Who want some Divisions?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 25, 2024, 01:41:50 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Government (Moderators: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee, Lumine)
  Who want some Divisions?
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Who want some Divisions?  (Read 6066 times)
The Duke
JohnD.Ford
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,270


Political Matrix
E: 0.13, S: -1.23

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: August 24, 2004, 03:19:38 AM »

The US has decided to move the USS Theodore Roosevelt Aircraft Carrier battle group from Norfolk to San Diego, California.  We will also be moving the 1st Armored Division from its bases Germany to the Yuma Proving Grounds in Arizona.  As a result, the 24th Infantry Division will, as previously promised, move to Fort Riley, Kansas.

We also need someone to find a home for the Italy based 173rd Airborne Brigade and the 1st Infatnry Division.  Governors, who wants it?
Logged
JohnFKennedy
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,448


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: August 24, 2004, 05:53:07 AM »

Give it to the Pacific!
Logged
Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon
htmldon
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,983
United States


Political Matrix
E: 1.03, S: -2.26

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: August 24, 2004, 08:58:00 AM »

The Southeastern Region would be delighted to have these Atlasian forces stationed within its borders.
Logged
TheWildCard
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,529
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: August 24, 2004, 11:02:17 AM »

The Pacific would be honored to host this division
Logged
YRABNNRM
YoungRepub
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,680
United States
Political Matrix
E: 0.90, S: -6.09

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: August 24, 2004, 11:13:44 AM »

We, in the Northeast would be greatful if Secretary Ford considered us for the new division.
Logged
PBrunsel
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,537


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: August 24, 2004, 11:27:09 AM »

Do you think the Midwest region has enough water to hold any naval divisions?
Logged
JohnFKennedy
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,448


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: August 24, 2004, 11:27:50 AM »

Do you think the Midwest region has enough water to hold any naval divisions?

You guys lost your coastline when we altered the regions.
Logged
ilikeverin
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,410
Timor-Leste


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: August 24, 2004, 11:30:17 AM »

Do you think the Midwest region has enough water to hold any naval divisions?

You guys lost your coastline when we altered the regions.

Lake Superior Cheesy
Logged
JohnFKennedy
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,448


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: August 24, 2004, 11:31:44 AM »

Do you think the Midwest region has enough water to hold any naval divisions?

You guys lost your coastline when we altered the regions.

Lake Superior Cheesy

How do you propose to get a naval division from the ocean into a lake? airlift?
Logged
ilikeverin
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,410
Timor-Leste


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: August 24, 2004, 11:36:20 AM »

Do you think the Midwest region has enough water to hold any naval divisions?

You guys lost your coastline when we altered the regions.

Lake Superior Cheesy

How do you propose to get a naval division from the ocean into a lake? airlift?

Mediterranean (sp?)->Atlantic->St. Lawrence Seaway->Lake Ontario->Lake Erie->Lake Huron->Lake Superior.
Logged
JohnFKennedy
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,448


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: August 24, 2004, 11:38:49 AM »

Do you think the Midwest region has enough water to hold any naval divisions?

You guys lost your coastline when we altered the regions.

Lake Superior Cheesy

How do you propose to get a naval division from the ocean into a lake? airlift?

Mediterranean (sp?)->Atlantic->St. Lawrence Seaway->Lake Ontario->Lake Erie->Lake Huron->Lake Superior.

LOL! That is a long way! I didn't even spot some of the connections, they are tiny on my map.
Logged
ilikeverin
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,410
Timor-Leste


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: August 24, 2004, 11:46:30 AM »

Do you think the Midwest region has enough water to hold any naval divisions?

You guys lost your coastline when we altered the regions.

Lake Superior Cheesy

How do you propose to get a naval division from the ocean into a lake? airlift?

Mediterranean (sp?)->Atlantic->St. Lawrence Seaway->Lake Ontario->Lake Erie->Lake Huron->Lake Superior.

LOL! That is a long way! I didn't even spot some of the connections, they are tiny on my map.

Here, just for you:



Cheesy
Logged
PBrunsel
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,537


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: August 24, 2004, 11:56:05 AM »

The 173rd Airborne Division would be better off in the flat plains of South Dakota.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,156
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: August 24, 2004, 12:58:51 PM »

The 173rd Airborne Division would be better off in the flat plains of South Dakota.

Brigade, not Division, unless the Administration intends to increase its strength and use it reactive one of the historical Airborne Dividions from WW2, which would be a bit odd, since the 173rd Brigade is one of the few US Army units that does not have a unit history that goes back to WW2 in some shape pr fashion (altho its constituient battallions do.)
Logged
PBrunsel
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,537


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: August 24, 2004, 01:13:08 PM »

The 173rd Airborne Division would be better off in the flat plains of South Dakota.

Brigade, not Division, unless the Administration intends to increase its strength and use it reactive one of the historical Airborne Dividions from WW2, which would be a bit odd, since the 173rd Brigade is one of the few US Army units that does not have a unit history that goes back to WW2 in some shape pr fashion (altho its constituient battallions do.)

I'll take the brigade. Durring the Cold War The Dakotas and Nebraska were widely used as places to host air bases and nuculer scilos.
Logged
JohnFKennedy
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,448


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: August 24, 2004, 01:14:19 PM »

The 173rd Airborne Division would be better off in the flat plains of South Dakota.

Brigade, not Division, unless the Administration intends to increase its strength and use it reactive one of the historical Airborne Dividions from WW2, which would be a bit odd, since the 173rd Brigade is one of the few US Army units that does not have a unit history that goes back to WW2 in some shape pr fashion (altho its constituient battallions do.)

I'll take the brigade. Durring the Cold War The Dakotas and Nebraska were widely used as places to host air bases and nuculer scilos.

Get on MSN PB.
Logged
The Duke
JohnD.Ford
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,270


Political Matrix
E: 0.13, S: -1.23

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: August 24, 2004, 04:46:35 PM »

The 173rd Airborne Division would be better off in the flat plains of South Dakota.

Brigade, not Division, unless the Administration intends to increase its strength and use it reactive one of the historical Airborne Dividions from WW2, which would be a bit odd, since the 173rd Brigade is one of the few US Army units that does not have a unit history that goes back to WW2 in some shape pr fashion (altho its constituient battallions do.)

I'll take the brigade. Durring the Cold War The Dakotas and Nebraska were widely used as places to host air bases and nuculer scilos.

The 173 is not an air unit, it is designated as "airborne" because its forces are rapidly deployable and specialize in being rapidly deployed via airlift.
Logged
King
intermoderate
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,356
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: August 24, 2004, 05:31:09 PM »

Pacific!!! We can be first response incase North Korea or China attacks us...
Logged
Niles Caulder
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 638


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: August 24, 2004, 05:56:20 PM »

Pacific!!! We can be first response incase North Korea or China attacks us...

Hmmm....
Logged
The Duke
JohnD.Ford
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,270


Political Matrix
E: 0.13, S: -1.23

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: August 24, 2004, 08:07:25 PM »

1st Infantry Division will be stationed in-- Nevada.

We will be using money saved from base closures in Germany, Italy, and Bosnia, to buy 100,000 acres of land adjacent to the Nellis range cmplex outside Las Vegas.  The Division will, as the 1st AD will, in desert warfare.


The 173rd Airborne will be stationed in-- Alaska.

Fort Greeley will provide a location within easy range of the Korean peninsula and sufficient rugged terrain to train for Korea and Afghanistan.
Logged
Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon
htmldon
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,983
United States


Political Matrix
E: 1.03, S: -2.26

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: August 24, 2004, 09:09:11 PM »

Hmmph.
Logged
PBrunsel
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,537


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: August 24, 2004, 09:12:29 PM »

Oh shoot. My first challenge as Governor (only governor elect) and I fail. Sad
Logged
The Duke
JohnD.Ford
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,270


Political Matrix
E: 0.13, S: -1.23

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: August 24, 2004, 10:03:17 PM »

Actually, PB, you do get a Division.  The 24th Infantry Div. was only temporarily stationed in Arizona, but now with the 1st Armored moving in there, the 24th will be moved back to its original home in Fort Riley, Kansas.

Don, sorry, but you guys don't have any desert down there.  However, there is another opportunity in the wings.  Because the Atlantic Fleet is so cncentrated in Norfolk, and I don't like that, I am willing to move one Aircraft Carrier to a southern port if you guys put up the money.
Logged
King
intermoderate
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,356
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: August 24, 2004, 10:04:43 PM »
« Edited: August 24, 2004, 10:05:30 PM by Lt. Governor King »

SCORE x2...nothing like some good military bases
Logged
JohnFKennedy
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,448


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: August 25, 2004, 05:34:37 AM »

1st Infantry Division will be stationed in-- Nevada.

We will be using money saved from base closures in Germany, Italy, and Bosnia, to buy 100,000 acres of land adjacent to the Nellis range cmplex outside Las Vegas.  The Division will, as the 1st AD will, in desert warfare.


The 173rd Airborne will be stationed in-- Alaska.

Fort Greeley will provide a location within easy range of the Korean peninsula and sufficient rugged terrain to train for Korea and Afghanistan.

Grin
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.055 seconds with 11 queries.