Twlight 2000 starting with a 2020 timeline?

[Hal]

Hello Folks,
I'm curious - much of the original T2K material stems from projections of a cold war that suddenly changed temperature so to speak. That it hasn't happened as written - well, I'm GLAD.

However - suppose we look at things a little differently, and adapt other "stories" or even look at the idea from a different temporal viewpoint (ie today's time line).

In THE LAST CENTURIAN, we have a sort of T2K'esque setting, with a nice Ice Age approaching kind of thing plus an unstable political background making life interesting. Has anyone tried to gear up for something like that?

Today, it seems that Russia is becoming territorial again as it engages in activity designed to not only weaken the NATO alliance, but also set up smaller border nations to fall and possibly become absorbed into a Russian sphere of influence. Turkey seemingly joining Russia or at least disdaining the NATO alliance might be the beginning of what can be described as a free for all in that region, coupled with certain Russian ruthlessness for its own affairs.

How, would you imagine the clash between Russia and the United States and other NATO forces - in such a way as

"You're on your own - Good luck."

[StainlessSteelCynic]

I recall some people worked out different historical periods for a Twilight setting but I have no idea if their ideas were carried beyond their local gaming group.
For instance, some years back there was a T2k style game set in the later stages of WW2. Someone else on this forum or the forum before, was exploring the T2k theme for the Napoleonic Wars. And naturally enough some other people looked at the Twilight War occurring at different times in the nuclear weapons era such as in the 1960s and the early 1980s.
I think someone also mentioned a later timeline like 2020 but even that discussion was a few years ago.

[Hal]

Thanks for the info.

Right now, I'm looking into the possibility of four possible flashpoints for a modern war.

1) Iran: If Iran were to join forces with say, Turkey - and the two of them playing NATO against the Russians, I could see that environment destabilizing easily enough into a single theater of war.

2) China: With the aggressive posturing made by Chinese political powers, I could see the possibility of China playing hard ball throughout the local theater. I can also see China making use of North Korea through manipulation, as a sort of puppet to get nations to watch North Korea more than China. Throw in a developing war on that theater and...

3) Russia: it is already playing games trying (rather successfully it seems) to get the Philippines away from a close relationship with the United States. Add to the mix Turkey, and to Iran - and we have the potential for a world player miscalculating things and a war starting unexpectedly when no one really wants one. What is happening on the borders of Russia today, might foretell what is to come as an emboldened Russia pushes harder.

4) Middle East seems to be crazy positioned for an unexpected event to light the fuse on a powder keg. Saudi Arabia could easily change with the change in government with the royal family. We could see an escalation in low level insurgencies in Syria and Iraq and the entire area coming into a fusion with hardline Islamics.

Toss in a few extra minor things - plagues, financial melt-down, etc - and we could see something akin to Twilight 2020 (God, that sounds like an alternative universe to Cyberpunk 2020 doesn't it?!!!).

Imagine the following:

Fanatical Terrorist Organization (FTO) funds a secret educational program of devout members of their sect learning the ins and outs of biological genetic engineering. Universities selling as second hand equipment, lab facilities required to modify the Pandemic Flu Virus of 1917-18 and adding a few modifications to make an old viral template all the more effective. The FTO might even have multiple tailored diseases and release them in a manner intended to implicate Russian culpability or to simply disrupt trust between western nations so as to shut down trade and mass transits between nations (air travel, train and sea transportation). Have this happen two or three times, and suddenly, every nation is going to want to secure its borders against the transmission of diseases. A few nukes get slung about - but not enough to destroy the world in general, along with financial melt-down and such - and we might have conditions similar to the T2K setting - just some 20 years later...

Thing is, I'm not very GOOD at this kind of speculation. Speculation on China's potential economic melt down is one thing. Trying to determine what China might do is another. Maybe China begins to push on the Korea's pointing out the history of Ancient China included the Korean land as part of their empire?

Ah well, maybe this kind of thread wouldn't get too far. Maybe it might. A lot will hinge upon who gets the Presidency within the next few weeks, for the United States.

It is one thing to have to worry about nuclear strikes and stuff per T2K in its original form. What if there were entire cities rendered uninhabitable due to biological warfare? Imagine the FTO mentioned above developing a Rice blight and loosening it into the Eastern portion of the world as well as the southern states in the US of A? Would a Starving China expand outwards to secure foodstuffs? Just some thoughts...

[Raellus]

Sectarianism is probably too great a barrier to a Turko-Iranian alliance. Turkey is majority Sunni, Iran is Shia. They typically don't get along, and it's hard to what their common interests are ATM- certainly there's not enough there to prompt any sort of military alliance but who knows- stranger things have happened.

There's plenty of ingredients for a major regional war in the Middle East. You've already got the Iranians and the Saudis fighting a proxy war in Yemen. You've got ISIS getting increasingly desperate in Iraq. You've already got Russian and U.S. airpower backing rival factions in Syria, with other regional players stoking the flames. It's a powder-keg.

In Europe, you've got the continued fighting in East Ukraine. You've got Russian saber rattling towards the Baltics. You've got the U.S. and NATO flexing in response. You've got instability in several of the former Soviet republics in the Caucuses.

The EU just lost a major member with the Brexit. The refugee and economic strains on south and east European member states are giving rise to right-wing movements. I could see other members leaving or even getting the ol' heave-ho (here's looking at you, Greece).

In Asia, you've got the Chinese pushing further out into the S. China Sea, building island airfields and taking pot shots at Vietnamese fishing trawlers. The Philippines starting to lean towards Beijing was pretty unexpected. I'm going to have to ponder the possible ramifications of that curveball.

And then North Korea is the ultimate wild card. Who knows what that regime will pull, especially if it feels threatened by foreign or domestic pressures.

I doubt it'll happen, but what if a U.S. presidential hopeful actually gets elected and follows through on his thinly-veiled threats to pull funding and troops from NATO? That might be just the invitation Putin needs to make his play for the Baltics.

[Hal]

Originally Posted by Raellus

Sectarianism is probably too great a barrier to a Turko-Iranian alliance. Turkey is majority Sunni, Iran is Shia. They typically don't get along, and it's hard to what their common interests are ATM- certainly there's not enough there to prompt any sort of military alliance but who knows- stranger things have happened.

There's plenty of ingredients for a major regional war in the Middle East. You've already got the Iranians and the Saudis fighting a proxy war in Yemen. You've got ISIS getting increasingly desperate in Iraq. You've already got Russian and U.S. airpower backing rival factions in Syria, with other regional players stoking the flames. It's a powder-keg.

In Europe, you've got the continued fighting in East Ukraine. You've got Russian saber rattling towards the Baltics. You've got the U.S. and NATO flexing in response. You've got instability in several of the former Soviet republics in the Caucuses.

The EU just lost a major member with the Brexit. The refugee and economic strains on south and east European member states are giving rise to right-wing movements. I could see other members leaving or even getting the ol' heave-ho (here's looking at you, Greece).

In Asia, you've got the Chinese pushing further out into the S. China Sea, building island airfields and taking pot shots at Vietnamese fishing trawlers. The Philippines starting to lean towards Beijing was pretty unexpected. I'm going to have to ponder the possible ramifications of that curveball.

And then North Korea is the ultimate wild card. Who knows what that regime will pull, especially if it feels threatened by foreign or domestic pressures.

I doubt it'll happen, but what if a U.S. presidential hopeful actually gets elected and follows through on his thinly-veiled threats to pull funding and troops from NATO? That might be just the invitation Putin needs to make his play for the Baltics.

I'm thinking more along the lines of the Turko-Iranian alliance being more of a thing of convenience where both sides are getting what they want to some degree, but neither really committing fully. Each secretly hoping the other half gets burned by the maneuvering where they agree something should be done. Iran with its nuclear capabilities recently gained, Turkey with its strategic location and Russia perhaps getting its fleet into areas it couldn't in the past. Perhaps Russian surplus ships sold to Iran as part of a cementing move - both with the understanding that in order to maintain any of the surplus ships, the Iranians will have to deal through Russia to get the spare parts and training for maintenance crews.

If we presume that the EU starts to experience some difficulties due to fragmentation, we might see not only Greece attempting to exit the Union, but perhaps Ireland or Portugal or perhaps even France. I don't know the local politics enough to say yay or nay on that. But from what I'm reading, it seems that the issue, as ever, revolves around money and political power. Greece is blaming the EU for its woes, all the while refusing to accept an austerity budget. It kinda looks grim there from what I'm reading. I almost wonder if that might be deemed an opportunity for Russia. If they have access to the Mediterranean sea via Turkey AND Greece, NATO would have a hard time containing the break out from the Black Sea.

If Russia sends aid to Syria, Iran, and Greece, and works on obtaining Cypress as part of its alliance - NATO might be harder pressed towards containing the Russian Fleet. Question is - to what end? What is it that Russia wants at this point in time? A fractured NATO would play right into Russia's hands, something that Donald Trump, as President might facilitate. Once that "mistake" is made, perhaps the US might recommit to the welfare of NATO, but by then, it would be a weaker position. If Hillary Clinton is Elected instead, what might the ramifications be? Pay for Play making it such that a sufficient "bribe" might cause the US to withdraw from NATO sufficiently to weaken it (same effect either way the US decides who becomes the next president perhaps? Just different reasons for the same effect?)

The thing from my perspective is "Why". War's aren't fought just because. They usually have a triggering point, and a final objective. With the current climate regarding the US-Israeli relationship, one could almost expect that with one president, we'd have a worsened relationship, with the other president, we'd have a strengthening relationship. Perhaps an Iran/Syria axis threatening Israel might be a focal point. By itself, I don't think it would start a massive war. But the result of a game of chess (so to speak) in conjunction with Syrian/Iranian Alliance AND Russia playing a grand game - and a Russian Fleet in support of Syria and Iran - perhaps the first nuclear warheads get launched by Iran, only to be met by retaliation by Israel, then engulfing the Balkan region in a war thanks to the Russian grand strategy? What does Russia Gain from the scenario just outlined?

[RN7]

Originally Posted by Hal

I'm thinking more along the lines of the Turko-Iranian alliance being more of a thing of convenience where both sides are getting what they want to some degree, but neither really committing fully. Each secretly hoping the other half gets burned by the maneuvering where they agree something should be done. Iran with its nuclear capabilities recently gained, Turkey with its strategic location and Russia perhaps getting its fleet into areas it couldn't in the past. Perhaps Russian surplus ships sold to Iran as part of a cementing move - both with the understanding that in order to maintain any of the surplus ships, the Iranians will have to deal through Russia to get the spare parts and training for maintenance crews.

Even ignoring the Sunni-Shiite sectarian rivalry I thinks its unlikely that Turkey would form an alliance with any other Middle Eastern power due to the fact that Turkey is Ottoman. The Arabs, Iranians, Kurds and other groups in the Middle East still have bad memories of the Ottoman Empire and the Turkish hegemony in this part of the world. Turkey has been kept at arms length by the rest of the Middle East since the Ottoman Empire collapsed after WW1. Turkey would also have to leave (or be expelled) from NATO if started forming alliances with non-NATO countries, and this would have severe economic and military consequences for Turkey.

Originally Posted by Hal

If we presume that the EU starts to experience some difficulties due to fragmentation, we might see not only Greece attempting to exit the Union, but perhaps Ireland or Portugal or perhaps even France. I don't know the local politics enough to say yay or nay on that. But from what I'm reading, it seems that the issue, as ever, revolves around money and political power. Greece is blaming the EU for its woes, all the while refusing to accept an austerity budget. It kinda looks grim there from what I'm reading.

There is some truth to this.

Originally Posted by Hal

I almost wonder if that might be deemed an opportunity for Russia. If they have access to the Mediterranean sea via Turkey AND Greece, NATO would have a hard time containing the break out from the Black Sea.If Russia sends aid to Syria, Iran, and Greece, and works on obtaining Cypress as part of its alliance - NATO might be harder pressed towards containing the Russian Fleet.

Russia would see this as an opportunity, but maybe not in this part of the world for a number of reasons.

1) Turkey and Russia have been enemies for centuries. The Turks shot down a Russian Air Force jet that crossed into their airspace from Syria not so long ago. There is no possibility of these two forming an alliance.

2) Russia is far more friendly with Greece than Turkey. They both share the same Orthodox Christian religion.

3) There are British military bases on Cyprus (also used by the US) which sort of guarantee that the Greeks and Turks behave themselves. The Russians, Greeks and Turks will not want to get into a war with the British who will certainly be backed by the US and others.

4) The Russian Navy is not very powerful, particularly its Black Sea Fleet. The current fleet they are sending from the Arctic to Syria is a flag showing fleet with limited capabilities. The US Navy would make mince meat out of it.

Originally Posted by Hal

Question is - to what end? What is it that Russia wants at this point in time? A fractured NATO would play right into Russia's hands, something that Donald Trump, as President might facilitate. Once that "mistake" is made, perhaps the US might recommit to the welfare of NATO, but by then, it would be a weaker position. If Hillary Clinton is Elected instead, what might the ramifications be? Pay for Play making it such that a sufficient "bribe" might cause the US to withdraw from NATO sufficiently to weaken it (same effect either way the US decides who becomes the next president perhaps? Just different reasons for the same effect?).

I don't think there is any real chance of NATO fracturing in the way you are implying. The Greek-Turkish and Med part of NATO has always been the weak link in NATO, they gain a lot but don't seem to want to contribute much. Its the northern European countries who count.

As for the Donald. Love him or hate him, the guy says crazy things to appeal to certain demographics in the US voting electorate. He could say the moon is made of cheese and little Green Men have taken over the Kremlin and some would believe him.