USSR v Western Allies circa 1945 - who would win and why?

USSR v Western Allies circa 1945 - who would win and why?


  • Total voters
    9
Nukes

....Okay ....



Like I said



If they used them against Japan then I think they would use them where needed. We had a different mindset then. Look how close ~ 15 years later Kennedy came to pushing buttons once the USSR pushed his button.
 
tanks machine gune vs fighter bomber I.E. P51, etc

They can if they have a machine gun mounted on top of the turret, which many tanks did.

Not impossible but a very unlikely for the machine gunner to shot down a fighter bomber
 
US used Manstein as consultant for Nato in 50's

Don't forget the German Fritzes.

Patton was planning on using German troops to help fight the Russians.

With the experience and experties of the German troops and with good leadership, the West more than likely would have won.

Nato used former Field Marshal Manstein as a consultant, despite his having committed war crimes in the USSR. This idea might not be to far off the track? Just an educated guess but so is this whole scenario.
 
Some WW2 input

hi

had the wehrmacht been able to use the bulk of its garrisoned troops it kept in the west and n africa, and without adolph's incompetetance, than the reich more than likely would have destroyed the u.s.s.r.

of course, getting a late start in june 1941 hurt too. it would have been nice to have started in late april - mid may rather than late june. damm that italian fool.

You are right the Mediterrian theater siphoned off valuable troops as did the Balkan guerrilla wars. Hitler’s switched directions 2ce between Stalingrad and the Caucus mountains in 1942 effectively keeping his own forces off balance and over stretched. He was informed it was time to pullback so as to reduce venerability and the length of the supply chain that extended > 1000 miles. He didn’t and lost big-time at Stalingrad. The USSR advanced some 200 miles and were stopped by Manstein whose forces where < ½ that of the USSR as he retook Kharkov. Hitler decided on operation Citadel. The USSR knew the battle plan and to make it worse Hitler delayed the offensive for months so his Panthers and Ferdinand’s could be incorporated in the battle. By that time the Russian had nearly ½ their army (including reserves) waiting well entrenched for the offensive. They attacked anyways despite much protest from his staff. It was after narrowly losing this critical battle and the increased allied air threat that the Germans went on the long slow retreat to Berlin with some more gigantic battles along the way: Kiev and in the Baltic areas. Operation Bagration occurred at the same time as the Normandy battle. The Germans incurred huge losses in both battles. Losses they could ill afford. General Eisenhower said at Falaise you could walk for miles on dead bodies and destroyed equipment The Germans were a force in retreat and defeat after these battles no longer the army of days past.
 
I looked in the rules I could not find a definition for the multi button? Sorry if I posted incorrectly

There is one about repeat posting, however we have the Multi button down there with the quote and edit buttons that allows you to reply to several other posts in one.

:)
 
not so depleted as you think

Many cream of the crop SS and Panzer divisions were pulled from the eastern front to fight in Normandy. They were lead by Rommel one of the most successful + capable German commanders. The German losses in Normandy were ~ to those suffered in Operation Bagration. It was this 2 fold defeat that finally put the nails in Hitler’s coffin. Although Germany had lost most of the USSR, the Balkans and Italy by this time.
They never again had enough of anything, particularly fuel. A good example was the failed Battle of the Bulge; they simple ran out of fuel and had no air support once the skies cleared.
BTW the Red army was ~ 6 million fighting men at the start of the war and ~ 6million at the end of the war.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top