Mexican Army Sourcebook

[Turboswede]

I just sent Paul my Polish Army Sourcebook and revised V2 timeline and I am currently working on a Mexican Army Sourcebook as a follow up. It’s hard to reconcile the T2K images of Mexican tanks across the Rio Grande given the equipment levels of the Mexican Army as of 1996 per Jane’s Armor & Artillery. I mean really, how would Mexico invade America with M3 and M5 tanks that were marginal performers in 1945? I know that the invasion was supposedly to have occurred after the 1997 nuclear exchange, but I think the City of Dallas police department has more armor than the Mexican army (they both use the LAV-150). Seriously, the exhibits at the Yuma proving ground’s museum would have a good chance of repelling a Mexican invasion.

I like the concept of a Mexican invasion though and would like to include it in any T2K US scenario so the Mexican Army needs a good overhaul. I figure some good old Peronist nationalism / militarism needs to be infused into the Mexicans sometime in the late 80s. I am going with the premise that the Mexican military/political establishment could have cozy up to the Germans prior to unification and entered into an agreement for domestic production of armored vehicles. If production were moderate then I don’t think the US would have raised any objections, especially if the decision to “modernize� the armed forces came at the tail end of the 80’s when the cold war was still going strong. I picked the Germans because I know a bit about the TAM project and the support Germany provided to Argentina following the Malvinas war.

I guess France could work too, but the Leopard I is sooooooooooo much better than the AMX-30, why would anyone have bought a tank with such a soft skin…but I digress. Another option would be the US (or maybe Spain) setting up an M48 production line for the Mexicans. I avoided this route because I would think a Nationalist Mexico would want to discourage reliance on U.S. designs.

Anyway, I would like any ideas about how Mexico’s arms procurement policies could have led to a force capable of sending “armored columns across the Rio Grande� (per the original rule sets)

[weswood]

I don't know about the Mexican Arms Procurement policy, but what about Mexican Special Forces types in conjunction with La Familia/MS 13 sneaking across the border with the mass of immigrants. Said forces then sabotaging the US forces supply chain so that US forces were unable to respond in time to repel the Mexican Armed Forces.

[Turboswede]

Said forces then sabotaging the US forces supply chain so that US forces were unable to respond in time to repel the Mexican Armed Forces.

Point taken, but there still needs to be some kind of Mexican Armed Forces. As it stands a single M60A3 with an ERA package (for the odd Milan) could pretty much take out the whole Mexican army circa real world 1996. Without some kind of force I think one could justify a terror campaign or even a guerrilla war (although in the desert that’s a tough one), but not an invasion capturing California, Arizona, New Mexico and most of Texas.

[kato13]

The Mexican Invasion is one of the three hardest points for me to reconcile (The Alaskan invasion and failure of US Continuance of government plan being the others). I still want to know who nuked Mexico. If the Sovs did why do the Mexicans allow division Cuba onto their soil. If the US did why hit the refineries and not military targets.

The only thing I can imagine the Mexicans having an advantage in is fuel and therefore mobility. Even with a fuel advantage I cannot see Mexican air power being decisive. One they are attacking the US's primary ADA school , and two the aircraft they have are generations behind what the US could send to counter them, even taking into account limited fuel.

[Turboswede]

I still want to know who nuked Mexico. If the Sovs did why do the Mexicans allow division Cuba onto their soil. If the US did why hit the refineries and not military targets.

:confused: I never thought of that, maybe it was the French :D

[Turboswede]

Even with a fuel advantage I cannot see Mexican air power being decisive.

:D Um, thats just funny.

Combat aircraft constituting the Mexican Air Amada, Circa 1996
10 F-5E Tiger II
2 F-5F Advanced trainers
12 AT-33s Jet trainers
12 Bell 205, 206, and 212 armed helicopters

I agree, I seriously doubt that Mexican airpower would have been decisive.

[Fusilier]

I still want to know who nuked Mexico. If the Sovs did why do the Mexicans allow division Cuba onto their soil. If the US did why hit the refineries and not military targets.

How about Sovs hit to deny to USA the fuel... blame the USA. How is Mexico going to know the truth? The book also states they elect a marxist government so they may be more willing to believe Moscow as opposed to the Imperialists.

The only thing I can imagine the Mexicans having an advantage in is fuel and therefore mobility. Even with a fuel advantage I cannot see Mexican air power being decisive. One they are attacking the US's primary ADA school , and two the aircraft they have are generations behind what the US could send to counter them, even taking into account limited fuel.

Slow build up from allies... particularly Cuba? Not the Cuba of today, but the Cuba of the 80s. That's where the tanks, artillery and aircraft come from. Add in some Nicaraguans and maybe even Venezuela (if you want to advance what's his name's ascension to power.

[kato13]

How about Sovs hit to deny to USA the fuel... blame the USA. How is Mexico going to know the truth? The book also states they elect a marxist government so they may be more willing to believe Moscow as opposed to the Imperialists.

I fully agree that 95% of the population including parts of the Civilian leadership could be convinced of this, but I would expect the higher-ups in the military would have serious doubts.

[Benjamin]

I think the only way to have the Mexican invasion happen is to assume that oil paid for a military build up some time during the late eighties/ early nineties. The price of oil went up during this time giving Mexico the ability to partially recover, and perhaps pay for a rebuilt military. The 1988 presidential elections were very controversial due to a computer failure in the election process and it is possible that President Salinas, who was already deemed a fraud by some could end up assassinated. This would cause chaos and open the door for a national socialist to take power on an anti-American platform.

During the nuclear exchange, I've always assumed it was the Soviet that struck the Mexican refineries. First of all, despite Division Cuba, which seems to be a rushed on the fly commitment, there is no way the Soviets can benefit from Mexican oil. Second there is a good chance that the Soviets already had nukes targeted on Mexico during the actual Cold War. Finally, I just don't see the US nuking a non-nuke neighbor especially given the chain of command chaos occurring within the US.

As for arming Mexico...
MBT: OF-40, an Italian designed and built export MBT. It was similar to, and even used some parts from the Leo 1. In our timeline only the UAE purchased it.

The remaining vehicles could come from a mix of countries but I think they'd primarily be from Italy, France and perhaps Brazil.

Benjamin

[Raellus]

Just to play devil's advocate/v1.0 canon apologist, here are a couple things to think about.

Although not a match for an M60, the Mexicans do have quite a few Panhard ERC-90 Lynx armored cars with 90mm guns and several Panhard VBL M-11 light armored cars fitted with Milan ATGMs.

With their recent history of buying AFVs from France, I can see them buying the French Army's old AMX-30 (being replaced in French service by the LeClerc) MBTs (this is the most logical MBT procurement options listed here, IMO).

They also use the German HWK-11 tracked APC (sources suggest they've got around 40 of them). I can see the Germans building and/or retrofitting some of them with high velocity 90mm or 105mm turreted guns, creating de facto tanks.

The Mexicans retired their M4 Shermans quite some time ago but I can see them paying (w/ high priced oil export revenues) the Israelis (experts at getting the most out of the Sherman tank) to soup them up. Upgunned Israeli Shermans routinely knocked out T-54/55 and T-62 tanks during the '73 Yom Kippur War.

There's always the Chinese. A lot of the tanks (mostly Soviet T-rip-offs) they build are marketed for export. I'm sure Mexico could have bought a bunch before the the Russo-Chinese War began.

I also like the idea of other Central/South American nations sending "expeditionary forces" to Mexico to assist in an offensive against the U.S.

Also, as Wes said, Mexican Army SF would have infiltrated dozens of teams across the rather porous border in the months and weeks prior to the invasion. They would launch a series of attacks against C&C and transportation networks immediately preceding the conventional invasion.

I was researching this same topic a few months ago and came across these sites. I hope they prove useful to you.

http://www.paperlessarchives.com/mexico.html

http://lcweb2.loc.gov/frd/cs/mxtoc.html

Lastly, perhaps the Soviets approached the Mexicans with promises of economic and military aid (Division Cuba being the down payment) in a sort of Zimmerman Note parallel.

[Turboswede]

Thanks everyone. The more I think about it the more I could see the Mexicans taking France's AMX-30s. I am sure that the French would unload them at a bargain price (always important to SEDENA). Granted, the T-55 and Chinese Type 59 are arguably better tanks (better armor, similar mobility, worse gun) but I think the US would have vehemently opposed any arms transfers from the Warsaw Pact or PRC to Mexico, especially in the late 80’s. The nice thing about France is that we are nominal allies, but we let the French sell arms to just about anyone.

I think the Mexican version of the AMX-30 would need ERA. Without it they would never get past San Diego or El Paso. Every 16 year old kid would be punching holes in them with M72s.

For the APC/IFV I think they could make some pretty cool derivatives of the “DN� series which is basically a LAV-150. Put a 25mm cannon and a Milan on it and you have a good IFV, etc. Only problem is wheels vs. tracks, I don’t think that would be a major problem in the desert/urban setting (look at how we employ LAVs in Iraq).

[Benjamin]

Buying from France is probably the way to go for Mexico. Perhaps they could augment the piss poor AMX-30s with a regiment of AMX-40s, an improved version offered solely for export.

As for a fifth column of Mexicans arising in America, I don't buy it. Most Mexicans, especially in the pre-Fox era, came to the US because it wasn't Mexico and they had no particular love for the Mexican government or socialism. Pro-Mexican infiltrators are a possibility but may end up not being super reliable for the Mexican military.

Depending on when and how the Mexican government went socialist, there is the possibility of an interesting campaign based along the Mexican-American border. Unrest in Mexico, especially involving a mix of drug lords and socialists, could prompt a level of American intervention. With the advent of war in Asia and Europe attention would turn elsewhere and Mexico, bitter over American meddling, would be left to its own devices. From there it could escalate into a civil war in Mexico and a guerrilla war in the Southwest US. When the Mexican invasion finally occurs the few forces left along the Mexican border would be hard pressed to halt any type of offensive.

And remember the Mexican Civil War began prior to the invasion of the US. It was the Civil War that prompted the flood of immigrants that traveled into America. Given that America had been hit by nukes and was in a deplorable state of affairs, one can surmise that the Mexican Civil War was a particularly bitter affair which brutalized the civilian population. Given what we've seen from communists elsewhere (Pol Pot, Idi Amin, Stalin and so on) its not hard to believe that living in a war ravaged America still looked great compared to the hell that was communist held Mexico.

Benjamin

[Turboswede]

My timeline is based off of the V2 version and assumes that communism faded away after 1990. I like the idea of a right-wing ultra nationalist Mexico invading the US to protect ethnic Mexicans from the gringos up north. Besides, the bad guys in Latin America have always historically been on the nationalist right (Pinochet, Molina, Videla, MartÃÂ*nez de Perón, etc.)

Another catch with the Mexican invasion is that the peace time army in 1995 was roughly 10% Hispanic, assuming that Hispanics would enlist and be drafted at a similar rate, that would mean every squad would have one guy who would be perceived as a possible traitor. Not very good for morale I would think.

[Raellus]

Buying from France is probably the way to go for Mexico. Perhaps they could augment the piss poor AMX-30s with a regiment of AMX-40s, an improved version offered solely for export.

Good call. Perhaps, as part of the same arms deal, Mexico could have acquired a squadron's worth of Mirage 2000s. This would go a very little ways to address the gross imbalance in the air but at least it's something.

As for a fifth column of Mexicans arising in America, I don't buy it. Most Mexicans, especially in the pre-Fox era, came to the US because it wasn't Mexico and they had no particular love for the Mexican government or socialism. Pro-Mexican infiltrators are a possibility but may end up not being super reliable for the Mexican military.

I don't think anyone is suggesting a 5th Column. The idea is that Mexican army commandos would cross the border ahead of the offensive. If drug and people smugglers can do it, why can't Mexican SF? They would come across dressed in civilian garb. If caught without weapons, they'll claim to be illegal migrants. If caught with weapons, they're smugglers. I live in Southern Arizona and illegal border crossings happen every day.

One last thought: When the Mexicans invade, the U.S. is in a state of disarray due to the TDM strikes. Also, its best and brightest have already deployed to Europe, Korea, and CENTCOM is preparing to deploy to the Middle East. So, the Mexican army, primed and ready and miraculously achieving strategic and/or operation surprise, would have at least a little combat experience (at least in the officer corps) with campaigns against the Zapatista rebels in Southern Mexico and the long-running campaign against Mexicos narco-cartels.

Also, expect the Mexicans to be pumped up on nationalist sentiment (regardless of whether it's a left or right wing gov. in charge)- "let's take back what is rightfully ours!"

[Targan]

I still want to know who nuked Mexico. If the Sovs did why do the Mexicans allow division Cuba onto their soil. If the US did why hit the refineries and not military targets.
Last week someone pointed out that SLBMs launched at France would allow an attacker to plausibly deny having nuked Franch targets.So whether or not it was the Soviets that nuked Mexico, if they denied it how would the Mexicans know any better?

[Targan]

I also like the idea of other Central/South American nations sending "expeditionary forces" to Mexico to assist in an offensive against the U.S.
In my campaign that is also what happened in Panama.

[Targan]

I think the Mexican version of the AMX-30 would need ERA. Without it they would never get past San Diego or El Paso. Every 16 year old kid would be punching holes in them with M72s.
Umm, I know that most parts of the US have very liberal weapons laws compared to my country but surely that statement was made in jest? Are you telling me that it is easy (and affordable) for 16 year olds in Texas to get their hands on LAWs? If so its a wonder Texas doesn't have more bank jobs and armoured car robberies.

[Legbreaker]

I still want to know who nuked Mexico. If the Sovs did why do the Mexicans allow division Cuba onto their soil. If the US did why hit the refineries and not military targets.
Perhaps it was the French?
Although Mexico isn't now, nor is likely to ever be a military power, leaving their industry untouched after the war might lead to them being an economic competitor to France (France itself having been nuked, if not back to the stone age, at least half a century or so).
Destroying Mexico's future and it's ability to assist any other potential rivals to French power, might be something considered by elements in the French government.
With the nuclear exchanges of late 1997 as a cover, France cements their future role as a superpower....

And with France possibly selling old military equipment off to Mexico beforehand, it muddies the waters even more. The sale of such equipment is also in France's long term best interests as it potentially sets two of their rivals at each others throats reducing future pressure on France.

A little paranoid perhaps, but fits better than either Nato or the WP nuking them.

[Turboswede]

Umm, I know that most parts of the US have very liberal weapons laws compared to my country but surely that statement was made in jest? Are you telling me that it is easy (and affordable) for 16 year olds in Texas to get their hands on LAWs? If so its a wonder Texas doesn't have more bank jobs and armoured car robberies.

Well, assuming its 1998, the 2nd year of US involvement in the war and a year after the Nuclear exchange. The feds (civ or mil) probobly have better things to do than chase folks down for ATF violations :D

I was also thinking Germany at the end of WW2, they were passing out panzerfausts to 12 year olds like they were candy.

[kato13]

Perhaps it was the French?

So the Mexican's in Texas are just on their way to Quebec for revenge? :D

[pmulcahy11b]

:D Um, thats just funny.

Combat aircraft constituting the Mexican Air Amada, Circa 1996
10 F-5E Tiger II
2 F-5F Advanced trainers
12 AT-33s Jet trainers
12 Bell 205, 206, and 212 armed helicopters

I agree, I seriously doubt that Mexican airpower would have been decisive.

Back in the late-1980s when Northrop was still trying to market the F-20 Tigershark, the Mexicans were very interested, but the sale was blocked by both the Reagan and George HW Bush administrations. Perhaps under other circumstances it might have gone through -- such as if US aircraft manufacturers might need the export sales to finance even more advanced aircraft for the US?

[Targan]

So what ended up happening with the F-20 Tigershark. I know, I could just go unleash some Google-Fu to find out but I'm confident one or more of you clever forumites will be able to tell me in a nice, concise way. And for that matter what would happen to the F-20 Tigershark in the T2K (version 1) timeline?

Edit: Slow day at work (public holiday in my state) so I've had a bit of a look at Wikipedia's entry on the Tigershark. As far as I can tell it (and its predecessors the F-5E and F5-G) were a very good designs, quite cheap considering their performance and were very much viable but Northrop was repeatedly shafted by the policies of the Carter and subsequent administrations. So, in the T2K world might the Tigershark or something much like it have ended up being much more common in the air forces of countries allied to the USA? All it would take would be for the Regan administration to have been a bit more paranoid about things like selling F-16s to Pakistan and Bob's your uncle.

[Abbott Shaull]

Umm, I know that most parts of the US have very liberal weapons laws compared to my country but surely that statement was made in jest? Are you telling me that it is easy (and affordable) for 16 year olds in Texas to get their hands on LAWs? If so its a wonder Texas doesn't have more bank jobs and armoured car robberies.

No just a Marine camp out of one San Diego, and Army base outside of El Paso, TX actually several post in TX where one would be able to find arms once something like this started.

Just some thoughts.

[chico20854]

So what ended up happening with the F-20 Tigershark. I know, I could just go unleash some Google-Fu to find out but I'm confident one or more of you clever forumites will be able to tell me in a nice, concise way. And for that matter what would happen to the F-20 Tigershark in the T2K (version 1) timeline?

Edit: Slow day at work (public holiday in my state) so I've had a bit of a look at Wikipedia's entry on the Tigershark. As far as I can tell it (and its predecessors the F-5E and F5-G) were a very good designs, quite cheap considering their performance and were very much viable but Northrop was repeatedly shafted by the policies of the Carter and subsequent administrations. So, in the T2K world might the Tigershark or something much like it have ended up being much more common in the air forces of countries allied to the USA? All it would take would be for the Regan administration to have been a bit more paranoid about things like selling F-16s to Pakistan and Bob's your uncle.

The DC Group has decided to put the F-20 into full scale production as an export fighter. (It is also mentioned in service in Iran in canon, in RDF sourcebook and Challenge magazine). Basically it was sold as a replacement for F-5s in service with a number of US Allies - especially China and Iran, but also Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and possibly Mexico.

It was produced at the same plants that turn out F/A-18s. As the demand from the US military for F/A-18s increases, production of F-20s is switched to facilities that were converted to military aircraft production - notably the Gulfstream business jet production plant in Savannah, Georgia and the Cessna, Lear and Beechcraft business jet plants in Wichita and Independence, Kansas.

[pmulcahy11b]

So what ended up happening with the F-20 Tigershark. I know, I could just go unleash some Google-Fu to find out but I'm confident one or more of you clever forumites will be able to tell me in a nice, concise way. And for that matter what would happen to the F-20 Tigershark in the T2K (version 1) timeline?

IRL, there actually was a lot of interest in the F-20, by Mexico, some South American countries, a couple of Middle Eastern countries, and (most notably), Taiwan. And for political reasons, the US Government blocked the sales each time. Northrop ended up with no one interested in the F-20 that they could legally sell it to, and eventually stopped trying.

[Raellus]

Although I think the French weapons route is probably the most realistic, I don't think Chinese weapons should be ruled out.

Yeah, I don't think the U.S. would be too thrilled about it. They'd probably try to block it. But, the Paki's, a long-time ally in Central Asia, bought a lot of Chinese gear (tanks and aircraft) back in the '70s and '80s and the U.S. never cut them off completely (although, IIRC, they held up a shipment of F-16s for a while). If the Mexicans cut a great deal with the PRC, there's not much the U.S. could really do that wouldn't seriously harm its relationship with both parties.

Perhaps the Mexicans could have used a potential big-time arms deal with China as a way of leveraging the U.S. into making them a favorable deal on F-20 Tigersharks and M-60s and/or Stingrays (i.e. "Either cut us a good deal on your American-made gear or we'll buy what we need from the Chinese- they're offering us a real ganga."

But I still think AMX-30/40s and Mirages are the way to go to boost Mexico's conventional warfighting power prior to the invasion of the U.S.

[Benjamin]

Well, it took a little digging, but I've found the info I was looking for...and I was a bit wrong. The Mexican Civil War does not happen until 1999, after the invasion of the US. This rules the Civil War out from being the cause of the mass migration to the US.

But, the timeline in V2.2 (which I fall back upon, so long as it does not directly contradict V1 canon, since it is more detailed) states that Mexico was hit in 1997 during the first round of strategic nuclear exchanges. Also, Division Cuba does not move to Mexico until 1998, well after Mexico is it by nukes. This means that it was almost certainly the Soviets who hit the Mexican oil refineries so as to deny their use by the US. I'm of the mind that this in no way prevents Mexico from making use of Division Cuba to assist in its invasion of the US. The general populace of Mexico would not know who hit them with nukes and it is unlikely the left-leaning government would be willing to tell the truth. All that is revealed is that the Gringos are killing Mexicans along the border and the Soviets have graciously offered to lend their support in helping Mexico to regain the land stolen 150 years prior.

Bigger lies have been foisted upon people before, and given the Mexican government's efforts to distract the population with a bout of cross border adventurism it seems to fit. Also, an invasion of the US allows the coalition leftist government to get right of large elements of the regular army, an institution that has been historically conservative in Mexican politics. Of course this doesn't save the country from civil war and chaos, but there is a crazy logic to it all.

Of course 300 years down the road in 2300AD the history books may not know the truth, and people of that era may actually believe that it was the US that nuked Mexico.

Benjamin

P.S. One thing I based a whole 2300AD campaign around almost a decade ago was the canon breaking statement in the Survivors Guide to the UK that stated that NATO were the first to use tac nukes in Europe (p.8). After finding documents in one of the few remaining hidden stockpiles, the PCs were able to prove that this was French fabrication used hundreds of years ago to place war guilt upon America, Germany and Britain. It was great fun to follow the political fallout that wracked the globe...until the Kafers invaded.

[Targan]

The DC Group has decided to put the F-20 into full scale production as an export fighter. (It is also mentioned in service in Iran in canon, in RDF sourcebook and Challenge magazine). Basically it was sold as a replacement for F-5s in service with a number of US Allies - especially China and Iran, but also Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and possibly Mexico.

It was produced at the same plants that turn out F/A-18s. As the demand from the US military for F/A-18s increases, production of F-20s is switched to facilities that were converted to military aircraft production - notably the Gulfstream business jet production plant in Savannah, Georgia and the Cessna, Lear and Beechcraft business jet plants in Wichita and Independence, Kansas.
Very good. I like the work of the DC Working Group. Its been a while since I've had a proper review read through of the RDF Sourcebook and all the T2K Challenge articles so I wasn't aware that the Tigershark was mentioned there but I like what you've said Chico and so it shall be in my campaign. Thanks for the feedback.

[Legbreaker]

One thing I based a whole 2300AD campaign around almost a decade ago was the canon breaking statement in the Survivors Guide to the UK that stated that NATO were the first to use tac nukes in Europe (p.8).
You'll probably find on closer inspection that nuclear weapons were first used in the east. I'm not sure off hand if it was China or the Soviets who threw the first one, but I think it was the later.
After the war in the east was effectively won, the excess units were transfered back to the west in time to halt the NATO offensive into the Soviet Union and throw them back into Germany. NATO, in a desperate attempt to halt the oncoming juggernaut started using nukes but barely managed to slow them down a little.

The way it's written, it's a fair assumption that if Nato did not use tactical nukes in 1997, the war in Europe would have been over and done with by Christmas of that year with an almost certain Pact victory and communist control of virtually all of the continent.

France would have been left with no choice but to fight or face destruction as I doubt the rampaging communist forces would have halted at the Rhine with total and utter victory over Captialism just a few hundred miles further on...

So yes, NATO fired first in Europe, but did they really have a choice?

[Targan]

It don't think Benjamin was saying that the first use of tac nukes in the entire Twilight war was in Europe. It is very clear that the nukes first flew in the eastern theatre.

As for who lobbed the first nukes in Europe I think that in light of contradictory statements in different books it comes down to either individual GM choices or (in my case) going with the consensus view of the wise and well read folks from this forum.

I do take your point Leggy about tac nukes in Europe stopped the Soviets where had nukes not been used so extensively the Soviets might well have rolled right through Europe.

[pmulcahy11b]

Umm, I know that most parts of the US have very liberal weapons laws compared to my country but surely that statement was made in jest? Are you telling me that it is easy (and affordable) for 16 year olds in Texas to get their hands on LAWs? If so its a wonder Texas doesn't have more bank jobs and armoured car robberies.

Gun laws here in Texas are liberal, but not that liberal. Hell, I can't even buy a firearm here due to mental illness.

[Benjamin]

Legbreaker, Targan was correct. I was referring only to the European theater.

But two of the best canon sources, Twilight 2000: Referee's Manuel (pg. 25) and Challenge Magazine #31, USSR: 2000 (pg. 3), state rather clearly that tactical nuclear weapons were first used by the Soviets on July 9, 1997 in response to the NATO, and especially German, advance into Soviet territory. It was the use of tac-nukes that prompted the NATO withdrawal. Shortly there after the Soviets began to use them in China "on a massive scale", which differed from the limited shot-for-shot exchange occurring in Europe.

This account differs greatly from the timeline in the Survivors Guide to the UK; the last V1 book published, so I tend to see that book as French propaganda:-O

As for the Mexican invasion I am solidly on the "Mexico would need a much better military to pull it often even with the US in such a weakened state." With the Mexican Army 1998-2000 article in Challenge as the basis we could create a more believable invasion force without doing too much damage to canon. I have access to quiet a few Jane's Armour and Artillery books if anyone need some research done.

Benjamin

[natehale1971]

Actually on the first use of nukes, if i remember right... It was the USSR that had used nukes in the European theater first. They used tactical nukes to try and stop the advance of the NATO forces spearheaded by the German First Army when they had crossed the pre-war Polish-Soviet border.

I have always felt that the reason why the Mexican army was able to make their advances against the US, was that there was a major build-up of the Mexican armed forces during the 1980s and 1990s by the United States in an effort to counter the strength and rapid growth of the pro-Soviet Communist governments in Central and South America. The Mexicans where able to use all that training, weapons, vehicles and equipment to make a major offensive into the United States South-West with the assistance of the Soviet Division Cuba, and supported by the other Latin American communist countries sending Expeditionary Troops to gain the honor of having nocked out the great captialist enemy of the workers all around the world.

As soon as i can, i'll be posting the alternate timeline i came up with that is heavily based upon the 1st Edition Twilight 2000 timeline....

[Raellus]

With the Mexican Army 1998-2000 article in Challenge as the basis we could create a more believable invasion force without doing too much damage to canon.

Benjamin, for those of us who don't have access to the article you mentioned, would you be so kind as to give us a brief synopsis? I'm really curious as to how the game designers chose to beef up the Mexican military.

[Benjamin]

Besides bringing some of the regional battalions up to brigade strength I don't think that much was done to beef it up. It seems that the secret to the invasion was that the post strike chaos was such that the kinda waltzed in unopposed.

Even with the nuke strikes it was a bit far fetched. The left over military equipment in Texas alone could have stopped the Mexican Army. This is why we need to update the material.

Benjamin

[chico20854]

We're working on a few ideas. I'm on my way out the door now, but I'll try to get something up tomorrow evening (US time). It involves a change to US forces in Texas, nuclear attacks on Mexico, drug and criminal gangs infiltrating the US and the relative situation on both sides of the border. Plus, of course, French meddling (and arms sales) and extremist politics!

[Targan]

With the Mexican Army 1998-2000 article in Challenge as the basis we could create a more believable invasion force without doing too much damage to canon.
I treat the Challenge mag T2K articles as canon.

[Benjamin]

As do I, Targan. But, there are some odd bits that don't make sense along with out right discrepancies. So with that in mind I don't feel too bad fiddling with the canon.

With the Challenge article as a foundation we could tweak the Mexican OrBat into a force more worthy of invading the US.

I personally always thought it odd that Cuba doesn't participate more in the war. I know V2 says that Cuba suffered some bombing (I can't remember if V1 has anything about Cuba.), but I think that both Castro and the Cuban exiles in Miami would be more willing to have at each other once the war got rolling. I'd add a another, albeit larger, Bay of Pigs, along with a Cuban Volunteer Force in Mexico. What would really be great would be a drop by a combined Cuban, Mexican and Soviet airborne force into Colorado in an attempt to decapitate MilGov. Just a little homage to Red Dawn for the players to enjoy;-)

Benjamin

[Raellus]

Ha! Red Dawn... Growing up in Colorado during the '80s, I can tell ya, Red Dawn scared the stuffing out of me. Fortunately, even in the late '90s of T2K canon, it would be highly improbable that the Russians could scrape together the transports to carry/drop even a single airborne regiment and fly them unimpeded all the way to Colorado (I know you know this).

Also, I'm not sure that a second Bay of Pigs is that plausible. The U.S. government would be able to lend the expatriate invasion force even less aid than was given in the first attempt and without heavy weapons and air/sea cover, it would be doomed to utter failure (like the first one). I can, however, see the Cubans sending an expedition force of their own along with Division Cuba. They have much to gain by doing so and not too much to lose. Unless... perhaps the Cubans stay out of the U.S. to avoid their own total destruction (I can't recall if any U.S. nukes actually struck cuba, according to canon).

I do see various Latin American nations throwing in their lot with Mexico in its invasion of the U.S.

Maybe a Division Gran Columbia, or Brigada Simon Bolivar made up of an official battalion from here and a regiment from there; maybe an all volunteer force made up of men from all over Latin America- kind of like the various foreign Waffen SS units (Viking and Nordland made up of Scandanavian Volunteers, Florian Geyer [sic] from Beligium, etc.). It would beef up the Mexican invasion force a bit and add an extra element of chaos/intrigue once the Mexican offensive grinds to a halt and the invasion force fragments into various warring factions/marauder bands.

[Legbreaker]

Looking at "Gateway to the Spanish Main", there's strong indications that Cuba is heavily involved in Africa (Angola springs to mind).
It's therefore highly possible Cuba simply didn't have the resources available to accompany Division Cuba into Mexico and then the US.

[Benjamin]

While neither Red Dawn nor Bay of Pigs II: Return of the Cuban Expats is all that realistic, I often throw one or two of these quirky things into my version of Twilight: 2000.

As for the airborne assault, I thing Mexico and Cuba could scrape together enough aircraft and fuel to penetrate what remained of America's air defense in Fall of 1998. A mixed force of a battalion or two of Mexicans, Cubans and Soviets could land near Colorado Springs in an attempt to destroy MilGov and take out Gen. Cummings. It might be a suicide mission but could make for good role-playing opportunities.

Concerning Cuba, I always found it odd that the island wasn't given more attention given the decades of animosity. America would almost have to neutralize Cuba given how it sits astride a major shipping route leading to and from the Gulf Coast ports.

I think I'll start working on a revised Mexican Orbat along with Cuba's role during the Twilight War.

Benjamin

[Raellus]

I suppose it's possible. Heck, the U.S. air defense grid would have plenty of holes in it after the TDM. On the other hand, just a pair of fully armed F-15 could wipe out an entire airfleet of Soviet/Cuban transport aircraft. The Soviets don't have any true fleet carriers and Cuba's airforce is somewhat limited in its size and long-range capability so I don't see an airlift having much in the way of fighter cover. Where would it come from? Without it, an airdrop that far behind enemy lines wouldn't stand much of a chance if it was detected. How many U.S. airbases (non-nuked) would such an airlift (originating in Cuba, I would assume) have to bypass undetected? That's quite a long shot.

But hey, if it works for your T2K universe, go for it.

Wolverines!;)

[Legbreaker]

As the Mexican/Soviet invasion didn't occur until quite late in the war, chances are that all the high tech, and even most of the lower tech older aircraft available to the US would have been shipped overseas or northward to counter the Soviets in Alaska and Quebec.
Any anti-air assets remaining in southern USA would undoubtably be almost entirely ground based guns - missiles also having been shipped to the warzones just like aircraft.

Therefore, there'd be little need for the invading Soviets and Mexicans to possess fighters beyond a handful to keep away armed Cessna's etc

[Benjamin]

In the scenario I'm imagining, the assault would launch from Mexican airfields and would kick off a day or two after the ground invasion. This way attention would be focused on the fighting along the border, while the Mexican aircraft flew into the US on separate routes converging on Colorado Springs.

Mexico has 12 C-130s, but if we assume that they had a military build up prior to the start of the Twilight War they could have up wards of 48 Hercules. Let us say that the invasion was launched using half these numbers after stockpiling fuel for several months. This gives them the ability to drop 1,536 paratroopers, which could be raised a bit by making use of a few Soviet or Cuban transports brought in from Cuba. This gives the airborne attack about battalion strength.

That's not too bad for a surprise attack aimed at causing alarm and chaos behind American lines. Other single plane attacks could drop platoon strength attacks at other strategic targets within 1,000 miles of a Mexican airfield.

Benjamin

[rnitze]

As I still play Twilight 2000 V1/2, and ran it at a gaming Convention last year (Origins in Ohio) I'd love to see you do that Mexican sourcebook, where will you post it when its done?

[Raellus]

Benjamin,

Where did the Soviet paratroops come from? How'd they get to Mexico at that stage in the war?

They'd probably be better off launching the attack before the ground invasion kicked off, with the planes taking off a couple of hours before the Mexican SF infiltration teams began their attacks on various U.S. military and C&C installations.

The drop on Colorado Springs would have the benefit of sowing confusion and panic and thusly hindering the response to the conventional invasion. Also, the Americans wouldn't be expecting it (or ready for the Mexican invasion in general). Waiting to launch the drops until after the ground invasion would have the Americans on the alert. Whatever air assets were available in CONUS would be cued and poised to support the American troops attempting to stem the Mexican tide. Yeah, most of the USAF's F-15 and F-16s would be overseas. But heck, a couple of F-4s- even a flight of old ANG/AFR Delta Darts (fresh out of mothballs, of course)- could tear an unescorted Mexican transport fleet to shreds. Even if the transports were flying in dribs and drabs on different vectors, losing just 2-3 would severely deplete the fighting power of the airborne troops. And forget about resupply.

[Benjamin]

I envision the Soviet Airborne contingent to the invasion being a company sized unit sent to Cuba just prior to the invasion in Norway. Their initial purpose was to serve as a training cadre for the Cuban Airborne forces. The origional plan was for an airborne drop in Florida as a diversion from the Alaska invasion, but Cuba refused to cooperate. After the strategic nuclear exchange Cuba, which had not yet been hit by nukes, offered Division Cuba, which included the paratroopers, for service in Mexico.

Along with Division Cuba Castro, Raul not Fidel at this point, sent nearly two divisions worth of Cuban "volunteers" to Mexico. Included in this number was a brigade of paratroopers. These traveled to Mexico over a period of nearly a year on a variety of transports.

I believe you're right that launching the airborne assault a day before the ground assault would make more sense.

An interesting idea is using civilian airliners to launch the air assault. Would it be possible to parachute out of the rear doors of a major airliner such as the 747? Perhaps they could set the autopilot... everyone bails... and the airplane then goes along until crashing. I'm sure there'd be no shortage of unused passanger aircraft sitting around. Give them enough fuel for a one way trip and send them on their way.

Benjamin

[Raellus]

A very credible explanation for the presence of Soviet and Cuban airborne troops in Mexico. It seems, though, that such a force would be dropped in direct support of Division Cuba's operations in Texas.

An interesting idea is using civilian airliners to launch the air assault. Would it be possible to parachute out of the rear doors of a major airliner such as the 747? Perhaps they could set the autopilot... everyone bails... and the airplane then goes along until crashing. I'm sure there'd be no shortage of unused passanger aircraft sitting around. Give them enough fuel for a one way trip and send them on their way.


Heistmeister D.B. Cooper jumped out of the rear passenger loading ramp door of an in-flight 727 back in the '70s. It looks like he landed in a river and probably drowned, though.

I don't know if you could jump from a larger jetliner. 747s can fly low and slow enough to drop fire retardents on forest fires (there's a company that does the coversions a few miles from my house) so they could probably fly low and slow enough drop paratroopers.

Would there be regular international air service after the TDM, though? I've never really thought about it. The air traffic control system would be totally screwed up by '98. Probably not is my first reaction. So, I would think any suspicious radar contacts would be treated with suspicion, if not outright hostility.

Anyway, as far as I can tell, a Soviet-Cuban-Mexican airdrop in Colorado would go down as the longest-range large unit airborne operation in history, insofar as the distance from the front lines to the target DZ. Pretty audacious, if not downright suicidal.

[Fusilier]

Would it be possible to parachute out of the rear doors of a major airliner such as the 747?

Why not just land them on the tarmac of a civilian airport? Its been done before.

I've been a fan of the airborne concept myself. Not really probable (although not impossible), but more for nostalgic reasons (Red Dawn like you mentioned).

In my timeline, there were airborne drops to support the invasion. A couple battalion drops (not all para though - some landing and dismounting from planes on undefended civil airports) and some smaller platoon/company drops.

I have the Cuban's heavily involved in the Mexican campaign. At first they are reluctant to get involved, but eventually get drawn in. As do the addition to a couple other nations (Nicaragua and Venezuela).

[Legbreaker]

If you're really set on airborne insertion, why not add a few plywood gliders?
On D-Day back in 1944, many of the aircraft were towing at least one, sometimes two gliders behind them. Didn't do much for manouverability or fuel consumption, and anyone inside the gliders were either suicidally brave or rediculously stupid/naive, but it was an effective means for dropping troops untrained with parachutes as well as heavier equipment like AT guns, jeeps and the like.

[Rainbow Six]

How about a Spetznaz attack on Colorado Springs?

A Mexican C130 could be painted in US colours, fly north and drop a Spetznaz team in Colorado who would be tasked with infiltrating Milgov HQ and causing as much damage as possible. Presumably the Mexicans would have acquired lots of US Army equipment in Texas, so the Spetznaz could easily be disguised as American troops.

Rather than being a suicide mission, the Spetznaz might be able to take advantage of the chaos and confusion that they had caused to get clear of the area (especially if still disguised as Americans) and make their way back to Texas overland.

[Turboswede]

I feel the need to chime in here. I never bought the “leftist-Marxist� government in Mexico premise of the original timeline even when I was 10. Considering the support the U.S. gave right wing military governments in the rest of Latin America through the 70’s and 80’s, there is no way we would have allowed that to happen in Mexico.

Mexico may have elected some kind of green/catholic socialist/land reform party, but they would never have provided the military with the resources to threaten the U.S. Other than organizing some kind of labor movement among agricultural workers, I could not even imagine an expansionist “leftist� government in Mexico.

The only way I could ever reconcile a Mexican invasion of the U.S. (which is a cool gaming idea) is a military Junta. I could see the Cubans aligned with a Mexican Junta because the Junta could still be a populist movement, but not a Marxist one.

O.K. I loved Red Dawn and played Fortress America and though the SDI system was a good idea. However, Regan never, ever, ever, ever would have allowed anything resembling the Sandinistas to take power in Mexico.

[Benjamin]

I totally agree that with a continuing Cold War no leftist government would be allowed in Mexico. This whole thing started as a thought experiment to have a legitimate Mexican invasion with the possibility of success. I added an airborne assault into Colorado as a wink-wink to the cult classic, Red Dawn.

Having a smaller Spetznaz attack makes more sense but is a bit less fun for those wishing to play out a Red Dawn scenario.

[Raellus]

O.K. I loved Red Dawn and played Fortress America...

Fortress America! What a blast from the past. I used to make my little brother be the foreign invaders every time we played. Talk about an improbable scenario. It was still a fun game though.

Leg, gliders take a lot of practice to fly and land properly. In fact, it would probably be easier from a cost/logistics standpoint to train up a new regiment of parachute troops than to design and build a new type of military glider and train pilots to fly it (and train the "tug" pilots to tow it). I don't think gliders have been used in combat since WWII and there are definitely many good reasons for that. And towing gliders is one of the only things I don't think a C-130 has ever done before.

Benjamin, I'm not trying to shoot down your idea. I'm just trying to rationalize it in my own mind. How about this? Spetznaz, either parachuted in disguised as Americans or landed in a legit civilian airliner, take over an airport/airfield while Mexican commandos, infiltrated over the border in the months leading up to the invasion, attack radar installations along the follow-up flight path. This would allow a large force of parachute troops and/or just regular infantry to both drop from Mexican military aircraft and land in regular civilian jetliners. It could also allow some follow up resupply aircraft to sneak through. I think eventually, though, the USAF and ground based AA would be able to close that air corridor. But, for a couple of weeks, at least, the Soviet-Mexican (maybe Cuban also) airborne/airmobile force would be able to wreak havoc in Colorado.

[Raellus]

I totally agree that with a continuing Cold War no leftist government would be allowed in Mexico.

Mexico's ruling government during most of the last century, the PRI, was a really a broad coalition of many different political philosophies including many center-left groups.

I think this is where the French come in to play. If Mexico was leaning towards a sort of Western European socialism- like what the French had going on in the '80s and '90s- especially if it was openly supported/encouraged by the French, the U.S. would probably accept it. They wouldn't be too happy about it, but a moderate center-left government, retaining strong ties to the U.S. and the West, wouldn't be seen as too much of a threat. It may actually be seen pragmatically as somewhat of a buffer or mediating force between the right-leaning U.S. (of the '80s and early '90s) and the more leftist, Soviet-influenced countries of the rest of Latin America.

This also sets up the French as a major player in the region prior to the war starting and would help justify a massive French arms deal for the Mexicans, making them stronger and the successful (at least initially) invasion of the southern U.S. more plausible.

[Webstral]

I still love Fortress America. One of my long-term start-again-stop-again projects has been to create an on-line page devoted to Fortress America. In my experience, it’s entirely possible for the invaders to win, but they need a bit of luck and more than a bit of skill. Even more so than Axis & Allies, Fortress America is a game of psychological warfare.

One change some friends and I have used for years is to place the invasion zones off-limits to lasers. We found that the entire game could be unhinged by as few as three laser hits on Euro-Socialist Pact bombers early in the game. While possibly a reflection of how hard a real world invasion of the continental US would be, we found that we preferred a game in which the US would have to work harder. In fact, we played that way so long (since the game came out) that we rather forgot that the rules allow lasers to target units in the invasion zones.

Webstral

[Benjamin]

Raellus, I think there is a very fine line between the far right and far left sides of the political spectrum. While Mexico could get away with having a European style socialist government, it would not be able to have a near communist government that nationalized foreign assets. What is possible is that a right-leaning coalition backed by the military holds control from the late eighties until the nuclear exchange whereupon they are overthrown by a leftist government that sides with Cuba and the Soviet Union.

Is anyone else working on a Mexican Sourcebook? If not I may give it a try though my Spanish is very poor. I think I'll stick mostly to the military side of things with only limited references to the politics behind the invasion. Most major weapon systems will be of French and Chinese origins.

As for Mexican war aims, I would have their goal be to seize the large Mexican-American population centers within Texas and California. The Mexican leadership is working under the naive belief that these ex-Mexicans will welcome the Mexican Army as saviors, given the chaos that exists in the US. By "liberating" these Mexicans they hope to unite the fractured Mexican populace by holding America up as an external threat requiring Mexicans to unite together.

A secondary war aim is to seize the remaining oil producing regions of the American Southwest. This would give Mexico a step up in its recovery efforts. Even though many of the oil production facilities have been destroyed holding the well heads would give Mexico a major advantage in the near future.

Finally, Mexico hopes to position itself in such a way as to allow a quicker recovery than that of America. This would allow Mexico to possible reverse the political situation that has traditionally existed between Mexico and the US. This would allow Mexico to become the dominant nation in Central America and the Caribbean.

Benjamin

[Legbreaker]

Leg, gliders take a lot of practice to fly and land properly. In fact, it would probably be easier from a cost/logistics standpoint to train up a new regiment of parachute troops than to design and build a new type of military glider and train pilots to fly it (and train the "tug" pilots to tow it). I don't think gliders have been used in combat since WWII and there are definitely many good reasons for that. And towing gliders is one of the only things I don't think a C-130 has ever done before.
They probably haven't been used since 1945, however I can imagine a severe shortage of parachutes in Mexico in 2000 so gliders made from the much more common and available plywood, etc, would likely be a necessity.
Granted there'd be a bit of a shortage of pilots to fly them, but nothing a few hours training couldn't fix (or a swift knock to the head to reduce the "pilots" common sense and self preservation).
I'm guessing there'd be at least one pilot available with some experience of gliders as a prewar hobby, both flying them and piloting the tug aircraft. Their experience would be invaluable in reducing basic mistakes.

Still, you wouldn't catch me within ten miles of the deathtraps!