Stalin attacking the west? WTF?

[metalstar316]

http://www.fantasticfiction.co.uk/c/...ferno-1945.htm

Shouldn't AH book publishers demand at least a Degree of plausibility from their authors?

[ZachScape]

No! He's right. I just learned about this in physics...

Newton's First Law:
Every object in a state of uniform motion tends to remain in that state of motion...
(although I am a little spacey at times....)

[jmberry]

Originally Posted by metalstar316

http://www.fantasticfiction.co.uk/c/...ferno-1945.htm

Shouldn't AH book publishers demand at least a Degree of plausibility from their authors?

Possibly, IF Alternate History was considered a book genre. Since it's not, and all such books are classified as "Science Fiction", publishers don't have to require plausibility.

[metalstar316]

Originally Posted by jmberry

Possibly, IF Alternate History was considered a book genre. Since it's not, and all such books are classified as "Science Fiction", publishers don't have to require plausibility.

And as a result, authors who ostensibly know a thing or two about history crank out books without considering whether they're realistic or not.

[I Blame Communism]

Oh, this old thing again. I rather feel like writing a parody of this particular cliche, because its so absurdly prevalent.

[Wolfpaw]

Robert Conroy needs to stop writing books. Immediatley.

[Crueldwarf]

"Enourmous force of Red Army"?
By april 1945 average soviet rifle division had around 3-4 thousands of men. Manpower reserves were seriously depleted and men badly needed in agriculture and industry. So you need some sort of ASB mind control of all soviet government to start a war against Allies.

For illustration: Soviets to compensate their lack of infantry in late stages of war attach to rifle divisons whole tank and artillery brigades. And infantry mostly just take and hold the land.

[BlackWave]

Well, someone's been playing too much Red Alert...

[Amerigo Vespucci]

Originally Posted by Wolfpaw

Robert Conroy needs to stop writing books. Immediatley.

He's gotten a lot better since 1901. He's improved in every book since, and I'll be buying this one. 1945 showed that he's not going to follow every AH cliche, which is a good thing.

[hopper2cool]

I sort of like Conroy's books. Yes he sets up major battles by both sides doing baffling things. However do all "AH" books have to be logical? Internal consistency is more important to me then following every single historical fact (or common sense). If I hate the premise I don't buy the book. However I have read a lot of books that sounded good but because the author sucked at editing I ended up hating.

[Sachyriel]

Originally Posted by BlackWave

Well, someone's been playing too much Red Alert...

That's impossible, you can never play enough red alert...

[stirlingdraka]

I will be buying this and 1945 and 1942 very soon.

[Chris S]

Originally Posted by Crueldwarf

"Enourmous force of Red Army"?
By april 1945 average soviet rifle division had around 3-4 thousands of men. Manpower reserves were seriously depleted and men badly needed in agriculture and industry. So you need some sort of ASB mind control of all soviet government to start a war against Allies.

For illustration: Soviets to compensate their lack of infantry in late stages of war attach to rifle divisons whole tank and artillery brigades. And infantry mostly just take and hold the land.

These claims usually crop up but I've never seen any supporting evidence and wouldn't be surprised if the original information referred to the motor rifle divisions in one particular army (corps) after maybe a particularly fierce battle and that this information (which is really only relevant for that specific point in time) was then applied wholesale to the entire Red Army.

Apart from the fact that terminology differs between the Red Army and the Western Allies (for instance "army" does not mean the same thing as in the Red Army what was called an "army" would have been called a "corps" in the US Army and what was called an "army group" in the US army was a "front" in the Red Army), how can the supposed fact that motor rifle divisions were down to 3-4,000 men be reconciled with the fact that no source has ever given the size of the Red Army after the war as being under 7 million? How can manpower reserves be seriously depleted with that many people (in the army alone as Churchill's own chiefs of staffs knew when they were drawing up Operation Unthinkable)? The figures given in there can in no way be worked to give 3-4,000 men per division. In sum it gives the total amount of Soviet forces in Europe, Caucasus and Iran as being the equivalent of 200+ western divisions and I doubt any such document would work off the assumption of anything less than the equivalent of a full-strength western division. Divide the minimum estimate (7 million) by a total of 300-350 western allied division equivalents and at the very least one gets
20,000 men. It also conveniently gives the number of Soviet divisions (as "division" was defined by the Red Army at the time) - over 570. Even if we use a figure of 600 it would mean what the Red Army called a division at the time consisted of 11-12,000 men. This would seem to fit in with the fact that 360+ "divisions" were assigned to 40 "armies" (corps). Since corps are usually thought of as being 2-3 divisions (but really it is only a minimum of 2 divisions and I don't think there is necessarily an upper-limit) then having 7-8 "divisions" per "army" (corp) indicates that the terminology seems to have differed between the Red Army and other armies.

Likewise some fairly simple calculations with regards to the units transferred to the Far East to invade Manchuria don't give 3-4,000 people per division on average. The Manchurian campaign was carried out with 1.5 million soldiers which was given as being 80 divisions or about double the number of divisions the Soviets had there before (anyone can look it up). 1,500,000/80 = 18,750. And of course even if we remove some of them and say even half weren't combat forces but something else (administration, cooks, whatever) it still wouldn't give anything close to 3-4,000.


All of that said, you rightly point out that there is no way the USSR is going to want to maintain about 8-10% of it's total population (and probably 20-30% of it's adult male population) under arms. Technically it would be possible since Germany was probably starting to go through worse by 1944-1945, but it wouldn't be sustainable.

In addition this Conroy's book seems to ignore the fact that the US Army by war's end was estimated at 3.5 million (with 16 million having served in total). Compared with the Red Army's 7-8 million at the end of the war (with some estimates as high as 10 million and 12.5 million being the high water mark at some point during the war out of 34 million who served at some point), these figures are not peanuts.

Conroy's book just insults basic intelligence. The real gem in the summary is when it says

With the Soviets vastly outnumbering the Americans - but undercut by chronic fuel shortages and...

....and I wondered how this didn't immediately kill the idea. So he has the Soviets knowing that they have chronic supply problems but decides to have them prolong WWII anyway?

The second bit in the summary which seems to show little or no research on Conroy's part is when the summary says:

Soon, Truman makes a series of controversial decisions, enlisting German help and planning to devastate the massive Red Army by using America's ultimate and most secret weapon...

Yep, so in addition the Soviets being stupid enough to continue pressing into Europe with supply problems that they are aware of, he has them pressing into Europe and making it 100% likely that the US will use it's not-so-secret weapon (at least not to the Soviet government).

[Emperor Norton I]

Stalin had ordered his troops to fire on American forces should they have entered Berlin, which gives you some semblance of what Stalin was willing to do. So WW2 evolving into WW3 is not out of the question; just a very messy issue.

[I Blame Communism]

Originally Posted by Emperor Norton I

Stalin had ordered his troops to fire on American forces should they have entered Berlin, which gives you some semblance of what Stalin was willing to do. So WW2 evolving into WW3 is not out of the question; just a very messy issue.

That does not mean he was willing to go on the attack. As we've ha dpointed out, he knew perfectly well about the nukes and his own army being on its last legs.

The scenario in fact requires us to attack the Soviets, and then start with the delightful nukings and Nazi-recruitings strongly implied in the blurb, which is probably not what all but the most strident Cold War fantasists are imagining when they repreat this tired old cliche yet again.

[BlackWave]

Isn't this also rather reminiscent of that Warfront Turning Point game, which featured a similar premise, and the Allies and Germans suddenly cuddling up and marching on Moscow, a fantasy prevelant among some people that leaves a rather bad taste in my mouth?

[Amerigo Vespucci]

Folks, I think you're building a mountain out of a molehill of a review, particularly one sculpted to appeal to the vast majority of semi-interested history buffs. You all know these issues, and Conroy's written enough AH and history to know them too. I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt until the book comes out.

[Crueldwarf]

Originally Posted by Chris S

These claims usually crop up but I've never seen any supporting evidence and wouldn't be surprised if the original information referred to the motor rifle divisions in one particular army (corps) after maybe a particularly fierce battle and that this information (which is really only relevant for that specific point in time) was then applied wholesale to the entire Red Army.

No, this was real combat strength (double up if you count support troops) of average soviet rifle divisions in 1945.

Originally Posted by Chris S

, how can the supposed fact that motor rifle divisions

Not many of the soivet rifle divisions were motor. Trucks largely assigned to tank armies, support units and various detached brigades for mobility sake.

Originally Posted by Chris S

were down to 3-4,000 men be reconciled with the fact that no source has ever given the size of the Red Army after the war as being under 7 million?

Only maybe half of this number were frontline troops. And around million was deplyed in Far East.

Originally Posted by Chris S

Likewise some fairly simple calculations with regards to the units transferred to the Far East to invade Manchuria don't give 3-4,000 people per division on average.

This is because troops sent to Far East was not average, but best and largely consisted of motorized and armoured units. And mobile troops in Soviet Army was in far better state than simple infantry.

By the end of the war Soviets just try to employ true mechanized warfare - never sent a soldier if you can use tanks or artillery bombardment.

For example: In january 1945 at Vistula Soviets had 200-280 guns and howitzers per 1 km of front. During assault every rifle or tank battalion was supported by 3 detached artillery regiments (this is 140 76 mm guns and 40 122 mm howitzers). So you can imagine how many support personnel needed for such quantity of artillery. And this numbers not including battallion 45 mm guns and mortars at all.

[Number three]

I read the ARC of this a while ago, so I don't remember everything and I don't have it sitting right here:

The whole fight breaks out as one commander decides to exceed his orders. Conroy set up Stalin's mental state pretty clearly. The post war world in this TL would be quite interesting.

[Grimm Reaper]

Conroy had one stroke of brilliance/luck with 1901 long ago and he must have found himself in need of money or prestige so he started spitting out novels like 1862, 1942 and other extremely dubious AH novels.

I blame Harry Turtledove.