View Single Post
  #14  
Old 10-10-2010, 03:03 PM
Webstral's Avatar
Webstral Webstral is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: North San Francisco Bay
Posts: 1,688
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt Wiser View Post
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
Reply With Quote