DBWI: Operation Starfall

Please see the background from here, I have made number of changes but the grand structure are still the same.

This is gonna be borderline......no, very ASB, but since there is no magic or time travel etc etc involved, I'm posting it here.

Operation Starfall:

With the capitulation of Britain, France and victory of battle of Bermuda, the entente power’s naval supremacy had completely collapsed. We have finally dust off the craziest military plan we've ever made: Operation Starfall, the landing of North America.

The first would be around Nova Scotia, the least prioritized of the three. The goal would be first to gain a strong hold onto the island and use it as a staging area for a later attack on the Gulf of St. Lawrence. This would give the us direct access to crucial cities in Canada such as Montreal, Toronto, and most importantly Ottawa. This would not only push Canada to defeat but also give Imperial forces a strong hold in the Great Lakes region, which is very important for other invasion forces’ success.

The second landing would be on to Mexican controlled Alvarado, Veracruz, the United States had already occupied vast amount of northern territories, with the help of European reinforcements, the Mexicans could finally start to push the Americans out of their Fatherland.

The Third would be a direct attack on the mouth of the Mississippi, just outside of New Orleans. There would definitely be stiff resistance to defend this valuable port; however it would be vital for the Imperial Powers to take it. This would give us access to the Mississippi River as well as all of the branches that stem off of it. We would attempt to work their way up the river until we reach Minneapolis and Chicago. A successful offensive in this area would secure the Great Lakes for the Imperial powers, assuming that the northern landing troops would be successful taking the other side via the Gulf of St. Lawrence. A control over the Mississippi would cut the US in half, making organization between the two divided sides very difficult and crippling the US defense.

After the success of Mississippi landing, The State of Louisiana would be the first state to re-establish the exiled confederate government; the stars and bars flag would be rise again as a signal for all the oppressed southerners to resist the tyranny of northern aggressors. Of course, the "exiled" Confederate government would be completely controlled by us.

The fourth landing would be a direct attack on the Chesapeake Bay. This landing would be much later than the first two, and made up of more or less every soldier we had available. The first two invasions should have weakened the American military and will, making the invasion slightly easier. However, that does not mean that it will be a clean sweep for us.


Herr Reichskanzler, what do you think about such plan? Please decide quickly, the Americans would rearm their naval powers if we do not act fast.

02.11.1919
General Staff Daley Graf Dáithí von Westmeath

Operation Starfall.png
 
Reichskanzler isn't available, he has dystentary and I'm his fourth in command and taking his position for this week. I think his second in command will recover soon and he himself should be back in three weeks.

Skip all but the Louisiana landing. If Britain capitulated, Canada should follow its stated foreign policy and stop bugging us.

Aside from the main reserve units that will not leave the Fatherland, we have a great deal of deployable manpower. However, I suggest only using 1/8 of it in order to conserve future options.

Once we secure Louisiana, we shouldn't establish a new CSA as that has some unfortunate implications. Let's just call it the indepdent Louisiana government or something like that.

Our objective is not conquest of such a huge area, but to destroy the willpower to fight. Unfortunately, the capital will likely be fortified and the undefended west coast is difficult to reach.

After securing Louisiana, I suggest a triple pronged attack, not to gain further territory but to reach critical areas. Remember how the machine made cavalry obsolete for the full frontal attack, but not their roles in pursuit, reconnaissance, and flanking? We have forgotten the use of cavalry, but in the early days of the Western front it was a war of maneuverability and not of trenches. Infantry covered 24 kilometers per day and cavalry triple that. Even the defeated French admit that if we had 3,000 extra cavalrymen a week before the Marne (in a battle which consists of dozens of thousands), we would have neutralized a good portion of their undeployed artillery and many of the machines guns would not have been set up. This put us in a good position to win the Battle of the Marne, if there would even be a Marne. When both sides dug too many trenches, there simply wasn't any room to flank anymore!

This is what I suggest we do. Send a party of 18,000 cavalry raiders towards Los Angeles, 6,000 towards Arkansas, and 5,000 towards S Carolina, perhaps Charleston. We give them a week's worth of provisions, ammunition, and some war script to requisition from the locals and be redeemed 3 years after the war. Their goal is to eat everything on site, avoid the forts, and destroy anything mechanized, this includes the factories.

This sounds suicidal, but around 75% of the Americans are deployed against the Mexicans and most of the rest are scattered in various garrisons. The biggest problem is danger of running out of supplies, and I have trained many to recognize edibles in the Americas. I also know where the federal armories are... and which ones have few guards and have a place where one can sneak up to 100 meters close before even being seen. Most are defended by men... and padlocks, not walls.

By picking off undefended places instead of fortifications around the Chesapeake bay and Hudson Valley, we should be able to get the manufacturing. Unless America is prepared to go back to hand craftsmanship, this should cripple political will.

All hail the Hapsburgs.
 
Reichskanzler isn't available, he has dystentary and I'm his fourth in command and taking his position for this week. I think his second in command will recover soon and he himself should be back in three weeks.

Skip all but the Louisiana landing. If Britain capitulated, Canada should follow its stated foreign policy and stop bugging us.

Aside from the main reserve units that will not leave the Fatherland, we have a great deal of deployable manpower. However, I suggest only using 1/8 of it in order to conserve future options.

Once we secure Louisiana, we shouldn't establish a new CSA as that has some unfortunate implications. Let's just call it the indepdent Louisiana government or something like that.

Our objective is not conquest of such a huge area, but to destroy the willpower to fight. Unfortunately, the capital will likely be fortified and the undefended west coast is difficult to reach.

After securing Louisiana, I suggest a triple pronged attack, not to gain further territory but to reach critical areas. Remember how the machine made cavalry obsolete for the full frontal attack, but not their roles in pursuit, reconnaissance, and flanking? We have forgotten the use of cavalry, but in the early days of the Western front it was a war of maneuverability and not of trenches. Infantry covered 24 kilometers per day and cavalry triple that. Even the defeated French admit that if we had 3,000 extra cavalrymen a week before the Marne (in a battle which consists of dozens of thousands), we would have neutralized a good portion of their undeployed artillery and many of the machines guns would not have been set up. This put us in a good position to win the Battle of the Marne, if there would even be a Marne. When both sides dug too many trenches, there simply wasn't any room to flank anymore!

This is what I suggest we do. Send a party of 18,000 cavalry raiders towards Los Angeles, 6,000 towards Arkansas, and 5,000 towards S Carolina, perhaps Charleston. We give them a week's worth of provisions, ammunition, and some war script to requisition from the locals and be redeemed 3 years after the war. Their goal is to eat everything on site, avoid the forts, and destroy anything mechanized, this includes the factories.

This sounds suicidal, but around 75% of the Americans are deployed against the Mexicans and most of the rest are scattered in various garrisons. The biggest problem is danger of running out of supplies, and I have trained many to recognize edibles in the Americas. I also know where the federal armories are... and which ones have few guards and have a place where one can sneak up to 100 meters close before even being seen. Most are defended by men... and padlocks, not walls.

By picking off undefended places instead of fortifications around the Chesapeake bay and Hudson Valley, we should be able to get the manufacturing. Unless America is prepared to go back to hand craftsmanship, this should cripple political will.

All hail the Hapsburgs.


Thank you, we shall re-write the plan immediately, a few question remains:

By skipping all of the other landings, I assume we still send reinforcements to Mexico? Mexican themselves could not hold much longer, furthering war on their home soil would definitely leads to the "abdication" of his imperial majesty Maximilian.

By order of the Reichskanzler, the zeppelin bomber squadrons and it's crews had already been transported to Cuba waiting for further deployment, shall we deploy it with the reinforcement of the Mexican front or send it to Louisiana? Also, consider due to the ambiguity of Swiss sovereignty, we never signed the Geneva convention, should we utilize our massive stocks of chemical weapons on urban areas?

P.S: The eastern front is a mess! White, Red and Black (us) were all dragged into a massive battle royal! The Reichskanzler must be mad to sacrifice so many men, just to restore Nicholas II, the guy who betrayed the alliance and invade us in the first place!

That old bastard is 89 now and still kicking, why don't he just die!?
 
Top