ww2 what if

Enforcer Talen · Post by **Enforcer Talen** » 2002-09-04 01:50pm

1945, ussr declares war on u.s.

Alyeska · Post by **Alyeska** » 2002-09-04 02:14pm

The USSR has neither the manpower nor the resources to conduct such a war. At the end of the real war in 1945, the United States was the only country to come out of the war stronger then before having entered the war. The UK, Japan, Germany, and USSR were in pieces following the war. With no strong allies, the USSR would have faced quick defeat by allied forces ranging from Australlia, United Kingdom, Canada, United States, and possibly even China. The USSR would have been forced to fight against technologically superior forces with little naval support on multiple fronts. And lets not forget the Atom Bomb either.

Enforcer Talen · Post by **Enforcer Talen** » 2002-09-04 02:23pm

true, ww2 did ravage the u.s.s.r nicely. . .but they did have the training that 1500 miles of war gave them, and their industry hadn't been bombed in what, a yr, two? they were building up a great deal. . . and, I'm not sure of the exact timing, but wasn't china involved in a civil war at the time?

Alyeska · Post by **Alyeska** » 2002-09-04 02:28pm

Enforcer Talen wrote:true, ww2 did ravage the u.s.s.r nicely. . .but they did have the training that 1500 miles of war gave them, and their industry hadn't been bombed in what, a yr, two? they were building up a great deal. . . and, I'm not sure of the exact timing, but wasn't china involved in a civil war at the time?

China's civil war was after the end of WW2 by a significant time frame IIRC. Had the USSR gone to war against the US, allies of China who fought against the Japanesse, things might have gone very differently in China.

While the USSR was building their industry back up, it was not back to the level it was first at before it entered the war. You should also take note of the fact that even up to the end of the war, the USSR was partially relying on supplies being sent to it by the US. The USSR would logically loose access to such supplies if it went to war with the US.

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2002-09-04 02:31pm

Yes China was quite fucked but to be blunt the Acutal Ability for the USSR to attack us at the time was BEYOND bad, They had less than 10% of the Air-Force they started with had lost over half of thier industal capability, thier Navy thanks to the Japanise was no-existant and America was the only power at the time to have the bomb and the means to make more.

Oh plus 100% of our Industial Capability and a huge Tatical and Strategic Advantage Compared to them, They have to cross six to nine rivers to reach France, We have to Cross two before we have smooth sailing

Oh and it was nearing Winter at the time so by the time we marched through Poland it would be Spring and the perfect time to attack

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2002-09-04 02:32pm

Russia lacks the manpower to sustain such an offensive; even if they wait till most of the US ground forces in Germany had been withdrawn. They are also highly dependent on Western food imports, go to war and the USSR is in a famine within months.

America's ability to ramp up Atomic bomb production combined with the USSR's lack of defenses against four engined bombers make such an invasion pointless, they cant win. Which is why Stalin planed to wait till the late 50s to attack. It took a decade for the Union to recover.

Good thing he died before his plans could be completed.

Pablo Sanchez · Post by **Pablo Sanchez** » 2002-09-04 05:00pm

I think you guys are seriously overestimating the capacity of the Allies to resist the Soviets. You're all assuming that the war would last long enough for American industry to be a factor. In 1945, they had superior numbers, more experienced troops and commanders, superior tanks, an airforce that could at least challenge air superiority, and vast amounts of artillery. Given planning and a modicum of surprise (Stavka was very good at deception), I'm willing to bet that they would kick the shit out of the Allied armies in the field.

The Soviet problem is that they can't sustain their advance. In 1945 most of their divisions were depleted and tired, the vast population of able-bodied men is running low, and logistically they're in no position for an offensive. Then you've got the problem of the bomb. It would probably take months for the next set of bombs to be ready (there was only two ready to use, and we dropped them), but once they were in the field, the Soviet can't possibly win.

The best hope for the Soviets is to destroy the allied armies or force them from the continent before the A-Bomb can arrive, and then try to force a settlement. With a little luck, they might be able to pull it off.

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2002-09-04 05:08pm

Then you've got the problem of the bomb. It would probably take months for the next set of bombs to be ready (there was only two ready to use, and we dropped them), but once they were in the field, the Soviet can't possibly win.

There was a third bomb ready. Mass production ramps up around November 1945, IIRC.

The best hope for the Soviets is to destroy the allied armies or force them from the continent before the A-Bomb can arrive, and then try to force a settlement. With a little luck, they might be able to pull it off.

I don't think their logistics network is up to it, and I doubt they'll be able to stop the USAAF and RAF from proceeding to flatten what remains of it. They'll not be able to sustain the advance.

Stravo · Post by **Stravo** » 2002-09-04 05:49pm

The overwhelming airpower that the Allies could bring to bear on the front would be devastating to the Soviets. RAF and US airforce units could punch deep behind Soviet lines and wreack havoc on advancing forrces and cut supply lines, there would be very little the Soviets could do to the counter that. Not to mention the vast forces the US had accumalated in the Pacific would allow the Allies to open a Second front in the far east, pulling Russia both ways at both exteremes of their vast country. It would have been devastating. Let's remember that the Soviets absorbed the heaviest casualties of all the Allied armies by the end of the war.

They would not be able to sustain the offensive for very long and what little supplies they had would be interdicted by Allied aircover. I don't even think the bomb would need to be brought in except as a bargaining chip, just start round the clock bombing raids into Russia with standard payloads using German airfields as forward bases, or even steam a few carriers north into the Kamchaka peninsula and you have some decent aircover into Russia.

The Russian bogeyman of overwhelming land forces that haunted us throughout the cold war was not a reality during the end of WWII. The US had millions of men under arms, most of them in Europe and the PAcific, both within perfect striking distance of Russia and Russia simply did not have the numbers to overwhelm us as they could have in later years when the US presence in Europe was simply a shell of its former self.

Raptor 597 · Post by **Raptor 597** » 2002-09-04 08:26pm

Now lets add another element into the pot. Germany, true they were utterly shattered, but still posed the technology which handed over to the US, or even stolen could be leathel, remember the allies captured most of the German Technological capaibility around Deresden and all the rivers. Not to mention Air Superiority.True, the USSR might roll thru Europe initially but the Allies would gain the upper hand, not to mention the bomb coming to mass production.

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2002-09-04 08:41pm

The USSR is utterly demolished by the ensuing conflict. They had no atomic weapons. Their industrical capability had been devastated. They were facing unrest in many of their new provinces. Their airforce was exceptionally weak, and their armies, though large, were short on gasoline and ammunition.

The allies comparatively, were very strong at the time. They could have probably counted on Chiang Kai Shek for some support, though probably not outright inervention. The Soviet navy was virtually non-existent, and the USSR had no ability to invade the Japanese home islands. Also, the USSR had no ability to produce much more, industrially, without a long recovery period, and their population had been utterly devastated.

The USSR would win a few early battles because their armored forces were so powerful, but their attack would have petered out before they got through Germany. The American, French, and British counter offensives would have devastated the Soviets and pushed them back to Eastern Europe, where the Soviets would have had to have attempted to fortify their positions. This would have almost certainly been ultimately futile, had the war remained a shooting contest at this time, and the loss of Eastern Germany would have prevented the Soviets from recovering as quickly as they did in real life.

Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi · Post by **Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi** » 2002-09-04 08:49pm

America would laugh it off. We just used the atomic , and the USSR would have to threaten America first with something like invading Europe.

LordChaos · Post by **LordChaos** » 2002-09-06 01:17am

best USSR could hope for to would be conquering the contenental european countries ala germany. They lack the resources to poss a credible threat for an amphibious landing against any moderately prepeared defense. And while they had a huge air force, and some of their aircraft (like the Yak-3) were damn good (actualy damn great), it wouldn't have been enough to achive air superiority against "allied" forces.

And time isn't with them. in 1945, the US alone had a greater warmaking potential then the rest of the world combined. You realy don't want to force the issue with a country with that much industry, with all of it running full swing and with no infrastructure damage at all.