World War III scenario: mid-1946

Other Wars Cold War
#41

RE: The British report: The numbers of aircraft available to the “west” is much lower than during the last stages of the war, about 1/3rd tactical. The number seems somewhat “de-mobilised”, but then again, they can´t have considered to attack USSR with less than all they got. The Soviets couldn´t have gone to the Atlantic against any spirited defense, for logistical reasons, but I haven´t seen anybody here really consider the “western” situation. One thing is bringing US gear across the Atlantic, another bringing it to eastern europe through damaged infrastructure. Advancing east would eventually mean advancing into thrice scorthed earth territory, with whatever underdeveloped infrastructure available severely damaged.

The Soviets estimated it would take about 100 (one hundred) Hiroshima-sized nukes to do them the same damage as the Germans had done in 1941 (sorry, can´t remember the source).

(For the debate on casuallities of west-strategic aircraft in a 1945/46 conflict: USSR had no fighters in service able to fight on equal terms with the west´s at USAF cruise altitudes (the (195?) P-47´s lend leased being an exception. (There would have been no MIG-15´s, the first couple of years).

(Another beginning of this scenario could be Patton continuing east in May 1945 -begun as his private enterprise. Not a Patton expert in any way, but it seems he would have very much liked to :D)

#42

The scenario puts the numbers as being the same as at the end of hostilities in 1945.

The Soviets had not the Wolfpacks to inhibit Atlantic crossings.

Why would the west be wanting to advance into the Soviet Union?

The Berlin Airlift was a good example of logisitical supply without a ground based infrastructure.

The scenario doesn’t consider the West attacking the Soviet Union in 1945. That would be a totally different scenario.

#43

The build up required to get the Russians ready would be enormous, and would undoubtedly allow the Divisions in Germany on the “Front” to be reinforced.

With this greater force ready to engage, not to mention the whole of Germany still on a anti Russian footing, there would be a considerable force in front of the Russians, that would now lack the support that they had in the closing months of the war (from USA and UK).

UK and USA bombers command could go back to the 24/7 conveyor belt of bombing at selected targets. Particularly the main supply routes and possible depots and HQs.

The Russian fleet would not play too big a role in this.

The Western allies would soon control the airspace.

Whilst the initial surge would be good and possibly take Germany, the Russians would be turned back and routed. Where the rout stopped is anyones guess, but possibley Moscow when a nuke was lobbed in.

#44

Nuke the whole planet most die and then mother nature takes over and washes the human race off her planet .
I thought this forum was about hard facts of WWII and not the what if and what about topics?
You younger members go to the library or buy some books if you have the money and start reading and put down the video games.Knowledge is the key to life and not some of these home grown shows and movies ,join the military and start you career early in life because time goes by way to fast to sit back and daydream about things .Before you know it you will look back and say holy mother of god I graduated high school 20 years ago and have family now where did time go so fast and you can still think back to your first date with that someone special and all the good times in between and feel like it was just yesterday in your mind .
My point is that we are not getting any younger and time goes by in a blink of a eye increase you knowledge by reading that book and dont take advantage of your youth and enjoy it and at the same time embrace it because its one thing in your life that you can not reclaim .

#45

Thank you for sharing those pearls of wisdom. I’m off to renew my library membership right away. After all, as you imply, knowledge is power, and I’m feeling empowered!

#46

I’m feeling ALL powerful, at the moment.

Knowledge is POWER!!!

Make your own superheros here

http://www.ugo.com/channels/comics/heroMachine2/heromachine2.asp

If you like. I was going to show my offerings here, but I couldn’t be bothered save, manipulate and post.

#47

I have not read any of the rest of this topic, and I’ll update this periodically.

First thoughts on the first post:

Conventional would work if the US would let Patton keep going East, rolling over the Soviets.

#48

HOW?..Just like that?..Don’t you think the Soviets might have had something to say about it?

And why Patton - what did he ever do?

#49

Patton was one of the best tank commanders the US had in WWII, and the Soviets wouldn’t have had much to say: They lost twenty million or so in the war, and if we’d have waited until '46, they’dve been losing more by the day in Stalin’s early purges.

#50

That doesn’t tell me much - care to elaborate?

and the Soviets wouldn’t have had much to say:

I doubt that very much - did Patton advise waiting until 1946?

#51

Patton had the most troops with him and was already in Berlin, GER; He could’ve kept rolling East. And no, he didn’t advise waiting until '46. This scenario is just in '46.

#52

How many troops did Patton have with him?

#53

I think the Soviets would have thought otherwise…

#54

Why do you say that?

Bravo: I can’t find exact figures, but Patton had the entirety of the Third Army with him before he got kicked upstairs. Thus, in '46, maybe not, but certainly he had enough troops right after he arrived in Czechoslovakia.

#55

Because the Soviet Red Army was quite powerful at this point and would have inflicted heavy casualties…And do you think the 3rd Army would have been enough?

#56

And also not operating at full efficiency. And maybe not, but the 1st Army and 9th Army were sitting on the Elbe River, and the 7th was across the Rhine.

Thus, enough troops could’ve been deployed as needed, I think.

#57

Methinks, not.

#58

You just left yourself wide open to blatant sarcasm.

I’m skipping it.

But anyway, if you don’t think so, explain.

#59

As a non-thinker, Methinks I would prefer the blatant sarcasm.

Explain? Durr…let me try to think???

The Soviet warmachine was abolutely gargantuan by the time they took Berlin. If Patton had tried to ‘steamroller’ them, he would have filled a lot of bodybags on both sides. However, the Soviets would have stood the losses and replaced them. The democratic USA would never have been able to sustain them, neither physically i.e. militarily, nor politically. Why do you think Patton wasn’t allowed to go ahead with his madcap mission?

I would also argue that Patton always new that it was a non-starter, and only suggested attacking the Soviets to enhance his ‘Blood and Guts’ rep.

Quite simply, the Soviets would have been ready, as opposed to the time of Barbarossa, when they were unready. If they had been pushed back, they would have been shortening their lines of communications and supply. The US would have been extending theirs, as they were sucked into the Soviet hinterland. The Steppe was the Soviet domain and leant itself to the Soviet tactics involved in ‘Deep Battle’, which by then they had near perfect. I doubt the US had the ability to field the quality of leadership (Patton), manpower, equipment and supply to make up for the disparity in numbers etc.

You’ve made a number of sweeping statements, most of which have been,as I read it, complete and utter nonesense, so, how about you doing a little explaining?

#60

I’m gonna come back and do it, just checkin stuff right now. Be back later.