Crisis in the Kremlin - Our 1982 USSR
- Thread starter panpiotr
- Start date
-
- Tags
- 1980's communism soviet union ussr
Exactly, Romanov and Kunaev might brought a breathe of fresh air to USSR and the eastern camp, but many of their policies in the long-run are still unsustainable, like belief in centrally-planned economy. Yes, the reforms and reorganization introduced by them did help, but it more like a new paint covering all of the old problems, so the players will be forced to give up some things to save the other. Current state of affairs is on its last legs and will not last forever.
And let Soviet propaganda ridicule SDI as pseudo-science mumbo-jumbo proposed by Reagan's personal astrologer.
1. A More troops won’t fix things, Warsaw Pact ones especially as that’ll only piss off those nations and push them further towards revolution. And chemical weapons will only escalate their bad relations with the west and other parts of the world. And not help really at all.
2. A. The bureaucracy needs to be streamlined to be more efficient and effective as well as less corrupt.
3. E. Idk it sounds like it could help, to open things up and sorta introduce the free market/capitalism while also still maintaining control. Iirc it didn’t work forever with Yugoslavia but some sort of major reform is needed.
4. A. More trade means more money and more capital to work with.
2. A. The bureaucracy needs to be streamlined to be more efficient and effective as well as less corrupt.
3. E. Idk it sounds like it could help, to open things up and sorta introduce the free market/capitalism while also still maintaining control. Iirc it didn’t work forever with Yugoslavia but some sort of major reform is needed.
4. A. More trade means more money and more capital to work with.
Thanks for the vote, however its too late as the next update is already released, so you can vote in this turn.
1) A and D. Protest on a diplomatic level and announce our anti-SDI, not getting ourselves involved in an expensive arms race but potentially calling the USA's bluff if it's indeed an attempt at goading us, while also hopefully reassuring our citizens.
2) A. This is a project that if successful could counterbalance any USA developments and give an edge
2) A. This is a project that if successful could counterbalance any USA developments and give an edge
Will definitely include it in one of future updates on economy and new technologies. Unfortunately, this will come only after Able Archer 83 in November, as the new soviet leadership must focus on a quickly spiraling out of control situation between the USA/China and USSR, which has a real chance of turning into WW3 down the road.
Well interesting results so far.
1 C I feel we can't react well enough without causing serious issues.
B. We need to focus on restoring the economy unless we want to use it in a all out war to destroy our enemies.
Comrades, what is your opinion on the situation with Afghanistan and Pakistan? I know it's a bad situation but we must look at the facts, the USSR has been subsidizing it since 1919. We are likely never going to turn a profit with it and should accept it's probably going to be a drain on the USSR for as a long as we are around.
However just because of that does not mean we can't look a tolerable outcome, a Pakistan dominated Afghanistan will be a major hindrance and as we continue to try and invest more into India we naturally are dragged further into the region. The Pakistani leadership believe or at least pretend to believe our army there is apart of some plot to create a puppet state or directly annex parts of Pakistan for a warm water part and so will do there best to destabilize Afghanistan while it's in our sphere with the help of their allies.
Does not help that almost every Afghan government has and will turn to the Durand line issue when they need a boost of PR so we can't promise them a inactive border then again neither can they.
However we do have some leverage, we have Al-Zulfiqar a rebel group set up by Bhutto's sons after Zia's coup in Afghanistan alongside some other groups. Not the most menacing threat but we can hand them over in a agreement, we probably can get India to get Bangladesh to let some war criminals who fought for Pakistan back. Zia is very much looking for legitimacy which can be used in whatever agreement.
1 C I feel we can't react well enough without causing serious issues.
B. We need to focus on restoring the economy unless we want to use it in a all out war to destroy our enemies.
Comrades, what is your opinion on the situation with Afghanistan and Pakistan? I know it's a bad situation but we must look at the facts, the USSR has been subsidizing it since 1919. We are likely never going to turn a profit with it and should accept it's probably going to be a drain on the USSR for as a long as we are around.
However just because of that does not mean we can't look a tolerable outcome, a Pakistan dominated Afghanistan will be a major hindrance and as we continue to try and invest more into India we naturally are dragged further into the region. The Pakistani leadership believe or at least pretend to believe our army there is apart of some plot to create a puppet state or directly annex parts of Pakistan for a warm water part and so will do there best to destabilize Afghanistan while it's in our sphere with the help of their allies.
Does not help that almost every Afghan government has and will turn to the Durand line issue when they need a boost of PR so we can't promise them a inactive border then again neither can they.
However we do have some leverage, we have Al-Zulfiqar a rebel group set up by Bhutto's sons after Zia's coup in Afghanistan alongside some other groups. Not the most menacing threat but we can hand them over in a agreement, we probably can get India to get Bangladesh to let some war criminals who fought for Pakistan back. Zia is very much looking for legitimacy which can be used in whatever agreement.
Maybe bring out the original Tsar Bomba plans for the 100-megaton load then...
Regarding Alcoholism (yes I know it is past), we should encourage Soviet women and children as foot soldiers in this campaign since they bear the brunt of its effects.
Results of the vote so far
1. Vote on the Soviet reaction to SDI:
A) Protest on a diplomatic level - 14 votes
B) Enlarge the Soviet nuclear program as a response - 5 votes
C) Don't react at all to SDI - 2 votes
D) Announce an anti-SDI program - 11 votes
E) Actually start to research Soviet anti-SDI program. - 7 votes
2. Vote on development of Status-6 Oceanic Multipurpose System or the Poseidon:
A) Yes, we need this project to success - 17 votes
B) No, the vehicle is not needed. - 4 votes
Note: So, it seems that the players decided not to take the American bait, which would result in spending enormous amounts of money and resources against a program, that could only be a propaganda stunt by Reagan. At the same time, the number of votes towards enlargement of Soviet nuclear program and beginning research on anti-SDI program are enough to force Romanov to take some action. My take is that the anti-SDI program would be announced by USSR, but in reality it would be based rebranding of some of the older projects already under development, changes in Soviet nuclear strategy and doctrine taking into account potential existence of SDI and the main focus of research and development will be placed on development of the Poseidon based on number of votes in favor of this project.
1. Vote on the Soviet reaction to SDI:
A) Protest on a diplomatic level - 14 votes
B) Enlarge the Soviet nuclear program as a response - 5 votes
C) Don't react at all to SDI - 2 votes
D) Announce an anti-SDI program - 11 votes
E) Actually start to research Soviet anti-SDI program. - 7 votes
2. Vote on development of Status-6 Oceanic Multipurpose System or the Poseidon:
A) Yes, we need this project to success - 17 votes
B) No, the vehicle is not needed. - 4 votes
Note: So, it seems that the players decided not to take the American bait, which would result in spending enormous amounts of money and resources against a program, that could only be a propaganda stunt by Reagan. At the same time, the number of votes towards enlargement of Soviet nuclear program and beginning research on anti-SDI program are enough to force Romanov to take some action. My take is that the anti-SDI program would be announced by USSR, but in reality it would be based rebranding of some of the older projects already under development, changes in Soviet nuclear strategy and doctrine taking into account potential existence of SDI and the main focus of research and development will be placed on development of the Poseidon based on number of votes in favor of this project.
Realistically, this is the answer. Doubling your nuclear arsenal and spending three times as much on military = expensive. Continuing/reviving old projects as a response to a potential threat = much cheaper and in the chance that SDI is real, we've also developed a counter/equivalent to it so no need to worry.