This is a really odd, Puget. And I'm not sure it makes that much sense--really, the USA began its nuclear weapons program to try to get an advantage against Nazi Germany.
The thing is that we'd need a fundamentally different Germany to get this to work--there is some evidence that averting Hitler's death on July 4th, 1941, could well have changed the entire nature of the war in Russia. I suggest that instead of the vast Partisan Hell that Germany encountered, that the Soviet Red Army might have survived, instead of losing first Moscow, then facing destruction in detail in 1942.
We needed Nuclear Weapons to secure beachheads in France; we needed them to dust the Wehrmacht--We'd need WW2 to end in 1946 or so, instead of 1948. But how can we realistically expect Stalin, who has purged his armed forces and the insane orders from Stavka that followed, to be any match for Fuhrer Heydrich?
Short answer--not unless WW2 is drastically different. We used something like 100 nuclear weapons in that conflict--getting it down to something like two means fundamentally rewriting the course of the war.