View Single Post
  #23  
Old 01-08-2016, 10:45 PM
Legbreaker's Avatar
Legbreaker Legbreaker is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Tasmania, Australia
Posts: 5,070
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RN7 View Post
Once the nukes start landing I think we can forget about the US and Soviets having a satellite launching capacity. Some infrastructure and capability to launch something into orbit may survive, but not the resources to design, manufacture and test satellites.
Agreed. IF, and that's a BIG if, anyone is in a position to launch more than a weather balloon, it'd be using existing stocks of rockets, etc. Can't imagine any new materials would be created for a good decade after the nukes, at best.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RN7 View Post
France on the other hand might. It would depend on if you believe France was targeted by Soviet nuclear weapons in T2K or not. I don't think France was and if it was it was a limited nuclear strike on French oil refineries. The French completely withdrew from the Atlantic Alliance (they withdrew from NATO in 1966) once NATO crossed into East Germany in December 1996. Unlike Japan the French offered no support to the US or NATO before the war went nuclear in any capacity. Their actions after the nuclear strikes do not follow that of a country wounded by the Soviets. No cooperation with NATO in Europe, in fact they invade two NATO countries (Germany and the Netherlands), they carve out a new power-bloc with Belgium in Africa, they send a fully functional and well equipped military expeditionary force to the Middle East in direct rivalry to CENCOM and the RDF, and they support French separatists in Canada.
Those actions occurred after the nukes, and the "invasion" of the Netherlands and Germany were little more than a realignment of the border to the river - a geographical obstacle they could use to repel the hordes of refugees. Makes perfect sense to me, and is certainly understandable, if not even forgiveable.
As for the middle east, why does any country send troops? Oil, a resource France, like every other country, really, really needs. It'd be astonishing if they didn't have a presence there!
Quote:
Originally Posted by RN7 View Post
Their main launching site is in Kourou in French Guyana which is in South America. Latin America wasn't nuked in T2K and if Kourou was nuked why did did the Soviets miss the Panama Canal?
In 2.x Chile and Brazil nuked each other. Where did they get those weapons? Was part of that deal a deniable requirement to attack French interests (Nato may have wanted a bit of payback for France abandoning them, and the Soviets to deny a historical ally of their enemy certain vital facilities and resources).

And what about conventional attacks? Not everything has to be nuked, not when conventional explosives emplaced by saboteurs will do the job. Nukes against French interests may prompt retaliation in kind, while sabotage may be either ignored in the big picture, or illicit a similar "low scale" retaliation by commandos.
__________________
If it moves, shoot it, if not push it, if it still doesn't move, use explosives.

Nothing happens in isolation - it's called "the butterfly effect"

Mors ante pudorem
Reply With Quote