Yet another Alternative TW2K Timeline

[sglancy12]

Howdy folks,

Being a history/political science wonk from way back, I completely got off on the alternative history in the TW2K game setting. Like most of you I was sorry to see history render the game's setting obsolete, and was a little disappointed in GDW's attempts to tinker with their time-line to keep it relevant. Rather than advancing the time-line and setting the Twilight War further and further into the future, I felt that Twilight 2000 should be an alternative history set in the 1990s. By setting TW2K in an alternative past we can correct some of the faulty assumptions and presumptions the game designers made back in the 1980s when they were writing it. Furthermore, we can avoid our own faulty assumptions and avoid having real world events render our predictions "quaint" or even ridiculous.

Both these documents are very incomplete. The time-line dates for real world events have not been properly checked against off-line sources. The gazetteer, in particular, suffers from the use of online data (particularly from the CIA World Factbook) and is anachronistic because the data does not reflect 1997 conditions.

The time line and gazeteer diverge from TW2K canon on several major points:

1) I was never convinced that the Soviet Union could fight a two front war against the US and the PRC and manage to hold out for as long as they did before taking the nuclear option. From my perspective, once the second front opened up in the west, it would have been a matter or weeks before the Kremlin used the same sort of nuclear options in Europe that they used on the Chinese. I just don't see them as being able to keep up that pace conventionally without the empire falling apart.

The only country on earth that could simultaneously fight on two continents against two super powers (or close enough to being super-powers) is the United States. So I wanted to create a situation where the People's Republic of China patched up their differences with the USSR sufficiently to have them fighting against the west. That way the war could grind along conventionally with victory just within reach, thus discouraging the Reds from going nuclear until they've completely exhausted themselves.

Besides... I'm no more a fan of Red China than I was of the USSR. Having the Red Chinese on our side in the Twilight War is a lot like having Joseph Stalin on our side in WWII. I'd rather be shooting at them too.

Furthermore, for America to be so out of resources that we are down to one Los Angeles Class attack boat by 2000, we are going to need to have been slugging it out against both the USSR and the PRC. A war of attrition against both those powers might just grind the American military down to the nub it is in the canon materials.

2) I was not completely convinced about the likelihood of combatants nuking neutrals in order to deny the enemy the resources, particularly when it comes to oil resources. I can imagine Cahm Rahn Bay in Vietnam getting nuked, even if the Vietnamese didn't overtly join the USSR's war. I can also imagine Soviet listening posts in Cuba being knocked out, or that huge NSA facility in the Australian outback getting nuked, but I wasn't convinced that nuking neutrals would be as widespread as the canon indicated. In my world there are a lot of countries that never got hit. Sweden, Switzerland, Australia, New Zealand, all of South America were spared the war's direct effects (mostly), but they would have plenty of problems to keep them occupied in the aftermath. The canon even has France getting nuked once or twice, and again, considering the French nuclear strike capacity, I just don't think that would have been a good idea for either side to provoke a French nuclear response.

3) I was never convinced that NATO allies like Italy and Greece would first duck out of the war and then enthusiastically join in again on the side of the Warsaw Pact. I can see the Greeks getting into it with Turkey... after all, what are Greeks and Turks supposed to do except shoot each other? But Italy? I kept Italy on the side of NATO, where they would be bogged down fighting in the Balkans.

Certainly I can see NATO bailing out when the war starts, leaving the UK, USA and FRG on their own. But when the Soviets try to invade Norway (and Denmark in my version), that brings the northern European NATO members back into the fold. That invasion would demonstrate that everyone is at risk, not just the Germans and their dream of unification.

4) Speaking of the Balkans... I never did make much sense out of anyone sending three divisions off to be marooned in Yugoslavia when they were so badly needed at home. In my time line, the Pentagon retains the IV US Corps in the States prior to the MilGov/CivGov split. IMO, CivGov's best hope to recruit military units away from MilGov in 1999 is by telling them the war is over and that they should be concentrating on rebuilding at home. A sales pitch like that could sway a lot of soldiers. In fact it does... within a year that message sways the Joint Chiefs of Staff and they launch Operation Omega to evacuate the European Command.

5) The old canon backgrounds seem to have missed out on radical Islam and the Jihadists. My preference was for a Twilight War waged between Western Democracies, Eastern Communists and Radical Jihadists. The Jihadists would be a kind of global New America... an insidious fascist totalitarian movement that is preying on the world when it is weakest. While there won't be armies of Mujahehdeen marching on Chicago, there are other parts of the world that are going to feel their effects... and more than just a few suicide bombers. The Persian Gulf, India, Pakistan, Indonesia... and Africa. From Cairo to Cape Town, from Tangiers to Zanzibar... radical Islam is going to turn Africa into a corpse factory. Throw in the AIDS pandemic and who needs nukes to create total devastation?

With more involvement from radical Islam the fight in the Persian Gulf would get more confused, with the Iranian Republic essentially shooting at everyone rather than forming an alliance with the west. Al Queda would be bombing and attacking US, UK and even French forces for "occupying the holy soil of Saudi Arabia." The aftermath of the Twilight War could easily be spun as "Allah's judgment on the infidel," with the least westernized and least modernized elements of the region seeing this as the perfect opportunity to rebuilt the Uma. There might be a point where the Soviet and US forces in the area start to realize they have more to fear from the Jihadists than from each other.

6) As part of the new background, I wanted to be sure to include real world events and "Twilightize" them into the context of TW2K. The Second Gulf War, for instance, and the break up of Yugoslavia. Those events are included, but recast in light of the Twilight War and the continued survival of the USSR and the Warsaw Pact.

Ugh... "Twilightize?" Sounds like there's going to be sparkly vampires... maybe we need a better term?

Finally I should point out that these documents are nowhere near complete. Even though both stand at somewhere around 35,000 words apiece, I expect the Gazeteer needs another 50,000 words and the time-line needs another 15,000. Of course with the time-lime I'm also going to lose some of the material that's there if it could not have happened in the alternative universe.

Nevertheless, comments are welcome.

A. Scott Glancy, President TCCorp, dba Pagan Publishing

[sglancy12]

Just giving my thread a bump to see if I can generate some more interest.

[kato13]

I like the gazetteer. I was thinking of doing a wiki at the US state and county level with similar information. I am actually trying to create a few business tools that use Google maps and the data overlap is substantial.

I have not dug into the history deeply but it is certainly has a good summary of disasters and terrorist attacks. Might be good to create a 'serious incident" table for when someone gets 01 on that luck roll.

[Legbreaker]

You know I'm interested!
Just might take me a bit of time to wade through the mountains of info you've got there.

Give me a week....

[Cdnwolf]

One questions and this is to all... but why does it take 5 years for the world to go to hell in a hand basket? So far in my timeline I can do it in 3 years max and thats only because the Spanish Flu took so long to spread.

[Legbreaker]

It's a long slow slide into hell. The longer and slower the slide, the further it gets before anyone notices, starts to panic, and DO something to stop it.

Make things happen too fast and it's too easy for those in power to take notice and get some political milage out of it.

Take global warming for example. Even now, decades after it was first brought to the worlds attention, there are those still denying it's existance, or downplaying it's effects. Is it real? Who knows? The point is that because change is (or is not) happening at such a slow pace, there's no urgency to do anything.

Now if the oceans where to rise 2 metres practically overnight, you can bet everyone in the world would be tripping over themselves to find a solution...

[sglancy12]

Originally Posted by Cdnwolf

One questions and this is to all... but why does it take 5 years for the world to go to hell in a hand basket? So far in my timeline I can do it in 3 years max and thats only because the Spanish Flu took so long to spread.

Heck, we could do it in two months if we went with a huge Warsaw Pact invasion that blows through the Western Front and the only way to stop them is to deploy tactical nukes in West Germany or even the low countries. In that scenario, it was likely that the Sovs would start lobbing tac-nukes back at us and we'd be throwing theater nukes around in a matter of days. Then everyone in Washington and Moscow starts to panic that if they don't hit the button now 1/2 their birds will get caught on the ground if they wait. Then you get your strategic exchange... only problem is that the result is a northern hemisphere a bit too scorched and irradiated for interesting role-playing... at least for a couple hundred years.

The slow slide is the death of a thousand cuts for civilization. By inching forward by increments, civilization is worn down, rather that vaporized by a thousand suns. If it moves slower, the leaders have more time to consider their position and more time to react in proportion. Of course, a proportional reaction doesn't end the war, it just prolongs it as each side exchanges blows.

Frankly I like the 5 year schedule... the Sino-Soviet war (or Central Asian War in my time line) goes on long enough that it appears almost as distant as Vietnam or the Iraq War. Then when things break loose in Europe, its only a few months between the time the Sovs use tac-nukes on Pact soil, to the time the sneak attack during the peace negotiations in November.

After November of 1997, things fall apart over the next three years, not because the limited exchange was fatal, but because too much national effort is wasted continuing to fight the war.

A. Scott Glancy, President TCCorp, dba Pagan Publishing

[Marc]

First of all, I have not read the timeline but I hope to do it very soon. Only two small comments about the matter

Originally Posted by sglancy12

3) I was never convinced that NATO allies like Italy and Greece would first duck out of the war and then enthusiastically join in again on the side of the Warsaw Pact. I can see the Greeks getting into it with Turkey... after all, what are Greeks and Turks supposed to do except shoot each other? But Italy? I kept Italy on the side of NATO, where they would be bogged down fighting in the Balkans.

I totally agree that this is one of the weak points of the Twilight timeline. I've been working in Italy for months and while in Kosovo we were (I don't know if still they are) under Italian jurisdiction. I've been working and living together with soldiers from the Ariete Armored Brigade and the Garibaldi Bersaglieri Brigade. Our close languages make our communication easier and, my feeling is that , though Italy probably would not leave NATO in the beginning of the war depicted in the v2 Twilight timeline, it would be a political decision against a very reluctant population that would put the country in a very difficult situation. Riots and civil disobedience are probable. I cannot imagine Italy leaving NATO to avoid the war and then entering in the fight for an alliance (without precedents) with Greece.

About the gazeteer I've only have a quick look to it, searching for the references to Spain. The situation depicted seems very plausible. An evacuation from Ceuta and Melilla and a fighting withdrawal from these two enclaves are credible and, most probably, it is an old studied maneuver in the Spanish army high command. They are not military valuable. Canarias and the Balearic Islands are a total different matter and they will be defended for their strategic position. The coming together between Spain and France seems plausible, too. About the Basque country I think that sometimes the situation is enourmously exagerated for the foreigners. I think that If you want to create enough instability to force the Spanish army to send there "limited resources" (as stated in he gazeteer), a conscription could be the suitable trigger.

[RN7]

One thing I've always noticed about Islamic extremists is that Western countries and even Islamic countries tolerate them in a way that would not tolerate voilent nationalist movements or racial supremist, until they do something really bad like go out and massacre innocent people.

Another thing that strikes me about Islamic extremist is that their recruitment pool is pretty much at the bottom of the pile in whatever country they are found. In the Islamic world the recruits are usually sociopaths, criminals and gullible peasants. In Western countries they are generally unemployed misfits and petty criminals from ethnic backgrounds who have finally found a purpose in life, or Western converts who were unemployable social weirdos to start off with.

A final thing that strikes me about Islamic extermists is that they never stop talking about the injustices and evils inflicted on them by Western countries and Israel, but never talk or want to hear about the injustices and evils they have inflicted on non-Muslims for the past 1,500 years.

Maybe I'm being a bit harsh but I realy think Islamic extremists are pond life, and I have no time for Muslims who justify terrorism and elevate their religion above everyone elses.

[sglancy12]

Originally Posted by RN7

One thing I've always noticed about Islamic extremists . . .

Woah! Stop! Hold on! Back up!

Please, I don't want this thread to derail into a back and forth about how justified or unjustified Islamic extremists are in their positions. My views are pretty harsh and unforgiving on the subject matter, and they'll probably come out as you read the timeline and the gazetteer, but please keep the comments confined to the documents.

A. Scott Glancy, President TCCorp, dba Pagan Publishing

[pmulcahy11b]

Originally Posted by RN7

Another thing that strikes me about Islamic extremist is that their recruitment pool is pretty much at the bottom of the pile in whatever country they are found. In the Islamic world the recruits are usually sociopaths, criminals and gullible peasants. In Western countries they are generally unemployed misfits and petty criminals from ethnic backgrounds who have finally found a purpose in life, or Western converts who were unemployable social weirdos to start off with.

So basically, in both cases terrorists are recruiting from the same pool. It just looks different because of the difference in cultures. In the West (especially in the US), most people have a different opinion of such wackos -- we laugh at them and make fun at them, to the point that most of them don't want to show their faces or admit they are a part of such an organization. In the Middle East and Southern Asia, terrorists have demonstrated that they are a lot more dangerous, and the locals are afraid of them, to the point that even a $25 million reward can't get anyone to turn Osama Bin Ladin in.

[RN7]

So basically, in both cases terrorists are recruiting from the same pool. It just looks different because of the difference in cultures. In the West (especially in the US), most people have a different opinion of such wackos -- we laugh at them and make fun at them, to the point that most of them don't want to show their faces or admit they are a part of such an organization. In the Middle East and Southern Asia, terrorists have demonstrated that they are a lot more dangerous, and the locals are afraid of them, to the point that even a $25 million reward can't get anyone to turn Osama Bin Ladin in.

Unfortunately or fortunately the grass roots have similar backgrounds no matter what culture they come from, they are usually as dumb as a box of rocks but are still voilent and dangerous. In Europe extremist are actually quite vocal and a lot of left wing and trendy people will listen to them and even sympathise with them. Recently in Britain airmen were ordered not to wear their uniforms in Luton because of the trouble it would attract from some Islamic nutters on the streets at night. Naturally enough the Queen was a bit upset that her soldiers were made to feel ashamed in their uniforms in their own country and the government gave them permission to wear their uniforms outside of their base. Could you imagine that happening in America?

[ChalkLine]

At this point Kato would shift the conversation to a new thread. Shall we do that rather than derailing sglancy12's thread? It only seems polite.

[sglancy12]

Originally Posted by Marc

First of all, I have not read the timeline but I hope to do it very soon.

Please remember that it is a mess and needs a great deal of work to adjust real world incidents to the TW2K timeline.

Originally Posted by Marc

Only two small comments about the matter

And at least they were both positive comments. I'm glad you generally approve.

Originally Posted by Marc

I totally agree that this is one of the weak points of the Twilight timeline. I've been working in Italy for months and while in Kosovo we were (I don't know if still they are) under Italian jurisdiction. I've been working and living together with soldiers from the Ariete Armored Brigade and the Garibaldi Bersaglieri Brigade. Our close languages make our communication easier and, my feeling is that , though Italy probably would not leave NATO in the beginning of the war depicted in the v2 Twilight timeline, it would be a political decision against a very reluctant population that would put the country in a very difficult situation. Riots and civil disobedience are probable. I cannot imagine Italy leaving NATO to avoid the war and then entering in the fight for an alliance (without precedents) with Greece.

Yes, but like anything involving the Italians, where there are five Italians there are likely to be ten opinions on any given subject. Italy would be torn by political strife at home, maybe even a resurgence in the Red Brigades with covert KGB assistance. Governments would fall, form and fall again, leaving the Italian military in a precarious position of not knowing when their orders are going to change on any give day.

Originally Posted by Marc

About the gazeteer I've only have a quick look to it, searching for the references to Spain. The situation depicted seems very plausible. An evacuation from Ceuta and Melilla and a fighting withdrawal from these two enclaves are credible and, most probably, it is an old studied maneuver in the Spanish army high command. They are not military valuable. Canarias and the Balearic Islands are a total different matter and they will be defended for their strategic position. The coming together between Spain and France seems plausible, too.

The Secretary General of NATO at the time (Javier Solana) was, and still is, very anti-NATO, seeing it as an extension of US power over European sovereignty. I can easily see Spain (and Portugal) quitting NATO under the TW2K scenario. Of course, if Portugal stays in NATO, their joint-use military bases could be subjected to Soviet nuke strikes and the resulting chaos could land Spain with a massive refugee problem, plus a fair bit of fallout. Who needs to get nuked if your country is over-run by starving refugees from next door.

So, big question back to you, as a resident of the Iberian Peninsula, would Portugal (in the mid-1990s, not now) stayed in NATO or withdrawn? Under a goon like Salazar they would have stayed in, but I'm not familiar with Portugal's politics in the 1990s. They, like Spain, have everything to lose and nothing to gain by joining the conflict. At least in the short term. Granted, it would suck to have the Iron Curtain roll all the way forward to the Rhine for the next 50 years, but I just can't see the Red Army (in TW2K) rolling through Portugal and Spain.

The only places on the Iberian peninsula I imagine getting nuked are Gibraltar and any NATO bases still in use. Of course, I'm imagining the Spanish taking a very hard line neutral position on the war, perhaps totally withdrawing from NATO and forcing a withdraw from the airbases, because they can afford to. The USSR isn't going to get to them even if they win. France will prevent that. So Spain can afford to try and avoid getting nuked in the crossfire. They have nothing to gain and everything to lose by joining in the Twilight War.

Originally Posted by Marc

About the Basque country I think that sometimes the situation is enourmously exagerated for the foreigners. I think that If you want to create enough instability to force the Spanish army to send there "limited resources" (as stated in he gazeteer), a conscription could be the suitable trigger.

I agree that the Basques would definitely resist a move to have forced conscription. And forced conscription would definitely be happening as the government tried to keep order (with the lights going off due to energy shortages), distribute food, and keep the country from being over-run by refugees.

A. Scott Glancy, President TCCorp, dba Pagan Publishing

[Marc]

Originally Posted by sglancy12

So, big question back to you, as a resident of the Iberian Peninsula, would Portugal (in the mid-1990s, not now) stayed in NATO or withdrawn? Under a goon like Salazar they would have stayed in, but I'm not familiar with Portugal's politics in the 1990s. They, like Spain, have everything to lose and nothing to gain by joining the conflict. At least in the short term. Granted, it would suck to have the Iron Curtain roll all the way forward to the Rhine for the next 50 years, but I just can't see the Red Army (in TW2K) rolling through Portugal and Spain.

Bon dia!

Sadly, I must recognize my nearly total ignorance about Portugal and the Portugueses. I suppose that my situation at the opposite site of the Iberian Peninsula (I live near Barcelona) is one of the causes of this ignorance. In Catalonia, more commonly we tend to travel across our northern frontier towards France, Central Europe or Mediterranean Europe. Now, thinking about it, we received very few news from our discreet neighbors of the East, especially when compared with the quantity of news and information from the rest of Europe. So, my lack of knowledge about Portugal prevents me to make any well-based supposition about their attitude towards NATO in case of a Twilight-style war.

Other regions of Spain (among others Extremadura or Galicia) have very strong ties with Portugal. If Spain retreated from NATO and with the situation depicted in the gazetteer (retreat from Ceuta and Melilla, pirate incursions in the Mediterranean coast, etc.), I think that Spanish government would try to accept Portuguese refugees. If not, probably the government would have to do it after discovery that Spanish citizens have been accepting them before any official declaration. The situation would be bad but not desperate, especially if we had not try to keep the impossible to defend Ceuta and Melilla, and the pressure to help the Portuguese civilians would be strong.

[sglancy12]

Originally Posted by Marc

Other regions of Spain (among others Extremadura or Galicia) have very strong ties with Portugal. If Spain retreated from NATO and with the situation depicted in the gazetteer (retreat from Ceuta and Melilla, pirate incursions in the Mediterranean coast, etc.), I think that Spanish government would try to accept Portuguese refugees. If not, probably the government would have to do it after discovery that Spanish citizens have been accepting them before any official declaration. The situation would be bad but not desperate, especially if we had not try to keep the impossible to defend Ceuta and Melilla, and the pressure to help the Portuguese civilians would be strong.

That seems reasonable. I'm not sure how badly Portugal would be hit, even if they did stay in NATO, so I'm not sure how many refugees there would be leaving Portugal for Spain. Of course, since Brazil isn't hit in my scenario, maybe Brazil shows up to offer aid to Portugal... even offering to take in refugees. This could cause big problems at home in Brazil where taking in Portugese refugees might be seen as giving aid to "whites" while the "blacks" in the Brazilian slums are suffering. I'm not sure what Brazil's race relations are like, but they didn't dump slavery until the 1870s and there is definitely a color line in the country. Still, it would be an interesting turn of events to have the home country getting aid from the former colony.

Does Spain still have a "Foreign Legion?" Once upon a time there was such a formation, much like France's colonial military. If Spain is overrun by Portuguese refugees, one way to ensure your family stays fed and sheltered by the Spanish (or French) government would be to sign up for military service. I'm sure both countries would rather burn up foreigners than natives keeping the Muslim pirates and Jihadists away from their borders.

Undoubtedly there will be a few over-anxious North African wack jobs who think that now is the time to reconquer Spain and declare the Caliphate of Al-Andalus. I'm not expecting Morroccan tank brigades rolling through the Spanish hills, but bands of fanatics armed with AKs would be showing up confident that Allah will grant them victory and their faith will armor them against the infidels' bullets.

A. Scott Glancy, President TCCorp, dba Pagan Publishing

[Marc]

Originally Posted by sglancy12

Does Spain still have a "Foreign Legion?" Once upon a time there was such a formation, much like France's colonial military. If Spain is overrun by Portuguese refugees, one way to ensure your family stays fed and sheltered by the Spanish (or French) government would be to sign up for military service. I'm sure both countries would rather burn up foreigners than natives keeping the Muslim pirates and Jihadists away from their borders.
A. Scott Glancy, President TCCorp, dba Pagan Publishing

Here you have a link to a previous post about the Spanish Legion

http://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.php?t=872

Surely the Spanish Legion would be one of the Brigade-Sized units implied in the withdrawal from Ceuta and Melilla, together with the 52nd Melilla Regular Infantry Regiment and the 54th Ceuta Regular Infantry Regiment. The three units have their origins in the colonial wars in the former Spanish Protectorate of Morocco. The "Regulars" were originally formed by native troops but in the present day their personnel are mainly Spanish.

[Mohoender]

Originally Posted by sglancy12

So, big question back to you, as a resident of the Iberian Peninsula, would Portugal (in the mid-1990s, not now) stayed in NATO or withdrawn? Under a goon like Salazar they would have stayed in, but I'm not familiar with Portugal's politics in the 1990s. They, like Spain, have everything to lose and nothing to gain by joining the conflict. At least in the short term. Granted, it would suck to have the Iron Curtain roll all the way forward to the Rhine for the next 50 years, but I just can't see the Red Army (in TW2K) rolling through Portugal and Spain.

I think, I'll be the one to answer that question as I spent plenty of time in Portugal from 1986-2002 (my mother living there). Also I happen to meet most of the army head officers in 1995 (including the Portuguese chief of staff).

First of all, IMO, Portugal will definitely remain within NATO and that will be for a very simple reason. That country was always faithfull to its ally and the Portuguese are very proud of that.

Portugal would not benefit much for it, I agree, but they have a very important position for the alliance. NATO ship are more than able to operate from Portugal and patrol most of of the western central Atlantic. However, their army would not represent a great addition but they have some experience abroad that have been lost by everyone else (especially in Africa and Jungle' regions).

Portugal is remote enough to escape most bombing except for Lisbon and Porto. Lisbon would certainly be entirely whiped out but that is not as sure for Porto. The northern half of the city would be destroyed but the southern half will certainly survive.

Internally, Portugal would be more stable than Spain. Algarve and Parts of the South would be mostly insular with each fortifed city/town/village living on itself. A strong pro-soviet movement would plague Alentejo, the surroundings of Lisbon and part of the central area. The coast would be cantonment with military garrison in every coastal fort (at the time they were still owned by the army). Lisbon itself would be full chaos as a small area north of Porto. I'm not entirely sure for central Portugal but it might be partly organised around the university town of Coimbra. At last, the northern area (north of the Douro river and including what is left of Porto), would remain organized and faithfull to NATO (fully anti-communist). In addition, this last region might include what was Spanish Galicia.

The Portuguese army would lack a great number of modern weapon but firearms are more than common with a few private people still owning artillery pieces. One of my mother's neighbour was living on a hill top with his house defended by Bofors 40mm gun and Machineguns. Up to the early 1990's most rich portuguese were still travelling with weapons at their side (an effect of the 1974-75 revolution).

[Marc]

Bon dia Mo!

I was waiting for your opinion about Portugal, given your background. It's strange (and sad) to verify my ignorance about Portugal, given our geographical position.

I only will add two points from my personal point of view:

-The opinion about the Portuguese paratroopers in the Spanish Parachute Brigade is high. They were also under Italian jurisdiction in Kosovo and, though our relationship was more frequent with the Italians, we considered the Portugueses much more "reliable".

-The incorporation of Spanish Galicia to Portugal would depend of the relative damaged suffered by the two countries in the used timeline. If Spain is untouched by nukes, I think it would not happen. Though Galicia has some nationalist movement, it has not the same "colour" that in Catalonia or in the Basque Country. They will remain (if possible) faithful to Spain. I must add the importance of the Galician naval shipyards for Spain. Anyway I will ask a Galician friend his opinion about the subject in our next roleplaying session. It would be interesting.

[Mohoender]

Originally Posted by Marc

It's strange (and sad) to verify my ignorance about Portugal, given our geographical position.

That must come from History matters As you are Catalan you aren't very much concerned by these but Portuguese and Spanish are much like Irish and English.

Originally Posted by Marc

-The incorporation of Spanish Galicia to Portugal would depend of the relative damaged suffered by the two countries in the used timeline. If Spain is untouched by nukes, I think it would not happen. Though Galicia has some nationalist movement, it has not the same "colour" that in Catalonia or in the Basque Country. They will remain (if possible) faithful to Spain. I must add the importance of the Galician naval shipyards for Spain. Anyway I will ask a Galician friend his opinion about the subject in our next roleplaying session. It would be interesting.

I definitely agree and assume than Spain is much as it is described in canon: "Its central government is a shamble, now represented by roving bands of Guardia Civil and military units."

I don't buy that statement entirely for Portugal for several reasons:
- GNR are not Guardia Civil but they are closer to the french Gendarmerie.
- Each portuguese regiment was (and somehow remain) attached to its garrison city. In case of chaos, Portuguese units in Porto would be faithful to that city and the surrounding areas. It would be similar for every city: Braga, Coimbra, Evora...

sglancy I don't wan't to contest your point (It is yours) but with Lisbon and the refinery in Porto I almost covered all my bases (outside the Azores and Madeira which can become other targets). Several regiments were stationed in Porto but the nuking of the refinery would also wipe out most of the industrial port. What facility would remain are unable to accomodate anything bigger than an Aviso or a small Frigate. There is no true air base in Porto and if the airport was run partly by the air force (G-91R were stationed there), its facilities will never make it a primary target. The base was never opened to F-16s and is now closed.
It has one of the shortest airway of Europe and only very well trained pilots can land there. In fact, qualification must be the same than that for Madeira and the old Hong Kong airport. It also has the simplest radar equipments and it is closed one third of the time. Each time you have fog on it, the airport is closed (1 day out of 3) as it is not equipped with the proper tools.

Other strategic bases do exist indeed but they are all in the south and mostly around Lisbon. Sintra would definitely be a target (you'll find the peacetime portuguese HQ there). Montijo could also be targeted as it is the main transport base but again it is only a few miles away from Lisbon. Sad, I would not be able to go there and watch corridas any more (they are the most beautiful).

The last two targets would be Monte Real (on the coast halfway between Lisbon and Porto) and Beja. For Beja I don't believe it would be nuked because it is right in the middle of the communist region of Alentejo. It would, however, be the center of heavy fighting between military and guerrilas.

Still, the North would escape almost untouched. It is a very mountainous region and it would have some strong point for survival. Several mines on the Douro river can provide what is needed to manufacture ammunitions (+tungsten for trade). Again, the Douro region can easily be turned to producing energy for the entire area (oil and alcohol in large quantities) plus tools in every village. In addition, Villa Nova de Gaia could be turned to energy production in no time.

[Kellhound]

Originally Posted by sglancy12

The only places on the Iberian peninsula I imagine getting nuked are Gibraltar and any NATO bases still in use. Of course, I'm imagining the Spanish taking a very hard line neutral position on the war, perhaps totally withdrawing from NATO and forcing a withdraw from the airbases, because they can afford to.

Some soviet documents declassified in the 90's showed we had a few "secondary targets" in our country. From naval and air bases to civilian airports and harbors, to refineries (Tarragona was higher than some bigger ones in other European countries, since it had also a harbor and other chemical plants close by) and shipyards (Galicia).
Even in case of extreme neutrality, only a couple small tac-nukes are needed to avoid these resources to fall in enemy hands.

Originally Posted by sglancy12

I agree that the Basques would definitely resist a move to have forced conscription.

In this country, most cases of forced conscription have ended in open riots and street battles, and armed forces taking the streets.

Originally Posted by Marc

-The incorporation of Spanish Galicia to Portugal would depend of the relative damaged suffered by the two countries in the used timeline. If Spain is untouched by nukes, I think it would not happen. Though Galicia has some nationalist movement, it has not the same "colour" that in Catalonia or in the Basque Country. They will remain (if possible) faithful to Spain. I must add the importance of the Galician naval shipyards for Spain. Anyway I will ask a Galician friend his opinion about the subject in our next roleplaying session. It would be interesting.

Knowing them, it's more likely to have Portugal joining Galicia
Ok, this is only half a joke, not suitable for, or understandable by foreigners.

Originally Posted by Mohoender

I definitely agree and assume than Spain is much as it is described in canon: "Its central government is a shamble, now represented by roving bands of Guardia Civil and military units."

I agree mostly with this.
But only until a foreign soldier (any foreign soldier) tried to occupy any ground or impose it's language and strange customs.

[Mohoender]

Originally Posted by Kellhound

I agree mostly with this.
But only until a foreign soldier (any foreign soldier) tried to occupy any ground or impose it's language and strange customs.

At least you know that the foreign soldier won't be french. We had enough when Napoleon tried.