US vs USSR?

The russians would have most likely ran right into the Magnot line......

The russian horde probably wasnt capable of advancing through the Ardennes.

------------------
Out side is America!

 

Sorry Yankee, ur wrong.
The Maginnot line was no more at the time, dismantled to build the Atlantic Wall.
BTW, it didn't cover the Belgium border so they didn't need to cross the Ardennes. And even if they wanted to try, T34 were much better than Panzers on difficult grounds...

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>
Originally posted by Rommel:

Every mainstream estimate I have seen about the deaths caused by stalin are around 30 million, but I've read as high as 40 million.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Does this 30 million include the Soviet casualties during 1941 to 1945? I mean, including these would be nonsense: Similarly one could say the KIA U.S. soldiers at Pearl Harbor were not a victim of Japanese aggression, but of the blunder of U.S. Intelligence.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>
Also, many russians died during the war because of Stalin's ridiculous purges of the officer corps in the Red Army. Stalin even condoned anti-Jewish pogroms and all this on his own people!.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Isn’t it a sad, but true fact that as long a dictator puts terror on his own people we tend to don’t give a shit for it, but if he starts killing “our” people, he turns to be a monster? The difference is that Stalin’s terror was limited to his area of influence, while Hitler did too, AND invaded other countries to put his terror on these.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>
Both men were absolute monsters, but at least Hitler was fairly decent to most germans.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Unless this Germans were unlucky enough of being either jewish, a gipsy, a homosexual, a criminal or mentally disabled, a Communist, a Pacifist, an Alcoholic, a members of Christian a sect, a returned emigrant, a drug addicted, someone who didn’t want to work, part of the left intelligentsia (whatever that means), a social democrat, a child refusing to join the Hitler Youth, a farmer who left his farm or someone who had the bad luck of being accused of making jokes mocking or criticizing national socialism or Herrn Hitler (truthfully or not), short everyone who was conspicuous of being a “unworthy element” or a thread to the nazi regime or Herrn Hitler personally.

This, plus the 3 M killed German soldiers, the other 3 M killed German civilians and the 18 M Germans expulsed from their homeland (of which 2 M died), the irreversible loss of East Prussia, Pommerania and Silesia, not to count the billions of billions worth damage caused by starting this %&$ war.

16 % of the German population died because of Hitler. Very decent indeed.


<FONT COLOR="#ff0000" SIZE="1" FACE="Verdana, Arial">This message has been edited by AndyW on 16 October 2000 at 06:42 AM</font>

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>
Originally posted by Yankee:

i dont want to have this Neo-communist anti-American, Anti-capitlist propaganda
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Me too: I don’t to want to have ANY kind of propaganda here, this off course includes also neo-nazi or anti-soviet propaganda.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>
Stalin is one of the most Evil men in history, he is reposnsilbe for the deaths of Millions
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree.
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>
he was a greater mass murderer then Hitler
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I disagree. Necrophiliation shows something else. The gap would have been even greater if the one mass murder wouldn’t have stopped the other.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>
He was an evil man who created the "evil empire" which is really the best way to put it because the Russians would never cease their agressions
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I only hope my English is too bad to understand the real meaning of this sentence. Do you try to say that _every_ Russian is a beast per se, an aggressive Untermensch?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>
i dont know how you could like a man who split your country into 2 and caused so much suffering and and division
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

??? If you look at the conferences in Teheran and Jalta, you will see that there was a consensus between FDR, Stalin and Churchill about Germany’s separation and the expulsion of 18 M Germans.

And I don’t like Stalin nor Communism. The only credit I give Stalin is that his Red Army killed off the Nazis from Europe, with Western help.

Back to topic. As nobody bring it up til now: Did the Red Army had enough manpower to sustain an invasion?

 

Can we get back on topic now?

I think the Allies vs Russia war would only have been fought had the Allies initiated it. Had that been the case, the US would have prepared, B-29's, sherman firely and pershing tanks, etc. It would have been a bloodbath, but the allies would have won. The only issue I think might make things difficult for the allies is wether or not they could sustain very heavy combat losses. EG,: 1 to 2 million. The fighting spirit of the US back home might have been diminished had they known they were throwing their youth into a true meatgrinder.

-----------------------------------------------

Rommel, by the way, I see where you are coming from, these two guys are evil, just different kinds of evil. You never said he was "decent", read your posts guys!

------------------
Who's peppy? I am!!

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>The fighting spirit of the US back home might have been diminished had they known they were throwing their youth into a true meatgrinder.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


To say the least...

Market Garden was a walk in the park compared to “Barricades” and “Krasny Oktyabr” (“Red October”) factories in Stalingrad.
Total US Casualties for WWII: less than 300,000. the cost would have been MUCH higher for a war against USSR in 1945.

 

Ok you maybe right about a drive to moscow circa 1945 but one thing i'm well informed about is a Nato 1980's and soviet push into western Europe.

Now i can undestand that in 1945 the Russian people would have taken the casualties of another war, but look at the Afghan war the Russian people wouldnt take the conlfict too many people were dying and even worse it could get onto TV and news despite heavy censoring, cesnoring cant stop telegrams coming home and people from dying.

But the Russians would have taken EXTREME casualties due to the fact that in their 80's come of their units were still using T-55s and T-60s. many of the new russian tanks at the time didnt have thermal and or night version sights making them easy prey for Nato Tanks. some acouns put a battle for western europe lasting about a Month. this would have been a critical month because the Russians would have most likely taken horrendous casualties (Nato practiced defensive strategies) and it would have been a matter of how many casualties the Russians would have accepted. Nato would have most likely not have been taking as many casualties in Europe (infact it probably couldnt have logisticly lol due to Natio:russian ratio).but that is just the theoratical late 80's situation.

But Fighting Americans is much different from fighting Nazis....


BTW it wasnt churchill or FDR who put up a wall through downtown berlin until 1989.

 

A 1980 NATO/Warsaw pact war would have been another story... Western Europe as a whole was ready for the clash with Soviets, from anti tank infantry missiles to ICBM.
Depends of the readiness of US forces (they still have the Atlantic too cross, and USSR subs, even old, could have some lucky days).

For that matter i will advise you (if you didn't already read it) the best IMO Tom Clancy Book: Red Storm Rising.

 

Okay, we're starting to hover around a question that I've been thinking about:

The United States, while producing an absolutely fantastic war machine in 1945 - was still an entire ocean away from the Soviet Union. Germany, on the other hand, posessed an army which (under the circumstances and although was stretched out on multiple fronts) was strong but eventually failed in Barbarossa - while being situated much closer to Russia.

Would distance play a major role in a US/USSR war at the time? Obviously, but maybe not(?) Any feedback.............

 

Distance does matter, the Atlantic ocean is less a problem in 1945 than 1980 (USSR had no nuke sub navy in 1945 to stink the US in north atlantic) but Western Europe in 1945 was a ruin, and ground logistic without any good ports would have been a major problem. The Allied bombed each and every road and railways... Logistic was a problem in 1944 when the Allied tried to push toward Germany, it would have been so worst for a push toward Moscow... Not speaking of communists partisans.

 

the US had a large army sitting in Alaska to protect it from the Aleutian invasion. They could have stormed right through the back door of the USSR.

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Yankee:
the US had a large army sitting in Alaska to protect it from the Aleutian invasion. They could have stormed right through the back door of the USSR.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

At what time? 1945 before VJ day w/o A-bomb? After VJ day? Or do you refer to 1980?

U.S. invasion of East Siberia on 1945 before VJ day was strategically impossible, 1945 after VJ possible, but a for sure a disaster. 1980 I don’t know, as it has nothing to do with WW II.

 

One of my teachers was stationed in Nome (sp?) Alaska during WW2 and there were a large number of American stationed there, it was the last airbase before Russian and im sure bombers could have done alot of damage, he told me the entire base had an underground storage deport full of Tanks and Airplanes for the lend lease program.

------------------
Out side is America!

 

Alaska was a defensive setup against possible invasion, and later a strategic base for B52.
Please explain what damages B29 could have done to USSR war industry from Alaska...

 

Had the US and Germans forces combined to fight Stalin, I believe we would have still come out on top. The Germans probably(though being tired)would have had a reason to fight on and harder, just to keep the Slavs off German soil.

The Russian industries being very far away, couldnt help their situation out much. We would eventually kick their hammers and sickles, back to Russia.

It would have been interesting, but.......

 

I'll tell you what, we in the US would have gotten our asses kicked. The casualties inflicted by the massive Soviet armies would have caused so many deaths that the US public would turn against the war. Just like in Vietnam, public opinion would have causes a slow withdrawal of US forces from Europe.

------------------
Who's peppy? I am!!

 

I dont know if the people would support the effort to go to war with Russia. I really doubt it since everyone was tired of the war, and wanted to have peace. I believe that the western allies were in a better position to continue the war, than the Russians were. I saw or read or heard from somewhere, that the Soviet Union was basically bankrupt from the whole affair.

The general opinion of them at the time, probably wasnt too bad-considering. I doubt a war against them would be supported. Speaking from this point of view.