View Single Post
  #70  
Old 09-22-2015, 12:09 PM
Olefin Olefin is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Greencastle, PA
Posts: 3,003
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Webstral View Post
The 40th doesn't walk away from the oil. Sixth US Army does, it seems, but 40th ID does not. I’m also inclined to dismiss both the severe drought and the very high attrition rate of military units that are not generally in high-tempo combat, as we have all discussed at great length. Once the population and food supplies balance out, which they seem to have done in most places by the time the Fall harvest of 2000 comes in, recruitment should be able to keep pace with losses fairly easily.

It is hard to understand why things develop the way the authors describe in California. The Bakersfield oil would be a major factor in the thinking of the senior leadership in the region. One possibility is that the supply of oil or refined products becomes so small that it is not as big a deal as we might otherwise expect. Accidents or sabotage might be responsible for a refinery bottleneck. It’s hard to say. I do note that the parting of company between 63rd Corps and 40th ID seems amicable. Nine hundred troops from 40th ID leave the division and go north, which strongly suggests that some sort of modus vivendi has been worked out between Sixth US Army CG and the commander of 40th ID. Perhaps some sort of trade agreement has been put into place whereby Sixth US Army provides 40th ID with something they need in return for crude oil or refined products. While this sort of dealing seems counterintuitive on the surface, perhaps a few very level-headed people realized that blue-on-blue violence as a solution to their differences was going to weaken everybody and perhaps destroy some of the critical remaining infrastructure.



Interesting! I have a download that doesn’t have locations more specific than “California” or “South Texas”. I’d be curious to see the locations given in your resource on a map.

I really do wonder why the Army of California is putting manpower into patrolling/occupying Los Angeles. Most of us here understand what four nuclear strikes on the LA basin is going to do to LA County. The whole basin ought to look more-or-less like Tokyo after the last big firebombing raid before the attack on Hiroshima. I haven’t read City of Angels extensively, so I’m not familiar with the rationale given for the presence of Mexican Army units. It seems to me like a needless diversion of resources.

When I was still putting time into Thunder Empire, I gave some thought to the fate of the Army of California. It seems to me that the Second Mexican Civil War offers the Americans an opportunity, though not without cost. We know that there are two main factions fighting for control of Mexico: the Nationalists (ENM? Really, the PRI) and the Constitutionalists (EMC). There are several smaller groups, and they are not without their importance. What matters is that the EMC is the main rival to the PRI throughout most of Mexico in 2000.

Milgov is going to want to see regime change in Mexico, if at all possible. If this isn’t possible, then Milgov would like to see an independent Republica del Norte or Aztlan Republic in northern Mexico to be a buffer between the US and the main body of Mexico. This amounts to supporting the EMC. EMC control over the Imperial Valley and the Imperial Dam gives them an important base of supply upon which an offensive to capture the rest of Baja California and/or Sonora might be based. The Americans want to regain control over this resource, but taking this resource from the EMC would deprive them of a crucial resource for their own efforts even if forces available to Milgov in the American Southwest were up to the task and could get it done without major losses. It’s a challenge.

Los Angeles is going to be reduced to ashes and rubble by firestorm. The thermal pulses from four separate nuclear explosions within the basin will create a firestorm that will dwarf anything seen in WW2. Greater Los Angeles is noteworthy for being wall-to-wall development. Obviously, not everything will be completely destroyed. But the level of destruction will be spectacular--comparable to Warsaw only even more widespread.
And by the way I agree totally with you that having US units continue to shrink and lose manpower in the US makes no sense at all- you have a population that is looking to get fed - well the quickest way to get fed is to join the US Army - if anything those units should be growing in size, using recruits to bring back their service units and letting combat soldiers concentrate on being infantrymen again

i.e. "Ok Sonny, looks like you passed the test" says the Sergeant tasting his rabbit stew. "You are now in the US Army. Report to the mess sergeant tomorrow!" - which now lets the trained infantryman who got drafted into being a cook because they were so short on manpower go back to being an infantryman
Reply With Quote