# In Soviet Russia, book writes you! Dah!



## BurntMason84 (Mar 5, 2015)

So I've got one project I've been working on, and have been doing copious amounts of research.  To the point where I've done more research than writing actually, because I want to make it as accurate as I can, despite being a fictional piece.  I've kind of run into one snafu though, and wondering if anyone had any advice on it.  Here's the breakdown:

*The Jist*:  The story is a bit of a play on Red Dawn, but more in depth.  A sort of historical fiction, it's based in the year 2000.  The coup that, in essence, brought the downfall of the Soviet Union, happens, but with a twist.  A younger bunch of military leaders actually foil the coup from the original conspirators that we actually know about, and reinstate a Soviet Union.  They do a play on the "perestroika" that Mikhail Gorbachev was trying to instate to a great deal of success.  A touch of renewed hope, patriotism, and a kinder, gentler, more understanding Soviet Union leadership brings them back into full power, and actually turns the table on their previous views of the hard, stone faced Soviet Union we may have grown up with.  In the year 2001, the United States is attacked in a similar fashion to 9/11, though more with dirty bombs in populated areas and government facilities.  The Soviet Union launches huge care packages to the United States in the shape of massive container ships which have anti-radiation supplies, thousands of specialists (veterans of Chernobyl clean up), and general relief resources.  The US reluctantly agrees to accept the help, as the US has become the "bad guy" in the Cold War, according to international opinion, as USSR is reformed and trying to better themselves.  Unfortunately, the US is right in it's suspicions and the USSR container ships land with thousands of soldiers, armor, air and support, surprising the US and taking east coast, Hawaii and Alaska, nearly neutralizing the US's naval power.  And so the story begins...

*   The Issue*:  I have the technology, the money, and the tools I need to make it better.  What I don't have, is strategic knowledge.  I was in the Navy, but only for a stint.  I have friends and family who are all in the military, but no lifers or career men/women.  Top it off, we're all enlisted, and I can understand squad/unit tactics, but overall military strategy... well, that is a bit out of my grasp.  I feel that I have a understanding of it, albeit slight and a novice understanding at best.  So didn't know if anyone knew of any resources of people with experience I might be able to utilize?

   Also, the second one is the effects of taking a city, say like New York.  I'm having a hard time trying to wrap my head around how a large, enemy force with the technological capability of the US, would conquer a city so large and so vast, full of millions of civilians.  How would you go about cordoning off areas, feeding that many people, ensuring that water, power and so forth would still work.  Would it operate on an indentured servitude style, where people would work to maintain livable conditions for all under the eyes of a task master?  I'm curious.


----------



## PatriciaLoupee (Mar 8, 2015)

I like the idea of the Trojan Horse-esque containers. If I understand what you are asking for, try studying the take-over of cities during famous wars, particularly WWII, where it happened on several ocasions, and just update the technology. 

Abou the way to maintain a city under control... Destroy the local law enforcement, take over energy power plants and water treatment stations, just to get you started. Most of the worlds big cities are already sub-divided in districts to make administration easier, so you would need to assign a team leader for every district, with people working under their power to distribute resources and keep things under control.

Some poetic license is allowed in a subject like this, since the Armed Forces are always updating in technology and strategy.


----------



## BurntMason84 (Mar 9, 2015)

I will check that out.  I'm a bit of a history buff, but have always followed the front lines bit of wars.  Come to think of it, most of published (or at least widely and most popularly published) material is on great battles, strategic advances, and so forth.  Not on the administrative, transitioning and maintaining seized lands, assets, and prisoners/liberated.

Totally love the idea of the districts... a few bases of operations, create walls to divide the city into areas with guards at points, but most of the "representation" comes from newly elected officials within designated districts.  Keeps the populace separate to dissuade revolts, allows for a bit of freedoms so they don't feel completely oppressed, and creates a trust (even if it's fragile) to maintain peace and keep good intentions flowing, such as freely flowing water, power, etc.  Totally awesome, hope your ok if I utilize that idea and expand upon it?


----------



## PatriciaLoupee (Mar 9, 2015)

BurntMason84 said:


> [...] hope your ok if I utilize that idea and expand upon it?



Completely fine, that's why I commented here in this thread: to help with ideas. I'm glad you were able to find something useful in my rant...


----------



## SirJohnnyBoy (Mar 11, 2015)

I've actually had a project that primarily focused on an invasion, but for much more modern times and on the west coast. And it took a long time to figure out. I've done most of my research through games, if you can believe it, but games that focus and realistically recreate military strategy, but I also studied real battles, observing maps and the progression of battle-lines. Throughout history, battles tend to end through two ways: A heavy push through the front lines, or flanking maneuvers. Of course, technology changed, and today you can reach out and touch anyone in a battlefield. Air superiority is an extreme importance to gain a foothold. For your example of taking New York City, destabilizing its infrastructures through proxy forces, the main problem is the response they'll receive unless they're immediately backed up, a steady stream of supplies, air support, naval support. Then it gets easier, since they can hold Manhattan and defend the bridges. US forces have to push through a funnel to get somewhere. The downside is the Russians defending it will have little room to move around. They need tanks, anti-tank vehicles, and a huge amount to turn that island into a bunker and be able to hold it.

Holding it is even worse, however. 7 million civilians, and the NYPD. Once a main force lands, that proxy force might be tasked to collecting civilians, but keeping them from revolt, riots... It's difficult. I fear I can't suggest any ways of containment and quell a civilian populace. Patricia has some good ideas, though.

But, if all else fails, a very Russian indiscriminate artillery bombardment sometimes works... A little violent and I sound a little sadistic saying it, but it frees you up from dealing with huge problems, especially with dealing with invading the US...


----------



## SociallyAwkward (Mar 11, 2015)

Quite a lot to take into consideration in regards to an invasion. Usually there are consolidation units, these range from Military Police, Logistics, Engineer and Signal units. They usually come after the fighting has moved on, but sometimes are used in a rolling front capacity. 

In regards to how the invasion would take place. It entirely depends on the geography, the units at your disposal, the units at the enemies disposal, logistics and lines of communication and military doctrine (to name but a few). 

If you're looking to do research then look up Einsatzgruppen and the SS, they were used to control the conquered lands whilst the Wehrmacht pushed forward in the second world war. Also, they used local groups, usually ones who were disenfranchised or had a reason to hate the original Government. The British used a divide and conquer strategy, especially in India, might also be worth looking at.

Naturally every army, time period and what not will to it different so you have plenty of room for artistic license. Military strategy is something I've studied A LOT, that and I find it fascinating so I love it. If you want to ask more then I'd be happy to help. If you want to get a good grasp of strategy, and things to take into consideration insofar as military planning goes, then your first port of call should be Sun Tzu's the art of war.


----------



## BurntMason84 (Mar 13, 2015)

*SirJohnnyBoy:  *I've done the same, as games still give you basic understanding of tactics and what have you.  I'm with you too, on the classic pushes or flanks that usually win.  I just cannot see that falling in on urban warfare though, street by street and block by block.  Then again, like you mentioned, artillery levels a few blocks too and opens up a field for battle compared to window by window.  The kicker with this too is that most battles in history take place initially on fields or wide expanses of land, and usually when they reach cities, much of the populace has time to leave, generally becoming refugees elsewhere.  I think I'm thinking about it too hard, it's probably just going to have to be an exceptionally bloody affair.

I thought about the NYPD and police forces too, but at that point, with a surprise attack, I'm wondering if their priority would be too evacuate people, as they're not equipped to deal with a full blown military force with numbers.  Despite it all though, like you mentioned about the artillery, it might just come down to quelling the numbers and making examples.

This may sound dumb, but I've done logistics for a long time, and I'm just wondering how would they feed a city?  Seriously, I cannot see companies like Wal-Mart willing to risk sending employees into cities to deliver groceries, or the occupying force even allowing it.  I'm guessing they'd take over processing plants and local farms... perhaps ship huge loads in from Cuba and other Southern American sympathizer countries once they secure ports.  The bare necessities, water, flour, etc., maybe?

*SociallyAwkward:*  You may regret offering help with the strategy, as I will take you up on that whole heartedly!  I've found a few old Soviet field strategy books for officers and NCO's, pretty rowdy, especially the old ones.  Strictly about numbers and persistence, kind of wild.  I had briefly gone over Sun Tzu's for a report years ago in school, and tried my utmost to try to read War & Peace (utmost being about umpteen pages out of the thousands), but I may have to give it another go.

I did check out the WWII Nazi tactics with logistics, though I could only take it with a grain of salt.  Lots of info, but a lot of viciousness in their efficiency, a sort of by the numbers instead of by the people.  So got the basic premise of it though, just trying to adopt it to a modern _Information Age_ where their still trying to maintain a better image (despite invading) than the Nazi's, and tip toeing about in how the United Nations would react.

I am thinking though, of them fully adopting "big brother" technology for the conquered cities, completely razing any right people had to privacy by implementing a slew of high tech surveillance systems, techs, and even hackers (mercenary or ally alike).  Especially when they raid well-to-do contractors of the DoD, their companies, sites and kidnapping their people.


----------



## PatriciaLoupee (Mar 13, 2015)

BurntMason84 said:


> I thought about the NYPD and police forces too, but at that point, with a surprise attack, I'm wondering if their priority would be too evacuate people, as they're not equipped to deal with a full blown military force with numbers.  Despite it all though, like you mentioned about the artillery, it might just come down to quelling the numbers and making examples.
> 
> This may sound dumb, but I've done logistics for a long time, and I'm just wondering how would they feed a city?  Seriously, I cannot see companies like Wal-Mart willing to risk sending employees into cities to deliver groceries, or the occupying force even allowing it.  I'm guessing they'd take over processing plants and local farms... perhaps ship huge loads in from Cuba and other Southern American sympathizer countries once they secure ports.  The bare necessities, water, flour, etc., maybe?



The police would certainly take care of the civillians and themselves, with the aid of the fire department, probably - BUT, they would be the ones signaling for help to the National Security and Armed Forces, that's what I said one of the top priorities from the invading side should be neutralizing them.

About the food and water: NY must have a central water treatment facility (if not more than one), so controlling by them, they can keep on delivereng water to each and every tap. NY has also a heck of big naval port. So whatever is not already there, can be delivered through it. A weekly or monthly ration can be delivered to every district and distributed by their personell.


----------



## BurntMason84 (Mar 16, 2015)

PatriciaLoupee said:


> The police would certainly take care of the civillians and themselves, with the aid of the fire department, probably - BUT, they would be the ones signaling for help to the National Security and Armed Forces, that's what I said one of the top priorities from the invading side should be neutralizing them.
> 
> About the food and water: NY must have a central water treatment facility (if not more than one), so controlling by them, they can keep on delivereng water to each and every tap. NY has also a heck of big naval port. So whatever is not already there, can be delivered through it. A weekly or monthly ration can be delivered to every district and distributed by their personell.



Maybe you're right... SWAT and other departments of the police force are more adept at handling conflict rather than throngs of civilians.  Maybe they'd be the first on scene/eye-and-ears of the military when they counter attack.

While the water wouldn't be a problem, the food and power is.  I wonder if they'd be able to manage power through the local utilities, as war machines, digital included, would create huge draws of electricity, if the power was from local power plants.  I believe much of the east coast has nuclear power provided, so I'm curious how they'd strike at those with high risks of meltdowns occurring during an incursion.  As for the rations, maybe good old fashioned "soup kitchens".  Food/slop is served two to three times per day, which also allows them to take role calls, perhaps even listen into conversations through electronic listening devices as people congregate?


----------

