08-05-2005 06:29									#1
	War between the western allies and the Sovs in '45. Who wins? Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Assuming that we don't drop the bomb, a big assumption I agree.

The Sovs have T34s, the west has huge airforces. The Sovs have huge armies, Zhukov, and lots of arty. The west has control of the sea Patton, and industrial might.

At stake? Well we know history. Seventy years of oppression in eastern europe and elsewhere, the nuclear arms race, maybe even Korea and Vietnam. The huge expense of the cold war...

Or, a protracted war and defeat for the west? The Sovs the world's greatest empire, the map painted red...

	08-05-2005 06:33									#2
	Increase the size of your Attachments

They wipe each other out. Leaving cockroaches and cities of the dead. Then the zombies will rule.

	08-05-2005 06:39									#3
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

The west at the end of WW2 would have just simply bombed the USSR into submission.

	08-05-2005 06:46									#4
	Increase Your PM Length

I think the socialists would have won, but not in the way that many think.

In 1945 the west (especially europe) was war-weary and socialism was on the rise.

The massive casualties (compared to what had been suffered) that would have ensued if the west tried an invasion of the Soviet Union would probably have stoked the fires of socialist thought.

So the west would have won, but become socalist itself (although probably not to the extent of communist dictatorship)

	08-05-2005 07:23									#5
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

There are no winners in war, only losers.

	08-05-2005 07:41									#6
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

If you guys are right, we should have demanded the Sovs retreat from europe.

	08-05-2005 07:42									#7
	Get a bigger avatar today!

The USSR was far more exhausted by 1945 than the Allied Powers; an Allied attack would have destroyed their armies.

Allied victory if the goal was to drive them from Eastern Europe, a bloody stalemate, perhaps eventual defeat if we were to go down Patton's route and try to advance to Moscow.

	08-05-2005 07:43									#8
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

I remember a quote from somewhere from an American General during the Berlin airlift. Something like "The chances of war are about one in ten. If it comes to war, they will be well and truly licked"

Interesting insight? or hubris?

	08-05-2005 07:52									#9
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

The cockroaches.

Seriously, communist guerillas in France and Italy would have made the West's life hell. Labour unseated Churchill in '45, and U.S. troops were already restless by the end of the war. The merchant marine even mutineed when ordered to lift war supplied to aid the KMT in China. They were sick of war and ready to go home. Furthermore, the Communists were still a force in the U.S. before McCarthyism. Any war would have been over quite quickly with the Soviets in Western Europe and Greece and the U.S. with Spain and Portugal its only toe holds.

Last edited by chegitz guevara on 08-05-2005 at 07:57

	08-05-2005 07:54									#10
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

che, besides a very few nukes in the US, the rest of the world had none. "The cockroaches" is very dramatic, but not very realistic.

	08-05-2005 07:57									#11
	Support Apolyton

DanS'd ya.

	08-05-2005 08:01									#12
	Re: War between the western allies and the Sovs in '45. Who wins? Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by Lancer Assuming that we don't drop the bomb, a big assumption I agree. The Sovs have T34s, the west has huge airforces. The Sovs have huge armies, Zhukov, and lots of arty. The west has control of the sea Patton, and industrial might.

The West "allowed" the Soviets to take Berlin. However because of the military operations necessary to accomplish this, why it took the Soviet spearheads well west of Berlin, as well as the fact thast the Nazi's inflicted heavy damage onto the attacking Soviet columns. Because of this over-extension of the Soviet front, as well as their attenuated strength due to Nazi resistance, why the Soviets were primed for an allied counterstroke, if it were so chosen: the Allied Air Force could simply bomb the Soviet's Second Echelon (i.e. the support soviet) to nothing, while circling round the forward Soviet units and cutting them off, thus effectively starving them to death of fuel and munitions. Because of the Western Allies overwhelming positions on both the Northern and Southern Europe Front, why they could very easily feint the Soviet second echelon into defending the wrong front (due to overwhelming western air power denying the Soviets good air recon).
By 1944 the Soviets had already lost 90% of their youth aged 18-20 years old. If the Western Allies then destroyed the Soviet's Western Front's pincers in early '45, and then their support soviet, why I cannot see how the USSR could have effectively carried on the struggle in a gainfull manner from there.


D

	08-05-2005 08:01									#13
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

Okally dokally Che. So the Sov armies drive to all the way to Spain? The only real card they held was the T34... Still, who knows? Perhaps you are right.

Nahh...

	08-05-2005 08:05									#14
	Support Apolyton

Darsnan The allied airforces are a card that can't be beaten imo. The T34s would have done some damage, but they would have been hunted from the sky while strategic bombers flying from Germany took the war deep into Sov territory.

Actually, presented with an ultimatum, Stalin must have retreated.

	08-05-2005 08:07									#15
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Seriously, communist guerillas in France and Italy would have made the West's life hell.

Seriously, nationalist guerillas in Poland and Czechoslovakia would have made the Soviet's life hell.

	08-05-2005 08:14									#16
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by Lancer Okally dokally Che. So the Sov armies drive to all the way to Spain? The only real card they held was the T34... Still, who knows?

That's not the only card they held. France, Italy, and Greece would have fought for the Soviets, Britain would have taken itself out of the war, and masive strikes in the U.S. would have killed the war effort.

Allied air support wasn't as effective as claimed, having little effect on the Nazi war effort, the U.S. would still have a war in the Pacific, as Japan would refuse to surrender.

You also forget about the Il-2, one of the best planes in the war.

our_man,Poland and Czechoslovakian partisans didn't exist against the Nazis, so they can be discounted against the Soviets. On the other hand, Communist partisans liberated Greece and Northern Italy and were a problem for the Nazis in France.

	08-05-2005 08:16									#17
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Lancer Actually, presented with an ultimatum, Stalin must have retreated.

Of course, you forget that the West didn't want the responsibility of rebuilding Eastern Europe. They thought they were handing the Soviets a poison pill. Make the Soviets, who need to rebuild their own country, rebuild Eastern Europe.

	08-05-2005 08:17									#18
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Poland and Czechoslovakian partisans didn't exist against the Nazis, so they can be discounted against the Soviets.

The Warsaw uprisings? The assassination of Heydrich?

With Allied help, these national liberation movements could bleed the Soviets just as easily, perhaps moreso, than communist sypmathisers in Western Europe.

	08-05-2005 08:19									#19
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by our_man The Warsaw uprisings?

Led by Communists! They gonna attack their allies?

quote: The assassination of Heydrich?

An assassination, wow that will stop an army of millions.

Most of the liberation movements against the Fascsists were led, both in Europe and Asia, by the Communists. There were some non-communist elements, but they were pretty much non-factors. That's just history.

The nationalists had been either rubbed out by the Nazis or discreditted by collaborating with the Nazis. Either way, they weren't a serious threat, especially if the Allies launched an offensive, rather than the Soviets.

	08-05-2005 08:29									#20
	Remove this text

quote: Led by Communists! They gonna attack their allies?

OK, I didn't know this, but I have trouble believing it for the following reason: during the uprising, the USSR could have advanced to save the Poles instead of allowing them to be crushed by the Nazis. If they were really Allies, why didn't the Russian army attack Warsaw to help the partisans during the uprising? I just don't buy this.

	08-05-2005 08:30									#21
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

"Of course, you forget that the West didn't want the responsibility of rebuilding Eastern Europe. They thought they were handing the Soviets a poison pill. Make the Soviets, who need to rebuild their own country, rebuild Eastern Europe."

The Sovs never rebuilt eastern europe. I took a train through the Czech Republic in '93 or '94 and there were still many signs of WW2. Demolished buildings, wreckage...and this was after a few years of democracy with the rest of europe investing like crazy. The train I was on flew out of Switzerland, flew through Germany and tip toed through the Czech republic on rail lines with war damage still evident.

Communism.

	08-05-2005 09:02									#22
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara Any war would have been over quite quickly with the Soviets in Western Europe and Greece and the U.S. with Spain and Portugal its only toe holds.

Nonsense.

The Russians were exhausted in 45. The main risk for the allies was mutiny by their own troops.

	08-05-2005 09:07									#23
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara France, Italy, and Greece would have fought for the Soviets, Britain would have taken itself out of the war, and masive strikes in the U.S. would have killed the war effort.

God you sprout some bullsh*t sometime

quote: Allied air support wasn't as effective as claimed, having little effect on the Nazi war effort, the U.S. would still have a war in the Pacific, as Japan would refuse to surrender.

What a mindreader.

quote: You also forget about the Il-2, one of the best planes in the war.

Those who agree with you could meet in a phone booth. History and computer games are not the same thing Che.

quote: our_man,Poland and Czechoslovakian partisans didn't exist against the Nazis, so they can be discounted against the Soviets. On the other hand, Communist partisans liberated Greece and Northern Italy and were a problem for the Nazis in France.

Do you live in some kind of leftwing fantasy world?

	08-05-2005 09:24									#24
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

Is this thread a joke? Europe was in crappy shape but the USSR was in *FAR* worse shape....... the U.S. alone could of bombed them into submission.


I'm surprised no one mentioned this.

WE HAD NUCLEAR WEAPONS.

The soviets were scared shitless after we nuked the Japanese, they were afraid they might of been next.

We only needed to build more nukes.

	08-05-2005 09:38									#25
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

yeah add one nuke and its all over

	08-05-2005 09:47									#26
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

You guys need to read the first post in the thread. Nukes are out for discussion purposes. Add nukes and there isn't anything to BS about and we all just schrivel up and blow away.

	08-05-2005 11:21									#27
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

The Russians did originally think the Nazis were liberators, I'd imagine the Allies would have been able to make that label stick, Which is what it would have boiled down to in a war with the Soviet Union that we intended to win. Its ****ing cold up there.

	08-05-2005 11:36									#28
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

What percentage of Soviet military supplies came from the US in 1945? Quick Googling came up with the following (unsubstantiated!) list:

quote: Here's some statistics on Lend-Lease (LL) to the USSR. Over 400,000 trucks, more than half of which were medium and heavy trucks. 60% of the Soviet wheeled vehicles in 1945 were Lend-Lease trucks. 22,800 armored vehicles (tanks, half tracks, etc.), including more than 12,000 tanks. 40% of these arrived in 1941 when the USSR most needed them. 11,000 freight cars and 540,000 tons of rail -14,798 aircraft -4,111 20mm and 40mm AA guns -434,000 trucks -28,000 jeeps -5,500 artillery tractors -330,000 field telephones -2,670,000 tons of petroleum products including 476,000 tons of aviation fuel -5,500,000 pairs of boots -25,000,000 yards of uniform cloth -1,045 locomotives -8,260 wagons -1,200,000 tons of steel -26,000 machine-tools Soviet explosive production - 600,000 tons explosives via LL - 317,000 tons Soviet toluene (key ingredient in TNT) production - 116,000 tons Toluene via LL - 103,000 tons

http://www.strategypage.com/message...ges/478-530.asp

Here's a far more detailed list: http://www.geocities.com/mark_willey/lend.html

Any consideration of this question must take into account that the Soviet military would've lost it's biggest arms manufacturer - the United States!

	08-05-2005 11:37									#29
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

Finland wins, no question.

	08-05-2005 11:40									#30
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Lancer You guys need to read the first post in the thread. Nukes are out for discussion purposes. Add nukes and there isn't anything to BS about and we all just schrivel up and blow away.

.....no, because A. the nukes we had at the time were *FAR* weaker then the ones we had today...... I doubt we could of irradiated the planet if we wanted to.

B. Russians did not have them.