The Atlantic and the Northern Countries

[Lundgren]

Just poking around a bit on the timeline and the involved countries for the 2.2 setting.

As I see it, the battle of the Atlantic decide if US troops and supplies can reach Europe or not. So a decisive victory there would have a great impact on the war on the ground.

But for the Soviet to get the fleets into play, they have to sail past northern Norway with the fleet stationed at Murmansk, and through the narrow gap between Denmark and Sweden with the fleet at Leningrad.

Controlling either side of that narrow passage would mean quite a pounding of the Leningrad fleet. So taking and holding that part of Denmark is vital. If the Soviet doesn't trust the Swedish neutrality, they would need take the Swedish side as well.

As I understand it, there are four important airfields in Norway that would be "like adding four extra carriers to the battle." Controlling them, or denying access to them, would be important. One can take the long route, as the Soviet Union and Norway share a border; or one can cut through Finland and Sweden.

The reason of the Finnish Winter War during WWII was because the Soviets wanted more area around Leningrad to protect the naval base. Beside a lot of forest, and industry, I'm not aware of any strategic resources in Finland. As trees isn't really something the Russians lack, I don't think they would be much more interested in Finland than possible that Shortcut to get to Norway.

Same thing with Sweden. Sweden has an iron mine in Kiruna (far north) and a copper mine (about in the middle) as well. But the output are probably to small for the Soviets to bother, unless they want to deny the enemy the option to buy from Sweden. So mainly, as with Sweden, the reason would be said shortcut.

While Finland may be east oriented on paper, there is no love between them and the Soviet Union, and the army is geared to give them a new nosebleed if needed. Some of the Soviet leaders might remember the last time.

While being neutral on paper, information gathered by Swedish intelligence is passed on westward and the equipment used by the Swedish army is NATO compatible. Not attacking Sweden is a gamble (at least from the Soviets point of view), but attacking would tie down troops that might be needed elsewhere. During the first half of the '90s, Sweden did some upgrades of the military. Replacing the 7.62 battle rifle with 5.56 assault rifles (giving the former to the home Guard), new multi-role jets, and buying quite a load of Leopard I and II's from Germany.

Any thought of the battle of the Atlantic or the situation of the Nordic countries?

[Targan]

IIRC there was a Finnish Handbook produced back in the day which had lots of information about Finland (obviously) and Scandinavia during the Twilight War. I don't know if an English-translated version was ever made available though.

[Legbreaker]

I do believe one of our members who just so happens to reside in the area in question began just such a translation on these very boards a year or so back. I don't believe they finished but a good start was made.

Edit: Hmm, looks like it was just the timeline. Still, there's a lot of good info in there!
http://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.php?t=1437

[Lundgren]

I have seen references to that sourcebook, and always thought it was some fan made material. So they made their own licensed stuff over there? Cool

Unfortunately, considering the language it would be not be much point of getting my hands on it. If it had been in Swedish... Oh, well.

Reading on wikipedia I can see that the Baltic fleet at Leningrad has the task of securing the coast of Germany and Poland, and give amphibious capability to be able to attach Denmark and Germany.

So no reason to break out and engage in the battle of the Atlantic, thus southern Sweden or eastern Denmark would not be considered an immediate threat.

Denmark and Holland (and possible Belgium depending on if they stay in NATO or not) would be transit lands for US and Canadian troops and supplies. While denying access to those ports would be of interest, I don't think it would be done by an amphibious invasion of Denmark. Strategic bombing and later nukes would probably be the method of choice.

If the invasion of Norway would be halted in Lapland, then the rest of Norway would probably be quite untouched until the nukes starts to fly. If the invasion of Norway is successful, I would guess quite a few resistance group would have their bases on Swedish soil. The later could mean the same type of tension as the one between Colombia and Venezuela/Peru as FARC and other groups have used bases across the border.

But it can be worth to remember that one of the main objective to invade Norway during WWII was to secure the import of Swedish steel. Apparently, there was some plans by the British to invade northern Sweden to deny Germany the option to import from Sweden. Those plans was scrapped. So a question is, how important would imports from Sweden be to Germany and Great Britain in the Twilight war?

[Legbreaker]

WWII and T2K are very different situations logistically. In WWII, Germany had to fight virtually all it's neighbours in an effort to secure resources.

In T2K, the situation is very different - Germany, and most of Nato (obviously not including the effectively isolated Turkey and Romania) have a relatively open back door to the west. Likewise, the Pact have the vast natural resources of the USSR in addition to that which can be found within the client states themselves. Nobody on either side in T2K really NEEDS resources from neutral countries (although they do help), so I doubt resources alone would be enough (in the early years) to make anywhere a particular target.

Later on, say 1999-2000 even just the rumour of a single resource type could make a general offensive a real possibility.

[Lundgren]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

WWII and T2K are very different situations logistically. In WWII, Germany had to fight virtually all it's neighbours in an effort to secure resources.

True. So it is back to "the only point of attacking Sweden is to get to Norway from another angle"; which sounds to be to costly and time consuming.

Later on, say 1999-2000 even just the rumour of a single resource type could make a general offensive a real possibility.

After the Soviet offensive during the summer of 2000, not many would have the resources needed to go on the offensive again. I also guess food is the primary resource on most minds.

While Sweden might not have the best soil in the world, with a rather small population and large land mass, it would probably be able to handle a wave of refugees from Norway. But it would probably lock down its border. By assisting Denmark in locking down its border against Germany, I see it as quite unlikely that any larger amount of refugees would reach Sweden.

Finland has quite a border against Russia. So it is a question of how well Finland would be able to keep starving masses out. If they would retake Karelia (lost to the Soviet during WWII), they would get a shorter border due to lake Ladoga adding as a natural barrier. So depending on how far Russia collapses, that might end up as an option.

With its railroads, hydropower and nuclear power plants, Sweden would probably be able to fairly well adapt if undamaged. Methanol and charcoal are produced from the same process, and there is a lot of forest to make it from. But everything would probably be rationed, so when the normal idealistic naivety of Swedes might not be as common anymore; creating a higher readiness of keeping people out in the same way as France.

[Raellus]

I've posted these thoughts elsewhere, but...

In the early days of the Twilight War, I can see Soviet forces attempting to seize airbases in northern Norway. Success would allow the Soviets to provide top cover for their fleet to sortie out into the Norwegian/North Sea. In order to seize them quickly and without damaging them, the Soviets would rely on Spetznaz and chemical weapons, followed in short order by airborne troops.

NATO naval forces would respond, both to stop a major Red Fleet sortie and to support NATO ground ops against the Soviet bridgeheads. This would lead to at least one fleet action resulting in heavy losses on both sides.

As to Denmark, we had a complete thread a while back about when and why the Danes would enter the war and the role Iceland would play in the Twilight version of WWIII. I thought that Denmark might enter the war after the Soviets nuked the US bases in Iceland.

Lundgren, what do you think about the idea of Sweden trying to seize Polish territory along the Baltic Coast after the U.S. evacuation of Europe? I ask only because historically, Sweden laid claim to and controlled some of this territory. Since Sweden would come out of the war in relatively good shape, they would have the strength to do this. I can't think of any strategic reason to do this- it would be more a matter of national pride and power projection as Sweden stakes a claim to being a post-WWIII power. Perhaps Sweden could claim that it's seizing Polish territory to stop raids by pirates or something like that. I just kind of like the idea of adding another player to the scramble for Poland.

[Lundgren]

Originally Posted by Raellus

Lundgren, what do you think about the idea of Sweden trying to seize Polish territory along the Baltic Coast after the U.S. evacuation of Europe? I ask only because historically, Sweden laid claim to and controlled some of this territory. Since Sweden would come out of the war in relatively good shape, they would have the strength to do this. I can't think of any strategic reason to do this- it would be more a matter of national pride and power projection as Sweden stakes a claim to being a post-WWIII power. Perhaps Sweden could claim that it's seizing Polish territory to stop raids by pirates or something like that. I just kind of like the idea of adding another player to the scramble for Poland.

I can't see Sweden being interested in claiming land in any direction. But I can see Sweden trying to spread our moral values, just as Sweden try to shove our prostitution law down everyone else throat. Here is an Australian evaluation of said law. The Ban on Purchasing Sex in Sweden - The So-Called Swedish Model.

The cultural map of the world might give an indication with whom Sweden somewhat shares values with. So I would guess the first objective would be to secure our own borders. Then help Finland, Norway and Denmark.

But as Sweden currently have troops in Afghanistan, and we have had troops under UN mandate on the Balkans, etc. So while I can't imagine much of forceful expansive ambitions, I can see Sweden to possible send aid to a faction they consider legit. If I would want Sweden to start involve themselves, I would have them help Denmark and Finland to secure their borders. Possible by having enough refugees coming through to make the Swedish population want that situation to stop (much easier to sit on ones high horse and have opinions on how people would handle things while being 5,000 kilometers away). So if Russia is collapsing, having them help Finland setting up a more secure border (retaking Karelia). From there, perhaps going on a "peace making mission", sending aid in form of advisors, troops, arms and supplies (kind of sound like Vietnam, doesn't it... ). Now, Sweden is a small country, population wise. So it would not be a large amount of troops. But having pre-war technology, it would still have some bite.

[Lundgren]

To continue a bit more on the thought of Sweden involving itself in Poland. It touches quite a few sensitive topics, and I will not argue what is right or wrong. The purpose is to give an insight into Swedish mentality, and how it could be used in a plausible way in the Twilight setting. A more cute, slightly politically incorrect way, to learn more about how we in Scandinavia is geared would be to look at the "Scandinavia and the World" web comic.

But to be able to weight my writing a bit, as most Swedish TW2k players (or at least those I have met) tend to be right wing voters; my political affiliation is to the Swedish left.

As I understand it, Poland is one of the most Religious countries in Europe, while Sweden is one of the least religious. If I recall, Poland is one of the few countries in Europe today where abortion is illegal. As many turn to religion during hard times, I would probably turn that up a notch or two. Sweden is on the forefront on the "pro-choice" side. So we have a collision course with religious factions.

Sweden's opinions on democracy, law and order would probably put it on collision course with the communists, criminals and warlords.

A lot of eastern Europe is strongly against homosexuality, Sweden is on the other end of the spectrum. So another point that can be used to raise the tension.

Considering websites like "God hates Sweden" and there was a senator a couple of decades ago who wanted to have an embargo against Sweden because we were a "communistic country that potentially could develop nuclear weapons"; I guess there would be quite a few Americans who would think Sweden is just yet another commie country trying to squash liberty and religion. Apparently, not everyone understand the difference between a Social democratic party and Soviet Union communism. While it would be a small minority, it might destabilize the US ranks, and possible desertions to join "free units that carries on the crusade."

So while I don't think Sweden would end up on a collision course with any NATO forces, I can definitely see them on a collision course with some former NATO soldiers.

Now, with legit group, I would assume a group supporting Swedish ideals of equality and democracy. But if I recall correctly, Castro talked a lot about free elections. So Sweden could be supporting the wrong faction.

So the proper tagline to Swedish intervention in Poland could very well be: "The road to hell is paved with good intentions."

[Trooper]

When we are talking about Scandinavia 2.2 “history” simply sucks.

"Scandinavia: While nothing in the Scandinavian countries was subjected to nuclear attacks, the peninsula saw considerable fighting during 1997-98 between NATO and Soviet forces. Cut off from world trade, life is becoming increasingly difficult for most Scandinavians. Most of the cities of Scandinavia are independent or insular, although broad regions in the south are organized. Areas in the north subjected to fighting during the war are either cantonments, devastated, or in anarchy."

No nuclear strikes in Scandinavia? Soviets really didn’t appreciate neutrality. I have read some articles about soviet war planning during cold war and those plans were simply horrific. They were prepared to nuke Austrian garrison towns and Wien (2 x 500 kt). Danish people would have enjoyed several nuclear strikes in 20-100 kilotons range. Unluckily historians were unable to get those soviet war plans against other Nordic countries, but I don’t think there would be doubts about nuclear weapons use against Norway, Sweden or Finland. Yes - swedes were able to keep their neutrality during WW2 but their fate would have been completely different during Twilight war. "you're either with us, or against us" If soviets didn’t hesitate nuke neutral France – why should they leave Sweden intact?

On the other hand Boomer (v.1) has nice timeline for Norway and there also a few lines about Finland in Twilight war.

[Lundgren]

That the Soviet had plans to nuke about everywhere doesn't mean much. The US had plans to nuke cities and towns in West Germany. War is an ugly business, and one creates plans for a lot of different scenarios.

The traditions of the Soviets tend to be quite brutal and paranoid. But there is an internal logic to it. If nuking France would cripple the war effort of NATO, or a perceived benefit, I don't have any problem with that attack. From the Soviet point of view, taking out the French harbors while still having the ability to do so, might be a long term strategy as well.

France is also quite a power, that have shown itself ready to not care what the rest of the world is thinking. So the Soviets might want them to be weakened, so they won't project that power elsewhere.

Taking out the ability to fly sorties over the Atlantic is a reason to nuke the airbases in Norway. Any harbor in Denmark would probably be targeted. They are already in war with Norway, and Denmark is still a NATO member. But both Sweden and Finland do have high tech industries, but are probably quite insignificant. While being able to knock out the industries and infrastructure, the military forces would be to dispersed to be knocked out. Neither country have any nuclear capability to retaliate with, so any threat would be from conventional measures. Low risk but low reward.

So I find both alternatives to be plausible.

[headquarters]

If the Soviets were o do it they couldnt do it efficiently by slugging it out in Finnmark and Lappland. The area is just to void of resources. Roads are limited and the terrain in Norway favours the defender. There is a limited Window of operations due to winter.

Amphibious and airborne ops on a massive scale would have to commence simultanously - or nuclear attacks on population centers. Otherwise the land war would grind on without much gain but hard losses on either side. Assuming the Norwegians have continous airsupport from the USAF and the RAF.

Just a perspektive

[dude_uk]

From the timeline

June 7 - US and British units begin a rapid flanking movement through northern Finland, but are severely hampered by Finnish troops

Which idiot at NATO HQ thought that one up?! And more importantly the British Army toy-box is empty, what units?

[Adm.Lee]

Drat, now I want to pull out the old GDW "Arctic Front" game. That was sort of my favorite in the TWW series. I think it's the one I played most often with my brother, but the German front game would have been pretty close.

[Legbreaker]

Nuke usage in T2K doesn't exactly follow any plans I've ever heard about. From reading through all the material (all versions) it seems fairly clear that each and every warhead was fired off on a case by case basis - might have been a dozen or so a day, but it was still far from a wide scale usage (well, ok, maybe against China it was). Every warhead was targeted to achieve a specific goal, while simultaneously avoiding going "too far" and triggering a full scale strategic exchange.
As it says in the books:

Neither side wishes to cross the threshold to nuclear oblivion in one bold step, and so they inch across it, never quite knowing they have done so until after the fact.

Therefore, without a clear and specific target in Sweden, there's no real requirement for them to have been hit, especially since the other side may have acted rather negatively at the nuking of a neutral country (NATO were probably happy France got hit after they abandoned them and invaded Belgium, the Netherlands and part of Germany, and may even have fired a few warheads at them themselves).

[Panther Al]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

Nuke usage in T2K doesn't exactly follow any plans I've ever heard about. From reading through all the material (all versions) it seems fairly clear that each and every warhead was fired off on a case by case basis - might have been a dozen or so a day, but it was still far from a wide scale usage (well, ok, maybe against China it was). Every warhead was targeted to achieve a specific goal, while simultaneously avoiding going "too far" and triggering a full scale strategic exchange.
As it says in the books:
Therefore, without a clear and specific target in Sweden, there's no real requirement for them to have been hit, especially since the other side may have acted rather negatively at the nuking of a neutral country (NATO were probably happy France got hit after they abandoned them and invaded Belgium, the Netherlands and part of Germany, and may even have fired a few warheads at them themselves).

Totally agree: The Nuclear Exchanges was very much a piecemeal thing in hopes to keep it from becoming an 1000 missile bad night. Its that piecemeal exchange that in a weird way, made things a nightmare scenario as they are in the TW2K 'verse as I alluded to when I referred to a comment a friend of mine who is in the business of nukes and the use of in another thread.

(In short: The TDM was too massive in too short a time to allow emergency services to do a good job in dealing with the effects, but too small and targeted on the right targets without hitting others, that would force a epically massive need for the same.)

[Lundgren]

Originally Posted by dude_uk

Which idiot at NATO HQ thought that one up?! And more importantly the British Army toy-box is empty, what units?

Good points.

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

Nuke usage in T2K doesn't exactly follow any plans I've ever heard about.

As the saying goes, no plan ever survive the contact with the enemy. In my opinion, plans are just a foundation for improvisation.

Originally Posted by Panther Al

(In short: The TDM was too massive in too short a time to allow emergency services to do a good job in dealing with the effects, but too small and targeted on the right targets without hitting others, that would force a epically massive need for the same.)

I agree as well. Just one hit in an urban area would probably tie up most of a countries medical and firefighting abilities.

One thing to remember is that the Soviet nukes was cruder and larger. I don't know if that was correct for the late '90s or not. But the reason for the larger Soviet ones was that the western robots could hit a specific building, and a Soviet one could not. A Soviet one didn't have precision enough to hit a specific city block, so it needed a lot more bang to make sure the target was destroyed. That was also the reason why it was any point to build those bunkers that would survive "...unless receiving a direct hit."

[Trooper]

About nuke strikes in Scandinavia…

We can agree to disagree.

Now let’s move on!

I have been thinking some campaign ideas to Baltic Sea area.

Estonian oil shale – who is going to control this valuable resource?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_shale_in_Estonia

Soviets – crushing new independent Estonian state.

Finland – supporting new independent Estonia. Not direct involvement but a proxy war. Arming & training of Estonian freedom fighters. There are close ties between Finnish and Estonian people. Many Estonian volunteered to serve in Finnish army & navy during WW 2 – because they didn’t want serve in German army. Finnish volunteers also trained Estonians in 80s, when Estonian was trying to regain its independence.

(ex-NATO mercenaries – welcome to Tallinn.)

Sweden – Without nuclear strikes Swedish is going to be very strong military power in northern Europe (mini France). They can try direct occupation of Estonian oil shale mining and production areas
.
Of course you can throw in different political factions in your campaign to create game without goodies and baddies.

Great WMD hunt

Swedish and Finnish special forces trying to find nuclear warheads on soviet soil. Their goal is to find working nuclear warheads. (If war is going to “heat up” again, there is no better defense against nuclear blackmail…) Of course you have to specialist to maintain and rearm those weapons. Again unnuked Sweden can send their own special forces, but Finnish army is going to use mercenaries to locate those warheads. (They can even hire some stragglers from 5th division…)

Soviets : GRU spetsnaz team trying to regain those lost warheads. KGB trying to “help” their comrades…

[Medic]

If you guys want, I probably could continue where my esteemed countryman hopped off. The thread about Finland in Twilight: 2000 is, as such, my interpretation of how things went in Finland, but I can translate the originals to a language a bit more of you understand.

Edit: The Finnish supplement, 'Erikoisjoukot' (Special Forces on English) has a number of things that might interest those who run things with the first version of the game. I can see, if I'll find time to translate those templates.

[Raellus]

A good buddy's T2K PbP has Gdansk fighting to remain a free city in the late summer of 2000. He had a small group of Swedish SF operating in the city (their intentions were never fully explained in the game, but I'm hoping to learn what they were doing there someday.) Lundgren, could you see Sweden trying to support a friendly city-state on the Baltic?

I could also see the Swedes operating against pirate bases along the Baltic from the fall of 2000 on. In most cases, they would be conducting raids to destroy pirate enclaves, but I imagine that the Swedes might possibly occupy some territory in their piracy suppression efforts, at least temporarily. Does that sound plausible?

Trooper, I really like your Estonian oil shale scenario. I think it would be interesting to play "neutrals" in the T2K world. The French seem to get a lot of play, but I find the Scandinavian/Baltic angle quite captivating. It's also a good place for stragglers from the U.S. 8th I.D. to end up as well.

[Medic]

Actually, since there is little happening on RPoL just now, here's the first batch of 'Erikoisjoukot'.

New Skills

EXP: Explosives. The charactersnwith this particular skill can set and disarm explosives, know how they can be rigged on bridges, vehicles etc.. They can also set and disarm traps. This skill replaces CBE in such tasks. Characters with high skill level in EXP know something about Combat Engineering as well and can attempt the tasks with 1/4 of their EXP-skill and vice versa. EXP costs, like CBE, double and can be bought either as a military or background skill, but as background skill it costs three times the normal price, that is, three points per a percent up to 50 and 6 points a percent from there on.

SKI: Skiing. The character with this skill knows how to ski. Skiing in the ordinary terrain is ESY:SKI, on hills AVG:SKI and in the mountains DIF:SKI. The skill can be selected as background, education or military skill.

MA: Martial Arts. This skill depicts some oriental martial art like Karate, Tae Kwon Do, Ju Jutsu and Kung-Fu. These styles are all different and putting them under one skill is a great insult, but highly necessary for easing up the progress of the game. It can be chosen as either background, education or military skill, but as a background skill it costs three times the normal.

The characters with this skill know a couple more tricks than ordinary characters. Fighting the ordinary characters unarmed is easier for them and they get two unarmed attacks per turn against any opponent.

Strike: A character with the Martial Arts skill can choose between punch and kick. Punching is ESY:MA and kicking is AVG:MA. Blocking either one is DIF:MC, DIF:BC or AVG:MA. If the martial artist wishes to make an aimed strike, doing so with a kick will be DIF:MA. Aiming a punch is far easier and the difficulty does not change.

Martial Arts strike has damage ratingof Unarmed Damage + 1d6+2 for punch and Unarmed Damage + 1d10 for kick.

Joint Lock: Joint Lock works as with BC, but it is either AVG:AGI or AVG:MA and takes both attacks that turn. For martial artists the Joint Lock 'damage' is Unarmed Damage + 1d10 for martial artists.

Knockdown: A new attack type for unarmed combat. This is exclusively for Martial Artists. The attack is AVG:MA. If the target was not surprised, he can try to dodge, which is DIF:AGI. If the dodge is unsuccesful, he will fall prone and be stunned.

All other rules for unarmed combat can be found in the Play Manual.

TRA: Traps. This skill is used in setting and disarming traps.

Setting Traps: Ordinary traps without explosives are AVG:TRA and with explosives DIF:TRA. You can try twice each time. If you succeed, roll d100 and add your Traps-skill. This is the traps visibility value. Record the number. If you are not satisfied with it, you can attempt to improve it by making a DIF:TRA. If this is successful, add 2d10 to the value; if not, reduce the value by 2d10. This score is final and you can not change it anymore.

Disarming Traps: Disarming a trap is DIF:TRA. If successful, the trap has been rendered inoperable and poses no longer a threat. If unsuccessful, there is a 10% chance, the trap is set off.

Detecting Traps: Detecting traps is a task, but it is resolved slightly differently than the usual tests. Roll d100 and add your RCN or TRA. If the result is higher than the visibility value of the trap, you detect it. Wild animals and dogs are considered to have RCN of 75 and other animals 60. If the character doesn't detect the trap, it goes off.

Characters with CBE or EXP know a thing or two about traps as well and can use 1/4 of their skill instead of TRA. TRA costs double and can be bought as background, education or military skill, but costs triple as background skill.

DT: Dog Training. With this skill the characters can control and train dogs. Issuing ordinary commands (sit, stay, heel) to ones own dog is an automatic success. If the dog belongs to someone else, but is friendly, the task is ESYT. To order a dog to attack is ESYT for your own dog and AVGT for someone elses friendly dog.

Tracking by just the smell is DIFT for your own dog and by the smell on an object AVGT. For someone elses dog, the task is DIFT for both. The test is made for the dog once after fifteen minutes. If the dog loses the trail, it can try again every five minutes.

Dogs can be trained as well. Teaching the basic commands to a puppy is AVGT, attacking and tracking DIFT. For adult dogs, both tasks are one step more difficult.

Even if the dog belongs to a player character, the GM will do all the rolls for the dogs. The GM should remember, dogs are just ordinary creatures and can not be coerced. They won't attack a ten-man group of bandits even if the owner told them to. Well treated it is, however, a faithful companion and won't abandon its master. The skill can be learned as background, education or military skill.

CLI: Climbing. This skill includes climbing walls with or without a rope. With harness, climbingnis ESY:CLI, with just a rope AVG:CLI and without one DIF:CLI. It can be learned as a background or military skill, but costs double as a background skill.

COM: Communications. This skill replaces ELC in using communications equipment. Can be chosen as background, education or military skill.

RDR: Radar. The skill of using radars, which replaces ELC in those uses. It can be learned as background or military skill, but as a background skill it costs double.

[Medic]

For the Estonian scenario, I could buy that, though I'd believe, there has been some action along (and across) the Fenno-Soviet border. If it has not been a active war, it has been Special Forces type operations on both sides. For the Soviets the troops have been Spetznas while for the Finns, they have probably been either sissi (ranger), laskuvarjojääkäri (airborne; technically same as the sissi, except they are inserted by parachute drops or helicopters) or taistelusukeltaja (combat diver) operations.

Finns would probably, as the doctrine dictates, concentrate on mining the Gulf of Finland in places the Finnish Coastal Artillery can not get firing solutions to and use the missile boats to make quick strikes from their hiding places inside the archipelago. The mining operations would probably be extended to the Estonian coast as well, making it difficult, if not impossible for the Soviet Baltic Fleet to conduct a landing operation behind the Estonian lines. The Finnish Airforce would extend the effected area across the Gulf of Finland as well, especially if reinforced by Swedish Royal Airforce in this operation. Of course, airborne operations would be continued only to the point, where there would be enough fuel to launch one final strike in case of an emergency. Same goes for most naval vessels.

The Gulf of Bothnia would be kept open for commercial traffic as long as possible, as the naval route is by far the easiest when Finland is concerned. The network of underwater listening stations and observation posts on islands gives a good chance for detecting and tracking the enemy naval forces.

As an anecdote, a person I know was serving in coastal artillery as a sensor operator during his conscript service and he spotted a strange sounding ship on the underwater system. He begun checking the timetables (there's several ferries going back and forth between Finland and Sweden daily), managed to find the ship there and called the to check their props once they reached the harbor in Turku. They did - there was a huge chunk of metal missing fromone of them, which could have eventually caused the blade to break off and great deal of damage to the powertrain. The guy received a couple extra days of leave for that.

The military co-operation between Finns and Estonians is not a new thing as I think I wrote in that pas history-thread of mine. It existed prior to WWII, but the Soviet Union invaded Estonia very early and the co-operation ended before it had gotten up to speed. Had it done that, the Soviets would have had great difficulties navigating through the Gulf of Finland, as they would have been subjected to the fire of heavy coastal artillery batteries on both sides, designed with overlapping fields of fire and a communications cable running across at the bottom of the gulf, giving the batteries the advantage of one single forward observer calling the fire. This would have been augmented by minefields, submarines and the two Finnish Coastal Defence Ships Väinämöinen and Ilmarinen with their 10" batteries.

[Legbreaker]

Originally Posted by Trooper

Estonian oil shale – who is going to control this valuable resource?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_shale_in_Estonia

I proposed a couple of years back that this very resource could have been an objective of the US 8th ID.
http://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.php?t=2706
http://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.php?t=3261

Originally Posted by Medic

If you guys want, I probably could continue where my esteemed countryman hopped off.

Sounds like a plan!
Perhaps tack it on the end of the existing thread? http://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.php?t=1437

[Lundgren]

Reposting in the correct thread...

The upgrade of the Swedish army during the early 90's would free up a lot of M/45 submachine-guns and 6,5mm Mauser rifles from the home guard. The home guard are upgraded to the AK4 (H&K G3) freed up from the Army. The Swedish police also replaced their version of the M/45 with H&K MP5.

I noticed that the English Wikipedia page for the M/45 didn't mention the 9mmB ammunition. It is an overloaded version of the 9mm parabellum round, and all but the oldest ones can handle it.

If the Swedish army would involve itself on the continent (or elsewhere), all of those weapons would still be in storage and could be used to equip "support forces".

[Lundgren]

One does not simply walk into Mordo... Scandinavia.

With the only southern land crossing being the bridge between Denmark and Sweden, the southernmost northern being the border between Finland and Sweden, a lot of rivers with not that many bridges, and large low populated areas; it would probably not be that hard keeping refugees from the rest of Europe out.

Sweden also has a quite developed medical industry at the outbreak of the war. So unless Sweden was targeted, the diseases killing millions in Europe would probably not spread into Scandinavia. Now, with Sweden being more or less a "covert member" of NATO and the Russians knows it, Sweden could easily receive some nukes (probably part of the reason why the Swedish military doctrine looked the way it was with its resources scattered around).

With the oil in Estonia, I have heard that quite a few Estonians consider their country being part of the nordic countries. So if the situation stabilizes enough in Norway, Denmark and Finland, "helping the Estonians" could be a good excuse to bring their oil into the Nordic fold.

Another point, that can either be used as a reason to drop some nukes on Sweden, or to use Sweden as a future "power player", is that while the nuclear weapon program was scrapped in the fifties; Sweden do have nuclear power-plants, space rocket technology (if I recall correctly, the European Space Agency uses two launch sites, one in South America and Esrange outside Kiruna in Northern Sweden), and knowhow. So it would probably not take long from a project green-light until Sweden could drop a nuke at a location anywhere around the world. When the nukes start flying, the Swedish political establishment might reconsider their "nuclear weapon free zone" stance.