Soviet controled USA in 1976 since the Korea War

Well I'm trying seriously to make this work it is the Hot War series that got me asking these questions,

Ah, there's your problem. I actually like Turtledove's books

*someone flashes up The War that Came Early*

...sometimes, but the man is not known for his probability. He ignores pesky details if they would stop the story from working. For example, in his books about the Japanese conquest of Hawaii he ignores the logistical impossibility of supplying such a force, and hand waves the 45,000 American troops who could defend the island, as well as the rather...inhospitable waters of the invasion site (hint, its surfer territory for a reason.) Or either of his works where the South magically decides to end slavery despite that being the whole point of the war. He's still better than some AH authors *coughStirlingcough*, but he's not to be trusted on plausibility.

all the jews in teh early 40's west of Moscow were an endangered group. all the jews east there of were not fairing much better.

Eh, if you're going the SUPERSCIENCE route you've left reality behind already, why let mere details slow you down.
Mgo whole hog. I'm talking giant robots with LAZURS, submarines that can freakin' fly, and tanks requiring their own zip code. :p
 

B-29_Bomber

Banned
Eh, if you're going the SUPERSCIENCE route you've left reality behind already, why let mere details slow you down.
Mgo whole hog. I'm talking giant robots with LAZURS, submarines that can freakin' fly, and tanks requiring their own zip code. :p

Well, Americans will genetically engineer our fightin' boys to have 10 foot dicks that shoots Energy Beams of FREEDOM!!!:p;)
 

B-29_Bomber

Banned
Uh, I am actually not super comfortable with the implications of that...

*drinks 10 bottles of vodka*

Nah, man, is cool, is cool.

We're gonna use our Freedom Beams* to liberate everypony...

*similar to moon beams from the animated titanic movie sequel except... er... Freedomer...
 
all the jews in teh early 40's west of Moscow were an endangered group. all the jews east there of were not fairing much better.
after the war, all the jews were moving out.
the chosen ones are not saving the day in this case, except themselves by getting away from the germans and the soviets by moving to America, Israel and other places
Bro, do you even Wolfenstein?:p
You're not so much flogging a dead horse now, as trying to flog the empty space where the horse was after it was picked up and taken away to be rendered down for dog food at the local factory.
Let it go please.
Couldn't have said it better myself.
 
Bro, do you even Wolfenstein?:p

Couldn't have said it better myself.
not in like 20 years honestly. have no time for games .. just work and making odd comments here and there ;)

but my comment makes as much sense as the soviets controlling a USA that isnt a total nuclear wasteland in the 1970's and or its self also not being just as bad if not worse.
 
Last edited:
Let's put it this way; I'll give an honest answer.

We can rule out any sort of invasion whatsoever after the US manages to get an extremely large stockpile of nuclear weapons. The only real window is in the immediate aftermath of a nuclear war and, well, the Soviets can't conquer enough that they won't possibly lose a few population centers alone to that. (In addition to other bombing).

Note that the British and Americans were already in Persia and India. In order to take out any attacks or bombing runs being launched from those regions, the Soviets would have to invade both there along with into Western Europe and into East Asia. So, we're talking about a front that stretches for thousands and thousands of miles, with a population that has been exhausted by military casualties and is starting to approach the bottom of its manpower barrel.

Let's look at our other assumptions: an invasion of North America. Recall that in the leadup to the Soviets entering the war, the US engaged in operation Hula, the transfer of 149 vessels and the training of 12000 Soviet sailors in preparation fro the Soviets to assist in the invasion of Japan (southern Sakhalin and potentially Hokkaido). The Soviets did not possess the sealift capability, on their own, to go a few hundred miles and put a sizable number of troops in Japan proper. And, by 1949, the Soviets had returned most of those ships that it had been lent. Both the British and Soviets returned equipment to the US they did not wish to purchase. By retaining the vessels, the Soviets would have to come up with some way to pay for it... which isn't going to be possible. they're too deeply in debt and they've nearly shot their load by now. (I'm assuming that Hula didn't have a clause saying the ships were going to be returned. If it did, it makes it that much harder)

So, not only do the Soviets not have the sealift for an operation, they won't be able to build it anytime soon, and any massing of ships will be noticed by the US (where the massing of ships has to take place at, Vladivostok, isn't exactly far from Occupied Japan. The US would easily notice such a buildup... which could easily be stopped.

And, to put things lightly... Alaska isn't exactly important terrain to invade. it's about as far from it as possible. By occupying the land, you are only overstretching yourself while at the same time allowing the US and Canada to trade miles of territories for lives. Until they get to Vancouver, the Allies just have to delay and stall. Bleed the Soviets dry (and they were dry. Nearly 9 million lives lost for the Soviets so far, just in the military, while about 22 million more military casualties...) The Soviets can't afford to throw away a million troops in some harebrained scheme to invade North America.

After all, the Allies just have to hold long enough in the west for the Soviets to start to run dry (Lend Lease was still a significant factor). The Soviets will pillage their puppet states until they are dry, which is not going to be a great way to build support. All the while, the US is churning out an endless number of aircraft and tanks to be used on the battlefield.

The only thing that might save the Soviets the loss of the far east (the US was in a far better position to invade Asia than the Soviets North America) are the Chinese. Of course, it depends on how early the Soviets intervene and if the CCP wins. Oh, and if the Soviets decide to try and talk the Chine into counterinvading into India/Indochina, they lose all the support that might have existed for those regimes.

In the end, the best the Soviets can hope for is a stalemate in the west as their cities are bombed and their invasion fleet into North America is shot up in the water or shelled on the beaches. And, if things don't go quite their way, it is likely they could be pushed all the way into Russia proper, if not further. (The yellow press is not going to sit on atrocities that the Soviets committed while at war. The NYT might have covered up quite a bit of the Holodomr and other similar actions, but that won't stay unnoticed for long.
 
Well I'm trying seriously to make this work it is the Hot War series that got me asking these questions, and I'm not a Troll.


How about A Bomb research I know that most came from our timeframe from spying, I need to make Warsaw Pact Stronger then Nato, also what about the 1950's USA Armed forces wouldn't they bin cut to the bone as stated in Harry Turtledove's Hot War?.

And what about the Weak Sister Nations in Europe during the Korea War,


LW

The easiest way to make this work is just go full fantasy and choose to create the illusion of plausibility where you want to. But know its illusion. It might be possible to create a plausible scenario but its sooooo difficult. So create your own fantasy where you choose to mirror reality where you want and where you dont.

Some key considerations:

1) Continental powers tend to struggle with naval development. And for good reason - they have land based threats next door and they choose tanks over battleships/carriers.
2) Industrial production limitations create guns vs. butter scenarios. Or in this case tanks and trains versus carriers and cargo ships.
3) Soviet economy/infrastructure was devastated by the Nazis. Hard to catch up when you start so far behind.
4) Their communist allies didnt like them very much and werent very trust worthy.

Finally, you cant invade the US through Alaska! The Soviets have a hard enough time getting their shit to Siberia let along crossing some of the most rugged, unforgiving, and undeveloped land on earth. If the Soviets are going to invade the US, they need Mexico to be communist ally, a major presence in Cuba, and they probably have to island hop through England, Iceland, Bermuda, Greenland, and Nova Scotia.

Give the Soviets 20 carriers, a strong communist ally in Mexico, and have fun wanking a way! And dont mind skippy the space bat - in fact pass him some popcorn so he can enjoy the show.
 
To invade the US, they need Mexico to be communist ally, a major presence in Cuba, and they probably have to island hop through England, Iceland, Bermuda, Greenland, and Nova Scotia.

Give the Soviets 20 carriers, a strong communist ally in Mexico, and have fun wanking a way! And dont mind skippy the space bat - in fact pass him some popcorn so he can enjoy the show.

I'd read that thread.
 
Finally, you cant invade the US through Alaska! The Soviets have a hard enough time getting their shit to Siberia let along crossing some of the most rugged, unforgiving, and undeveloped land on earth. If the Soviets are going to invade the US, they need Mexico to be communist ally, a major presence in Cuba, and they probably have to island hop through England, Iceland, Bermuda, Greenland, and Nova Scotia.

Give the Soviets 20 carriers, a strong communist ally in Mexico, and have fun wanking a way! And dont mind skippy the space bat - in fact pass him some popcorn so he can enjoy the show.

They also need all of Europe to simply shrug and say nothing, and even then they're still outnumbered by the US on the seas. It's not the carriers, it's the cargo. :p

Unless the seas are safe, they can't guarantee the troop transports will make it all the way. Hundreds of thousands of troops dying before they even make it to shore isn't productive.

Either way, as for this thread to be successful, it requires (as one of its opening moves!) a Soviet Sealion. That should address the plausibility of everything.
 
They also need all of Europe to simply shrug and say nothing, and even then they're still outnumbered by the US on the seas. It's not the carriers, it's the cargo. :p

Unless the seas are safe, they can't guarantee the troop transports will make it all the way. Hundreds of thousands of troops dying before they even make it to shore isn't productive.

Either way, as for this thread to be successful, it requires (as one of its opening moves!) a Soviet Sealion. That should address the plausibility of everything.

Well, I kind of assumed if you can take out England and Iceland, Norway/Germany/Italy/Turkey/France etc are already neutralized. And I suggested 20 carriers because that's probably what it takes to protect the cargo. Probably more but you can make it work with 20. Now teaching the Soviets to conduct carrier operations to do this is a whole nother issue. But hey, Skippy's already flying so no sense getting overly worked up about the details...
 
Well, I kind of assumed if you can take out England and Iceland, Norway/Germany/Italy/Turkey/France etc are already neutralized. And I suggested 20 carriers because that's probably what it takes to protect the cargo. Probably more but you can make it work with 20. Now teaching the Soviets to conduct carrier operations to do this is a whole nother issue. But hey, Skippy's already flying so no sense getting overly worked up about the details...

heh. By that point, it'll be a wonder that the Soviets have any troops left. i mean, how many millions of millions of casualties would it take to get that far? XD
 
Top