Twilight 2025

[.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.

[.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.