T2K: State of the U.S. Army in the late Twilight War

[Webstral]

Propagandizing one's own troops would have been a priority mission during the Twilight War. I think we will have a very difficult time imagining the mindset of the troops in mid-2000, or later. Most of their frames of reference are gone. The survivors have endured a trauma unlike anything seen in the Western world since perhaps the big outbreak of the Black Plague or maybe the fall of Rome. Survivors of the 1941-1942 winter fighting on the Eastern Front might be able to give us some idea. Perhaps the Germans in May of 1945 could tell us something of what is going on in the heads of the troops of 2000. The survivors of the Tokyo firebombing or in Horishima or Nagasaki might have some idea. Obviously, there is going to be tremendous variability.

What are the troops of XI Corps thinking as they receive orders to move out from their cantonments in 2000? We may conjecture; but I think the men and women who have made it that far will have been on such an emotional roller coaster that even those of us who have been in combat probably can't identify with them, except in the most rudimentary of ways. Simply to be alive is to suffer from PTSD.

I'll bet the churches of Europe are full.

Webstral

[Marc]

Originally Posted by Webstral

What are the troops of XI Corps thinking as they receive orders to move out from their cantonments in 2000? We may conjecture; but I think the men and women who have made it that far will have been on such an emotional roller coaster that even those of us who have been in combat probably can't identify with them, except in the most rudimentary of ways. Simply to be alive is to suffer from PTSD.

I'll bet the churches of Europe are full.

Webstral

I would think the same if the war in Europe has continued without pause in 1999. I’m following v2.2 timeline, so I do not know if the same pause exists in the v1 timeline. But in 1999 the main activity seems to turn around marauding raids and protective measures against them. So, most units remain static through this year and no important military movement is mentioned until the NATO offensive in 2000. This interruption, although not a total pause, could create some hope of an end of hostilities in soldiers of both sides.

Some units will establish or consolidate their own cantonments. German units seems to have advanced more in the cantonment systems that their allies in Europe. It seems reasonable given that they are in their own land. Probably NATO and US high command will try to discourage their units to do the same. Establishing a cantonment not only implies that you are taking a defensive role, trying to control enough land to keep your unit fed. It implies a certain degree of resignation to take any important offensive action in the short term. And it means a change in the mentality and the role developed by your soldiers. In any case, something resembling to a cantonment must be established. An entire year to recover oneself or suffer the sequels due to all the lived experiences. And an entire year to listen and expand rumors in a limited conflict environment, but with a safe base, ties with the local population and occupations related to guard duties, maintenance, farming or recovery. And the sensation that everything will be over because both sides are exhausted and have suffered terrible loses with little or no gain. Change this way of live to adjust your mentality to launch yourself another time to the offensive could be a hard process.

[Abbott Shaull]

It also means that units and their commanders are moving from the mentality of one in Armor/Mechanized Force that you should always be on move and only stay in place long enough to get resupply if you have to wait for them to catch up. It also implies that your supply chain is failing, which it has.

Granted Germans would have the advantage to building up their cantonments since they are in their own country, where allied units, there will be those in the area looking at the units as just another occupation force much like the Polish would look at the Soviets in cantonments in their country.

Honest, I don't see the Soviet High Command being too thrilled with any Division of theirs or allies setting up cantonments for it means the unit doesn't plan on moving for awhile and the Soviets much like NATO relied on units being highly mobile.

Legbreak in theory the unit would be consolidated, but there are plenty examples where Company/Troop size units were still operating under the previous system and no one seem to say, "Hey we have only an oversize platoon here, let reorganize it as such." Company Commanders still wanted to have all the resource they could get, and in some cases it meant keeping old organization even though they were in many case down to platoon level or less.

[Raellus]

Here is a rough draft of the "chapter" on morale.

Your suggestions are welcome. I could use your help since I don't know what the official U.S. Army designations/equivalents are for morale and/or propaganda officers. I'm not real happy with the CRC acronym either.

The next chapter will be on health, mental and physical.


Morale

Following years of nearly constant fighting, reduced supplies, and little to no contact with the folks back home, morale in the U.S. Army of 2000 was understandably low. Efforts were made to boost the troops’ morale, increase their fighting spirit, and discourage desertion.

After the nuclear exchanges, USO shows and other official morale-boosting entertainments all but ceased. Enterprising morale officers took stock of local talent and recruited musicians, actors, comedians, and other performers from among the troops to stage improvised shows for the their comrades.

After the TDM, leaves were by and large dispensed with. Most major leave centers had been destroyed by nuclear strikes and small groups of unarmed troops were no longer safe travelling the roads between surviving population centers. This removal of even the temporary respite of a hard-earned leave no doubt led to a widespread decrease in morale. Morale officers had to get creative. Modest leave centers offering bathing facilities, clean sheets, food, drink, games, and other entertainments were set up in cantonment rear areas to provide some relief for exhausted, battle-weary troops. Whenever possible, troops were rotated through these cantonment recreation centers (CRCs) in an attempt to improve their morale.

American propaganda officers made great use of the fact that dozens of American cities had been destroyed, and millions of civilians killed, by Soviet nuclear strikes. “Remember the TDM” (Thanksgiving Day Massacre) became a slogan frequently employed to demonize the communist enemy and rouse American troops’ fighting spirits. To a lesser extent, the idea that soldiers were fighting for freedom and democracy- the “American Way of Life”- against a godless, totalitarian regime bent on world domination also motivated many of the more idealistic troops to fight on.

The cantonment, with its strong sense of community involvement and belonging, also acted as a pull-factor to keep soldiers from deserting. Many soldiers continued to fight more to defend their local cantonment than to defend their distant homeland.

Despite the Army’s best efforts, desertion became an increasing problem and field commanders were given extended latitude in dealing with deserters. Desertion was discouraged to some extent by geography. Outside CONUS, most American troops were unfamiliar with the language and culture of their surroundings. The sense of being a stranger in a strange land probably went a long way in maintaining unit cohesion. The cantonment offered a tangible sense of community and belonging to the troops who lived, worked, and fought there. Tales of cutthroat marauders* roaming the areas outside most cantonments also discouraged some would-be deserters.

*In nearly all cases, marauders were said to have been enemy deserters or local bandits. Reports of American or NATO marauder bands were generally suppressed as much as possible.

Nonetheless, officers had to contend with the slow but steady loss of fighting manpower to desertion. Over time, the Army developed a carrot- and-stick approach to discourage desertion. From time to time, amnesties were offered to deserters (the message being delivered by air-dropped leaflets and vehicle-mounted loudspeakers). Floggings and firing squads acted as the stick. Many units saw a return to corporal and capital punishment for a range of offenses, desertion foremost among them. Discipline was usually left up to the division commander and some deservedly earned a reputation for strict and sometimes brutal enforcement.

In most cases, however, soldiers kept fighting for the same reason soldiers have continued to fight under miserable circumstances for millennia- they fought for their buddies.

[chico20854]

Originally Posted by Raellus

Here is a rough draft of the "chapter" on morale.

Your suggestions are welcome. I could use your help since I don't know what the official U.S. Army designations/equivalents are for morale and/or propaganda officers. I'm not real happy with the CRC acronym either.

The term you'd use is MWR, Morale, Welfare and Recreation. There would be a MWR center or MWR tent on larger posts, smaller units (company size) have a recreation room referred to as the "dayroom". While there were European-level MWR facilities (including entire resort complexes), MWR follows the troops fairly closely.

As to who's responsible, there are two options. At the battalion and brigade level (peacetime, maybe brigade and division in 2000), the chaplain plays a significant role in maintaining the morale of the troops.

He's the only officer, in general terms, that plays a direct role in morale, other than the obvious good leader = dedicated troops in garrison and combat, poor leader = lead from the rear, so none of your own troops can lodge a bullet in your back. But the day to day little things that keep morale up is the purview of the NCO corps, often a mid-grade NCO (E-5 to E-7). Any higher rank makes the effort suspect, as GI's have a tendency to hate "mandatory fun" imposed from on high. In a company, its the first sergeant and platoon sergeant's jobs to monitor and maintain morale, while the actual duties (mail clerk, getting videos, maintaining the weight room, organizing a softball or football game, grabbing some newspapers or magazines from somewhere else) is performed by a lower rank soldier, usually somebody from the company headquarters like the commander's or first sergeants' driver, the supply clerk/armorer or the commo specialist. At battalion level, the sergeant major monitors morale, in addition to the chaplain (if any).

And with the chaplain, he plays a critical role. In addition to his spiritual duties, he's considered a neutral or friendly advocate that is to a large extent exempt from the chain of command. His duties extend well beyond conducting religious services and counseling individual soldiers... he frequently lobbies the commander on the troops' behalf to maintain/improve living conditions. And chaplains also maintain a "spiritual neutrality" in that they generally don't proselytize their particular religion - it doesn't matter if a soldier is Lutheran and the battalion has a rabbi, the soldier will receive the same treatment from his chaplain. (Chaplains in a command will work together to arrange the appropriate services - in Desert Storm, where non-Moslem services were prohibited by Saudi law, units held "Morale Meeting C", "Morale Meeting P" and "Morale Meeting J" at various times.)

And the chaplain may have to "look the other way" as far as the other means of relieving tension... camp followers. We've had a number of discussions over the years of this seedy underside of morale; even if the command (rightly) tries to suppress it, it'll probably happen anyhow, starting with the same civilian "contractors" you mentioned. (There were constant rumors about the various young ladies that worked the mess halls, barber shops and laundries on posts in Bosnia).

MWR facilities in an operational zone usually include movie tents, workout facilities, dry bars (non-alcoholic, or a 2-beer limit), American-style restaurants (in Desert Shield some units received McDonalds, hours old and cold, for Thanksgiving dinner and were overjoyed to do so!) and sports.

On top of that, living facilities make a big difference day to day. You mentioned hot showers and clean sheets. Having a solid roof rather than a tent, not living in mud and filth, hot food at least once a day, being able to clean uniforms, not being overcrowded and having a place to relax (segregated by rank - lower enlisted, junior NCOs, senior NCOs & officers) all come into play too.

So that's kind of the day-to-day morale issues in the US Army, somewhat different from the morale that makes soldiers hard chargers willing to follow their PL into the teeth of Soviet troops. Its the kind that makes soldiers attentive on guard, not desert, take care of their gear and so on.

As for what makes soldiers act and fight hard, I'll let one the paratroopers and marines talk about that kind of esprit de corps. Infantry units in general tend to be filled with pretty aggressive guys, and many a MWR facility has been seriously damaged before the MPs arrive. The next morning the senior NCOs administer the usual ass-chewing, but then follow it up with: "Did you beat their asses or get beat yourself? You better have given better than you took!" And in inter-unit fights, it's us against them, at whatever the convenient level: NATO vs Pact, Americans vs Turks, Army vs Air Force, 1st Bde vs Divarty, 1st Bn vs 2nd Bn, C Co. vs A. Co., and so on...

Hope this helps! Looking forward to more of this quality piece!

[Legbreaker]

Originally Posted by Raellus

Despite the Army’s best efforts, desertion became an increasing problem and field commanders were given extended latitude in dealing with deserters.

As you've mentioned, desertion would most certainly be more of a problem in English speaking areas than in Europe, the Middle East or Korea. The language barrier would be a huge impediment to small groups or individuals trying to make it on their own.
Also, desertion when overseas could be seen by many as admitting all hope of returning home was gone. While ever at least some mail got through from time to time, soldiers would probably hang on to the hope that the military (and whatever was left of the government) might be able to scrape up enough transportation to get them all home again. I imagine great effort would be made to maintain at least minimal contact with the US, propaganda units going to far as to print fake copies of newspapers and magazines from home to distribute amongst the troops.

The reality might well be all hope was gone, but the illusion would have to be maintained at all costs.

Originally Posted by Webstral

It's got to be better than the alternative. The way young American servicemembers behave in Amsterdam is just embarrassing.

It's bad enough when they're over here in Australia. I don't even want to think about how they'd be in a country where prostitution and marijuana are legal! :O

[Ironside]

Thank you Raellus for your interesting and thought provoking essays. Thanks for your permission to borrow your ideas, I intend to do so extensively I look forward to reading more.

In my campaign, the locations of nuclear strikes are highly classified info due to the morale implications. My players have to decide for themselves if they still receive letters from home or not. Fortunately I don't think we have the slightest idea what would be the mindset of T2k military survivors (although being role-players we try); many of my NPCs would be considered stark, staring mad today, but I reckon it has survival value in T2k.

[Raellus]

Thanks, Ironside.

I will use MWR. I'll also add a section on chaplains, another on brothels, and another on espirit de corps.

I wonder how much espirit de corps some units would have. Those kicked around and/or nuked before being reconstituted would probably not have much. Other, more successful/storied units likely would.

Another idea I had for maintaining unit cohesion and morale is to have recuperated wounded return to their parent unit instead of to a general replacement pool. I know that the Marines and Airborne units did this in WWII whereas the regular army did not.

[Legbreaker]

Originally Posted by Abbott Shaull

Legbreaker in theory the unit would be consolidated, but there are plenty examples where Company/Troop size units were still operating under the previous system and no one seem to say, "Hey we have only an oversize platoon here, let reorganize it as such." Company Commanders still wanted to have all the resource they could get, and in some cases it meant keeping old organization even though they were in many case down to platoon level or less.

Keeping the pre-war standard of three infantry platoons per company, three companies (plus mortars, etc) per battalion (or however each nationality handles it) and so on requires sufficient officers to be available to command the units.

It is usual for officers (and NCOs) to suffer a higher casualty rate in combat than privates and similarly low ranks. This is because their role requires them to take more risks, leading by example and poking their heads up out of cover so they can maintain some idea of the overall situation. Therefore, there would not be enough command personnel available to keep the pre-war structure and so consolidation would be vital (or you end up with leaderless units, or units run by Corporals or even Privates).

As shown in the R/L exercise, a seriously understrength unit is completely ineffective. Because of this (and going from memory), units today are withdrawn from front line service if they suffer around 30-40% casualties, rebuilt with reinforcements and then sent back. Even the strongest T2K units have suffered in the order of 50-70% casualties.

Without reinforcements, there would be little to no choice but to consolidate smaller units while hoping to be able to reincorporate the other elements once reinforcements arrived.

Tanks and other AFVs have been proven over the past century to be extremely vulnerable when operating alone and without infantry support. Therefore a Divisions armour assets are likely to be amongst the first to be consolidated. I would expect a similar situation with aircraft and artillery - a single 105mm gun isn't anywhere near as effective a battery as 3-4 of them even if they have a near endless supply of ammunition.

[Webstral]

You might see authorized brothels appear in the cantonments. The surviving American officers might be forced by events to relax their puritanical standards and provide women for the sake of morale. The alternatives are continuing to lose men to STDs or making a self-defeating effort to completely control to movements of every private. Since it's the Ladies' Church Muffin Club types of America that keep us quite immature in the area of soldiers and sexuality, it might be fairly easy to convince post-Exchange leaders that each cantonment needs a brothel with its own medical personnel to check the women regularly.

Webstral

[Legbreaker]

US soldiers in a sexually liberated Europe. Now there's a scary thought (and one that's likely to result in many "unplanned families" once the contraceptives run out).

[Webstral]

It's got to be better than the alternative. The way young American servicemembers behave in Amsterdam is just embarrassing.

Webstral