Great Britain v. Soviet Union all out total war 1946.
 

Interested as I am in the recent report about how we would come off in a non nuclear conflict with Russia today, I want to pose this question.
How would Britain have come out against Stalin's Soviet Forces in 1946 if the new iron curtain was breached with an all out attack from Russia?
Indulge me as I set out my scenario.
1. Attlee Government. No nuclear capability on either side.
2. We haven't de-mobbed, and the 3 forces generally are at May 1945 strength.
3. We are financially broke and America hasn't yet backed us in the actual fighting, they are keeping out (but happy to supply us with military aid-at a price).They offer no such aid to Russia.
4. Soviets have struck first with multiple armoured thrusts across Northern Europe with a apparent push to the ports of N Germany, Holland and Belgium.

Indulge me.What would have happened, who would have "won"?
HS.

American Forces have withdrawn to France.
 

No American Forces are in situ beyond the 1939 borders of France ( the border is a DMZ 10 miles deep. Britain, militarily is on its own stand fast newly forming armies in the recently liberated European countries. Germany has been entirely disarmed and militarily stood down.

1. We have secure lines of communication as USSR has no maritime capability.
2. We have jet fighters albeit short range, high performance prop fighters, long range bombers, radio navigation aids, and probably air superiority if not supremacy.
3. The army is numerically inferior and its tanks, whilst numerous are out numbered and outgunned.
4. A scorched earth policy and a devastated 3rd Reich deny the Red Army opportunistic logistic supplies.
5. The Red Army loses manoeuvre ability.
6. Red Army has slow advance and continuous interdiucy and attrition.
But
7. A thrust into Caucasus oil fields and Persia and Iraq secure oily supplies and deny these to British forces.
8. Red Army reaches North Sea but lacks any ability to reach UK.
9. British Army retires in good order to UK.
10. RAF jet bombers continue deep penetration raids into eastern Europe.
11. RN units blockade Dardanelles and Baltic.
End game, Reds hold northern Europe. UK controls all SLOC and Air Supremacy to Russian border.

I see my fag packet assessment mirrored the wiki defensive plan mentioned by desk wizard, particularly the navy and air aspects.

That wouldn't be because you read it before posting? :E

I note you say no nuclear capability,but one would have assumed that the U.S. would have given us the use of atomic weapons and the aircraft to deliver them fairly quickly. No one has mentioned Japan either. If Japan could have been remilitarized, they could have posed a threat to Russia's far eastern territories.

In order to answer this question, you could do worse than to read this book about Stalin, looking into his mind, by a Russian 'defector'.

MG, not at all.

The imponderable is not kit - theirs broadly quite as good as ours, in overwhelming quantity - but motivation, especially of conscript infantry. They need a good reason to advance into harm's way.

Well, in 3 days, August,1945, Ivan disposed of the Imperial Japanese Army. We read that we faced that in SE.Asia, and that USMC faced it in the Pacific...but no: it sat throughout 1941-8/45 up on the edge of the Arctic. Rolled up in brief hours, by brown jobs whose understanding of their Mission will have been vague.

So, 1946, Ivan would have rolled forward and swamped us, reaching Antwerp briskly, heedless of casualties. So, what then? Well: Q: why would Stalin have done this: West of the Urals Mother Russia was devastated - why add to that? A: to spread the good word in France, Italy, everywhere really.

And, I surmise, to good effect. Chaos, revolution, workers and peasants rising up all over. In the real world:
France's Chief of Staff, early '47 “concurred (USSR) would be in Paris by August(’47)” Bullock,Attlee,P537: Joliot-Curies and other nuclear physicists, and 182 French National Assembly Members (11/46), were Communist; so to 11/3/47 were some Belgian Ministers. Soviet Arctic Fleet route to our Atlantic passed Iceland - ⅓ MPs were his; Occupied Austria seethed with Third Man strife.

Stalin had a one-time chance to create his version of Socialism throughout the European land-mass. Nothing we could have done to stop him. Truman had pledged to bring all the boys home by 8/47.

Stalin tho wasn't that interested in exporting Communism IF it was at a serious cost to the USSR - he was very much of the "Socialism in One Country" mind-set

thrashing the Germans and establishing a 2 country buffer zone pretty much gave him all he needed - and the troops were needed to rebuild Western Russia as well.............

I think a thrust such as this would have kept going until it reached the Suez with Egypt then lost.

A WHAT IF scenario written years ago suggested that if Hitler had not invaded Russia but instead thrust from Eastern Europe/Greece etc into Middle East they would have put Egypt in a pincer between Rommel and Army driving through Syria / Palestine.

Racedo, indeed, but look at the British logistics train: an air route right across Africa and the sea route around the Horn and still Rommel failed to take Egypt.

Oh agree but if you had cut off Middle East then Nazi's would have had pretty much whole Mediterranean to themselves and could have continued towards India joining with with the Japs.

Losing Middle East / India / Ceylon and its a different outcome.

racedo, the Germans might have reached into Egypt but the logistics tail was already stretched and approaching India and the Indian Army fighting on home ground would probably have finished that expedition off.

Put simply, while the Germans chose the wrong enemy in the west so did the Japanese in the east. Now that would have been a can of worms.

Pontius

you assume the Indian Army would continue fighting for the British after the Germans had motored through the Middle East - I think that's a big assumtion TBH. The collapse of British arms in the ME would probably have led to a de facto collapse of the Raj and a takeover by Congress.

Apart from our losses the supply chain would have been unsustainable and, at the end of the day, the UK Govt would want to hold onto the Britsih Isles even if it meant the abandonment of the Empire....

HH, I know some Indians sided with the Japanese. I know India wanted indepoindependence and I also know that they have many committed communists.

My assumption was not that they would support the Raj but that they would not welcome either German or Japanese occupation.

Yes I think PN's is probably the most realistic outcome, and something we talked about at work in a strictly amateur way....my question triggered by a website I found with hundreds of recon pictures following up RAF bombing raids....I fairly admit I had no idea the actual real physical damage a raid could do to a town or city until I saw this site and made me think about the power the RAF held at this time. Utterly awesome. Think this was a section of Histomil - someone had access to the IWM and uploaded a lot of stuff I had never seen.
I watched a documentary years ago about the a UK Army Officer who happened to come face up to a Russian tank crew in 1945, and he recalled the hostility he received by a thoroughly anti western Russian military. They were motivated to fight onwards as the propaganda they had received seemed to place us very little higher than the actual Nazis. They could have got to the ports Id wager, but it would have been difficult under the sights of a powerful RAF Air Force. And I agree they would never have got across the North Sea.

But very thankfully it never happened, things stand as they did. HS.

Where was UK Oil supplies coming from in WW2 ?

I assume Iran / Saudi but really don't know......

https://www.quora.com/Where-did-Brit...om-during-WWII

Mainly from the USA, Venezulela and the Caribbean - I think a lot of the ME oil was diverted to Australia, India & Egypt (to replace Burmese & Indonesian oil)

Saudi wasn't a major producer until the 1950's - most ME oil came from Iran