Mexican Army Sourcebook complete

[Turboswede]

I just finished my Mexican Army Sourcebook and posted it to

http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/t2k/

So now I am thinking about my next project, what about a T2K guide to the People’s Liberation Army, or maybe the Bundeswehr? I could try to tackle the Russian army and figure out how to integrate Belorussia and the Ukraine.

[kato13]

Just to help people find the files they are under
Files->Army Sourcebooks

If I get a chance I will map your Mexican units.

[Ramjam]

Very interesting read and very useful for a southern US game.

I never realized they used so many Shermans.

The People’s Liberation Army would be good. But after 4 years of combat against the Russians there's not alot left of them.

The Bundeswehr again would be nice to give a more complete picture for Europe.

[General Pain]

I just finished my Mexican Army Sourcebook and posted it to

http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/t2k/

So now I am thinking about my next project, what about a T2K guide to the People’s Liberation Army, or maybe the Bundeswehr? I could try to tackle the Russian army and figure out how to integrate Belorussia and the Ukraine.

If you want I can post it on the big book of war - with creds offcourse

[pmulcahy11b]

I'll have that up on my site later tonight.

[Turboswede]

Well today is my first day of a two week vacation and last night I was up until 1:00am (late for the dad of a 2 year old) working on the Bundesheer sourcebook. To tie the actions of the Heer into the T2K timeline I am making the post reunification Germany much more agressive than they were in reality.

It’s interesting that the West Germans were worried about a real life T2K arising from reunification, i.e. the NVA officer corps would take a hard line on issues like the return of east Prussia and the aqusition of Bohemia. As a result they retired everyone above the rank of Captain from the Nationale Volksarmee (NVA) and only allowed about 10% of the NVA jr. officers into the Bundesheer.

Wow, you can really learn a lot from role playing games

[kato13]

Wow, you can really learn a lot from role playing games

You just summed up why I still have an interest in gaming.

[Targan]

Wow, you can really learn a lot from role playing games
Absolutely. I can confidently say that if it wasn't for T2K I'd know much less about Poland and the east coast of the USA.

[pmulcahy11b]

I'll have that up on my site later tonight.

It's up. (Actually, it's been up since about 11 PM CDT last night.) Accessible through Anders' page.

[Webstral]

I’ve just read for the first time the outstanding Mexican Army Sourcebook by Turboswede. What an accomplishment! What a contribution to the Twilight: 2000 community! Really, dude—this is tremendous work. I’m inspired by it. If I weren’t already working on another project that I’m trying to complete by the beginning of my student teaching in January, I’d be inspired to copy the format and produce a sourcebook of my own work. This is wonderful.

I’ll mention some of the things I think work well, starting with the fact that Turboswede really has captured the Twilight: 2000 flavor, the Wikipedia flavor, and the Jane’s Guide flavor in this work. Did I mention just how impressed I am by this work? Here are a few other items that deserve praise:

• The photos and captions
o Great creative use of RL photographs. There’s nothing like realia to give people an image of what you’re talking about.
• The back story
o Grounding the Second Mexican-American War in history is a great idea that is in keeping with the Twilight: 2000 mode.
o This took work. I appreciate that Turboswede took the time to write a framework covering the history of the Mexican Army and of Mexico herself.
• Russian nuclear strikes on Mexican oil facilities
o Yes, this is exactly what I have advocated. I’m delighted someone else has seen things the same way.
• Escalating border violence in early 1998
o Although Turboswede and I aren’t on the same page regarding Mexican refugees during this period, we agree that American citizens are likely to take matters into their own hands.
o Turboswede uses the term “militia�, while I prefer the moniker “State Guard�. When it comes down to it, these ideas are fairly easily reconciled.
• The 1996 Order of Battle and US Army Vehicle Guide-style table of organization. What a great resource!
• Weapons and vehicle guides, too! It’s like a Christmas stocking that is enchanted to hold the contents of a footlocker.
• The improved mechanization of the Mexican Army vis-Ã*-vis the official source material makes it much easier to understand how the Mexican Army could have achieved success in the initial invasion.
o I’ve always been hard-pressed to justify why Sixth US Army didn’t just roll down into southern California and kick the Mexicans out. A handful of M1 goes a long way against armored cars and APC.
 The improved Mexican Army OOB makes it ever so much easier to explain why the Mexicans enjoy so much early success in Texas and California.
o I LOVE the DN concept. I won’t comment on whether it’s realistic or not because I love the combination of creativity and disciplined approach to presentation.

Without shame, I’m going to say that I will pirate much of Turboswede’s material for use in Thunder Empire.
There are one or two items I want to address. They’re nit-picks, really.

One problem with controlling illegal crossings into the US by Mexico is that this runs counter to the perceived self-interests of the ruling caste of Mexico (Turboswede, 2009, p. 9). The people who have the gumption to try to cross into the United States are exactly the kind of people the folks running the show want to have leave Mexico. They are obviously unhappy with their lot in the current arrangement, and they are willing to take action. If the action is that they go to the US, earn some money, and remit some of that money, then it’s win-win for the Mexican ruling class. If the same group is kept at home by force of (Mexican) arms, the equation becomes lose-lose. Would-be expatriates, already dissatisfied with their lot under the existing arrangement, have no options left but to oppose the government. This has been the unstated and underappreciated (the US) dynamic underlying the movement of Mexican nationals into the US for decades.

Some mention should be made (it’s possible I missed it) of an improved logistical capability on the part of the Mexican Army. Supplying a more-mechanized force in the US is going to take a lot more trucks. A LOT more trucks. Still, the logistical situation helps us understand why the Mexican drive stalls in 1998. They just can’t keep their forces supplied as the supply lines move forward. The Americans, not being irretrievably stupid, destroy the rail network from the border north. Despite using requisitioned trucks, the Mexicans find that as their forces move further from the border their ability to provide support diminishes dramatically.


Once again, this work is tremendous!


Webstral

[kalos72]

My only issue with the source book was the way the units were organized and named. Trying to figure out what type of unit it was and where the hell it was now. :)

But Spanish confuses me. :P

[Matt Wiser]

Nice work! Though there's just one nit: once the JCS realize that the invasion can't be stopped with the forces available in CONUS, guess what happens to the Mexican supply lines? Places like Hermosillo, Chiuahaua City, Monterrey, Tampico, San Luis Potosi, etc....Instant sunshine grows there. The same thing for Mexico City.

[Dog 6]

very good work Turboswede . it was fun to read :)



Nice work! Though there's just one nit: once the JCS realize that the invasion can't be stopped with the forces available in CONUS, guess what happens to the Mexican supply lines? Places like Hermosillo, Chiuahaua City, Monterrey, Tampico, San Luis Potosi, etc....Instant sunshine grows there. The same thing for Mexico City.

That sounds about like what happened in my game, along with a counterattack that over ran half of Mexico a few years latter.

[Webstral]

Though there's just one nit: once the JCS realize that the invasion can't be stopped with the forces available in CONUS, guess what happens to the Mexican supply lines? Places like Hermosillo, Chiuahaua City, Monterrey, Tampico, San Luis Potosi, etc....Instant sunshine grows there. The same thing for Mexico City.

Matt, it’s nice to see a post from you.

I agree that the treatment of Mexico by the JCS after the war starts is indeed a sticky issue. There are a few forces pulling in different directions. The first is canon, which doesn’t mention any nuclear attacks on Mexico City. The second is realism, by which we would expect some sort of nuclear action against Mexico. Realism is subject to various interpretations of the frame of mind of the JCS at the time.

Admittedly, I’m not exactly the best champion of canon. Thunder Empire and my various works in New England are decidedly non-canonical. I have advocated the use of nuclear weapons against Mexico’s oil production, which is not directly supported by the official body of work. This much said, I’ve generally advocated modest and justifiable departures from the established body of material. I don’t want to upset the applecart.

I think we can draw a meaningful distinction between nuclear attacks on Mexico’s oil production and Mexico’s urban areas. Firstly, I maintain that the v1 chronology supports attacks on Mexico’s oil production facilities based on the idea that such facilities in neutral nations were attacked to keep them out of the hands of the belligerents. Moreover, I think the Soviets are the most likely culprits for reasons I have given elsewhere.

The official body of material doesn’t mention American nuclear attacks against Mexican cities. Absence of proof is by no means proof of absence. GDW’s coverage of Mexico in the Twilight War is hardly exhaustive. I mention the absence of coverage of American nuclear strikes against Mexico in the wake of the start of the Second Mexican-American War only because the absence leaves the door open for interpretation.

From the standpoint of realism, there certainly is justification for the JCS to hit Mexican targets with nukes. The US has been knocked on its fourth point of contact by the November-December attacks. By the end of May, it should be obvious just how bad things are going to get in the US. Emotions are probably running high for the Joint Chiefs. The temptation to fix the situation in the Southwest by nuclear means would be huge—especially since the Mexicans have no means of counterstrike.

Against this, we probably ought to weigh the fact that Mexico doesn’t have the means of retaliation. 1Mt strikes against Mexican cities will kill millions. The JCS may be under the gun, so to speak, but they are still Americans. More importantly, they are American officers raised in the post-WW2 tradition. Civilians get wrapped up in war, but this fact does not release commanders from responsibility for their decisions. Some readers on this board may have poor opinions of American ethics, but the unavoidable fact remains that the United States has led the way in precision-guided munitions for the purpose of minimizing civilian casualties. It’s true that precision munitions reduce the number of sorties necessary to destroy a target. So would weapons of very high explosive yield. So would very effective incendiary weapons (in some cases). The JCS are going to have to consider how many civilians—even Mexican civilians—they are going to kill to achieve operational or strategic goals. By no means am I saying that the JCS are going to keep the remaining US nuclear arsenal sheathed for the purpose of sparing Mexican civilians. I am saying that there is reason to believe American nuclear strikes against Mexico may be limited and that even these limited strikes can be dovetailed with Turboswede’s work to explain the stagnation of the front.

Tactical strikes against major military centers, lines of communication, and logistical centers are warranted. We probably can expect tactical nuclear strikes against the major air bases near the US border, along with the Mexican Air Force HQ. The yield and method of the weapons used is subject to question. The fact that the official Mexican Army OB puts a number of units in Mexico City strongly indicates that while there is room for a low-yield ground burst, a one-megger let’s-go-get-‘em-all strike might not be in order. Strikes aimed specifically at rail hubs in northern Mexico also seem quite likely to me. Again, these might very well be ground bursts intended to knock out the rail hubs rather than wiping out cities.

Assuming that tactical nuclear strikes cripple the Mexican Air Force, the Mexican Navy, and the flow of supplies north to the Mexican Army, we can better understand by Turboswede’s more mechanized (and larger) invasion force runs out of steam against not-very-impressive American resistance. At the same time, we can envision a Mexico which hasn’t been reduced to a Spanish-speaking Poland. Perhaps we can even envision the JCS using just enough force to create a stalemate that will leave enough Mexicans alive to start the civil war. Although it appears unlikely on the surface, stranger things have happened. We should remember that the JCS are a handful of people leading in the midst of circumstances with no precedent. The influence of a handful of staffers on important decisions can be huge.


Webstral

[Legbreaker]

I am 100% behind the nuking of Mexico.

With the limited forces available to the US to resist the Mexican/Soviet invasion, the US Military/Governement will be left with little choice to stop them. Nukes would be targeted at rear areas though, with the object of crippling the logistical support networks of the invaders.

Great effort would be made to avoid nuclear attacks on or near US borders as the ideal result would be for the enemy to withdraw without causing more destruction to US property - nukes might destroy the enemy forces but would also inflict untold damage which would need to be repaired in the future, not to mention the contamination issue.

[Targan]

I agree with the above two posts. I've never researched Satellite Down or City of Angels line-by-line so I'm not sure if there is any useful information to be gleaned from those sources on the use of US nukes against Mexico.

One reason why I agree with Web that the JCS would probably seek to minimise civilian casualties as a result of a nuclear response is that they are intelligent people and would understand that for decades, even centuries in the future Mexico will continue to be their close neighbour. There will be bitter hatred on both sides after the war anyway, but there was too during the 1700s and 1800s after the various US-Spanish and US-Mexican wars. That bitterness would run alot deeper and for alot longer if the US had nuked major metropolitan centres during the Twilight War.

Having said that there are obviously many cases where oil production facilities and other high value nuke targets are sited adjacent to civilian centres. I admit I know little about Mexico's industrial infrastructure so it won't be me that compiles an expanded/adjusted list of probable nuke targets in Mexico but I'm happy for one or more of my knowledgeable fellow forumites to school me on the matter.

[Matt Wiser]

One argument that would be voiced at Raven Rock (or wherever the JCS are situated at this time) is that the government that ordered the invasion ought to be held personally accountable, and that means putting some instant sunshine on the Presidential Palace in Mexico City. The counterargument would be that you'd be slagging a city of 8 million people just to fry a few dozen. But smashing up Mexican supply lines with SAC's remaining bombers or a few TLAM-Ns, certainly. And those orders would certainly go out to SAC's remaining elements. And a civil war? Well, suddenly seeing Mexico City go up in nuclear fire would give generals of varying political persuasion a good reason to do so. Even if it's a TLAM or ALCM set on the low-yield setting. (10 KT or so)

[Webstral]

Matt, I'm inclined to agree that a low-yield nuke or two directed against the most important leadership targets in Mexico City seems in order. I also agree that the appearance of a mushroom cloud of any dimensions over Mexico City gives some impetus to rebellious elements.

So the question becomes why it takes until 2000 for the civil war to break out. I do think we should find ways to keep the canon applecart more or less upright. Does this help us to understand why comparatively few Mexican reinforcements go north after 1998? Is the Mexican Army busy supporting counter-insurgency efforts by the various police forces? I've postulated significant unrest in previous threads. Perhaps the unrest reaches all the way to the top in some areas.

Red Star, Lone Star claims that the Second Mexican-American War was started more so that the PRI could maintain control than to protect Mexican lives. The primary opposition to the government in Mexico City calls itself the Constitucionales, referring to the 1917 Mexican Constitution. The Constitucionales claim that the Federales violated Mexican constitutional law in 1998, though we don’t have a lot of detail on the matter.

Given all of this, and my desire to incorporate a great deal of Turboswede’s excellent material into Thunder Empire, I want to try the following on for size:

In the 1980’s, Mexico develops a more self-sufficient arms industry with an eye on Brazil as a role model. DN constructs a number of VAB under license and refits earlier models for specialty roles. Additionally, DN manufactures some Cadillac-Gage vehicles under license. In both vases, the hope is that Mexico can make some arms sales to Central America as an alternative to the Cold War rivals. Africa and the Middle East are eyed as potential customers. However, the Mexican arms industry never really takes off and never really goes beyond improving Mexican self-sufficiency.

Fast-forward to the 1990’s, and the Sino-Soviet War gives the Mexican arms industry a shot in the arm. China is in the market for everything; Mexico ramps up and re-starts production of several types of light AFV. Consequently, when the nukes start flying the Mexicans have some finished AFV on the docks and others on the assembly line. This can help explain the dramatic improvement in Mexican levels of mechanization in Turboswede’s guide vis-Ã*-vis the GDW Mexican Army OB.

In the wake of the surgical nuclear exchange at the end of 1997, the Soviets are starting to develop a use-or-lose-it attitude. Sub-launched cruise missile attacks against boomers at their moorings have demonstrated that the docks are no longer safe havens for Soviet ballistic missile submarines. When the Soviets put their boats to sea, the Western attack submarines quickly begin sinking them. When the idea of nuking Mexican oil production comes up, it is pointed out that deniability is a big part of the plan. The attacks have to come from a submarine so that the Soviets at least can pretend that the Americans are to blame. Since the boomer fleet is experiencing very serious attrition, the decision is made to go ahead with the attacks against Mexican oil in December 1997.

PRI responds by suspending elections. In real life, the PRI was in decline during the 1990’s. PAN was on the rise. The 1998 elections put ten of thirty-one governorships on the block. PAN, which was already strong in the north of the country and in the Yucatan, seemed poised to make major gains. State legislatures also were up for re-election across the country.

Incorporating these ideas into a picture of Twilight: 2000 Mexico, we might imagine that the Soviets convince the PRI that the Americans are responsible for the attacks on Mexican oil. The Americans, claim the Soviets, want to prevent Mexico from claiming her place in the sun in the Western Hemisphere. For a variety of reasons, the PRI senior leadership places blame for the attack on the US.

Elsewhere in the country, blame is assigned to the Soviets and occasionally the French (who are taking revenge for Cinco de Mayo). In particular, the PAN believe that the Soviets are using Mexico as their patsies. While PAN is split about affections towards the US, the party certainly doesn’t want to be anyone’s dupes.

PRI, recognizing an opportunity to take complete control, suspends elections “for the duration of the crisis�. The Army is fully mobilized and deployed throughout the country to aid in keeping law and order. Local PRI bosses take this opportunity to settle scores against rivals, using the police and the Army as their enforcers. This, combined with the very unequal distribution of relief (covered in my previous posts regarding Mexico), provokes massive unrest throughout the country.

By April, the government realizes that they need something to distract the people from the situation at home. The problem at the border seems to offer just what the doctor ordered. A little adventure to grab some American territory, followed by negotiations that would return some of Mexico’s previous territory to Mexico, would get the country behind the PRI.

The nuclear question requires a bit of attention. There are a couple of possibilities, it seems to me. The first is that the senior PRI leadership doesn’t believe early 1998 that the US will go nuclear on them. The US has a no-first-use policy, after all. Perhaps the leadership convinces each other that the US would never go nuclear over what amounts to a border squabble. Also, they may come to believe that the US can no longer make nuclear attacks against Mexico. Finally, the Soviets may make a nuclear guarantee they have no intention of honoring. For the Soviets, an American nuclear attack on Mexico is a win-win scenario. The Soviets are hardly going to put any of their own national assets at additional risk by retaliating against the US for strikes against Mexico, but the Mexicans don’t need to be told this. We know that the Soviets develop fraternal relations with Mexico because Division Cuba is brought to the mainland.

The US responds to the invasion with a very limited nuclear strike on Mexico. A high-altitude weapon blankets the country with EMP. A handful of low-yield nukes hit major transportation hubs in northern Mexico, air bases, and the senior leadership posts (civilian government, military) in Mexico City. Maybe a couple more take out the main Navy bases, too.

PAN and other groups, already being actively suppressed, are unable to act effectively until 2000. Thus in many ways the Second Mexican Civil War begins in 1998, but it doesn’t actually burst into flame until 2000.

The above offers some interesting possibilities. PAN and other folks fleeing the situation in Mexico may end up on the American side of the lines. This could start as early as 1998. In Arizona, these folks could offer very useful intelligence about what is going on in Mexico. Fort Huachuca could soften the JCS enmity by passing on the intelligence that arrives in Arizona. PAN folks could initiate clandestine cooperation with Huachuca. This would greatly aid American efforts to conduct raids, etc. into Mexico. A useful spy ring could be built using PAN agents who are interested in defeating troops loyal to PRI in northern Mexico, ending hostilities with the US, and taking control of Mexico.

In relation to the survival of Fort Huachuca in the face of a much more muscular Mexican Army, the logic remains the same as before: Arizona simply isn’t a priority in 1998 and 1999. The prizes are in California and Texas. This is where the armor is going to go. Also, if the Second Mexican Civil War is smoldering throughout 1998 and 1999 before bursting into flames in 2000, then the Army is going to have need of its fighting vehicles at home to run down malcontents. Finally, the tanks Turboswede lists are on the lighter side. The upgraded Shermans are vulnerable to every anti-tank weapon fielded by the Americans. The TAB-30, though more survivable, still will be vulnerable to American ATGM and the guns of both M1 and M60 series tanks. This is not to say that the Mexican Army won’t have success; it is to say that in head-to-head encounters with modern American equipment, the Mexicans are going to suffer heavy losses. However, since Sixth US Army and Fifth US Army are lacking in tanks, this problem isn’t a deal-breaker for the Mexicans. Again, we may have a better explanation for the stalemate that develops at the end of the 1998 campaign season. The idea of diverting armor to a secondary front like Arizona would seem ridiculous if the goal of the fighting is either to secure resources in California or, by threatening them, to force the Americans to come to terms.



Webstral

[Matt Wiser]

Which means, in a nutshell, that the politicos who ordered the invasion do wind up as radioactive air pollution. And any surviving ministers try and hold things together, until the whole mess just plain falls apart. And Mexican forces in the field, with no supply lines back home now have a choice: either go home (units from cities that have been nuked wouldn't have anything to go home to, so guess who goes marauder, or the CO declares himself a warlord?), stay and hold onto what has already been seized, or just plain keep going, seeking an honorable death on the battlefield. Some of the units that stay where they are will eventually start fighting amongst themselves, politics aside, there will be arguments over what supplies are left, among other things, and the Soviets in Division Cuba will be wondering what in the hell they've gotten themselves into.

[Webstral]

Remarkably like the Russian situation, no?

Some of the PRI folks responsible for the war must have survived the strikes on Mexico City. Otherwise, the surviving federal government would have ended the whole thing as a bad deal and brought the troops home. Someone wanted Mexican troops in the US--even after the limited strikes.

This makes me wonder whether the Soviet respresentatives in Mexico simply lied to the Mexican President (or his successor) about Soviet nuclear retaliation against the US. By mid-1998, most strikes inside the US will be rather difficult for the Mexicans to confirm. If the US only employs one strategic package--and if the Soviets have the brass to make the claim--the Soviets can tell the Mexican President that Soviet strikes in the US have dissuaded the Americans from further nuclear use.

Also, I'm not sure it is necessary to incinerate the city to destroy rail hubs. I'm not an expert on low-yield nukes, but I wonder if a 10-20kt ground burst against a rail yard would cause a firestorm or irradiate the city. I suppose the effects will vary from city to city based on a variety of factors.


Webstral

[Targan]

Nice work Web. I particularly like this:
PAN and other folks fleeing the situation in Mexico may end up on the American side of the lines. This could start as early as 1998. In Arizona, these folks could offer very useful intelligence about what is going on in Mexico. Fort Huachuca could soften the JCS enmity by passing on the intelligence that arrives in Arizona. PAN folks could initiate clandestine cooperation with Huachuca. This would greatly aid American efforts to conduct raids, etc. into Mexico. A useful spy ring could be built using PAN agents who are interested in defeating troops loyal to PRI in northern Mexico, ending hostilities with the US, and taking control of Mexico.
as it ties into comments made in a previous thread about the Fort Huachuca making attempts to placate MilGov.

I also like your suggestions on the possible reasons for a home-grown Mexican arms buildup prior to and during the early stages of the Twilight War. Kudos.

[Webstral]

Thank you, Targan. You are indeed kind.

The nuclear question requires a bit of attention. There are a couple of possibilities, it seems to me. The first is that the senior PRI leadership doesn’t believe early 1998 that the US will go nuclear on them. The US has a no-first-use policy, after all. Perhaps the leadership convinces each other that the US would never go nuclear over what amounts to a border squabble.

I realized last night that this doesn't make sense. PRI already believes that the US went nuclear, thus obviating the no-first-use idea. Either the Mexicans believe that a Soviet nuclear shield will protect them, or they believe that France attacked Mexican oil. The latter makes little sense, although I suppose it depends on who is listening. So really, it seems like it comes down to the Soviets nuking Mexican oil, convincing the leadership that the Americans are responsible, then offering a bogus nuclear guarantee so that the Mexicans will start a war with the US.

Perhaps the Soviet ambassador to Mexico is named Zimmerov.


Webstral

[Legbreaker]

Also, I'm not sure it is necessary to incinerate the city to destroy rail hubs. I'm not an expert on low-yield nukes, but I wonder if a 10-20kt ground burst against a rail yard would cause a firestorm or irradiate the city.

Hiroshima - 13-18kt
Nagasaki - 21kt

Low yield yes, but both bombs where more than enough to totally flatten both cities.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

TLAM
I don't even know what that is.
This site so needs a glossary.
Some of you folk forget that not all of us speak US military jargon

[Dog 6]

I don't even know what that is.
This site so needs a glossary.
Some of you folk forget that not all of us speak US military jargon


this:Tomahawk Land Attack Missile - Nuclear (TLAM-N)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BGM-109_Tomahawk

[Webstral]

Hiroshima - 13-18kt
Nagasaki - 21kt

Low yield yes, but both bombs where more than enough to totally flatten both cities.

Very true, but these attacks were airbursts. A ground burst is a different creature. Also, the location of the target's rail hub relative to the city makes a difference. If the rail hub is at city center, then the effects on the city will be much more pronounced than if the rail yards are near the outskirts. Also, Japanese cities were very tindery. If the target city has more brick and cinder block construction than a WW2-era Japanese city, the blast damage will be lessened. It's worth noting, too, that the loss of life at Hiroshima was greater than at Nagasaki, despite the higher yield of the Fat Man. The layout of the city and density of its population affect the impact of a given nuclear explosion. While I don't doubt that a 10kt ground burst at city center would result in major loss of life, a 10kt ground burst away from the city center in a city with some topographical features to deflect blast and heat and a high percentage of stone, brick, or cinder block housing will not have the same effects.

All of this said, a little research into the specifics at the major northern Mexican rail hubs should help answer some of the questions. I'll have to see if I can find a rail map of Mexico.


Webstral

[kalos72]

I always assumed, perhaps incorrectly, that an air burst was for more of an EMP / firestorm of oil refineries and such then any true damage. And a ground burst was for more physical direct damage and radiation...

[Legbreaker]

Regardless of air burst, ground burst, or target city layout, etc you're never going to be able to call a nuclear explosive a "precision attack"....
:firedevil

[Dog 6]

Regardless of air burst, ground burst, or target city layout, etc you're never going to be able to call a nuclear explosive a "precision attack"....
:firedevil

very true. even the smallest nukes. .01 kt will still blow the shit out of the heart of any city.

[headquarters]

with how amny tens of millions of Mexican background citizens and other south American citizens in the US - would using WMDs against the estados unidas de Mexico -and especially the big cities-be an option?

What could a possible backlash be ?

The need to evict any occupying force in a big hurry might not be there from a JCS chess game perspective.

Allowing the invaders to weaken over some time and then try to
a)bribe units and commanders
b) force them out through conventional warfare
c) limited use of WMDs to cut supply lines/build up areas

just a thought..

[Rainbow Six]

with how amny tens of millions of Mexican background citizens and other south American citizens in the US - would using WMDs against the estados unidas de Mexico -and especially the big cities-be an option?

I tend to agree with HQ here...whilst I think tactical nuclear strikes on key military targets, supply lines etc is possible (perhaps even probable), I think the JCS might stop short of an attack on Mexico City...if the goal is simply to destroy Mexico's leadership, it's massively disproportionate; as well as HQ's argument, which I think is a good one, several other good reasons have already been put forth, not least the fact that the two countries have to live side by side after the War. Also, killing the Mexican Government may act as a barrier to future peace negotiations if there is no one on the Mexican side for the US to negotiate with? (I'm sure the original V1 timeline includes a statement about the European War after the first nuclear exchange that goes somewhere along the lines of "peace might have been possible but there were no Governments to talk to each other"?)

Just my tuppence worth...

[John Farson]

Very interesting debate here. I too have always thought that Mexico would get nuked in the Twilight War after the Mexican Army crosses the border with Division Cuba. It's the degree of the U.S. strike that's the question, ranging from a full-blown attack (i.e. nuke every Spanish-speaking person between the Rio Grande and the Yucatan) to a targeted one (hit the rail hubs, the troop concentrations, supply junctions, the Mexican government in Mexico City etc.) and watch the Mexican Army and Division Cuba quickly run out of gas and supplies and disintegrate in a wave of mass desertions and surrenders.

As others have already pointed out, the JCS would have various things to take into account. First of all the total annihilation option is out, because at the end of the day Mexico isn't the USSR/Russia. You don't really need THAT many nukes to render Mexico harmless. And it's quite obvious that not everyone in Mexican political and military circles would support this mad scheme anyway. Also, the JCS has to take into account that any nukes too close to the border would potentially also endanger Americans with the fallout. Also, nuking your worst opponent in retaliation for his nuking you is different from nuking a country without nukes. Having said that, I do add the caveat that certain other non-nuclear countries would have also been hit hard (e.g. Canada and Japan).

That being said, it's also out of the question that the JCS would withhold from using nukes at all to stop the Mexican advance. The Mexican government has essentially stabbed the U.S. in the back. The nuclear strikes of Nov./Dec. 1997 have decimated the U.S. military and U.S. forces in America are stretched thin as it is. They have no way of conventionally stopping the Mexican advance. Any prior reluctance in using nukes is out the window as the nuclear genie hasn't just been let out of the bottle, it's been smashed out of the bottle. So nukes is what they'll use, against the Mexican military, transportation hubs and the Mexican government. There will be an attempt to avoid excessive civilian deaths, but it has to be said that with the nukes, the civil war, famine, epidemics and general political and social breakdown that Mexico will be just as worse off as the U.S., if not even more so.

[John Farson]

Having said all that, I do have to wonder, though, whether a Mexican invasion of the USA after the November nuclear strikes would really even have come to pass. IMHO, no Mexican government, regardless of what party running it, would be stupid/insane enough to consider stabbing the U.S in the back in such a scenario. They would have to consider that even after the nuclear exchange the U.S. would still hold a number of nukes in reserve, more than enough to bomb Mexico to the stone age if necessary. And I'm sure the JCS would warn the Mexican president, in no uncertain terms, that any aggressive moves toward the U.S. would be met with immediate, nuclear retaliation. And any constraints the U.S. might have once had in using nukes would be gone after the world blowing up and millions of people already dead.

[kalos72]

Not to mention the fact that all their refinery capability has been nuked to hell...where are they getting the fuel.

[Webstral]

In 1998, the Mexican Army is probably getting its fuel from the same place the other combatants are: pre-Exchange stocks. It can't have escaped the notice of the Mexican leadership that in July NATO and the Pact start exchanging nuclear fires. Given the importance of oil to the world's economy and the war effort, everyone with an oil rig in-country probably starts thinking about stockpiles, if they haven't thought about this already. After 1998, though, the Mexicans probably switch to alcohol like everybody else.

Stupid is as stupid does. While I'm inclined to agree that the invasion of the US was ill-considered and that its real purpose is to advance the game, I'm willing to play along because people do insane things when they feel they are under pressure. After the Germans had very clearly lost the war on the Eastern Front, Bulgaria joined the Axis and declared war on the Soviet Union. This was an insanely stupid thing to do, but it was done. The Japanese started a war in the Pacific under the assumption that the US would not use its overwhelming manpower and industrial advantage if the Japanese could establish a favorable position before beginning negotiations. We all know how well this turned out.

The Mexicans have a couple of reasons to think that a border skirmish with the US might turn out in their favor. The first is that the US has been very badly hurt. There hasn't been a chance like this in 150 years. The second is that the PRI needs a foreign adventure. In the wake of the nuclear attacks on Mexican oil, the collapse of the global economy, and the unequal distribution of relief supplies (in keeping with the racial and economic themes of Mexico), the PRI needs something to distract the people and unite the country. There's nothing like a little foreign adventure to fit the bill. With a nuclear guarantee from the Soviet Union (or maybe France?), the Mexican leadership might have felt that a border skirmish was practicable. A few fights, a few setbacks for the Americans, and they would come to the table with some modest territorial concessions. The Mexican Army would relinquish territory captured in excess of the concessions, and the PRI could claim to have reversed 150 years of shame. Everybody wins--except of course that the Americans chose to go nuclear instead of coming to the bargaining table.

The PRI invades the US for essentially the same reasons the Sauronski regime goes nuclear: they're out of power and probably dead if they don't do something decisive. [Expletive deleted] the fate of the nation--these guys have their lives and personal fortunes on the line. Neither government probably imagined things getting so out of hand. With the Americans NOT suing for peace, the Mexicans are forced to push ever deeper into US territory. Pretty soon, they are at the limits of their strength, and both sides are locked in a stalemate.


Webstral

[Matt Wiser]

The Mexicans probably didn't think there would be nuclear retaliation, especially if Webstral is right and the Soviets promised nuclear support in event there was such action. No doubt they wondered what in the hell they'd gotten themselves into when cities like Hermosillo, Monterrey, Tampico, Chihuaha City, etc. go up in nuclear fire. Even a strike near Mexico City (their AF's main base is at Santa Clara, east of Mexico City, would drive that home, not to mention 10 KT on Benito Juraez IAP (Mexico City's main airport). The effects on the Mexican Army in the field would be serious from a supply standpoint, and moralewise...even more so. Especially units raised from cities that were hit, even if low-yield ground or near-ground bursts were used to destroy rail yards and other supply infrastructure (though the grunts wouldn't know that-they'd assume home just got totally slagged). The Mexican Army starts to break up as a result. Civil War is delayed, but it starts eventually. The Soviets in Division Cuba are past being screwed-they're being wheeled into the delivery room. They're 10,000 miles from home, a hostile civilian population around them, and their "allies" are getting ready to fight each other. Not a good place to be....

[Webstral]

The [limited] nuclear option against Mexico brings a bit of the European flavor to North America. The US isn't up against an intact minor-to-medium power. Strikes againat the oil infrastructure, EMP, and attacks on the Air Force, Navy, and logistical infrastructure level the playing field a bunch.


Webstral

[Webstral]

I was thinking a bit about reconciling Turboswede's work with canon. What if Mexico rides the upsurge in arms sales in 1995 & 1996 by producing French equipment under license? If Mexico gears up to produce a handful of French AFV--such as VAB, Lynx, and scout cars--we could see a greater standardization of French-designed light AFV in the Mexican Army. Mexico could keep a few back for her own use. After the nukes start flying, Mexico could keep the factories operating and equip her own formations.

Webstral

[Matt Wiser]

And those factories are targets when SAC flies south of the border. Not nukes, mind you, but there would be enough iron bombs available to do the job.

[Webstral]

And those factories are targets when SAC flies south of the border. Not nukes, mind you, but there would be enough iron bombs available to do the job.

Without arguing about whether the USAF would have assets to do the job in June 1998, the destruction of key Mexican plants fits nicely with the overall tone of Twilight: 2000.

Webstral

[Legbreaker]

I can see nukes being more likely than planes actually - most of the planes are occupied elsewhere in the world, a fact which surely had some bearing on Mexico's decision to invade. Nukes on the other hand....

[Matt Wiser]

Not every SAC base is on GDW's target list, and then there's the recovery fields (fomer AF bases, civilian airports, and other AF bases-TAC, MAC, ANG, etc.). There'd be munitions available. And if conventional weapons aren't available in quantity, there's enough B-61s or B-83s left....

[kalos72]

Anyone put together a list of nuclear targets by chance? Or even just strategic military/oil production targets...

[Lawstcause]

I know this is an old thread but I just don't see the invasion working out the way the canon has it. First you've already discussed the Nukes and the fact that most of the Mexican equipment is dated. Also, I don't believe their troops are well trained enough to take on even what is left in the US.

[Matt Wiser]

Same here. Personally, I think GDW's writers got the idea from a passage in the book The Day After World War III, where the question is raised about the behavior of U.S. neighbors after a nuclear attack on the U.S. "Would Cuba, Mexico, or even Canada, try and encroach on the U.S. after a nuclear exchange?" (even though Canada would have taken its share of weapons...) And even if the Mexicans did try the invasion, SAC, even in its weakened state, would have enough weapons to see to it that the invasion is stopped in its tracks by blasting their supply lines with B-61s turned to the low yield setting. (somewhere betwen 20 and 40 KT)

[Legbreaker]

It has to be remembered that the Americans had just been nuked and the vast majority of their military left in country was occupied with disaster relief missions. I don't know how many tanks and heavy weapons would be immediately at hand for something like that, but my guess is it would take them some time to re-equip and deploy for combat.
The Mexicans were also bolstered by the Soviets from Cuba, as well as the very effective distraction up in Alaska.
I agree that it would be stupid for the Mexicans to attack if the US was actually prepared to receive the assault, but that was far, far from the case in T2K.

As for attacking supply lines, perhaps the US President at the time didn't feel that nuking US soil, or anything close to it, was a very good idea given the massive destruction that had already been inflicted. Perhaps they were just paralysed from the overwhelming reality of the situation and by the time the authorisation was given it was too late to have any significant effect. Perhaps the planes simply weren't available, or the Mexicans routed their supplies through civilian areas, or any number of other viable and realistic reasons NOT to nuke them.

[Matt Wiser]

I'm not talking about supply lines in the U.S.; rather, those south of the border are those SAC singles out for attention. And by this time, according to canon, the JCS are the de facto government.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

It's also worth remembering that the writers at GDW were not trying to recreate a plausible real world scenario with the Mexican invasion of the USA - they were trying to create an interesting world for the PCs to adventure in.

[Legbreaker]

Well in that case, perhaps they simply didn't have access to the necessary codes to use the nukes, OR saw using yet more nukes would be a serious Public relations problem in the future. Perhaps they just saw that the existing units on the ground would be able to at least contain the Mexican advance to the Texas region and once the situation in Europe had stablised, they could counterattack with veteran troops recalled from there and gain additional non-irradiated Mexican land for the US.

[Matt Wiser]

The JCS had to have the codes: look at the 1998 exchange, for starters. And given how things were going, using nukes to shatter Mexican supply lines and use a low-yield TLAM-N or ALCM on the Presidential Palace in Mexico City (10 KT) would have been very appealing, given the lack of conventional forces available to deal with the invasion. There are proceedures in place that, if the communication links to civilian leadership fail, the military takes over until a Presidential successor can be found. And that includes having nuclear release authority.

[Webstral]

Given that the Soviets obviously have a cozy-ish relationship with Mexico by mid-1998, a geunine nuclear guarantee might be in place. The nuke guarantee doesn't have to be a USSR-on-USA type of thing to be effective. We can imagine that the surviving Soviet government lets it be known that for every nuke used against Mexico (a Soivet ally), the USSR will use a nuke against a US ally. There are enough populations centers left in Germany, Denmark, Norway, Japan, etc. for a Soviet threat to mean something--if only that the US limits nuclear action to the barest minimum of strikes necessary to ground the Mexican Air Force and strangle the Mexican Army supply lines. Canada gets it pretty hard in Twilight: 2000. I haven't seen anything that says all of these strikes on Canada occur in 1997. What if one or more of the nuclear attacks on Canada is Soviet retaliation for American nuclear attacks on Mexico?

[Legbreaker]

Essentially canon indicates there are two main strategic exchanges - the November 1997 massive strike against the US, and a weaker one in autumn 1998 but was primarily aimed at industrial centres in the UK and Italy.
We also know the very first tactical warhead exploded on the 9th of July 1997, but their use continued right up to and probably beyond November.
A few individual warheads here and there ouside those basic guidelines isn't just compatible with canon, but I'd go so far as to say encouraged by it.
A GM just needs to be careful any additional strikes don't unbalance the known situation in favour of one side or the other.

However, it's my personal view the US would avoid nuking Mexico and it's supply lines if they possibly could - there's enough fallout floating around already, and as Web indicated, the Soviets have itchy trigger fingers and a demonstrated willingness to use it.

[Olefin]

A very good work - but keep in mind that in reality the Mexican Army only operated M3 and M5 Stuarts and the M8 75mm Howitzer Motor Carriage based on the Stuart for tanks. The only three Shermans they ever had were ARV's.

Actually always thought that the Mexicans didnt have to have tanks to have done the invasion. They had lots of light armored vehicles that were armed with a variety of guns and missiles that would have been very dangerous against their opponents in the US even without tanks to back them up.

Basically you had several US training divisions, who had almost no armor and several other infantry, National Guard, and MP formations that at best were armed with M113APC's and maybe a sprinkling of old reserve tanks pulled out of depots.

With the fact that their invasion occured after the loss of most petroleum sources the fact that their army used lighter vehicles was probably its biggest asset - i.e. even if they were faced with Abrams tanks, those tanks were facing a lack of fuel to be able to operate properly

Now could they have bought Shermans from the Israelis and tanks from the French - the Shermans are certiainly possible and the French vehicles were confirmed by Red Star Lone Star. However considering the opposition that they faced and their general lack of heavy armor, if the Mexicans had been as well equipped with tanks as the Sourcebook indicates there is a good chance the only way they would have been stopped would have been by using nukes. So I would think they had them but that instead they relied more on the APC's and AC to do the dirty work of the invasion with the tanks only being called up when a very hard nut had to be cracked to conserve them as much as possible.

As for the one Armored Division the US did have that was used to oppose the invasion - that single Division would have been opposed by both the Soviet Divison Cuba, with its heavy tanks, and also by overwhelming numbers of Mexican light armored vehicles armed with recoilless rifles, ATGM's and cannons, not to mention infantry using anti-tank rockets and recoilless rifles of their own.

You could see the 49th being overwhelmed much the way the Germans were overwhelmed in WWII - trying to stop large numbers of inferior vehicles that one on one an Abrams could deal with easily - but ten or twelve to one they couldnt. (especially once the Soviets showed up to aid the Mexicans with modern MBT's)

Keep in mind that given the timing of the invasion the most probable tanks they faced were M60's/M48's/Stingrays/Sheridans and not many of them no matter what the type (in formations outside of the 49th that is).

[Raellus]

I like the idea of giving the Mexicans a few battalions of tanks. It makes them a more formidable opponent and helps explain (or justify) their initial military success. I don't think that a battalion of French AMX-30s or whatever would make them unstoppable, though. That generation of MBT would be fairly vulnerable to most types of LAWs, let alone ATGMs.

I've also proposed that the Mexicans use their rather large fleet of commercial 16-wheeler cargo trucks to supply their mechanized and light armored forces. Well supplied with gasoline, they'd have an edge over their American adversaries in terms of mobility.

Like I said, any relatively realistic way to make the MAF tougher makes a SW CONUS campaign all the more interesting/challenging.

[Olefin]

Even the Stuarts that they had in real life would have been effective in the invasion. Remember that the 49th and the 40th had to be moved south of combat them but werent in place when the initial invasion occurred.

So their main opponent would have been National Guard and police units armed with mostly M-16's and machine guns and possibly not even any anti-tank weapons at all. In that situation a Stuart would have still been a very effective weapons (as they showed during the revolt in the Yucatan in the 90's against similiar armed rebels)

The sourcebook adds a lot more than a couple of battalions of tanks - if they had really had that most likely they would have penetrated further into the US and gotten to Vegas or Utah.

Also keep in mind, and I am putting it in bold not to shout but to make a point, the canon has absolutely no mention in it of Mexican tanks.

Red Star, Lone Star says the following about the Mexican Army - which is that the AFV's they mention in their units are almost universally the ERC-90 Armored Car, a 6 x 6 amphibious armored car, equipped with a 90mm gun.

The only tanks mentioned in the whole module are the Soviet ones in Soviet Division Cuba.

The canon magazine article on the Mexicans had this in it as well

Armored Vehicles: Armored cavalry regiments and armored recon battalions included a squadron of seventeen ERC-90 armored cars and two squadrons of infantry in VAB armored personnel carriers (both of French manufacture).
Some motorized cavalry regiments included a mixed squadron of VABs and ERC90s (trucks and jeeps carried the other squadrons of the regiment).
Mechanized infantry regiments included forty VAB APCs.


Notice no mention of tanks at all.

Putting together the only two canon mentions of the Mexican Army composition points plainly to a singular fact - that the Mexican Army is not a tank equipped army, but instead an army of armored cars, APC's and light armored vehicles.

Which exactly matches the reality of the Mexican Army makeup during that time.

While the Sourcebook is a great source of information, its inclusion of so many tanks in the Mexican Army is clearly not supported by the canon articles and modules.

However the rest of its armor for the Mexican forces, especially the light armored vehicles, APC's and AC's is supported by the canon for sure.


Again keep in mind who stopped the 49th's counter attack - it was the Soviet Division Cuba's heavy tanks, not the Mexicans. They may have slowed them down and burned their ammo and fuel but it was the Soviet tanks that were able to stand up to the tanks of the 49th, not Mexican ones.

Actually if they had had that many tanks the invasion may never have happened - I dont see the US stripping the Southwest of all its armored units if the Mexicans are both unfriendly to the US and have several battalions of tanks in their army. That would have made them a major threat and thus they would have kept more forces there, especially forces with anti-tank weapons and tank support.

And Red Star, Lone Star mentions several times how lightly equipped the US forces were in Texas during the invasion.

[Raellus]

Olefin, Mexican tanks may not be canonical, but if this embelishment livens up someone's game world, what's the big deal? I mean, not to get all finger pointy here, but you seem to blatantly cherry pick when it comes to canon. For just one example, Mexican tanks don't get a pass since they're not mentioned in canon, but you're all good with a total rewrite of published sources like HW and a couple of the other modules. I'm not trying to start crap with you here, but you are not the arbiter of canon. If Turboswede wants to add tanks to the MAF ORBAT, let him. If you don't like it, don't use it.

[Olefin]

Not trying to scrap his whole work - just pointing out that the Mexicans never had any appreciable tank force - but also pointing out that the whole canon invasion works just fine with the armored forces that they did have and also how the sourcebook that Turboswede is presenting said invasion outside of the tank forces mentioned.

After all they arent facing fully equipped US armored divisions when they go in - at best the US might have some Sheridans or some light armored vehicles that are patrolling navy bases and the like - against that kind of equipment the Mexican armored forces would be very effective (which is the story the canon tells) and also the story that Turboswede tells.

And I dont see the US stripping the Southwest of armor the way they did if the Mexicans were both a) unfriendly and b) had an army with a large force of tanks. Under that scenario, for instance, the 49th would have been in Texas when the invasion occurred and probably stopped it dead in its tracks.

Turboswedes's work is very good - an excellent sourcebook - and i do plan on using it. I only point out that the canon works on the Mexican Army do not show them as having any tanks in either of the works published on the makeup of the Mexican Army. I would think that it would be highly unlikely that every Mexican tank got knocked out by the US during the invasion - some would have survived for sure and still been in Mexican units in 2000.


As for HW and Kidnapped - those modules have tons of flaws in them that have nothing to do with Mexico having tanks or not. Including things like how does Colorado Springs get hit by a nuke earlier in the war but somehow MilGov is headquartered in a city that would have been destroyed by said nuke? But that horse has been beaten to death and no reason to bring it back to life yet again.

[Apache6]

Is there a functional link to a Mexican Army Sourcebook?

[.45cultist]

Is there a functional link to a Mexican Army Sourcebook?

Try Paul Mulcahy's page, there was a link to a good one. I'm going to use it for an alternative SW. BTW, the 49TH AD(TNG) isn't a pack of lightweights, a lot of ex-1ST Cav guys in it. The chief drawback of U.S. forces is too tech savvy. I met a MONG cadre NCO at my friend's surplus store. He made all thier guys, even the platoon leaders put their phones, GPS units in a box and issued compasses, maps, and protractors out for land navigation. War has a steep enough learning curve with out OJT in lower tech skills.

[Olefin]

And the 49th, contrary to what some have said, was well equipped with up to date tanks when the Mexicans invaded. Per the canon books they received Stingrays and other vehicles to replace vehicle losses after the failed offensive into Texas, not before that.

Have a feeling their defeat at the hands of the Soviets and the Mexicans had more to do with them not having proper air support - as per the Texas module the Soviets had and still have helicopter gunships - if the 49th went in expecting only ground opponents and wasnt properly equipped with anti-air weapons or didnt have them ready to rock they might have taken a nice beating from the air even before they engaged the Soviet tanks.

The Soviet air contingent may be the real story of why the US Army didnt succeed in taking back Texas - especially considering I am betting the Mexican Air Force had long been shot out of the sky and they werent expecting to face anything more menacing from the air than bird droppings.

[mpipes]

I've long felt the cannon was REALLY off with the Mexican invasion without some major tweaking on a pre-war buildup of Mexico's military.

For me, I modified the cannon considerably. Some of the highlights....

-Mexico makes major oil and gas discoveries in the late 70's and is a major oil producer by TDM.

-As a second tier world power, Mexico steps up its presence on the world stage in the 80's, with its army involved in UN peace keeping operations.

-Mexico expands military capabilities in the 90s.
--Buys Israeli Shermans.
--Buys Mirage 4000, F1-Es, APCs, tanks (AMX-30s), and artillery from France.
--Buys license to build AMX-40s from France.
--Buys retired Jaguars from France and UK.
--Buys MiGs , M48A3s, MiL-24Ds, BTR-60s, artillery, and frigates from reunited Germany.
--Lures Spanish Legionnaire armor vets to service.
--Lures veteran Cuban pilots to fly MiGs.

-President Tanner's administration fails to take military threat posed by Mexico seriously. Texas' 49th Armored division deploys to Europe in October 1996 as a strategic reserve. Finally deploys as part of XVII Corps to Turkey in March 1997.

-By TDM, Mexican army was among the best trained military force in the Americas; better on average than the Russians and the National Guard units in the Southwest.

-A-10s and F-20s flown by NG pilots save the US bacon, as the armored columns moving through Texas are blunted and fail to reach the intact oil fields and refinery complexes in North Louisiana, Oklahoma, and western Colorado before US units mobilize to finally stop the invasion along the I-20/I-10 corridor in Texas.

[swaghauler]

A very nice write up sir. I enjoyed it very much.

[ArmySGT.]

An MP company fights as Infantry Dragoons liberally supplied with crew served weapons.

A typical Corps MP Squad would have three weapons carrier HMMWVs (M1025/M1026 in the 80's and 90s or M1114s in the late 90s)

A single team in the late 80s or early 90s would have three M9s, two M16s, one M203, one M60, and one MK-19 or M2HB. In some cases drop one M16 and add a SAW. Then in the mid 90s drop the M16 for the M4.

MPs are also liberally supplied with night vision and radios....... This is because of their route reconnaisance mission and radio relay mission.... two radios per team and an AM long range per platoon leader. One PVS5 in the early 80s, then one PVS5 and one PVS7 in the mid 80s, then two PVS7s in the 90s. One PVS4 with reticles for the m16/m203, SAW, M60, and M2HB. One TVS5 for the M2HB or MK19.

hand grenades and signal rockets galore. one to four claymores per as well.

A Divisional MP company may have several FIM-92 stingers.... 82nd MP Co being one that does.

10 weapons carriers and one cargo per platoon.... the a HQ platoon.

MPs are regularly issued light and medium AT weapons and trained in mine warfare too.

MP Bns are always ersatz affairs with non MP companies such as Cavalry, Signal, and Med companies attached based upon the Corps Commanders direct instruction and dictated mission.

Look for period editions of Field Manual 19 - 4 for the difference in MTOE for Division, Corps, Special, and Detachment military police units.

[ArmySGT.]

And the 49th, contrary to what some have said, was well equipped with up to date tanks when the Mexicans invaded. Per the canon books they received Stingrays and other vehicles to replace vehicle losses after the failed offensive into Texas, not before that.

Have a feeling their defeat at the hands of the Soviets and the Mexicans had more to do with them not having proper air support - as per the Texas module the Soviets had and still have helicopter gunships - if the 49th went in expecting only ground opponents and wasnt properly equipped with anti-air weapons or didnt have them ready to rock they might have taken a nice beating from the air even before they engaged the Soviet tanks.

The Soviet air contingent may be the real story of why the US Army didnt succeed in taking back Texas - especially considering I am betting the Mexican Air Force had long been shot out of the sky and they werent expecting to face anything more menacing from the air than bird droppings.

Unlikely, the Air Defense school at Ft. Bliss, outside El Paso, Texas, encompasses most of the northern part of that, to the border with White Sands Missile Range..... the AD school is multi service and multi national.

White Sands Missile Range tests all new systems and regularly tests lots of munitions from industry suppliers for quality.

There wouldn't be a shortage of AD weapons or Artillery (Ft. Sill) in the Southwest.

[LT. Ox]

Fort Sill alumni.
If it was not nuked then old, new and in between would have been located at the school. Mixed types of rounds including experimental for testing.
From airmobile and towed to all self -propelled types.
The school also had air ops units for training new Officers Etc. I have no doubt that enough experience existed there to train FOs to use the “old” methods of map reading and adjusting fire that even EMP would not keep them from accomplishing their mission of delivering fire on target.

[swaghauler]

Fort Sill alumni.
If it was not nuked then old, new and in between would have been located at the school. Mixed types of rounds including experimental for testing.
From airmobile and towed to all self -propelled types.
The school also had air ops units for training new Officers Etc. I have no doubt that enough experience existed there to train FOs to use the “old” methods of map reading and adjusting fire that even EMP would not keep them from accomplishing their mission of delivering fire on target.

Trained there in 1988. Did an introductory 2 week course on Fire Direction/Forward Observation there through ROTC in 91. They were still teaching the "old school" method even after standardizing on the Paladin HIP in 1988. Did my Special Weapons at Hood and they were pretty heavy into alternate fire direction because of the risk EMP would disable your BCS.

[.45cultist]

Fort Sill alumni.
If it was not nuked then old, new and in between would have been located at the school. Mixed types of rounds including experimental for testing.
From airmobile and towed to all self -propelled types.
The school also had air ops units for training new Officers Etc. I have no doubt that enough experience existed there to train FOs to use the “old” methods of map reading and adjusting fire that even EMP would not keep them from accomplishing their mission of delivering fire on target.

Saw the museum there, it was neat!

[.45cultist]

The more I think about it, the more I'd say that there should be changes to the Southwest to reflect a failed invasion before everything broke down. Also I believe that what forces survive would drift back for internal security and relief duties or turn marauder. The invasion allows insurgent groups on both sides to upgrade their gear. La Familia has some real life inspiration and can be considered the Mexican New America. In the South the Marxist guerillas rise again, etc.