>June 1945 >operation unthinkable happens, your objective

>>34595678
>no atom bombs.
Probably not happening then

>>34595696
US had completely control over the skies, we would have just bombed the shit out of them while they scurry around like ants

>>34595678
>operation unthinkable happens, your objective is to prevent the red hoard from taking the rest or Europe, and push them back to the pre-war boarder.

But the point of Unthinkable was that the Western Allies would be the aggressors, why is it whenever you fucks propose these scenarios you have the west/US be the defending powers when in reality they'd be the ones attacking?

>>34595678
Dress like the enemy and take them out one by one.

>>34595678
You don't. USSR takes western Europe, save for perhaps Britain. The US keeps up strategic bombing and eventually retakes europe.

>>34595678
UK and US already control the skies and seas.
>retreat to well defensive line
>bomb the reds every time they try to concentrate a large force for an attack
>rape supply lines from air
>if the red mass in Germany is still too strong just land forces anywhere behind them where they can't reach fast enough
Moscow could be bombed from Finland if that was worth it.

File: battle of berlin3.jpg (494KB, 2110x1350px) Image search: [Google]

494KB, 2110x1350px

>>34595678
>operation unthinkable happens
No, it does not.
>your objective is to prevent the red hoard from taking the rest or Europe
Which is exactly why it does not happen. Not even your sweet baby Jesus would have saved you from Russians after attempting such a pointless suicidal backstab just two months after they won the greatest war this globe has ever seen.

>>34595678
Does anybody know the state of Russian cities in June 1945? Also how was Russian manufacturing as well?

>>34595774
If I HAD to plan it out, I guess I'd have to be on the defensive at the start, because the ground forces of the allies is too few to handle literal millions of Russian troops. During this time, there'd be a lot of bombing happening while troops and equipment arrive in Europe.

This is difficult though, because the American public by early 1945 was sick of the war and just wanted it to be over, and morale of new troops arriving would be a concern, along with veterans that thought they'd already given enough.

Britain really had next to nothing, which is why they had to live off of rations into the fucking 1950s.

Winning would definitely be possible on paper, but getting people to stand behind the new war would be extraordinarily difficult.

>>34595678
Russians get rekt by the US, at the end of the war the USSR was stretched to the limit, the US would rapidly deploy its full might and then the Russians realize that it's was the West that won the war, an their numbers are their own worst enemy.

>>34595942
>t. Tankie

>>34596068
Who's that, some local tripfag?

B-29s attacking railway hubs and trains.
The Soviets might produce a billion tanks but good luck driving them to Germany from the Urals with the absolutely atrocious russian gearboxes.

>>34595678
hard mode

'horde'
'border'

>>34596038
>USSR was stretched to the limit

No they werent, their production was in full capacity and their supplies routes were secure.

>>34595678
The atom bomb is pretty much the reason this didn't happen. Stalin didn't know how many the US actually had at their disposal.

>>34595678
>Evacuate and arm all germans
>Evacuate all german factories
>Restart stug production
>Build all the stugs
>win

> beg the western powers for help to stop the red hoard and keep germany from being cut up
> arm everyone who is on your side
> use artillery to stop any advancement
>kiss ass good bye
> attempt to force negotiations with the reds threw stalemate

>>34596215
>most of their workforce in Army.
>their supplies and factories staying intact for long.
Ok.

>>34595678
With how shot threw with Communists the state department was at this point, it would have been tough. The US would need to move the Pacific sea assets into theater without the rooskies being the wiser. We were kinda fucked with regards to litoral assets.

Not gonna happen.
Soviets had far more battle-hardened and larger troops, and despite logistical problems and manpower shortage USA is across the fucking ocean.
Those saying "jus bomb them lol" severely overestimate the effectiveness of airpower at the end of WW2, as well as underestimating Soviet airpower.
Not to mention that effect of Western Allies strategic airpower would be limited due to distances involved.
And last but not least, you would literally be invading people your propaganda guys were boasting as great allies a few months earlier. It won't be popular. And average Soviet would go into berserk mode, while your grunts wonder what kind of shit are you abusing.
It was really just an impossible idea, nothing more.

>>34596627
>troops
*forces

>>34596215
m8 the almost entire fit adult male population of the USSR was in the military at that point. There were no significant real reserves. The Soviets would have been on their own. The US alone had 2x the population of the USSR. The USSR wouldn't have been able to sustain themselves for that much longer

>>34596637
US alone is across the ocean. You're totally ignoring this very important point.
And while Soviets didn't have the means to disrupt it, we're talking about thousands of miles long supply line.
Not to mention average American would be far from motivated to go and die.
Sorry, all factors point to a Soviet victory or at best a bloody stalemate. Glorious ride east armchair fatniks imagine is a wild dream.
And this may sound controversial but Soviet army was quite better than American army.

>>34596668
Except this is assuming no continental European powers join against the Soviets. Or that the countries "liberated" by the soviets wouldn't have attempted to resist the now distracted soviets. It's useless to speculate on such a thing anyway. It never happened and it honestly could have gone either way.

>>34596696
>continental European in 1945
USSR would steamroll them just like japanese in 1945

Just a reminder that Russia was part of the Soviet Union between 1922 and 1989. As such it is not appropriate to call them Russian during this time. Instead use Soviets.

>>34596637
The Soviet Union had more people than the United States in 1945 u retard

>>34595942
t. Vatnik

>>34596713
Except there is a huge difference in the condition of Japanese and allied European countries in 1945. Japanese forces in China had always got the worst equipment and were chronically undersupplied. While the Free French Forces had been completely resupplied with US manufactured arms, uniforms, and vehicles. The goal of Operation Unthinkable wasn't to defeat the Soviets the goal was to get Poland a "square deal"

>>34595999

>Britain really had next to nothing

They had a fuckton more to give. They had a lot more forces than just the ones in Germay, remember. Once they brought them back from India, Burma, got the Canadians and Aussies back over there would be a lot more freed up.

Nothing on Russian or US sizes, but definitely not inconsequential.

Their main offering would be their fucking enormous bomber force, their excellent air force and what was at the time the second most capable navy active. Add on a very strong industry and that certainly isn't giving "nothing" to the effort.

>>34596696
>Or that the countries "liberated" by the soviets wouldn't have attempted to resist the now distracted soviets.

NKVD got to work immediately in all of these countries, except close to the demarcation line (Czechoslovakia) where they made an effort to pretend to be civil (didn't help much when the soldiers were looting and raping with impunity despite being in a "liberated" country).
That means everyone who posed any threat of eventually mounting any kind of resistance against the Soviets was killed or spirited away.
Furthermore, the Soviets took great efforts to paint the West as warmongers and secret fascist sympathizers in their propaganda, if they went through with Unthinkable and attacked one of the enemies of 3rd Reich, it would instantly convince everyone the Soviets were right.

>>34595678

Send direct correspondence to as many units on the Soviet lines to convince them to overthrow crazy Stalin or to surrender or stand aside. Results will vary but any effect will help.

Mine the fuck out of the German held territory and normal elastic defense stuff. Know full well that it's only a stop gap measure.

Broker a peace with China and Japan so they can focus on Mongolia (Puppet State at the time) and Eastern Russia. Probably won't work, but if it does then the Pacific front becomes the Eastern front.

Germany now has to rearm itself, the new Allied administration has to basically support as many anti-communist resistances, gain Air superiority, Naval dominance, and convincing people to go back to war.

There's a reason why neither side wanted to fight.

File: WWII USSR would have surely won alone.png (187KB, 1245x521px) Image search: [Google]

187KB, 1245x521px

>>34596668
>we're talking about thousands of miles long supply line.
Didn't stop fighting at three fronts while also supplying enormous amount of stuff to USSR and other nations.
Time is American friend. Soviets won't advance anywhere near as fast as they did at east Europe. Soviet airfields would be quickly wiped and any advance would starve when supplies are late or never get there.

It's also shit easy to tell some lie to people, how the mad dog Stalin started it and wants to destroy whole Europe.
USSR might have likely lost to Germany if it was 1s1.

>>34596785
>eventually mounting any kind of resistance against the Soviets was killed or spirited away.
>Furthermore, the Soviets took great efforts to paint the West as warmongers and secret fascist sympathizers in their propaganda, if they went through with Unthinkable and attacked one of the enemies of 3rd Reich, it would instantly convince everyone the Soviets were right.
No. Only a Russian could think you could execute away ideas. There is no way in he'll they killed all of their opposition or even came close, this is particularly evident in Czechoslovakia which rebelled again in the 60s and Poland showers faced by some of the worst Russian injustice during the war. All nations and people's would switch to whichever side best could ensure their sovereignty. That could never have been the USSR.

>>34595678
yfw you realize the Soviets were not that good. 9/10 they get their shit kicked in by the Germans who were short on everything.

Now imagine the Soviets facing an enemy that has air supremacy, industrial complex that almost supplied the entire Allied effort, including millions of tons of material to the Soviets themselves.

>>34596807
>gain air superiority and naval dominance
They already had it.

>>34596785
>>34596825
The USA explictly showed all soviet bloc countries that they would not support any rebellion against the Soviets
Hell they would fight to defendsupport the Soviets.

If the USA had instead been the opposite, actually anti-communist/anti-soviet... We would have easily seen more uprisings throughout the USSR

>>34596839
US had air supremacy against an airforce with no fuel. Therefore they will always have air supremacy, Is this logical to you?

>>34596895
Or they could have air supremacy against an air force who had trouble gaining air superiority over an enemy who as you say, had no fuel.

pretty logical to me.

>>34596881
I believe launching a massive offensive against the Soviet Union would show the western allies to be sufficiently "Anti-Soviet" for most people

>>34596895
Read the the first line from this picture here. >>34596817

>>34596881
>If the USA had instead been the opposite, actually anti-communist/anti-soviet... We would have easily seen more uprisings throughout the USSR
Whatever point your trying to make with that first statement is irrelevant (sorry but I don't see where you're going with it) the Americans are exactly how you describe in this scenario. Thus uprising would be rampant.

>>34596924
>>34596938
>Thinking 1941 is 1945.
tsk tsk.

>>34596881
See
>>34596936
I'm not sure what you're trying to say.

File: 1145145808927.jpg (150KB, 1600x1240px) Image search: [Google]

150KB, 1600x1240px

>hard mode no atom bombs.

no

>>34596945
American fuel was still a significant part of Russian fuel consumption.

File: 1490915895333.jpg (489KB, 1195x847px) Image search: [Google]

489KB, 1195x847px

>>34595942
I wonder who could be behind this post

>>34595678
Factors I see;
>Soviet manufacturing is still recovering
>Soviet Union is still receiving "lend lease" supplies in 1945
>Soviet personnel losses are so high, that personnel are being pulled from key industries (like food production)
>Should the war last another year, there will be a famine over the summer of 1946 that lasts until 1947. They had a poor harvest in 1945 as well (but not famine level).
>US manufacturing is effectively untouched
>Food rationing is in effect in most of Europe, leading to lower morale. The US is rationing luxury foods.
>The US has to transport its supplies across an ocean
>Soviet Navy can not even compare to the US Atlantic Fleet in numbers
>US forces are split between two war fronts. Even when Japan surrenders, the US will not sit ideally by and let communist forces take over China if they could become an ally of Russia.
>Neither side would have complete domination of the air, at least at first.
>Most of the world is sick of war.

My plan should I be forced to take command would be
>Reactivate and rearm German & Italian army, navy and air force. Don't reactivate the SS, for political reasons.
>Focus air campaign on bridges, rail depots, fuel depots and other ways to slow down Russian reinforcements.
>Fight a defensive war, sacrificing Germany to the Russian assault, letting the Russians strain their supply lines.
>Destroy any bridges or rail depots on the way out.
>Make sure to keep a foothold in mainland Europe
>Once the Russian Supply lines reach the breaking point, counter attack.
>Keep pushing until you reach Moscow, but make sure to slow down for winter and to rebuild supply lines and ports

>>34596983
How significant?

File: B-29.jpg (46KB, 1000x659px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 1000x659px

>>34595678
Conservative defensive tactics in western Europe for the initial stages of the conflict, and expect to for at worst be pushed back to France (though unlikely). Meanwhile hammer the Moscow and Leningrad rail heads along with major rail junctions within the Soviet Union using strategic bombers. The Soviet Union had virtually no defenses against strategic bombers considering they had no major radar infrastructure and poses no interceptors capable of intercepting the high altitude B-29s. The VVS was very focused on low to medium altitude performance. With the Moscow and Leningrad rail heads destroyed its incredibly likely that the Soviet Union's already over burdened supply lines would collapse and the red army in central and eastern Europe would begin to wither on the vine.

With Soviet logistics hopelessly crippled a counter offensive could be launched against the Soviets in central Europe. Meanwhile strategic bombing focus could shift more on to industrial targets and in the final stages fire bomb cities to force them to surrender. That said, this war would be so utterly horrific that it would make the past two look pleasant in comparison and there is no real way to sell this war to the people. Though let it not be said that the allies couldn't have pulled it off.

File: m.jpg (32KB, 185x319px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 185x319px

>>34596945
funny
War in Europe ended in May so it kind of explains why 1945 is only about half of 1944.

>>34595678
Uhh, but cutting off the logistics needed for the USSR to do anything. By 45 more than half of the refined petroleum they had was brought in via lend lease. That image you have is always shitty because it shows western Armies which are 2-3 Corps vs Soviet Armies which, in WW2 were as few as 5 divisions

>>34596825

You obviously have no idea what the public opinion was like in Central and Eastern Europe at the end of WWII.
Protip: the main reason the Czechoslovak communist coup worked out was because everyone was scared shitless of the (really non-existant) West-supported German revanchism the KSČ were using as a scarecrow, and deathly sick of war.

>>34596825
>this is particularly evident in Czechoslovakia which rebelled again in the 60s

Czechoslovakia didn't rebel in the 60's. We tried to reform the communist party and promptly got our shit pushed in. There was close to zero resistance.

>and Poland

Poland has a history with Russia, which is why they paid special attention to them.
They became a seemingly willing Soviet puppet only six years after Soviets invaded them hand in hand with Hitler, if you don't consider that a success of the purges and propaganda, what would a success look like?

>All nations and people's would switch to whichever side best could ensure their sovereignty.

Oh yeah, the easterners and Czechoslovaks especially were so very hot on trusting their sovereignty with the Western Allies again... do you even listen to yourself?
Munich was one of the evergreens of the Soviet propaganda for decades. It still works on a lot of people today.

>>34597011
Almost all the B-29s were based in the Pacific

>>34595678

>do the thing where you form local armies out of anti-Soviet Ukrainians, Poles, Czechs, etc
>DON'T GENOCIDE THEM
>ez victory

>>34597017
Anon, from the looks of it, this isn't an answer at all, it's just a picture of the total amount of lend lease in tons. Is this your way of saying you're just making it up?

>>34595678
Not possible. The red army was a mean lean killing machine at that point.
The only wildcard is allied air power.

Does the US have full control of the French, German, Italian, British, and insurgents in europe? If yes, then they could hold off an assault by the Soviets, and break their supply chain. B-29s to strike deep into Russia and attack their factories. This is assuming that US public support for the war would be 100%.

>>34596783
>and what was at the time the second most capable navy active

That sure would help a lot against the Soviets.

>>34597030
This is also true, a Soviet division was nearly the same size as a US brigade. Soviet numerical superiority wasn't as one sided as everyone believes. Especially due to the fact that the US had 13 million men in all services.

>>34597094
Marines landing at Vladivostok could do a lot of damage there, and push westward.

File: hermann-goering.jpg (440KB, 1622x720px) Image search: [Google]

440KB, 1622x720px

>muh war weariness
Come one now, we all know how you do this. You don't tell your populace that you're gonna have them fight a war because it will probably be better in the long run, maybe. You tell them some bullshit about how they have no choice but to fight, garnish with some horror propaganda, problem solved.

File: 1388993026984.jpg (322KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

322KB, 1920x1080px

>>34597049
They would be rebased in Europe. Though some would remain in the Pacific for raids against cities in the Soviet far east. Though really they are by no means essential, there were thousands of strategic bombers in service with both Bomber command and the Army Air Corps in Europe.

>>34597100
Numbers don't matter that much if you aren't prepared to use them.
Fact is that Soviets could absorb a shit ton casualties and still keep going.

File: air_flyingfortress33.jpg (129KB, 1800x1425px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 1800x1425px

I don't think the Soviets ever faced a 1000 bomber raid on their cities. They had virtually no defense against B-29's or B-17's that were escorted by P-51's.

>>34597126
The Soviet Union could not afford to take the casualties it did in previous years. By 1945 it was pulling men from essential industries was becoming a serious problem with a famine beginning in 1946.

>>34597126
Do you really believe that Soviet motor rifle divisions could withstand massed US artillery?

>>34597108
Well congratulations. You just occupied some speck of Russian hinterlands. What's the next step in your master plan? Attack their industrial base trough goddamn Siberia?

I really have my doubts about the marines prevailing against the Red Army. We are not talking about some gooks with toy tanks. Both Russians and Americans fared well against them in combat.

>>34597100
Huge unwieldy formations were not shown to be practical in world war 2, I don't know of anyone else than the Americans who thinks that 20,000 people in a single division is a reasonable amount of people.

>>34597108
Didn't the soviets redeploy a nice big army from europe to manchuria just before japan fell? I doubt the americans could defend a landing, even less push inland - certainly not far enough that it would matter (industrially valuable areas would be far away into siberia) and not without massive air support that would be more useful in europe.

>>34597136
They had fighters with 37mm cannons, firing the same type of ammunition which shat all over B-29s in the Korean war.

>>34597011
>there is no real way to sell this war to the people

This. It's a war that only makes sense in hindsight.
It took decades for the details of Soviet atrocities to become public knowledge, and there are still plenty people trying to downplay them nowadays.
Had the US gone through with operation Unthinkable, they would instantly become the villain that started a world war right at the end of the last one, backstabbing one of her allies.

>>34597171
>They had fighters with 37mm cannons

Those guns were in MiG-15s. That makes a huge difference.

>>34597058
>form local armies out of anti-Soviet Ukrainians,

Hitler did that. It didn't work out very well, and not many Ukrainians would be willing to follow the example.
Not to mention you have to be, like, present in the country in order to try and form and equip militias.

>Poles

Most Poles who were into the whole "armed resistance against oppressive regimes" thing died doing so by 1945.

>Czechs

kek

Soviets could not have withstood a prolonged war.
The only real questions is would USA willing to go all in on it.
They fielded lots of really juicy tech just as the war ended.
The Soviets didn't have any breakthrough shit in the pipe

>>34597187
Because when the gun is mounted on the MiG-15 is it's shells became magic and unicorn farts. But when 37mm shells explode and rip apart B-17s when fired from Yak-9s everyone in the plane is very calm, because while the plane is currently scattering itself over a large area, it's okay, because it wasn't fired from a MiG-15 and that makes all the difference.

>>34597226
I think you're underestimating the sheer amount of people who hated the Soviet Union. Even Russians hated it, but were scared of sent to gulags. Setting off a few sparks could light a powder keg of resentment.

>>34597226
Because there is no difference between literal Hitler asking you to fight for him and Americans doing the same and promising you an independent state.

>>34597226
>Hitler did that. It didn't work out very well, and not many Ukrainians would be willing to follow the example

Yeah because you know. They decided to completely turn on them.

>>34597237
>What are escorts

The Mig-15 had a higher flight ceiling than prop aircraft. B-29s were far out of reach for Soviet fighters of 1945.

Why is /k/ always so wrong about everything?

Go look up the percentages of total of rails (the actual metal things trains ride on) and rolling stock provided to the Soviets as aid. Then think about the targets the strategic bombers would be set against given the distance to Soviet industry. Then try to work out Soviet logistics. Then tell me how far the Soviets will be able to move before having supply shortages.

>>34597237
Yak-9 has too poor performance at 30 000ft to be effective.

File: jakub-rozalski-warsaw-rising44-jr.jpg (335KB, 1920x1344px) Image search: [Google]

335KB, 1920x1344px

>>34597282
You also have to consider that very shortly after WWII ended, the SU was plunged into a pretty severe famine, all those farmers had been conscripted and were sitting around in East Germany, Poland, Czechoslovakia etc. A little pressure was all it would have taken for a collapse, but a little pressure with Armies of millions equates to a hell of a lot of pressure and make no mistake, even if the Russians would have collapsed and the Red Menace removed from Europe and possibly the world, it would be extremely bloody.

>>34597237
The Yak-9 performed poorly with the 37mm gun and to expect it to have the high altitude performance to both intercept a bomber stream at high altitude and make it past screening escorts while carrying such a weapon is unrealistic. The reason it was so effective in the MiG-15 is because the aircraft's performance isn't being ruined by carrying such a heavy weapon.

>>34597244
>I think you're underestimating the sheer amount of people who hated the Soviet Union

No I'm not, I've lived in a Soviet and later post-Soviet satellite my whole life.
But I think you're underestimating the power of the Soviet Union to curb dissent. The whole thing was *built* on stomping out dissent, for fuck's sake, Soviets had mastered the art for decades, and at the end of WWII dissent was at an all time low anyway, because everyone was euphoric about Hitler getting rekt.
If you think anyone who would try and start a new war right then and then move its front back through your homeland for the third time in half a decade would be welcomed as a liberator, let alone joined in the fight by anyone but a handful of people, you're pretty delusional.

>>34597248

From the point of view of an Ukrainian back then?
Not a lot of difference, really.

File: 0000000000000000000.jpg (96KB, 564x737px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 564x737px

Use the size of the USSR against it. They are worn out by this point manpower and logistics wise, and will not be able to maintain a war for long.

No large encirclement, no over extending, Meat grind them down at the furthest reaches of their logistical network. Bomb them relentlessly, tactically and strategically. Use whatever strategic weapons the mad scientists come up with. Get as many fronts active from germany to nepal. Have brits create a front in british india, have marines take every single lesser defended island and teritory of any value whatsoever like vladviostock, those islands above japan, etc. Dominate the pacific, atlantic, baltic, black sea, azov and medeteranian with the navies, blockade, and constant naval/commando harassment. Their navy will be non existent, then their air-force, then their army will be bleed dry.


That's the plan anyway....

>>34597282
One air force geared for strategic attrition
One for combined operations and close air support

The initial allied armies in central Europe would certainly be decimated whatever the outcome.

File: let me tell you why you are wrong blyat.jpg (65KB, 604x604px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 604x604px

>>34597258
>B-29 9,710m
>Yak-9U 10,650m

Hmmmmmmm

>>34597302
>>34597310

>They don't have it
>Well they do
>Oh well then it's bad against this thing
>This thing wasn't even deployed to Europe
>Yeah but if this thing was deployed in Europe it would totally be really good against that thing which is bad based on my wish for it to be so.

The amount of straw grasping is just a little silly.
You guys have no clue how it would perform, but they had it. The US on the other hand did not have B-29s in Europe, they had other planes. They Soviets also had a considerable amount of aircraft with cannons and not just machine guns, which were effective against big planes.

The idea that the Soviet air force couldn't shoot down bombers, is just wish thinking.

>>34597323
>From the point of view of an Ukrainian back then?
>Not a lot of difference, really.

Flood the country with all that lend lease material and suddenly you'd have a lot of friends there.

>>34597343
Be honest
>one airforce not capable of strategic bombing, only tactical
>one airforce capable of strategic and tactical bombing

>>34597352
>You guys have no clue how it would perform
but we do
Not a single yak model could even catch a b29 at the b29's operational altitude
Not even going to talk about the hordes of angry P-47Ns that would be escorting them by 1945

>>34597187
>>34597171
>Those guns were in MiG-15s.
MiG-15 had different guns. Soviet attempt to intercept B-29s in Korea with YaK-9 and La-9 achieved zero results.

>>34597343
Soviets might have gotten to the Rhine, but they'd not have gotten across. Then they'd start getting ground up on the front lines and in the logistical tail and start being pushed back. Then aid would have stopped and their manufacturing would have started to falter. Then the US A-bomb production would have started coming online. Bloody for both sides but they aren't winning this one. Not in the long run.

>>34597352
>Yak-9U
>5 hours engine service life
Nope.

>>34595678
>hard mode no atom bombs.
Deflect.

>>34597331
At least the crows ate

File: rv0SYgG.jpg (73KB, 1492x1080px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 1492x1080px

>>34597352
>They don't have it
I never claimed they never had it.

>You guys have no clue how it would perform
The performance of both aircraft is known as is the Soviet's inadequacy for dealing with high level strategic bombers as they lack both the infrastructure for detecting them in time and aircraft capable of effectively intercepting them. I also never claimed that the allies would somehow conduct raids without losses, the point is that the VVS would be forced to deal with a threat they are simply not able to adequately counter and as a result the Soviet Union's logistical and industrial capabilities would be utterly decimated.

>>34597365
I'm not sure if strategic bombing made sense in WW2 compared to interdiction and cas.
It certainly made more sense when you couldn't bring your forces to bear against the enemy bulk for most part of the war.

You could get ten fighters for the price of one bomber.
I'd say those would have better impact attacking the thin end veins of the logistics tail, rather than the woefully inefficient high altitude bomb runs.

>>34597352
Read why Japanese had so much trouble killing B-29s little cyka.
It's not that they didn't have enough guns for it.

>>34597458
>I'm not sure if strategic bombing made sense in WW2 compared to interdiction and cas.

Its not really fair to compare the two considering you're looking for two completely different outcomes. Though strategic bombing severely limited the capabilities of German precision manufacturing and forced them to disperse their industry, further reducing their industrial efficiency. The dispersal of German industry also made them more reliant on their rail lines, which were also under attack.

>>34595678
Wait for the army airforce to bomb them into submission. With no more foreign aid russian planes stagnate with their current designs. Russia will never get a jet fighter becuase they don't know shit about metallurgy, and then let Patton kick their shit in.

File: manchgsno-1[1].jpg (729KB, 2049x1370px) Image search: [Google]

729KB, 2049x1370px

>>34597511
>Thinking that Soviets wouldn't steamroll US and UK in a matter of weeks.

File: 1947a7adeace5f888f3a908f3e7ca0a6.jpg (61KB, 480x338px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 480x338px

>>34596983
This

Some of you guys who are saying Russia would win have to keep in mind a huge portion of Soviet manufacturing and food production was destroyed by the Germans during Operation Barbarossa. The USA supplied over 10,000 tanks and even more in trucks and AFVs to the Soviets. Additionally the US provided over 17 million tons of fuel, ammo, and food to the USSR.

Now cut off all of that and add in the largest Air Force ever fielded in human history bombing every road, every factory, and every city in Soviet control. Their supply routes would be significantly crippled.

>>34597526
They'd need food, ammo, fuel, and a functioning rail network to do that.

>>34597526
US Air power >>>>>>>>>> Soviet air power. This isnt warthunder. Where the yak9 is the greatest plane ever flying around at 600 mph.

>Thread about operation unthinkable
>No one read actual report

>>34597179
>Implying any of the allies actually liked Soviet Russia
>Implying it'd be that hard to go from 'Russian allies' to 'Red Menace's.
Churchill would be in board, the French had no love for Communists, certainly not De Gaulle. Finland and Poland have no love for the Soviets.
It wouldn't have turned anyone into the villain.

File: 023[1].jpg (197KB, 769x1105px) Image search: [Google]

197KB, 769x1105px

>>34597593
Not even close.

>>34596215
Secure supplies because Germany had no airforce

>>34597635
Its not just selling them on the enemy, its the belief that the costs of toppling them might not be worth it and that it was impossible to say how long the ensuing conflict might have lasted. Also, in the case of France the French resistance had many communist members, Stalin specifically reminded Roosevelt and Churchill of this at Yalta.

>>34595940
>finland
>bombing moscow
i think you need to take another look in your history book buddy

>no atom bombs
Russia steamrolls through Europe and take the UK, the manpower and materiel at that point was ridiculous.
>With atom bombs
Dozens of millions of deaths and the ruin of Europe for the century to come, hot cold war during the next decade, white people forever doomed with a slight chance for the white man in the US or what's left of it
>No US presence in the vast majority of eurasia, Vietnam, korea everywhere scale x10

>>34597526
Yeah, they'd just cruise across the channel with that powerful navy they had.
Oh wait.

File: 024[1].jpg (203KB, 739x1030px) Image search: [Google]

203KB, 739x1030px

Soviets had twice more divisions
Almost twice more planes
Generals back 1945:
>It would be beyonf our power to win a quick but limited success and we should be commited to a protracted war against heavy odds
/k/ in 2017
>we would have just bombed the shit out of them
>Russians get rekt by the US
>B-29s attacking railway hubs and trains.
>USSR might have likely lost to Germany if it was 1s1.
e.t.c.
Clearly, greatest military minds in history.

>>34597669
>Fight the Soviets or they'll invade Europe, replace the Nazis and rape/plunder your country
>Which they're already demonstrate doing
No. It would have been pretty easy to convince people to go ahead with it. Not that they needed people's permission.
>>34597670
I think you need take a look at what he actually said buddy

>>34595942


Spotted the jew

>>34597585
The sole means of supply for the Manchurian front was a single rail track which had to run across the vast wastes of Siberia.

>>34597674
>the manpower and materiel at that point was ridiculous.

The Soviet Union was pulling so many people from important sectors of the economy and agriculture that they caused a famine and were still reliant on the Allies for material support to sustain their offensives.

>>34597641
Is this report comparing numbers alone? Also the US was unmatched at the rate at which it constructed aircraft the point on replacement aircraft is strange.

>>34596995
>Re-arm Italians
As a distraction right?

>>34597531
What no one thinks about is that the US supplied most of the railroad equipment and rails, machine tools, high alloy steels, and a bunch of their basic economic aid that allowed Soviet industry to focus on munitions production. Once that was cut off and attrition from Allied air forces starting having an impact, the Soviet logistical network and eventually the economy as a whole would start to grind to a halt.

Meanwhile the US economy has begun shifting back to civilian production in 1943 and the original 1939 plan for a 240 division army had never been implemented in favor of a plan for a smaller army and use of the air corps as a force multiplier.

That's not even counting atomic bombs, which were viewed with a completely different mentality in 1945. The US had no hesitation about using them and no fear of retaliation and the only limitation on their use would have been the number available.

The reds take all the way to the shore and stop there.

>>34597698
The report overestimates Soviet logistical and economic capability. They might have gotten to the Rhine. They couldn't have gotten further. They couldn't have held long term.

>>34597725
>Is this report comparing numbers alone?
How about to read a fucking report before going into thread about that report? It's not very long.
>Also the US was unmatched at the rate at which it constructed aircraft the point on replacement aircraft is strange.
Soviet temps of advancement in Operation Bagration and in China showed that war in Europe would be over for weeks. When you new shiny planes arrives, Ruskies are already watching at la Manche. Also, if you attack Soviets, you lose support from France.

>>34597698
The internal status of the Soviet Union was not fully known at that point, since the fall of the Soviet Union records were released a more accurate record of the state at that time. For example it was unknown to the allies the famines which struck immediately after the war. Also we would've bombed the shit out of them, but thats only part of the picture. The other half would be of a brutal battle fought in central Europe that would eventually favor the allies. The Allies have many long term advantages and the belief that the conflict would be short is utterly foolish.

>>34597641
Most of those are going to be IL2s.... so a very slow two engine. Ground attack plane. Filled with Russians with next to no experience in air to air combat. Russian planes of ww2 were way behind us planes. Hell even in Korea when the planes were most closely related in terms of power. The US slaughtered the russians in the air.

>>34597698
>USSR might have likely lost to Germany if it was 1s1

There is absolutely nothing wrong with that statement.
Even Zhukov admitted that were it not for lend-lease, the USSR would be in deep shit.
Now imagine not just no lend-lease (and therefore Soviet artillery without ammo to shoot or trucks to tow it, soviet aircraft and tanks with no ammo, fuel or even the raw materials to build them to begin with), but no African campaign, no Battle of Britain, no Overlord etc.

>>34597780
Soviet armies from 1944 to 1989 have never had the logistics capability to advance more than a few hundred miles. Then supply problems crop up and they have to halt and reorganize. They pushed to the extent of their abilities in Bagration and got about that far.

That discounts the air impact on their supply lines. SS units transferred to the West got their asses handed to them when they tried elastic defense tactics used in the East because fighter bombers would chew up the mobile elements before they got into the battle and leave the infantry blocking forces isolated. Different war in the west.

you know why its called operation unthinkable? because nobody even considered it an option because it was post war propaganda to make it seem like america/britain totally hated the soviets goy even though they supplied them with the supplies that kept them alive.

>>34597780
>When you new shiny planes arrives
There were thousands of bombers already in Europe, the B-29's are the nails for the charred, battered coffin.
>Operation Bagration
The conditions of Operation Bagration are completely different. They were fighting an exhausted enemy that had to defend from two fronts, and the Red Army relied on foreign supplies to sustain the offensive.

>>34597826
>IL2s.... so a very slow two engine

The Il-2 was a single engine aircraft. You're thinking of the Pe-2.

>>34597641
When and how did the British run so low on planes?

>>34597237
I'm goimg to let you in on a secret. You have to catch the plane before you can shoot at it.

>>34597753
Every war needs its fodder

>>34597849
>no African campaign, no Battle of Britain, no Overlord etc.
No Chezh industry, no Hungary, no Romania, no Finland, no Slovakia and Croatia? Bring it fucking on.
also, Zhukov is not an argument, he changed his position with every new general secretary.

>>34597955
>No Chezh industry, no Hungary, no Romania, no Finland, no Slovakia and Croatia?

What makes you say this?

>>34597955
>No Chezh industry, no Hungary, no Romania, no Finland, no Slovakia and Croatia?

Are you retarded? How does the 3rd Reich even go to war with Russia then?
No, we're talking about Barbarossa, with Western Allies taken out of the equation from the start.

>>34597876
>Different war in the west.
Different road map. Europeans roads >>>> Russian roads. That mean that supply getting easier. You don't have an absolute air domination against Soviets, but Soviets had an absolute artillery domination against you.

>>34597985
>What makes you say this?
Original post about Germany against USSR in 1v1.

>>34597955
He likely meant "Nazi Germany with all allies against the soviets alone" because people like to give germany all the advantages in their strange alt-history imaginations for some reasons.
Btw. germany also benefitted from the ressources that could be pressed from occupied countries (and from semi-aligned ones like vichy etc.)

File: map35sov.jpg (77KB, 578x382px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 578x382px

>>34598005
>Nazi Germany with all allies against the soviets alone
>soviets alone

The U in USSR stands for union you dipshit.

>>34597997
>That mean that supply getting easier.

Rail is the key here considering just how long the Soviet supply lines are.

>>34597994
>No, we're talking about Barbarossa, with Western Allies taken out of the equation from the start.
Barbarossa was a secondary operation related to Battle of Britain. It original goal was to knock down last UK allie on a continent.
If you want to see USSR vs Germany 1v1, then go to 1938 when Soviets were ready to battle against Germany for the sake of 1935 Soviet-Czechoslovak Treaty and 1935 Soviet-French Treaty. Soviets were ready to go hot even without France, but Poland refused to gave passage.

>>34597910
My mistake yes the il2 is a single engine slow as shit ground attack plane.

>>34597997
They have to keep trucks running and even with US resources and complete air superiority the Red Ball express couldn't get it done. This was a ship and rail war at the bottom line. Plus they'd have to get it from Soviet industry to Europe before they could try to use those road networks.

>>34598033
>>(You)

>>34598033
does "soviet" stand for something other than the USSR?

>>34595678
Massive bombing campaigns from Sweden, Finnland, North Italy and Turkey.
Send the 1 million german pows to the front because they are trained and disciplined.

>>34598065
And US and UK need to deliver stuff from US and UK. What is bigger - Atlantic ocean or Poland?

It depends on the goal. A defensive war is feasible, though not before a lot of ground is lost. Pushing the Soviets back across Poland? Not likely, certainly not in the short term. Occupying Moscow? Forget it. Atomic weapons are the only thing that makes any of this workable.

>>34598127
The convoy system was massive and the Soviets couldn't touch it.

>>34598127
>What is bigger - Atlantic ocean or Poland?
depends on whether the supply lines are being constantly exploded by enemy air superiority

>>34598127
Do the Soviets have thousands of B-17s sinking anything that moves in the Atlantic?

>>34598247
They had a thousands of people who could build an entire new railroad like before Stalingrad. (Actually it depends on Soviet action in Scandinavia. Norway is the key for the Atlantic)

>>34595678
Stop supplying them with food and trucks. Wait for them to starve.

>>34598265
Norway is the key to the Atlantic if a competent, adequately sized navy can operate from it. Something that takes years if not decades to build and man in ideal conditions.

>>34598127
The Allies had proven this capability by 1945 and the Soviets couldn't touch it. The Soviets had not proven this ability and it's likely the Allies could adversely impact their attempts to do it.

>>34597922

They have pretty comparable numbers there?

>>34596076
It's the word socialists use to describe hardline "Lenin/Stalin/Mao did nothing wrong" communists. Tankies are basically the left wing version of /pol/

>>34596076
>>34596068

A tankie is a socialist who will excuse or ignore any atrocity or repression perpetrated by a left-wing regime, usually with a dose of "AmeriKKKa bad!" whataboutery thrown in for good measure. It comes from the Useful Idiots shilling for Moscow who refused the condemn the USSR's crushing of the Hungarian uprising in 1956.

>>34595678

All the material questions have been answered in previous posts, but all the guns and bullets in the world are useless if no-one will fire them. What about will to fight?

Britain elected a socialist government into power just a few weeks after VE-Day. Could there have been mass mutinies in the UK army and strikes at home if they'd tried to continue fighting against the USSR?

>>34598977
It really depends on who started it. If the Allies started it, you have problems. If the Soviets started it, "stabbed in the back" would be going nuts especially with the fresh memory of Pearl Harbor. I think the internal Soviet dissent would be minimal given the Patriotic War propaganda and the tight grip of the NKVD. Sure, you'd get minor partisan activity in the baltics and Eastern Europe wouldn't be helping the Soviets but that effect would be negligible on the war as a whole.

File: 1944II.png (2MB, 819x1319px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 819x1319px

Rommel, his wife and son war gamed it in 1944

In April and May, American Officers found themselves being flooded by German officers with their maps, talking on about recent soviet troop movements.

We should have listened.

>tfw Rommel will never play war games with you

>>34597152
>USMC vs Red Army
USMC.
They're FAR better trained, led, and equipped and have fought an enemy that requires 98-100% casualties to defeat, the Red Army tactic of OHRAHHHH is just Banzai:2 Electric Boogaloo and unlike the Heer we won't run out of ammo.

>>34599317
The Soviet army was fairly experienced at the end of the war. Sure, they took many casualties, but they still ended up with a large amount of soldiers who experienced multiple actions on battlefields that make the pacific theatre and western front look like a walk through the park. Overall, the Soviet Union would have had far more experienced men.

File: 1467990127415.gif (72KB, 175x175px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 175x175px

>there are retards in this thread RIGHT NOW who unironically think the West could have withstood the unholy might of 12-million reds
XAXAXAXAXAXA, 1945 BEST YEAR OF MY LIFE

>>34599373
The front line was after they are blunted it's the savages in the rear line that would be getting absolutely destroyed

>>34599317
>They're FAR better trained
In 1945? Hell, no. Also, Korean war showed how good Marines were against T-34. They were so good that fucking Patton personally hold the fucking line.

File: 20170528_234727.jpg (43KB, 276x280px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 276x280px

>>34599373
>a front that made the Pacific look like a walk in the park.
The fuk? What part of 98-100% of the enemy force being killed don't you understand? You took more Germans prisoner in one battle than we did the Japanese the entire WAR. Banzai charges would have Zhukov blush in their utter psychotic bravery. Japs would rush with fucking bamboo SPEARS, while you guys had to have special units to stop deserters, the USMC would be skullfucking you out from 500M on in, you couldn't even supply your guys with a semi-auto rife worth a damn and yet you think that would make a difference?

File: 1497809965478.jpg (237KB, 683x626px) Image search: [Google]

237KB, 683x626px

>>34599453
>Patton
>Korea
What shitposting is this?

>>34599373
All armies were experienced after a minimum of five years of war. Experience and equipment were not an issue at this point in the war like they were in 1939. It was all logistics and industrial might by that time. Arguing about weapons or tactics misses the point even though this is /k/.

File: soliderwithskull[1].jpg (222KB, 1000x612px) Image search: [Google]

222KB, 1000x612px

>>34599487
Soviets fought against Japan in 1937 and in 1945. Nothing special. USMC is just taking credit in murdering brainwashed children in poor physical condition.
>Hey, we're strong, our enemy has no training, no armor, and no clean water, but we managed to overwhelm them! I'll send that scull of that underfeed conscript to my wife. She'll be proud of how strong her husband is.

>>34599594
The Soviets did fuck the Japs proper every time they faced them.

>>34599594
>>34599658

Didn't matter if they were inferior, The naval assaults carried out in the pacific were unprecedented battles that no other country has ever emulated. you gotta respect both sides of that struggle for fighting in such insane circumstances. Anyone who has read eugene sledges autobiography or other accounts from that theatre would understand what i mean.

>>34599594
What the fuck are you talking about?

>>34595678
I... it was unthinkable

>>34599772

in the later 30's and in 45.

File: 1498598142971.jpg (41KB, 599x336px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 599x336px

>>34595678

Seriously ?
Do you guys not recall the letters from Patton to command about this exact thing at the end of war.
About how he said NOW is the time to push the soviets.
About how he had NO doubt he could march to moscow.

He had a plan.
He wanted to enact it
He was going to completely crush them with the combined forces at the height of the American war machine.

And he was told not to...

America could have defeated the soviets if we wanted too , america was ready for it.. supplies where there, soldiers were vetted, tanks planes and automobiles at the ready.
and he said he could do it with what he had, not even taking into account the forces on the otherside of the world in japan.

>cmon guys..

Also, its fucking war.. and we have a atom bomb.. period.
All is fair in love and war... We would have won. End of story.


General George S. Patton on Russia & Russians

> “We promised the Europeans freedom. It would be worse than dishonorable not to see they have it. This might mean war with the Russians, but what of it? They have no Air Force anymore, their gasoline and ammunition supplies are low. I've seen their miserable supply trains; mostly wagons draw by beaten up old hoses or oxen. I'll say this; the Third Army alone with very little help and with damned few casualties, could lick what is left of the Russians in six weeks. You mark my words. Don't ever forget them... Someday we will have to fight them and it will take six years and cost us six million lives.

>>34599895
USSR just had no answer to far too many tricks up the allies sleeve. New fronts, along with the combined navies making all of their coastlines vulnerable would have been a huge deal. They would have been under a complete blockade very quickly, and would have to be entirely self sufficient while bearing war in every direction. The size of the country would work against it, logistically, it likely would have been one of the biggest logistical challenges for any military to manage.

>>34599725
Not taking anything away from the Marines as they fought different types of tough battles against an entrenched and fanatical opponent and won, but the Soviets also did fuck the Japs proper every time they fought them.

>>34599937
Its 1129.03 miles to Moscow from Berlin.
With paths already carved out by the soviets.
I truly think he could have done it in 6 weeks...

if we didn't nuke it to hell within the week and force a surrender

>>34599895
I thought they used the whole atom bomb arsenal on the nips.

>>34600045
it would took years before the Soviets achieved nuclear weapons. The Allies had the atomic weapon technology down now, production on a mass scale would follow quickly.

>>34600089
They should have just allied with Germany in the 30s and fucked the soviets up early. Let Hitler have Europe.

>>34597641
The POL situation the Red Air Force would be in if the US stopped Exporting and they had to try and prosecute a war would have a greater impact on Soviet air power than any number of aircraft the US or Britain shot down.

>>34599266
>>34599266

File: 1532562131.jpg (659KB, 5760x1080px) Image search: [Google]

659KB, 5760x1080px

>>34599895
>>34600014

Truthfully...
The worst part of this all...

is at that time.

We should have.
We should have taken Europe for our own.
We should have quelled the soviets and left them to deal with their winters.
We should have taken the jap land and established a significant base.
We should have then, after all the major players where removed from the game...mounted the world.

Then gone on to disband their armys.
Force them to concentrate on rebuilding infrastructure and materials
Then taken our cut and shipped it back home.

Im not saying that we dont control the world as we know it, because by far.. America has conquered the world as we stand right now.
By todays standards even with the globe combined could not stop the American war machine in this day and age.
But what we should have done is shown no mercy; much like the japs or germans would have IF they won.
They reaped hellfire during those years.. and they would not have stopped until they accomplished total domination of the globe. Period.

We should have taken it for ourselves
Shaped the worlds future

After the chaos mess and upset the world war would have casued
and after people got used the massive shift in power

We would only have had one goal at that point
>We would be in space, not as a nation.. but as planet earth.

Instead, becuase of the forces that be that day that told patton "Do not proceed" in 1945
We have men that use womens restrooms...
Kids who think being a socalist is cool and edgy
People afraid of guns
The youth drowned in hundreds of thousands of dollers of dept which they will carry all their lives.
and Muslims have invaded Europe

I think had the high command seen this future; they would have let Patton proceed.
Now the worlds a much harder political game to conquer..almost impossible
Back then it was metal, blood and steel.. much simpler.

>>34600320

Patton always talked big and we didn't know half as much about the Soviets as we do now; hindsight's a bitch, no need to try and get poetic over it. Also that shit is happening either way, and no space race means that we'd be going into space much later.

File: colonel.webm (2MB, 640x356px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 640x356px

our grandpas fucked up, boys.

>>34600408
Germans on the ground
Americans in the skies
British on the seas and engaging in dehousi- I mean Strategic bombing.

Poles and Germans working together on the ground against the Soviet occupation. Imagine fucking that

Pushing Stalin back out of Eastern Europe and forcing him to remain in his own borders.

>>34600459
I found it interesting Otto Carius surrendered to Americans with his tanks in hopes of getting to fight the Soviets again with the US. I'm sure there were others who thought the same.

>>34600506
Shoulda known better
American media & politicians had been covering up Soviet crimes for decades

File: Patton on Defeating the Russians.png (19KB, 1387x125px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 1387x125px

>>34595678
If General Patton were put in charge, the Soviets could have been easily destroyed. America had control over the air and could bomb their terrible supply lines while their cut off ground forces were swept up by the tank divisions. While the russians certainly had the numbers, that wouldn't have meant much if they had no food or supplies. For most of the war, the Soviets had been supported by American lend-lease, especially the trucks that made the Red Army mobile in the first place.The Russians already lost 20 million people and had their fertile farm country and industry destroyed during the war, there is no way they could have supported a war against the United States in 1945.

>>34599784
>30's
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Lake_Khasan

>>34600574
Patton was a field general, not a front commander. Bradley with Manstein acting as council. German leadership would be vital to the operation.

>>34599988
yes but sov fought them army to army, my point was the pacific theatre of operations required unique military capabilities that the soviet union or no other nation had.

>>34595678
>no atom bombs.
outright impossible

File: Kharkovoc.png (643KB, 942x1370px) Image search: [Google]

643KB, 942x1370px

>>34600739

>Be Red Army
>Get Pincered

File: 1500020998879.jpg (73KB, 500x672px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 500x672px

>plan a defensive war
>build CAS airfield up and down the front
>bring marines up to help on the defense along with their airforce
>concentrate a large force of shermans on the northern flank
>let the russians come at my defenses fully using my air power
>the small russian airforce is overtaken by late war american air power
>when they exhaust themselves and break off their offensive i counter attack blitzkrieg style and (hopefully) break through their lines
>if the russians down south dont pull back i surround and destroy them

Thats my strat r8 and h8

That's why God gave man the Apache helicopter and the Hellfire missle.

And also the A-10 Thunderbolt.

File: Alpha_and_Omega_poster.jpg (73KB, 300x445px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 300x445px

>>34600574

I enjoy reading all the /pol/ people who think their ultra-right wing position is the default one for most people, particularly in 1945, the british socialist party just won the election, the italian and french communist parties were going to win if not for the election inteference the next 2 years, and even then still had huge elections, several hundreds thousand Poles were already fighting in with the red army, as well as Yugoslavians and Romanians. The Soviets could easily have ignited civil trouble in the US as well, and the british under the best conditions were able to hold on to india for another 3 years, the Japanese were hoping that the Soviets may even had allied with them against the US.

The absolute delusion that everyone in the world would turn on the Soviets at the signal of USA is laughable. Stabbing your ally in the back is rarely a popular move with your own population.

>>34595678

Reinstate the Third Reich and force every German citizen to the front lines to clean up their fucking mess. Women and children, too. Battle of Berlin taught us that they can carry their weight. Basically Operation Human Shield from South Park. Send in American and coalition forces behind them. Bomb the shit out of the USSR.

Drops the nukes on Japan in August and that will make the soviets consider a peace agreement. More bombs would have taken time to create, so hold a line somewhere (probably poland since home guard was there too) and wait until Spring to advance forward.

File: Skorzeny busted.jpg (22KB, 500x381px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 500x381px

>War against the Soviets is about to start.
>Sent by superiors to German POW special holding camp.
>Explain the situation to him.
>Politely asks for a cigarette,
>You oblidge
>he smokes in total silence
>Leaves you sitting there cold and surprisingly nervous.
>Finishes the cigarette and leans forward, an awful grin crosses onto his scarred face.
>"Give me a Squad of SAS men, refit my SS-Jagdverbände and get me Jack Churchill as my X.O. Parachute us near Moscow and I'll blow the canal dams like I was going to do in '41."

>>34599658
Except for that one time the Soviets attempted a naval landing against the Japanese and got their asses handed to them.

>>34599658
Fukkin wut. Look at this,>>34600584

One thing I'd briefly like to mention is oil. Without even taking additional territory, allied strategic bombers is easily in range of about 70% of Soviet crude oil production, and might be able to eek out enough range to put over 80% of it in range. It all really depends on how the conditions mess with fuel consumption, something I don't know anywhere near enough about, other than that with all the mountains in the Urals, as well as out of likely bases in then-Persia (and possibly Turkey) likely would be a bitch. In any sort of extended campaign, this would be decisive.

File: 1478576835561.jpg (2MB, 714x1116px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 714x1116px

>>34600977
at the time the Russian air force was no small. and the idea that CAS and tanks will win you the war was what lost the Germans the last war. your strat is very akin to the German strat but with a defensive footing. it would be a disaster to say the least. you really couldn't break through with and armour spear head. you would sacrifice the closest thing too intact part of German industry.

You must examine the states of allied and warsaw-pack air forces. on the eastern front, the air to air fighting was low and centred on fast dog fights. while the allied air force centred on long range missions. if your air doctrine focused on CAS guess who would win that one.

>>34599895

Eisenhower was a little bitch.
Had Patton been allowed to cross the Czechoslovak border earlier, advance east of Pilsen, liberate Prague and be done with Bohemia and Moravia before the start of May when the Soviets were still in Slovakia, the entire post-war development in central Europe would be different.
What's worse, it wouldn't even have costed more than a handful of lives, because the main goal of nearly every German troop in Czechoslovakia at that point was to GTFO to the West and surrender to the Americans, the only ones still willing to fight were concentrated in Prague, and that was against civilians armed with scavenged weapons, when the Vlasov corps turned against them, they got their asses handed to them promptly.

>>34603298
You're so divorced from reality clapper.

>>34603317
>clapper

Try again, vatnik.

File: fuq.png (21KB, 657x527px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 657x527px

I-I could do it in HOI3

>>34597033
You reap what you sow. Czechs betrayed Slovaks and Rusyns and you got betrayed by your allies. And then, thanks to your glorious Czech nation, ae had communism for 40 years in Slovakia. We could have been Finland tier. Not super rich but better than in planned economy.

As for the topic, I guarantee that the locals would join Americans after what the wild Russians have done to them. Raping, looting, etc.
Too bad it never happened.

>>34595678
Lose immediately as all operational details are leaked by high level Soviet moles in the UK and OSS.

>>34603357
>Czechs betrayed Slovaks and Rusyn

How, you mongoloid? By dragging your backwards asses into the industrial era using Czech money, and only ever getting whiny Ľudák bitches like you in return, who would stab us in the back in exchange for crumbs from Hitler's table and keeping the Hungarian dog on the leash?
Oh, and as for communism being "our" fault somehow (you're probably referring to the fact KSS lost the 1946 elections, which honestly has zero bearing on what happened in 1948, as the communists had the LE, armed forces and secret services by the balls since before then, and were ready and willing to get their hands dirty unlike the yellow bellied, lukewarm and complacent democrats), you should have seceded, I wonder how being neutral would have worked out for you... I'd say you'd last three years tops before a "spontaneous" "proletarian" revolution took place.

File: Railways1941.png (3MB, 3100x2004px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3100x2004px

>>34596995
You're forgetting the layout of the Soviet rail infrastructure. The only high-volume routes from east to west go through Moscow, so you need only drop a handfull of bridges over the Volga, and you essentially cut the country in half. And to add, the Sovets don't have an analogue to the

>>34605706
Wow, why'd it to that?
Anyway, they don't have an analouge to the Army Corps of Engineers, which is why in Western Europe the Allies could put up bridges within days of them being needed, if a Soviet bridge falls, it's staying down for weeks, at least.

>>34603357
A Tiso byl co, ty zkurvenej čobole. Jednou zrádce, navždy zrádce.

>>34595942
You're so full of shit it's leaking out of your nose, vatnik.

>>34595678
>How would you do it?
moral support from my lazyboy in america until the ruskies invade America
then essentially just "red dawn"

>>34605720
>they don't have an analouge to the Army Corps of Engineers
Next time google before posting.
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%98%D0%BD%D0%B6%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%BD%D1%8B%D0%B5_%D0%B2%D0%BE%D0%B9%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B0_%D0%92%D0%BE%D0%BE%D1%80%D1%83%D0%B6%D1%91%D0%BD%D0%BD%D1%8B%D1%85_%D0%A1%D0%B8%D0%BB_%D0%A0%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%81%D0%B8%D0%B9%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B9_%D0%A4%D0%B5%D0%B4%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B0%D1%86%D0%B8%D0%B8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r7uBhyFjQII
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZ642bz7g24

>>34606952
>1945
>BMP's

>>34606952

It doesn't seem to me like either of these videos are from the end of WWII, my vatnik friend.

>>34598105
The idea of a 'soviet' is entirely different and distinct from the particular political entity known as the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Please attend a political science class at some point in your life.

>>34595678
One word: Patton

>>34595999
> overlooking the battle-hardened German soldiers who got their layoff notices a few weeks ago.

> Lots of vacation hours accruing for 6 years, and wartime back-pay.

> Want to RNR Fraulein Helga

> Go to the seaside?
> NO! beaches all bombed up, UXBs and bomb debris every where. Ocean has oily sheen.

>Nice ride in the country side!
>NO! Roads are bombed to hell and back, debris everywhere. No petrol anywhere.

>Go to a museum? NO! Bombed.
>Zoo? NO! slow animals eaten, fast animals ran.

>Night on the town? NO! bars were bombed.

>Reds have literally raped everything that could walk. Starting on things that cant walk in the morning. Everybody literally butthurt.

>We graet Nazi war fitters, hate how Russkies are disrespect
>they want payback for against Reds

tl:dr: Lots infantry with nothing to want revenge on commi rapehorses. Another 500K soldiers lots of trainikng, paybackdefeat of Komrade Stalin Slav Dogs

File: 3b4.jpg (11KB, 960x960px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 960x960px

>>34597352
>Intercepting fighters designed for low altitude vs escort fighters designed for high altitude and which have an altitude and speed advantage in every encounter
>Maximum speed of B-29 at optimal altitude: 574kph
>Maximum speed of Yak-9 at optimal altitude: 597 kph

>>34599317
>have fought an enemy that requires 98-100% casualties to defeat
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_invasion_of_Manchuria

>>34595940
And all bomers go right into the hands of Soviet interceptors.

File: 15003835576940.png (108KB, 273x252px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 273x252px

Was USA ready to sacrifice millions soldiers during the land operation?

File: са.jpg (63KB, 705x375px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 705x375px

>>34595678
>>hard mode no atom bombs
Well, no chances, mr. capitalist.
8 millions of angry, expierenced and well-motivated Soviet Army members, who removed nazi out of Europe, guarantee it.
Sorry.

I think it is important to add that the U.S. gave a lot to Russia in terms of lend lease including planes and tanks

File: 6867837f69ba4edce85a159225578063.jpg (35KB, 585x441px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 585x441px

>>34595678
I'd call in a few favors.

>>34612830
The Soviets hardly had an Air Force. They struggled to give every man a rifle

>>34612923
Learn history, mate, no offence, but you hardly know anything real.

File: 1eb8ef2213f8f86b35e28a2d316bf17a.jpg (42KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 600x600px

>>34612915
~1/20 of total soviet vehicles amount. Land Lease helped to avoid bottlenecks in production lines sending to USSR rare metals and other deficit resources, but there was few tanks and planes send from US compared to produced in Soviet Union

>>34612830
>Soviet
>interceptors

Even on low altitude the Soviets would have huge problems:
1.weakest weaponry out of the six important plane producing countries
2.not much experience about how to fight heavy bombers
3.long range fighters escorting the bombers

I'm not sure if the Soviets even have effective radar network.
And if the bombers stay on high altitude the Soviets can't even catch them.
Allies could use their far superior range to bomb shit out of all the Soviet airfields.

>>34612990
ughm, why do you think their first jet migs had 37 mm guns

>>34612995
I don't think we are talking about jet age.

>>34613018
Production of soviet jet fighters started at early 1946

>>34613018
what's 1945 if not the dawn of jet age

File: 1407234209113.jpg (144KB, 659x659px) Image search: [Google]

144KB, 659x659px

>>34612990
>1.weakest weaponry out of the six important plane producing countries
If soviet fighters sucks so hard, than why you lost so many planes in Korea?

>>34613036
The numbers would be too low and too late to matter much. Yak-15 was a shit anyway.
>>34613055
>raping Soviet airfields not allowed
It would have made more communist farmers mad.

well, in june 1945 soviets didn't have jets yet and most of their aviation was fitted to support massive ground battles so they indeed would have a lot of problems with high alt bombers

but then, soviets weren't retards and they wouldn't do any such move after they saw the nuclear strikes against japs, burgers did those partially to demonstrate their power to russians. those were in august but anyway any such possibility could stop soviets from any silly moves very fast

>>34613068
mig-9 was made about then too, from reverse engineered german engines

>>34607089
>>34607166
In exists since 1701. It's an institution literally older than your entire fucking country, shitbags.

>>34613072
>so they indeed would have a lot of problems with high alt bombers
They had interceptors perfectly capable of this role.
>burgers did those partially to demonstrate their power to russians
No, retard, they did that to crush gook will to fight and force them to capitulate without having to actually attack Japan proper.

>>34613113
>They had interceptors perfectly capable of this role.

let's see, they had a small number of thunderbolts and mustangs, considering that i-185 didn't go into mass production... yaks and las were mostly medium alt planes as well as stuff like aircobras and spitfires, what did they have else? pe-3 was a night fighter, maybe some version of mig-3 but those weren't even produced since the beginning of the war

>>34596303
>Acting like Reds won't open up another front in Asia

>>34613144
it's exactly what they did irl

In 1945 soviet industry, military strength and morale were at the peak of its power, they had dozens of millions of well-equipped, experienced solders, they had the largest tank army in the world and had the US not opened the western front, Red Army would've stopped its march in Lisbon, not in Berlin. Had Operation Unthinkable happened, RKKA would've easily steamrolled through US and UK forces in Europe. Obviously, western strategic bombers were untouchable to USSR avaiation (they had no capable high altitude interceptors) and AAA (artillery gun batteries were quite inefficient against such high targets), but mass bombings would've done nothing to halt the soviet advance. Now after sovoks capture Europe, they'd be sitting ducks and would've suffered greatly from massive convential/atomic bombings, but the damage would've been already done by then. Operation Unthinkable would've only lead to a red europe.

File: la-5.jpg (560KB, 1742x1054px) Image search: [Google]

560KB, 1742x1054px

>>34613131
>what did they have else?
Let's see. B-29 service celling: 9,710 m. La-7 service celling: 10,450 m. Yak-9 service celling: 10,650 m. Yak-3 service celling: 10,700 m. La-5 service celling: 11,000 m.

>>34613161
>had the US not opened the western front, Red Army would've stopped its march in Lisbon, not in Berlin
Is this the actual propaganda amerishits and westfags in general are fed with? Or are you just a special kind of a person?

Why have nobody talked about non-existent soviet MiG-15 in this scenario? All other Soviet jets were, mildly saying, mediocre. The longer the war would have been going, the more obvious technological superiority of Allied Airforce would have become

>>34613195
those planes had a rather bad high alt performance

not like soviets couldn't made a high alt interceptor (a jet one likely) but they didn't really have them at the end of the war

>>34613195
And all of them couldn't compete with allied fighters at these alts cause shitty soviet engines. The main service aircraft of Soviet AA was, for one second, British Spitfire and that says a lot.

>>34613208
they didn't even have mig-9 then

we discussed it

and finally the nukes were a more serious stopping factor than some air force, the soviet russia got them in 1949 only

>>34613210
Good enough to knock out an extremely fat bomber.

>>34613224
MiG-9 would have appeared, it used a German engine after all. Unlike MiG-15, which used Rolls-Roys Nene

>>34613219
>The main service aircraft of Soviet AA was, for one second, British Spitfire and that says a lot
now, it sounds as a pure bullshit
they had la-5fn/la-7 and yak-3/yak-9

>>34613229
they also had to overcome an horde of mustangs and thunderbolts too

>>34613231
Pls don't post anymore

>>34613252
are you a teaboo or something

>>34613254
Nope. By the way, do you understand what AA stands for?

>>34613259
i know, i doubt that claim

File: la-7.jpg (346KB, 1100x745px) Image search: [Google]

346KB, 1100x745px

>>34613241
>Marcel Albert, World War II French ace, who flew the Yak in USSR with the Normandie-Niémen Group, considered it a superior aircraft when compared to the P-51D Mustang and the Supermarine Spitfire.
"An horde of mustangs and thunderbolts" escorting B-29 from which airfield exactly? For B-29 itself it would have been a problem to reach even Moscow, let alone the actual industry centres at Ural, and its escorts had virtually no possibility to reach that far. Not to mention stretching air routes, while Russians are still basically at their own backyard.

>>34613282
yak was good at medium to low alt but not on high alt

>>34613288
Good enough to knock out an extremely fat bomber.

>>34597753
underrated/10

>>34613289
well, their armament wasn't that fitted to down four engined bombers too

they could do it ofc, but they weren't designed for it

>>34595678
bomb them into oblivion after destroying their mediocre airforce.

>>34613086
That had a wopping 211 staff assigned to it by special order in 1945.

>>34613324
Your strategic bombings were not really effective against germans. Moreover, german soldiers fought more violently after thousends of peaceful german citizens were killed by allied bombs

>>34613323
Just because it's not MiG-15 doesn't mean it's not well fitted to down a bomber.
>>34613354
See that long list of brigades in 1918—1945 part of the article? Yeah, fuck you.

>>34613375
>Just because it's not MiG-15 doesn't mean it's not well fitted to down a bomber.
Correct, their actual armament and engines do. High altitude performance is almost completely lacking. Their guns aren't designed for taking down heavy bombers if they even can catch them.

>>34613375
you see back then it needed a pretty distinct plane to down a heavy bomber than to down a fighter, it had to have more powerful weapon. stuff like schwalbe, the german jet designed to down fighters, had 4x 30mm guns, yaks mostly had 1x 20mm gun and a couple of mgs, a decent gun and decent mgs but superfortresses needed something more menacing. soviets had a few planes with 37mm guns though so the main problem it was their engines

>>34613391
>High altitude performance is almost completely lacking
Good enough to knock out an extremely fat bomber.
>Their guns aren't designed for taking down heavy bombers
Says who?

*designed to down bombers

>>34613375
>During the war, the engineering troops built fortifications, built up barriers, mined the terrain
They acted as their unit names state... SAPPERS.

The actual direct equivalent to the US Army Corp of Engineers would the the Rear Services Management Office of the Red Army which further breaks down to "Highway and Road Forces, Railway Troops, and Pipeline Troops". This Organization/Units were the primary logistics chain builders of the Soviet Union.

>>34613372
>Moreover, german soldiers fought more violently after thousends of peaceful german citizens were killed by allied bombs
wehraboo or pidorboo?

>>34613372
Effective enough.

>>34613394
La had 2 to 3 20 mm guns. Designs emerge from necessity. Soviets had aircraft perfectly capable of taking out B-29 at altitude. If there was a need to, these aircraft would have been more heavily armed. See the aforementioned MiG-15 that pretty much expertised taking out bombers.

>>34595678

>1. Lube up anus
>2. prepare to be raped by millions of battle-hardened soviet troops with superior doctrines and training

>>34613407
>Engineering management teams pontoon bridge brigades
>They acted as their unit names state... SAPPERS.
You see, you keep shitposting, but you don't even try. Next time at least make an attempt.

>>34613399
>>34613391

If we disregard the Yak series, the Soviets still captured plenty of German staff working on jet airplane and flew a 262 clone as early as 1946, not to mention the BI-1 rocket plane or the Ju 287 they were completing after capture. There's also the oddball known as Yak-15/17 which was basically a Yak-3 with a Jumo 004 strapped underneath.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_Su-9_(1946)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bereznyak-Isayev_BI-1
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junkers_Ju_287
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yakovlev_Yak-15

If the Yaks were failing, I don't think it would be much of a stretch to assume the Soviets would set up a jet aircraft line or to the least copy the 163/262 for air defense.

File: aa4.jpg (64KB, 640x632px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 640x632px

>>34613407
Also, keep reading, faggot.
>...mined the terrain, provided maneuvering for the troops, made passages in the minefields of the enemy, provided for the overcoming of its engineering obstacles, forcing water barriers, participated in the storming of fortifications, cities, etc.

>>34596825

You forget about the French, most of whom fought on the side of Hitler, despite the fact that officially France was considered an allied state of the USSR.

>>34613372
That's not true. Strategic bombing did a lot to prevent manufacturing efficiency, such as necessitating the dispersal of industry. The Soviets notoriously concentrated their new Ural production, simply because it was a logistical necessity. Such concentrated industry would get fucked. They're even within, admittedly at the edge of, B-29 range if they were operating out of Persia.

>>34613510
Too bad Ural is out of bombers' reach.

>>34613399
>Good enough to knock out an extremely fat bomber.
Not really. They would hardly be fast enough to catch them

>Says who
History. If you want to poke tiny holes into a heavy bomber with machineguns or 20mm guns? Be my guest. However, it's going to take a lot more than that to reliably take down a bomber. At least two cannons of larger than 30mm is the minimum norm.

>>34613437
That's all well and good, if the Soviets could manage to build appropriate engines. Then remember that Baku and other nearby oil would be flattened, removing over 70% of Soviet crude oil production, to say nothing of the Soviets not producing the correct high performance fuels for such engines. So no, you can't wait months for the solution, an extended campaign would go exceedingly poorly.

>>34613569
Didn't they reverse-engineer the Nenes and build the MiG-15 out of it? The VK-1 was first tested in 1947, the same year when the earlier plane first flew.

Without taking any sides, how did the Soviet Union develop the necessary infrastructures to field all those MiGs during the Korean war if it couldn't in 1945-6?

>>34613600
>Didn't they reverse-engineer the Nenes and build the MiG-15 out of it?
Correct. Britain went full retard and sold it with meaningless assurances that they wouldn't be used for military purposes.

As for your second question, it's amazing what several years of rebuilding your country will do. In WW2, the Soviets had to focus their efforts in certain areas because they lost the capability to do certain industrial practices due to losing the land they were on. Additionally, Lend Lease could provide them with those industrial resources they could not set up new production facilities for, meaning they weren't forced to at the time. After the war, the Soviets wisely went back to domestic supply.

>>34612830

Fucking LULZ. Yak 3s were just coming into service with terrible teething problems, and the Soviet Air Force had that was competitive over 5,000m. Their supply lines, FOB, airfields, mass storage and rail lines would have been gone within days.

There would have been DAILY strikes with ~300 bombers to their entire line. Within 3 weeks, there would have been B29s in northern Europe making deep strikes into their industrial base and fuel refineries.

>>34612848

No, just have the slave shits go back to their own counties. It would have saved East Germany most of Eastern Europe from being shitholes.

>>34613230

The MiG9 first flight was in April 1946.

>>34613229

Sure, if you think so.

>>34613195
>service ceiling is a metric of actual combat performance
I want slavaboos to leave

>>34595678
>Operation Unthinkable
>No nukes
How are you supposed to do something without the prerequisit?

>>34612923
Hahaha, holy shit. Yeah, they gave women entire squadrons of new fighters just for publicity.
They had literally hundreds of planes rusting out in open air because the US an UK were just throwing thousands of newer models at them. At no point did the Luftwaffe even compare in numbers.

>>34597753
The italian army was pretty effective against the russian
Also at this point the leader of the italian army was Messe and Messe was a compentent general

>>34613547
>Not really
More like yes, really.
>History
History also says the West wasn't that retarded and suicidal back then, so the whole thing never happened. But if a conflict was to emerge, see above: designs emerge from necessity. The aircraft themselves are more than capable. Changing ShVAK to NR-23 or N-37 is not rocket science.
>>34613975
>service ceiling is a metric of actual combat performance
It is, retard. With whole 1.3 km of service celling advantage over B-29, a La-5 would have a huge room for manoeuvre.

>>34596110
this

>>34595774
>US had completely control over the skies, we would have just bombed the shit out of them while they scurry around like ants

>We had utter and complete dominance, they were at our mercy.
>That's why the operation got a codename Unthinkable, the plan deemed inane and never carried out despite the clear cries for help by many countries that have fallen under the Soviet influence.

You should stop indulging on those burgers, the fat is getting to your brain.

Patton knew it could be done.
He was killed for it.
It could have been done.
But who controls the Federal Reserve?

>>34613200
>Is this the actual propaganda amerishits and westfags in general are fed with? Or are you just a special kind of a person?

Not that guy and not an American (not even really a westfag), but you DO remember the doctrinal goal of USSR was the sparking of proletarian revolution in the whole world, and their preferred method was conquest and installation of a puppet regime?
Furthermore, the French were primed perfectly for communism back then, with a large portion of the French resistance being communist and the rest of the country used to bend over, and the rest of the continent wasn't much better off.

>>34613513
I just told you it wasn't quite

>>34614142
How can one man be so retarded?

Пpивeт.

File: B-17 taking hits.webm (3MB, 750x422px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 750x422px

Somebody please get Soviet WWII fighter altitude performance tables.
It's like these slavs never read anything about Japanase fighters against B-29 raids.

File: ca4424c543d8184e05fb35eee6329dc6.jpg (10KB, 202x178px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 202x178px

>>34616910

Jesus fucking Christ that thing just won't go down no matter what... there were like three times where you think at least one engine is finally going to shit the bed, but it shrugged the 20mm off like it was nothing. Damn.
Also, were all the gunners kill? The 110 went about its business completely unharassed.

>>34595678
First off, achieve air superiority. I do not want the Soviets fucking Sturmoviks in my direction. Those things are literally flying tanks.

Build up defenses. At this point in time, there is no way any Western Allied nation can afford a thrust into Soviet territory. Best thing to do in this situation would be to turn pockets of our controlled territory into death zones for the inevitable Soviet human waves. As stated earlier, air superiority will help immensely with this, both getting room for our own strike craft in and for denying the airspace to the Soviets.

Once Soviet morale and manpower has been expended somewhat, go on the offensive. Get strategic bombers fucking up their infrastructure and massed troops, get the navy to blockade Leningrad/St. Petersburg. At this point in time, the British and Americans still have leftover carriers and battleships from fighting the Axis, so tearing the Soviet Navy a new one will be child's play.

For the Black Sea, do the same as done with Leningrad except prepare invasions on the city of Sevastopol and surrounding areas, using Turkey as a staging area.. The reason I don't do this for Leningrad is because I know the Soviets will fight like fucking savages for that city. I do not want to make the same mistake the Germans did.

Only thing that remains is to slug it towards Moscow, all the while bombing the fuck out of their factories and such so that I can cripple the Soviet war machine so they can't make shit. Basically Dresden their asses.

At least, this is how I would do it. Dunno if it would actually work but ah well.

>>34617712
>I do not want the Soviets fucking Sturmoviks in my direction. Those things are literally flying tanks.

Il-2s are kinda overrated, really.
Sure they're armored like no one's business, but the kind of effectiveness the Soviet pilots claimed was nothing short of insane.
I mean, there's no problem with the aircraft itself, but Soviet ground assault pilots weren't nowhere as good as they thought / claimed they were.