How different would things be if Stalin died at 1992, how would

Too hard to tell. Anything more than 1000 years in the future is impossible to predict.

>>3108133
>How different would things be if Stalin died at 1992, how would the Soviet Unions situation and overall word be?

This question has already been answered.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Command_%26_Conquer:_Red_Alert
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3HUWUtTZvK4

File: IMG_1311.jpg (84KB, 774x1032px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 774x1032px

>>3108146
This doesn't help me at all whatsoever

>>3108142
But I wasn't asking that, I was asking what if Stalin had lived 50 YEARS LONGER

>>3108196 yeah but you said if he lived to the age of 1992

File: IMG_1326.jpg (39KB, 750x169px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 750x169px

>>3108272
Read again

>>3108303
Oh wait; I meant died at the year 1992

>>3108303
Ambiguous

>>3108133
>>3108272
>>3108312
Who'd win: 1992 Stalins vs 2991 one armed Hitlers?

>>3108133
First of all, Stalin would be known as the oldest man who ever lived, outside of ancient Biblical accounts. Second, the Soviet Union would likely have retained a more authoritarian, brutal character, compared to how it was in its last years.

>>3108133
soviet union would be north koreaesque government. economy would be dead tons of poor people.

>>3108133
There are roughly two scenarios.
One is that Russia would develop like North Korea but on a huge scale. Get increasingly poor, famine once every few years, threatening the world with nuclear weapons to get economic help.
Second scenario is that Stalin would get killed or moved aside. He was always engaged in brutal high stakes powers straggles and managed to come on top (although many believe that in the end he was denied medical help on purpose so he can die already). The longer his term the higher are the chances to be eventually beaten by other players.

>>3110238
>famine once every few years
That has little to do with how North Korea is governed though. It has shit landscape for farming and it's isolated from almost all of the world save for China and maybe Russia to trade with.

>>3110238
Oh and there weren't any power struggles anymore for at least a decade before Stalin died. He is probably the only man to have made such a huge state into his personal bitch. The only 'struggle' that was left was everyone trying to appease him.

>>3110286
Not if you ask him because he was purging people and being paranoid all the time. And when your colleagues are afraid on getting prurged they will try to strike first. And as I said, the guy received about zero medical attention after having a stroke.
>>3110272
Gommunist detected.
>Decreased food production has nothing to do with the state taking away all farm land and collectivizing it. After which a formerly self sufficient countries starve.

Let's see which communists countries had famines:
USSR: check
China: check
Cuba: check
Best Korea: check
Cambodia: check
Venezuela: I got my popcorn ready

>>3110537
>USSR: check
>China: check
>Best Korea: check
Lets discount the fact that each had massive civil wars, Russia and China also suffering hugely from the world wars in addition.

Lets also discount the fact that all of those countries were third world shitholes and some still are, adding to that huge overpopulation.

Two of those countries are under embargo from most of the world.

Cuba didn't even have any starvation. Closest was when the Soviet Union, it's only trading partner crumbled and caloric intake fell from 3k to 2k.

India never had any famines, right? Or North Africa? But lets ignore them and focus on those that had a red flag.

Not even a commie or close to it, just sick of this bs being peddled here. Capitalism vs Communism belongs in the last century, not this.