I read that, and is one of my sources. Funny enough, KaLeu put a link to Quora asking the same question, and one of the answers just copied and pasted the article you sent me.
What if U.S. invaded Soviet Union?
-
can´t watch it Garg, need ´n american PC :-D…thinking bout watching it in a other language. Will not be a very good idea since it might differ from yours hahahahaha :lol:
-
@CWO:
Not something that would have happened. When the Germans signed their first surrender under the supervision of the western Allies (they signed a second one a day later under Soviet supervision), Eisenhower didn’t even enter the room until the German officers had signed the document – and even then, it was only to ask in a cold tone of voice for confirmation that they had done so. Eisenhower had no sympathies for the Wehrmacht whatsoever (particularly after he had visited one of the liberated Nazi death camps), and he would have been appalled at the idea of teaming up with the army that had fought for Nazi Germany and launching a Germano-American campaign against the Allied country which had defeated Hitler on the Eastern Front. The idea that he would have participated in such a venture is as much of a fantasy as Himmler’s line in the movie “Downfall” in which has asks an aide, in complete seriousness, “When I meet Eisenhower, should I shake his hand or give the Nazi salute?” If Himmler had actually tried to see Eisenhower, Ike would have had him arrested on the spot by some MPs without letting him get within half a mile of his office.
Had Eisehower been informed that Stalin actually killed more people during World War 2 than Hitler, he might have had looked differently.
I like the point the other members have made, particularly about Japan.
USA had a lot of troops, equipment, airplanes and naval forces committed to Japan. U.S. could simply use the same strategy against Russia that they did against Japan. 1) capture key port cities using heavy bombardment from battleships 2) land large amount of diehard marines :) 3) use long range bombers to devastate enemy factories. This was the technique that worked against Japan, it worked against “fortress Europe” and it would have worked against Russian industry. Once a country is back in stone age, everything else is a matter of time.Another member complained about American public being not very sympathetic. Well, easy solution. Remember Vietnam? Draft everyone ages 18-56 and tell them you are going to free the world of communism. Or…. U.S. could repeat Pearl Harbor but this time with Russians as offenders and wait for 10 million volunteers to show up.
Also people forget to mention that the Chinese were friendly with USA during WWII. Those guys could have been used as well to hit the Russia from both sides.
-
USA had a lot of troops, equipment, airplanes and naval forces committed to Japan. U.S. could simply use the same strategy against Russia that they did against Japan. 1) capture key port cities using heavy bombardment from battleships 2) land large amount of diehard marines :) 3) use long range bombers to devastate enemy factories. This was the technique that worked against Japan, it worked against “fortress Europe” and it would have worked against Russian industry. […] U.S. could repeat Pearl Harbor but this time with Russians as offenders and wait for 10 million volunteers to show up. Also people forget to mention that the Chinese were friendly with USA during WWII. Those guys could have been used as well to hit the Russia from both sides.
A few comments:
On the part about the US using on Russia the same techniques it used on Japan, note that Japan is a tiny in size, and is an island nation that sits in the Pacific Ocean, a body of water which the US Navy was able to dominate during the last two or three years of the war. The Russia is the largest country in the world, and has a very small amount of ice-free coastlines compared to its enormous interior size. The overwhelming proportion of its industry is far inland, completely out of range of any coastal bombardment. Russia’s geography means it can’t be defeated by sea power, and its sheer size and harsh climate and large population make it a very difficult country to fight even with strong land forces and air power. As for the suggestion to “land large amount of diehard marines” – well, as much as I admire the USMC’s formidable fighting abilities, note that it took the Marines almost two months to secure Iwo Jima, an island with an area of only 8 square miles and which was defended by only 21,000 Japanese troops. The old USSR had an area of about 9 million square miles, and in 1941 it survived an invasion by millions of Axis troops.
On the part about “U.S. could repeat Pearl Harbor but this time with Russians as offenders”, this seems to imply that it was the US rather than Japan which arranged the attack on Pearl Harbor. I assume this is a reference to the old Roosevelt-wanted-the-Japanese-to-attack conspiracy theory which has been floating around for decades.
As for the part about enlisting the Chinese, I would simply point out that the Chinese spent most of the period from 1937 to 1945 on the losing end of a war with Japan…a country which, when it took on the Russians in the border incident wars of 1938 and 1939 achieved stalemates at best and got trounced at worst.
-
Well the soviet union never would have conquered America!
You are right though… Factories being beyond reach was a BIG problem for the Germans. Their aircraft simple didn’t have the range to make it out there, bomb what they could find, and make it back, with weather permitting.
Trade Embargo’s, and WORLD support, would have been the only way…
-
Well the soviet union never would have conquered America!
Negative. Alaska would fall first and then your precious British Columbia would have been taken next. Then they would have discovered the wonderful women of Alberta and settled for peace, giving back BC, probably to America.
-
…and California would now be called Calivostok and Vodka and Caviar would be sold to puplic on Zuhkov Beach :-D :-D :-D
-
But they would never have had England! Only knights led by a bastard using underhand tricks or ancient peoples in rowing boats made of wood could conquer this island.
-
But all of England’s actors would defect so they could star in all the blockbuster films coming out of the big Stalinwood movie studios.
-
The US already invaded Russia during the civil war 1918-1920, along with UK and failed.
Russia is too big and logistics would be a nightmare. Also, the Soviet manpower advantage would really be felt. Consider the total manpower delivered to France 1944-45 and compare that to the Soviet figures.
-
@Most:
But all of England’s actors would defect so they could star in all the blockbuster films coming out of the big Stalinwood movie studios.
As soon as the Russian 1st waves arrived at the Franco German border all actors would have been put against a wall to avoid such an eventuality. We did not have the luxury of right wing actors like you: Reagan or John Wayne to name two.
-
@Most:
But all of England’s actors would defect so they could star in all the blockbuster films coming out of the big Stalinwood movie studios.
“Hollyngrad” would be a good name too.
-
Oh Hollywood is a communist enough name itself. Believe me.
But…
Los Archangelsk
Seattleostok
Colovrado
Euguineorov
Portlandolesk
San Fransicovik
-
Maybe Stalinfrancisco is better… ?
-
In Virginia we could have the Kremlin District, so instead of Washington DC we could have Lenin KD
-
Chicagogorsk
-
@CWO:
A few comments:
On the part about the US using on Russia the same techniques it used on Japan, note that Japan is a tiny in size, and is an island nation that sits in the Pacific Ocean,
Sure I agree that Japan was much smaller. However Japanese were much more reluctant to surrender than Russians. In Iwo Jimma out of 23,000 defenders, 22,000 died defending and only ~1,000 surrendered. Russians on the other hand were known to surrender by hundreds of thousands.
Now if you are referring to Japan being smaller than Russia, know this that Japan was much more industrialized than Russia. They might have been a smaller nation but they were very powerful smaller nation.
@CWO:
The overwhelming proportion of its industry is far inland, completely out of range of any coastal bombardment.
Thats true. Russia is a huge land mass, yet B24 Liberator had a range of 3,000 miles. Given that USA would invade coastal cities around Russia, they would be able to lunch bombing missions anywhere in the country and knock out whatever industry they still had going.
@CWO:
On the part about “U.S. could repeat Pearl Harbor but this time with Russians as offenders”, this seems to imply that it was the US rather than Japan which arranged the attack on Pearl Harbor. I assume this is a reference to the old Roosevelt-wanted-the-Japanese-to-attack conspiracy theory which has been floating around for decades.
Yes. This is perhaps a discussion for another topic. But the way US lined up their fighters and ships nicely in a row and ready to be bombarded was either a complete idiocy or
they simply needed a good reason to convince public to go to war with Japan.
Even country like Poland in August 29th-30th 1939 did not line up their fighters on airfields. Contrary to popular believe most of the Polish fighters were relocated to smaller and hidden airfields and survived initial Blitzkrieg.@CWO:
As for the part about enlisting the Chinese, I would simply point out that the Chinese spent most of the period from 1937 to 1945 on the losing end of a war with Japan…a country which, when it took on the Russians in the border incident wars of 1938 and 1939 achieved stalemates at best and got trounced at worst.
That’s okay that Chinese were not very good fighters. Their only purpose would be to open 2nd front which would forces Russians to divert resources from Europe.
So in the end this would be my plan for invading Russia in 1945:
A well coordinated invasion of Russia from Eastern Europe, Asia and Pacific led by veteran U.S. troops from Normandy and Italian Campaign. German elite army would have been used as initial strike forces supported by U.S. air force. As the US/German forces would be hitting from the East, the Norwegians would engage in another Winter war. Chinese would hit the Russians in Asia along with U.S. Pacific forces capturing key port cities and lunching bombing raids deep inside Russia. The point would have been to attack Russian on as many fronts as possible. An element of surprise could have been achieved by invading during winter when Russians would least expect. There would be actually an element of advantage for the invading forces since air force is less crippled by cold weather than ground forces. A prolonged bombing raids during winter would cripple Russian supply chain and cause mass starvation of their armies.To sum it up, the goal of such invasion would have been:
- Paton knocks out Moscow
- German army bypass Stalingrad and goes after Oil Fields
- U.S. airforce initially criples Russian supply chain
- U.S. airforce supplies Paton army and German army with supplies via air
On Pacific Front - U.S. invades costal cities and lunching bombing missions deep into Russia
- Chinese open yet another front
Yes the downside of invading a large land mass is that it is hard to control. Nevertheless, winter could have been used to allied advantage, along with it’s powerful airforce and the fact that a large land mass when invaded from multiple locations would have been impossible for Russians to defend.
-
I hope I am not the only one getting off on this!
I like how you put the Germans in the front line. A sort of: you started the damn war! -
And remember the Red Baron never died!
He should be worth at least a Russian Armoured Division. -
Now if you are referring to Japan being smaller than Russia, know this that Japan was much more industrialized than Russia. They might have been a smaller nation but they were very powerful smaller nation.
This is not true, the Soviet Union was actually vastly more industrialized and technologically advanced when it came to warfare then Japan. The Japanese learned in 1939 after their defeat at Khalkhin-gol that the Soviet had superior armour and artillery designs to Japans and were able to deliver accurate firepower on a scale that dwarfed Japans. Also, Soviet logistics (the real deciding factor in war) far out paced their own. The Soviet had shown that they were able to transport and operate large mechanized forces over 600km from a railroad head but they had used over 6,000 trucks to support their forces at Khalkhin-gol, while Japan had only 9,000 motor vehicles of all types in Manchuria at that time. Also, in 1940 Japan produced only 573 tanks as opposed to 3,000 in the Soviet union and even though in 1941 Japan was able to double their numbers from the previous year, all types were vastly inferior to the ones the Soviets had.
-
Czar Peter spent a lot of time bringing the Russians up to European snuff. This was later reflected by their Navy (and St. Petersburg of course.) It allowed the Russians to fight the Chrimean wars. Even though they lost, it proved to the world that Russia could take on the major European empires (France won in particular here, but it was not the only one on the allied side fighting.)
One of the reasons Russia was treated as an honorable ally was their industrial power. Were they an actual ally in world war 2? I’d argue they were not, but we digress.
I point these out because I do not think America would have faired any better invading Arkhangelsk in the 1950s than they did invading Arkhangelsk in the 1920s. Russia is vast, industrialized, hardened after many battles and harsh living conditions, and as fiercly patriotic as many Americans. IMNSHO.
Suggested Topics
