US Politics after an early "Hot War"

Assuming a (mostly) conventional confrontation between Soviet and NATO forces in the late 1950s, how would US politics be effected in the post war world? It's possible that, depending how late into Eisenhower's term the war starts, it may still be going on come election time. What do you guys think would be the general tone of US Politics afterwards?
 
A conventional war in the late-1950s? When the US military doctrine about everything was "nukes, motherfucker" and the Soviet military regarded them as "especially large bombs"? Excuse me if I express some skepticism on that possibility.

Anyways, some of that depends on exactly how the war ended...
 
Assuming a (mostly) conventional confrontation between Soviet and NATO forces in the late 1950s, how would US politics be effected in the post war world? It's possible that, depending how late into Eisenhower's term the war starts, it may still be going on come election time. What do you guys think would be the general tone of US Politics afterwards?

The Hot war must happen before the USSR builds its bomb. That calls for a war in the late '40s, not the late '50s. I believe there are some timelines on here that do that.
 

Asami

Banned
If it's pre-1949, I can see the United States being nearly killed on the ground before they, in desperation against the Soviet horde approaching the Rhine, detonate their atomic bombs over the Ruhr, causing immense damage and the crippling of the Soviet Army. The NATO armies in other states that are less hit by the Soviet offensive go to offensive mode and begin to push back.

HOWEVER... If the US were capable of holding the Soviets before they overran their lines (the Soviets had a huge ground advantage in the late '40s), then you might see the Americans deploying nuclear bombs to the Vistula to cut off the majority of the Soviet supply, or even launching atomic attacks on Russian cities from Turkey.

In any case, the USSR will ultimately lose a pre-1949 scenario.

Early-to-mid 1950's, after the USSR gets the bomb? I can see massive stalemating and death on both sides before a general ceasefire is called. The US would be the least scathed by the nuclear war, as the Soviet Union had no way to deliver long-range nuclear attacks before the ICBM. But the US is hampered by dealing with the irradiated ashfield that is Europe.

Late 1950's to 1960's? Complete destruction of the human civilization, no victors.
 
If it's pre-1949, I can see the United States being nearly killed on the ground before they, in desperation against the Soviet horde approaching the Rhine, detonate their atomic bombs over the Ruhr, causing immense damage and the crippling of the Soviet Army. The NATO armies in other states that are less hit by the Soviet offensive go to offensive mode and begin to push back.

HOWEVER... If the US were capable of holding the Soviets before they overran their lines (the Soviets had a huge ground advantage in the late '40s), then you might see the Americans deploying nuclear bombs to the Vistula to cut off the majority of the Soviet supply, or even launching atomic attacks on Russian cities from Turkey.

In any case, the USSR will ultimately lose a pre-1949 scenario.

Early-to-mid 1950's, after the USSR gets the bomb? I can see massive stalemating and death on both sides before a general ceasefire is called. The US would be the least scathed by the nuclear war, as the Soviet Union had no way to deliver long-range nuclear attacks before the ICBM. But the US is hampered by dealing with the irradiated ashfield that is Europe.

Late 1950's to 1960's? Complete destruction of the human civilization, no victors.

Mmmm even in the 60's the Soviets didn't have anywhere near the strike capacity of the USA. They had something like 20-30 or so weapons capable of hitting the USA compared to the American's 300 and something. In such an exchange the USA could probably weather it (albeit with A LOT of problems) but the USSR would probably collapse. The US would be in a semi-warlord, 3rd world state for decades. Europe would be a mess. South America and Parts of Asia and Oceania would still be somewhat stable (once they got sued to the climate effects). Around the mid 70's-80's you start seeing civilization ending numbers of weapons.
 
Just to clarify, the "conventional" here does not refer to nuclear weapons generally, it refers to the post war world. Yes, the USSR will in all likelihood cease to exist due to strategic nuclear bombing, but this is not mutually assured destruction we're talking about.
 
I have no idea why but in 1962 the ratio of nuclear weaponry was something ridiculous like 30000 to 3000 warheads, in NATO's favor. Add in general NATO air superiority and the entire USSR can pretty much be destroyed with impunity after Europe is leveled and the US hurt rather badly. Russia is so big that not quite every town, village, and base can be hit but they can get pretty damn close.
 
Top