Could the United States have taken on the Soviets after World War II?

...

Other urls found in this thread:

kiatipis.org/Writers/N/Nikita.Khrushchev/Memoirs-of-Nikita-Khrushchev[Vol3].pdf
bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-05-10/a-message-to-putin-from-42-million-dead
twitter.com/AnonBabble

We could have wiped the world clean of all the filth if we realized that the filth was under our noses.

Patton is Trump

NIxon thought so.
He also sat in the ark Quixotically watching Patton over and over, it was his favourite movie.

Perhaps, but not right at the end of war like Patton sperged about. Soviet forces were simply superior and America is across the ocean.
It would require massive preparation and probably massive propaganda campaign because you're attacking people your propaganda just a year ago called allies and liberators of Europe.

Yes we could have nuked them

You had like 13 nukes...in 1947.

We had 2 in 1945

>Soviet forces were simply superior
Yeah, they only needed the US and UK to send them everything. From tanks and aircraft to boots, food and trucks

The last chance you could have fixed all this shit was during the Korean War where the USSR had barely functioning nukes and you half-assed it, just like every single other war you got yourself involved in.

While being outnumbered 3:1 in men and 5:1 in tanks? Well, they could've tried.

Yes and we would have had a better world if we did

Yeah and both were dropped on Japan.
Even if they were dropped on Moscow and Leningrad, that wouldn't erase Soviet superiority. Not to mention outrage it would provoke.
Communists would basically win a propaganda coup and there would be a lot more communists in Europe because of that. In some countries like France they were very strong.
So all you would get is devastating WW3 right after WW2 ended.

Fuck off Fake China, we were under Jewish control by that time. MacArthur wanted to rid Asia of Communism, specifically in China. He was relieved of his duty by (((Harry Truman)))

>implying nukes can't be mass produced

Yes. Of course there would be losses, but you only need to look at the state of the Soviet petroleum refinery industry at the end of WWII and how much refined oil products they had to import.

>had trouble beating unsupplied dregs of german army
Did this guy achieve anything except being edgy?

>Yeah and both were dropped on Japan.
We should have
We should have use them and the Germans to eradicate the Jew menace

Fucked his niece and drank himself to death. Most revered general in US military history

It depends on how effective the nukes on the Soviets would work. At the time right after WW2 the Soviets had a much bigger army in Europe compared to the rest off the allies and if nukes where not used the Soviets would have won.

You could have done the smart thing and let the Axis wipe them out from the start instead of giving them constant lifelines, then afterwards knocked over the overextended Axis.

I can't imagine how much better a place the world would be as a result, communism would be some fringe meme ideology and we'd have a lot more honesty in the world.

>by that time
You were jewish puppets even before WW1. One puppet fighting another is amusing, but hardly necessary.

No.

Patton was a retard.

LeMay would have laughed his ass off at such a proposal.

They can. But you couldn't do it in 1945 or 1946 or 1947.
Not to mention those nukes were low-yield weapons.
As I said, nuking few Soviet cities would achieve nothing on strategic level, except making them more eager to fight you, and proving communists right.

this.
soviet numbers and arguably tenacity were superior, but in total war, tenacity doesn't really matter and numbers can be nullified by superior technology.

Without a doubt and we should have. Logistics wins wars, kiddo.

Please, we weren't controlled by Jews until Woodrow Wilson. Taft was in favor of a central bank and Wilson signed it into law, by that time the US was as good as controlled and while it's true we were controlled, you can't blame us for entering World War I when the Germans constantly sunk our merchant ships and even sent the Zimmerman Telegram.

>mfw our most revered historical figure drank to death while all your people starved to death
russia and usa truly are yin and yang.
would you like to be allies?

Using heavy ass inefficient fission against widely deployed armored troops in the countryside?

LOL!

They didnt have air superiority
We could have destroyed their supply lines

>As I said, nuking few Soviet cities would achieve nothing on strategic level, except making them more eager to fight you, and proving communists right.

Do you have any brain capacity at all.
Do you know what an army does when it has no chain of supplies such as no food or ammo?

It's fucked....kind of like the German armies were as a result of their cities being flattened and supply lines destroyed. It also doesn't prove communism right or wrong.

>low-yield

Not an argument. Soviet industry was relatively concentrated within a number of cities so the point is moot particularly when the allies would have had overwhelming air superiority from availability of aviation fuel alone.

There seems to be a rather peculiar lack of knowledge regarding Soviet oil production and refinery capacity in particular throughout WWII, the latter of which is absolutely crucial to making any war material.

>You could have done the smart thing and let the Axis wipe them out from the start
Then Axis get entire Europe at their disposal.
Good luck invading Europe with the brunt of their armies not tied down in the East.
If Soviets lost, Germans won. The end.
Even nukes won't change that outcome.
>communism would be some fringe meme ideology
Like it is now?
Patton wasn't bad (leader) by any account, but this American delusion about him being some god of war is ridiculous.
He's literally a man who acted tough and slapped soldiers with PTSD but only campaign he ever fought as a grunt was running around Mexico a bit.
He's a glorified corps-level commander, like Rommel was.

Not with all those Jews in the government

>being this butthurt over an image
Unless you’re commie right now he probably isn’t talking about you. But he’s right the red army was on its knees after WW2 and could’ve been easily taken.

You know why the Russians survived both Hitler and Napoleon? Only one reason. The weather.

Lemay was right we should have nuked them before they got the bomb and established total American world domination, and also btfo'd the Chinese before their revolution.

Honestly, your country's biggest problem is half-assing every single conflict you start.
You either go full empire mode and fully annex the country you are invading like the good old days or don't start shit at all. There might be folks who don't like outright imperialism but nobody wants another jihadistan.

>Then Axis get entire Europe at their disposal.
How is this a bad thing?

>Superior
After loosing 40 Million People to 3 Million german casualties

>logistics
>has to supply army across the ocean.
It would have been extremely costly war. Soviet's would have lost, eventually, but it would have taken years to beat back to Moscow and beyond, all the while having commie shill hard.
You had jewish-controlled wall street. Maybe not full-control, but they had a lot of influence.

Russia was always USA's ally.

>Honestly, your country's biggest problem is half-assing every single conflict you start.
We didn't start half-assing everything until the end of World War II. We entered the war to free Europe and failed because our (((leaders))) had the strange notion that we won. Our military leaders like Patton and MacArthur really and truly wanted to stop Communism, they knew what would happen if they let it live but were stopped.

They would have had to invade Russia from the Eastern coast, draw them into a conflict in the east so they have to march dudes through Siberia.

Russia can't be invaded and occupied on a whim. Germans got fucked in the ass by the Russian winter.

Russia won't be invadable until the full blown space age. Drop motherfuckers in from orbit, resupply them from orbit, and fusion reactors to warm up a base during the fucking winter.

>taken years to beat back to Moscow
We could have vaporized Moscow

Not the influence of today, mind you. Wall Street didn't have complete control of the money supply and didn't have complete control of Congress at that time, they definitely did their best to put their people at the executive branch but after the Twenty-Second Amendment they took a hint they could do more damage in the Judicial and Legislative Branch

Yup, could of and should have.

Just think (((they))) would have had far lower numbers in the states and Stalin couldn't construct the holocaust myth

Should have dropped a few nukes on em

Hindsight is 20/20 but it is strange to think the USA really could have conquered the earth around the end of WW2.
Anybody they could not beat in a stand up fight (or win but win at great cost) they could blockade/besiege until they were fucked.

Instead America pussed out and went with this wishy washy neoliberal bullshit we have now that's just going to fuck up everything in the long run.
Oh well, we can always play Hearts of Iron or something.

What fuel were your tanks running on? What food were your troops eating? What trucks were these being brought to the front on? What are logistics? What is total war? Think before you type.

Patton's plan was to immediately rearm the germans and continue the war machine toward the USSR while also nuking moscow and such. IDK if it would've worked. Certainly would've been better for us geopolitically, as well as preventing the soviets from starting the lies about gas chambers and death camps in poland.

>They didnt have air superiority
They wouldn't be wiped out either. Their air-force was okay in 1945, they picked up.
>We could have destroyed their supply lines
No you couldn't. This is 40's we are talking about. Air power matters but it definitely wouldn't offset the massive advantage Soviets had on ground.
Again, I'm speaking about 1945 and period immediately after the WW2.
>no chain of supplies
They had a chain of supplies.
Few low-yield nukes wouldn't interrupt that.
That's even if Americans had FEW. They had none in 1945 after Japan was nuked.
>Soviet industry was relatively concentrated within a number of cities
Large part of Soviet industry was moved to Ural during WW2.
>from availability of aviation fuel alone
A bonus perhaps, not a decisive advantage. Air superiority that is.
Again, this is 1940s.

Anyway, problem with you people is that you always assume your enemy is absolutely retarded and doesn't react to your glorious plans.
British undertook a study and decided attacking Soviets was a retarded move that had little chance of success.
I'm gonna trust British CSC more than a bunch of guys on Sup Forums Sup Forums.

This. People don't understand that America was completely propping the USSR up with lend-lease. The soviets would've folded like cardboard if we weren't being good goyim propping them up the entire time.

No, operation unthinkable was doomed to fail. the russians didnt give a shit about nuking themselves to get the americans. the americans would also not be able to nuke the russians since that would wipe out the planet. the russians could drop their entire arsenal if they wanted on them, it would still end life in europe and asia probably, so it would obviously not be worth it, but just a few would be acceptable.

I've been trying to find proof of the rearming of Germans, do you have a source?

Thats why the German occupation Forces in France surrendered so easily. Even my Granduncle told me they thought the US would rearm them and send them east

maybe but only if they were willing to deploy nukes quite liberally

russians didnt have nukes in 1945

>Yeah, they only needed the US and UK to send them everything. From tanks and aircraft to boots, food and trucks

didnt they build like huge numbers of tanks themselves?

>tfw the UK, US, Germany, and the whole of the West could have fought together against Communism

Moscow is in fucking middle of continent. There is no way several planes would not be spotted and shot, B-29 were modified to fit a atomic bomb.

this.

you're confused, that's real China. Fake China is the """"People's"""" """""""Republic"""""""" of """"""""""China""""""""""

Granduncle went to Vietnam instead when they needed Legionaires

>and beyond
what beyond?

Nikita Khrushchev and Stalin both agree had the US not done lend-lease they would have been crushed by the Germans. Nikita says so in his biography

>This. People don't understand that America was completely propping the USSR up with lend-lease. The soviets would've folded like cardboard if we weren't being good goyim propping them up the entire time.

Nonsense. The Soviets didnt like the shitty weapons you gave them.

USSR didn't develop nukes until quite a while after WW2. Not until the (((Rosenbergs))) stole the atomic bomb data and gave it to them.

Right after WW2 was the only opportunity we had to get into a direct war with the Soviets.

Tis a joke for saying something so stupid. I know Taiwan is real China but calling them a fake gets under their skin

>Nikita Khrushchev and Stalin both agree had the US not done lend-lease they would have been crushed by the Germans. Nikita says so in his biography

It's bullshit. The Soviets didnt need fucking Sherman tanks.

They lost around 7 million soldiers in combat as opposed to around 5 million Axis soldiers.
Again, good luck with convincing your population that rearming Nazis (as all Germans were considered Nazis back then) and nuking the capital of your erstwhile ally is a good move.
It would be a political disaster.
What would follow is a military disaster as Soviet superiority in numbers (and quality too, for that matter) routs American and Commonwealth armies in Western Europe.
Patton was no strategist. He didn't know shit about what he was talking about.
Not to mention Germans weren't really in a position to fight in 1945 in any way.

They recounted in 2016. That 26 Million number is bullshit
They lost 20 Million soldiers and Militia
and 20 Million Civilians

>Tis a joke for saying something so stupid. I know Taiwan is real China but calling them a fake gets under their skin

Taiwan will soon be part of the real China.

>the USA really could have conquered the earth around the end of WW2

If the USA had a dictator then yes. I don't think the American people would be very happy with the government at that time if we legitimately tried and conquered the world. The American people at that time did not want to go to war at all in Europe until Pearl Harbor.

They sure enjoyed the trucks and gas and food and ammo and raw materials....

The red army was made more in Michigan than Moscow

>Stalin frequently said that without lend-lease we could not have won the war, and I agree with him.
Page 159 paragraph two
kiatipis.org/Writers/N/Nikita.Khrushchev/Memoirs-of-Nikita-Khrushchev[Vol3].pdf

>
>They lost around 7 million soldiers in combat as opposed to around 5 million Axis soldiers.
Most Axis losses were when they were out of supplies and no longer had air superiority

>The US being able to take on the communist suicide-monkeys

Every last Russian would have been sent to their death before a resolution could have been reached. What would have been the point? BRB killing 100 million more white people for nothing.

Nope. Soviets were inferior in terms of nuclear arsenal right until mid-60s.
USA in the meantime had a lot of nukes and means to deliver them.
If war happened, only way to win it was in 60s. Though it would be a very bloody affair in any case.
Give me a source for that recount.
Because according to you people, they lost 40 million at war, Stalin killed some 50-60 million, and they somehow had a growth of population and were the second economy of the world in 50s.

>Page 159 paragraph two
>kiatipis.org/Writers/N/Nikita.Khrushchev/Memoirs-of-Nikita-Khrushchev[Vol3].pdf

Like i give a fuck what that old loony says.

They seemed to like the M4A2's and the P-39's we gave them. And our gunpowder, and our fuel, and our trucks, and our food.

yes..shoulda nuked them

>They sure enjoyed the trucks and gas and food and ammo and raw materials....
>The red army was made more in Michigan than Moscow

Sure it was sweetie.

There was 0% chance of it ever happening. There was never meant to be war against Russia, or the allies would have declared war on Russia the same as they did on the axis when Russia invaded Poland.

No their birth rates were too high, the soviets had cheap everything they would of out manned you.

>They seemed to like the M4A2's and the P-39's we gave them. And our gunpowder, and our fuel, and our trucks, and our food.

Nobody saw any American weapons on the front line.

worthless.

How is that relevant?
My point is Axis didn't lose 3 million, and Soviets didn't lose 40 million as he says.
Out of 27 million, 20 million were civilians and POWs. That's not relevant for gauging the combat effectiveness of Soviet Army in late war.
Khrushchev is as reliable as Goebbels when it comes to that. Man had every motive to disparage Stalin and make him look incompetent.
Saying that Soviets only survived thanks to Western aid is exactly that.
Of course LL helped a lot, but saying that LL saved Soviets, when they stopped Germans practically alone in front of Moscow in 1941 is ridiculous.
LL was 7% of Soviet war production.

Lend-lease wasn't only about tanks and shit. Americans also shipped tractors, gun powder and other equipment. Zhukov said, that all gunpowder Soviet Union had during WWII was from lend-lease. Also, most of tanks were build from american steel, and this is also Zhukov's words.

bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-05-10/a-message-to-putin-from-42-million-dead

Even Germany had a Growth in Numbers. How do you Think we got up to 82 Million when the Reich had only 65 Million and lost 9 Million in the war ? My Grandma lost 8 Brothers but had 12 Kids herself

>Nobody saw any American weapons on the front line.

The first 76-mm-armed Shermans started to arrive in Soviet Union in late summer of 1944.[14] In 1945, some units were standardized to depend mostly on them, and not on the ubiquitous T-34: 1st Guards Mechanized Corps, 3rd Guards Mechanized Corps, and 9th Guards Mechanized Corps.[14]

Five of the 10 highest scoring Soviets aces logged the majority of their kills in P-39s. Grigoriy Rechkalov scored 44 victories in Airacobras. Pokryshkin scored 47 of his 59 victories in P-39s, making him the highest scoring P-39 fighter pilot of any nation, and the highest scoring Allied fighter pilot using an American fighter.

>Lend-lease wasn't only about tanks and shit. Americans also shipped tractors, gun powder and other equipment. Zhukov said, that all gunpowder Soviet Union had during WWII was from lend-lease. Also, most of tanks were build from american steel, and this is also Zhukov's words.

what a load of shit. the Soviet Union didnt need steel. it had huge steel plants of its own. it made its own tanks, 10s of thousands of them, 100%.

Honestly, that doesn't even get under my skin anymore. We've been culturally conquered so through and through by the Japanese, the only thing remotely resembling Chinese tradition is relegated back home in the family, and that people here speak Mandarin.

Seriously, you can't walk for two minutes here (in the capital) without seeing a [[[Japanese Restaurant]]] or some poster plastered with weeb stuff.

Oh, so it's some ''historian'' coming up with ridiculous numbers for a moment of fame. Thanks.
>In total, according to Ivlev, the Soviet Union had a population of 205 million in 1941
But that's absolutely false.

>The first 76-mm-armed Shermans started to arrive in Soviet Union in late summer of 1944.[14] In 1945, some units were standardized to depend mostly on them,

absolutely worthless in combat, small in numbers, and arriving only long after the Soviet Union was already winning.

we could have demanded anything after we nuked Japan, unfortunately we would have needed to conquer immediately before their own research was complete

Im not going to send you all the shit
Read the paper, search for it yourself
If you found Sup Forums you will find this shit also
everythings mentioned in the Report
Do whatever you want with that

Those are just 76mm gunned Sherman's, they were recieving 75mm armed models much earlier, in fact, the Soviet's were recieving Sherman tanks before the USMC was. And nice job going just for the tanks and completely ignoring the P-39's.

I don't give a fuck about the paper, just reading the summary makes it clear it's some pseudo-historian like ''Viktor Suvorov'' spouting sensationalist shit for some fame.
Since archives were opened up in late Gorbachev era and after the fall of USSR, there is really no fucking reason to debate this shit. Number is 27 million and almost every reputable historian agrees with that.
Broken down into around 7 million combat deaths, 3 million POWs killed in extermination camps, and 17 million civilians.

Exactly, the rest of the world had none. You drop one of those on the edge of Moscow, another on St. Petersburg. That war would have been over.

>extermination camps,

>Those are just 76mm gunned Sherman's, they were recieving 75mm armed models much earlier, in fact, the Soviet's were recieving Sherman tanks before the USMC was. And nice job going just for the tanks and completely ignoring the P-39's.

right, like they made a huge difference compared to the 100,000 tanks a year the Soviet Union itself was churning out.

Fucking worthless.