At what point the USA will launch nukes?

May be. May be not.

France already said, that they won't tolerate American attempts to retake Panama channel.

Is he decisive enough to use nukes?

Vietnam, North Korea, Afghanistan, even Somali. Latam alliance doesn't even need to keep control over the channel. Degrading its work by raids and by time to time disturbing attacks is good enough.

Without nukes the war against Cuba, Venezuela, Mexico and Colombia will be much worse than Vietnam and Afghanistan combined.

Ok. In our game, as it was in our reality in Cuba, Russia (and China) do support "Panama's alliance" as much as the USA and NATO supported Ukraine.
1. No maybe about it. No local military would oppose the US in Panama.

2. France did not say that, they have no say in the Americas. If you have a link post it.

3. No need to use nukes. So stop discussing them.

4. Those places are around the world. Panama is local. Easy to defend. There is no benefit to closing it. The local economy depends upon ship traffic for income.

5. Cuba is a 3rd world country, so is Venezuela, they have no army or navy to speak of. Mexico is a staunch US ally.

6. Russia and China can't put military power in Cuba or Panama. That would start a local conventional war with the US.
As an example:
1. One day the US military takes control of the Panama Canal. Panama surrenders to avoid loss of life.
2. The US tells China to abandon their posts at the ends of the canal, China complies.
3. ...there is no 3
 
In our scenario they are united with the cartels.

Russia and China will give them a lot of equipment and "volunteers"

And what if they are not? You don't play for China, you play for the USA.

If you say that you won't use nukes first in any circumstances, it means that Latinos (and even Russians and Chinamen) may be as provocative as they want.
1. Mexico is a staunch US ally, we give them a lot of business, they will not bite the hand that feeds them.

2. Russia and China volunteers? Remember what happened to Russian mercenaries in Syria? Bad idea.

3. I can't imagine China projecting military power into Central America, they aren't that stupid.
That is "poking the tiger", bad idea.
Any buildup of Chinese military near the Panama Canal would be a provocation or trigger for US military action.

4. You aren't considering conventional military power in the Americas. This is our backyard, not China's or Russia's.
 
As an example:
1. One day the US military takes control of the Panama Canal. Panama surrenders to avoid loss of life.
2. The US tells China to abandon their posts at the ends of the canal, China complies.
3. ...there is no 3
There is 3. Guerilla war (sponsored by China and supplied by Russia and Brazil).
And what is more important, there is 4. China invest 300 billion dollars/month, hire, equip and train one million strong army of Latinoamericans, equipped, among other things, with SA and SS missiles, unmanned water and air unmanned devices.
So, you'd face the choice - 1) use nukes or 2) leave Panama.
 
1. Mexico is a staunch US ally, we give them a lot of business, they will not bite the hand that feeds them.
Ok. In this setting you don't feed them.

2. Russia and China volunteers? Remember what happened to Russian mercenaries in Syria? Bad idea.
Most of them successfully earned their money. Some, of course, got killed, but it is normal level of risk.
3. I can't imagine China projecting military power into Central America, they aren't that stupid.
That is "poking the tiger", bad idea.
If you say, that your tiger is vegetarian and won't use his fangs - they might believe you and try.
And, you know, arming and funding Ukrainian Banderlogs is poking a bear, and some of American decision-makers thought that it was a good idea. Chinamen are not smarter.
Any buildup of Chinese military near the Panama Canal would be a provocation or trigger for US military action.
70% of Panama canal transit is American, as far as I know. US military actions alongside with guerilla warfare will strike American economy significantly. China may decide that it is a good investment.

4. You aren't considering conventional military power in the Americas. This is our backyard, not China's or Russia's.
As Ukraine is Russian backyard.
 
Mexico's military is busy fighting drug cartels

Sad to say, Mexico's military is often being beaten by the drug cartels. Is sad when you realize the cartels are often better equipped and armed than the national military is.

And even all of Mexico combined with other nations in the region are no threat to the US military.

In fact, one of the reasons the Mexican military is so weak is that they are largely co-dependent upon the US to keep them safe. They do not have to have much of a military presence because they know that if anybody invaded, the US would step in to protect them.

Here, this should give an idea.

Number of tanks in the Mexican army: 0

Now they have a couple of thousand armored infantry vehicles, scattered across around two dozen different models. But the most common is the 400 or so AMX-VCI that they got from France. These date back to the 1950s, and have a 20mm cannon and an M2 machine gun. Now exactly how much of a threat are those to the US? Pretty much none.

Their air force is not much better. The entire air combat wing is seven F-5 fighters. And 30 PC-7 ground attack fighters. That's it, 37 aircraft, The only jets are seven that the US made primarily for export to other nations in the 1950s.

Some appear to be seriously overestimating the militaries of other nations. One thing about most of the Americas, they have among the weakest military forces on the planet. And one reason is that they know if they come under foreign military threat the US will step in to protect them. Even Venezuela and Cuba have that protection, as if any nation tries to invade either one the US and the OAS will step in to defend them. It is very much a form of "Pax Americana", as if anybody notices actual conflicts between American Nations are rather low. And compared to nations on other parts of the planet, they all have rather small military budgets. Because if they actually like the US or not, they all live under that umbrella of protection.

Only the outliers on the edges of quick US response like Brazil and Argentina have any kind of real military forces on the continents. And even then, it is not much. Argentina for example does have over 200 tanks. Tanks that they had built for them by West Germany. That alone should give an idea how dated they are.

To give an even better idea, the National Bolivarian Armed Forces of Venezuela has a whopping 123,000 members. And they actually do have tanks, about 92 T-72s they bought in the early 2000s.
 
5. Cuba is a 3rd world country, so is Venezuela, they have no army or navy to speak of. Mexico is a staunch US ally.

The Venezuelan Navy had one of their largest and most modern naval ships sunk in 2020. The Naiguata was built for them in Spain, and was a fairly modern patrol boat, 1 of 3 of the Guaicamacuto class boats.

And what was it sunk by? Mines? Enemy action? Fighting pirates or drug cartels?

None of the above. They were essentially trying to hijack a cruise ship in International waters, and the cruise ship sank it.

 
Sad to say, Mexico's military is often being beaten by the drug cartels. Is sad when you realize the cartels are often better equipped and armed than the national military is.

And even all of Mexico combined with other nations in the region are no threat to the US military.

In fact, one of the reasons the Mexican military is so weak is that they are largely co-dependent upon the US to keep them safe. They do not have to have much of a military presence because they know that if anybody invaded, the US would step in to protect them.

Here, this should give an idea.

Number of tanks in the Mexican army: 0

Now they have a couple of thousand armored infantry vehicles, scattered across around two dozen different models. But the most common is the 400 or so AMX-VCI that they got from France. These date back to the 1950s, and have a 20mm cannon and an M2 machine gun. Now exactly how much of a threat are those to the US? Pretty much none.

Their air force is not much better. The entire air combat wing is seven F-5 fighters. And 30 PC-7 ground attack fighters. That's it, 37 aircraft, The only jets are seven that the US made primarily for export to other nations in the 1950s.

Some appear to be seriously overestimating the militaries of other nations. One thing about most of the Americas, they have among the weakest military forces on the planet. And one reason is that they know if they come under foreign military threat the US will step in to protect them. Even Venezuela and Cuba have that protection, as if any nation tries to invade either one the US and the OAS will step in to defend them. It is very much a form of "Pax Americana", as if anybody notices actual conflicts between American Nations are rather low. And compared to nations on other parts of the planet, they all have rather small military budgets. Because if they actually like the US or not, they all live under that umbrella of protection.

Only the outliers on the edges of quick US response like Brazil and Argentina have any kind of real military forces on the continents. And even then, it is not much. Argentina for example does have over 200 tanks. Tanks that they had built for them by West Germany. That alone should give an idea how dated they are.

To give an even better idea, the National Bolivarian Armed Forces of Venezuela has a whopping 123,000 members. And they actually do have tanks, about 92 T-72s they bought in the early 2000s.
If Mexican forces (legal and illegal combined) are that weak, why do you allow them to kill one hundred thousand Americans /year?
Your price of peace with Mexico is higher than the Russian price of "war" with Ukraine.

And, anyway, in our scenario they've got a lot of weapons, ordnance, equipment and vechicles from Russia and China.
 
Last edited:
There is 3. Guerilla war (sponsored by China and supplied by Russia and Brazil).
And what is more important, there is 4. China invest 300 billion dollars/month, hire, equip and train one million strong army of Latinoamericans, equipped, among other things, with SA and SS missiles, unmanned water and air unmanned devices.
So, you'd face the choice - 1) use nukes or 2) leave Panama.
There is no 3 or 4.
 
Ok. In this setting you don't feed them.

Most of them successfully earned their money. Some, of course, got killed, but it is normal level of risk.

If you say, that your tiger is vegetarian and won't use his fangs - they might believe you and try.
And, you know, arming and funding Ukrainian Banderlogs is poking a bear, and some of American decision-makers thought that it was a good idea. Chinamen are not smarter.

70% of Panama canal transit is American, as far as I know. US military actions alongside with guerilla warfare will strike American economy significantly. China may decide that it is a good investment.

As Ukraine is Russian backyard.
1. Mexico is a US ally and business partner.

2. Hundreds ot mercenaries killed. The US doesn't miss its targets.

3. Conventional capabilities are all the "fangs" the US needs.

4. Guerilla warfare along the canal is nonsense. Drones and robots are very deadly.

5. Ukraine is in Russia's backyard, the same way Cuba is in America's. As long as they are not a threat peaceful co-existence is called for.
 
Sad to say, Mexico's military is often being beaten by the drug cartels. Is sad when you realize the cartels are often better equipped and armed than the national military is.

And even all of Mexico combined with other nations in the region are no threat to the US military.

In fact, one of the reasons the Mexican military is so weak is that they are largely co-dependent upon the US to keep them safe. They do not have to have much of a military presence because they know that if anybody invaded, the US would step in to protect them.

Here, this should give an idea.

Number of tanks in the Mexican army: 0

Now they have a couple of thousand armored infantry vehicles, scattered across around two dozen different models. But the most common is the 400 or so AMX-VCI that they got from France. These date back to the 1950s, and have a 20mm cannon and an M2 machine gun. Now exactly how much of a threat are those to the US? Pretty much none.

Their air force is not much better. The entire air combat wing is seven F-5 fighters. And 30 PC-7 ground attack fighters. That's it, 37 aircraft, The only jets are seven that the US made primarily for export to other nations in the 1950s.

Some appear to be seriously overestimating the militaries of other nations. One thing about most of the Americas, they have among the weakest military forces on the planet. And one reason is that they know if they come under foreign military threat the US will step in to protect them. Even Venezuela and Cuba have that protection, as if any nation tries to invade either one the US and the OAS will step in to defend them. It is very much a form of "Pax Americana", as if anybody notices actual conflicts between American Nations are rather low. And compared to nations on other parts of the planet, they all have rather small military budgets. Because if they actually like the US or not, they all live under that umbrella of protection.

Only the outliers on the edges of quick US response like Brazil and Argentina have any kind of real military forces on the continents. And even then, it is not much. Argentina for example does have over 200 tanks. Tanks that they had built for them by West Germany. That alone should give an idea how dated they are.

To give an even better idea, the National Bolivarian Armed Forces of Venezuela has a whopping 123,000 members. And they actually do have tanks, about 92 T-72s they bought in the early 2000s.
I'm waiting for Trump to order drone attacks on cartel targets. That would help Mexico's weak military.
 
Sad to say, Mexico's military is often being beaten by the drug cartels. Is sad when you realize the cartels are often better equipped and armed than the national military is.

And even all of Mexico combined with other nations in the region are no threat to the US military.

In fact, one of the reasons the Mexican military is so weak is that they are largely co-dependent upon the US to keep them safe. They do not have to have much of a military presence because they know that if anybody invaded, the US would step in to protect them.

Here, this should give an idea.

Number of tanks in the Mexican army: 0

Now they have a couple of thousand armored infantry vehicles, scattered across around two dozen different models. But the most common is the 400 or so AMX-VCI that they got from France. These date back to the 1950s, and have a 20mm cannon and an M2 machine gun. Now exactly how much of a threat are those to the US? Pretty much none.

Their air force is not much better. The entire air combat wing is seven F-5 fighters. And 30 PC-7 ground attack fighters. That's it, 37 aircraft, The only jets are seven that the US made primarily for export to other nations in the 1950s.

Some appear to be seriously overestimating the militaries of other nations. One thing about most of the Americas, they have among the weakest military forces on the planet. And one reason is that they know if they come under foreign military threat the US will step in to protect them. Even Venezuela and Cuba have that protection, as if any nation tries to invade either one the US and the OAS will step in to defend them. It is very much a form of "Pax Americana", as if anybody notices actual conflicts between American Nations are rather low. And compared to nations on other parts of the planet, they all have rather small military budgets. Because if they actually like the US or not, they all live under that umbrella of protection.

Only the outliers on the edges of quick US response like Brazil and Argentina have any kind of real military forces on the continents. And even then, it is not much. Argentina for example does have over 200 tanks. Tanks that they had built for them by West Germany. That alone should give an idea how dated they are.

To give an even better idea, the National Bolivarian Armed Forces of Venezuela has a whopping 123,000 members. And they actually do have tanks, about 92 T-72s they bought in the early 2000s.
I'm waiting for Trump to order drone attacks on cartel targets. That would help Mexico's military.
 
The Venezuelan Navy had one of their largest and most modern naval ships sunk in 2020. The Naiguata was built for them in Spain, and was a fairly modern patrol boat, 1 of 3 of the Guaicamacuto class boats.

And what was it sunk by? Mines? Enemy action? Fighting pirates or drug cartels?

None of the above. They were essentially trying to hijack a cruise ship in International waters, and the cruise ship sank it.
LOL. Zavulon keeps trying to recruit these inept militaries for his war with the US over Panama.
 
I'm waiting for Trump to order drone attacks on cartel targets. That would help Mexico's weak military.

Only if Mexico requests it. The US could do it with ease, right from the bases in New Mexico and Texas. But the Mexican government would have to request that. And I can't see them ever doing that.

For some reason, Mexico seems completely incapable of either dealing with their cartels, or asking others for assistance.
 
Only if Mexico requests it. The US could do it with ease, right from the bases in New Mexico and Texas. But the Mexican government would have to request that. And I can't see them ever doing that.

For some reason, Mexico seems completely incapable of either dealing with their cartels, or asking others for assistance.
The reason is very simple. Mexico is and always has been utterly corrupt. Officials at all level s would rather take the Cartel's money than do the jobs the Mexican taxpayers are paying them to do.
 
Only if Mexico requests it. The US could do it with ease, right from the bases in New Mexico and Texas. But the Mexican government would have to request that. And I can't see them ever doing that.

For some reason, Mexico seems completely incapable of either dealing with their cartels, or asking others for assistance.
As long as the US keeps losing 100,000 citizens.a year to drugs Trump should take out as many cartel targets as he can identify.
 
Officials at all level s would rather take the Cartel's money than do the jobs

In that, I will actually with damned good reason state that it most certainly is not all.

A mayor in Mexico's central San Luis Potosi state, who was a member of the ruling Morena party, was shot dead on Sunday along with three other people, local authorities said, while a prominent vineyard owner was murdered in another central region.[/qupte]

A Mexican congressman who was a member of the ruling coalition was shot dead in coastal Veracruz state on Monday, officials said, marking yet another politician being targeted by violence in the country.

Only a week in office and the mayor of a small Mexican town is assassinated — as cartel violence continues to spiral out of control.

Mexico City's police special operations chief has been killed in the capital, local authorities said, the latest in a series of attacks targeting officials and politicians across the country.

And I could probably list a hundred more, those are simply the most notable ones in the last six months.

There have been a hell of a lot of good cops and politicians there who have been killed by the cartels because they are trying to stop it. But until the country gets serious about taking their nation back I can't see it ever ending. And it sure as hell does not help that it is the US demand for drugs that is letting this happen in the first place.
 
1. Mexico is a US ally and business partner.
Same way Ukraine was a Russian ally and business partner. Who said, that cartels can't become a new government?

2. Hundreds ot mercenaries killed. The US doesn't miss its targets.
Less than one hundred. And thousands of American proxies were killed, too. And thats how Russia, Turkey, America, Iran and Israel divided their zones of influence in Syria.

3. Conventional capabilities are all the "fangs" the US needs.
How many "conventional soldiers" you'll need to occupy and control Mexico, Cuba, Venezuela, Colombia and Panama itself, and don't allow local guerillas (backed by other Latam contries, Russia and China) degrade the work of the canal? And, if you declare that you won't use nukes in literally any situation, it means, that China may be as provocative as it wants. They might even give nukes to Venezuela. Why not?

4. Guerilla warfare along the canal is nonsense. Drones and robots are very deadly.
Yep. And thats why local guerillas (and regular Armies of Panama's Alliance) will use them. Good luck to protect the canal from, say, Iskander (or even Oreshnik) missiles.

5. Ukraine is in Russia's backyard, the same way Cuba is in America's. As long as they are not a threat peaceful co-existence is called for.
Yes. But what if, one of the sides doesn't accept suggested terms of the "peaceful coexistence"? What if they create a threat?
 
Last edited:
LOL. Zavulon keeps trying to recruit these inept militaries for his war with the US over Panama.
I'm not trying to recruit them. I just suggested to play a little game - what if, China and Russia will try to recruit and build up them. What if they invest significant money, material and intellectual resources in this project?
 

Forum List

Back
Top