OT or Not OT: Twilight 2030

[RN7]

Originally Posted by StainlessSteelCynic

As far as I can find, Australia doesn't have any direct defence treaties with South Korea, we are not bound by any agreement to assist them except through UN committments - if the UN declared it, then Australia would oblige.

None with NATO either but they still sent a large force to Afghanistan.

Originally Posted by StainlessSteelCynic

In fact, that's probably the only type of force we'd be able to send as our ground forces are nowhere near the size they were in the 1950s-70s period However, they would not be under US command. If memory serves me correctly, after the Gallipoli campaign and some other battles in WW1, the Australian government declared that no Australia force would be under foreign command again and instead would always be under Australian command. There are plenty of examples of Australian forces working with foreign forces and being under the command umbrella of those forces but the Australian forces still retain their own command structure and will refer back to Australian HQ/government if they have any issues with tasks given by the allied command.

I was sort of implying this.

Originally Posted by StainlessSteelCynic

The Australian military (particularly the Army) operates under a philosophy of retaining "core" forces in peacetime to maintain skills and equipment but committing to rapid expansion during wartime - e.g. WW2 and Vietnam. Many of the current expansion projects support this purpose even though they were purchased under the banner of the Global War on Terrorism e.g the NH90 helicopters, the Canberra class LHDs, enlargement of the SASR. We haven't expanded actual regular force manpower by much particularly in regards to Infantry, Artillery or Armoured units. In the last decade, the government has held numerous recruiting drives to increase regular forces but so far has not invoked the expansion to the extent seen during Vietnam (and there won't be any conscription unless it's life or death - conscription is a career killer for any political party these days).

At the present time, although the government would like to deploy 12 submarines, there aren't enough volunteers who want to serve in them. It's possible we might have seven or eight fully manned but so far there just aren't enough people willing to be submariners to man all 12.
Unfortunately with the per unit cost of new combat aircraft and the lack of long-term career potential in the RAAF, we don't have many options to increase the size of the air force. We have been progressively buying fewer and fewer fighter aircraft with each replacement e.g. we went from three full squadrons (of Mirage III) to two squadrons when we bought the F/A-18. Same thing has happened with 1st Amroured Regiment with the purchase of the Abrams to replace the Leopard AS1 - 59 Abrams (including variants) to replace 101 Leopards (including variants).

Still its a major jump over the capabilities they have had over the past 40 years and the willingness of what the Australian government was prepared to give them. There is even talk of Australia buying Virginia Class SSN's at the mo, couldn't see it happening but it is a major turn around in Australia's defence outlook.

Originally Posted by StainlessSteelCynic

I don't think this is particularly likely. If the UN declared support of South Korea in a war against the North and Australia committed forces to the conflict they would certainly work alongside and with any friendly forces and a joint Commonwealth force under that situation is not outside the realms of possibility but again, Australian forces would retain their own command structure and not be beholden to any other.
Irrespective of whether Commonwealth/former Commonwealth nations decided to assist South Korea, there is no current obligation for Australia to commit military forces.
If the US asked for it and it could be justified under some treaty/defence pact, then Australia would likely send forces but the government would not necessarily join a South Korean operation because other Commonwealth nations had.

Unless Australia was directly threatened or attacked by the North Koreans its the only way I could see the Aussies sending infantry to Korea. A brigade sized force would probably remain under Australian command.

[kato13]

One thing I think we have to remember if we are following the spirit of the original game. You sometimes include things that don't make complete sense to give a greater variety of potential for combat.

Logically I don't like the Soviets in Alaska, Washington and Southern Texas, but if they were not there someone solely running an North American campaign would have no use for the Soviet Vehicle Handbook.

[Olefin]

Originally Posted by kato13

One thing I think we have to remember if we are following the spirit of the original game. You sometimes include things that don't make complete sense to give a greater variety of potential for combat.

Logically I don't like the Soviets in Alaska, Washington and Southern Texas, but if they were not there someone solely running an North American campaign would have no use for the Soviet Vehicle Handbook.

Well I think they were there for more than just that reason - and given that reasoning if you dont go up to Canada then you dont need the NATO book either - i.e. you wont see any NATO vehicles

was there ever a book that detailed the vehicles of the Italian Army by the way?

[kato13]

Originally Posted by Olefin

Well I think they were there for more than just that reason - and given that reasoning if you dont go up to Canada then you dont need the NATO book either - i.e. you wont see any NATO vehicles

was there ever a book that detailed the vehicles of the Italian Army by the way?

I agree it was not the only reason, but it makes sense from a business standpoint. Adding the Soviets as an enemy within the US was a lot of fun.

I don't remember if canon Mexican forces have any French vehicles, but I'm pretty sure they did IRL, so that gets you some NATO vehicles on the southern border as well.

[Rainbow Six]

Originally Posted by Olefin

was there ever a book that detailed the vehicles of the Italian Army by the way?

Not specifically. The only guides were the US, Soviet, and NATO ones. I'm fairly sure the only publication that went into any sort of detail was Going Home, which listed the strengths and locations of several Italian Divisions (three if I recall correctly, but I'm going from meory so could be wrong). There was a Challenge magazine that had an article about Italy written for T:2300 which added some detail (for example that the Pope had gone to Perugia).

[Olefin]

Actually surprised they never put out details on their vehicles as you would have figured that either NATO units or US units that fought against them would have captured some of them - or that the Folgore Division, having declared for NATO would thus give them a reason to add them. And Italy has some very interesting vehicles that are unique to them.

Kato - you are right about the Mexican forces having some French vehicles - they had some armored cars and APC's that were part of the Texas module - and an official Mexican Army vehicle guide would have been very interesting indeed - especially for a North American campaign - face it they are in the whole Southwest and probably had some of their advanced patrols get as far as Oklahoma and Arkansas before they got stopped.

And even if you dont use the Texas module, the Satellite Down module is definitely one that getting home may require a long walk thru both Mexico and occupied America to get home.

Anyone ever ask Frank Frey if they were planning more vehicle supplements for Mexico or Italy or China and never got around to them?

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by kato13

One thing I think we have to remember if we are following the spirit of the original game. You sometimes include things that don't make complete sense to give a greater variety of potential for combat.

That's exactly what I'm going for. I want to keep elements of the original game but produce an updated setting so that I can incorporate more modern gear. I think that we can keep a lot similar in Europe but in Asia, with China on the other side this time, the changes will be significant.

Originally Posted by kato13

Logically I don't like the Soviets in Alaska, Washington and Southern Texas, but if they were not there someone solely running an North American campaign would have no use for the Soviet Vehicle Handbook.

Agreed. I haven't thought of a plausible way to do this, though. I can see how the designers could have thought it possible in the early 1980s but now, or in 10-15 years, I don't think anyone believes that the Russians could pull something like that off.

Could the Chinese, though? Probably not. Not with their current or even projected amphibious/sealift capabilities. And not with Japan in the way, either.

So, I'm thinking a gradual collapse of the U.S. federal system after the war goes nuclear, and I'm thinking about an opportunistic land grab by Mexico as well. That should create the degree of chaos in the CONUS that will facilitate gameplay in the States as well.

Any other ideas of how we could plausible mess with the U.S. looking forward about 15 years?

[Targan]

Originally Posted by Raellus

Any other ideas of how we could plausible mess with the U.S. looking forward about 15 years?

Biological warfare. One option (the less likely IMO) would be a genetically-engineered pathogen developed by the Chinese that targets people with certain non-Asian haplomarkers, or perhaps specific caucasoid haplomarkers. Another option would be a pathogen spread by some organism only (or mostly) found in North America (the red squirrel for instance).

Either of those options would reduce the risks to the Chinese if they released the pathogen. By my understanding of genetic engineering, option one would be considerably more difficult than option two due to the tiny genetic differences between human ethnicities.

[Targan]

Originally Posted by RN7

Since the demise of the Soviet Union I can't see any scenario that would lead to a global nuclear war on the scale of Twilight 2000.

From a purely military point of view America is just too powerful at the moment for any rival to take on outside of their own territory.

Which is exactly why I suggested this:

Originally Posted by Targan

Biological warfare. One option (the less likely IMO) would be a genetically-engineered pathogen developed by the Chinese that targets people with certain non-Asian haplomarkers, or perhaps specific caucasoid haplomarkers. Another option would be a pathogen spread by some organism only (or mostly) found in North America (the red squirrel for instance).

I admit that would give a campaign a slightly different flavour to standard T2K. You have to admit though, it would be an effective way to bring the US down several notches before the nukes fly. It could also be the "last straw" needed for the US to launch the ICBMs.

[RN7]

Originally Posted by Targan

Which is exactly why I suggested this:



I admit that would give a campaign a slightly different flavour to standard T2K. You have to admit though, it would be an effective way to bring the US down several notches before the nukes fly. It could also be the "last straw" needed for the US to launch the ICBMs.

I don't know if that's possible, but how would that work. Asians are the fastest growing segment of the US population, and what about American with Native-American (Asian) DNA. An awful lot of White and Hispanic Americans have this DNA. Also from what I've read (and I've a degree in archaeology) a lot of Central Europeans and Russians also carry Asian DNA due to the historic invasions of Europe from Asia by numerous groups such as Huns, tartars and Mongols etc. Even Scandinavians may have Asian DNA as the original inhabitants of Scandinavia may have been Lapps who are of Asian origin. Also many Chinese may also carry European DNA, as it is suspected that Europeans once inhabited large parts of western and northern China until relatively recent times and interbred with Asians.

[Targan]

Originally Posted by RN7

I don't know if that's possible, but how would that work. Asians are the fastest growing segment of the US population, and what about American with Native-American (Asian) DNA. An awful lot of White and Hispanic Americans have this DNA. Also from what I've read (and I've a degree in archaeology) a lot of Central Europeans and Russians also carry Asian DNA due to the historic invasions of Europe from Asia by numerous groups such as Huns, tartars and Mongols etc. Even Scandinavians may have Asian DNA as the original inhabitants of Scandinavia may have been Lapps who are of Asian origin. Also many Chinese may also carry European DNA, as it is suspected that Europeans once inhabited large parts of western and northern China until relatively recent times and interbred with Asians.

Agreed, which is why I said:

Originally Posted by Targan

Another option would be a pathogen spread by some organism only (or mostly) found in North America (the red squirrel for instance).

Yet another option would be a pathogen with a high mortality rate but a very short active period due to, for instance, an inbuilt fast rate of mutation that quickly renders it no more harmful than the common cold. All that is needed is to simultaneously release it most of North America's larger cities.

Genetic engineering has come a long, LONG way since the Cold War. Weaponised anthrax is long outdated. The time is a-coming (in fact probably already here) when a well-resourced bio-lab could create some highly specific, well-tweaked, nasty pathogens the likes of which the world has never seen before.

Putting it another way, is it realistic that a world war in 2030 wouldn't involve the use of such weaponised diseases? Maybe not deployed by the Chinese or the US or the Russians, but by one of the more extremist bit players. North Korea for instance. I reckon they might be crazy enough to try it.

[kato13]

Originally Posted by Raellus

Agreed. I haven't thought of a plausible way to do this, though. I can see how the designers could have thought it possible in the early 1980s but now, or in 10-15 years, I don't think anyone believes that the Russians could pull something like that off.

Could the Chinese, though? Probably not. Not with their current or even projected amphibious/sealift capabilities. And not with Japan in the way, either.

So, I'm thinking a gradual collapse of the U.S. federal system after the war goes nuclear, and I'm thinking about an opportunistic land grab by Mexico as well. That should create the degree of chaos in the CONUS that will facilitate gameplay in the States as well.

Any other ideas of how we could plausible mess with the U.S. looking forward about 15 years?

I never saw the new Red Dawn (given how much I loved the first one that shocks me), but maybe there are some ideas there.

In regards to getting foreign troops into the US, every option I can think of involves Mexico

Perhaps Mexico devolves into drug cartel fueled chaos and either the Russians or Chinese somehow convince the Govt that they can provide peacekeepers.

Or maybe the Chinese invest heavily in Mexico and send "guards" to protect their facilities and staff. That at least gives them a foothold in North America.

You could have the drug cartels buy weapons from the Russians (or DPRK) as well.

[Rainbow Six]

I think a Mexican strike into the southern US as per the original timeline is probably plausable enough. And as Kato said, would be good to try and involve the drugs cartels, perhaps in an alliance of convenience with the Mexican Armed Forces.

In the run up to hostilities both Russia and China could certainly infilitrate small groups of Special Forces or Intelligence Officers, but I'm struggling to think of a single realistic senario that would put large bodies of Russian or Chinese troops on the ground in the United States.

A quick search of the net this morning has thrown up a couple of articles about the possibility of the Russians being interested in establishing military bases in Nicaragua and / or Venezeula. I don't know how credible these reports are IRL but could you use one of those options in T2030? Perhaps the Russians have a presence in Venezeula which takes the role of the original Division Cuba...i.e. after the nukes start flying the Venzeuelans want the Russians out before the Americans decide to nuke them so tey end up in Mexico as Division Caracas...from there it's into Texas?

Looking at a map they would have to go through Panama so not sure how practical that suggestion is, but at the very least you could end up with an additional front as Venzuelan based Russians fight US forces who have been sent to secure the Panana Canal? If you use Nicaragua they're already north of the Panama Canal. Or you could use both...

I think a large scale Chinese military presence is a no though, unless, as Kato suggested, you can come up with a realistic reason for Chinese troops to be in Mexico before the start of hostilities (I rather doubt the United States Navy would allow a Chinese troop convoy to sail from China to Mexico unchallenged once the shooting starts), but to be honest that sounds a bit too "Hollywood" to me...even before the War starts how is the United States going to react to a Chinese military build up on its southern border? I can't see them sitting doing nothing as Chinese troops flood into Mexico.

I just can't see a large scale, multi front invasion of the USA by foreign powers(plural) as being realistic beyond a limited incursion by Russian forces from long established bases in Central / South America in conjunction with the Mexicans.

[Olefin]

remember too in Red Dawn the invasion was helped by Mexican infiltrators who came in as illegal aliens and caused all kinds of problems at SAC bases during the initial invasion - you could see that for sure happening in 2030 but now its all over the Southwest and even further afield with how Mexican illegal alien workers are used in the US

so a Mexican invasion once the US was massively committed overseas is actually more plausible now than it was in the 1980's when the game was written

[Raellus]

Thanks for all of the input, guys. You've helped me come up with something that I think approaches plausibility.

How about this? Starting in 2015, in response to Russian annexation of Eastern Ukraine (I think it's safe to say now that the writing is on the wall), the U.S. negotiates permanent military base deals with Poland and the Baltic republics. As a tit-for-tat response, the Soviets negotiate base deals in Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua, starting later that year. That place as least some Russian military elements in the western hemisphere not too too far from the United States.

Later, as war breaks out in Asia between China and the U.S., prior to a planned Russian invasion of the Baltics, the Russians convince Mexico to take advantage of America's overextension overseas by attempting to regain the American southwest by force. The Russians provide direct military support- a new "Division Cuba", if you will- to the Mexicans. I bet that the Russians could cobble together at least a division from their personnel presited on their Latin American bases.

[CDAT]

Originally Posted by kato13

I never saw the new Red Dawn (given how much I loved the first one that shocks me), but maybe there are some ideas there.

In regards to getting foreign troops into the US, every option I can think of involves Mexico

Perhaps Mexico devolves into drug cartel fueled chaos and either the Russians or Chinese somehow convince the Govt that they can provide peacekeepers.

Or maybe the Chinese invest heavily in Mexico and send "guards" to protect their facilities and staff. That at least gives them a foothold in North America.

You could have the drug cartels buy weapons from the Russians (or DPRK) as well.

One thought that I have is the Chinese working with whomever they hit the west cost of the US. How, three ways that I see.

First there is so much shipping comving from China to the US you take several container ships and modifie them so that they are now "assault ships" you have some heavy equipment loaded in the back/bottom then some light vehicles and last light troops. When the ship hits the port the light troops storm the port and take it over, no matter how good the port police are they are not staffed/trained or equiped to deal with a military assault. As this is going on you are offloading the light vehicles to go and attack the close by military bases, if you timed it for a four day weekend the number of troops on base are limited and most of them do not even have access to weapons and ammo. last for this part you are now off loading the heavy equipment to be you main attack force if/when the US military gets up and running.

Second you modifie some comercial airliners for airborn insertion of "commandos" you can have them fly from one airport to another then to there final destionation in the US so that they are slightly off corse not so much that it raises red flags but close enough that they can jump and land on different military bases. The commandos would be used to tie up any armed troops on the base waiting for the heavery troops to land in the ships (above).

And last not sure so much down south but up here in WA there is a large Asian population (more in Canada) you send in some special forces to prep and when attack happens to attack the police keep them from getting involved.
So if this happened at every major port up and down the west cost on a four day weekend how much mayham could they cause. Now if this was only part of the "Bad guy" plan may the opening shot quickly followed by other operations by other countries would it work? The possable ways that it could be found out about are if at one of the airports customs wanted to check even though no passengers were getting on or off the plane, if one of the ships got picked for a customs inspection, or if a spy got word of this before they left China.

Some possable couterparts I could see, Mexico hitting the south, Russia in EU, Middile east (just about any part).

[Raellus]

I'll have to give some more thought to the bio-warfare ideas that have been posted. I'm leery of going hard in that direction because, although I like my T2K grim, I'm not sure I want it global pandemic grim. I want to be able to differentiate between T2K and The Stand.

@CDAT: As to the container ship idea, it's devious and I like it, but it's pretty much a one-way ticket and I'm not sure the Chinese would go in for something hopeless like that. If we were talking WWII-era Japan, then hell yeah, but from my reading of the PLA and where it's been heading over the past 30 years, a large-scale suicide mission like the one you've described doesn't seem to fit.

I just got Osprey's The Chinese People's Liberation Army since 1949: Ground Forces (Elite) today and, so far, it's reinforced by assessment of the PLA's growing capabilities. It's scary to think about where they'll be, organizationally, doctrinally, and technologically in 20-30 years.

[Targan]

Originally Posted by Raellus

I'll have to give some more thought to the bio-warfare ideas that have been posted. I'm leery of going hard in that direction because, although I like my T2K grim, I'm not sure I want it global pandemic grim. I want to be able to differentiate between T2K and The Stand.

Once again (and I've obviously failed dismally despite trying to make my point abundantly clear) I'm NOT suggesting a global pandemic. I say again, a global pandemic would NOT give you the same vibe as original T2K and that's why a global pandemic is NOT what I'm suggesting. What I've described is a weaponised pathogen specifically designed and deployed so as to be confined mostly or completely to North America. I suggested it as a direct response to the question of how could you bring the US down a couple of notches just before or during a circa 2030 Twilight War.

[Rainbow Six]

Originally Posted by RN7

1) Military Rivalry: Attack by a foreign rival? America doesn't have a military equal since the Soviet Union collapsed. Russia remains the second most powerful military nation in the world, but it's not up to taking on America anywhere outside of its own territory.

This...

Originally Posted by RN7

China is the number three military power and is the second largest defence spender. It clearly is on a path to establishing some sort of parity with America in the Pacific and it might partly do so by 2030, although that could depend on its future economic situation and if it can bridge the very wide technological and logistical gap that America has over it. However beyond the Pacific (really the Far East) China's military power will never match America's.

And this...emphasis mine...is pretty much what my original thoughts were…

The US is taking on Russia in its territory (or at least in the Baltic States, so right on the Russian border). It is taking China on in the Far East. So the number one military power is taking on the number two and number three military powers simultaneously. In their own respective spheres of influence. I think that could be a fairly major challenge to the US.

And no one is disparaging the US military or any other military -we're dealing with this in the context of a game, and maybe eventually creating scenarios that allow us to mix the "old" T2K with new technologies, equipment, vehicles, etc...so we can maybe create a situation where instead of replaying Escape From Kalisz the PC's can be stuck behind Russian lines in the Baltic States, or on the front line against the Chinese in Vietnam. There were things in the original T2K that some people didn’t like…I’ve seen some of the debates where people have said that such and such just couldn’t happen or wouldn’t be possible…personally I don’t think anything that has been put forward in this thread is utterly impossible…whether some parts are implausible or not is another matter, and perhaps one where opinions may vary, but Kato said the above upthread and I think it’s part of what makes T2K what it is…

Originally Posted by kato13

One thing I think we have to remember if we are following the spirit of the original game. You sometimes include things that don't make complete sense to give a greater variety of potential for combat.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Originally Posted by RN7

None with NATO either but they still sent a large force to Afghanistan.

For Australia, Afghanistan was Global War on Terrorism part 2. We committed forces because the US asked us to and under the actions against Al Quaeda previously established via ANZUS, we agreed.

Originally Posted by RN7

There is even talk of Australia buying Virginia Class SSN's at the mo, couldn't see it happening but it is a major turn around in Australia's defence outlook.

There was serious discussion in government about nuclear power for the next generation of subs due to China's continuing upgrade of its military capacity. However a government decision in 2012 ruled out this option. Unless a radical change comes about, Australia's next class of submarine will have conventional power. To quote the report “All options are being considered other than nuclear propulsion which the government has ruled out.”

However, in a Twilight: 2030 timeline with a Chinese government in a more threatening posture (the initial reason the government considered nuclear powered subs) or with an antagonistic Indonesia, SSNs could be part of a mixed sub fleet. Part of the Australian desire to maintain conventional subs is because of the stealth factor - conventional subs can shutdown noisy systems but SSNs cannot, their powerplants must be kept on.

There's also the possibility of Australia acting against Indonesia through the Five Power Defence Arrangements. If Indonesia were to threaten Malaysia (again) or Singapore, the FPDA could be invoked to bring UK, NZ and Australia military action against Indonesia.

Originally Posted by RN7

Unless Australia was directly threatened or attacked by the North Koreans its the only way I could see the Aussies sending infantry to Korea. A brigade sized force would probably remain under Australian command.

Aside from the UN calling for military action, there's also the likelihood that if North Korea attacked the US, the US government could invoke ANZUS to get Australian involvement (or we might invoke it ourselves).
As mentioned before though, although Australian forces might be placed under another nations command structure for joint operations, any Australian force deployed anywhere in the world for whatever reason will always retain Australian command authority. Any Australian unit operating under the command structure of an ally can refuse orders from that ally if the Australian unit commander believes it is against Australian interests.
Gallipoli left a very bad taste and the insult to Australian troops in WW2 by MacArthur with his directive that any victory by Australian forces under his command be written up as an "Allied victory" rather than Australian sure as hell didn't help.

[Rainbow Six]

Originally Posted by StainlessSteelCynic

Aside from the UN calling for military action, there's also the likelihood that if North Korea attacked the US, the US government could invoke ANZUS to get Australian involvement (or we might invoke it ourselves).

So if I'm reading this correctly is the most likely route for Australian involvement in an Asian War as a result of a North Korean attack on US forces in South Korea leading to an invocation of the ANZUS treaty?

Originally Posted by StainlessSteelCynic

There's also the possibility of Australia acting against Indonesia through the Five Power Defence Arrangements. If Indonesia were to threaten Malaysia (again) or Singapore, the FPDA could be invoked to bring UK, NZ and Australia military action against Indonesia.

The UK Parliament is on record as saying the FPDA has no "specific commitment to intervene militarily" and merely requires the signatories to "consult immediately" in the event of an attack (or threat of attack) on Peninsular Malaysia or Singapore so UK interpretation at least would seem to be that such an attack would not automatically lead to a military intervention.