Crisis in the Kremlin - Our 1982 USSR

If I were ever to make 2nd timeline, which one would you be most interested in?

  • 1. German Empire 1888

    Votes: 22 25.3%
  • 2. Russian Federation 1993

    Votes: 37 42.5%
  • 3. Red China 1949

    Votes: 18 20.7%
  • 4. Yugoslavia 1920

    Votes: 15 17.2%
  • 5. India 1947

    Votes: 12 13.8%
  • 6. alt-fascist Italy 1922

    Votes: 13 14.9%
  • 7. South Africa 1994

    Votes: 6 6.9%
  • 8. Germany 1990

    Votes: 6 6.9%
  • 9. Japan 2000

    Votes: 6 6.9%
  • 10. United Kingdom 1997

    Votes: 6 6.9%

  • Total voters
    87
  • Poll closed .
Yeah, on that part I must clarify, that I didnt mean that the reform was magically able to completely reshape soviet bureaucracy just in two moths, but in much longer period of time.
Perhaps you could rework the wording a bit? The quote of bloated mess to an well oiled machine really stood out for me, giving me the impression that through a finger snap the bureaucratic problems evaporated.

Ah, also, how feasible would it be, politically speaking, as a response to SDI's claim of making nuclear weapons obsolete, to help each Warsaw Pact member to develop their own nuclear arsenal? (Romania is currently just doing that) After all, President Reagan should have no fear against nuclear arsenals that are rendered impotent by the defense system?
 
Perhaps you could rework the wording a bit? The quote of bloated mess to an well oiled machine really stood out for me, giving me the impression that through a finger snap the bureaucratic problems evaporated.
Will simply delete that part, nothing in meaning will be lost without that quote
 
Ah, also, how feasible would it be, politically speaking, as a response to SDI's claim of making nuclear weapons obsolete, to help each Warsaw Pact member to develop their own nuclear arsenal? (Romania is currently just doing that) After all, President Reagan should have no fear against nuclear arsenals that are rendered impotent by the defense system?
In my opinion, the Soviets would like to keep the current status of nuclear domination and control over other members of the Warsaw Pact, but I think it could be possible for Romanov to propose something similar to NATO's nuclear sharing I guess. But we could do a vote on the matter, as tensions between the USA and China on the one side and the USSR on the other will only grow.
 
Last edited:
tu95ms003.jpg

(Soviet planes over the skies of Pakistan)
Just a small note the Su-27 and Su-30 fighter jets aren't in service in 1983 so you might want to change the image...

1. Vote on the Soviet reaction to SDI:

A) Protest on a diplomatic level

B) Enlarge the Soviet nuclear program as a response

C) Don't react at all to SDI

D) Announce an anti-SDI program

E) Actually start to research Soviet anti-SDI program.

Well vote A is obviously the straightforward answer here, we should denounce SDI, although words expressing our disapproval carry little weight unfortunately.

The only way I see to make it clear to Reagan that we are not to be trifled with is to expand the Soviet nuclear program with vote B, the President has given us a perfectly legitimate excuse to enlarge our stockpile of nukes and actions unlike words speak much louder, while we mass produce cheap nuclear weapons that are already in production the US will be forced to waste billions of dollars into a paper project that will require decades of research and investment to get somewhere, I expect that the American taxpayers will not be fond of President Reagan and his successors if their money disappears into a massive black hole.

I will also support the vote D option of "starting" a anti-SDI program, we actually already have a orbital satellite interceptor program (Polyus) under development since the mid 1970s. Just rebrand that existing project as part of this new anti-SDI program and let it get developed as our response to SDI, the system won't be able to stop Ballistic missiles, however it will be able to attack the American SDI satellites and clear a path for our Ballistic missiles to strike the US and her allies if World War 3 unfortunately comes.

2. Vote on development of Status-6 Oceanic Multipurpose System or the Poseidon:

A) Yes, we need this project to success

B) No, the vehicle is not needed.

If you have any other ideas/topics to vote one, please write it.

So you are giving us the option to develop an 1980s version of the OTL Poseidon nuclear torpedoes.

ru-kanyon-illustration1-940-1534446375.jpg


Well honestly this thing on a military prospective is honestly terrifying, being able to strike any target across the world without much warning.

The fact that the not so prosperous Russian Federation was able to get this weapon into service gives me confidence that our scientist in the state can provide us an affordable alternative to the costly project of developing an true anti-SDI system.

So yes I'm voting A.
 
Just a small note the Su-27 and Su-30 fighter jets aren't in service in 1983 so you might want to change the image...
Got it, no problem, will change it for some other picture

Edit: changed for picture of TU-16, hopefully this will fit the timeframe
 
Last edited:
1. A and D, we can accuse the United States of warmongers, and announcing countermeasures will cause them to waste time and money on the project, while showing that we can respond to any threat, but just in case, I would suggest a call for de-escalation nuclear power, which would improve public opinion of the USSR, while forcing Reagan to position himself
2. A, the benefits of this project are numerous, it could not only threaten coastal enclaves and commercial and military fleets, it can also be used to sabotage canals such as Panama, while it can be "loaned" to allied nations or nations that plan to do amphibious operations (cough, Argentina, cough)
 
1). B and E - We need to show the Americans that the Soviets will not tolerate Reagan's rhetoric and we will expose him for the fraudulent con-man he truly is. Once he sees our expanded nuclear arsenal, he'll back off with his tail behind his legs. We should also develop an anti-SDI program, but we shouldn't announce it until it is near completion. It'll be a nasty surprise for the West.

2). A - This will truly give the Soviets the upper hand in any war scenario, so it'll bring further pressure on the American elitists to back off.
 
1) I cast my vote for options A and D since both seem to be the ideal options following the escalations made by the USA.
2) I cast my vote for A since the development of new weapons can help modernize our military abilities.
 
1. Vote on the Soviet reaction to SDI:

A) Protest on a diplomatic level

B) Enlarge the Soviet nuclear program as a response

C) Don't react at all to SDI

D) Announce an anti-SDI program

E) Actually start to research Soviet anti-SDI program.
A) Protest on a diplomatic level, in all likelihood the actual program is technologically and economically infeasible so we'll probably just complain and ridicule it and nothing more.
2. Vote on development of Status-6 Oceanic Multipurpose System or the Poseidon:

A) Yes, we need this project to success

B) No, the vehicle is not needed.
B) We can't continue this ridiculous dick-swinging contest with the true Evil Empire while we have an economy to fix.
 
1. Vote on the Soviet reaction to SDI: E

2. Vote on development of Status-6 Oceanic Multipurpose System or the Poseidon: B


Let us devote more resources to scientific development that can be used for both civilian and military uses.
 
1. Vote on the Soviet reaction to SDI:

A) Protest on a diplomatic level

B) Enlarge the Soviet nuclear program as a response

C) Don't react at all to SDI

D) Announce an anti-SDI program

E) Actually start to research Soviet anti-SDI program.

2. Vote on development of Status-6 Oceanic Multipurpose System or the Poseidon:

A) Yes, we need this project to success

B) No, the vehicle is not needed.

If you have any other ideas/topics to vote one, please write it.
1.) B, C, and E.
2.) A.
 
1. A,D&E) Like the others said, we should denounce Regan's speech and warmongering attitude towards us and the ideal of peace. I also think that we should initiate an Anti-SDI program in case his threat is genuine or just to appease the Western powers.

2. A) While I'm against supporting this with how economy is but we're gonna need alternatives that could deal with America's Pacific bases so they caught off guard.
 
Opposing the not very real SDI, the War in Afghanistan Costs overall (which will expand further TTL no matter if we win or loose) and ultimately Chernobyl in combination were major factors for the Soviet Union falling and losing the Cold War, how will we combat that political, economic and military downfall further here (and fast)?
 
Opposing the not very real SDI, the War in Afghanistan Costs overall (which will expand further TTL no matter if we win or loose) and ultimately Chernobyl in combination were major factors for the Soviet Union falling and losing the Cold War, how will we combat that political, economic and military downfall further here (and fast)?
Well, the Soviets will have to find a way to get more money flowing. And that may require some form of reform or even sacrifice.
 
Top