Cold War alternative mini-scenarios thread

Gillan1220

Gillan1220

Monk78 said:
Indonesia attempts an invasion and conquest of PNG in late 1970s
Do they have the military capability?
How will Australia respond ?
How will the superpowers react ?
Can an indigenous guerilla movement start there ?
Click to expand...
Indonesia was occupied with East Timor at this period.
 

Monk78

Reymet_2 said:
North and South Yemen reunification in 1967 with Yemen becoming an unified communist country.
Click to expand...
And a major soviet base at Aden which is
Destabilizing Saudi Arabia.
And cooperating with a communist Ethiopia to create minefields in the straits
 

Monk78

How much of difference would it make if in Vietnam the NVA and VC never got the AK47 ?
Will the war still have the same result if communists fought with ww2 era SMGs and SKS rifles ?
 
Pax_Nihil

Pax_Nihil

Monk78 said:
How much of difference would it make if in Vietnam the NVA and VC never got the AK47 ?
Will the war still have the same result if communists fought with ww2 era SMGs and SKS rifles ?
Click to expand...
It's not a matter of the gun alone, its just as much if not more important who wields it.
 
mr morbius

mr morbius

The USSR stays under Beria, and while they lose the Eastern Bloc they reform into a OTL China-style Market economy but with One Party communist rule.
 

Monk78

Can we have a far bigger and more serious uprising under IRA during the troubles in 1970s ?

A full fledged insurgency on the level of Algerian civil war ?
How can that be achieved without ASB ?
 

Monk78

USSR encourages hungry to take a hawkish stance on Transylvania
And if Romania refused to bend then in mid 1970s a operation Danube style invasion is launched against Bucharest
Goal is hungry should annex Transylvania
How will that fare ?
This time DDR troops will probably be involved
Can Yugoslavia can be bribed to be quiescent somehow ?
 

Declan

Monk78 said:
So was Czechoslovakia
But Romanian leader was buddies with PRC and routinely opposed USSR
Click to expand...
Massive differences between the two. The Soviets justified the Czechoslovak invasion by accusing Dubcek of taking Czechoslovakia from socialism altogether. In that regard, the invasion was marketed to prop up marxist socialism.

On the other hand, you're suggesting the Soviets invade Romania because the latter refused to give up land. Romania was still a communist country despite it's estrangement from Moscow.
While it didn't protect Czechoslovakia, being a member of the Warsaw pact would prevent such an escalation

You're suggesting an invasion during the 70s. By then, Romania's military was able to operate far more independently from the Warsaw Pact that it's neighbours. There would be no confusion as with Czechoslovakia that lead to their army practically giving up; it's clear that Romania is under siege.
The Soviets would get stiffer resistance than Operation Danube would have expected.

Lastly, the Soviets won't try this because it can open Pandora's box and backfire badly.
 

Monk78

Declan said:
Massive differences between the two. The Soviets justified the Czechoslovak invasion by accusing Dubcek of taking Czechoslovakia from socialism altogether. In that regard, the invasion was marketed to prop up marxist socialism.

On the other hand, you're suggesting the Soviets invade Romania because the latter refused to give up land. Romania was still a communist country despite it's estrangement from Moscow.
While it didn't protect Czechoslovakia, being a member of the Warsaw pact would prevent such an escalation

You're suggesting an invasion during the 70s. By then, Romania's military was able to operate far more independently from the Warsaw Pact that it's neighbours. There would be no confusion as with Czechoslovakia that lead to their army practically giving up; it's clear that Romania is under siege.
The Soviets would get stiffer resistance than Operation Danube would have expected.

Lastly, the Soviets won't try this because it can open Pandora's box and backfire badly.
Click to expand...
Well, I’m not suggesting that the Soviets just blatantly support the landgrab
Here’s my suggestions feel free to critique
1 soviets try to woo Ceausescu of Romania to come back Solidly in the soviet camp and break ties with China
2 if that fails, they start supporting separatist sentiment in Transylvania engineer, ethnic riots in the country
3 in the eastern bloc try to undermine the image of Ceausescu as an agent of the west and traitor
4 convince Bulgarian and Hungarian leaders that this is an opportunity of a lifetime to settle old scores with Romania ( even a people’s republic of Transylvania which is a Hungarian puppet could be an option)
5 try to find people within ruling Romanian elite who are willing to betray ceausescu
6 even if does come to full conflict with Romanian military, it was the not as advanced as many other members of WP. It might be bloodier than 1956 but there is a chance defections from within the party can weaken the resistance.
It can reignite territorial disputes within Eastern Europe yes but it can also show you cannot show the finger to USSR right in their backyard and get away with it
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top