09-05-2005 09:34									#91
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by Urban Ranger The Western allies were only facting at most 1/10 of Nazi Germany's military might, the rest was on the Eastern Front.

Which is why they outnumbered the Krauts by 10 and 20 to 1 or more in AFV's And I think the accepted figure is 25% of Axis forces were in the West, particularly after D Day.

The Western allies also achieved full motorisation of their forces, something neither the Germans nor the Russians ever achieved, or even got close to. Allied airpower would have made an awful mess of the Red Army's horse and rail based transport.

The general state of the roads is another interesting point - the Western allies would have been using paved roads and other well developed and "thick" transport arteries whilst the Sovs would have been using unsealed dirt roads and narrow supply corridors, vulnerable to interdiction.

And just to cap off a bad year, there would have been famine in Russia if Western food supplies had been cut off in 1945.

	09-05-2005 10:15									#92
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

This is a ridiculous argument. The US had mad tonnage by the end of the war. Apply until Russkii defeat.

	09-05-2005 10:50									#93
	Re: War between the western allies and the Sovs in '45. Who wins? Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Lancer The west has control of the sea Patton, and industrial might.

Folks, this is why commas are useful. There is no such thing as the Patton Sea . . . . .


now there most certainly was an American general by the name of Patton.

	09-05-2005 11:02									#94
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

I screwed up MrFun.

I'm really sorry.

	09-05-2005 11:03									#95
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

I will allow this horrid butchering of grammar to slip by this one time . . . . . .

	09-05-2005 15:34									#97
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara 1. How do they reach the Urals?

The B-29 had a range of 3250 miles with a full bomb load.

	09-05-2005 16:01									#98
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

Probably a stalemate. The Soviets have grave logistical problems getting supplies and men to central Europe in the teeth of Anglo-American interdiction efforts, and time is most certainly not on their side with their massive production deficit and already severely depleted manpower. While they have superior armor and much more combat experience than their adversaries, they would have to attack not only into the teeth of allied tactical air, but much more significantly on the tactical level into masses of world class allied artillery. Beside this, the Anglo-American allies are very stubborn defenders.

On the flip side the Allies aren't a lock in taking the attack to the enemy. For starters they aren't nearly as imaginative or effective in the attack as they are on the defensive, while the Soviets are very good on the defensive. The large deficit in quality and numbers of armored vehicles between the Soviets and the Western Allies is a much larger factor if the Allies are forced to send their tanks into the open to find the Soviet tank and anti-tank forces the hard way. There won't be any chance to use terrain or fortifications to support the generally inadequate armor of the majority of allied tanks, while local firepower superiority won't guarantee a victory as undergunned allied tanks will achieve few kills on Soviet heavy tanks dug in hull down. Assuming that the Soviets learn to move their tanks once they have been exposed (probably after smoking a sherman or two), allies indirect artillery will have a hard time making up the difference.

Logistically the war would be a nightmare for the allies, despite the fact that they would have an infinitely easier time getting supplies to central and Eastern Europe via the Baltic. The reason for this is that there would be many millions of starving civilians to care for, and more for every mile the Allies advance. As it was people starved in Europe and Japan at the end of the war. Allied strength would be also diluted as they occupied all of the territory on their way east. Sure, the relative popularity of the allied political program would make this necessity less of a burden, but the sheer mass of territory would add up.

I think the strategic air war would have a minimal impact, as I don't think the Soviets could last long enough for the allied strategic forces to do enough damage, nor do I think that the Anglo-Allies would have the political will to fight another several year war in order to achieve a significant victory.

Oh, and the Japanese would still lose, badly.

	09-05-2005 16:11									#99
	Tired of ads?

The guys with the nuclear bomb win.

	09-05-2005 16:56									#100
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara No, I guess not. He was talking about an ultimatim to deman the USSR leave Eastern Europe though, which implies an U.S. attack.

Wasn't that in reply to the posts above it?

	09-05-2005 19:27									#101
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by Sikander Oh, and the Japanese would still lose, badly.

With thirteen divisions in Kyushu (our invasion force only had 12 divisions) and 5,000 combat aircraft, they weren't going to be a pushover.

	09-05-2005 19:31									#102
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

It was around 12k aircraft I think, all slated for kamakaze missions though. No, if the war had lasted into 1946 millions of Japanese would have starved. it was over.

	09-05-2005 19:42									#103
	Suffering from ads?

The Allies would win, and Moscow would be radioactive glass.

Pwning Russia: priceless

	09-05-2005 20:09									#104
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara Led by Communists! They gonna attack their allies?

the '44 warsaw uprising was led by the Polish Home Army.

	09-05-2005 20:14									#105
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

i will go with the stalemate side. US airpower just about offsetting Soviet ground forces. War exhaustion on both sides.

	09-05-2005 20:19									#106
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

Hard to say.

The Sovs had crushed the most formidable land army in the history of Europe.

We had technology, and massed air forces, but the reds had
numbers, fanatical hate and a stomach for casualties that we
could not match. It would have been the ultimate battle, and
most likely left us with a planet of the dead.

.

	09-05-2005 21:30									#107
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

The Red Army was exhuasted and bleeding dry by wars end. It had been shriking steadily since spring of 1944. The USA was only partly mobilized, with much mapower left at home that had been supplying the Soviets. The svoiets would have been sweep from the air, and from the Baltic sea in short order, and would have have a very difficult time maintaining LOC to their front.

	10-05-2005 00:35									#108
	Put an end to popups!

A few of points:

1) The US and Britain had an overwhelming airpower advantage. No modern army has ever won against an oponent that had air superiority.

2) German armies would have joined the Allied side if we needed them.

3) The US was fielding modern tanks in '45, equal or better than Tigers.

4) The peoples of Eastern Europe would have supported the Allies, provided that we did not employ the Germans.

The net, Allied victory was inevitable.

	10-05-2005 01:54									#109
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by lord of the mark i will go with the stalemate side. US airpower just about offsetting Soviet ground forces. War exhaustion on both sides.

Why does everyone keep saying that Allied air power "stalls" the Soviets? It didn't even come close to do that to the Germans in 44-45, and the Soviet air force in 45 was better than the German one.

	10-05-2005 01:58									#110
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Oh, and another argument I keep hearing is that the Soviet manpower was depleted. This argument in itself does not make sense, you have to look at the number of men available, not the losses taken.

I couldn't find the exact figures, but IIRC there would have been 250 Soviet divisions against 100 Allied ones.

	10-05-2005 02:11									#111
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

But guys, what about war aims? What could be the stated war aims, for both sides, in such a war? World domination?

We all know it would be impossible for the allies to go all the way to Moscow. Setting the mark for the 1939 Soviet border would be more plausible but still very difficult. Trying to win a limited war over the core German territory would be feasible.

As for Stalin, he was capable of anything, but, he had to say somethimg to the masses. What would that be? Spread the revolution worldwide? That wouldn't be him, but the partisans all over Europe would not have expected less.

	10-05-2005 02:14									#112
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara With thirteen divisions in Kyushu (our invasion force only had 12 divisions) and 5,000 combat aircraft, they weren't going to be a pushover.

But the Japanese had no fuel. That's why they were reduced to Kamikaze attacks in the first place. By the spring of 1945 they were reduced to attempting to make jet fuel out of pine tree roots.

	10-05-2005 02:43									#113
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Qilue, Vesayen, and Oerdin...

You guys are clearly not (well-trained) economists... The man said that nukes are out by assumption...

This one would go to the Allies for reasons already mentioned... Air superiority, ok. Manpower, maybe. But most importantly, IMHO, the US had a full-fledged modern industrial economy backing up the war effort...

Taking into account that the Soviets had already suffered during the war (their land, industries and people ravaged by the Germans and the previous war effort), whereas the USA itself was unscathed (spelling?)...

Had it been a fight to the end with no political solutions at hand (ruled out by assumption? ) it could only have gone one way, but at a terrible cost in lives...

Carolus

	10-05-2005 02:45									#114
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by JohnT But the Japanese had no fuel. That's why they were reduced to Kamikaze attacks in the first place. By the spring of 1945 they were reduced to attempting to make jet fuel out of pine tree roots.

Kamakazis were quite effective. IIRC they killed ten thousand Americans and sank dozens of ships. They also demoralized the hell out of the people facing them.

	10-05-2005 02:48									#115
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Che, any time you're destroying your capital equipment you're playing a losing game.

	10-05-2005 02:51									#116
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara Kamakazis were quite effective. IIRC they killed ten thousand Americans and sank dozens of ships. They also demoralized the hell out of the people facing them.

There's pretty good evidence that the Japanese were already trying to surrender in July of 1945. They weren't going to out last August anyway.

If the Soviets attack in the west in the summer of 1945 they probably would not have transferred enough troops to the eastern provinces to invade Manchuria. I still say that the emporer would have seen the handwriting on the wall after the two nuclear bombs were dropped.

	10-05-2005 02:53									#117
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

I would think that the loss of pilots would be worse than the planes themselves, no?

Perhaps not for the Japanese, which did not have the same industrial capacity as the US...

Carolus

	10-05-2005 02:54									#118
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by JohnT Che, any time you're destroying your capital equipment you're playing a losing game.

Maybe so, but the idea was to try and make the Americans think that an invasion of Japan was just too damn costly, and to negotiate an end to the war that didn't involve a Japanese surrender. With the Japanese meatgrinder in full swing, I doubt many Americans would be in favor of a war with our former ally.

	10-05-2005 02:57									#119
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by Dr Strangelove I still say that the emporer would have seen the handwriting on the wall after the two nuclear bombs were dropped.

Probably, but what could he do about it? The military wanted to keep fighting, and the Emperor had to explain that it was the Soviets handing them their ass in Manchuria that made surrender necessary. Even then, there was a coup attempt. More likely was a general uprising of the Japanese people, and the government was very worried about this, even if the military wasn't. The military seems to have been off in its own fantasy world where it thought it wasn't defeated.

	10-05-2005 03:07									#120
	Inflate your Upload Space

Industrial power etc isn't the crucial point if there had been incidents starting a war between Soviet and the rest of the allies. At least not the first. The real question is if the English/Americn/French forces would be able to prevent the soviet forces thowing them into tha atlantic. If that doesn't succed, then there are no serious chance of another D-day.

If that is done, then we can talk about introducing newer and stronger panzer etc, but it will take months before they arrive at the battlefield.

Attacking the core of soviet through the baltic ocean is not an option - no sane admiral would ever try to go into that area through the belts or øresund -. that would be suicide.