Great Britain v. Soviet Union all out total war 1946.
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Moscow region
Age: 65
Posts: 567
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some considerations from another side.
1. It's pity to see such a topic. SU, US and GB were good allies during the WWII, and nobody in the Stalin's mob was really planning to move further westward after Berlin was taken. Yes, in some memoirs of the Stalin's multi-star generals it was mentioned that some commanders were raising such a topic, but these were rather chats over vodka after some unintentional friendly fire took place in the last days of war.
2. Stalin had a clear plan regarding Europe. First, to crack down Hitler completely and denazify Germany. No "side trips" were planned. Second, to extend his influence and control over the territories liberated from the nazis by SU. Note that puppet governments were later put in place only in the countries that were "on the march mainstream". It seemed rather fair at that time: hundreds of thousands lives were left in Eastern Europe. Note also that countries alongside the route, such as e.g. Finland and Norway ( north) and Austria (south), were not included in the pro-Soviet block though many soldier lives were left there as well.
3. "Great three" (US, UK and SU) have just agreed (in Yalta/Crimea in Feb 1945 and later in Potsdam) on the principles of a new world order after WWII. Stalin seemed to be satisfied with the agreements reached. What the hell would he turn the guns towards yesterday's colleagues?
4. OK, forgetting the above 1-3, and taking an abstraction of a military conflict, it's better operate with numbers. First, leaving only UK vs SU (taking US out)makes no sense. SU had three times more troops, planes, tanks and self-propelled artillery, etc. than GB. Soldiers and officers had extremely rich combat experience in air and land ops (Navy is not the case here). Thus, no chances. Let's now "take US in". US had comparable (to SU) armed forces (e.g. both had about 11+ mln army), but only a minor part of them were in the European theatre. Anyway, still a serious threat to SU. In my opinion, SU would anyway reach the Atlantic, but would then have to face regular bomber attacks from many directions and I can hardly predict the result as it would be a very long conflict (like a GB vs Germany over the Channel for some 6 years). Taking a longer period into consideration (when A- and H-stuff appeared), it is well-known that SU could hardly adequately reply to US plans like "dropshot" until late 50's.
1. It's pity to see such a topic. SU, US and GB were good allies during the WWII, and nobody in the Stalin's mob was really planning to move further westward after Berlin was taken. Yes, in some memoirs of the Stalin's multi-star generals it was mentioned that some commanders were raising such a topic, but these were rather chats over vodka after some unintentional friendly fire took place in the last days of war.
2. Stalin had a clear plan regarding Europe. First, to crack down Hitler completely and denazify Germany. No "side trips" were planned. Second, to extend his influence and control over the territories liberated from the nazis by SU. Note that puppet governments were later put in place only in the countries that were "on the march mainstream". It seemed rather fair at that time: hundreds of thousands lives were left in Eastern Europe. Note also that countries alongside the route, such as e.g. Finland and Norway ( north) and Austria (south), were not included in the pro-Soviet block though many soldier lives were left there as well.
3. "Great three" (US, UK and SU) have just agreed (in Yalta/Crimea in Feb 1945 and later in Potsdam) on the principles of a new world order after WWII. Stalin seemed to be satisfied with the agreements reached. What the hell would he turn the guns towards yesterday's colleagues?
4. OK, forgetting the above 1-3, and taking an abstraction of a military conflict, it's better operate with numbers. First, leaving only UK vs SU (taking US out)makes no sense. SU had three times more troops, planes, tanks and self-propelled artillery, etc. than GB. Soldiers and officers had extremely rich combat experience in air and land ops (Navy is not the case here). Thus, no chances. Let's now "take US in". US had comparable (to SU) armed forces (e.g. both had about 11+ mln army), but only a minor part of them were in the European theatre. Anyway, still a serious threat to SU. In my opinion, SU would anyway reach the Atlantic, but would then have to face regular bomber attacks from many directions and I can hardly predict the result as it would be a very long conflict (like a GB vs Germany over the Channel for some 6 years). Taking a longer period into consideration (when A- and H-stuff appeared), it is well-known that SU could hardly adequately reply to US plans like "dropshot" until late 50's.
If Stalin's hordes had moved West then UK forces pushed right back would have had to face a second Dunkirk, however Dunkirk was conducted from a rather narrow bridgehead where BEF weren't spread out over hundreds of miles.
A Soviet armoured thrust and a Uk forces retreat would have been intense with the likelihood that couple of hundred thousand personnel are behind enemy lines as prisoner.
In 1940 if Germans had pushed hard onto Dunkirk and not rested then potentially 300,000 plus men would have been prisoners.
A Soviet armoured thrust and a Uk forces retreat would have been intense with the likelihood that couple of hundred thousand personnel are behind enemy lines as prisoner.
In 1940 if Germans had pushed hard onto Dunkirk and not rested then potentially 300,000 plus men would have been prisoners.
I don't think anyone has mentioned the most heinous crime of all committed around this time by surprise surprise a socialist government and in particular Stafford Cripps. That crime was the gifting to the Soviets of a number of RR Nenes, on the basis of not being used for military purposes, yeah right! The Soviets were having trouble at the time with their own axial flow of German design. A delegation was also allowed to tour RR and wore soft soled shoes to collect alloys samples. Why the entire labour government were never put on trial for high treason, I have never understood.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Rolling, I did. Racedo, second time around Britain would enjoy air supremacy, army mobility, and RN heavy units able to secure disembarkation ports. A salvo of 2,000 lb shells would have a salutary affect.
A Van, I agree, it is just an intellectual exercise leaving out political aspects. The most significant 'what if' concerns technology transfer. No jet engines, no electronics, no German U-boats.
A Van, I agree, it is just an intellectual exercise leaving out political aspects. The most significant 'what if' concerns technology transfer. No jet engines, no electronics, no German U-boats.
second time around Britain would enjoy air supremacy, army mobility, and RN heavy units able to secure disembarkation ports. A salvo of 2,000 lb shells would have a salutary affect.
Even with best disembarkation you would still leave many behind plus equipment.
Would population want to continue with another war after 6 years ?
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Ricardo, that is my point, we had the capability to disengage which we lacked in 1940. In the west we had created the infrastructure to advance and could use this for a rapid retreat.
Only if someone decided to hold ground in the WW 1 would we have lost many men. Had we used manoeuvre warfare it would be difficult. In this scenario we were not defending Europe but realistically just retiring gracefully against massive Soviet Armies.
Only if someone decided to hold ground in the WW 1 would we have lost many men. Had we used manoeuvre warfare it would be difficult. In this scenario we were not defending Europe but realistically just retiring gracefully against massive Soviet Armies.
Pontius: In 1946, Patton is already dead.
The US Navy is still big, having no Japan to deal with as of September 1945.
Demob wasn't done in a day.
Who is at #10: Churchill, or someone else? (IIRC, it did not take long for Winston to no longer be popular ...)
What possible reason does Stalin have for going West of the Rhine? (Hell, does he really want to go west of the Elbe?)
Anyone? Yeah, I thought not.
Dead letter. They (the Sovs) were already using the fifth column in Asia and elsewhere. (See Austria, 1945-1950, among other examples). Fifth column is cheaper by a lot than a column of T-34/85's.
The US Navy is still big, having no Japan to deal with as of September 1945.
Demob wasn't done in a day.
Who is at #10: Churchill, or someone else? (IIRC, it did not take long for Winston to no longer be popular ...)
What possible reason does Stalin have for going West of the Rhine? (Hell, does he really want to go west of the Elbe?)
Anyone? Yeah, I thought not.
Dead letter. They (the Sovs) were already using the fifth column in Asia and elsewhere. (See Austria, 1945-1950, among other examples). Fifth column is cheaper by a lot than a column of T-34/85's.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
LW, Patton was not dead in 1945 nor would he have been relieved of his post or had a car crash.
The initial premise did not have to be wholly credible. The US position was defined once again as benevolent neutrality. There is nothing wrong with either premise and many, many success novels have been written on less credible premise, Clancy, Bond and Brown amongst them.
The initial premise did not have to be wholly credible. The US position was defined once again as benevolent neutrality. There is nothing wrong with either premise and many, many success novels have been written on less credible premise, Clancy, Bond and Brown amongst them.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: london
Posts: 379
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#44: r20: red Derwents and Nenes.
No time because it wasn't a crime. Uncle Joe was our valiant Ally...until...well, your own view of when the Cold War began, by whom...why?
UK Cabinet decided that date was 14/8/48, when they Tasked Chiefs to halt USSR before the Rhine. Opposition Leader WSC decided it was 5/3/46, with his Iron Curtain speech. UJ may have wondered why did US not cancel 100xB-36A (even adding 200, 12/45)/60x(B-29D/)B-50A ordered 7/43, all with range US-Berlin (?Moscow).
15/7/46: Congress Approves UK's Loan: we use some of these $ to buy Oregon timber to start repairing bombed homes and workplaces. UK was cold and broke. Congress required £ to become freely convertible by 15/7/47: this we profoundly feared (for good reason: we dammed the outflow 20/8/47). What on earth could UK sell to earn $? Ah: aeroplanes. To whom? ah, folk with $-goods we needed. Ah: Argentina. They were taking lots, bartered for Fray Bentos spam.
As we had no enemy, we did not urgently fund new combat types. Argentina did (FMA Pulqui) and asked for Derwent: might they take Meteors (5/47: yes, 100 please)? Sweden did and asked for Goblin on -21R, Ghost on J-29. Nationalist China wanted Gloster CXP-102, Nene or Ghost. If we were happy to take $ from dictators and neutrals, why then not from our Ally?
We declassified Derwent/Nene (I assume Goblin/Ghost too), mid-1946.
USSR requested quotations for Meteor and Derwent, small batch supply, production licence. President of the Board of Trade R.S.Cripps (wartime Minister of Aircraft Production) did a barter deal (timber+grain) and issued Export Licences 10/46 for 10 each, Derwent/Nene; spring, 1947 for 20 more Derwent/15 Nene.
During 1947 Communist MPs were widely but freely elected, minorities in Iceland, France, Italy...but further East UJ was manipulative (30/12/47 he would hi-jack Romania). We reclassified Nene/Derwent 11/47. UJ by 24/6/48 had taken us on in Berlin and the War warmed. Cripps (by then at Treasury) and Cabinet funded British Bombs and Bombers and the Cold War, atomic standoff was onway.
Whose fault...your judgement. It was not treason for Ministers in 1946 to try for harmony.
No time because it wasn't a crime. Uncle Joe was our valiant Ally...until...well, your own view of when the Cold War began, by whom...why?
UK Cabinet decided that date was 14/8/48, when they Tasked Chiefs to halt USSR before the Rhine. Opposition Leader WSC decided it was 5/3/46, with his Iron Curtain speech. UJ may have wondered why did US not cancel 100xB-36A (even adding 200, 12/45)/60x(B-29D/)B-50A ordered 7/43, all with range US-Berlin (?Moscow).
15/7/46: Congress Approves UK's Loan: we use some of these $ to buy Oregon timber to start repairing bombed homes and workplaces. UK was cold and broke. Congress required £ to become freely convertible by 15/7/47: this we profoundly feared (for good reason: we dammed the outflow 20/8/47). What on earth could UK sell to earn $? Ah: aeroplanes. To whom? ah, folk with $-goods we needed. Ah: Argentina. They were taking lots, bartered for Fray Bentos spam.
As we had no enemy, we did not urgently fund new combat types. Argentina did (FMA Pulqui) and asked for Derwent: might they take Meteors (5/47: yes, 100 please)? Sweden did and asked for Goblin on -21R, Ghost on J-29. Nationalist China wanted Gloster CXP-102, Nene or Ghost. If we were happy to take $ from dictators and neutrals, why then not from our Ally?
We declassified Derwent/Nene (I assume Goblin/Ghost too), mid-1946.
USSR requested quotations for Meteor and Derwent, small batch supply, production licence. President of the Board of Trade R.S.Cripps (wartime Minister of Aircraft Production) did a barter deal (timber+grain) and issued Export Licences 10/46 for 10 each, Derwent/Nene; spring, 1947 for 20 more Derwent/15 Nene.
During 1947 Communist MPs were widely but freely elected, minorities in Iceland, France, Italy...but further East UJ was manipulative (30/12/47 he would hi-jack Romania). We reclassified Nene/Derwent 11/47. UJ by 24/6/48 had taken us on in Berlin and the War warmed. Cripps (by then at Treasury) and Cabinet funded British Bombs and Bombers and the Cold War, atomic standoff was onway.
Whose fault...your judgement. It was not treason for Ministers in 1946 to try for harmony.
In 1940 if Germans had pushed hard onto Dunkirk and not rested then potentially 300,000 plus men would have been prisoners.
Fortunately for the Brits....the Japanese attacked the United States and brought us into the war although we could have ignored the Germans as up to that point they had left us alone.
But had the Japanese not attacked the US, and just confined themselves to attacking British interests such as Singapore (by surprise as well) etc, how long would the US have stood by? Would the invasion of the Philippines have been enough ie no direct attack on the US? Or would US forces there have been withdrawn to avoid the confrontation, and keep the US out of the war?
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Traffic - the US were pushing the Japanese hard with all sorts of restrictions to support the KMT in China - a lot of people thought the USN in the Phillipines was likely to be a target and a cause that would allow Roosevelt to break all his promises about keeping the US out of any war.
Unfortunately the Japanese decided to go for broke and took out Pearl Harbour........
Unfortunately the Japanese decided to go for broke and took out Pearl Harbour........
LW, Patton was not dead in 1945 nor would he have been relieved of his post or had a car crash.
The initial premise did not have to be wholly credible. The US position was defined once again as benevolent neutrality. There is nothing wrong with either premise and many, many success novels have been written on less credible premise, Clancy, Bond and Brown amongst them.
The initial premise did not have to be wholly credible. The US position was defined once again as benevolent neutrality. There is nothing wrong with either premise and many, many success novels have been written on less credible premise, Clancy, Bond and Brown amongst them.
I think that's kinda moot. The US was effectively at war with Germany from roughly September 1941, when the US Navy was ordered to sink U-Boats on sight.
At the start (start from a Brit point-of-view, forget about Czechoslovakia and the second Sino-Japanese war) of WW2, the USSR was allied with Germany.
- The USSR invaded Poland jointly with Germany in 1939, and invaded the Baltic states.
- Britain and France had plans to support Finland in the Winter War, but couldn't figure out how to get 135,000 troops there. The Winter War lead to the USSR's expulsion from the League of Nations.
- The USSR was negotiating to join the Axis Powers as least as late at November 1940.