War in the Far North

[Lurken]

Originally Posted by Ewan

A really good read and looking forward to part 3 and Battle of Germany 1996
I do have one question, as part of the ACE Mobile Force (Land) OOB we have Italian and Belgian units and I thought they would not deploy due to their governments not supporting NATO during the war.

It is explained in the text. In the case of the Italians, it is due to the Italians refusing the accept the cowardice of the socialist government of Italy refusing to aid the rest of the NATO. Basically going AWOL. Same with the Belgians I think.

[Ewan]

Originally Posted by Lurken

It is explained in the text. In the case of the Italians, it is due to the Italians refusing the accept the cowardice of the socialist government of Italy refusing to aid the rest of the NATO. Basically going AWOL. Same with the Belgians I think.

Thanks, I missed that bit and it makes sense

[rcaf_777]

Originally Posted by Ewan

Thanks, I missed that bit and it makes sense

ACE Mobile Force (Land) was never meet to be a that would fight on a large scale

"NATO’s first foray into rapid reaction can be traced back to proposals in 1960 by the then Supreme Allied Commander, Europe (SACEUR), General Lauris Norstad, to create a rapidly deployable mobile force for his command – Allied Command Europe (ACE) – to help deter intimidation, coercion or aggression, short of general war, against allied nations located on ACE’s northern and southern flanks. In peacetime, these nations hosted no or a very small allied military presence, and the concept of the AMF aimed at projecting a multinational deterrent capability on short notice."

https://www.nato.int/docu/review/art...nrf/index.html

Logistical speak a force like would a nightmare to support. Also Canada the US and Uk also already had forces earmarked for the region

United Kingdom/Netherlands Landing Force
4th Marine Amphibious Brigade. (USMC)
Canadian Air-Sea Transportable Brigade Group (downsize in 1987 and disbanded in 1989)

[Louied]

Chico, Great job as usual.......

I had been working on this, its on hold while I am trying to finish my BAOR/UKMF/UKLF docs. Feel free to use in updates.

[chico20854]

Thanks for all the feedback folks!

On the AMF(L), I had it deploy prior to the outbreak of war in its deterrent role as a show of Allied solidarity, less German units, who were both unavailable (in combat against GSFG) and to avoid any lingering bad feelings about German troops on Norwegian soil, which was a very real concern throughout the cold war. The force's manifest failings as a combat unit led to it being disbanded fairly quickly, the British and Canadian units falling under command of other HQs of their own military, the Belgians repatriated and the Italian deserters who remained to fight (most of the Alpini battalion) and the Luxembourgers attached to the Canadian headquarters.

Changing gear, I'd like your feedback on the format of my documents as I fiddle with the second part of the Norwegian campaign. Are there readability issues? Things I could tweak? This document had pictures in it, is that something that adds to it? (They complicate any effort to publish it, since there may be IP issues with some of them). This document had some maps in the text, but it didn't have where the front lines were on any given date. The Advent Crown and 1998 Campaign documents had links built in to Google maps that showed unit locations at different times. I have a more detailed jpeg map of the western Kola that I can (with an investment of time) put in unit locations. (In that case I've decided a google map isn't going to work because the dirt roads that are about all that exist in most of the area don't show on the map at any useful scale.) This document had references listed, is that something you find useful? Is the orbat useful? Too detailed? Not detailed enough? Should it list equipment types? Numbers? You guys are the audience for what I'm writing up, so I'd like your feedback on how I can make it better. (And that opens another issue... what content-wise can I improve? Too much on logistics? Not enough? More on the air war? Something in my writing style that grates? Always open to feedback on that as well! Seriously!)

And looking forward, I'd like to get the Battle of Germany out next after the Kola campaign. Any preferences for the next history for me to work on after that? I feel RDF Sourcebook and the Korean Peninsula sourcebooks did great jobs (Raellus!!!!) detailing the course of the war in those areas, so I'm not really interested in reinventing those wheels. I'm thinking the Battle of the Norwegian Sea/Third Battle of the Atlantic or 1996-7 Balkan/Turkish theater are the next big lifts, as well as picking up where Webstral left off in the Chinese theater. Or I could shift my focus to doing more unit histories, which I have a lot already started, but with the completion of the Battle of Germany document I would be able to pull together nearly the entire history of the German armies, for example. (I have roughly 20 pages of German Army unit histories drafted so far.)

I'd like to hear your ideas!

Thanks!!!

[rcaf_777]

Originally Posted by chico20854

Thanks for all the feedback folks!

The force's manifest failings as a combat unit led to it being disbanded fairly quickly, the British and Canadian units falling under command of other HQs of their own military, the Belgians repatriated and the Italian deserters who remained to fight (most of the Alpini battalion) and the Luxembourgers attached to the Canadian headquarters.

why not have the entire Canadian force in Norway have them move from Germany to Norway there was certainly enough political pressure in Canada to do so many at NATO that felt if 4 Canadian Mechanized Brigade Group and
Canadian Air-Sea Transportable Brigade Group were committed to Norway it would have tipped the balance of power in the region towards NATO

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadi..._Brigade_Group

[Ewan]

I thought the photos gave it a really professional feel to it and what would be really useful at the end would be bullet points of the key dates of the campaign.

The 96/97 Balkan/Turkish theatre would certainly be an interesting area to explore.

[chico20854]

Originally Posted by rcaf_777

why not have the entire Canadian force in Norway have them move from Germany to Norway there was certainly enough political pressure in Canada to do so many at NATO that felt if 4 Canadian Mechanized Brigade Group and
Canadian Air-Sea Transportable Brigade Group were committed to Norway it would have tipped the balance of power in the region towards NATO

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadi..._Brigade_Group

I think that would be a little too drastic of a change from the v1 storyline, which has an entire Canadian division in action in 2000 in Central Europe. As it was, the CAST Brigade's Norway commitment was withdrawn in 1987. More relevantly, transporting a mechanized brigade from southwestern Germany to northern Norway would have been a very difficult move with all the reinforcements flowing into Germany in late 1996, and upon arrival in Norway the armored vehicles would have been tied to the few roads that existed, already burdened with trying to support a large NATO force. The deployment of the US 6th ID from Alaska (a mission which, as far as I can tell, was never considered in Cold War planning) does a bit to tip the balance of power in the theater as well.