If the Cold War Had Not Ended, What Would The U.S. Military Look Like in 2009?

[Dayton Kitchens]

Originally Posted by joea64

There's a very extensive AH (posted elsewhere, not here) by, if memory serves me right, JN1, called "The Last War" about a Cold War lasting beyond 1989/1991 that goes hot in 2005. It started several years ago and I believe it's still in progress. Very Clancyesque, lots of looks at things that don't often get covered in a conventional-WWIII timeline.

Sounds interesting, do you have a link to it?

Originally Posted by Anderman

All this stuff looks pretty expensive so how does the US financed it ? The budget under Reagan was eh lets call it not balanced.

Remember that "Cold War not ending", does not mean "a continuing worsening relations".

Even in 1988, there was pressure on the U.S. to cut or at least reduce the rate of increases in defense spending. I can see a leveling off of defense expenditures in the early 1990s paired with a Soviet scale back at around the same time (kind of a 'mini detente"). Then along about 1994-95, worries about the Soviet Union trigger another renewal of U.S. military spending increases.

The U.S. had the "bomber gap" and a "missile gap" in the 50s & 60s (perceived not real). Perhaps in the 1990s we would've had a "submarine gap" fueled by pictures of those huge Soviet Typhoon class SSBNs.

[Killer300]

Again guys, the Soviets will not survive to 2009 unless they reform. They can't go the North Korea route. It's simply too many people in this age.

With that in mind, it IS possible for them to continue the Cold War while reforming, however it would require an earlier POD, namely where they get the reforms done in the 1970s.

[Dayton Kitchens]

Originally Posted by Killer300

Again guys, the Soviets will not survive to 2009 unless they reform. They can't go the North Korea route. It's simply too many people in this age.

With that in mind, it IS possible for them to continue the Cold War while reforming, however it would require an earlier POD, namely where they get the reforms done in the 1970s.

I wonder what would've happened if Brezhnev had shuffled off his mortal coil say at least five years earlier?

[CalBear]

Originally Posted by Anderman

All this stuff looks pretty expensive so how does the US financed it ? The budget under Reagan was eh lets call it not balanced.

That was because Reagan, as part of his campaign promised to cut taxes, pushed through a reduction in his 2nd term. He dropped the top rate from around 70% to 51% and then to 39.6%. That would have climbed back up, probably through some sort of "temporary" increase on everyone pulling in $100K or more (remember that the number of $100K earners in the early 90's was similar to the number of $250K today, and the current concept regarding taxing the wealthiest was not in place the way it is now).

The amount of income from corporations would also be much higher, since the elimination of their taxes was also mostly in its infancy and had not become ingrained as is the current case.

[joea64]

Originally Posted by Dayton Kitchens

Sounds interesting, do you have a link to it?

Here: http://www.tboverse.us/HPCAFORUM/php...forum.php?f=28 (I think you'll need to register to be able to view the forum).

[Dayton Kitchens]

Originally Posted by joea64

Here: http://www.tboverse.us/HPCAFORUM/php...forum.php?f=28 (I think you'll need to register to be able to view the forum).

Nice looking site but I can't find where to register at.

[TxCoatl1970]

I gotta ask- which phase of the Cold War continues through 2009?

Depending on the POD's

* the US and SEATO don't get suckered into Nam post 1965. The US doesn't suffer the tremendous loss of men and materiel, but doesn't learn the tactical lessons either. More money and political capital for further interventions later in the 1970's. Less emphasis on conventional forces and more on nuclear deterrence.

* The USSR doesn't get sucked into a quagmire in Afghanistan either. They have the money and unblemished record of crushing whomever they pointed their guns at from 1945 on.

YMMV on how demands for political liberalization from Poland, Czechoslovakia, etc affected Soviet policies and assumptions of stability.
If the USSR pulls what China did 1980-present from 1960's on, economically liberalizing while not giving a millimeter politically, then they could easily survive to the 2000's

If one or both of these POD's happens, then you could easily have the Cold War continue into the 2000's, especially if one or both blocs don't go on a mad military spending spree in the 1980's. The Soviets couldn't afford to compete in quantity or quality as they fell further and further behind the West in productivity and technical proficiency.
IFF they economically liberalized and encouraged technical exchange with the West, then possibly, Soviet gear gets and stays competitive with Western gear but gets so bloody expensive that they have to drastically shrink/ "professionalize" their armed forces to keep it at manageable force strengths.

[eliphas8]

Originally Posted by The Red

It wouldn't be a Cold War then would it?

Well they could simply still be working against the US's interests which was the real reason for the Cold War.

[Polish Eagle]

Originally Posted by Killer300

Again guys, the Soviets will not survive to 2009 unless they reform. They can't go the North Korea route. It's simply too many people in this age.

With that in mind, it IS possible for them to continue the Cold War while reforming, however it would require an earlier POD, namely where they get the reforms done in the 1970s.

Oh, it can reform. To some degree. They'll probably still be authoritarian (Putin on steroids). They might even adopt some Chinese policies toward the Free Market.

They'll still be The Enemy. The Other. The guys with a bloc east of the Elbe and a massive army. An enemy that the United States has been conditioned to fear. China rose up relatively recently, so the wannabe-Cold Warriors have yet to inspire such a fear of Beijing, but Moscow was always treated with suspicion by the West.

Perhaps a continuing Cold War would see some form of Missile Defense develop further and faster. The Soviets, IIRC, developed an orbital laser platform that failed during launch around '89 (no permission for testing from the Kremlin anyway, for fear of giving the US an excuse to go ahead with their own). The US could one-up them.

[Timmy811]

Would the western Europeans get their act together faster without all those eastern European nations in the EU? Maybe a federalized EU of Germany, France and the Low countries.