Thread 64089952

Operation Unthinkable . Could it really be pulled off by the US and British army in 1945? The Soviet army had more manpower than the US and UK combined at the time. Nukes won’t stop a Zerg rush.

yeah

>>64089952 (OP)
No.
West didn't have political will and control to start such war. Communists are our friends, remember?

>>64089952 (OP)
Yes and in a better timeline it occurred.

>>64089952 (OP)
No, most people in the West wanted the war to be over, and it would have taken an order magnitude of more men and equipment to pull it off

>>64089952 (OP)
>Could it really be pulled off by the US and British army in 1945?
Maybe to push the USSR back to its pre-1939 borders but then what? There's just miles and miles of Russia that you have to cross and there's nothing there worth having. As another anon pointed out the political will to launch an offensive against an "ally" likely wasn't there to support such an action. Maybe if the Soviets attacked first and triggered similar sentiment to the reaction to Pearl Harbor I could see it happening. But I think the Soviets knew they were reaching the limits of their manpower reserves, whereas the USA had legions of untapped potential.

Would the other allies be able to beat Russia in a straight fight? Undoubtedly yes. Their military was weak to begin with, further degraded by their massive losses, and without Lend-lease propping them up, would have been totally ineffectual.
Was there any political will to do so, and would the public or the enlisted have stood for it after 5 hard years of war? No chance.

>>64089952 (OP)
Discounting things like morale and homefront fatigue, yes. The SU was fairly stretched on manpower and materiel, and such a situation would see the loss of Allied industrial and economic support. It lacked decisive advantages in tactical aircraft and had no strategic aircraft worth anything. It lacked any meaningful naval assets and would be faced with the real risk of new frontlines opening up. Would it be easy? No. Could it be pulled off? Yes.

US and UK could have teamed up with the good guys and pulled it off easily.

in 1945 america was pretty uncontested with their air power and nukes
i think if the us nuked moscow it would turn the tide quickly

>>64090585
pretty much*

no. some would say it's...

the USSR could probably hold for a while but they were far too overextended, reliant on american lend lease for logistics, destroyed infrastructure in general, american air supremacy guaranteed and also tactical nuclear strikes
also, a looming famine in the ussr unless the soldiers get back home

>>64089952 (OP)
nuking moscow would have been enough

>>64090883
>just fly a lone bomber with your one nuke left through a thousand miles of unsuppressed airspace bro
yeah

>>64089952 (OP)
Yes but with a huge asterisk. Atomic bombs were a force multiplier beyond anything else, the Soviets basically couldn't have any force concentration, bases, hospitals, or logistical depots because they'd just be nuked. Also the Allies were at the peak of their military buildup, huge number of battletested veterans, and also Germans would have likely joined in as well to retake their East German clay. Plus Poles, Czechs, and so on all revolting.
HOWEVER, everyone was completely exhausted by war by 1945 so anyone who said "let's go for round 2" would not have been taken kindly. You'd have seen outright commie revolts throughout Europe and the US, even if these were easily put down the Soviets would just ramble on about "capitalist warmongers" forever.

>>64090905
Oh we're doing that thing where soviet supply lines and logistics are unaffected by going to war againat their main supplier but America suddenly finds itself hamstrung from multiple angles and incapable of maintaining it's astronomical industrial output for some reason.

>>64089952 (OP)
At the end of the war in europe, the USSR had 180 divisions deployed in central europe of which 40 were armored divisions while the Allies had 40 divisions in all of europe of which 8 were armored.

the soviets would have rolled well into france before the Allies could have stabilized the line

>>64089952 (OP)
Tbh yes. The soviet army was pretty fucked by that point. So I think if the western allies got serious uncle Joe would have suddenly decided that Poland and Czechoslovakia didn't need international socialism after all

>>64089952 (OP)
Neither side could really invade the other. The USSR had far more ground forces in europe, while the allies would absolutly dominate the sea and air. So mainland USSR wouldnt fall, and neither would the brit empire and naturally not the US. It would just be another euro bloodbath that fizzels out or ends up with US nukes.

>>64090905
yeah

>>64090962
They would've been nuked by France in Germany way before that though

>>64090952
No, we're doing that thing where you pretend that deep penetration raids are something you can just do at the drop of a hat. Apparently you need it spelled out that the USSR still had an air force in 1945, and that it wasn't completely swamped with intercept mission to the point where "probably a recon flight" wasn't worth the effort of intercepting. You're not getting one of the less than 5 nukes the US can get together in late '45 into Moscow without first winning the air war for a third time, against an enemy that now knows what a lone bomber can mean.

Can it be done, yes. But now you're asking for a major air campaign that's going to involve throwing that bomber force that just got done thinking it was over back into months of high-intensity operations, including about 300 miles round-trip outside of escort range. It took less than 6 months for the Cold War mentality to settle in, you do not have time to re-invigorate the armed forces for another round or develop a smaller bomb.

You stupid fucking niggers fundamentally fail to grasp the monumental scale of the things you ask for, and then have the utter fucking gall to ask with a straight face why nobody does it.

>>64091036
France didnt have nukes until 1960 you homosexual frog

>>64091037
Fly one from the baltic or finnish airspace and nuke St petersburg lol

>>64091037
Did the Soviets have a fighter capable of intercepting B29s in 1945?

>>64091092
Nope, its literally why they poured massive ammounts of money into developing that postwar. High altitude fights was pretty much only a thing between the germans and UK/US for the whole war.

>>64091107
So you start the war with a knockout sucker punch by nuking Moscow, Leningrad, Stalingrad and a few other key targets simultaneously, while dictating the terms of their surrender.

>USSR on the verge of demographic collapse in 1945
>United States on the verge of economic collapse in 1945
>United Kingdom already in a state of economic collapse in 1945

It just would have devolved into static trench warfare and ended with both sides signing an unsatisfactory armistice anyway

>>64091218
>United States on the verge of economic collapse in 1945

wut

>>64090962
Soviet divisions were much smaller than Western Divisions, both on paper and in actual combat strength.

>>64090905
Japan struggled intercepting B-29s flying in a straight line without any support, russia wouldn't even be able to touch them unless they graciously came down to their level.

>>64090962
>soviet divisions
what's the next cope tankie? "acshually a fireteam is a division because i said so"?

>>64089952 (OP)
No because US and UK wartime propaganda and policy has been that commies are their valiant and indispensable allies this entire time.

Turning around and declaring them the big bad after years of whitewashing and pouring money into them would not only fall flat but undermine the whole political structure they've created.

They could've justified an invasion around 1948 following the soviet occupation and upheaval of local governments in subsequent warsaw pact states but they clearly didn't care about that by that point.

>>64091236
War bonds don't pay out till the war is over, anon.

>>64089998
>Their military was weak to begin with, further degraded by their massive losses
1945 hombre, not 1942.

>>64089952 (OP)
In a vacuum, they could do it, the Soviet Union was strained after fighting an existential war and it would not be able to put up with more war against much less exhausted opponents. The problem though, is there would be no political will to go through with it, the people were tired of war and would be less than tolerant of the idea of going to war with people they had just spent years being told was their ally.

However, it's a different story if the Soviet Union is the aggressor. If America and Britain insisted on giving Europe a fair deal, and forced the issue of Poland, and Stalin chose to fight over it, that would be a valid casus belli, as it would come across to the western powers as the communists betraying them, rather than the other way around.

>>64089952 (OP)
>Nukes won’t stop a Zerg rush.
Nuking Moscow would have. Hell, firebombing Moscow would have. We had thousands of long range bombers and fighters and the Soviets simply could not have withstood that. Especially after we stopped giving them material aid

>>64091037
>Apparently you need it spelled out that the USSR still had an air force in 1945, and that it wasn't completely swamped with intercept mission to the point where "probably a recon flight" wasn't worth the effort of intercepting.
Their air force did not have the capacity to deal with high altitude bombing campaigns and was reliant on US fuel shipments to even fly the missions they did. A B29 would be in uncontested airspace over Persia and Alaska corridors.

>>64089952 (OP)
US had a wartime ban on strikes. It had to revert back from a war economy right away or the countries Unions would have imploded the country.

>>64091037
The Soviets had nothing that could counter the B-29 until the British handed them the MiG-15

>>64089952 (OP)
You have to be both a retard and a psychopath to consider this. Years of brutal warfare just to turn and fight one of your largest allies from that conflict.There would be no faster way to turn both the civilian populations and military against you.

Anticommunism rots brains and ironically benefits communism because all they ever do is jack off about killing countless people to stop an ideology they never even actually took the time to define or read. Liberalism has led to the best case scenario of the soviets dissolving without war and defanging anticapitalist movements worldwide because it actually improves conditions instead of hanging priests and butchering school girls

>>64092837
>Liberalism has led to the best case scenario of the soviets dissolving without war and defanging anticapitalist movements worldwide because it actually improves conditions instead of hanging priests and butchering school girls
It just promotes secularism and imports the third world to butcher school girls under the guise of multiculturalism and calls the people who have issue with this racist. It is a far softer, kinder totalitarianism. Please fuck off.

>>64092703
Why the fuck did post war Britian immediately get hit with the retard stick

There'd be an instant communist revolution in France and Italy and Europe would be integrally part of the Soviet Union

>>64090585
This, one nuke to moscow and one to St Petersburg and you're done. Would work even today.

>>64092926
You know soviets have bunkers right?

It's useless to raze Moscow just as its useless to raze Tokyo if you cant defeat them on the field

>>64089952 (OP)
In terms of weapons, manpower, tactics, and logistics, probably. But when you factor in individual mentality it turns into:
>Oh man, Hitler's dead and we took (West) Berlin, I sure am excited to finally go home and fuck my wife
>...the fuck you mean we're going to war with the Nazi-killing dudes I just shook hands with?
I think there would have been mass mutiny.

>>64092934
Oh man, bunkers!

>>64092985
Yes, if Stalin doesnt die by the nuke the soviet army keeps rolling to the Atlantic

And you've killed dozens of thousands of civilians so Europeans would side with the soviets

Wouldn't Yugoslavia and Albania fight on the Communist side?

>>64092989
>the soviet army keeps rolling to the Atlantic
With a logistics tail thats going to be a feast for the USAAF? Are you thinking the Soviets are going to be anywhere near as capable when theyre not being fed the vitals via lend lease and a veritable swarm of Mustangs, Thunderbolts and Superfortresses are molesting them?
>you've killed dozens of thousands of civilians so Europeans would side with the soviets
Yeah man everyone was so hyped for the gentle humanitarian Soviets to come rule them

>>64089952 (OP)
The US alone had close to 14 million people in uniform in WW2 and that was still a far lower percentage of our total available military-age male population than the other major combatants. We had untapped reserves of manpower in 1945. The Soviet Union absolutely did not. And you, if Lend-Lease had been cut off while fighting was going on, the USSR would have suddenly found it's manpower reserves had abruptly gone DEEP in to the negatives and they'd either have to demobilize hundreds and hundreds of thousands at a minimum in 1945 just to get a crop sown in 1946 or else the entire Red Army would collapse before the start of '47.

>>64092999
Yes they were hyped up, communists were the leaders of the resistance and when you got american beasts killing people for no reason the Soviets become even MORE of liberators

The logistics become trivial when you got a western Europe that will welcome soviets without putting a fight, meanwhile the anglo-americans needs to cross an ocean again + manage to hold Asia

>>64093029
ahahahaha
sorry man didn't realize it was a bit

>>64093033
The american brain breaks down when it realises its fantasies dont apply to reality

>>64093028
>they'd either have to demobilize hundreds and hundreds of thousands at a minimum in 1945 just to get a crop sown in 1946 or else the entire Red Army would collapse before the start of '47.
I'm pulling out of my ass either. In real-life the war ended in '45, WW3 didn't start, the Soviets were able to demobilize millions of men by the start of 1946, and they still had close to a million people die of famine in 1946-1947. An Operation Unthinkable scenario basically ends with the death of Russia as a concept without even considering what effect WW3 itself would have had.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_famine_of_1946%E2%80%931947

>>64093028
>they'd either have to demobilize hundreds and hundreds of thousands at a minimum in 1945 just to get a crop sown in 1946 or else the entire Red Army would collapse before the start of '47.
I'm not pulling that out of my ass either. In real-life the war ended in '45, WW3 didn't start, the Soviets were able to demobilize millions of men by the start of 1946, and they still had close to a million people die of famine in 1946-1947. An Operation Unthinkable scenario basically ends with the death of Russia as a concept without even considering what effect WW3 itself would have had.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_famine_of_1946%E2%80%931947

>>64093050
Stalin wouldnt have exported food in this scenario though

>Between 1946 and 1948, a total of 5.7 million tons of grain (excluding cereals), were exported from the USSR

>>64093060
He would have because he didn't give a shit about his people, and cared only about profit.
>b-but he was a commie!
Capitalism consumes all ideologies and critique.

>>64093084
uh actually he exported it because he was a commie

The soviet Union feeding the Allies is killer propaganda

>>64092874
Stafford Cripps was a communist sympathizer who would have receiver a death penalty in the US for his disloyalty and treachery

>>64089952 (OP)
Yeah, especially if they used Eastern Europe manpower

>>64089965
The west had nukes and the soviets didn't. Operation Unthinkable would have disintegrated the soviet lines with nuclear hellfire.

>>64092837
You have to be both a retard and a psychopath not to consoder this. So basically a zigger.
russia at the time were ISIS with manpower, doing ISIS things.
They made the Nazis seem tame with their purges and ethnic cleansings. They brought back slavery in the russia.
Also they were already setting up to betray the West that saved them from utter and rightful annihilation.
Really not pushing them back to ziggeria borders let them rearm and plunder peoples they had no right to.

>>64093090
actually he exported it because he needed money.
In the mean time he was extorting the countries under the future Warsaw pact for you guessed it grain. Usually under the guise of occupation payments.In some cases he even killed friendly communist government ministers that dared to complain.
Now put two and two together from where the grain came.

>>64089952 (OP)
>Nukes won’t stop a Zerg rush.

Do you have any evidence that supports this statement?

>>64089952 (OP)
manpower means jack and shit degenerating into meat assault (like in ukraine 2025) without LOGISTICS. Vatnik union in 1945 was bombed to shit and could not really even feed itself without daddy americas hand outs. This is before the gross technological and industrial superiority of allies like b-29 bombers

Zigger union would have and should have been pounded to dust post berlin. WW2 was half assed and should have ended in 1947 with allied forces rolling into moscow. Vatniks did start the war together with the germans, italians and japanese after all. They deserved the same kind of atomization and reconstruction the other three got

Not finishing ziggers off in ww2 directly leads to todays world of monke, agent orange and regional war burning in east europe. In addition to the copius amounts of subversive propaganda that has poisoned the western thought for close to 80 years now. From marxist wannabe tyrants to todays "tradcon" fifth column grifters

>>64093730
also mainland china being occupied by the communist regime is a direct result of half assing ww2. Mao and his merry band of rats would have never graduated past mountain/steppe guerillas without vatnik union backing them up with gear and weapons. Even with all the corruption and incompetence going on with the nationalists at that time

Related to that Korea and Vietnam wars are also directly tied to that. Kim jong fats dynasty could have never established itself without stalins backing. Even if north Vietnam had its communist beginnings the idea that guided US into the war (domino theory) had no legs without maos china and CCCP up north

Bailing out vatnik union was the first disaster and the second one was not finishing it off after the germans were finished. vatniks are the biggest imperial cancerous tumor this planet has ever seen with its tentacles stretched across the globe

>>64093730
>>64093748
My alt history plan is a little more subtle. The Americans and Brits intentionally give the USSR as little as possible, so they can fight the Germans, but not well, and hopefully collapse. With a German occupation of everything up to the Urals, the Allies can then drive through after the war as liberators and install liberal democratic governments. Alternatively, Russians are bogged down in the east, and the German lines don't collapse. So then the Germs surrender to the Anglo-American allies, and the lines are drawn there. Cold War still happens, but the line of demarcation is in Poland or something.

Also: Putin.

It's funny he was portrayed as some kind of young reformer when he first took power, but he really was the KGB-mafia goon we now see him as. he never changed. He had a nostalgia for the USSR not for ideolgoical reasons, but because it was the biggest the Russian empire had ever gotten. As Mayor of St. Petersberg, he was the head of the Mafia for that city. What did they expect out of him?

The only way to get a reformer was someone who wasn't brought up as a true beliver in the system.

Also irony: word is Putin was part of a group who were robbing the state blind through KGB secret funds. Rather than spending it, they just pocketed it all and put it in off-shore banks, then when the USSR collapsed they swooped in with all this cash and bought up all the now privatized companies.

So he officially likes the USSR and considers its death a tragedy for Russia, but he was robbing from it and doing everything he could to undermine it. Is there no better pure Platonic form of a Russian leader than Putin?

>>64090905
you only need one bomber to make it

>>64092989
yeah im sure they would want to side with people that want to rape and kill them

>>64093029
>The logistics become trivial when you got a western Europe that will welcome soviets without putting a fight, meanwhile the anglo-americans needs to cross an ocean again + manage to hold Asia
indian or zigger?

>>64093570
>>64090585
Did you know that Operation Magic carpet had to be expedited to avoid mutinies worsening? Yes, there were several MUTINIES and strikes in the armed forces because guys just wanted to go home now that the job was done. The rate of demobilization in the United States was so rapid because of troops being done with soldiering, it functionally gutted the armed forces for it be still a problem when shit kicked off in Korea five years later.
Morale would've been fucking though the floor if you told them to initiate another war against an ally even stronger then the Nazis. Not to mention the chaos that'd erupt behind the lines. In France, for instance, where communists had just a moment ago been a major resistance player. And at home? Do you think people would continue working long hours to supply such a conflict, or would the be trouble from the highly unionized labor force of the day?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post%E2%80%93World_War_II_demobilization_strikes
https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2021/11/11/world-war-ii-mutiny-protests-veterans/

>>64093831
Yeah surely people voted for Communist parties in masse post-war because they wanted to be raped

Dumbass americoon

>>64093835
The war would be limited to Germany, you can just walk, once the soviets reach the Maginot line the war is over.
And the only harbour available for the Anglo-American would be Hamburg

>The Soviet army had more manpower
how much of that manpower would defect or shoot the gommies?

>>64093894
>or would the be trouble from the highly unionized labor force of the day?
vghh....

>>64092856
>not allowing us to implement population controls and state religions is totalitarian guys!!!!!

>>64093060
Anon he exported food despite millions dying of famine irl

The only way Unthinkable would be conceivable, is if Roosevelt And Churchill didn't buddy up with the Soviets in the first place.

>>64095571
Churchill knew it was a bad idea but Britain had lost all influence by 1944.
And Roosevelt loved Stalin, he probably fell for the Soviet propaganda.

Everyone who says "yes" should remember that the soviet army had enough resources to spare to launch operation august storm in manchuria, decisively destroying an admittedly poorly equipped, trained, supplied and deployed japanese kwangtung army.
The operation occurred over an area that coincides with the area of western europe.
>>64089970
got half of it right, it would've taken a literal order (10x) more manpower than what the western front allies had planned for (about 4.7 million men).

>could it
Yes
>would it have been easy?
No
>NOOKS?
Wouldn't have been needed but would likely make the entire thing a cake walk. Remember that both Churchill and Patton were for this but the OSS killed Patton and Eisenhower made Churchill kneel in exchange for money.

Additional reminder; Operation Unthinkable would never have needed to be considered had Eisenhower listened to Churchill who said that instead of a southern invasion of France that force should have landed in the Baltics (or was it the Balkans, I forget) and prevented USSR from annexing/influencing it. But Eisenhower in his infinite wisdom said the liberation of France was more important. So a huge army lands in southern France and faces nothing but token forces at best and most of the issues were literally just supplies and logistics. Thus cementing USSR hold over Eastern Europe for the next 45 years, the effects being seen to this day (go to east Germany and talk about the USSR near old boomer civil servants, they'll all shed a tear and start singing the Red Anthem).

>>64096463
I meant Roosevelt not Eisenhower.

>>64096411
>Britain had lost all influence by 1944
Nope. That was 10 years later.

>>64096426
I don't think the Soviets being able to destroy an underequipped, undertrained, undersupplied, and understaffed army of low quality troops and walking wounded that Japan could not reinforce because the USA was busy actively invading its territory counts for much.

>>64096411
>Roosevelt loved Stalin, he probably fell for the Soviet propaganda.

Roosevelt was a communist through and through. His new deal policies were straight up communist central planning theft of private property and all (Theft of US citizens gold and outlawing ownership) A few of the new deal things were unquestionably positive like public works and water towers but its still debated whether overall they helped end or prolong the great depression. And then when WW2 hits its no surprise he goes all in on keeping the Soviet regime alive.

We should have just continued the march towards outright hegemony instead of this gay obvious version where Russians and Chinese pretend they matter.
>American passport allows you free travel and no taxes anywhere
>Annual tribute from our vassal states
>France turned into an amusement park
>Foreign women pleading for American seed so they can afford basic health care
>The Kremlin burned
>The pyramids ripped down
>The Great Wall turned into a formula 1 track
>Canada nuked
>The Eiffel Tower torn down and dumped into the sea
>Rome sacked
The based timeline did not choose us bros.

>>64096470
at a bare minimum it demonstrates that the soviets were not the molasses, giant mass of human meat that give off the impression of slow and uncoordinated, who advanced on germany only through sheer numeric superiority (which they definitely had in their favor if the allies were to remain at 47 divisions).
It should also be mentioned that the forces sent to manchuria were troops that the soviets spared precisely because they knew the troops left in germany could fend off any western allies aggression (short of muh nooks). Stalin is many things, dumb enough to fall for an empty non-aggression pact twice is pushing it.

>>64095516
but not during war

>>64092989
It took the USSR more than 2 years to barely take back the territory Germany, a Nation half the size of Texas, took from them in six months.

The that was while Germany was fighting a ware on other fronts and being strategic bombed to shit.

The notion they are going to steamroll the western allies, who are infinitely better supplied and capable, while they are suddenly the ones on the receiving end the strategic bombing, is absolutely comical.

>>64096878
It took the US more than 2 years to barely take back the territory Japan, a nation half the size of Florida, took from them in 6 months.
Redditspacing
The hurrdurr was while japan was fighting two other warehouses on other fronts and being strategic bombed to shit.
Redditspacing
The notion they are going to steamroll the Red Army, who are infinitely better coordinated and capable, while they are suddenly the ones on the receiving end the numeric disadvantage, is absolutely comical.

>>64095506
>do not question the secular state you racist, science denying conspiracy theorist
Importing squatamalans by the literal truck load is population control. Telling people it isn't is authoritarian propaganda. Liberalism is just rationalizing its totalitarian tendencies. Sucks you're on the propaganda spewing end.

>>64091037
>”we won the war and defeated the nazis, comrades! We are sending a diplomatic plane containing cookies or whatever”
>nuke the shit out of moscow

>>64089952 (OP)
Poland was on Soviet side tho, it should say American, British, Canadian and French divisions.

>>64089952 (OP)
>Nukes won’t stop a Zerg rush.
They stop a moscow and a St.Petersberg nicely though and what can they do about the UK, it's a fucking island.

>>64089965
>West didn't have political will and control to start such war.
You have no idea how despised communists and kremlin dictators and their quislings are in free nations, then or now.

>>64096906
Yeah, it took the US two years, only they were crossing the Pacific and purposely skipping islands.

Oh yeah....they didn't lose 10 million soldiers doing it either.

Citing "numerical advantage" is hilarious considering how badly they got fucked up by Germany despite this. If they were "coordinated and capable" they wouldn't have lost 4 men for every 1 German they killed.

lmao.

>>64097036
If you can clap Stalin and much of the inner circle there's a fair chance that when you come in swinging their army won't do shit because everyone will be busy fighting over who's supposed to be next in line.

>>64091037
>But now you're asking for a major air campaign that's going to involve throwing that bomber force that just got done thinking it was over back into months of high-intensity operations,

Lmao, but imagine how Soviet infantry would feel...then imagine how they would feel when the famine comes.

>>64089952 (OP)
As others have said, militarily possible, politically impossible.
I think most western nations would have been dealing with insurgencies if they decided to follow WW2 with another war against an "ally".

>>64096507
Ah yes, Formula 1, the famous American motorsport. You are brown.

>>64099999
>>65000000

>>64100231
Shit, I'm retarded.
>>64100000

>>64089952 (OP)
No.
>Communications stretched and heavily damaged by the war
>Soldiers tired
>Germans are going to go all ways fighting for and against anyone
>Communist saboteurs in Italy, France, China, Korea, Vietnam and main allied nations would be doing as much shit as OUN, Forest Brothers and AK would be doing on Soviet territory
>Civilians throughout the Europe wanting for peace and possibly starving
>Baltic and North Sea being so stuffed with sea mines, little military operations would be possible
>Political mindset of the domestic masses in need for changing
>No enough nukes

>>64097014
>If you're against the Church worming its way into your life and forcing you to do what they say, you're a totalitarian.
You evangelist retards can't go extinct fast enough.

>>64092856
Capitalism is what imports people from the third world so they can wage-squeeze. Under Liberal wage schemes companies should actually pay fair wages to everyone and anyone so would get no benefit by importing foreigners because they'd have to pay them the same as they would any domestic worker. But sure, run through that old Capitalist trick of causing the problem then blaming it on others.

>>64101672
That's under Corpratism which has achieved paradigm under the purview of Neoliberal economics (starting in the the 70s/80s) while masquerading as Capitalism.

>>64089952 (OP)
>pictured in red: Russia's borders in 2026

>>64089952 (OP)

Anglo-American 20th century identity is founded on worshiping mongoloids. It is trivially easy for Englishmen and Americans to imagine their own extinction, but impossible for them to imagine the extinction of Muscovite and Han animals. In fact, they desire the former extinction, and put it off merely to stave off the latter (see: Anglo-Americans consider their own borders are a joke, but consider mongoloid borders sacred).

>>64097117
Evidently not, considering the West fought ww2 on their side, handed victory to them on a platter and proceeded to decolonize and brownize while letting
those benefactors like China rise up to be great powers.
>muh good chinks were in charge back then!
chinks are chinks and will forever be chinks

>>64089952 (OP)
The ussr literally starves without lend lease food

>>64101679
NTA, but:
>HIV is not AIDS because they're different and AIDS appeared later

>>64093060
>>64093060
>5.7 million tons of grain
>In 3 years
That's about 135 calories a day for 100 million people for a year.
The U.S. shipped 16.5 million tons of assistance food to Europe and Japan in 1946 alone.

funny how it wasn't unthinkable when it came to starting WW1 and WW2

>>64103552
You could probably materialize more flattering numbers, like number of people it could help sustain a 2,000 calorie diet, or really fudge it with something like number of toddlers it meets the caloric requirements for for a month.
I think its good to put the historical number in context, but I doubt agricultural production would remain constant in the proposed scenario.
However I believe any real speculation on scale or effects would move away from evaluating something and more towards molding the situation to get the wanted answers.

>>64092934
You know a ground shot will bounce everyone inside the bunker against the ceiling at supersonic speed right?

>>64089952 (OP)
Yes. The Soviets were holding on by a thread.
>the resulting Jewish crash out
I'd bet cash money that US/UK Jews would start mass murder terrorist attacks in response for this.

>>64092874
Who'd of thought that Soviet sympathizers would commit actions that benefit the Soviets!?! Anyone who glazes the MI6/MI7 as the best intelligence agencies to ever exist conveniently leaves this portion of British history out, which is why I laugh at 007 films.

>>64093060
right this one time he wouldn't be a complete retard

>>64096656
yes yes in fact he did, Stalin repeatedly treated food as a tool of state policy, willing to export even when domestic shortages were severe, if it served a foreign policy or military goal. This was consistent with his approach in peacetime too — the most infamous example being the 1932–33 grain exports during the Holodomor famine.
Stalin exported food seven separate times under your conditions.

>>64097758
Ford/Shelby raced fucking everything besides euros are faggots and high horsepower is american by the stink on it. Get fucked euroqueer, we're taking it.

>>64101979
And then fucking Ike and fucking Kennedy handed South America to commies on a fucking platter.

>>64097135
That's a fuckin GREAT day for Russia in Ukraine though kek.

>>64101672
capitalism is you buying a tomato at the farm stand, corporatism is buying it at FoodsMart

>>64089952 (OP)
>Nukes won’t stop a Zerg rush
You don't win a war by dying.
Zerg rushes literally don't work.

>>64096426
>Everyone who says "yes" should remember that the soviet army had enough resources to spare to launch operation august storm in manchuria, decisively destroying an admittedly poorly equipped, trained, supplied and deployed japanese kwangtung army.
Is that supposed to impress anyone?

The US could have done that fifty times over. The US wasn't even at full steam by the time WW2 ended let alone exhausted. We would have fucking demolished them.

>>64096555
>at a bare minimum it demonstrates that the soviets were not the molasses, giant mass of human meat that give off the impression of slow and uncoordinated, who advanced on germany only through sheer numeric superiority (which they definitely had in their favor if the allies were to remain at 47 divisions
It actually doesn't.
You could have taken Manchuria with an army from the fucking 1800s.

>Stalin knew
Dick.

>>64101672
Absolutely nothing about free trade requires any level of porousness at the border.
You can have a state devoted to free trade internally that's completely closed off from the outside world. This is because laws extend to your borders, and free trade no more demands open borders or immigration than a law against murder demands international interventions across the world to police the globe.

Browns aren't imported "for le capitalizm" they're imported to despoil the land and harm the people who have been declared "Amalek", not a bug, a feature.

>>64102586
Government involved with business, bad.
Government not involved with business, good.
Communism, socialism, corporatism, it's irrelevant pilpul. Government involved with business.

That's the only binary, no one wants to play your commie word games.
To the maximum extent which is possible while rights are being respected, third party (government) interference with voluntary transactions should be minimized.
That society which has held closer to this axiom has prospered, and that society that has moved closer to the reverse has suffered, and this success and suffering can be measured by virtually every metric possible.

>>64108003
Correct. I don't know why this is so hard. Even without muh nukes the allies overwhelming air superiority and naval dominance would strangle the Soviets as soon as their gibs were cut off. They would likely make initial gains in Europe but once the allies start snowballing it's gg2ez. The allies had a massive manpower advantage that could have very easily been tapped into.

>>64089952 (OP)
no, the allies let the soviet union build up their potential too much
the production rate of nuclear bombs was not high enough to use them strategically or operationally

Optimal Strat:
>pearl harbor kicks off war, focus on nook development and crushing the japs
>germany still declares war on US but never ally with the soviets or even provide logistics. demonize USSR for invading poland and finland.
>let europe stay occupied while the germs do their work
>england stays safe due to island and navy
>contain axis in europe and kick them out of africa as usual. dont worry about knocking out italy
>at this point the the germs should have enough to take moscow but just barely.
>USSR collapses and is a german puppet state but they are extremely overextended
>japan is nooked and now a staging area
>simultaneous invasions western occupied europe and eastern occupied asia with nook support
>germany gets rolled quickly. russian territory "liberated" by US but commie state is abolished

wadda think?

>>64089952 (OP)
British morale was pretty low, and I suspect would have collapsed.

The US? Maybe. Korea was a draw with basically the same equipment, and frankly less equipment on the commie side.

>>64108250
You have to get to the Urals, not just Moscow for a win condition. In your silly alternate reality you let Musoloni/Germs do whatever in Africa and ignore it until the Soviets fall. Really you'd have to find some way to have a cease fire/armistice with the Germans so 100% of their resources can go east. ON TOP OF THAT, you'd have to somehow convince the Nips to attack Russia and not Pearl Harbor/China. Really the only way the Germans could take them out.

>>64089952 (OP)
it would not be popular. many of the crimes that truly garnered antipathy among the west (e.g. czech coup, violent suppression of the hungarians, invasion of czechoslovakia) had not yet occured. no one really cared that maybe 10 million russians died and 170 million were poorer than they should be. that's just those wacky russians doing their ivan the terrible shit as usual but with a new name. that did manage to extend their stupidity further was what made people realize that some morons took the new name seriously

>>64108599
during the korean war a large portion of US forces remained in Europe anyway and at this time China had not yet fallen so it would be a better balance of forces
im pretty sure

>>64093570
didn't we only have two bombs that we used on japan and we were lucky japan didn't call our bluff or it would take us six months to make another?

>>64089952 (OP)
>Lend Lease yoinking kills the USSR by ball bearings alone, or logistics trucks, or diesel ...

Yes and given the entire FDR government was infiltrated over more than a decade to the point of MULTIPLE SOVIET (and british) SPIES IN THE MANHATTAN PROJECT, Churchill getting Patton together to plan it out was far too little far too late. If it took rogue generals presenting a fait accompli late in the war, that's what truly needed to actually happen while still mobilized. We're in Cold War Continuation Part 2 and taking Coof and Manchuko Jiao on the nose with hardly any retaliation radically does not bode well-- especially with legions of useless idiots promoting Goleniewski named agent Kissinger Doctrine of 'splitting' the Sino- from the -Soviet. And bean counting fagging whores to British influence like Peter Zeihan are just as bad routinely drawing the conspicuously always self-sabotaging conclusions from their better than the rest data (invading Narco-Terrorist Mexico to pre-empt some Tet Offensive bullshit being a recent exception).

Patton was going to run and win against The LItttle Swedish (blue) Eisenhower and spill the beans on Operation Keelhaul et. al., and that was a problem.There's no more face saving room for weasel maneuver now, as the Epstein idiocy as demonstrated.

>>64093897
>post war
>voting
...

>>64089977
>Maybe to push the USSR back to its pre-1939 borders but then what?

Stop nuclear proliferation at the source. Keep military administration of Eurotrash, specifically FRANCE AND DEGAULLE'S STOLEN RESISTANCE VALOR REDS, and prevent hundreds of thousands of combat capable Germans from being starved to death. Stop Marshall Plan funds from being embezzled to buttress Kraut creations (BIS et. al.), among myriad other things. Delay the GI Bill college glut enough for slightly more balanced generational demographics and politics in the current year. Cut the head off the proliferation snake before it spreads to Mao. Stop the Red tide in France from educating Pol Pot's ilk. Opening up all of Eurasia and its 70 trillion in assets to fuel an unimpeded march straight into space-- we had permanent moon bases in the 60s, take MAD outlay away and USAID pork to grease failed state thirdies' palms, and we actually have the Jetsons flying car future by now instead of Floyd Festivals and glacial Zimmerman Note replacement Mexican mass migration facilitated by frenemy pinkos in the EU and kayfabe 'near peer competitors' in Moscow & Beijing.

this would be impossible for many reasons.
but from an operational perspective k-27 being online by its actual-factual date should allow 3-4 bombs per month with war time exigencies. in practical matters the first aerial genocide could have been achieved

>>64090003
>Discounting things like morale and homefront fatigue, yes.

Soviets had no bombers worth a damn. Even if they magically manifested Lend Lease logistics, American total air superiority would actually and finally kick in the rotten edifice of the USSR in short order-- they were clapped out by Berlin, and clapped out looting manufacturing capital in the aftermath; Stalin was horny to get WW3 going in part due to the manufacturing gap widening, and the imperative to remove Europe as a market (and the Mediterranean) for US industry.

>>64096463
>had Eisenhower listened to Churchill who said that instead of a southern invasion of France that force should have landed in the Baltics (or was it the Balkans, I forget) and prevented USSR from annexing/influencing it. But Eisenhower in his infinite wisdom said the liberation of France was more important

Getting Italy neutral ought've been diplomatically trivial if it was done sooner rather than later, which was the rationale for France first. Given the non-existent navies of Berlin and Moscow - and Hess' flight - coordinating a rapid Baltics deployment with the Germans to retard their advance would have been ideal. Slow rolling Italy to extend German logistics in favor of a Balkans presence against the Soviets also was advisable.

>>64093029
>this is what ziggers truly belive
Ivan, I understand that you think kindness is when you're not getting raped in the barracks with bottles and broomsticks by your fellow noviops, but actual humans see things a bit differently

>>64108110
Anything can be true in your imagination and real inside your head. That doesn't mean anyone asked you to share.

>>64096507
>American passport allows you free travel and no taxes anywhere
Anywhere except america****
It does you as an american no favours in that regard

>>64101833
cope, pidorashka, and never post here again

>>64091037
Literally US aircraft fielded in 45 outclassed everything in the air even jets (they worked and didn't burn their pilots to chemical death). There isn't an aircraft in the SU air force in 45 that will contend with allied fresh planes, and once the US supplied stocks dwindle that's all they'll have

>>64089952 (OP)
Lend-Lease for the Soviets was the biggest geopolitical blunder in history.

>>64108250
Extraordinarily unlikely as the Germans were too retarded to not kill slavs but instead use them to kill other slavs (natural habitat)

>>64112755
it is hard to believe but the soviets were seen as liberators in many places they hadn't liberated. it took only a few years for many to see what they had actually done but others took until 1968 to realize the soviets were violent oppressors.

in Italy, for example, even as late as the Soviet invasion of Hungary was supported by their communist party which was strong in the north. But 12 years later the invasion Czechoslovakia was denounced (well, officially, the party couldn't stop the tankies from tanking)

>>64112831
I live in one of those "liberated" countries thoughbeit and at least here nobody was happy about it

>>64089952 (OP)
Possibly, IF the US and British could find the will to keep fighting. Russia was dead on it's feet and had no answer to the nuclear bomb. Not even air superiority would work since Russian airpower couldn't compete with British designs and American manufacturing.

>>64112831
In this case there was the assertion that they would also be happy to be liberated by the soviets and would save the soviets from the anglo-americans. It also completely avoided the topic of the soviet occupied countries.

>>64113037
please look again.
>in many places they had*n't* liberated
namely france, northern italy and parts of yugoslavia until the tito split.

>>64113176
Look at the previous posts.
>And you've killed dozens of thousands of civilians so Europeans would side with the soviets
>Yeah man everyone was so hyped for the gentle humanitarian Soviets to come rule them
Its relevant to the discussion.

>>64097103
>and French
No

Not a chance in hell, the USSR was a useful counterweight against the americans + communists were the leading party in 1946 and they had guns

>>64113403
I wonder if he's a zigger or a demoralized Westerner that just happened to swallow zigger propaganda?

>>64113403
They'd be hyped up because the americans would be genocidors unlike the Soviets in their eyes

Western Europe isnt Ukraine or Poland

>>64092837
Although the white population of the US at the time was far more libtarded(ie not interested in genocidal extermination) compared to today after 70 years of liberals not having kids and conservatives having 2.7 they weren't exactly pro-commie back then. If anything the biggest problem would come from the jews and commies(tautology) in the government.

A bunch of faggots ITT seem to think the best thing was not to simply smash the USSR or let them fight the Chinks in the 60s and then nuke the winner and loser into glass because letting the USSR fail invalidated commie bullshit. But given some of the faggots around today I don't think that invalidation will stick.

Anyway it might actually be better to blockade the USSR for at least 6 months and smash their domestic oil production via bases in the Levant and China. I don't think this would result in a political collapse but it would completely gut their ability to mobilize and then you could work from there.

>>64113423
>>64112755
You cant just throw zigger when you refuse to educate yourself on european history

Not even eastern europe, basic western european history

Use captured Germs and Japs as cannon fodder

Not one step back, Order 227: Allied POW boogaloo edition

Then mop up with a fully armed American, Bong, French forces

US Muhreens, Chinks and Jap POWs land in Kamchatka and Vladivostok, the latter gets sent to eat Soviet bullets and shells while Muhreens curbstomp the Russian Far East

>>64113443
First post you're calling out was because an anon was narrowing the scope of the discussion to make it fit his narrative. Then trying to call out another anon for making a reply that pertained to what was being discussed because it wasn't within the discussion that he wanted. Its not a refusing any interest in history, its calling the posts disingenuous.

>>64090905
>>64091092
>>64091107
B-29 were practically uncontested in the skies over Korea until the MiG-15s showed up.
Postwar Soviet made prop fighters/interceptors like La-9s and postwar Yak-9 models were still dogshit at altitudes B-29s easily cruised at.
Even worse if their supply of high octane fuel from the US would have been cut off.

>>64113503
Old Uncle Adolf was right about the oil fields, he was wrong about many things including what makes a good service rifle but we was right about that.

>>64113482
But i'm ingenuous

>>64093897
Except those communist parties weren't voted in. Hell the Czechs and Hungarians wanted don't immediately and they were both violently put down.

>>64114900
i know this is hard to believe in retrospect but france and italy had strong Soviet-aligned communist parties for a while. the PCF won the most votes of any party 1946, 51 and 56.

as an example of the of the concern for the US and UK at the time look here at a primary source
https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1946v05/d315
>...the unexpected success of the Communist Party at the polls on November 10 when the Communist leadership anticipated that their Party would not increase its representation in the National Assembly by more than five or six seats at the most; as a result of this success the Communists received the order from Moscow to make a serious bid for the formation of a Cabinet under Communist direction and consequently the Thorez interviews should be regarded in the light of the general campaign of the Soviet Union at the present juncture to reassure the distrustful Anglo-Saxons and thus attenuate the existing international tension. In this manner, the outbreak of the “inevitable” armed conflict with the British and Americans would be postponed until the Soviet Union had improved its military strength and had further consolidated its political position in eastern, central and southeastern Europe.

in any case i find this all hard to follow as i merely tried to add information here. the earlier comments are perhaps a joke, i cannot tell. but communists in france and italy were a serious concern for the US/UK at this time. Toviets were trying to hold back the French and Italian communists at this time out of fear of the Anglos (it seems to be their eternal fear) but if a war had started they would surely encourage all sorts of fuckery.

>>64115008
He was referring to the de-facto coups the Communists performed in Poland, Czechoslovakia and Hungary, where they joined in coalition governments, generally took over the Ministry of the Interior, abused emergency powers to arrest the democraticaly elected non-comunnist politicians and established one-party people's republics by banning all non-communist parties.

Compared to this, the situations in Italy and France were normal and democratic.

>>64115448
Yes, but there were also popular communist movements at that time. Not all of them were unpopular. The eastern Europeans got a one way ticket to communism due to FDR being a Trump-tier negotiator at Yalta. There was never a real choice. But in France and Italy, many people voted for communist parties even after the outcome of e.g. the Czechoslovak coup of 1948 was known.

Invading in 1945 gives no time for people to see the Soviet theory/reality dichotomy when these groups were at the peak of their popularity and not yet really disarmed from their partisan days.

The questionable part is western allied morale. Harder to start shooting refusers en masse compared to the red army.
Going from fighting an enemy that has chronic resource shortages to one with material and resource abundance, coupled with qualitatively superior aircraft in large numbers, I think they would be in quite a pickle pretty fast.
Long ass lines of communication would be suddenly vulnerable. Jet fighters than can operate with near impunity starting to appear in theater. Long range bombers that can threaten most of Russia. Even without the bomb long term prospects wouldn't be great for the Russians.

>>64110500
>didn't we only have two bombs
Forty more were being built. Not one.

>>64115588
Ture, but a continued war foooting also means that these communist parties are now enemies of the state and just get jailed or shot.
Annd neither Italy noor France aree actually reelevant for war production, tehy're even worse of than Germany.

>>64115634
>Red Army
>1945
>material and resource abundance
Only thanks to LL, and the Red Army almost broke itself by storming Berlin.

Without LL russians in 1945 would be without food and boots. I had few uncles who got forced into red army when they enteret baltics. They said every consumable ie food and non heavy gear had mark of made in usa

>>64093897
nigga, voted where?

>>64089952 (OP)
First, Russian Army in 1945 was in an absolute shit state. They had taken horrific casualties.

Second, the Russian economy in 1945 was completely artificial. Without equipment from the US/UK and food from the US they would fold incredibly fast.

Third, in terms of doctrine and combat power the Allies stood heads and shoulders above the Russians.

>>64116821
>Red Army almost broke itself by storming Berlin.
not even a zigger but this is not true at all
50,000 KIA out of what, several million?
They had 150+ divisions just for Berlin.

>>64117649
Logistics

>>64115634
>The questionable part is western allied morale.
Depends if we're going what was historically there or if we're using the assumptions made when planning. If you try and keep it historically accurate as possible it makes a bit of sense to challenge the assumptions, but if you also think of the assumptions as requirements then there isn't much of a point to discussing what happens if they aren't met, because it wouldn't happen.

>>64117649
They had close to 500k casualties during tthe Berlin operaation as a whole, they threw everything and the looted kitchen sink at Berlin.
They also suffered quite heavy losses south of the city during the drive to encirclle it.

AAfter the battle, everry Front that had foughht in the city was considered largely combat ineffective, aannd the Soviets were low on acttually draftable manpower at that point, so this could not have been remedied by June 1st.

Also, they were actively engaged by Czech partisans and SS holdouts in a three way clusterfuck in Czechia until well after the war had officiallly ended, a situation that would repeat iitself in Pooland, the eBaltics and Balkans in an Unthinkable scenario.
The Soviets were not welcomed as liberatorss anywhere outside of their own propaganda.

>>64089966
>tpbp

Imaging thinking germs wouldn't backstab allies after retaking east germany

>>64090585
>>64092926
> Stalin would surrender to the west because a couple hundred K of his people died
lol
LMAO even

>>64115679
> Forty more were being built.
by 1946 the US had a total of 9 bombs
also people need to keep in mind that these were not Megaton-Bombs

>>64110500
The japs thought we could only make one bomb a year. The second bomb erased that theory