Operation Unthinkable...

[RedGuard]

yes conscripts were conscripted, the americans called conscription a draft.

majority of US regulars were drafted ya know? so theoretically both soldiers could either have no will to fight or they could have a backbone you never know

they difference was the US regulars were better equipped, and in the very beginning of the war their morale was much better.
but it didnt matter how many soviets you killed there was always much much more to replace them. the americans couldnt do that.

besides the mosin could be used as a dedicated sniper rifle, the garand didnt perform as well in this department. so in the hands of a trained shooter the possibilities were endless

the soviets had no real need for a semi auto rifle when their army was equipped with the most, by alot, SMGs of any army of the time
the soviets always outgunned their opposition, be it small arms, artillery or armor

the soviets were resposible for 80% of the destruction of all axis forces - you only need half a brain to figure out who the superior soldiers were

[Seeme]

This is a job for.....

Hearts of Iron 3!!!!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hearts_of_Iron_III

(Btw the most realistic WW2 Game I ever played)

All we have to do is beat Germany on '44, an we will start another war with Soviets. That would be a good way to see how the Europe battle was fought and the middle east.

[cephalos]

Haha, in HOI3 I even started World War IV playing as Soviet Union 

[Otto Halfhand]

Morning guys,
Some ideas for your consideration:

Prologue: The land area known as the USSR has never been conquered outright. Overrun yes. conquered no.

Evaluation of Air Power:

• Air War: The Soviets and the Germans Strategic bombing forces during WWII were insignificant when compared to THe Anglo American Efforts.
  
• There is little evidence that a Soviet Air defense system would have had been any more effective than the German defenses were against the Anglo/American onslaught.  During the Berlin airlift  in 1948  the Soviet Anti-air response was in-effective; (A lot of airmen died though).

  A total of 101 fatalities were recorded as a result of the operation, including 40 Britons and 31 Americans,^[4] mostly due to crashes. Seventeen American and eight British aircraft crashed during the operation... During the early months of the airlift, the Soviets used various methods  to harass allied aircraft. These included buzzing by Soviet planes,  obstructive parachute jumps within the corridors, and shining  searchlights to dazzle pilots at night. Although the USAFE  reported 733 separate harassing events, including flak, air-to-air  fire, rocketing, bombing and explosions, this is now considered to be  exaggerated. None of these measures were effective.- Wikipedia
• THe air defense of Japan  was so effective that LeMAy ordered the Switch of USA  Bombing to nighttime operations.
  
• The fire bombing campaigns of JApan, 60 cities destroyed, Tokyo - 3/10/45 120,000 homes, 100,000 killed and Germany: Hamburg, 1943 45,000 dead,  Dresden 2/14/45 169,000 dead - one  night - ~ 25% of the population. (casualty reports varied widely; German figures are unreliable because flamethrowers used to clear the bodies destroyed the Evidence. NS propaganda reported casualties of 200,000 to 500,000 - I reject this). My figures were cited by Kurt Vonnegut, Who was there and survived the bombing.
  
• "Bomber" Harris and Curtis LeMay (Mutually Assured Destruction, SAC, Berlin Airlift, Hiroshima, Nagasaki ... Characatured in "Dr Strangelove"); were accomplished killers, well capable of destroying cities, people, and morale.
  
• Basing for airraids Was plentiful: the middle East was a  British protectorate, (aka "Mandate"); Okinawa, Japan, China, (india is not credible); Finland! Great circle routes from USA, Canada, Iceland. Oh yeah, the US NAvy - remember the Doolittle Raid in 1942? Prognosis: not good for USSR.
• I think the nuclear threat from 1945 to 1953 was negligible. However by the time of the Cuban missile Crisis in 1962 the 20 missiles in Cuba were estimated to have been capable of inflicting 5,000,000 deaths in USA. The USA response questimated 110,000,000 dead in USSR - about twice the total casualty rate during WWII. Propaganda? Probably, but It allowed the madman McNamara to add 80,000 nuclear missiles to the USA arsenal.

Enough for now. I have a doctor's appointment. Please feel free to critically challenge any of this. One of the few things I love better than a good debate is improving my knowledge and perspective of History. "I shall Return".

[neosdark]

Morning guys,
Some ideas for your consideration:

Prologue: The land area known as the USSR has never been conquered outright. Overrun yes. conquered no.

• There is little evidence that a Soviet Air defense system would have had been any more effective than the German defenses were against the Anglo/American onslaught.  During the Berlin airlift  in 1948  the Soviet Anti-air response was in-effective; (A lot of airmen died though). THe air defense of Japan  was so effective that LeMAy ordered the Switch of USA  Bombing to nighttime operations.
  

Let me tell you a Soviet secret, Stalin didn't want to start a WW3 over a city in the middle of his territorial zone. The reason Soviet Air Defenses were ineffective was because most if not all of them were not activated to attack. The American reports of harassment were mainly plane fly-bys and inconveniences. Now that I'm overlooking the op. report the only deaths from this operations that were related to Aircraft was on Black Friday (August 13,1948) Also as an after thought, why would you deploy the largest number of your AAA flak right at your border, do you think the Soviets learned nothing after Barbarossa? In case of war you want your Flak further back to make sure you can activate them before the enemy arrives and you can actually, you know, use them.

[Otto Halfhand]

Point taken Neosdark.

During the Berlin airlift  in 1948  the Soviet Anti-air response was in-effective; (A lot of airmen died though). "A total of 101 fatalities were recorded as a result of the operation, including 40 Britons and 31 Americans,^[4] mostly due to crashes. Seventeen American and eight British aircraft crashed during the operation... During the early months of the airlift, the Soviets used various methods  to harass allied aircraft. These included buzzing by Soviet planes,  obstructive parachute jumps within the corridors, and shining  searchlights to dazzle pilots at night. Although the USAFE  reported 733 separate harassing events, including flak, air-to-air  fire, rocketing, bombing and explosions, this is now considered to be  exaggerated. None of these measures were effective".- Wikipedia

[tigerclawstyle]

Just for clarification Redguard, how many conscripts and volunteers were their in the Soviet Army?

Out of the 13 million Americans that served in WW2, 11.5 million were drafted. 6.3 million however volunteered immediately after Pearl Harbor. So almost 40% of American forces were volunteers. So not all American forces were drafted and it's good assumption that alot of the volunteers ended up in units like Rangers, Para's or Marines.

Reason I bring it up it because the only information I can find regarding Soviet conscription, is that all able bodied men of 18 years old were required to serve.

Also cool post Otto. Definitely get the impression that you've seen Robert McNamara's documentary The Fog of War. Definitely one the most interesting things I've seen about war in general. If people here haven't seen it, they should.

[RedGuard]

the soviets conscripted just short of 30 million men at the start of the war. I believe there was about 5 million or more already serving in the red army before the conscription began

thats not counting volunteers, i cant find a number on that at the moment but it will no doubt be astronomically higher than the US military, ill post it soon

the red army was the largest army of the time, it was the largest army in the world before the war, and after the war it was even larger by alot. a real steamroller

[Otto Halfhand]

The question tigerclawstyle poses regarding numbers raises an interesting issue. How many casualties could the involved nations sustain? IIRC 60,000,000 died in WWII. 25,000,000 in the USSR alone. Perhaps half of these deaths were civilians. The USA estimated there would be 5-6 million American casualties resulting from the Invasion of Japan. Britain's resources were stretched to the limit by 1945. They had never recovered from the manpower/braindrain effect of WWI. USA logistical doctrine during WWII dictated 19 people in the support chain for each combat trooper on the front. Doubtless the Soviets had a lower ratio but even in Medieval times 10:1 was the rule. How many casualties can a nation sustain and still continue the fight?

Part 2

Naval Concerns:

• THe Soviet navy, like the Imperial Russian Navy before it, was severely hampered in projecting its force to the far flung reaches of its empire(sic). Consider the Russo-Japanese War, Battle of Tsushima and more importantly its aftermath. As a result of the loss of naval control the Russians were forced to 1. Sue for peace. 2. Cede the Sakalin Islands. (Details of the Battle are interesting but not germane to the discussion. But note that the Russians lost more battleships in this one battle than the Soviets deployed during WWII -including the 2 LL BBs from USA and Britain. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Japanese_War#Battle_of_Tsushima ).
• The "Queen" of the Soviet Navy was the submarine. The Western Allies  had great experience and success in countering submarine warfare directed against merchant marine and Naval Targets. German sub pens were effectively bottled up (they couldn't be blown up though). Allied sub efforts crippled the Japanese Merchant Marine  and  even infiltrated Tokyo Harbor!
• The Soviets had and effectively utilized large numbers of small missile boats during the Great Patriotic War. If and when they could be deployed to the appropriate locations, (weather and geography again), THey would have been deadly in confronting Allied amphibious assaults.
• AFAIK the Black Sea fleet was the most combat effective part of the Soviet Navy. I'm doubtful they could have forced the Turkish Straits and projected Naval power into the Mediterranean; Meaning the soft underbelly of the Balkans would be exposed. The Mediteranean was an Allied Lake by 1945 and Small RN and RAF forces had demonstrated their ability to neutralize the Italian Navy in 1941-2 (IMO Italian Navy more powerful than the Soviet surface Fleets).
• The United States Navy and USMC were "Ne Plus Ultra" in controlling the sea . Where ever they could project their power they would prevail (ultimately). In this regard a production figure may be pertinent. By Early 1945 USA was launching one Aircraft Carrier a week. During the course of the War IIRC the Soviet Union launched only four BBs. BTW THe Soviet Union did build one conventional CV "Admiral Kuznetsov",  but not during WWII.
  

Lend Lease: For Four or more years  The Soviets had recieved the benefit of Allied support.  Did this create a hole in the Soviet arms industry that the planners for Operation unthinkable hoped to exploit? The large number of trucks sent to the USSR coupled with the change in railroad gauge at the Soviet border suggests to my mind that Soviet Operational effectiveness in "non-Russian" Europe might be impaired. Q.Does anyone know if the RRs in the Baltic States had been converted to Russian Railroad guage by the start of Barbarossa?
                                                                                             

[tigerclawstyle]

They predicted that their would've been 1 million casualties in the first month if the invasion of Japan went through. That prompted the American's to drop the bombs. Your question definitely raises doubts on whether nations would even be able to fight another war directly after WW2 ended in Europe.

If all a nation's resources are being put into the war effort and every man turning 18 (or younger if desperate enough) being sent to the front, then after another few years or five years or another decade of war, would they really be fighting for anything anymore? Just be continuation of loss and destruction, and most likely nations would cease to exist. If their aren't any new generations being born because previous ones are killed off and all the resources are wasted on the war effort, then that nation would simply become a shell of what it once was. Their soldiers and civilians would wither into dust, and all that loss would be for nothing. Manpower is all well and good but once their is a massive generation gap because of the losses, then a nation wouldn't be able to bring up any more troops.

I'd hate to bring it up but it serves my point. As most of us know 6 million Jews died in the holocaust. Now assuming those 6 million people had family and distant relatives, its safe to say that maybe one person may have 100 people related to them either then or in the future that was cut short for them. If my math is wrong (which usually is) that means their are 600 million souls(or so) that didn't get to breathe one day. The same could be said for any incident where vast numbers of human beings were killed. WW1, WW2, Holocaust, Holodomor, Cultural revolution, natural disasters and the 150+ wars that have been fought since WW2. Imagine if these points in history didn't happen, and all those people didn't die. What would  our population be today?

My point being is, once those numbers start to rise whether it's soldiers or civilians, and continue to, then a responsible government or military should be able or made to say "we're done."

It also depends on the nature of the nations and war itself on what could be determined of sustainable casualties. For example, I can't remember where I read it but it is said that today the Chinese are willing to lose their entire east coast (where most of their population is located) and still be capable of fighting, if a major war broke out.

Sorry if I got off track.

[Otto Halfhand]

Your math is a little fuzzy. Start with 60,000,000 not 6.000.000... Your reasoning is correct. I think if the Unthinkable Operation had been pursued, regardless of the military outcome a negotiated settlement would have resulted fairly quickly. (In diplomatic time scales at least. THe fighting in Korea had stopped a year before a negotiated settlement could be reached. In Vietnam negotiations started in 1968. Over a year was wasted in determining the shape of the negotiating table).

I think the Will of the People would have been the cause. Winston Churchill, an early advocate of Unthinkable, and an ardent Hawk had been voted out of office in April 1945 IIRC. FDR utilized all manner of underhanded diplomacy with the Japanese to trick the American people into believing Pearl Harbor was an unexpected sneak attack. The American people needed to believe they had the moral high ground before they would support such a national effort.
I don't think betraying your Ally is something the People would consider right. Maybe RedGuard can shed some light on the Soviet peoples view on this. I find trying to obtain solid information about the Soviet Union somewhat of a futile endeavor.

OT: My brother-in-law's Father-in-law was a career engineer with General Electric. He was at Pearl HArbor on 12/7/1941 working on a recoiless rifle system to be mounted in the B26. The purpose of this weapon was to attack Japanese destroyers.

[RedGuard]

my sympathies and condolences to all the persecuted peoples of WWII

[tigerclawstyle]

Governments all over have lied or conducted false flag operations to stir the common people's resolve into fighting for whatever cause for ages. Still happens to this day, and it's amplified with the media. Information travels so fast now, and the masses are easily manipulated that it's basically become an art form for governments to utilize it.

I definitely agree with your statement about the people and their opinion on the matter would be determining factor whether or not something like Unthinkable could have happened. 5 years of war, bloodiest in history, more casualties then all the wars in recorded history combined (correct me if I'm wrong on that), and people, economies and civilization in general were tired of it.

Imagine being a civilian on the home front or a soldier ready to go home after VE Day or VJ day, go to bed, and wake up to find out that another war has begun with your former ally. Pretty sure any person on either side would be quite pissed.

Also about your link to Pearl Harbor. "The Art of War teaches us to not rely not on the likelihood of the enemy's not coming, but on our own readiness to receive him; not on the chance of his attacking, but rather the fact that we have made our position unassailable."

[Otto Halfhand]

Information travels so fast now,

This brings up the subject of espionage/counter espionage. THe Anglo/Americans were, are(?), the masters of code breaking. During WWII they had cracked the Japanese naval code; (Midway and Pearl Harbor- You don't really think it a coincidence that All USA Cvs were at sea on 12/7/41 do you)? German Naval and Heer  codes. Actually the Poles cracked the Enigma Naval code inf 1936(?). THe allies sent advanced notice of Barbarossa to Pappa Joe. (He ignored it just like king George II before 9/11). How would/did this effect the planning or implementation of Operation Unthinkable? At Yalta Stalin agreed to declare war on Japan 90 days after the Nazi's were Kaput. The USSR occupied Korea on August 9-10, 1945. THe JS3 was part of the occupying forces. Presumably Shock guards were too. In 1941 it took the Far East Army 4-5 months to arrive before Moscow.

The point of all this fol der rol is that Fore knowledge of Soviet movements would have been a powerful trump if warfare broke out again in Germany.

At the risk of incurring your ire, and in hopes that one day we will be able to mix and match factions in any game; I offer these trivia tid bits:
1. When Eisenhower was briefed on Operation Unthinkable he proposed withdrawing the Allied Armies to the Lowlands, while awaiting for the next generation of Heavy Armor to arrive at the front.
2. When Eisenhower became president he authorized the Interstate Highway System. (America's Military highway system). He insisted that one mile in every three of highway be straight and flat.... for use as emergency airfields and landing gliders. A little idea he copied from the Third Riech's similar use of the Autobahn during the Second World War.

[Tankbuster]

2. When Eisenhower became president he authorized the Interstate Highway System. (America's Military highway system). He insisted that one mile in every three of highway be straight and flat.... for use as airfields and landing gliders. A little idea he copied from the Third Riech's Autobahn.

Were the flat stretches of highway actually used in WW2?