Prev: Re: [FT][SG][DS] Canada, the US Civil War II, and the structure Next: [FT][SG][DS] Canada, the US Civil War II, structure of the NAC

RE: [FT][SG][DS] Canada, the US Civil War II, and the structure

From: Mike Wikan <MWikan@m...>
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 18:03:57 -0800
Subject: RE: [FT][SG][DS] Canada, the US Civil War II, and the structure

Hell, Georgia has the 24th Mechanized infantry Division, The Ranger
Battalion, etc, etc.. 

Michael Wikan
Game Design
Slave Zero
Accolade, Inc.
http://www.slavezero.com
mwikan@accolade.com
wikan@sprintmail.com
"We sleep safely in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night
to
visit violence on those who would do us harm."-George Orwell

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Los [SMTP:los@cris.com]
> Sent: Friday, December 11, 1998 5:47 PM
> To:	gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
> Subject:	Re: [FT][SG][DS] Canada, the US Civil War II, and the
> structure
> 
> 
> 
> John M. Atkinson wrote:
> 
> > Uhhh. . . The Canadians can put a division on the ground if they
called
> > up every reservist they have.  And then they would be straining to
> > deploy it--it wouldn't have the logistical tail to sustain long-term
> > operations removed from it's base of supply.  The Brits. . .well,
they
> > deployed a division to Desert Storm with massive US logistical help,
but
> > this required every functioning tank in their inventory.  Ooops. How
> > you'll deal with 10 Regular Army Divisions, 3 USMC Divisons, 8
National
> > Guard Divisions, 15 Enhanced Brigades, 1 USMCR Division, et al. is
going
> > to be interesting.	I'd bet there are States of the union with
larger
> > Air Forces than Canada--I know Texas has about as more tanks than
the UK
> > sent to Desert Storm.
> >
> 
> A funny side note, but up until the early eighties Texas had their own
> National Guard Airborne brigade, (the 30th). I often wonder what would
> happen if states got into fights with eachother. A common fantasy is
the
> RhodeIsalnd/Conenecticut hegemnoy vs the People's Republic of
> Massachusetts.
> They have a mech division (about two thirds complete) and a USAR inf
> battalion or two, a helicopter battalion (hueys) , plus the better
part of
> a
> Marine rifle regiment (reserve) and a few SF teams.
> 
> However, CT has a pair of inf battalions with two arty brigades
(including
> one from RI), an engineer brigade (w/ RI) and an A10 squadron and a
> chinook
> sqaudron. RI has an SF company, a ranger company, a reserve Seal team
> (Half
> RI, half Mass) an MP brigade, and a cavalry squadron including a
company
> of
> Cobras and a squadron of c130s to do all the specops insertions. Of
course
> if we call in the active duty posts, then you are talking Groton and a
> couple of Trident missle subs and a slew of 688s and a Seawolf on
trials,
> os
> that's pretty mucha  wrap.
> 
> In fact when I draw up training operations I usually use that
scenario....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> >
> > Of course, I don't buy a serious civil war in the US to begin with. 
But
> > that's a different rant.  Our military is not a very political one,
and
> > hasn't been since the Society of Cincinnatus.
> 
> agreed.
> 
> Los


Prev: Re: [FT][SG][DS] Canada, the US Civil War II, and the structure Next: [FT][SG][DS] Canada, the US Civil War II, structure of the NAC