Thread: Panama Canal
View Single Post
  #4  
Old 10-09-2010, 05:15 PM
pmulcahy11b's Avatar
pmulcahy11b pmulcahy11b is offline
The Stat Guy
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 4,354
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kalos72 View Post
It would be in a pre war scenario with the size of the naval vessels being deployed. But after the drop, much smaller ships would be used and the size of the canal would be no problem at all.
It would be useful in a T2K world, once you get the antiquated locks working again. They've already, in our world, have deteriorated and need constant maintenance. But what I mean is in a World War III scenario, as a target, they're not worth using a nuke on -- much less mounting an actual assault to capture them.

There are two countries who might think they're worth an attack: Mexico (doubtful if they have the forces to mount an attack) and Cuba (ditto). The Mexicans might be useful to their much smaller naval vessels and to resupply troops in California and the Southwest US. But by the time of the Mexican attack, anyone capturing the canal might find themselves in an uphill task to repair and maintain a neglected Panama Canal.

Another possible reason for an attack on the Canal Zone would be to tie down US troops there. The US might find the Canal Zone useful as a base to launch attacks on Mexico against their underbelly. But the canal itself, I think, would not be a worthwhile target to bother putting out of action or maintaining, at least during the actual war.

And for all we know, Columbia might try to take back Panama. Theodore Roosevelt basically stole Panama from the Colombians to build the Panama Canal.
__________________
I'm guided by the beauty of our weapons...First We Take Manhattan, Jennifer Warnes

Entirely too much T2K stuff here: www.pmulcahy.com
Reply With Quote