WI the Turbot War became an actual war?

This might be ASB, but what if Canada went to war with Spain over the Turbot War? Would the rest of the EU get behind Spain? How would the UK react to their former colony getting into a war without them? What would the US do?
 
It's not going to be a regular war. If the Canadians go through the effort of landing in Spain, or vice-versa, then you have to involve ASBs.
 

Sachyriel

Banned
Canada has the advantage, right? I mean, they have to cross the Atlantic to come fish off our coasts, which is what it was about. Our planes don't have the nightmare of floating out in the sea on a big target (which has hunting submarines...yeah, Canada has those...somewhere in our frozen wasteland), they can be launched from land to attack the Spanish Fleet. We don't have an Aircraft Carrier, but we do have the home field advantage.

Unless Mexico Zerg Rushes through the American Midwest and gets into Canada, we might be able to drag this war on long enough to claim we are victorious.;):p:rolleyes::D:cool:
 
Who starts the war? If the Spanish attack first, Canada invokes Article V of the North Atlantic Treaty, and Canada will win. If Canada attacks first, Spain does that, and the Spanish win.
 
The Turbot War was Canada's fishing minister Tobin's insane idea, mostly against the opposition of the rest of the canadian government. Using canadian vessels to protect canadian fishermen's rights in canadian waters I can understand. Using warplanes and warships to launch attacks on undefended ships in international waters to make an example is going a little bit too far in my book, and the canadian government knew it and would have never allowed Tobin's insanity of going that far. Still, Tobin's insanity deserves some kind of prize: even after the spanish government had accepted all canadian exigences (mostly because a) the spanish fleet didn't have the capability to project force an ocean away and b)the spanish governement could never consider the idea of a NATO ally backstabbing them out of the blue for a minor issue and was caught understandably unprepared), he ordered a canadian destroyer to attack the spanish vessels in its range under his own responsability: only Jean Chretien's personal intervention stopped shit from hitting the fan. Yes, as ludicrous as it sounds, in 1995 Canada and Spain were only minutes away from a naval confrontation in the middle of the Atlantic. If it had happened, and even when the canadian navy would have destroyed the spanish patrol boats in minutes, the diplomatic backslash against Canada would have been inmense, and Canada's loss of international prestige would have been enough to offset whatever they could have gained from that.

The confrontation was something so unexpected and unlikely that, when the spanish ambassador received a notification from the canadian government detailing the canadian intentions to attack all spanish vessels near canadian waters and their rules of engagement, he thought it was an April Fools' joke.

Still, the idea of two modern and technically allied fleets from the mid'90's duking it out in the middle of the Atlantic in a limited scale is too cool to just let it pass.
 
The Turbot War was Canada's fishing minister Tobin's insane idea, mostly against the opposition of the rest of the canadian government. Using canadian vessels to protect canadian fishermen's rights in canadian waters I can understand. Using warplanes and warships to launch attacks on undefended ships in international waters to make an example is going a little bit too far in my book, and the canadian government knew it and would have never allowed Tobin's insanity of going that far. Still, Tobin's insanity deserves some kind of prize: even after the spanish government had accepted all canadian exigences (mostly because a) the spanish fleet didn't have the capability to project force an ocean away and b)the spanish governement could never consider the idea of a NATO ally backstabbing them out of the blue for a minor issue and was caught understandably unprepared), he ordered a canadian destroyer to attack the spanish vessels in its range under his own responsability: only Jean Chretien's personal intervention stopped shit from hitting the fan. Yes, as ludicrous as it sounds, in 1995 Canada and Spain were only minutes away from a naval confrontation in the middle of the Atlantic. If it had happened, and even when the canadian navy would have destroyed the spanish patrol boats in minutes, the diplomatic backslash against Canada would have been inmense, and Canada's loss of international prestige would have been enough to offset whatever they could have gained from that.

The confrontation was something so unexpected and unlikely that, when the spanish ambassador received a notification from the canadian government detailing the canadian intentions to attack all spanish vessels near canadian waters and their rules of engagement, he thought it was an April Fools' joke.

Still, the idea of two modern and technically allied fleets from the mid'90's duking it out in the middle of the Atlantic in a limited scale is too cool to just let it pass.

I agree that it is pretty much ASB, but it would be kind of cool to see just what it takes to sink a modern Aircraft Carrier. (I've got this vision of a couple of squadrons of CF-18s ripple firing off as many Harpoon missiles as they can carry while another two squadrons provide top cover. ASB, sure, but made of pure awesome. Same goes for the aircraft carrier having to eat missile spam.) Also F-18 vs F-18. (CF-188 vs whatever the Spanish designation for their F-18 is.)
 

Sachyriel

Banned
I agree that it is pretty much ASB, but it would be kind of cool to see just what it takes to sink a modern Aircraft Carrier. (I've got this vision of a couple of squadrons of CF-18s ripple firing off as many Harpoon missiles as they can carry while another two squadrons provide top cover. ASB, sure, but made of pure awesome. Same goes for the aircraft carrier having to eat missile spam.) Also F-18 vs F-18. (CF-188 vs whatever the Spanish designation for their F-18 is.)

I thought the Spanish used Harriers?:confused:
 
On their "through-deck cruiser" to use the RN bureaucracy-evading lingo. :p The EdA uses Alpha and Bravo-model Bugs.
 
If Spain attacks their navy gets to play with the RN - for a very short while...
there was a huge amount of support here in the UK for the fishing war, especially in the places where the fishing industry is big.
Whats the USA and nato going to do? Antagonise Canada and the UK, or Spain..no contest, really...
 

Sachyriel

Banned
On their "through-deck cruiser" to use the RN bureaucracy-evading lingo. :p The EdA uses Alpha and Bravo-model Bugs.

Come on, I don't know that lingo.

If Spain attacks their navy gets to play with the RN - for a very short while...
there was a huge amount of support here in the UK for the fishing war, especially in the places where the fishing industry is big.
Whats the USA and nato going to do? Antagonise Canada and the UK, or Spain..no contest, really...

So we could've counted on British help? :D
 

Thande

Donor
So we could've counted on British help? :D

It's an interesting question what Britain would have done.

On the one hand: Commonwealth ties worn thin by 1995. On the other hand: Gibraltar.

Realistically John Major would probably sit uncomfortably on the fence...unless perhaps some of the Tories had the idea that the only thing that could save them from Blair was to reprise the Falklands War...
 

Sachyriel

Banned
It's an interesting question what Britain would have done.

On the one hand: Commonwealth ties worn thin by 1995. On the other hand: Gibraltar.

Realistically John Major would probably sit uncomfortably on the fence...unless perhaps some of the Tories had the idea that the only thing that could save them from Blair was to reprise the Falklands War...

... You'd attack smal islands off the coast of the Americas? I don't think France would let go of St. Pierre and Miquelon.
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
While wars have started over lesser issues than this, those generally happened when there was one one around with a trace of common sense.

That wasn't the case here.

But, to go with this to the illogical conclusion...

The USN, which OWNS the North Atlantic (actually which owns any body of water it sets its sights on at will) would do what the RN used to do, interpose itself between the kids and tell them to go home and calm down.

If you REALLY want a war, the U.S. has to choose between its closest ally, best trading partner, with which it coincidentally also shares the longest unfortified frontier on the Planet, along with a joint air defense zone on the one hand and a country on the far side of the Atlantic where it has a couple military bases. Gee, wonder how that decision will fall out?:rolleyes:
 

Thande

Donor
... You'd attack smal islands off the coast of the Americas? I don't think France would let go of St. Pierre and Miquelon.

I mean just get in a war with Evil Garlic-Eating Foreigners in defence of Plucky Little Canada. Or that's how the press would treat it, anyway.
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
I agree that it is pretty much ASB, but it would be kind of cool to see just what it takes to sink a modern Aircraft Carrier. (I've got this vision of a couple of squadrons of CF-18s ripple firing off as many Harpoon missiles as they can carry while another two squadrons provide top cover. ASB, sure, but made of pure awesome. Same goes for the aircraft carrier having to eat missile spam.) Also F-18 vs F-18. (CF-188 vs whatever the Spanish designation for their F-18 is.)

Where does this engagement occur? Red Flag at Nellis?

Gee, if only there was a modern CARRIER available for the engagement. Sadly there isn't.

The Armada Espanola operated a single baby flattop at the time. No cats, no arrestor gear, V/STOL only. It had now added a second deck, but both are more like the U.S. LHA than a carrier.

Canada doesn't even have that level of capacity.

You want a full on carrier battle the only real chance is still the USN vs. the Russians (at least for a few more years); although the Kuznetsov isn't really much a carrier as things go, it is still a full on carrier.
 

Sachyriel

Banned
Where does this engagement occur? Red Flag at Nellis?

Gee, if only there was a modern CARRIER available for the engagement. Sadly there isn't.

The Armada Espanola operated a single baby flattop at the time. No cats, no arrestor gear, V/STOL only. It had now added a second deck, but both are more like the U.S. LHA than a carrier.

Canada doesn't even have that level of capacity.

You want a full on carrier battle the only real chance is still the USN vs. the Russians (at least for a few more years); although the Kuznetsov isn't really much a carrier as things go, it is still a full on carrier.

Noes, the Spanish are coming toward Canada';s coast, perhaps we can send land-based aircraft at their Carrier.
 
While wars have started over lesser issues than this, those generally happened when there was one one around with a trace of common sense.

That wasn't the case here.

But, to go with this to the illogical conclusion...

The USN, which OWNS the North Atlantic (actually which owns any body of water it sets its sights on at will) would do what the RN used to do, interpose itself between the kids and tell them to go home and calm down.

If you REALLY want a war, the U.S. has to choose between its closest ally, best trading partner, with which it coincidentally also shares the longest unfortified frontier on the Planet, along with a joint air defense zone on the one hand and a country on the far side of the Atlantic where it has a couple military bases. Gee, wonder how that decision will fall out?:rolleyes:
Right. But say Canada sinks Spanish civilian vessels in international waters or something along those lines, giving Spain a legitimate and irrefutable casus belli. And the Spanish government invokes NATO before diplomacy can stop the nonsense. Then, the Canadian and Spanish government can't settle the issue diplomatically. The Spanish fleet moves into the Northern Atlantic, god knows with which realistic mission, a USN CVBG tries to stop them but both fleets are under orders from their respective governments to not to back down and shots are finally exchanged between the stubborn Spanish and American fleets.
How will the EU react politically, not military, regarding NATO? In this ridiculous scenario a Treaty member has taken war actions against another weaker member, and the most powerful member of the alliance has backed the rogue member.

In any case, not even power hungry politicians can screw things that badly
 

Sachyriel

Banned
Right. But say Canada sinks Spanish civilian vessels in international waters or something along those lines, giving Spain a legitimate and irrefutable casus belli. And the Spanish government invokes NATO before diplomacy can stop the nonsense. Then, the Canadian and Spanish government can't settle the issue diplomatically. The Spanish fleet moves into the Northern Atlantic, god knows with which realistic mission, a USN CVBG tries to stop them but both fleets are under orders from their respective governments to not to back down and shots are finally exchanged between the stubborn Spanish and American fleets.
How will the EU react politically, not military, regarding NATO? In this ridiculous scenario a Treaty member has taken war actions against another weaker member, and the most powerful member of the alliance has backed the rogue member.

In any case, not even power hungry politicians can screw things that badly

Wait wait, Canada took war actions against Spain, which has an Aircraft Carrier and more people as well as a longer military tradition than us and it's the weaker member?:confused::eek:

:D
 
Top