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....

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....

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

Just don't see it
 

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.

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)

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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).

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.

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.

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.

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.

Is there a functional link to a Mexican Army Sourcebook?
 

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

Sgt know his stuff
 

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.

Saw the museum there, it was neat!

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.