RPG Forums

Go Back   RPG Forums > Role Playing Game Section > Twilight 2000 Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 06-17-2009, 01:33 PM
Turboswede Turboswede is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Seattle
Posts: 33
Default Mexican Army Sourcebook complete

I just finished my Mexican Army Sourcebook and posted it to

http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/t2k/

So now I am thinking about my next project, what about a T2K guide to the People’s Liberation Army, or maybe the Bundeswehr? I could try to tackle the Russian army and figure out how to integrate Belorussia and the Ukraine.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 06-17-2009, 01:44 PM
kato13's Avatar
kato13 kato13 is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Chicago, Il USA
Posts: 3,353
Send a message via ICQ to kato13
Default

Just to help people find the files they are under
Files->Army Sourcebooks

If I get a chance I will map your Mexican units.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 06-18-2009, 06:05 AM
Ramjam's Avatar
Ramjam Ramjam is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Rugby, UK
Posts: 86
Default

Very interesting read and very useful for a southern US game.

I never realized they used so many Shermans.

The People’s Liberation Army would be good. But after 4 years of combat against the Russians there's not alot left of them.

The Bundeswehr again would be nice to give a more complete picture for Europe.

Last edited by Ramjam; 10-09-2010 at 04:48 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 06-18-2009, 08:38 AM
General Pain's Avatar
General Pain General Pain is offline
...not exactly open casket material
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Tiger City
Posts: 1,953
Send a message via MSN to General Pain
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Turboswede
I just finished my Mexican Army Sourcebook and posted it to

http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/t2k/

So now I am thinking about my next project, what about a T2K guide to the People’s Liberation Army, or maybe the Bundeswehr? I could try to tackle the Russian army and figure out how to integrate Belorussia and the Ukraine.
If you want I can post it on the big book of war - with creds offcourse
__________________
The Big Book of War - Twilight 2000 Filedump Site
Guns don't kill people,apes with guns do.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 06-18-2009, 12:32 PM
pmulcahy11b's Avatar
pmulcahy11b pmulcahy11b is offline
The Stat Guy
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 3,889
Default

I'll have that up on my site later tonight.
__________________
How did the universe get so weird? -- Michio Kaku

Entirely too much T2K stuff here: www.pmulcahy.com
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 06-18-2009, 01:05 PM
Turboswede Turboswede is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Seattle
Posts: 33
Default

Well today is my first day of a two week vacation and last night I was up until 1:00am (late for the dad of a 2 year old) working on the Bundesheer sourcebook. To tie the actions of the Heer into the T2K timeline I am making the post reunification Germany much more agressive than they were in reality.

It’s interesting that the West Germans were worried about a real life T2K arising from reunification, i.e. the NVA officer corps would take a hard line on issues like the return of east Prussia and the aqusition of Bohemia. As a result they retired everyone above the rank of Captain from the Nationale Volksarmee (NVA) and only allowed about 10% of the NVA jr. officers into the Bundesheer.

Wow, you can really learn a lot from role playing games
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 06-18-2009, 01:07 PM
kato13's Avatar
kato13 kato13 is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Chicago, Il USA
Posts: 3,353
Send a message via ICQ to kato13
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Turboswede
Wow, you can really learn a lot from role playing games
You just summed up why I still have an interest in gaming.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 06-18-2009, 11:13 PM
Targan's Avatar
Targan Targan is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 3,501
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Turboswede
Wow, you can really learn a lot from role playing games
Absolutely. I can confidently say that if it wasn't for T2K I'd know much less about Poland and the east coast of the USA.
__________________
"It is better to be feared than loved" - Nicolo Machiavelli
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 06-19-2009, 10:02 AM
pmulcahy11b's Avatar
pmulcahy11b pmulcahy11b is offline
The Stat Guy
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 3,889
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pmulcahy11b
I'll have that up on my site later tonight.
It's up. (Actually, it's been up since about 11 PM CDT last night.) Accessible through Anders' page.
__________________
How did the universe get so weird? -- Michio Kaku

Entirely too much T2K stuff here: www.pmulcahy.com
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 10-08-2010, 03:11 PM
Webstral's Avatar
Webstral Webstral is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: North San Francisco Bay
Posts: 1,687
Default

I’ve just read for the first time the outstanding Mexican Army Sourcebook by Turboswede. What an accomplishment! What a contribution to the Twilight: 2000 community! Really, dude—this is tremendous work. I’m inspired by it. If I weren’t already working on another project that I’m trying to complete by the beginning of my student teaching in January, I’d be inspired to copy the format and produce a sourcebook of my own work. This is wonderful.

I’ll mention some of the things I think work well, starting with the fact that Turboswede really has captured the Twilight: 2000 flavor, the Wikipedia flavor, and the Jane’s Guide flavor in this work. Did I mention just how impressed I am by this work? Here are a few other items that deserve praise:

• The photos and captions
o Great creative use of RL photographs. There’s nothing like realia to give people an image of what you’re talking about.
• The back story
o Grounding the Second Mexican-American War in history is a great idea that is in keeping with the Twilight: 2000 mode.
o This took work. I appreciate that Turboswede took the time to write a framework covering the history of the Mexican Army and of Mexico herself.
• Russian nuclear strikes on Mexican oil facilities
o Yes, this is exactly what I have advocated. I’m delighted someone else has seen things the same way.
• Escalating border violence in early 1998
o Although Turboswede and I aren’t on the same page regarding Mexican refugees during this period, we agree that American citizens are likely to take matters into their own hands.
o Turboswede uses the term “militia”, while I prefer the moniker “State Guard”. When it comes down to it, these ideas are fairly easily reconciled.
• The 1996 Order of Battle and US Army Vehicle Guide-style table of organization. What a great resource!
• Weapons and vehicle guides, too! It’s like a Christmas stocking that is enchanted to hold the contents of a footlocker.
• The improved mechanization of the Mexican Army vis-*-vis the official source material makes it much easier to understand how the Mexican Army could have achieved success in the initial invasion.
o I’ve always been hard-pressed to justify why Sixth US Army didn’t just roll down into southern California and kick the Mexicans out. A handful of M1 goes a long way against armored cars and APC.
 The improved Mexican Army OOB makes it ever so much easier to explain why the Mexicans enjoy so much early success in Texas and California.
o I LOVE the DN concept. I won’t comment on whether it’s realistic or not because I love the combination of creativity and disciplined approach to presentation.

Without shame, I’m going to say that I will pirate much of Turboswede’s material for use in Thunder Empire.
There are one or two items I want to address. They’re nit-picks, really.

One problem with controlling illegal crossings into the US by Mexico is that this runs counter to the perceived self-interests of the ruling caste of Mexico (Turboswede, 2009, p. 9). The people who have the gumption to try to cross into the United States are exactly the kind of people the folks running the show want to have leave Mexico. They are obviously unhappy with their lot in the current arrangement, and they are willing to take action. If the action is that they go to the US, earn some money, and remit some of that money, then it’s win-win for the Mexican ruling class. If the same group is kept at home by force of (Mexican) arms, the equation becomes lose-lose. Would-be expatriates, already dissatisfied with their lot under the existing arrangement, have no options left but to oppose the government. This has been the unstated and underappreciated (the US) dynamic underlying the movement of Mexican nationals into the US for decades.

Some mention should be made (it’s possible I missed it) of an improved logistical capability on the part of the Mexican Army. Supplying a more-mechanized force in the US is going to take a lot more trucks. A LOT more trucks. Still, the logistical situation helps us understand why the Mexican drive stalls in 1998. They just can’t keep their forces supplied as the supply lines move forward. The Americans, not being irretrievably stupid, destroy the rail network from the border north. Despite using requisitioned trucks, the Mexicans find that as their forces move further from the border their ability to provide support diminishes dramatically.


Once again, this work is tremendous!


Webstral
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 10-08-2010, 04:04 PM
kalos72's Avatar
kalos72 kalos72 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Jacksonville Florida
Posts: 921
Default

My only issue with the source book was the way the units were organized and named. Trying to figure out what type of unit it was and where the hell it was now.

But Spanish confuses me. :P
__________________
"Oh yes, I WOOT!"
TheDarkProphet
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 10-08-2010, 08:00 PM
Matt Wiser Matt Wiser is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Auberry, CA
Posts: 887
Default

Nice work! Though there's just one nit: once the JCS realize that the invasion can't be stopped with the forces available in CONUS, guess what happens to the Mexican supply lines? Places like Hermosillo, Chiuahaua City, Monterrey, Tampico, San Luis Potosi, etc....Instant sunshine grows there. The same thing for Mexico City.
__________________
Treat everyone you meet with kindness and respect, but always have a plan to kill them.

Old USMC Adage
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 10-09-2010, 11:21 PM
Dog 6 Dog 6 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 219
Default

very good work Turboswede . it was fun to read



Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt Wiser View Post
Nice work! Though there's just one nit: once the JCS realize that the invasion can't be stopped with the forces available in CONUS, guess what happens to the Mexican supply lines? Places like Hermosillo, Chiuahaua City, Monterrey, Tampico, San Luis Potosi, etc....Instant sunshine grows there. The same thing for Mexico City.
That sounds about like what happened in my game, along with a counterattack that over ran half of Mexico a few years latter.
__________________
"There is only one tactical principal which is not subject to change. It is to use the means at hand to inflict the maximum amount of wounds, death and destruction on the enemy in the minimum amount of time."
--General George S. Patton, Jr.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 10-10-2010, 03:03 PM
Webstral's Avatar
Webstral Webstral is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: North San Francisco Bay
Posts: 1,687
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt Wiser View Post
Though there's just one nit: once the JCS realize that the invasion can't be stopped with the forces available in CONUS, guess what happens to the Mexican supply lines? Places like Hermosillo, Chiuahaua City, Monterrey, Tampico, San Luis Potosi, etc....Instant sunshine grows there. The same thing for Mexico City.
Matt, it’s nice to see a post from you.

I agree that the treatment of Mexico by the JCS after the war starts is indeed a sticky issue. There are a few forces pulling in different directions. The first is canon, which doesn’t mention any nuclear attacks on Mexico City. The second is realism, by which we would expect some sort of nuclear action against Mexico. Realism is subject to various interpretations of the frame of mind of the JCS at the time.

Admittedly, I’m not exactly the best champion of canon. Thunder Empire and my various works in New England are decidedly non-canonical. I have advocated the use of nuclear weapons against Mexico’s oil production, which is not directly supported by the official body of work. This much said, I’ve generally advocated modest and justifiable departures from the established body of material. I don’t want to upset the applecart.

I think we can draw a meaningful distinction between nuclear attacks on Mexico’s oil production and Mexico’s urban areas. Firstly, I maintain that the v1 chronology supports attacks on Mexico’s oil production facilities based on the idea that such facilities in neutral nations were attacked to keep them out of the hands of the belligerents. Moreover, I think the Soviets are the most likely culprits for reasons I have given elsewhere.

The official body of material doesn’t mention American nuclear attacks against Mexican cities. Absence of proof is by no means proof of absence. GDW’s coverage of Mexico in the Twilight War is hardly exhaustive. I mention the absence of coverage of American nuclear strikes against Mexico in the wake of the start of the Second Mexican-American War only because the absence leaves the door open for interpretation.

From the standpoint of realism, there certainly is justification for the JCS to hit Mexican targets with nukes. The US has been knocked on its fourth point of contact by the November-December attacks. By the end of May, it should be obvious just how bad things are going to get in the US. Emotions are probably running high for the Joint Chiefs. The temptation to fix the situation in the Southwest by nuclear means would be huge—especially since the Mexicans have no means of counterstrike.

Against this, we probably ought to weigh the fact that Mexico doesn’t have the means of retaliation. 1Mt strikes against Mexican cities will kill millions. The JCS may be under the gun, so to speak, but they are still Americans. More importantly, they are American officers raised in the post-WW2 tradition. Civilians get wrapped up in war, but this fact does not release commanders from responsibility for their decisions. Some readers on this board may have poor opinions of American ethics, but the unavoidable fact remains that the United States has led the way in precision-guided munitions for the purpose of minimizing civilian casualties. It’s true that precision munitions reduce the number of sorties necessary to destroy a target. So would weapons of very high explosive yield. So would very effective incendiary weapons (in some cases). The JCS are going to have to consider how many civilians—even Mexican civilians—they are going to kill to achieve operational or strategic goals. By no means am I saying that the JCS are going to keep the remaining US nuclear arsenal sheathed for the purpose of sparing Mexican civilians. I am saying that there is reason to believe American nuclear strikes against Mexico may be limited and that even these limited strikes can be dovetailed with Turboswede’s work to explain the stagnation of the front.

Tactical strikes against major military centers, lines of communication, and logistical centers are warranted. We probably can expect tactical nuclear strikes against the major air bases near the US border, along with the Mexican Air Force HQ. The yield and method of the weapons used is subject to question. The fact that the official Mexican Army OB puts a number of units in Mexico City strongly indicates that while there is room for a low-yield ground burst, a one-megger let’s-go-get-‘em-all strike might not be in order. Strikes aimed specifically at rail hubs in northern Mexico also seem quite likely to me. Again, these might very well be ground bursts intended to knock out the rail hubs rather than wiping out cities.

Assuming that tactical nuclear strikes cripple the Mexican Air Force, the Mexican Navy, and the flow of supplies north to the Mexican Army, we can better understand by Turboswede’s more mechanized (and larger) invasion force runs out of steam against not-very-impressive American resistance. At the same time, we can envision a Mexico which hasn’t been reduced to a Spanish-speaking Poland. Perhaps we can even envision the JCS using just enough force to create a stalemate that will leave enough Mexicans alive to start the civil war. Although it appears unlikely on the surface, stranger things have happened. We should remember that the JCS are a handful of people leading in the midst of circumstances with no precedent. The influence of a handful of staffers on important decisions can be huge.


Webstral
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 10-10-2010, 06:41 PM
Legbreaker's Avatar
Legbreaker Legbreaker is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Tasmania, Australia
Posts: 4,570
Default

I am 100% behind the nuking of Mexico.

With the limited forces available to the US to resist the Mexican/Soviet invasion, the US Military/Governement will be left with little choice to stop them. Nukes would be targeted at rear areas though, with the object of crippling the logistical support networks of the invaders.

Great effort would be made to avoid nuclear attacks on or near US borders as the ideal result would be for the enemy to withdraw without causing more destruction to US property - nukes might destroy the enemy forces but would also inflict untold damage which would need to be repaired in the future, not to mention the contamination issue.
__________________
If it moves, shoot it, if not push it, if it still doesn't move, use explosives.

Nothing happens in isolation - it's called "the butterfly effect"

Mors ante pudorem
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 10-10-2010, 11:18 PM
Targan's Avatar
Targan Targan is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 3,501
Default

I agree with the above two posts. I've never researched Satellite Down or City of Angels line-by-line so I'm not sure if there is any useful information to be gleaned from those sources on the use of US nukes against Mexico.

One reason why I agree with Web that the JCS would probably seek to minimise civilian casualties as a result of a nuclear response is that they are intelligent people and would understand that for decades, even centuries in the future Mexico will continue to be their close neighbour. There will be bitter hatred on both sides after the war anyway, but there was too during the 1700s and 1800s after the various US-Spanish and US-Mexican wars. That bitterness would run alot deeper and for alot longer if the US had nuked major metropolitan centres during the Twilight War.

Having said that there are obviously many cases where oil production facilities and other high value nuke targets are sited adjacent to civilian centres. I admit I know little about Mexico's industrial infrastructure so it won't be me that compiles an expanded/adjusted list of probable nuke targets in Mexico but I'm happy for one or more of my knowledgeable fellow forumites to school me on the matter.
__________________
"It is better to be feared than loved" - Nicolo Machiavelli
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 10-10-2010, 11:32 PM
Matt Wiser Matt Wiser is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Auberry, CA
Posts: 887
Default

One argument that would be voiced at Raven Rock (or wherever the JCS are situated at this time) is that the government that ordered the invasion ought to be held personally accountable, and that means putting some instant sunshine on the Presidential Palace in Mexico City. The counterargument would be that you'd be slagging a city of 8 million people just to fry a few dozen. But smashing up Mexican supply lines with SAC's remaining bombers or a few TLAM-Ns, certainly. And those orders would certainly go out to SAC's remaining elements. And a civil war? Well, suddenly seeing Mexico City go up in nuclear fire would give generals of varying political persuasion a good reason to do so. Even if it's a TLAM or ALCM set on the low-yield setting. (10 KT or so)
__________________
Treat everyone you meet with kindness and respect, but always have a plan to kill them.

Old USMC Adage
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 10-11-2010, 10:13 PM
Webstral's Avatar
Webstral Webstral is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: North San Francisco Bay
Posts: 1,687
Default

Matt, I'm inclined to agree that a low-yield nuke or two directed against the most important leadership targets in Mexico City seems in order. I also agree that the appearance of a mushroom cloud of any dimensions over Mexico City gives some impetus to rebellious elements.

So the question becomes why it takes until 2000 for the civil war to break out. I do think we should find ways to keep the canon applecart more or less upright. Does this help us to understand why comparatively few Mexican reinforcements go north after 1998? Is the Mexican Army busy supporting counter-insurgency efforts by the various police forces? I've postulated significant unrest in previous threads. Perhaps the unrest reaches all the way to the top in some areas.

Red Star, Lone Star claims that the Second Mexican-American War was started more so that the PRI could maintain control than to protect Mexican lives. The primary opposition to the government in Mexico City calls itself the Constitucionales, referring to the 1917 Mexican Constitution. The Constitucionales claim that the Federales violated Mexican constitutional law in 1998, though we don’t have a lot of detail on the matter.

Given all of this, and my desire to incorporate a great deal of Turboswede’s excellent material into Thunder Empire, I want to try the following on for size:

In the 1980’s, Mexico develops a more self-sufficient arms industry with an eye on Brazil as a role model. DN constructs a number of VAB under license and refits earlier models for specialty roles. Additionally, DN manufactures some Cadillac-Gage vehicles under license. In both vases, the hope is that Mexico can make some arms sales to Central America as an alternative to the Cold War rivals. Africa and the Middle East are eyed as potential customers. However, the Mexican arms industry never really takes off and never really goes beyond improving Mexican self-sufficiency.

Fast-forward to the 1990’s, and the Sino-Soviet War gives the Mexican arms industry a shot in the arm. China is in the market for everything; Mexico ramps up and re-starts production of several types of light AFV. Consequently, when the nukes start flying the Mexicans have some finished AFV on the docks and others on the assembly line. This can help explain the dramatic improvement in Mexican levels of mechanization in Turboswede’s guide vis-*-vis the GDW Mexican Army OB.

In the wake of the surgical nuclear exchange at the end of 1997, the Soviets are starting to develop a use-or-lose-it attitude. Sub-launched cruise missile attacks against boomers at their moorings have demonstrated that the docks are no longer safe havens for Soviet ballistic missile submarines. When the Soviets put their boats to sea, the Western attack submarines quickly begin sinking them. When the idea of nuking Mexican oil production comes up, it is pointed out that deniability is a big part of the plan. The attacks have to come from a submarine so that the Soviets at least can pretend that the Americans are to blame. Since the boomer fleet is experiencing very serious attrition, the decision is made to go ahead with the attacks against Mexican oil in December 1997.

PRI responds by suspending elections. In real life, the PRI was in decline during the 1990’s. PAN was on the rise. The 1998 elections put ten of thirty-one governorships on the block. PAN, which was already strong in the north of the country and in the Yucatan, seemed poised to make major gains. State legislatures also were up for re-election across the country.

Incorporating these ideas into a picture of Twilight: 2000 Mexico, we might imagine that the Soviets convince the PRI that the Americans are responsible for the attacks on Mexican oil. The Americans, claim the Soviets, want to prevent Mexico from claiming her place in the sun in the Western Hemisphere. For a variety of reasons, the PRI senior leadership places blame for the attack on the US.

Elsewhere in the country, blame is assigned to the Soviets and occasionally the French (who are taking revenge for Cinco de Mayo). In particular, the PAN believe that the Soviets are using Mexico as their patsies. While PAN is split about affections towards the US, the party certainly doesn’t want to be anyone’s dupes.

PRI, recognizing an opportunity to take complete control, suspends elections “for the duration of the crisis”. The Army is fully mobilized and deployed throughout the country to aid in keeping law and order. Local PRI bosses take this opportunity to settle scores against rivals, using the police and the Army as their enforcers. This, combined with the very unequal distribution of relief (covered in my previous posts regarding Mexico), provokes massive unrest throughout the country.

By April, the government realizes that they need something to distract the people from the situation at home. The problem at the border seems to offer just what the doctor ordered. A little adventure to grab some American territory, followed by negotiations that would return some of Mexico’s previous territory to Mexico, would get the country behind the PRI.

The nuclear question requires a bit of attention. There are a couple of possibilities, it seems to me. The first is that the senior PRI leadership doesn’t believe early 1998 that the US will go nuclear on them. The US has a no-first-use policy, after all. Perhaps the leadership convinces each other that the US would never go nuclear over what amounts to a border squabble. Also, they may come to believe that the US can no longer make nuclear attacks against Mexico. Finally, the Soviets may make a nuclear guarantee they have no intention of honoring. For the Soviets, an American nuclear attack on Mexico is a win-win scenario. The Soviets are hardly going to put any of their own national assets at additional risk by retaliating against the US for strikes against Mexico, but the Mexicans don’t need to be told this. We know that the Soviets develop fraternal relations with Mexico because Division Cuba is brought to the mainland.

The US responds to the invasion with a very limited nuclear strike on Mexico. A high-altitude weapon blankets the country with EMP. A handful of low-yield nukes hit major transportation hubs in northern Mexico, air bases, and the senior leadership posts (civilian government, military) in Mexico City. Maybe a couple more take out the main Navy bases, too.

PAN and other groups, already being actively suppressed, are unable to act effectively until 2000. Thus in many ways the Second Mexican Civil War begins in 1998, but it doesn’t actually burst into flame until 2000.

The above offers some interesting possibilities. PAN and other folks fleeing the situation in Mexico may end up on the American side of the lines. This could start as early as 1998. In Arizona, these folks could offer very useful intelligence about what is going on in Mexico. Fort Huachuca could soften the JCS enmity by passing on the intelligence that arrives in Arizona. PAN folks could initiate clandestine cooperation with Huachuca. This would greatly aid American efforts to conduct raids, etc. into Mexico. A useful spy ring could be built using PAN agents who are interested in defeating troops loyal to PRI in northern Mexico, ending hostilities with the US, and taking control of Mexico.

In relation to the survival of Fort Huachuca in the face of a much more muscular Mexican Army, the logic remains the same as before: Arizona simply isn’t a priority in 1998 and 1999. The prizes are in California and Texas. This is where the armor is going to go. Also, if the Second Mexican Civil War is smoldering throughout 1998 and 1999 before bursting into flames in 2000, then the Army is going to have need of its fighting vehicles at home to run down malcontents. Finally, the tanks Turboswede lists are on the lighter side. The upgraded Shermans are vulnerable to every anti-tank weapon fielded by the Americans. The TAB-30, though more survivable, still will be vulnerable to American ATGM and the guns of both M1 and M60 series tanks. This is not to say that the Mexican Army won’t have success; it is to say that in head-to-head encounters with modern American equipment, the Mexicans are going to suffer heavy losses. However, since Sixth US Army and Fifth US Army are lacking in tanks, this problem isn’t a deal-breaker for the Mexicans. Again, we may have a better explanation for the stalemate that develops at the end of the 1998 campaign season. The idea of diverting armor to a secondary front like Arizona would seem ridiculous if the goal of the fighting is either to secure resources in California or, by threatening them, to force the Americans to come to terms.



Webstral
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 10-11-2010, 11:15 PM
Matt Wiser Matt Wiser is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Auberry, CA
Posts: 887
Default

Which means, in a nutshell, that the politicos who ordered the invasion do wind up as radioactive air pollution. And any surviving ministers try and hold things together, until the whole mess just plain falls apart. And Mexican forces in the field, with no supply lines back home now have a choice: either go home (units from cities that have been nuked wouldn't have anything to go home to, so guess who goes marauder, or the CO declares himself a warlord?), stay and hold onto what has already been seized, or just plain keep going, seeking an honorable death on the battlefield. Some of the units that stay where they are will eventually start fighting amongst themselves, politics aside, there will be arguments over what supplies are left, among other things, and the Soviets in Division Cuba will be wondering what in the hell they've gotten themselves into.
__________________
Treat everyone you meet with kindness and respect, but always have a plan to kill them.

Old USMC Adage
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 10-12-2010, 12:04 AM
Webstral's Avatar
Webstral Webstral is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: North San Francisco Bay
Posts: 1,687
Default

Remarkably like the Russian situation, no?

Some of the PRI folks responsible for the war must have survived the strikes on Mexico City. Otherwise, the surviving federal government would have ended the whole thing as a bad deal and brought the troops home. Someone wanted Mexican troops in the US--even after the limited strikes.

This makes me wonder whether the Soviet respresentatives in Mexico simply lied to the Mexican President (or his successor) about Soviet nuclear retaliation against the US. By mid-1998, most strikes inside the US will be rather difficult for the Mexicans to confirm. If the US only employs one strategic package--and if the Soviets have the brass to make the claim--the Soviets can tell the Mexican President that Soviet strikes in the US have dissuaded the Americans from further nuclear use.

Also, I'm not sure it is necessary to incinerate the city to destroy rail hubs. I'm not an expert on low-yield nukes, but I wonder if a 10-20kt ground burst against a rail yard would cause a firestorm or irradiate the city. I suppose the effects will vary from city to city based on a variety of factors.


Webstral
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 10-12-2010, 01:43 AM
Targan's Avatar
Targan Targan is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 3,501
Default

Nice work Web. I particularly like this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Webstral View Post
PAN and other folks fleeing the situation in Mexico may end up on the American side of the lines. This could start as early as 1998. In Arizona, these folks could offer very useful intelligence about what is going on in Mexico. Fort Huachuca could soften the JCS enmity by passing on the intelligence that arrives in Arizona. PAN folks could initiate clandestine cooperation with Huachuca. This would greatly aid American efforts to conduct raids, etc. into Mexico. A useful spy ring could be built using PAN agents who are interested in defeating troops loyal to PRI in northern Mexico, ending hostilities with the US, and taking control of Mexico.
as it ties into comments made in a previous thread about the Fort Huachuca making attempts to placate MilGov.

I also like your suggestions on the possible reasons for a home-grown Mexican arms buildup prior to and during the early stages of the Twilight War. Kudos.
__________________
"It is better to be feared than loved" - Nicolo Machiavelli
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 10-12-2010, 11:07 AM
Webstral's Avatar
Webstral Webstral is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: North San Francisco Bay
Posts: 1,687
Default

Thank you, Targan. You are indeed kind.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Webstral View Post
The nuclear question requires a bit of attention. There are a couple of possibilities, it seems to me. The first is that the senior PRI leadership doesn’t believe early 1998 that the US will go nuclear on them. The US has a no-first-use policy, after all. Perhaps the leadership convinces each other that the US would never go nuclear over what amounts to a border squabble.
I realized last night that this doesn't make sense. PRI already believes that the US went nuclear, thus obviating the no-first-use idea. Either the Mexicans believe that a Soviet nuclear shield will protect them, or they believe that France attacked Mexican oil. The latter makes little sense, although I suppose it depends on who is listening. So really, it seems like it comes down to the Soviets nuking Mexican oil, convincing the leadership that the Americans are responsible, then offering a bogus nuclear guarantee so that the Mexicans will start a war with the US.

Perhaps the Soviet ambassador to Mexico is named Zimmerov.


Webstral
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 10-12-2010, 04:16 PM
Legbreaker's Avatar
Legbreaker Legbreaker is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Tasmania, Australia
Posts: 4,570
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Webstral View Post
Also, I'm not sure it is necessary to incinerate the city to destroy rail hubs. I'm not an expert on low-yield nukes, but I wonder if a 10-20kt ground burst against a rail yard would cause a firestorm or irradiate the city.
Hiroshima - 13-18kt
Nagasaki - 21kt

Low yield yes, but both bombs where more than enough to totally flatten both cities.
__________________
If it moves, shoot it, if not push it, if it still doesn't move, use explosives.

Nothing happens in isolation - it's called "the butterfly effect"

Mors ante pudorem
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 10-12-2010, 05:03 PM
StainlessSteelCynic's Avatar
StainlessSteelCynic StainlessSteelCynic is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Western Australia
Posts: 1,842
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt Wiser View Post
TLAM
I don't even know what that is.
This site so needs a glossary.
Some of you folk forget that not all of us speak US military jargon
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 10-12-2010, 05:53 PM
Dog 6 Dog 6 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 219
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by StainlessSteelCynic View Post
I don't even know what that is.
This site so needs a glossary.
Some of you folk forget that not all of us speak US military jargon

this:Tomahawk Land Attack Missile - Nuclear (TLAM-N)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BGM-109_Tomahawk
__________________
"There is only one tactical principal which is not subject to change. It is to use the means at hand to inflict the maximum amount of wounds, death and destruction on the enemy in the minimum amount of time."
--General George S. Patton, Jr.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 10-12-2010, 06:50 PM
Webstral's Avatar
Webstral Webstral is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: North San Francisco Bay
Posts: 1,687
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Legbreaker View Post
Hiroshima - 13-18kt
Nagasaki - 21kt

Low yield yes, but both bombs where more than enough to totally flatten both cities.
Very true, but these attacks were airbursts. A ground burst is a different creature. Also, the location of the target's rail hub relative to the city makes a difference. If the rail hub is at city center, then the effects on the city will be much more pronounced than if the rail yards are near the outskirts. Also, Japanese cities were very tindery. If the target city has more brick and cinder block construction than a WW2-era Japanese city, the blast damage will be lessened. It's worth noting, too, that the loss of life at Hiroshima was greater than at Nagasaki, despite the higher yield of the Fat Man. The layout of the city and density of its population affect the impact of a given nuclear explosion. While I don't doubt that a 10kt ground burst at city center would result in major loss of life, a 10kt ground burst away from the city center in a city with some topographical features to deflect blast and heat and a high percentage of stone, brick, or cinder block housing will not have the same effects.

All of this said, a little research into the specifics at the major northern Mexican rail hubs should help answer some of the questions. I'll have to see if I can find a rail map of Mexico.


Webstral
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 10-12-2010, 06:56 PM
kalos72's Avatar
kalos72 kalos72 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Jacksonville Florida
Posts: 921
Default

I always assumed, perhaps incorrectly, that an air burst was for more of an EMP / firestorm of oil refineries and such then any true damage. And a ground burst was for more physical direct damage and radiation...
__________________
"Oh yes, I WOOT!"
TheDarkProphet
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 10-12-2010, 07:05 PM
Legbreaker's Avatar
Legbreaker Legbreaker is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Tasmania, Australia
Posts: 4,570
Default

Regardless of air burst, ground burst, or target city layout, etc you're never going to be able to call a nuclear explosive a "precision attack"....
__________________
If it moves, shoot it, if not push it, if it still doesn't move, use explosives.

Nothing happens in isolation - it's called "the butterfly effect"

Mors ante pudorem
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 10-12-2010, 07:27 PM
Dog 6 Dog 6 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 219
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Legbreaker View Post
Regardless of air burst, ground burst, or target city layout, etc you're never going to be able to call a nuclear explosive a "precision attack"....
very true. even the smallest nukes. .01 kt will still blow the shit out of the heart of any city.
__________________
"There is only one tactical principal which is not subject to change. It is to use the means at hand to inflict the maximum amount of wounds, death and destruction on the enemy in the minimum amount of time."
--General George S. Patton, Jr.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 10-13-2010, 02:11 PM
headquarters's Avatar
headquarters headquarters is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Norways weather beaten coasts
Posts: 1,825
Default nukes on Mexico in a game setting

with how amny tens of millions of Mexican background citizens and other south American citizens in the US - would using WMDs against the estados unidas de Mexico -and especially the big cities-be an option?

What could a possible backlash be ?

The need to evict any occupying force in a big hurry might not be there from a JCS chess game perspective.

Allowing the invaders to weaken over some time and then try to
a)bribe units and commanders
b) force them out through conventional warfare
c) limited use of WMDs to cut supply lines/build up areas

just a thought..
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
mexico, north america, sourcebook


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
A complete NATO Orbat (1989) kato13 Twilight 2000 Forum 2 11-19-2009 05:34 AM
Geocoding (was "Canon Mexican Locations") pmulcahy11b Twilight 2000 Forum 2 07-12-2009 08:46 PM
Canon Mexican Locations. kato13 Twilight 2000 Forum 7 07-12-2009 06:08 PM
Lead up to the Mexican Invasion Turboswede Twilight 2000 Forum 10 07-05-2009 01:08 AM
Mexican Army Sourcebook Turboswede Twilight 2000 Forum 57 06-08-2009 06:54 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:44 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.