Operation Unthinkable is actually carried out and it fails horribly, is there still a Cold War?

the Imperium of Canada

the Imperium of Canada

So it's my understanding that Operation Unthinkable was "Unthinkable" for a reason. Launching an unprovoked war against the USSR, who most at the moment consider an ally, and who possesses the largest and most experienced military in Europe, almost immediately after the previous war ended would be an absolutely horrible idea.

So for some ungodly reason it's actually attempted and there's predictably massive mutinies and public outcry, and the Red Army marches all the way to the Rhine before a ceasefire is declared and peace is made. Truman and Churchill are removed from office.

So after this disaster, would there still be something resembling the Cold War as we know it? Is a cold conflict between the United States and Soviet Union short circuited before it could even begin or just postponed?
 

El_Fodedor

Banned
I don't see any reason for a Cold War not to happen. The only difference is that the USSR is going to be much stronger this time. France and Italy are probably going to fall to communism eventually. The Soviet Union could last until the 21st century and beyond.
 
The_Persian_Cat

The_Persian_Cat

I feel like if there was a military invasion, it would by definition not be a cold war lol.

But more to the point -- I think it's more likely that both sides would be more aggressive. Tactical nukes may be deployed in future invasions of the USSR. Since there's no way for the USSR to overtake the West, and it'd be nigh impossible for the West to overtake the USSR, though, there might be a more aggressive "cold war." Germany might become less like Germany was OTL, and more like Korea.
 

skarosianlifeform

I wonder if local communist parties could also take power in Italy, France and Greece. One of the reasons they didn't was the agreement to share Europe with the USA, and now this agreement is shelved.

Plus, with France as an ally (and the USA/UK politically unable to directly oppose Russia for a few years), maybe the USSR could invade Spain ?
They have a legit casus belli : Franco sent a volunteer division during Barbarossa.
 

BeardedHoplite

You'd likely have a Red Europe to the Atlantic, not just the Rhine.

The Red Army was overstretched, but still possessed the largest, most experienced and, imo, best army on the continent. You'd likely see a Red France, Italy and Balkans, with Spain falling to Soviet subterfuge some years later.

Nuclear disparity would be an issue but the US would run out of bases to feasibly launch B29s as the Soviets overrun the continent.

A larger issue might be the near-famine the Soviet Union faced at the end of the war. It was food aid and the ability to demobilize men to work the fields that limited the damage, but in a Unthinkable scenario you might see a famine. However, given that a war would be fairly short, I don't think this would change the outcome. Just the aftermath

I could see the US wanting to have some sort of proxy war with the red Europe, but given that there would be a lot of us casualties, you would probably see the isolationists pumping the brakes for at least a decade, if not for longer
 
the Imperium of Canada

the Imperium of Canada

El_Fodedor said:
I don't see any reason for a Cold War not to happen. The only difference is that the USSR is going to be much stronger this time. France and Italy are probably going to fall to communism eventually. The Soviet Union could last until the 21st century and beyond.
Click to expand...
The_Persian_Cat said:
I feel like if there was a military invasion, it would by definition not be a cold war lol.

But more to the point -- I think it's more likely that both sides would be more aggressive. Tactical nukes may be deployed in future invasions of the USSR. Since there's no way for the USSR to overtake the West, and it'd be nigh impossible for the West to overtake the USSR, though, there might be a more aggressive "cold war." Germany might become less like Germany was OTL, and more like Korea.
Click to expand...
This is operating under the assumption that there is a massive public backlash against this idiotic conflict.
 

El_Fodedor

Banned
skarosianlifeform said:
I wonder if local communist parties could also take power in Italy, France and Greece. One of the reasons they didn't was the agreement to share Europe with the USA, and now this agreement is shelved.

Plus, with France as an ally (and the USA/UK politically unable to directly oppose Russia for a few years), maybe the USSR could invade Spain ?
They have a legit casus belli : Franco sent a volunteer division during Barbarossa.
Click to expand...
I think that a URSS that controls Germany and has Italy and France as allies, before trying to conquer Spain (which would probably harbor US nukes so it would be a no-no), would try to wrestle the Middle East away from American/British control so that they can break the power of the capitalist economies for good with an oil shortage. This would be a much more sensible strategy than an invasion of the Iberian Peninsula.

I'm curious to what would happen to Africa. Maybe a much more quick decolonization? The power of the USSR would be too strong. I don't see Belgium (1960) and Portugal (1975) holding their colonies for that long, and if the Soviets advance to Brussels then Congo would probably become instantly independent after the conflict.
 
Last edited:

ObssesedNuker

An isolationist resurgence in the US could very well short-circuit the Cold War. Not guaranteed, but perfectly concievable as part of the backlash against the sort of New Dealers who would be the ones percieved to be behind the catastrophe.
 
Wesley_Lewt

Wesley_Lewt

the Imperium of Canada said:
So it's my understanding that Operation Unthinkable was "Unthinkable" for a reason. Launching an unprovoked war against the USSR, who most at the moment consider an ally, and who possesses the largest and most experienced military in Europe, almost immediately after the previous war ended would be an absolutely horrible idea.

So for some ungodly reason it's actually attempted and there's predictably massive mutinies and public outcry, and the Red Army marches all the way to the Rhine before a ceasefire is declared and peace is made. Truman and Churchill are removed from office.

So after this disaster, would there still be something resembling the Cold War as we know it? Is a cold conflict between the United States and Soviet Union short circuited before it could even begin or just postponed?
Click to expand...
When do the US/UK pull the trigger?

As I understand it they fully intended to go through with it. Once they had 314 nuclear warheads, which was the number they thought necessary to destroy the military industrial capability of the USSR enabling them to overwhelm a Red Army which could not be supplied, win quick enough to avoid/weather the public backlash, then finish what the Germans started and do a modified form of Generalplan Ost.

Thankfully, they never got the required number of warheads before the USSR got the bomb.
 
Last edited:

El_Fodedor

Banned
ObssesedNuker said:
An isolationist resurgence in the US could very well short-circuit the Cold War. Not guaranteed, but perfectly concievable as part of the backlash against the sort of New Dealers who would be the ones percieved to be behind the catastrophe.
Click to expand...
But weren't the New Dealers adversaries even more anti-communists?
 

Alternator

BeardedHoplite said:
You'd likely have a Red Europe to the Atlantic, not just the Rhine.

The Red Army was overstretched, but still possessed the largest, most experienced and, imo, best army on the continent. You'd likely see a Red France, Italy and Balkans, with Spain falling to Soviet subterfuge some years later.

Nuclear disparity would be an issue but the US would run out of bases to feasibly launch B29s as the Soviets overrun the continent.

A larger issue might be the near-famine the Soviet Union faced at the end of the war. It was food aid and the ability to demobilize men to work the fields that limited the damage, but in a Unthinkable scenario you might see a famine. However, given that a war would be fairly short, I don't think this would change the outcome. Just the aftermath

I could see the US wanting to have some sort of proxy war with the red Europe, but given that there would be a lot of us casualties, you would probably see the isolationists pumping the brakes for at least a decade, if not for longer
Click to expand...
The Soviets can't sustain an offensive that far - just reaching Berlin involved multiple occasions where they had to stop and resupply. Sure, they have the raw manpower, but all the manpower in the world does no good if you can't get them clothes, food, and bullets.
 

ObssesedNuker

Alternator said:
The Soviets can't sustain an offensive that far - just reaching Berlin involved multiple occasions where they had to stop and resupply. Sure, they have the raw manpower, but all the manpower in the world does no good if you can't get them clothes, food, and bullets.
Click to expand...
Yes they can. Magdeburg to Dusseldorf would only requires the Soviets to advance 300-350 kilometers from their primary railheads, which by the time Unthinkable took place would be pushed right up the Elbe. Even if we pretend the Soviets are unable by some magic to extend their railheads forward from the Oder to the Elbe, that's only another 200 kilometers. By comparison, the Vistula-Oder Offensive saw the Soviets advance some 450 to 500 kilometers from their railheads on the Vistula River and that was both under far poorer infrastructure and far more inclement weather than Central Germany in July. Supply quantities reflect this: Soviet supply throughput through 1945 were the highest of the entire war, with their ammunition shipments even exceeding that of the Americans.

So yes, the Soviets definitely have the supply apparatus to sustain a drive from their starting positions in Unthinkable to the Rhine river. Any drive beyond the Rhine would undoubtedly require an operational pause to stop and resupply, but since the WAllies political collapse at home ends the war there, that hardly matters.

El_Fodedor said:
But weren't the New Dealers adversaries even more anti-communists?
Click to expand...
Yes, but in a peculiar way that didn't put much thought into opposing it abroad. Many of them loathed Western Europe, viewing it already as practically communist, and preferred embracing a sort of "Fortress America" attitude.
 
Last edited:

BobTheBarbarian

Banned
This is about what would happen if Unthinkable already failed. . .

I would say, the US and UK would be almost totally discredited internationally in the short to medium term, with many more 3rd world countries going communist than OTL. Socialism may even be more popular in the west as a result. Soviet success in mainland Europe would almost certainly embolden Asian communists, particularly Mao, so if Unthinkable butterflied the Korean war in either direction we may have seen a Chinese invasion of French Indochina. Meanwhile the Soviets would have brutally cracked down on both occupied Poland and Germany.

Additionally, with an actual war between the two sides on the record, the chance of nuclear annihilation later on would IMO have been far higher.
 

ivanotter

1 July was the date for the sneak attack. Why US/UK would even consider that they could succeed is a good guess. Nuclear bombs were not available at that time.

The initial plan also had an element of 200,000 German POWs signing up for Barbarossa V2.0 (why would they do that).

The US/UK forces would in all likelihood be defeated by the USSR armor pretty fast.

And here is the crux: Why would Stalin counter-attack as we seem to be looking at above?

The backlash from such an unprovoked attack might just play itself out: France and Italy could easily go communist (with Stalin leaning back and looking on).

Maybe Germany would not like to have another war within the country and could turn communist or at least paralyse US/UK politically (even in July 1945).

Stalin's smart move could be to defeat the invading forces (in spades!) and then let it play out by itself.
 

TDM

Kicked
Wesley_Lewt said:
When do the US/UK pull the trigger?

As I understand it they fully intended to go through with it. Once they had 314 nuclear warheads, which was the number they thought necessary to destroy the military industrial capability of the USSR enabling them to overwhelm a Red Army which could not be supplied, win quick enough to avoid/weather the public backlash, then finish what the Germans started and do a modified form of Generalplan Ost.

Thankfully, they never got the required number of warheads before the USSR got the bomb.
Click to expand...
Have you got a cite for that?

1). 314 seems a very specific number,

2). a modified General plan Ost?!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top