Ukraine Independence Conflict with UN Intervention: 1950

ASB is a blanket term for all unrealistic scenarios, not just those that involve extraterrestrial entities.
Aren't ALL Ah scenarios unrealistic by definition? After all, they didn't happen. True, some may have greater potential for being "real" than others... but it's all fiction.
 
WWIII is what your looking for.

If WWIII occurs in 1950 then the UPA will intensify their fight for independence. if the allies win and begin to advance into the Soviet Union, first thing they'll do is promise freedom to the Ukrainians. With so many Ukrainian-Americans and Ukrainian-Canadians I would imagine infiltration of the Ukrainian SSR would be wide spread. Once the allies decide to nuke Moscow and Leningrad the war will be over. And the world will be better for it.


1946 is a better year for this sort of thing. After all, Patton was right when he said he could roll back the Red Army to Moscow. They had no manpower left, they had no lines of supplies, and they had worse doctrines and equipment. American Combined Arms doctrine was such that even though outnumbered U.S Army forces would likely still push back the Russians.
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
Can NOT happen. The USSR has a veto. Unlike the mess with the DPRK Moscow is not going to ignore a debate regarding Ukraine. Flat not going to happen.
 
Yes, but any scenario where Germany prevails in WW2 is unrealistic. It could never have happened, at least not after failing to capture Moscow (and England). So every AH story where the Germans win is entirely unrealistic. I enjoy the illusion of possible, and I know I like as much historical accuracy as can be crammed into the story. But in the end AH is fiction, and flights of fancy are required to create fiction. Couldn't resist...
 
Can NOT happen. The USSR has a veto. Unlike the mess with the DPRK Moscow is not going to ignore a debate regarding Ukraine. Flat not going to happen.
Yeah, we've been there. I didn't know a requirement of ALTERNATE is HAPPEN. Ahem.
 
WWIII is what your looking for.

If WWIII occurs in 1950 then the UPA will intensify their fight for independence. if the allies win and begin to advance into the Soviet Union, first thing they'll do is promise freedom to the Ukrainians. With so many Ukrainian-Americans and Ukrainian-Canadians I would imagine infiltration of the Ukrainian SSR would be wide spread. Once the allies decide to nuke Moscow and Leningrad the war will be over. And the world will be better for it.


1946 is a better year for this sort of thing. After all, Patton was right when he said he could roll back the Red Army to Moscow. They had no manpower left, they had no lines of supplies, and they had worse doctrines and equipment. American Combined Arms doctrine was such that even though outnumbered U.S Army forces would likely still push back the Russians.
 
You asked a question. You got an answer.

Didn't like the answer?

Sorry.
One of your members called me on a "passive aggressive" response. I guess it's better to just leave off the passive around here. Creativity I enjoy. Attacks and cutoffs? Not the fun I'm looking for. If you don't like my scenarios my skin is tough. But I'm not looking for fights.
 
WWIII is what your looking for.

If WWIII occurs in 1950 then the UPA will intensify their fight for independence. if the allies win and begin to advance into the Soviet Union, first thing they'll do is promise freedom to the Ukrainians. With so many Ukrainian-Americans and Ukrainian-Canadians I would imagine infiltration of the Ukrainian SSR would be wide spread. Once the allies decide to nuke Moscow and Leningrad the war will be over. And the world will be better for it.


1946 is a better year for this sort of thing. After all, Patton was right when he said he could roll back the Red Army to Moscow. They had no manpower left, they had no lines of supplies, and they had worse doctrines and equipment. American Combined Arms doctrine was such that even though outnumbered U.S Army forces would likely still push back the Russians.
Thanks for the advice.
 
Your scenario simply does not work within the constraints of OTL. If you're fine with it going into ASB territory, then the thread can be moved to its correct location on this forum. While some threads/ideas turn out to not be possible, you can discuss the reasons as to why in length, since they aren't so "out their" that it would require many large changes (or one pretty much impossible change) to have occurred. This scenario is outright impossible unless you do one pretty much impossible change.

No need for passive aggressive or aggressive posts by anyone,getting salty happens, but don't get into an online fight. Not worth your time and energy.

The only way for this to happen would be with WWIII, how that happens is anyone's guess. In 1950, the U.S/allies could nuke the Soviet Union into the ground if they so wanted, as the Soviets only had five-ten war-heads operational, compared to the nearly 400 the U.S had. Outside of that, only theories.
 
Aren't ALL Ah scenarios unrealistic by definition? After all, they didn't happen. True, some may have greater potential for being "real" than others... but it's all fiction.
No, they aren't - not the good ones.

Didn't happen is not the same as unrealistic.

To take a couple of random examples:
James Earl Ray shoots and kills Martin Luther King Jr.
James Earl Ray shoots and wounds Martin Luther King Jr.
James Earl Ray marries Martin Luther King Jr.

The first is what happened in the original timeline. It makes a good story, just not an AH.
The second didn't happen, but quite reaslistically could have. It should probably make for an interesting story.
The third, assuming it's the point of departure, didn't happen and is highly unrealistic. It will probably not make a good story.
 
Top