Stalin attacks the Western Allies when the Soviets encounter them?

aleasp

Banned
Japan was incapable of offensive operations by this point, Pacific war could have been placed on hold and resources diverted until situation in Europe was stabilized. If Western allies found themselves against the wall, atomic bomb might have been used against Russian targets. Stalin knew of bomb through espionage network, this might have served as a deterrent to aggression against the west.
 
It isn't that hard to imagine Stalin instantly betraying the Western Allies

Yeah it is. It's worth considering this exchange between Stalin and an Allied official at Yalta, discussing Hitler.

Stalin: Hitler was a very clever man, but he had one flaw... he didn't know when to stop.
American: Does anyone ever know when to stop?
Stalin: I do.

Stalin knew that the USSR against the west would be able to win battles and campaigns, but it wasn't able to yet win wars against them. So he very much wasn't interested in a war with the capitalist west yet.

There was a reason why the Russian troops liberated from POW camps in 1945 were fed for a few days and then given a rifle and pointed west. The Russians were running out of manpower.

Myth. Soviet practice of impressment of freshly liberated back prisoners date back to the first year of the war and had little to do with their manpower situation. The Soviets in '45 were facing some hard choices in manpower, but they could sustain the strength of the Red Army in the face of the losses they were taking. They certainly weren't down to the level of the British, who were having to disband divisions wholesale.

The Western Allies have around 100 division-equivalents in Western Europe. The Soviets had just shy of 500 division-equivalents... although if we want to compute for the different strengths in stuff like manpower and equipment, the number is around ~250 Western division equivalents (the planners for Unthinkable came up with 264, which is roughly in the same ballpark). Regardless, the WAllies are outweighed in combat power on the order of approximately 2.5:1. The air war, at least in the short term, is a wash. Air power needs breathing space to affect the ground war, something that won't exist here. The naval war is obviously the WAllies from the outset, but is otherwise irrelevant to actual combat operations.

In any case, the most likely way this plays out is the Red Army mauls the WAllied forces, at some hefty losses to themselves, but stall out around the Rhine. Bloody stalemate ensued for 1-2 years until Soviet economic problems, overwhelming American build-up, and a whole bunch of nukes grinds them down and they start to lose ground at an increasing rate.

The fact that in this scenario it's the Soviets attacking first handily solves the the potentially war-losing political challenges WAllies would normally face if they were the ones attacking first.

This war will nonetheless still take years, see millions of Americans die, and leave Central Europe a devastated basket case.
 
Last edited:

Deleted member 1487

Myth. Soviet practice of impressment of freshly liberated back prisoners date back to the first year of the war and had little to do with their manpower situation. The Soviets in '45 were facing some hard choices in manpower, but they could sustain the strength of the Red Army in the face of the losses they were taking. They certainlyweren't down to the level of the British, who were having to disband divisions wholesale.
That was due too manpower allocation choices, they were more interested in continuing to expand naval and air forces rather than commit manpower to the army, so the army, which didn't make full use of it's divisions anyway at the time, responded allocating manpower to units that needed it. Had they had to fight the Soviets British manpower would have been felt via the air.
 
The Soviets wouldn't do this, but if they did it would be a disaster for them although in the short term it would play a lot of havoc.

Immediate end of Lend Lease would severely impact the Red Army logistics and Soviet economy. It would only be a matter of time before collapse happened based on whatever their stockpiles of critical materials were. Even those materials the Soviets could theoretically replace on their own would require them to move men out of the armed forces into the factories.

The Soviets were running out of manpower near the end of the war. They had enough to keep going, but couldn't replace future losses like they were able to do in 1941-1944.

While the Red Army was the superior land force, I don't think it's a question that the Anglo-Americans were masters of airpower. The Soviet air force would not be able to long contest Allied control of the air.

Strategically, the Western Allies have the ability to invade and conquer Europe and thus can theoretically invade the Soviet Union. Stalin has zero chance of ever invading Britain much less the USA.

In several months the US will be able to start raining down atomic bombs on the Red Army and against targets in the Soviet Union.

In 1946 historically there was a famine in the Soviet Union.


A Soviet attack would cause immediate panic and severe loss to the Allies, but I have a hard time believing the Red Army could cross the Rhine with any large force. The front would stabilize there and along the Alps keeping France and Italy relatively safe from invasion. Sometime in 1946, the combined effects of no Lend Lease, Allied naval blockade, Allied airpower, and atomic weapons would reduce the Soviets to shambles. If the war continues until 1947, I imagine the combined effects means the Allies proceed straight to Moscow with only logistical issues as a restriction. Central and Eastern Europe though will be a terrible place. IOTL Europe in 1946 was pretty bad, ITTL? I shudder.
 
OTL the Soviet were getting Lend Lease until mid September 1945 in anticipation of an attack on Japan. They would give that up here of course.

Allied air could range to the Vistula easy to interdict supply. Local Germans would be more than happy with WAllied occupiers vs. Soviet.

I can see Soviets holding through superior numbers, but not gaining anything in the face of air power / supply difficulties.

The Soviets got much by just playing ball with the WAllies att his point. Risk /Reward makes little sense here to provoke the Allies.

The only way I can see the Soviets getting into this mess is if something like the Warsaw uprising succeeds and the Soviets mercilessly put the rising down themselves, totally ruining relations with the WAllies and exposing their true plans for the region.
 
Perhaps this video below will have a probable result of a Stalinist attack against Western Allied Forces in 45 and 46
 
Remember also that the soviets have never experienced true strategic bombing before. The Luftwaffe was basically a tactical Air Force (as were the Russians). Moving west means their forces are entering the natural choke points of Western Europe, not the great expanses of Russia. That's a lot of men and material inviting the attention of large waves of B-29s, B-32s, Lancasters, and B-17s/B-24s. Thousands of bombs raining down from planes you can't even see, has a terrible physiological impact. Plus the Bearcat and Tigercat are becoming operational, as well as having the Meteor, and later marks of the Spitfire, P51, etc, so the bombers will be well protected, with many escorts having considerable range/loiter time.

Ric350
 
Remember also that the soviets have never experienced true strategic bombing before. The Luftwaffe was basically a tactical Air Force (as were the Russians). Moving west means their forces are entering the natural choke points of Western Europe, not the great expanses of Russia. That's a lot of men and material inviting the attention of large waves of B-29s, B-32s, Lancasters, and B-17s/B-24s. Thousands of bombs raining down from planes you can't even see, has a terrible physiological impact. Plus the Bearcat and Tigercat are becoming operational, as well as having the Meteor, and later marks of the Spitfire, P51, etc, so the bombers will be well protected, with many escorts having considerable range/loiter time.

Ric350

I wonder what kind of air defence/tracking/radar would the Soviets have in place. I know they had radars around their cities (western supplied), but in East Germany/Poland/Hungary I can't imagine there would be much. The Soviets imported high grade aviation fuel from the west I thought as well (although they had to have stocks that would last a while).
 
It isn't that hard to imagine Stalin instantly betraying the Western Allies and attacking the moment that both huge armies encountered each other so how do you think the war would have gone if suddenly the British, Canadians and Americans found themselves fighting the Soviets in June 1945 with the Soviet Union determined to take France?

Also for this, can we assume that nuclear weapons would not be a factor as I think that would make a more interesting discussion.

How would the war have gone if suddenly the Soviets were fighting the Western Allies pretty much the moment Germany was defeated?

  1. The first contact of Soviet forces with the Western Allies in Europe was on 25 April 1945, near Torgau on the Elbe. Germany did not surrender till 8 May; Berlin did not fall until 30 April. So the Soviets are attacking the Western Allies while Nazi Germany is still fighting, and Hitler is still alive.
  2. Even the Soviet regime is going to have trouble selling this to its people. They have been bombarded with four years of propaganda emphasizing the unity of the Allies. That couldn't be turned around overnight.
  3. It would be seen as treachery far more heinous than Pearl Harbor. Japan had never called itself an ally of the U.S. (except slightly during WW I); nor was Japan a recipient of lavish American aid.
  4. The Soviet war effort is critically dependent on Western Allied aid at this time. Entire segments of the Soviet economy have been shut down so the men could be drafted into the army or used in other areas, because Western aid could replace the lost production instead. A sudden cut-off of Western aid could be crippling.
  5. It would alienate lots of leftists in western Europe, even including the Communist elements of the Maquis and Italian Partisans. While many Reds were blindly loyal to the USSR and Stalin, this would be more than most could stomach. They might not want to fight against the USSR, but they would not fight for it.
  6. There were hundreds of thousands of Soviet subjects enlisted as "Osttruppen" in the Wehrmacht and SS, and the "Russian Army of Liberation". They surrendered to the Western Allies as much as possible. OTL, once the war was over, the Allies shipped most of them back to the USSR, where they were sent to the GULAG. If the USSR attacks, they immediately become manpower for a large "Free Russia Army".
  7. There are a lot of Soviet and US/UK forces in joint occupation of Iran, working together to move Lend-Lease supplies from Basra and Bandar Abbas to Baku. When does the shooting start there?
  8. Soviet forces won't fire on Western Allied troops without orders. How are those orders to be issued in a way that doesn't totally astonish the recipients without alerting the Western Allies that Something Is Up?
  9. Finally, the USSR has suffered enormous losses and damage in the last four years, and the Soviet people are drained by the struggle. This isn't the time to challenge new enemies even stronger than the Axis, with no allies.
 
Russian fighters were short ranged and didn't perform very good at altitude stopping a escorted formation of bombers is going to be difficult. But not as difficult as trying to explain to the NKVD why you failed to stop them.
 
Top