Patton Goes Wild

[Electric Earth]

After VE Day General Patton said he could manufacture an "incident," attack the Russians and quickly defeat them. Here is a scenario: With bold thrusts, encirclement and paratroops he finds himself in Warsaw, with virtually no opposition between himself and Moscow. Dilemmas abound: Truman is leery of plunging deep into Russia, recalling other disasterous attempts; the American public is war-weary. Stalin is in the process of transferring soldiers from Europe to Manchuria; should he order the trains back? Moscow erupts into violence; rioters in the streets. The USSR breaks down. Stalin becomes President of Georgia. US military investigators reveal that the incident which brought this on was bogus, but revealing this would prove embarrasing. Truman writes one of those "sealed for 50 years" documents, which is the subject of heated arguments. There was, of course no Korean War, Viet Nam, Berlin Wall etc.

[DAv]

Umm... Rusia had a lot more troops and equipment than America in Europe. If such an action was taken, Patton would be court-martialled at the very least and the USSR would push the other Allies out of Germany.

[Roberto]

Wait... So you're saying that an American army that has already fought tooth and claw through half of europe would succeed where the Germans could not? Also take into account that the other half of Europe was under Soviet control, and the Soviet army was far from pushover.

[Cockroach]

Originally Posted by AHF

Wait... So you're saying that an American army that has already fought tooth and claw through half of europe would succeed where the Germans could not? Also take into account that the other half of Europe was under Soviet control, and the Soviet army was far from pushover.

The US has two big advantages over the Soviets that the Germans didn't:

1. The sovs were heavily dependent on import US aviation fuel.
2. The sovs were heavily dependent on US built trucks (and spare parts for aforesaid trucks).

withdrawal of both will see a marked decline in the performance of both the soviet military and the USSR's industry.

I agree that those are far from enough to ensure a US victory... but they do mean it ain't an all out insane-ASB type possibility.

[Readman]

Originally Posted by Cockroach

The US has two big advantages over the Soviets that the Germans didn't:

1. The sovs were heavily dependent on import US aviation fuel.
2. The sovs were heavily dependent on US built trucks (and spare parts for aforesaid trucks).

withdrawal of both will see a marked decline in the performance of both the soviet military and the USSR's industry.

I agree that those are far from enough to ensure a US victory... but they do mean it ain't an all out insane-ASB type possibility.

#1 is incorrect, #2 however, is Male Bovine Excretion

Actually by this time the withdrawl of both of aforementioned goods is irrelveant, Baku is just one of many dozens of oil fields the Russians by this time have not only re-occuiped but built upon

and the U.S isnt the only nation that built trucks for the war....To Clarify; U.S Lend Lease certainly did HELP the Soviet war effort; particular early on during 41 to late '42, after which domestic production ,etc shouldered the bulk of the work load, and LL became increasingly, irrelevant, not nearly as 'Critical' as U.S History books would have one believe

That being said i also think it would be somewhat ASB for Patton to attack the Soviets randomly; just like *snap* that but i will say he had no love for them, and was certainly spoiling for a fight, but the thing of it is I don't think the U.S home front would be after 4 years of "Uncle Joe is our friend", our brave Russian comrade-in-arms; etc

[papal duke]

when i read the thread name i thought of boys gone wild

[Faeelin]

Originally Posted by Readman

#1 is incorrect,

While I know nothing about the Soviet production of Aviation fuel, there isn't anything inherently implausible about it. They might have plenty of oil, but no way to refine it.

[seraphim74]

Patton's 3rd Army in 1945 couldn't have more than 15 divisions - not a chance against whole Red Army. To successfully fight Soviets he would have needed all allied forces in Europe - and that is ASB. Even if Patton provoked some clash, politicians would have quickly put an end to it. US and Britain were not prepared to fight Soviet Union. Public opinion in those countries wouldn't have allowed that, after years of propaganda about good Uncle Joe.

[Michele]

Originally Posted by Readman

U.S Lend Lease certainly did HELP the Soviet war effort; particular early on during 41 to late '42,

In 1941? In that year, between lend-Lease and other arrangements (because as you know there was no Lend-Lease to the Soviets before October 1, but there were other shipments), the total shipments amount to about 360,000 tons – a drop in the bucket. And about half of that was sent in the last three months, so for all practical purposes, the importance of Lend-Lease in 1941 was entirely political and had no battlefield effect whatsoever.
Even in 1942, the bulk of the effort and of its effects is concentrated in the last 6 months.

[Michele]

The Soviets were heavily dependent on imports of _high-octane_ _Western_ aviation fuell. "High octane" means they produced lots of their own lower-quality avgas. Using that would cut the top performance of their fighters about 10%, which is bad, but it is not like saying they can't fly. "Western" means that some of it came not from the USA but from the Iraqi refineries, under British control. To cut that, you'd need to assume the British are happy with Patton's madness. While Churchill might even entertain the thought, at the time he was heading out of Downing Street, fast. To be replaced by people less inclined to make war with the SU. So you should explore the possibility that the British want none of this. Besides, the Central Asia Military District will mount an offensive back into Iran, exactly in a drive to try and secure those refineries. They'll have very low success chances – provided the British fight back.

The Soviets had enough US trucks and spare parts to wage a six-month campaign in 1945 without feeling any problem for the time being. This would bring about winter, the time when US troops only want to hole up, but also the time of the most devastating Soviet offensives. It is also a time when air superiority is less important due to weather. In those six months, the Soviets can reconvert factories from the production of limited-use lighter armored vehicles to producing trucks.

Meanwhile, Greece is in the throes of a a renewed Communist insurgency. De Gaulle manages to suppress his own Communists, but not without a bloodbath which paralyzes France and the supply lines the US forces are still largely relying upon, as French Communist railway workers sabotage those trains. Depending upon what the British position is, the Communist insurrection may be successful both in Greece and in Italy.

I also would suggest anybody interested in this bad idea to check
a) the distance from Warsaw to Moscow;
b) the balance of forces on the ground;
c) the morale of the Western soldiers when told, well, we were wrong, it's not really over yet;
d) for those paratroopers in Warsaw, what happened in Arnhem.