Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Armed Forces of the World Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: USA vs EU
gixxxerking    1/6/2005 6:13:25 PM
This is the mood in the Fighters forums so I thought I would just declare war here instead. C'mon all you armchair generals, who wins this fight?
 
Quote    Reply

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
oldbutnotwise    RE:War in Iceland -- IsoT   2/16/2005 12:47:44 PM
from experiance 1st para would prove you completely wrong they would leave the 82nd wondering why they hadnt been trained properly
 
Quote    Reply

gixxxerking    RE:War in Iceland -- IsoT   2/16/2005 1:00:02 PM
Bravado and tall talk is fine. But the 1 Paras will die in the air in this scenario if harsh language is their support.
 
Quote    Reply

oldbutnotwise    RE:War in Iceland -- IsoT   2/16/2005 1:02:22 PM
from previous expericance of US abilities your 82nd would be lucky to find iceland
 
Quote    Reply

gixxxerking    RE:War in Iceland -- IsoT   2/16/2005 1:10:04 PM
"from previous expericance of US abilities your 82nd would be lucky to find iceland" --oldandunwise Statements like this are what we should avoid. That add nothing and are clearly false. I guess you havent been watching or reading any news for the past 10 to 20 years because the US has been doing things no other military could possibly do. I didnt see the EU stop Saddam from entering Saudi Arabia. Nor did I see them fighting taliban on horse back. They were nowhere near Fallujah either. The US has been to all these places. Your comments make you look very bad. Please use facts as I have done if you disagree. Otherwise let the adults handle this and keep the foolishness to yourself. P.S. I question your experience if you stand behind this statement.
 
Quote    Reply

IsoT    RE:War in Iceland -- IsoT   2/16/2005 1:14:17 PM
First of all There is NO F-15 squadron in Iceland to enforce. There is a few f-16s. and some P-3 orions whic are dutch or german. Strategic bombers to controll sea east of iceland would haveto be on top of iceland and thus pretty much within range of EU fighters. As to multinational force. I thought Danes and Norwegians were in NATO, they should be somewhat interoperable. I added fiins and swedes so thet it wouldn't seem like Danes and Norwegiasn were the onlyones to pich up chestnuts from fire. Ferrylines operating in scandianvia could lift all the necessary personnel easily on one lift and and most of the wehicles needed. Some freighters would be needed to bring in additional gear. This under UK/French fighter umbrella. There are more harbours in Iceland than airports and ferries dont need much of a harbour anyhow. vehicles can be rolled off and on from the ship. Paras would be needed to secure the area untill regular infantry rolled in after wich they could ither be left on site or be flown back for other duties. As I mentioned nordic troops might be most tolerable for Icelanders and that would keep unrest to minimum. Even the troop numbers I gave were pretty low. Finland could, without breaking really a swet, grow the peacetime 30000 men to 100 000. Would'n even affect the production much, and it would still leave another 250 000 to be summoned if needed. Swededn and Norway could do the same, and so I believe could Denmark. A brigade is roughly 6000men and vehicles. BUT 4 brigades on beach would be enough to resist landing by two divisions (4-6 brigades). I'd opt for mechanized brigades, but even (light)infantry would serve. in Icelandic conditions
 
Quote    Reply

gixxxerking    RE:War in Iceland -- IsoT   2/16/2005 1:26:07 PM
"First of all There is NO F-15 squadron in Iceland to enforce. There is a few f-16s. and some P-3 orions whic are dutch or german. Strategic bombers to controll sea east of iceland would haveto be on top of iceland and thus pretty much within range of EU fighters. As to multinational force. I thought Danes and Norwegians were in NATO, they should be somewhat interoperable. I added fiins and swedes so thet it wouldn't seem like Danes and Norwegiasn were the onlyones to pich up chestnuts from fire. Ferrylines operating in scandianvia could lift all the necessary personnel easily on one lift and and most of the wehicles needed. Some freighters would be needed to bring in additional gear. This under UK/French fighter umbrella. There are more harbours in Iceland than airports and ferries dont need much of a harbour anyhow. vehicles can be rolled off and on from the ship. Paras would be needed to secure the area untill regular infantry rolled in after wich they could ither be left on site or be flown back for other duties. As I mentioned nordic troops might be most tolerable for Icelanders and that would keep unrest to minimum. Even the troop numbers I gave were pretty low. Finland could, without breaking really a swet, grow the peacetime 30000 men to 100 000. Would'n even affect the production much, and it would still leave another 250 000 to be summoned if needed. Swededn and Norway could do the same, and so I believe could Denmark. A brigade is roughly 6000men and vehicles. BUT 4 brigades on beach would be enough to resist landing by two divisions (4-6 brigades). I'd opt for mechanized brigades, but even (light)infantry would serve. in Icelandic conditions" --IsoT Thats impressive numbers but you do not have the lift to move these forces faster than the US can move the 82nd. Show some numbers or historical examples. There may be no F-15C there now. But as I said originally. They would come from the forces withdrawing from Europe. You could not stop them from redeploying there. Iceland is in Range of some U.K. fighters. And there isnt anyway you will assemble this force without it being noticed. Explain your logic. And a few F-16C can stop your attack cold. All those troops in EU are no threat to me outside the borders of their parent countries so why you mention them is really beyond me. How would you do it? With what? Thats what you need to explain in detail as I have.
 
Quote    Reply

IsoT    RE:War in Iceland -- IsoT   2/16/2005 2:32:08 PM
As for historical examples. Iceland May 1940 brits took over. in 56 french and British mad airdrops to Suez area. Icalnd IS in european home turf, and thus power projection is not so much needed. Also it may just be that those F-15 would be scrapped and and left to ground if it was felt that they are not needed. Even if there were F-15 in Iceland and If I as Marshal of EU was going to start hotilities then one or two hours eralier or later would not matter. I'd go after the airfield with TLAM just like you would agaist UK. My edge here would be that all those planes are on ONE airfield Kill most of the planes on ground, and then the CAP patrol would eventually either run out of fuel or land somewhere else. WHICH would give EU window to fly in the PARAS. With three brigades worth of troops on ground I can count on controlling the island and ferry in the heavier formations. And the Keflavik Airport isn't biggest in world so you could not cram stuff in immensly. Hmm and as you started to attac EUs space assets we would even have a legitimate war in our hands with US clearly the aggressor. Thus it would be wery unified front againts US. AS to SSN in Norwegian sea, They would have hard time chasing the ferries whic are doing +15 knots to keep out of harms way. They might get some but not so many as to jeopardize the Icelandic Mission. If they came closer the icelnad that would also help consentrate the ASW assets as well. I'm afraid that even trying to go into Africa might be bad. Anythig on north side of Sahara is much accessible for EU. and behind sahara. well it is a sea of sand really. Formations might even be flown into Icenland from Europe if it was really thougt necessary.
 
Quote    Reply

gixxxerking    RE:War in Iceland -- IsoT   2/16/2005 2:52:52 PM
"As for historical examples. Iceland May 1940 brits took over. in 56 french and British mad airdrops to Suez area. Icalnd IS in european home turf, and thus power projection is not so much needed. Also it may just be that those F-15 would be scrapped and and left to ground if it was felt that they are not needed. Even if there were F-15 in Iceland and If I as Marshal of EU was going to start hotilities then one or two hours eralier or later would not matter. I'd go after the airfield with TLAM just like you would agaist UK. My edge here would be that all those planes are on ONE airfield Kill most of the planes on ground, and then the CAP patrol would eventually either run out of fuel or land somewhere else. WHICH would give EU window to fly in the PARAS. With three brigades worth of troops on ground I can count on controlling the island and ferry in the heavier formations. And the Keflavik Airport isn't biggest in world so you could not cram stuff in immensly. Hmm and as you started to attac EUs space assets we would even have a legitimate war in our hands with US clearly the aggressor. Thus it would be wery unified front againts US. AS to SSN in Norwegian sea, They would have hard time chasing the ferries whic are doing +15 knots to keep out of harms way. They might get some but not so many as to jeopardize the Icelandic Mission. If they came closer the icelnad that would also help consentrate the ASW assets as well. I'm afraid that even trying to go into Africa might be bad. Anythig on north side of Sahara is much accessible for EU. and behind sahara. well it is a sea of sand really. Formations might even be flown into Icenland from Europe if it was really thougt necessary."--IsoT Well I notice that no mention of time required to move these paras is mentioned. I assure you though you cannot move three Brigades simultaneously. And the SSNs would have no problem with 15kts. Thats less than half their speed. But it is not necessary to chase them as the USN SSNs are in the path of the Amphibious ships. This means you would need considerable ASW effort prior to your mission which would also tip off intelligence services. There is more than one airfield on Iceland that would be used and additional support from Greenland would be brought to bear. Read my plan as I mention this several times. No F-15s are going to be left behind or scrapped. Also firing TLAMs will require some coordination which will require radio communication. This could help the US to locate the EU SSNs. The loss of space will also reduce the effectiveness of the TLAMs because they rely on GPS signals. Also the CAP, E-3 and Patriot missiles would do much to reduce the effectiveness of TLAMs approaching over the open water. No terrain features to hide behind and too few in number to cause real damage. As to the reference to the Suez and Iceland 1940 perhaps you should do some research into how long those ops took to plan and then to carry out. Essentially suprise is required for you to even launch the attack and even if you had it you could not hold Iceland. Unfortunately IsoT you do not have the physical ability to conduct the operation you propose. From a strategic point of view it may be to US advantage to let you have Iceland initially. This would tie up and isolate your limited defenses in the north and I could conduct a similar Operation in Morracco or the Canaries in the south relatively unopposed. But as I have shown, you have no ability to reach Iceland in the face of US opppsition in the time required.
 
Quote    Reply

IsoT    RE:War in Iceland -- IsoT   2/16/2005 3:47:10 PM
SO Gixx you are REALLY proposing that UK for example could not lift her paratroop regiment? Nor the french 2nd REP? It would be kind of ill adwiced to have paratroops, but not planes to drop them from. SO rest assured. THOSE assets ARE in place. as to SSN speed. Yes SSN CAN do 30 knots really nicely, but then it will start making noice, and when it is making noise, it comes ever easier to find it. and how ever you tried to do it you would not get all the boats coming in. Someone pointed out that Iceland has all five airfields, thus as you pointed out it is really simple TLAM them and and wait nature take its course. SO as you see either way, you loose F-15s in Iceland. C-130 takes about four/five hours to fly in from UK, so 82nd would still be FAR in Atlantic. The it would just be relatively simple thing of mending the runways and moving the scrap off the plateau. and Fortress Iceland is ready. I ahvent got a clue how long the palnning took in Suez 56 or Iceland 40 but as you have been wanting years tensiontime I'm sure that it would be enough. 8) SH*T Norwegians invaded the Iceland in 800 something and THEY didn't have GPS nor inkling that it even was there... I'm also sure that pinpoint accuracy would not be neede in hitting an airfield. Even a small airfield is DARN big. 10m accurace is not needed as 500kg warhead makes A lot bigger hole on paving than 10m.
 
Quote    Reply

Worcester    RE:gixx: evicting the American tenant   2/16/2005 4:03:26 PM
It is clear you are not "happy" with the existence of "EU"/Europe. We have much to lose by being kicked out of Europe; they have much to gain. An exercise of Icelandic or Danish sovereignty is not an act of war; our refusing to leave most certainly is - so much for the 12 month "build up". Many Europeans (mostly French) have spent decades planning for our eviction and it would include Iceland and Greenland as surely as we would have a problem with Russia retaking Alaska. Why wouldn't the EU/Europe initiate this process? And why wouldn't they be the first mover? Iceland is closer to Arbroath than Bragg.
 
Quote    Reply



StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2012StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy