lot of them add a third artillery battery. Msta-S and Grad should be most common, just based on existing numbers.

[mpipes]

When was the BTG concept adopted?

[Raellus]

It looks like Finland and Sweden are closer than ever to joining NATO. It'll be interesting (and potentially very scary) to see how this plays out.

-

[swaghauler]

When was the BTG concept adopted?

The first Battalion Tactical Groups were formed in 2013. With just 1,000 men, they are on the "light" side in manning and I would compare their function with the US Calvary (both the Air Cav & Armored Cav) in that they reduce manning in the hope of increasing tactical maneuverability and flexibility. However, it now appears that BGTs do NOT have the tactical flexibility that we thought due to their inability to "shoot, move, and communicate" effectively. They also lack the troop density (Infantry) for urban warfare... just like US Cav units which "do more with less" by leveraging airpower and artillery to break up enemy troop concentrations.

I believe the BTG was adopted due to "manning issues" in the Russian Army. Because of their structure (no NCO corps to control the enlisted) they can only control units of a certain size effectively. In theory, by having a "combined arms unit" of 1,000 men, junior officers can just "dispatch" BTGs towards objectives without having to "micromanage" them in combat. In practice, the lack of training in the Russian Army makes the BTG ineffective.

[.45cultist]

Another thing with later war dates is the loss of networks and GPS, something likely to affect younger folk, if properly expressed in game.