Jump to content

Water War Template--please comment


Recommended Posts

I'm brainstorming various ideas and I'd like a reality check on this one...

 

"Water War Template"

 

Basic concept: Water is already reaching dangerous shortages in some places. Especially when the territory is disputed, and perhaps if it is not, but still temptingly close to a border, a nation might decide to seize territory. This is not an invasion--it is simply a land grab. But it is land with a river on it (or both shores of a river that both countries share). Naturally, the country that has lost territory will be upset and will try to get it back, perhaps the help of allies or an international (perhaps UN) coalition.

 

I imagine that any valuable resource in a border area might be a target for a similar land grab.

 

How plausible is this concept? My gut feeling is that it could be used as the basis for MANY small wars in Harpoon. What do you all think?

 

In terms of Harpoon, there might be various battles, depending on the sides and what assets they have...

 

1) An air invasion of the disputed territory, either to take it or to take it back--aircraft vs. land targets

 

2) Air superiority operations, if either side has enough air assets to make it worthwhile--this would actually come before the invasion but I'm listing it second because it might not happen in some situations

 

3) Perhaps the coalition decides to use a naval blockade to punish the aggressor nation rather than attack it directly, but the blockade might come under attack from the aggressor nation or from one of its allies trying to get past (or perhaps simply destroy) the blockade.

 

Thoughts? Comments? Observations?

 

Mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A related comment...

 

I imagine #3 could be used for a much wider range of situations. For ANY reason, a UN blockade might be used to punish a nation for some bad behavior. However, the nation in question or its allies might seek to get past (or attack) the blockade.

 

A contemporary example...what if the UN decided the best way to force Assad from power in Syria was to blockade Syria, deny them access to the sea for trade, etc.? Syria would probably use aircraft against the blockade. Russia or some other ally of Syria might try to break past the blockade with a convoy.

 

Thoughts? Observations?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Mark,

 

A related comment...

 

I imagine #3 could be used for a much wider range of situations. For ANY reason, a UN blockade might be used to punish a nation for some bad behavior. However, the nation in question or its allies might seek to get past (or attack) the blockade.

 

A contemporary example...what if the UN decided the best way to force Assad from power in Syria was to blockade Syria, deny them access to the sea for trade, etc.? Syria would probably use aircraft against the blockade. Russia or some other ally of Syria might try to break past the blockade with a convoy.

 

Thoughts? Observations?

 

While I think that the basic concept is ok and gives room for plenty scenarios, the Syrian example may be a bit unrealistic: It does not look like as the Russians or Chinese will ever support a blockade. Thus there would be no UN decision on this. Furthermore, IF UN wuold decide to raise a blockade , this would only be possible with positive Russian vote. And if so, why then should the Russians try to break that same blockade they agreed with?

 

Thus the only way would be a coalition led blockade - without UN support - and the Russians supporting Syria. This would be no small thing then, it would be WW III.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mark,

 

I'm brainstorming various ideas and I'd like a reality check on this one...

 

"Water War Template"

 

Basic concept: Water is already reaching dangerous shortages in some places. Especially when the territory is disputed, and perhaps if it is not, but still temptingly close to a border, a nation might decide to seize territory. This is not an invasion--it is simply a land grab. But it is land with a river on it (or both shores of a river that both countries share). Naturally, the country that has lost territory will be upset and will try to get it back, perhaps the help of allies or an international (perhaps UN) coalition.

 

I imagine that any valuable resource in a border area might be a target for a similar land grab.

 

How plausible is this concept? My gut feeling is that it could be used as the basis for MANY small wars in Harpoon. What do you all think?

 

In terms of Harpoon, there might be various battles, depending on the sides and what assets they have...

 

1) An air invasion of the disputed territory, either to take it or to take it back--aircraft vs. land targets

 

2) Air superiority operations, if either side has enough air assets to make it worthwhile--this would actually come before the invasion but I'm listing it second because it might not happen in some situations

 

3) Perhaps the coalition decides to use a naval blockade to punish the aggressor nation rather than attack it directly, but the blockade might come under attack from the aggressor nation or from one of its allies trying to get past (or perhaps simply destroy) the blockade.

 

Thoughts? Comments? Observations?

 

Mark

 

I think 1) and 3) are the most realistic options, usable for many scenarios.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...