Invasion of Alaska

[Cdnwolf]

Ooops me bad again... off topic. I think I have somewhere someone did a definate OB for the Canadian forces in Canada...

But first things first... Canada vs USA for the gold medal game in world junior hockey... I have my beer and pizza and my remote... I am set...

[Webstral]

Of course that's a death rate of 52%....

How many more would be unfit for work due to injury, illness (specifically radiation sickness), mental breakdown, or just plain being a thousand miles away from where they're needed and without transport

I would imagine that perhaps as little as 10% of prewar numbers are available, maybe more, maybe less.

What part of the population would be capable of working by 2000 is an important matter to address. We have to ask ourselves how long those incapable of working would draw rations. Those suffering from acute radiation sickness in 1997 will be dead before 2000. The epidemics arising from poor sanitation will have run their course by 2000 simply because the unschooled will have killed themselves and their neighbors by this point. People crippled during the nuclear attacks and immediate aftermath aren't going to make it once tough decisions have to be made about who is going to get fed. The glut of dying will have run down to a steady stream by 2000 simply because those who have survived to this point are living off their own produce and have adjusted their behaviors to survive the most preventable diseases.

Of course, there is still plenty of dying to go around. Violent deaths are occurring everywhere, but not nearly at the 1997-1998 level. Less travel and trade means less opportunity for disease to spread. Cancer continues to produce casualties, but without fresh exposure to radiation the early radiation sickness survivors will either be working or dead of starvation. Everyone needing medications to live will be dead, as will lots of the elderly and, sadly, many children.

In summary, I think 10% is rather a low number. The US in 2000 can't support many unproductive people. The sick can be tended in the hopes that they will become productive again, but the chronically unproductive simply aren't going to draw rations. Even dements need to eat. The overwhelming majority are going to have to work for their food (whether by producing it or stealing it) because there is not other way for them to fill their bellies.

Webstral

[chico20854]

I just found this litle gem, from the CIA's declassified translation of the secret Soviet military journal "Military Thought" from 1965:

"It is inadvisable to include in the given [Far Eastern] theater the Chukchi Peninsula, Kamchatka, and Alaska. In these areas it is impossible to employ
operational formations [army-size] of ground forces both because of the severe natural conditions, the inadequate economic development of the area, and the scant availability of routes of transportation, and also because of the absence of major enemy ground forces in Alaska."

[John Farson]

I just found this litle gem, from the CIA's declassified translation of the secret Soviet military journal "Military Thought" from 1965:

"It is inadvisable to include in the given [Far Eastern] theater the Chukchi Peninsula, Kamchatka, and Alaska. In these areas it is impossible to employ
operational formations [army-size] of ground forces both because of the severe natural conditions, the inadequate economic development of the area, and the scant availability of routes of transportation, and also because of the absence of major enemy ground forces in Alaska."

Interesting. I guess this means that IRL if things had come to a head between the US and USSR that there wouldn't have been a Soviet invasion of Alaska And vice versa, of course. This does fit my own personal canon of T2K where I just pretend that the Russian invasion of Alaska and Queen Charlotte Islands (Canada) never took place. After all, why invade something as impassable as Alaska when you can just nuke the important bits Of course, the US would do exactly the same to Siberia. Them nukes and long range bombers would sure be swarming over the Bering strait.

I also have my own opinion about the feasibility of the Mexican invasion of '98, but maybe it's better for a separate thread.

[fightingflamingo]

just to add to Chico's orbat we do assume that the 10th Mountain Division is airlifted back to the Pacific Northwest at some point during the summer of 1997 and is available for this campaign. Probably sometime after the failure of the Kola Offensive.

[Abbott Shaull]

Well I always wonder why the Soviet would invade Alaska for the last couple years. Watching the various series the History had aired about Alaska, it seemed pretty senseless for the lack of road network. Considering the Russia discovery of Alaska was a costly mistake in itself.

What would of made sense was if they were securing base to leapfrog down the west coast until the hit the populated areas of Western Canada and US. Locations such as Fort Wainwright and Whitehorse are so far off the beaten path, they are easier to bypass and let them come and attack you if they had chosen too.

[Legbreaker]

In summary, I think 10% is rather a low number.

Absolutely, but I was really refering to the available specialists needed for a particular project (specifically oil production as per Chico's post) rather than the workforce as a whole. In that light, 10% is probably a very generous figure.

[kato13]

One thing to remember about oil field workers is that oil was produced in 31 US states in 1997, and 9 of those states had no canon nuclear strikes.

[fightingflamingo]

A possible political reason for the invasion of Alaska could be that it was a last ditch effort on the part of the Soviet leadership to force a more favorable peace settlement prior to the outbreak of tactical nuclear warfare in Europe and Asia. It is unclear from a reading of the published materials if the invasion took place immediately prior to the initiation of nuclear warfare, or if it was at the same time. However, it could be possible that Soviet intentions were to seize territory in the US, as an effort to force a settlement to the war on more favorable terms from their point of view prior to the use of nuclear weapons... just a thought anyway...

[fightingflamingo]

I previously posted this in the wrong thread:

I think that by 2000-01 most of the surviving population would be relatively fit, albiet malnourished in some instances. I think the combination of the strikes, disease, and the collapse of infrastructure would have killed off most of those who were not fit. Diabetics and other sufferers of chronic illness would be dead. Because of the lack of antibiotics, many traumatic injuries would result in death, even with otherwise good medical care. Cancer is a long-term problem, but not immediately debilitating depending on the type.

Another think to consider is the baby boom you'd get when people run out of contraceptives and TV goes off the air... I think that although there may be a very high rate of birth defects, you'd still see a radical spike in the number of births per 1000 also as a result of the strikes, among the survivors. This won't play into the immediately available manpower, but does immediately address the need to find teachers (trained or otherwise), and the available manpower situation might be very different by 2010-15.

[Legbreaker]

But would the specialists be where they're needed

At the slightest rumour of nukes you're likely to see a mass exodus from possible target areas - oil fields are a definate possibility. A large number of oil workers, miners, etc are contractors, brought in from elsewhere. This is especially true of the more remote locations such as ocean oil rigs, open cut mines, and so on.

I couldn't say what the percentage may be of local workers to contractors, however I'd have to say even locals would be inclined to flee and stay with friends and relatives in more "safe" areas, thereby stripping the "target" areas of skilled workers.

Yes, this may reduce specialist casualties, but what if these people were caught downwind, or misjudged where nukes would strike, or any number of other events

My thoughts are that regardless of the actual percentage, the required specialists aren't necessarily going to be where they're wanted. They're also unlikely to be easily found and moved due to the almost total lack of communications networks, outdated census details, and devastated transportation systems. It is also probable that many of these specialists will not want to leave their families in a time of great peril. They may also strongly resist returning into what may be perceived as very dangerous areas (may have been nukes nearby, or just the rumour of them).

As time passes things are likely to change of course, but I can't see much progress for the first 5-10 years.

[Matt Wiser]

That excerpt Chico quoted reminded me of a post a while back on the old board: It's likely old Joe Stalin himself told the General Staff to prepare an invasion plan for Alaska, and now this article Chico's quoting is the General Staff's post-Stalin thinking. Of course, they would have to have a plan to present to the dictator, since he demanded one. Or else....

[Fusilier]

A possible political reason for the invasion of Alaska could be that it was a last ditch effort on the part of the Soviet leadership to force a more favorable peace settlement prior to the outbreak of tactical nuclear warfare in Europe and Asia. It is unclear from a reading of the published materials if the invasion took place immediately prior to the initiation of nuclear warfare, or if it was at the same time. However, it could be possible that Soviet intentions were to seize territory in the US, as an effort to force a settlement to the war on more favorable terms from their point of view prior to the use of nuclear weapons... just a thought anyway...

I mentioned something almost exactly like this a while back (I think the old forum). This is how what I accept the reasoning for the invasion being - with or without the nuclear exchange occurring.

[Rainbow Six]

A large number of oil workers, miners, etc are contractors, brought in from elsewhere. This is especially true of the more remote locations such as ocean oil rigs, open cut mines, and so on.

That's also a very valid point. I live / work in Aberdeen; my job is related to the oil business and I've had dealings with crew rotations in the past (mostly offshore, some onshore). Whilst I can't put an exact figure on it I would definitely agree that the majority of offshore workers fly in from outside the area when they're due to start their hitch (and obviously fly home again at the end of their hitch).

Rotations vary - in the North Sea two weeks on / two weeks off is the most common, going further afield hitches can be longer...the longest I've ever seen was eight weeks on / eight weeks off, which if I recall correctly was someone going to either Mauritania or Equatorial Guinea.

[rcaf_777]

Here what the US Army Vehcile book had

9th U.S. Army

Current Location: U.S. and Canadian Pacific Northwest

U.S. X Corps

10th Infantry Division (Mountain)

A prewar regular division stationed at Fort Drum, New York. The division was placed on alert in early October of 1996 and on 1Novembr 1996 began to deploy to Norway by air. The division entered combat against Soviet troops in the Bardufoss area in mid-November, and in a series of costly holding engagements blunt4 the Soviet drive toward Narvik, gaining time for additional Norwegian and NATO reserves to deploy in the north. In March of 1997 the survivors of the division were withdrawn from the front lines to regroup and absorb replacements. In July the division redeployed by air to Fort Greely, Alaska, Where it joined the 1st and 2nd infantry Brigades (Arctic Recon) (Alaska National Guard) to form the X U.S. Cops. Throughout summer and fall, the division fought a series of successful holding actions in the vicinity of Forts Wainwright and Greely against Soviet army mechanized forces. In 1998 the division spearheads X U.S. Corps' counter offensive. By March the division had captured Fairbanks, and in early April elements of the division, in conjunction with 2nd Infantry Brigade (Arctic Recon) (Alaska National Guard) had isolated Anchorage, severing the most important Soviet logistical links with forces further south. As both sides' logistical situations deteriorated, combat wound down 20 a series of local action"s aimed mostly at securing t he limited food growing areas.

Subordination: X U.S. Corps
Current Location: Pacific Northwest
Manpower: 1000
Tanks 2 LAV-75

1st Infantry Brigade (Arctic Recon)

An Alaskan National Guard brigade, the brigade came into federal service on 3 July 1996, and assumed responsibility for local security and long-range recon patrols along the Bering Strait. Throughout the last half of 1996 and the first half of 1997, the brigade mounted aggressive deep patrols across t he Bering Strait into Soviet territory and fought numinous small actions with Soviet arctic forces. On June of 1997 the brigade repulsed a number of Soviet commando raids across the strait, but it was forced to withdraw westward after Soviet arctic mechanized units crossed to the U.S. side. The brigade abandoned Anchorage in July and withdrew to Fort Wainwright where it came under command of the newly formed X V.S. Corps. For the rest of 1997 the brigade held off numerous Soviet attacks on the X Corps' lodgment area, and in early 1998 it participated in the corps' counteroffensive. In March the brigade participated in the recapture of Fairbanks and in April drove west to Kayukak, cutting the Soviet direct supply line across the Bering Strait. As the logistical situation continued to deteriorate in the north, the brigade dispersed into small self sufficient hunting1raiding parties that continue to range along both sides of the straits.

Subordination: X U.S. Corps
Current Location: Alaska
Manpower 400
Tanks: 0

2nd infantry Brigade (Arctic Recon)

An Alaskan National Guard brigade, The brigade came into federal service on 3 July 1996 as the 207th Infantry Group (Scout), and was redesignated the2nd Infantry Brigade (Arctic Recon) on 5 July 1996. The brigade assumed responsibility for local security in the Aleutians in August and remained there until June of 1997. At that time the brigade returned to Anchorage, and then moved north overland to join the 1st Infantry Brigade (Arctic Recon). In July the brigade retreated east to Fort Greely and upon arrival cane under the command of the newly formed X U.S. Corps. For the rest of 1997, the brigade held off numerous Soviet attacks on the X Corps' lodgment area, and in early 1998 participated in the corps' counteroffensive. In March the brigade participated in the recapture of Fairbanks, and In April it drove south with 10th infantry Division (Mountain) to the Anchorage area. In l a t ~ 1998, the brigade left the Anchorage area and drove southeast toward Juneau. On 25 December 1998 the brigade, considerably aided by local partisans, recaptured Juneau by assault, suffering heavy casualties in the process, the brigade then took over local security for the Juneau logistical hub.

Subordination: X U. S. Corps
Current Location: Alaska
Manpower: 300
Tanks: 0

VIII U.S. Corps

47th Infantry Division

A National Guard division consisting of the 1st (Minnesota NG), 347th (Iowa NG), and the 66th (Illinois NG) brigades, The division came in to federal service on 1 November 1996 and began deploying by air and sea lo Fort Richardson, Alaska where they relieved the 6th Infantry Division (Light) of Internal security duties. In July of 1997ovtmsts of the division were attacked h Soviet Spetsnaz units and shortly there after by elements of two mechanized brigades. The division was pushed southeast in heavy fighting and retreated across the Canadian border where it was reinforced by elements of the Canadian Forces. The appearance of additional Soviet troops, coupled with limited tactical nuclear strikes, inflected heavy casualties in the division, and by mid-1998 it had fallen back to northern Washington. The deteriorating logistical situation of the Soviet forces, multiple by the attacks on their rear areas by the X U.S. Cops from the Fort Wainwright (east-central Alaska) region and the arrival of the 104th Infantry Division, halted the, Soviet attack. At that time the division reverted to a defensive role and became responsible for internal security in the Washington-Oregon region.

Subordination: VIII U.S Corps
Current Location: Pacific Northwest
Manpower 5000
Tanks: 0

104th Infantry Division (Light)

The division was formed at Vancouver, Washington on203uly 1998 by re-designation of the 104th Training Division (U.S. Army Reserve). Upon activation, the division came under command of VIII U.S. Corps, and on 2 August 1998 entered combat against Soviet forces attacking the Fort Lawton area from the north. By late August, the situation was stabilized and the division was withdrawn from the front line to take over internal security duties in the Montana-Idaho region.

Subordination: VIII U.S, Corps
Current Location: Pacific Northwest
Manpower 4000
Tanks: 1 M728 CEV
1 Stingray
1 M60A3
1 M1A2