Question about Gundam Seed major military bases.

The place to discuss anything relating to anime or manga.
Post Reply
Scorchijs
Posts: 69
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 7:14 pm
Location: Latvia

Question about Gundam Seed major military bases.

Ok, the question is, do Carpentaria and Gibraltar bases have mass drivers? Panama and Victoria bases do have them, but what about ZAFT? How do they get into space?
There's no point in listening to others. They'll either agree with you or keep saying stupid shit.
Hyakushiki
Posts: 1238
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 8:07 pm

ZAFT is space based, they conducted drop operations
,then captured mass drivers on Earth to get back into space, Which was the original objective of Operation Spit Break.
Don't send a coordinator to do a newtype's job!
User avatar
ShadowCell
Moderator
Posts: 4716
Joined: Sun Mar 05, 2006 12:59 pm
Location: California
Contact:

Carpentaria and Gibraltar do not have mass drivers, as far as I know. During SEED, they had captured Kaohsiung (in Taiwan, I think?) and Habilis in Africa, while the Earth Alliance still had Panama (until ZAFT took it out) and Kaguya (which the Earth Alliance invaded Orb to gain access to, and which Uzumi subsequently exploded). The only other mass driver in the Cosmic Era that I know of, other than those four, is Gigafloat--and that belongs to the Junk Guild.

The original objective of Spit Break, I thought, was to take out the EA headquarters at Alaska. They just disguised it as an attack on Panama, which would have taken out the EA's last remaining mass driver and could have been spun as a defensive move (while attacking the Alliance's headquarters would have been harder to spin as defensive). Some of the more moderate members of the PLANT Supreme Council wanted to go ahead with the attack on Panama and use it as an excuse to end the war by denying the Alliance access to space (and thus, the PLANTs), while the more hawkish members wanted to go for the jugular and attack Alaska. We all know who won that argument.
Hyakushiki
Posts: 1238
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 8:07 pm

That may have been the case, but from what I remember, Patrick Zala changed the target at last minute so his forces were confused by the conflicting objectives. Of courset hat ultimately played into Rau Le Cruzse's plans who tipped off the Alliance as to where the real offensive would take place.
Last edited by Hyakushiki on Thu Oct 18, 2007 2:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Don't send a coordinator to do a newtype's job!
User avatar
ShadowCell
Moderator
Posts: 4716
Joined: Sun Mar 05, 2006 12:59 pm
Location: California
Contact:

I think that ties into "Patrick was a lot more gung-ho about attacking the EA's headquarters, and changed the target at the last minute in order to throw off the more moderate council members who preferred a strike on Panama."

I think.

Either way, lots of explosions were had, so the real winner was Rau.
Imperial
Posts: 1017
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 4:52 pm
Location: Athens, GA
Contact:

Hyakushiki wrote:That may have bee the case, but from what I remember, Patrick Zala changed the target at last minute so his forces were confused by the conflicting objectives. Of courset hat ultimately played into Rau Le Cruzse's plans who tipped off the Alliance as to where the real offensive would take place.
I was under the impression that the target was always Panama. However, Patrick concealed this from your average Joe in order to maintain secrecy and make the surprise attack all the more surprising. If you can fool your friends, you can fool your enemies.

Of course, Rau caught wind of the true objective and passed this information along to the Alliance, who booby-trapped the base with the Cyclops System and left only a token defense line. (Or so I recall. Maybe I'm smoking the crack rock.)

But, really, the point I'm trying to make is that Operation Spit Break was an elaborate bait-and-swtich from the very beginning.
This space for rent
Hyakushiki
Posts: 1238
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 8:07 pm

That is a much clearer explanation of how I thought things went down.
Don't send a coordinator to do a newtype's job!
User avatar
Melchior
Posts: 293
Joined: Wed Mar 15, 2006 8:19 pm

As stated, ZAFT used captured mass drivers such as those at Victoria and Koahsiung, at least that was the case during the first war. During the second war, ZAFT didn't have access to a mass driver until the Republic of East Asia defected, giving ZAFT access to Kaohsiung once again.
Dean_the_Young
Posts: 1293
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 7:24 pm
Location: Near Rockets

Imperial wrote:
Hyakushiki wrote:That may have bee the case, but from what I remember, Patrick Zala changed the target at last minute so his forces were confused by the conflicting objectives. Of courset hat ultimately played into Rau Le Cruzse's plans who tipped off the Alliance as to where the real offensive would take place.
I was under the impression that the target was always Panama. However, Patrick concealed this from your average Joe in order to maintain secrecy and make the surprise attack all the more surprising. If you can fool your friends, you can fool your enemies.

Of course, Rau caught wind of the true objective and passed this information along to the Alliance, who booby-trapped the base with the Cyclops System and left only a token defense line. (Or so I recall. Maybe I'm smoking the crack rock.)

But, really, the point I'm trying to make is that Operation Spit Break was an elaborate bait-and-swtich from the very beginning.
Ouch. I feel a headache coming on. Let me just get this straight:

Target was supposed to be Panama.

Zala, hating the Naturals, aims at the throat and tricks friend and foe alike to go at Alasaka at the last minute.

Rau gets wind, alerts the Alliance, who booby trap while putting a lot of men in Panama.


Did I get that straight?
I'm sorry this letter is so long, but I did not have time to make it shorter. -Mark Twain

Official Jerid Fanboy
User avatar
ShadowCell
Moderator
Posts: 4716
Joined: Sun Mar 05, 2006 12:59 pm
Location: California
Contact:

Yeah, that's how I read it.

Rau's an ass like that.
Post Reply