\
  The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
BackRefresh Options Favorite

Should US have invaded Russia on May 10, 1945?

1 day after Germany surrendered?
snowy soul-stirring pozpig market
  02/07/20
Why invade when you are the only one with nukes?
nubile bateful newt pistol
  02/07/20
Were not available until August. Would have to be a lot of n...
snowy soul-stirring pozpig market
  02/07/20
Then we chill so we can stockpile. But no, taking on a GAKKE...
nubile bateful newt pistol
  02/07/20
Invaded, no. Nuked at the earliest opportunity? Yes.
bistre pit
  02/07/20
November 1918, actually
Chest-beating marketing idea famous landscape painting
  02/07/20
Pointless question. History happened as is was meant to.
charismatic violet partner
  02/07/20
russia should have nuked dc as soon as they got the bomb
territorial corn cake
  02/07/20
from their airbase in Maryland? state ur IQ
Chest-beating marketing idea famous landscape painting
  02/07/20
With the first Vostok spaceship actually. Instead of Gagarin...
razzmatazz police squad puppy
  02/07/20
...
territorial corn cake
  02/07/20
Gagarin and Armstrong were the same person and never went in...
Histrionic Persian
  02/10/20
I always lol @ analysis like this. Ok, lets assume a best c...
translucent place of business
  02/07/20
Germans would do at least half of the fighting. Russians wou...
snowy soul-stirring pozpig market
  02/07/20
The Germans post WW2? Do you have any idea what state Germa...
translucent place of business
  02/07/20
Germany still had millions of military age men. If given new...
snowy soul-stirring pozpig market
  02/08/20
...
snowy soul-stirring pozpig market
  02/10/20
"If the USSR is defeated, what gets in the way of world...
translucent place of business
  02/10/20
What could Asian countries do in the 1940s without the suppo...
snowy soul-stirring pozpig market
  02/10/20
In the short term, yes. But they would all 100% realize tha...
translucent place of business
  02/11/20
It would have meant US control of the world for at least a g...
snowy soul-stirring pozpig market
  02/13/20
Control which probably would have ended with the US getting ...
translucent place of business
  02/13/20
"Lets say the US somehow managed to defeat the USSR, po...
arousing effete liquid oxygen jap
  02/14/20
Yes. The cold war with Russia wiped out any benefits of win...
Comical half-breed
  02/07/20
You say that, but post-WW2 and pre-fall of Communism was the...
translucent place of business
  02/07/20
US was united socially and politically in 1950 and enjoyed t...
Comical half-breed
  02/07/20
I remember watching a documentary on biker gangs and how the...
translucent place of business
  02/07/20
"I get your point about the 1960s and the USSR definite...
Comical half-breed
  02/07/20
I get your point, but power struggles would happen regardles...
translucent place of business
  02/07/20
2nd part. Civil rights movement was in large part a leftist...
Comical half-breed
  02/07/20
Might or might not. Commies weren't behind BLM, Antifa, etc...
translucent place of business
  02/07/20
We had Jews either way breh
motley embarrassed to the bone messiness
  02/07/20
That was Patton's goal - he wanted to rearm Germany to fight...
Wonderful buff spot athletic conference
  02/07/20
what could possibly go wrong!
Pea-brained Contagious House Windowlicker
  02/07/20
It was blind luck that we did not have a catastrophic nuclea...
beady-eyed tanning salon
  02/07/20
Yes and no. After we nuked Japan we should have told Stalin ...
Vivacious area
  02/07/20
Shouldn't have used both bombs on Japan. One would have suff...
Exhilarant Bawdyhouse Sneaky Criminal
  02/10/20
The weird schtick of "the US should have tried to rule ...
translucent place of business
  02/10/20
Yes, a thing that has never even been tried has never worked...
Exhilarant Bawdyhouse Sneaky Criminal
  02/10/20
No one has ever tried to conquer the world? Seriously?
translucent place of business
  02/10/20
no one of a realistic expectation of doing so. the US in 194...
Exhilarant Bawdyhouse Sneaky Criminal
  02/11/20
Yeah, but you forget that for more primitive civilizations t...
translucent place of business
  02/11/20
I doubt the US would be such bitchass Geneva Convention cuck...
Exhilarant Bawdyhouse Sneaky Criminal
  02/12/20
I don't doubt it - we would quickly become the evil empire. ...
translucent place of business
  02/12/20
Great. Wtf are they going to do about it?
Exhilarant Bawdyhouse Sneaky Criminal
  02/13/20
Secretly develop nukes and turn the US into a nuclear wastel...
translucent place of business
  02/13/20
? We had more than 2 bombs lil breh
Misanthropic electric field
  02/10/20
iirc we dropped our entire arsenal on japan. https://en.w...
Exhilarant Bawdyhouse Sneaky Criminal
  02/11/20
tcr. The next one was only going to be ready in a while, ii...
translucent place of business
  02/11/20
The US should have picked up where Hitler left off lmao
Outnumbered Weed Whacker Doctorate
  02/10/20
Right, so then the US could let Stalin beat Hitler and try t...
translucent place of business
  02/10/20
Everyone in this thread is underestimating the military stre...
vigorous fortuitous meteor church
  02/10/20
8.5 million military deaths 1939-1945, the Soviet Union was ...
snowy soul-stirring pozpig market
  02/10/20
(Napolean) and (Hitler)
vigorous fortuitous meteor church
  02/10/20
...
translucent place of business
  02/11/20
So I think the only way this works is assume a) the US has e...
translucent place of business
  02/11/20
Strategically it's not clear that nukes were any more effect...
vigorous fortuitous meteor church
  02/12/20
...
Walnut Brunch
  02/11/20
No it was ultimately a good thing that communism happened
Walnut Brunch
  02/11/20
Totally agree. That's what ultimately prevents Communism fr...
translucent place of business
  02/11/20
Exactly - It's literally what you would do if you were tryin...
Concupiscible stage roast beef
  02/13/20
nice try, Shlomo.
Sickened nofapping step-uncle's house knife
  02/11/20
No.
olive balding goal in life
  02/12/20
I love how we're pretending we have a full modern arsenal of...
Concupiscible stage roast beef
  02/13/20
...
translucent place of business
  02/13/20
western europe being under the control of the USSR would hav...
Walnut Brunch
  02/13/20
You overrate how formidable the Soviet Union military machin...
snowy soul-stirring pozpig market
  02/13/20
In Europe? Very well.
translucent place of business
  02/13/20
10 million military deaths, disproportionately Russian. Thin...
snowy soul-stirring pozpig market
  02/14/20
Stalin also didn't have to deal with same constraints as wes...
Concupiscible stage roast beef
  02/14/20
Yes but consider the state of everyone else at the end of th...
Concupiscible stage roast beef
  02/14/20
the Russian economy in 1945 was in such shambles that it pro...
Chest-beating marketing idea famous landscape painting
  02/13/20
Yes they were truly a rotting house. One only needed to kick...
vigorous fortuitous meteor church
  02/13/20
10/10
Concupiscible stage roast beef
  02/14/20
now imagine they don't have 3 million GM trucks and jeeps sh...
Chest-beating marketing idea famous landscape painting
  02/14/20
I think we might be speaking at different things - the hypo ...
Concupiscible stage roast beef
  02/14/20
this is all true
Chest-beating marketing idea famous landscape painting
  02/14/20
How formidable was the Red Army at the end of WW2? They lost...
arousing effete liquid oxygen jap
  02/14/20
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/how-the-west-lost...
Titillating dark chapel legal warrant
  02/13/20
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Unthinkable It was ...
galvanic nibblets theatre
  02/13/20
Interesting. 180 add.
translucent place of business
  02/14/20


Poast new message in this thread



Reply Favorite

Date: February 7th, 2020 10:43 AM
Author: snowy soul-stirring pozpig market

1 day after Germany surrendered?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39557179)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 7th, 2020 10:45 AM
Author: nubile bateful newt pistol

Why invade when you are the only one with nukes?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39557188)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 7th, 2020 10:47 AM
Author: snowy soul-stirring pozpig market

Were not available until August. Would have to be a lot of nukes which would not be immediately available.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39557196)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 7th, 2020 10:51 AM
Author: nubile bateful newt pistol

Then we chill so we can stockpile. But no, taking on a GAKKED UP red army with the full weight of their industrial capacity in action seems like a bad idea

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39557213)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 7th, 2020 10:52 AM
Author: bistre pit

Invaded, no.

Nuked at the earliest opportunity? Yes.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39557222)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 7th, 2020 11:00 AM
Author: Chest-beating marketing idea famous landscape painting

November 1918, actually

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39557267)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 7th, 2020 11:01 AM
Author: charismatic violet partner

Pointless question. History happened as is was meant to.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39557271)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 7th, 2020 11:01 AM
Author: territorial corn cake

russia should have nuked dc as soon as they got the bomb

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39557274)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 7th, 2020 11:02 AM
Author: Chest-beating marketing idea famous landscape painting

from their airbase in Maryland? state ur IQ

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39557279)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 7th, 2020 11:04 AM
Author: razzmatazz police squad puppy

With the first Vostok spaceship actually. Instead of Gagarin the payload should have been a nuke.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39557290)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 7th, 2020 11:05 AM
Author: territorial corn cake



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39557297)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 10th, 2020 11:11 AM
Author: Histrionic Persian

Gagarin and Armstrong were the same person and never went into space

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39570602)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 7th, 2020 11:10 AM
Author: translucent place of business

I always lol @ analysis like this. Ok, lets assume a best case scenario. Lets say the US somehow managed to defeat the USSR, possibly at the cost of millions of lives. What problems that we have now would be solved by that? Exactly none. And in fact, it would spawn a host of new ones. For one, you would have millions of Communists that would have claimed that Communism actually can work, but the nasty Americans intervened and put an end to it.

The best case scenario was exactly what happened. Communism failed spectacularly. The USSR collapsed but at the cost of 0 lives.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39557317)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 7th, 2020 12:56 PM
Author: snowy soul-stirring pozpig market

Germans would do at least half of the fighting. Russians would have been weakened by the nearly 10 million military deaths. It would cost maybe 500,000 US lives. The outcome would have been true world domination.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39557911)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 7th, 2020 7:35 PM
Author: translucent place of business

The Germans post WW2? Do you have any idea what state Germany was in after having lost WW2?

"The outcome would have been true world domination."

If you think this then I have some nice swampland in Florida to sell you.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39559664)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 8th, 2020 8:00 AM
Author: snowy soul-stirring pozpig market

Germany still had millions of military age men. If given new equipment and motivation they could start fighting again. What shape do you think the USSR was in in May 1945? If the USSR is defeated, what gets in the way of world domination?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39561353)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 10th, 2020 10:24 AM
Author: snowy soul-stirring pozpig market



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39570424)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 10th, 2020 10:49 AM
Author: translucent place of business

"If the USSR is defeated, what gets in the way of world domination?"

You still have Asia, the ME, and pretty much everyone else that doesn't want to be ruled by the US.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39570509)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 10th, 2020 1:20 PM
Author: snowy soul-stirring pozpig market

What could Asian countries do in the 1940s without the support of the Soviet Union? They would go along with the US imposed order.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39571305)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 11th, 2020 1:08 PM
Author: translucent place of business

In the short term, yes. But they would all 100% realize that sooner or later they will need to confront the US. IRL, everyone would rushing to secretly develop nukes ASAP.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39577726)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 13th, 2020 3:20 AM
Author: snowy soul-stirring pozpig market

It would have meant US control of the world for at least a generation. China would not have been very strong even 20 years after the defeat of the Soviet Union by the US. And it's not like China and Japan would end up working as an alliance.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39587258)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 13th, 2020 11:38 PM
Author: translucent place of business

Control which probably would have ended with the US getting nuked. Great idea.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39592348)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 14th, 2020 12:23 PM
Author: arousing effete liquid oxygen jap

"Lets say the US somehow managed to defeat the USSR, possibly at the cost of millions of lives"

I'm not a history buff but didn't WW2 take the biggest military toll on the USSR like by a long shot? And they didn't have nukes yet. I have no idea whether this would have been a good idea or if our lives would be better because of it, but is there any doubt that we could have taken them out at that point?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39594411)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 7th, 2020 11:11 AM
Author: Comical half-breed

Yes. The cold war with Russia wiped out any benefits of winning WWII within a few decades. US free society and democracy was as poorly suited to fight the cold war as the USSR's rigid government controlled economic system. Both countries suffered tremendously as a result of the mutual pain and decline brought on by the cold war and it just so happened that the USSR model died first. EDIT: if not for the Reagan revolution this country may have been full-blown socialist by now and basically ideologically in line with much of the the political thought of the USSR (i.e. Marxism & bullshit like that).

The damage done to this country by virtue of this ideological struggle appears immense. If the US were to devolve into civil war, or some other awful civil unrest based on a nationalist v. leftist basis, it seems IMHO to be the proximate cause of that would be the USSR's efforts to destabilize American culture from the cold war.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39557324)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 7th, 2020 11:14 AM
Author: translucent place of business

You say that, but post-WW2 and pre-fall of Communism was the golden age of the US (along with just after the collapse of the USSR).

"The damage done to this country by virtue of this ideological struggle appears immense. If the US were to devolve into civil war, or some other awful civil unrest based on a nationalist v. leftist basis, it seems IMHO to be the proximate cause of that would be the USSR's efforts to destabilize American culture from the cold war."

To a degree. But the USSR didn't a) create the American left, or b) convince the American left that the credited strategy is demographic change. As long as these two things happened we would end up exactly where we are now.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39557340)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 7th, 2020 11:17 AM
Author: Comical half-breed

US was united socially and politically in 1950 and enjoyed the most prosperous economy perhaps of all time. Within 15 years the US was on the brink of civil war with civil unrest causing major cities to be burned. Within 25 years the US was mired in severe economic decline and defeated militarily in Vietnam.

You think that was all just the long arch of history?

EDIT: the time were talking here is no different than 2001-present. It would be like studying the economic and social unrest that has occurred since 2001 without mentioning 9/11

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39557350)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 7th, 2020 11:25 AM
Author: translucent place of business

I remember watching a documentary on biker gangs and how they started because of all the soldiers returning home from WW2 and couldn't integrate back into normal life. And in the early 50s you have Korea - which was just the better version of Nam.

I get your point about the 1960s and the USSR definitely helped that along, but it would have happened no matter what. The draft in Vietnam, segregation, an American left that captured the hearts and minds of that generation, drugs, etc. - a lot of that would happen no matter what.

Not for nothing, but Afghanistan was a similar war for the USSR that also drove significant cultural change. The point is that if you have to draft a bunch of people to fight a stupid war no one cares about you're going to get huge backlash as the war drags on. Would we have stupid wars but for the USSR? Sure. We have stupid wars now, right? We're just more cautious because of the disasters that are Iraq and Afghanistan, but our willingness to accept those losses rather than throw all in is partially due to Vietnam.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39557388)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 7th, 2020 11:28 AM
Author: Comical half-breed

"I get your point about the 1960s and the USSR definitely helped that along, but it would have happened no matter what. The draft in Vietnam, segregation, an American left that captured the hearts and minds of that generation, drugs, etc. - a lot of that would happen no matter what."

This is the fun part. Without USSR, there no worldwide threat of soviet communism to fight, thus probably no Korean War and definitely no Vietnam War. The full extent of USSR influence on college campuses and in pushing American cultural decline will never be known, but it is an amount significantly greater than 0. Shit, US goes to war and prevails against the USSR in the 40's, Mao doesn't get support (as WW communism is in the fight of its life against US & UK), and the communist revolution in China probably doesn't happen. I know that nobody cares about bug people, but that's about 100M people that don't get got and probably solid justification for a war against USSR in the 1940's.

There's no way to know, but in the fun exercise of alternative history, I don't think a lot of the stuff you describes happens if USSR collapses in the late 1940's.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39557402)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 7th, 2020 7:34 PM
Author: translucent place of business

I get your point, but power struggles would happen regardless. They would have simply been under different banners. The result wouldn't have been that everyone would allow the US to run shit, just like right now you have alliances forming to push back against the US though Communism has long since been dead.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39559658)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 7th, 2020 11:38 AM
Author: Comical half-breed

2nd part. Civil rights movement was in large part a leftist/ communist movement with ending segregation etc. as a front. MLK's I have a dream speech was made at a economic rally that was basically calling for socialism. Leftist activists basically exploited the old US Civil War divide for fun and profit.

USSR doesn't get involved, possible that state sponsored discrimination against blacks ends in a less destructive manner.



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39557445)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 7th, 2020 7:32 PM
Author: translucent place of business

Might or might not. Commies weren't behind BLM, Antifa, etc. Remember that the last time the US disagreed over major racial issues we got the Civil War (no USSR back then either).

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39559631)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 7th, 2020 11:16 AM
Author: motley embarrassed to the bone messiness

We had Jews either way breh

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39557347)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 7th, 2020 11:55 AM
Author: Wonderful buff spot athletic conference

That was Patton's goal - he wanted to rearm Germany to fight the Russians and push into Moscow

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39557547)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 7th, 2020 11:56 AM
Author: Pea-brained Contagious House Windowlicker

what could possibly go wrong!

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39557555)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 7th, 2020 3:57 PM
Author: beady-eyed tanning salon

It was blind luck that we did not have a catastrophic nuclear war. Bertrand Russell was right that we should have had a preemptive strike against the USSR.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nuclear_close_calls

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39558893)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 7th, 2020 8:24 PM
Author: Vivacious area

Yes and no. After we nuked Japan we should have told Stalin you get the USSR, leave everywhere else. No North South/South Korea, no communist china, no Warsaw pact, Cuba is like vegas. If he doesn't take it then we start nuking. Either way this contains communism to the UUSR, which will collapse in due course. The problems the USSR created around the world would be gone today though.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39559887)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 10th, 2020 10:58 AM
Author: Exhilarant Bawdyhouse Sneaky Criminal

Shouldn't have used both bombs on Japan. One would have sufficed, and we could have used the other as leverage to functionally rule the world.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39570553)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 10th, 2020 11:01 AM
Author: translucent place of business

The weird schtick of "the US should have tried to rule the world through military might" is totally nuts. Does this ever go well?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39570566)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 10th, 2020 12:07 PM
Author: Exhilarant Bawdyhouse Sneaky Criminal

Yes, a thing that has never even been tried has never worked. I agree.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39570971)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 10th, 2020 12:24 PM
Author: translucent place of business

No one has ever tried to conquer the world? Seriously?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39571061)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 11th, 2020 12:10 PM
Author: Exhilarant Bawdyhouse Sneaky Criminal

no one of a realistic expectation of doing so. the US in 1945-49 was the only time in human history anyone could have united the world under a single rule of law.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39577399)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 11th, 2020 1:04 PM
Author: translucent place of business

Yeah, but you forget that for more primitive civilizations the "world" was just smaller. In other words, in practical terms what Rome achieved was basically "ruling the world" for all intents and purposes. And their overreach was their doom.

Regardless, it is futile because no one half way across the world wants to take orders from Americans. Sooner or later, they'll rise up and destroy the US in a world where the US rules it. That would be a world where everyone has only a single enemy: the US. Who is to blame for their problems? The US. Even if it is some stupid local border dispute, it ends up being a problem with the US. We see that even now with Muslims and Israel. But now we can walk away. If we "ruled the world?" There's no way to walk away without losing the illusion of world domination.

It is just a really stupid goal that ends with countries sooner or later getting nukes anyway and possibly nuking the US for freedom. The worst thing is that you can't even blame them in that scenario - we would 100% be the evil empire that dominated the world.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39577694)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 12th, 2020 12:06 AM
Author: Exhilarant Bawdyhouse Sneaky Criminal

I doubt the US would be such bitchass Geneva Convention cucks if we ruled everyone

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39581512)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 12th, 2020 8:27 PM
Author: translucent place of business

I don't doubt it - we would quickly become the evil empire. Absolute power would corrupt absolutely.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39585720)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 13th, 2020 7:06 PM
Author: Exhilarant Bawdyhouse Sneaky Criminal

Great. Wtf are they going to do about it?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39590927)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 13th, 2020 11:38 PM
Author: translucent place of business

Secretly develop nukes and turn the US into a nuclear wasteland?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39592351)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 10th, 2020 1:55 PM
Author: Misanthropic electric field

? We had more than 2 bombs lil breh

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39571498)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 11th, 2020 12:10 PM
Author: Exhilarant Bawdyhouse Sneaky Criminal

iirc we dropped our entire arsenal on japan.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_nuclear_weapons_stockpiles_and_nuclear_tests_by_country

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39577397)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 11th, 2020 10:48 PM
Author: translucent place of business

tcr. The next one was only going to be ready in a while, iirc.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39581065)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 10th, 2020 12:13 PM
Author: Outnumbered Weed Whacker Doctorate

The US should have picked up where Hitler left off lmao

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39571002)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 10th, 2020 12:25 PM
Author: translucent place of business

Right, so then the US could let Stalin beat Hitler and try to beat Stalin so that the US could become ... Hitler and Stalin. Great idea!

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39571063)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 10th, 2020 12:38 PM
Author: vigorous fortuitous meteor church

Everyone in this thread is underestimating the military strength of the ussr as of the end of ww2.

Could it have been won? Depends on how were defining winning. But the cost would have been utterly staggering and enforcing peace afterwords impossible unless ignoring domestic politics of the allied powers.

We probably could have starved out and perhaps eventually forced regime change but at the cost of total war for another decade. And even that's highly questionable. Soviets had ample fuel etc and domestic manufacturing increased exponentially each year.

It's an interesting thoufht experiment but he outcome is far from certain.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39571141)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 10th, 2020 1:21 PM
Author: snowy soul-stirring pozpig market

8.5 million military deaths 1939-1945, the Soviet Union was severely hobbled.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39571307)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 10th, 2020 1:38 PM
Author: vigorous fortuitous meteor church

(Napolean) and (Hitler)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39571388)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 11th, 2020 10:48 PM
Author: translucent place of business



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39581068)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 11th, 2020 1:07 PM
Author: translucent place of business

So I think the only way this works is assume a) the US has enough nukes to nuke the USSR into submission, and b) the USSR doesn't get nukes in time and doesn't/can't use chemical/biological warfare to even the playing field.

In a conventional war the US loses.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39577716)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 12th, 2020 8:11 PM
Author: vigorous fortuitous meteor church

Strategically it's not clear that nukes were any more effective than firebombing. hen even moreso than now, conventional weapons if applied appropriately could be just as devastating. The Germans already tried this, albeit without true strategic bombers.

Also, contrary to Japan, the vast majority of Russia's industrial base would be out of range of bombers of the time.

You could say, well the nukes would be used tactically but it's far from clear how effective this would be (it's still never even been attempted). So basically we'd be nuking Stalingrad and the caucases but not clear what effect long term this would have.

US was not churning out nukes at the time so it's not like we could have carpet bombed them with nukes.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39585647)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 11th, 2020 1:10 PM
Author: Walnut Brunch



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39577731)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 11th, 2020 1:08 PM
Author: Walnut Brunch

No it was ultimately a good thing that communism happened

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39577725)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 11th, 2020 1:09 PM
Author: translucent place of business

Totally agree. That's what ultimately prevents Communism from being acceptable in the world today. If Communism was defeated militarily instead of internal collapse then people would constantly bleat that it could work but for evil capitalists.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39577730)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 13th, 2020 2:20 AM
Author: Concupiscible stage roast beef

Exactly - It's literally what you would do if you were trying to build an ideal creation mythology for communism.

Look what we had started, look what the workers had accomplished, what was in sight - then the evil capitalists not only opposed it, but had to use its military and kill millions to stop it etc.

It's sort of like how censoring shit just actually increases its appeal - naturally people wonder what don't they want us to read / hear? The mystique and appeal of communism would be orders of magnitude greater than they are today. setting up a half century long competitive experiment side by side with the two great superpowers was the optimal way to defeat communism, and to your point we really needed to have that full collapse of THE communist state.. It's one thing if it doesn't work in vietnam , but it had to reach the full collapse and let the world see that happen - in the land of Lenin / Trotsky etc.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39587094)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 11th, 2020 1:35 PM
Author: Sickened nofapping step-uncle's house knife

nice try, Shlomo.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39577924)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 12th, 2020 12:07 AM
Author: olive balding goal in life

No.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39581525)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 13th, 2020 2:10 AM
Author: Concupiscible stage roast beef

I love how we're pretending we have a full modern arsenal of nukes, and that the Red Army wasn't a fully ramped up well-oiled machine by the end of the war especially effective in tank warfare / land battle with huge supply of infantry.

Stalin had Eastern / central Europe by the balls, and our threat of nukes was probably the only thing keeping his ambition / thirst for revenge in check.

In '49 I think there was a short time we had true nuke supremacy, and this is arguably the only situation where something like this would be justified - if you think nuclear proliferation and therefore war with Soviets is so inevitable, that you might as well pre-empt their chances at obtaining the bomb and crush them right away...

The idea the western democracies could've mustered the morale at the end of the war to fight the fucking Red Army on the European continent is beyond retarded. A nuke or two doesn't end the game, it just loses every European postwar ally for us while giving Stalin an excuse to keep going West...... Europe would've rightfully blamed us for serving them up to Stalin on a plate, Stalin swallows up much more (if not all) of Europe, and we're supposed to convince the guys who just fought Japs in the south pacific and germans / Italians in Europe to go fight the Red Army on the continent..... why?

The question should be about '49, not '45, and it vastly underestimates the Red Army strength, importance of allies in postwar world, importance of needing a very good reason to send people off to fight and die in a war - especially for western democracies, and importance of morale / willingness to fight especially right after they just fought ww2? lol . Also completely ignores how necessary it still would've been to confront on land.... And especially in hindsight it's not clear what this buys us? The optimal outcome for u.s. ended up happening.



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39587073)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 13th, 2020 2:18 AM
Author: translucent place of business



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39587091)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 13th, 2020 2:21 AM
Author: Walnut Brunch

western europe being under the control of the USSR would have been a better outcome long term imo

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39587097)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 13th, 2020 3:17 AM
Author: snowy soul-stirring pozpig market

You overrate how formidable the Soviet Union military machine was in 1945. It had been bled dry. The Soviet Union had upwards of 10 million military deaths. That's more than a dent to the supply of infantry. They were left on VE Day with 6 million men in uniform. And how many of the remaining pool were lower quality Tajiks rather than Russians? Military deaths by ethnicity: https://www.reddit.com/r/russia/comments/6aana3/soviet_military_deaths_in_world_war_ii_as_of/

The remaining army could look formidable against the completely stripped Japanese garrison in Manchuria in August 1945 but how would Soviets do against a re-equipped German/US military?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39587252)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 13th, 2020 7:54 PM
Author: translucent place of business

In Europe? Very well.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39591177)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 14th, 2020 2:48 AM
Author: snowy soul-stirring pozpig market

10 million military deaths, disproportionately Russian. Think about that for a moment.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39593072)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 14th, 2020 4:05 AM
Author: Concupiscible stage roast beef

Stalin also didn't have to deal with same constraints as western democracies, and so just stripped their agricultural / civilian workforce to replenish.....

At end of war both armies had ~6 million in uniform. But they are concentrated and pushed up all the way to East Berlin / into eastern bloc. See my full reply but i just see the morale issue + distance too large of obstacle to be worth it, and if you really want to attack Stalin we could just wait until we have a comfortable nuke supply in a couple years, since we knew we were ahead in development then

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39593148)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 14th, 2020 3:58 AM
Author: Concupiscible stage roast beef

Yes but consider the state of everyone else at the end of the war / Mid-may in '45 as well.

As you say - at the end of the war we have roughly similar size military forces (~12 million) and similarly sized armies (~6 million).

The Soviets were nearly fully mobilized in Europe, although having had to mobilize twice as many troops during the war meant they were stripping workers from their civilian / agricultural workforce.

The key differences IMO is that first the morale in Western countries wouldn't have been there, a problem Stalin wouldn't have had to face for obvious reasons - not to mention the Red Army is "already at the fight", with a gun to Germany's head.

Western democracies had to deal with things like defense budget cuts which the country's leaders wanted yesterday, and so the western democracies couldn't demobilize fast enough after the war. The morale problem would've been a major disadvantage if not intractable - because again 1 or 2 nukes are great but this still would've had to largely been a conventional land war.

And are we changing the hypo? I get your point about a re-equipped Germany, but how many British and American GIs are you really going to get to get to fight by saying: "hey all that propaganda you've been fed the last few years? That's inside out now - and we need you to go fight alongside the people who just killed all your buddies you had to suffer through watching them get mowed down by machine gun fire attacking that nest....."

I'm sure this is true for others, but reading / listening to American GI journal entries and first-hand quotes from the end of the war, these dudes had been there a while and were fed up to the extreme with extraordinary hatred towards the army and its bureaucracy. American officers learned in Europe that for whatever reason, moreso than e.g. Brits, American GIs needed to be told why they were doing something when carrying out an order. Soviets by contrast ate each other's children at Stalingrad.......

I'm not arguing the Red Army is a superior force - I'm saying what do we gain out of the attack given we're pretty certain we're comfortably ahead of Soviets in developing nukes / they're not going to have one anytime soon, and so it wouldn't make sense to get into a brutal bloody land war with the Red Army with zero morale behind it *and* trying to fight where they'd have such an advantage, rather than play nice while we develop more nukes if you really want a surprise attack against Stalin.....

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39593139)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 13th, 2020 8:40 AM
Author: Chest-beating marketing idea famous landscape painting

the Russian economy in 1945 was in such shambles that it probably deserves scare quotes. They were at the end of their rope and facing another couple of years of war economics would've led to widespread famines and/or a repeat of March - October 1917

meanwhile in the US the worst citizen adversity was ration cards for 8 gallons of gas per person per week

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39587712)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 13th, 2020 8:48 AM
Author: vigorous fortuitous meteor church

Yes they were truly a rotting house. One only needed to kick the door in. Good call.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39587754)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 14th, 2020 4:21 AM
Author: Concupiscible stage roast beef

10/10

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39593160)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 14th, 2020 6:46 AM
Author: Chest-beating marketing idea famous landscape painting

now imagine they don't have 3 million GM trucks and jeeps shipped to them from an overseas benefactor

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39593258)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 14th, 2020 12:17 PM
Author: Concupiscible stage roast beef

I think we might be speaking at different things - the hypo in OP isn't whether it could be done, but whether it should (have) be done.

I'm not debating as to whether the full might of U.S. military could have defeated the Soviets in 1945...

Because there's a whole range of outcomes that includes victory but at too high of human and strategic cost. And if we were determined to do this / indulge this hypo, why wouldn't we just wait until our nuke arsenal was comfortably stocked since we knew we had a fairly comfortable buffer in terms of time estimates of their development.... It's lunacy to take the Red Army head on in Europe and slug it out with them in a land war (their relative military strength by an absurdly disproportionate amount), rather than wait for those nukes to come through into our arsenal....

And I'm still not even clear on the objective of this war? To defeat communism? To save millions and millions of Russians at the cost of our own, rather than letting it flame out and implode in full embarrassing view of the rest of the world? We had a near-optimal outcome: no nuclear war, Soviet Union collapses and the world witnesses the failures of communism at an internal cost to those states rather than to our troops / etc

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39594379)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 14th, 2020 12:32 PM
Author: Chest-beating marketing idea famous landscape painting

this is all true

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39594448)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 14th, 2020 12:36 PM
Author: arousing effete liquid oxygen jap

How formidable was the Red Army at the end of WW2? They lost around 10 million soldiers compared to the US at like 400k. I ask genuinely and acknowledge i don't know what i'm talking about.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39594458)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 13th, 2020 8:41 AM
Author: Titillating dark chapel legal warrant

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/how-the-west-lost-world-war-ii-at-yalta

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39587717)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 13th, 2020 11:43 PM
Author: galvanic nibblets theatre

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Unthinkable It was militarily unfeasible.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39592376)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 14th, 2020 2:58 PM
Author: translucent place of business

Interesting. 180 add.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4440167&forum_id=2#39595474)