- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: What If 24 Delta Force Soldiers Defended the Alamo?
Posted on 6/29/26 at 8:09 am to Nole Man
Posted on 6/29/26 at 8:09 am to Nole Man
If 24 modern soldiers went back with their personal weapons and nothing else, yes they handle business. Easily.
Fire superiority and suppressive fire from a LMG is a game changer in combat. A 5-round burst sprinkling around your arse will instantly make you shite your pants and reconsider life decisions.
Fire superiority and suppressive fire from a LMG is a game changer in combat. A 5-round burst sprinkling around your arse will instantly make you shite your pants and reconsider life decisions.
0
Posted on 6/29/26 at 8:10 am to Nole Man
quote:
Enough to drive back the illegals?
You do realize that we were the illegals in this instance
Posted on 6/29/26 at 8:16 am to Nole Man
24 Deltas would have defended the Alamo. Snipers alone would pick off officers and cannon/artillery men before they could get close enough to inflict damage.
Give them .50 cals on the ramparts and they'd mow through those soldiers like a turkey shoot. They would eventually abandon their invasion.
Weapons are so many orders of magnitude more deadly and powerful these days.
Give them .50 cals on the ramparts and they'd mow through those soldiers like a turkey shoot. They would eventually abandon their invasion.
Weapons are so many orders of magnitude more deadly and powerful these days.
Posted on 6/29/26 at 8:18 am to Nole Man
The problem - as always - is one of logistics. Ammunition and modern fire support would be far, far, far more important to holding this particular position (in historical context) than any quality or even capability of a modern, however elite, small unit.
24 modern soldiers against, at a minimum, 2000 early 19th Century soldiers is a bad bet. Just being able to deliver fire and maintain ammunition supply in that environment is a big question for me.
Yes a modern rifle platoon is far, far, far more lethal than larger units even from the 20th Century, but much of that is based on modern sensors, modern logistics and modern projection platforms, more so than any variances in the quality of the individual soldier.
24 modern soldiers against, at a minimum, 2000 early 19th Century soldiers is a bad bet. Just being able to deliver fire and maintain ammunition supply in that environment is a big question for me.
Yes a modern rifle platoon is far, far, far more lethal than larger units even from the 20th Century, but much of that is based on modern sensors, modern logistics and modern projection platforms, more so than any variances in the quality of the individual soldier.
Posted on 6/29/26 at 8:21 am to OleVaught14
quote:
Yeah we had a handful of guys successful invade Iraq on fricking horseback with modern air support.
Afghanistan.
I rode a Bradley into Iraq.
Posted on 6/29/26 at 8:22 am to Nole Man
Delta would have operated at night in the Mexican camp.
Posted on 6/29/26 at 8:26 am to Philzilla2k
quote:
Afghanistan
Yep, your right
Posted on 6/29/26 at 8:26 am to Nole Man
They really needed TEAM AMERICA World Police.
'Merica F*k Yeah'
'Merica F*k Yeah'
Posted on 6/29/26 at 8:37 am to AU_RX
quote:
How many Mexican 5 year olds could they hold off?
How many abuelas with two sandals each in hand would it take to siege the Alamo?
Posted on 6/29/26 at 8:40 am to CatfishJohn
Flintlocks fire about 3 rounds per minute accurate to about 100 yards.
Modern light machine guns fire up to ~700 rpm accurate up to 800 yards.
Belt-fed is a helluva thing.
Modern light machine guns fire up to ~700 rpm accurate up to 800 yards.
Belt-fed is a helluva thing.
This post was edited on 6/29/26 at 8:41 am
Posted on 6/29/26 at 8:52 am to Nole Man
Travis and Bowie's boys took out 500+ Mexicans before falling. After Delta killed a few thousand, the Mexicans would have routed.
Posted on 6/29/26 at 8:54 am to Nole Man
The stand off distance capability alone would be enough to allow delta to win.
Posted on 6/29/26 at 8:55 am to Ace Midnight
quote:
Yes a modern rifle platoon is far, far, far more lethal than larger units even from the 20th Century, but much of that is based on modern sensors, modern logistics and modern projection platforms, more so than any variances in the quality of the individual soldier.
What?
Posted on 6/29/26 at 8:56 am to SparkyWilson
quote:
The AI had a the Mexican artillery man loading the cannon ball on the back of the cannon. Well done.
Well the breech loading cannon was invented in 1837, however I don't think Mexico had any.
Posted on 6/29/26 at 9:16 am to Toroballistic
quote:
Well the breech loading cannon was invented in 1837, however I don't think Mexico had any.
If I remember reading correctly, a lot of the Alamo defenders had better rifles. The Mexicans just had superior numbers and were able to wait it out. They had retreated a couple of times already before succeeding.
Posted on 6/29/26 at 9:21 am to Nole Man
I've been to the alamo, it's not really that big. 2 dozen D boys with machine gun fire in all directions would mow down an absurd amount of enemy soldiers. The real question is, how many guys would need to get blistered before the remaining Mexican soldiers turned and said "f this, we're out of here." Don't forget distance and night vision as well. Modern guys would see the Mexicans coming from a mile away and could pick them off in the dark. That doesn't even account for mortars and artillery support either.
Posted on 6/29/26 at 9:22 am to upgrayedd
quote:
What?
Give me a rough estimation of your military experience, baw.
Posted on 6/29/26 at 9:25 am to Nole Man
Hell no! Santa Anna’s army was 5000 deep, numbers rule.
Posted on 6/29/26 at 9:26 am to Techdave
quote:
Modern light machine guns fire up to ~700 rpm accurate up to 800 yards.
Let's just assume the 24 guys have 4 SAW gunners and even designated marksmen are all using 5.56mm M4 variants with scopes (so 4 SAWs, 4 DMR and 16 operators with M4s).
How...much...ammo...do...they...have? How...quickly...can...you...resupply...them?
Every 1000 rounds of 5.56mm weighs roughly 40 pounds.
Posted on 6/29/26 at 9:31 am to Koolazzkat
quote:
Hell no! Santa Anna’s army was 5000 deep, numbers rule.
Well, I'm not going to go that crazy. The low end was about 2k and the upper end was 5k to 6k. Opinions vary.
A modern rifle company (would have mortars, too), would likely wipe the floor with them. 2 modern companies? Without a question. They wouldn't even take very many casualties.
But, the OP is 24 operators. As a reminder, it is not CAG, Devgru or even a line A detachment or SEAL platoon's job to fight with conventional forces in the line and certainly not a defensive asset. Their job is (if force on force) to move quickly, establish a base of fire, destroy a (reasonable) force and clear the area. These guys are normally securing a critical location behind enemy lines, briefly, to either extract a high value target or destroy a critical C2 node, etc.
And that's what I'm having trouble with. If these 24 are all kitted out as "riflemen" - you likely have under 5k, 6k (hell, let's say a max of around 10k to 11k) rounds of ammo, all in. And most of that is going to be wasted on suppression rather than effective fire.
So, you might not even have enough ammo for effective fire to account for all the enemy troops. Ergo, the 24 might not be enough.
This post was edited on 6/29/26 at 9:53 am
Page 2 of 3
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News