On this day 25 years ago (Commentary Thread)

[cawest]

i forgot about this. two are in AZ the first one was in 1986 what if they were not in use due to cost until the enemy invaded the US.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tether...t_Radar_System

[Homer]

Oh yes, the tethered aerostat site out by garden canyon!

I’m betting it and the other sites would have picked up their original purpose of cruise missile detection very quickly.

Once hostilities with Mexico start, I could see the perimeter getting expanded very quickly down past miller’s peak and the Coronado memorial to keep direct fire off the aerostat site. Naco probably gets evacuated and becomes part of an expanded security zone south of the border to deny the Naco Hwy/92 junction, rail lines, and the the high ground around Bisbee once Mexico enters the fray. The main defensive positions are probably along the San Pedro along the Miller’s Peak/Huachuca Complex to Patagonia, with at least the initial intent of denying penetration up the 92/San Pedro mobility corridor to the whetstone junction and the I-10 junction.

You could hold the Huachuca area pretty easily against anything other than mountain and/or air assault trained light infantry without a lot of trouble. Any force coming in from the south between Patagonia and Lowell has to contend with some pretty gnarly terrain. Rock drops or other blocking obstacles are very viable on the mountain roads and passes, and even infantry movement is canalized. Moving mounted forces across at Naco requires you to negotiate the San Pedro (the riparian area and channel is the obstacle, not so much the river) or fight through the Bisbee/Lowell Area. The other mounted avenue of approach is through the Miracle Valley Area, but to negotiate that you’re going to have to fight through Sierra Vista and the wadi complexes south of town while exposed to potential enfilading fire and masked indirect fires from the west. North of there you get a little break until the Huachuca city/whetstone area. Envelopment from the west is possible once the green valley/sahuarita area is secured, but even then you’ll still have a mountain fight to break through the passes to the 83/82 mobility corridor.

The problem is it doesn’t really get you much. The prizes are the mobility corridors along I-10, the population center in Tucson, the active copper mines around green valley, and the agricultural areas of the Santa Cruz basin. Most of them are outside the immediate area of Huachuca and squarely in the crosshairs of the forces moving north on 19 from Nogales. Unless there is another compelling need, Huachuca and Cochise county could be very easily isolated and bypassed, at least initially.

[castlebravo92]

Glad to see you are back at it Chico.

I think there is a slight continuity problem with GDW's version of the Mexican invasion of the American Southwest.

Namely, they have the PRI-PPS taking power "in summer of 1998" (RSLS), promptly ordering an invasion of Texas (RSLS), the Soviet Division Cuba moving out of Cuba in June (RSLS), and crossing over into Texas (with the rest of the Mexican Army) on June 2 (Howling Wilderness). That's pretty darn efficient work in a couple of days.

I would recommend a modest retcon to have the PRI-PPS take over in Feb, and start mobilizing from there. In the timeline I am building for the 2001-2002 Texas Almanac, I have:

Jan 1998 - Mexico initiates general draft and mobilization (mainly for disaster relief an internal security at this point)
Feb 1998 - Fuel + food shortages leads to rioting and widespread unrest in Mexico, refugee situation in Southwest turns critical (no food there either), and massacres of tens of thousands of refugees follows
Mar 1998 - PRI & PPS join forces and overthrow PAN government. Military ordered to begin planning intervention into Southweset US. Government begins negotiations with Soviets in Cuba.
Apr 1998 - First group of mass draftees graduate to their units, Soviet Division Cuba begins transferring by sea to Veracruz
May 1998 - Mexican army begins deploying to jump off points near the border. Communist guerillas (PRS) and cartel gunmen attached to army as irregularos. Soviet Division Cuba completes deployment to Mexico. US President commits suicide, civilian government collapses.
2 Jun 1998 - Mexican military crosses border into Texas

The above, IMHO, solves a couple of continuity problems; 1 - the original timeline doesn't work, and moving up the PRI-PPS takeover and the Soviet Division Cuba deployment solves that...it takes a while to logistically prepare an invasion. 2 - the invasion force listed in Challenge 27 is too small; the initial force is only about a 4 division equivalent (and that's being generous, including Division Cuba). Even with token military resistance, you basically have a scenario similar to what the Russians faced in Ukraine in the initial invasion - not even enough troops to defend the supply lines against partisans, much less pacify the country. The altered timeline gives the Mexicans the ability to, at least initially, have something between a hope and a prayer before your version's logistical nuke strikes kneecap them and most of their forces wither on the vine anyway.

[castlebravo92]

Originally Posted by Homer

The prizes are the mobility corridors along I-10, the population center in Tucson, the active copper mines around green valley, and the agricultural areas of the Santa Cruz basin. Most of them are outside the immediate area of Huachuca and squarely in the crosshairs of the forces moving north on 19 from Nogales. Unless there is another compelling need, Huachuca and Cochise county could be very easily isolated and bypassed, at least initially.

I'm not sure foreign population centers are prizes at this point in the war...and judging by the actions of the 43rd Military Police Brigade, they probably aren't prizes for US forces either. Too many hungry mouths to feed.

[Homer]

Yep- normally I’d say you’d want to avoid any city by summer of 98, but Tucson is a geographic/demographic/and infrastructure target that’s hard to unwrap from its populated core.

The Tucson population center as an objective only makes sense because it is (1) squarely astride the I10-I19 junction (no bypass), controlling the high speed routes east and north from the border; (2) joins the FERROMEX rail freight line terminus in Nogales, Mexico to the Union Pacific at the Tucson UP yard via a UP branch line that more or less parallels I-19, its on the east side of Tucson but well within the city; (3) contains electrical power generation (gas), defense (Raytheon Missiles division), Biotech/Medicine development and manufacture in both the Oro Valley startups and in Tucson proper, Smelting/mining support in the Oro Valley area (processing ores extracted from further south or locally) industries which can provide materials and potentially whatever finished products are seized; (4) the city has two large military/civilian airfields, Davis-Monthan AFB and Tucson IAP, with 10k+ ft runways and each capable of hosting a fighter wing (Tucson IAP was actually used as an F-16 training base by the RNLAF from the late 80s/early 90s until 2022 and hosted a squadron of Dutch F-16s) Neither are in the city proper, but utilizing them will require controlling a perimeter in the built up areas of south Tucson and east Tucson to deny direct fire attacks; (5) demographically, Tucson (37% Hispanic in 2000 and rising, above Arizona average and with regular cross border linkages common before OTL 2001) has the potential to be neutral/neutral-supportive to the Mexican force if they comport themselves well. That’s a lot of potentially supportive civilians and/or replacements. In addition, Tucson sits astride the I-19/I-10 settlement corridor which forms one of the two major Hispanic population concentrations in the state along with Yuma, both of which are of primarily Mexican-Americans.

I’ve gotten to spend a little time in Tucson, and it seems like the city just grew around the key infrastructure, etc. So, it’d be hard to seize any of that stuff without getting into at least a little bit of the city. Also, the city has grown to dominate the mobility corridors in the area. Getting north virtually requires you to control the city itself, since it sits like a plug between Mount Lemmon and the Tucson Mountains. You could bypass west, dragging your logistics through the desert, but that just gets you into a fight through the gap between the Roskruge and the Tucsons, with the Santa Cruz river channel providing a natural anti-tank obstacle before you reach I-10 at Marana.

If there is a defense/attack in Tucson, a lot of it will be decided around Green Valley/Sahuarita, since the decision to go through or attempt bypass will likely occur here because the terrain opens up. The defender has excellent lateral mobility in Tucson proper using the I-10 system to rapidly move forces, and the advantage of fighting in an urban area with good LOCs to the “rear” (such as it is), but they likely don’t have the forces to fight against multiple axes of advance, so early identification of enemy intent in a security zone centered on Green Valley will be key. The Mexican Army will retain the advantage of a high speed avenue of approach and a simple LOC if they stay on I-19, but will be forced into fighting through Tucson. Bypassing allows them to potentially avoid an urban fight and potentially prevent damage by combat or fire (it is summer) to Tucson and its contents, but they will also be forced to drastically slow their rate of advance and increase logistics difficulties and consumption. I’d offer either side may attempt to negotiate with the Tonoho O’Ohdom for assistance in passage or security as both options are either through or by their land.

[castlebravo92]

Yeah, but then again, I don't see Mexico going deep into Arizona. It's rough country and Sonora, Mx is rough country. Arizona is strategically dubious (at least in the sense the juice isn't worth the squeeze), Mexico didn't invade Arizona with enough troops to come close to even pacifying Tucson, much less securing their supply lines back into Mexico (1 "army" for both California and Arizona), and unlike Texas, there would not have been enough migrants / refugees from Sonora to give Mexican forces home field advantage like they might have enjoyed in South Texas.

800k people in Tucson area...say half starved in 1998, and another half starved in 1999, leaving you 200,000 (American) people in 2000. Mexico has 2500 personnel and 8 AFVs left in Arizona (and Sonora!) by July, 2000. Probably would not be a fun situation to be in.

[bash]

A lot of the Mexico campaign as written suffers from "the map is not the territory" problem. The narrative of the campaign relies on looking at flat maps with highways and state borders and assuming the land is just as flat and featureless. The land of the Southwest is rarely flat and featureless. In fact the settlement patterns and placement of cities in the Southwest was basically determined by low altitude passes through mountain ranges and access to water.

Mexico invading southern Texas? Yeah there's not a lot of movement-stopping geography. The Sonora Desert portion of Arizona and California? Also makes sense. Invading up to Bakersfield? Not a chance. A Boy Scout troop could secure the Techapi and Tejon passes into the Central Valley. The Mojave desert is a barely habitable moonscape, no stretched thin army is going to be holding it. Northern Arizona is likewise not a place an army with long supply lines in a resource-scarce setting could manage to hold. New Mexico has a couple valleys stretching north-south and holding those would be difficult as well.

A nuclear beleaguered US would have a hard time securing its southern border. So an invasion by Mexico could gain ground for sure. It's just not a friendly region without pumped in electricity, power, and food. A small invasion force would be hard pressed to maintain LOCs and make forward movement.

[Homer]

Originally Posted by castlebravo92

Yeah, but then again, I don't see Mexico going deep into Arizona… Probably would not be a fun situation to be in.

Agreed. Much of Southern Arizona sucks to walk through, is questionable in a vehicle, and even can be questionable for rotary wing (Colorado can be worse, but try hot and high in a UH-1 or A model Blackhawk in AZ with fully kitted passengers). Maneuver on the high ground is the almost exclusive province of light or airmobile infantry and the flats provide ample IV lines and wadis that can be both obstacles and micro terrain cover (or be deadly in the monsoon).

Despite the “allure” of charging north into AZ, I think the most likely outcome is that both sides culminate short of a decisive engagement and are left with a security zone/no man’s land between Nogales, AZ and South Tucson. The US is too weak/disputed to push south (and what do they really gain?) and the Mexican Army lacks the combat power to push north and is content to maintain a “Liberated Zone” in the upper Santa Cruz River basin.

With the lack of aerial platforms, I could see both sides trying their hand at raiding using light forces infiltrated through the mountains. However, even that would probably die out as target sets are depleted through breakdown/lack of supply and capacity dwindles. Probably a bad time to be in green valley or sahuarita. I’m thinking they’re probably rubble in the middle of no-man’s land by the time things stabilize.

“Victory” for Mexico probably consists of dropping overpasses/bridges or cratering I-10 to say they cut it, and maybe some raids or bombardments of infrastructure (DMAFB as a symbolic target?) before pulling back to the south with their effective FLOT just north of Nogales, AZ. “Victory” for the US is keeping control of Tucson, retaining the ability to extract resources as permitted, and being able to keep the remaining irrigation/farming/ranching base going to feed the populace and military. This is an area where both sides could easily say they “won”, while allowing things to dwindle as they focus on securing resources and maintaining internal security.

I wonder what Tucson would look like circa 2000-2001. I’m thinking population would have moved close to the river or gone up into high ground like mount Lemmon or elsewhere in the Santa Catalina’s where water is more available and temperatures are more moderate. Maybe dry land agriculture around the riparian areas to the east and west?

[castlebravo92]

Originally Posted by Homer

Agreed. Much of Southern Arizona sucks to walk through, is questionable in a vehicle, and even can be questionable for rotary wing (Colorado can be worse, but try hot and high in a UH-1 or A model Blackhawk in AZ with fully kitted passengers). Maneuver on the high ground is the almost exclusive province of light or airmobile infantry and the flats provide ample IV lines and wadis that can be both obstacles and micro terrain cover (or be deadly in the monsoon).

Despite the “allure” of charging north into AZ, I think the most likely outcome is that both sides culminate short of a decisive engagement and are left with a security zone/no man’s land between Nogales, AZ and South Tucson. The US is too weak/disputed to push south (and what do they really gain?) and the Mexican Army lacks the combat power to push north and is content to maintain a “Liberated Zone” in the upper Santa Cruz River basin.

With the lack of aerial platforms, I could see both sides trying their hand at raiding using light forces infiltrated through the mountains. However, even that would probably die out as target sets are depleted through breakdown/lack of supply and capacity dwindles. Probably a bad time to be in green valley or sahuarita. I’m thinking they’re probably rubble in the middle of no-man’s land by the time things stabilize.

“Victory” for Mexico probably consists of dropping overpasses/bridges or cratering I-10 to say they cut it, and maybe some raids or bombardments of infrastructure (DMAFB as a symbolic target?) before pulling back to the south with their effective FLOT just north of Nogales, AZ. “Victory” for the US is keeping control of Tucson, retaining the ability to extract resources as permitted, and being able to keep the remaining irrigation/farming/ranching base going to feed the populace and military. This is an area where both sides could easily say they “won”, while allowing things to dwindle as they focus on securing resources and maintaining internal security.

I wonder what Tucson would look like circa 2000-2001. I’m thinking population would have moved close to the river or gone up into high ground like mount Lemmon or elsewhere in the Santa Catalina’s where water is more available and temperatures are more moderate. Maybe dry land agriculture around the riparian areas to the east and west?

Between Tucson and Phoenix, you have about 3.3 million people in 1995, and using satellite imagery (modern), ~750,000 acres under cultivation. Anyone's guess as to how much city sprawl has eaten up in terms of cultivated land between today and 28 years ago. An acre of wheat can feed ~6 people for a year in terms of calories, but that's with pesticides and fertilizer and commercial seed. Mechanization is labor efficient but not acreage efficient, so intensive subsistence agriculture would likely counteract some of the yield loss from the collapse of civilization. If we say yields are cut in half, then you get to a back of the envelope math of enough agriculture in the area to support about 2/3 of the pre-war population. Not awful by T2K standards - certainly much better than Manhattan, where you have enough green fields to support maybe 10,000 people (plus however many people you could feed with rats, pigeons, and fishing from the river).

The problem with Tucson proper is it has maybe 2,000 acres inside or even close to the city that are green or cultivated. Sahuarita is 17 miles as the crow flies from Tucson International Airport (itself at the south end of Tucson). So I would think Tucson would be almost entirely abandoned, with maybe 10-15,000 farmers / scavengers / bandits. The US or Mexican military might maintain a token garrison at DMAFB (most likely the Mexicans), and most of the original population either dispersed to shanty towns to the north, or dead from violence or starved during the 1998-2000 period.

Operating assumptions:
1) still sufficient irrigation & power to drive agriculture activity
2) not enough fuel for farmers to commute to work, people would live in close proximity (1 hour's hike, ~5-7 km) to work the fields.
3) food would not be transported by vehicle to "unproductive" city populations. Collapse of central authority = collapse of food distribution.
4) yields decline but not precipitously so
5) roving bands of refugees do not burn out the farms like they did in the Ohio Valley.

Using those assumptions, I could see Arizona retaining 50% of it's pre-war population. If #1 or #5 are false, then you could see Mad Max and a 90%+ population collapse instead, with the remaining population eking out a miserable existence along rivers and the canals.