Twilight 2025

[ChalkLine]

If we were to make a time set seven years in the future, what would it look like?

How different would it be from a NATO vs USSR clash we know from T2K?

[Cdnwolf]

China Sea clash over Spratley Islands
Ukraine Russia clash
Potential South America clash involving Columbia and Venezuela
Economic crisis in Greece/Italy leading to civil war
Syria war expands drawing in the US vs Russia clashes
Mexico/US border clashes heat up
US economic boycott of Chinese products

Hey some of this sound like they came from TWL2013
Now just need some reason for Canada and the USA to .... ooops...

[Raellus]

Proxy war between Saudi Arabia and Iran in Yemen and Syria. By means of deliberate attack, mistake, accident, brinksmanship, or what-have-you, the Israelis, Americans, and Russians (and their respective allies) get dragged into the fight. Voila! Armageddon a-la Revelations. It's not as far fetched as it seemed even just a decade ago.

[ChalkLine]

True, but apart from the causes what else would be different?

The Satellite War would now have to be fairly involved and, as usual, possibly causing a Kessler Cascade where all the satellites in orbit are destroyed by debris. This means there will be no future satellite launches either for those 2300ad people. Goodbye GPS targeting, one of the most important artillery advances. Also good bye to instant map updating.

[Raellus]

Space force!

In all seriousness, the History Channel series Dogfights had a special near-future air/space warfare episode that was really great. This was 5-10 years ago. Unfortunately, it wasn't included on the DVD series. But the "special episode" had a "dogfight" between U.S. and Chinese space planes that seemed very realistic.

Found it! It's not in HD, but it's worth your time if you have an interest in aerial warfare c. 2025.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W9XgldnXb5s

[.45cultist]

A little tweeking of IRL get's these premise:
The state of some western Europe forces suggest a desperate rearming. I don't believe any would jump to nukes. The refugee shuffling may stretch infrastructure and inflame friction in Europe, and even less so in Canada, where they don't want to integrate. And in the U.S. social strife is a big business already.

[swaghauler]

I see Russia, China, Iran, North Korea, and their proxies (Lebanon, Yemen, Syria, and potentially India) engaged with NATO either directly or indirectly. The various "War On Terror" campaigns (Afghanistan, Nijer, Uganda, Pakistan, Kenya, Somalia, etc...) will also draw away precious resources from the NATO countries in question.

Couple this with the reductions in military strength that many NATO nations are experiencing and the fact that there is NO "reserve production capacity" in the West (thanks to "Lean manufacturing") and you have the "Mad Scramble" that .45Cultist was talking about. I too believe that this would be a "come as you are" war.

The big question is "What would be the Spark that ignites the Fires of War?" Will it be Syria, Yemen, or North Korea? Will there be some kind of "incident" in the Balkans? Will the State of Georgia (the one near Russia, not the US state) be the "Flashpoint?"

Then there are the added "unknowns" to consider. What role would organizations such as ANTIFA (who are just as "Fascist" as the "Fascists" they purport to oppose) play on US (and European) soil? How would minorities feel about a "draft?" The World is NOT anymore stable today than it was during the Cold War. In fact, I would venture the opinion that it is LESS SO now.

[Tegyrius]

Originally Posted by Cdnwolf

Hey some of this sound like they came from TWL2013

Thoroughly implausible and poorly-researched. None of that could ever happen.

- C.

[ChalkLine]

What new weapons apart from drones have been developed since 2000?

[Legbreaker]

Quite a lot. Only got to trawl through Paul's site to see that.

[.45cultist]

Originally Posted by swaghauler

I see Russia, China, Iran, North Korea, and their proxies (Lebanon, Yemen, Syria, and potentially India) engaged with NATO either directly or indirectly. The various "War On Terror" campaigns (Afghanistan, Nijer, Uganda, Pakistan, Kenya, Somalia, etc...) will also draw away precious resources from the NATO countries in question.

Couple this with the reductions in military strength that many NATO nations are experiencing and the fact that there is NO "reserve production capacity" in the West (thanks to "Lean manufacturing") and you have the "Mad Scramble" that .45Cultist was talking about. I too believe that this would be a "come as you are" war.

The big question is "What would be the Spark that ignites the Fires of War?" Will it be Syria, Yemen, or North Korea? Will there be some kind of "incident" in the Balkans? Will the State of Georgia (the one near Russia, not the US state) be the "Flashpoint?"

Then there are the added "unknowns" to consider. What role would organizations such as ANTIFA (who are just as "Fascist" as the "Fascists" they purport to oppose) play on US (and European) soil? How would minorities feel about a "draft?" The World is NOT anymore stable today than it was during the Cold War. In fact, I would venture the opinion that it is LESS SO now.

ANTIFA And their ilk will peel away units for civil disturbance duties, which is the downside to divisive politics as a business, those who profit will lose control. With economies in shambles and militaries trying to instantly correct years of budget neglect, nukes become more attractive in the tactical role, then the strategic. It's just a question of filling the blanks in. As for weapon advancement, even upgrades are impressive. Adapt RW stuff like the doubling range on the 120MM gun, field testing the EM shield for AFV's. ETC.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

I think an important aspect is that of the potential for modern Western society to break down under the strain of war. It's something that has been discussed in other threads but is particularly relevant to this one.
That is to say, the current Western practice of "just in time" deliveries will make the wartime civilian situation much worse than it was in the past.
Shops don't hold large stocks anymore, often what you see on the shelf is all there is because they expect a "next day" delivery to replenish anything they sold.

Military forces typically have a far more robust logistics system and so are unlikely to be affected by this but the situation in civilian organizations is likely to be very dire.
I'm not just talking about things like food delivery to your local store but such things as medical supplies to hospitals, equipment and/or ammunition deliveries to police units and so on. I don't know what sort of ammunition stocks an inner-city US police station is likely to hold but in many other countries it's really minimal.
In some Australia police stations, it amounts to about double the normal patrol issue of ammo per officer so for a small station of six officers (with the Glock or S&W semi-autos popular here, three mags per officer) we're talking approximately 300 rounds in total of handgun ammo.

I think the potential for societal breakdown is far greater now than in the timeline of the Twilight War of 1st and 2nd editions because these days for example, if we have a disruption at the fuel stations, all those "just in time" deliveries will stop, shops will rapidly run short of supplies with little hope of getting resupplied within the week.
In peacetime, these sorts of things get resolved by the government as fast as they are able but in wartime, the government's attention won't be able to focus exclusively on a civilian problem.
That one week of no deliveries could lag on and last two weeks or more.
By that time, some people will probably feel like taking the law into their own hands.

[rcaf_777]

Originally Posted by StainlessSteelCynic

I think an important aspect is that of the potential for modern Western society to break down under the strain of war. It's something that has been discussed in other threads but is particularly relevant to this one.

This is a topic keep coming up and is never really resolved. I would like to point out that in V1 and V2 the nuclear option is not used right away. The US and her allies have time to prepare. Historically the US have always been prepare to fight a war with the Soviets. This includes having a Continuity of Operations Plan (COOP) secure locations for member of the Government. It also includes many Executive Orders like Executive Order 11921. Which Allows the Federal Emergency Preparedness Agency to develop plans to establish control over the mechanisms of production, distribution, energy sources, wages, salaries, credit, and the flow of money. Both timelines don't tell of Government actions following the begin of the shooting war.

I don't think is unreasonable for the following to happen

1. US moves to DEFCON 2 or 1
2. Border Security is Tighten
3. Increased Security at Key Infrastructure (Nuclear Power Plants, Power Dams Bridges waterways)
4. Full Federalized of the National Guard and Army Reserve
5. Selective Service begins
6. Federal Emergency Preparedness Agency starts preparing the nation.

[Raellus]

I think the issue of societal breakdown and civil disorder is one that gets exaggerated in both directions. I don't quite buy the sheep, wolves, sheepdogs trope. I don't think the country would descend into Mad Max levels of lawlessness and depredation. On the other hand, I don't think that the Federal Gov't, even with a year or two to prepare, in earnest, for nuclear war, is going to be able to make provisions to shelter, feed, clothe, and provide medical care for tens of millions, if not hundreds of millions, of refugees (i.e. people evacuating potential nuclear target areas or fleeing the vicinity of an actual strike). Even if the Gov't could lay in adequate provisions, once fossil fuels are in short supply (and refineries are the priority target for nuclear attacks, according to v1 & v2 canon lists), it's going to be extremely difficult to get aid to the people that need it (or vice-versa). Millions will go hungry. Hundreds of thousands of refugees will die of starvation, exposure, or communicable diseases like cholera and typhus- maybe not right away, but over the first few years after the TDM, the death toll is going to be catastrophic. This doesn't even take into account victims of nuclear strikes (read Susan Southard's, Nagasaki: Life After Nuclear War) for a thorough description of what it was like to live through a relatively small nuclear bomb attack).

Seriously, aside from farmers and "preppers", how many citizens are going to know how to cope [well] when the lights go out, the water shuts off, gas pumps run dry, and the grocery store shelves are empty? 10%? I think that's a probably a generous estimate.

So, I think it's more likely conditions across the U.S.A. are going to become dire relatively quickly- not Mad Max dire, but pretty dire. I agree with SSC that people today, more reliant on digital aides than even 10 years ago, are going to be much less able to cope than folks could have back when T2K was first written.

Will surviving law enforcement, whether it be military or civilian, be able to cope with the apocalypse? I think the answer is, it will largely depend on a number of factors. To name a few,

Urban v. rural.
Was there a nuclear strike in the region?
Are/were there hostile conventional forces in the region?
Is there a strong military presence in the region?
How prepared and competent is local law enforcement?
Were there significant criminal elements in place before the war started?

So, there's no universal answer to the question, "how bad will it be?" As a GM, it's up to us to look at the above and make decisions about local conditions. It's quite a challenge, but it's a big part of the fun of T2K, IMHO.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Prompted by what Raellus said, I should point out that I didn't intend to give the idea that society would break down to complete lawlessness e.g. Mad Max or Tom Clancy's The Division. Nor give the idea that everyone would start bringing on the chaos in a few weeks because they couldn't get their morning cup of tea/coffee.

It was more to stress the idea that for a 2025 conflict, we are talking about Western societies that have a heavy reliance on electricity and petroleum fuels to keep their societies running. Once something interferes with that, most city dwellers are going to be sitting back waiting for the government to fix the problem. The government is unlikely to be able to respond to these problems as quickly as they have in the past for two reasons.

1. The way they deal with these situations has changed relative to the use of "just in time" deliveries.
2. There's a war going on.

I'm inclined to think that any country that is accepting lots of refugees is going to really feel the strain from this and will have a difficult time preventing societal breakdown from happening once rationing, blackouts and late deliveries become the norm.

[Legbreaker]

Originally Posted by StainlessSteelCynic

...start bringing on the chaos in a few weeks because they couldn't get their morning cup of tea/coffee.

You SURE about that?

Attachment 4132

[swaghauler]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

You SURE about that?

Attachment 4132

I do believe that the "Combat Effectiveness" of any US unit would be reduced by 50% if you simply deprived them of Coffee. This is untested as no Army Command is willing to risk the consequences of testing this theory. There are three things you simply DON'T do in the Army...

1) You never screw with the Mail Clerk, Mess Section, or Pay Clerk.
2) You treat ALL pregnant females as "emotionally disturbed persons."
3) You NEVER F**K with the coffee.

[.45cultist]

Originally Posted by StainlessSteelCynic

Prompted by what Raellus said, I should point out that I didn't intend to give the idea that society would break down to complete lawlessness e.g. Mad Max or Tom Clancy's The Division. Nor give the idea that everyone would start bringing on the chaos in a few weeks because they couldn't get their morning cup of tea/coffee.

It was more to stress the idea that for a 2025 conflict, we are talking about Western societies that have a heavy reliance on electricity and petroleum fuels to keep their societies running. Once something interferes with that, most city dwellers are going to be sitting back waiting for the government to fix the problem. The government is unlikely to be able to respond to these problems as quickly as they have in the past for two reasons.

1. The way they deal with these situations has changed relative to the use of "just in time" deliveries.
2. There's a war going on.

I'm inclined to think that any country that is accepting lots of refugees is going to really feel the strain from this and will have a difficult time preventing societal breakdown from happening once rationing, blackouts and late deliveries become the norm.

It might be that way, but once folks believe the "Thin Blue Line" is gone, it is gone. And then people get stupid and vicious, the Government response won't be much better either if it believes it's survival is at stake.

[Marconi]

Originally Posted by swaghauler

I do believe that this comprehensive review of ZQuiet would be reduced by 50% if you simply deprived them of Coffee. This is untested as no Army Command is willing to risk the consequences of testing this theory. There are three things you simply DON'T do in the Army...

1) You never screw with the Mail Clerk, Mess Section, or Pay Clerk.
2) You treat ALL pregnant females as "emotionally disturbed persons."
3) You NEVER F**K with the coffee.

I also believe you're right regarding the coffee thing. But soon enough the technology will allow us to test the heck out of theories like that one in VR.

[Heffe3737]

Originally Posted by Marconi

I also believe you're right regarding the coffee thing. But soon enough the technology will allow us to test the heck out of theories like that one in VR.

This isn't just in the US either. I do a lot of work in the outsourcing industry, and the number 1 thing employees at locations all over the world agree on, is that coffee is an absolute essential when it comes to productivity.

As a side note, if you run a business and don't offer free coffee to your employees, they very likely secretly hate you for it.

[CDAT]

Originally Posted by Heffe3737

This isn't just in the US either. I do a lot of work in the outsourcing industry, and the number 1 thing employees at locations all over the world agree on, is that coffee is an absolute essential when it comes to productivity.

As a side note, if you run a business and don't offer free coffee to your employees, they very likely secretly hate you for it.

I must have been in a different military than you all, yes we had our coffee drinkers, but with one individual exception we did not have anyone who was so into it that they even had a coffee pot in the unit. We did have the Army issued pot that got pulled out for official functions, but not day to day. When we were in the field no one that I can remember had to have their cup of Joe. The coffee at the warming stations always had some left when it was picked up, the soup on the other had was gone in no time.

[Legbreaker]

Coffee for us was important, and whenever were were halted for an hour or so (sometimes less) somebody always had a brew on, but in my section there was something even more vital.
BOOZE!
Every last one of us had a hip flask in their pack, each person with something different in it - bourbon, port, tequila, etc. Between us there weren't many cocktails we couldn't make!
Technically we were breaking the rules, but given the platoon sergeant and company sergeant major also carried....
Even the cook could be counted on to have a little something squirrelled away.

[pmulcahy11b]

Unlike almost all soldiers I knew, I hate coffee (though I love the smell -- go figure). But I quickly found that coffee was an important trade item -- depending upon the coffee I bought before leaving, I could get anything from cheese and crackers to a new extractor on my M16 before it was scheduled to get a new one. (My biggest problem with the M16 was extraction failure.) One time, I got two new matching units for my track from Commo for a jar of Folgers.

[.45cultist]

I was drinking coffee at Barksdale AFB, while we watch an ORI, the nuke laden B52's were taking off and the youngsters asked, "What do we do now?" I sipped and replied, "If this was real, we'd orbit the Earth for 10,000 years." "HUH?"
I then had to explain Nuke Warfare to the AB's while chugging Folger's.

[mpipes]

Watching a MITO simulating a scramble of the alert BUFFS and tankers is definitely an impressive sight!!


I hear that we now have an alert force again. About time. At least the alert pad at Barksdale was left relatively intact.
https://stevenmcollins.com/usa-prepa...b-52-squadron/

[swaghauler]

Originally Posted by .45cultist

It might be that way, but once folks believe the "Thin Blue Line" is gone, it is gone. And then people get stupid and vicious, the Government response won't be much better either if it believes it's survival is at stake.

I tend to agree with you watching riots break out in New York City and Pittsburgh whenever there are power outages. I think the real issue is twofold;

1) How poor do you "perceive" yourself to be in comparison to your neighbors?
2) How WELL do you "know" your neighbors?

If you know all your neighbors and are on a fairly equal economic basis with them, you will often see mutual support and assistance from those communities. Such communities tend to be smaller with a more "integrated" social system (everyone attends the same schools, churches, and social functions).

On the other hand, if you don't associate with your neighbors regularly, or even know their names, it is easy to view them as a "resource" instead of as "people." Add to this the fact that cities usually have limited resources available (leading to competition for those resources) and you have a disaster in the making.

In addition, if you view yourself as "marginalized" by the vast majority of society, a major disruption could be your chance to not only acquire "resources" that are otherwise unavailable to you but also to "punish" those you feel have kept you in poverty. I think of the people in Baltimore looting and burning the CVS Pharmacy during the protests for Freddy Gray. What exactly did CVS do to cause Freddy Gey to die? NOTHING! It was a convenient excuse to loot that CVS.

This behavior is what will cause the most damage to major cities in the War.

[.45cultist]

Originally Posted by swaghauler

I tend to agree with you watching riots break out in New York City and Pittsburgh whenever there are power outages. I think the real issue is twofold;

1) How poor do you "perceive" yourself to be in comparison to your neighbors?
2) How WELL do you "know" your neighbors?

If you know all your neighbors and are on a fairly equal economic basis with them, you will often see mutual support and assistance from those communities. Such communities tend to be smaller with a more "integrated" social system (everyone attends the same schools, churches, and social functions).

On the other hand, if you don't associate with your neighbors regularly, or even know their names, it is easy to view them as a "resource" instead of as "people." Add to this the fact that cities usually have limited resources available (leading to competition for those resources) and you have a disaster in the making.

In addition, if you view yourself as "marginalized" by the vast majority of society, a major disruption could be your chance to not only acquire "resources" that are otherwise unavailable to you but also to "punish" those you feel have kept you in poverty. I think of the people in Baltimore looting and burning the CVS Pharmacy during the protests for Freddy Gray. What exactly did CVS do to cause Freddy Gey to die? NOTHING! It was a convenient excuse to loot that CVS.

This behavior is what will cause the most damage to major cities in the War.

Yes, the best and worst comes out in people.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

I think these may have been discussed before on the forum but they fit in here well enough as a colour/background element of any post-apocalypse scenario.
Specifically I am talking about two ideas to get long-range comms back after the breakdown.

The first is a concept still in use by ham radio operators so is very much a proven idea. Earth-Moon-Earth communications, basically you aim your microwave transmitter at the Moon and someone somewhere else in the world can pick it up with their microwave receiver.
Quite a bit easier than trying to get a hold of working comms satellites, finding a suitable launch vehicle, fuelling said launch vehicle and then getting the satellite into orbit.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%..._communication

The second is a little more difficult and has a limited life span of a year or two. Difficult because it does require a rocket to deliver a package into orbit and the package itself needs some thought put into how it will deliver its contents but the concept itself is incredibly simple.
Essentially, a collection of short lengths of copper wire, placed in orbit, function like a giant antenna. It was a serious consideration in the 1950s when North America and Western Europe had either ionospheric radio or undersea cable as their only means of long-range communication with each other.
But their are issues with seeding near-Earth orbit with 20kg of copper wire, aside from finding a suitable rocket to get it there.
https://www.wired.com/2013/08/project-west-ford/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_West_Ford

Both concepts could be attractive solutions for rapidly re-establishing communication in a world that is very dependent on satellites for long-range comms these days.

[Legbreaker]

Hmm, putting even MORE shrapnel into orbit sounds like a wonderful idea.
What could possibly go wrong?

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

Hmm, putting even MORE shrapnel into orbit sounds like a wonderful idea.
What could possibly go wrong?

Oh don't worry, there's soooo much space in space, there's plenty of room!
And anyway, it'll all fall back to Earth after about two years.

Or so they thought...
Apparently there's still clumps of copper wire floating around up there from their initial tests.
To be a little fair, it was conceived of and deployed in the 1950s, before they had developed any satellites and realized the problems of tiny objects smacking into delicate machines in orbit.

But still, what could possibly go wrong?