US troops and aid in Soviet Union during WWII? Timeline of events for this Alternate timeline

What if Moscow is firebombed like the US firebombed Dresden. The Soviets suffer heavy losses Stalin and the remaining military leaders realize they need American help. In this timeline Douglas MacArthur is appointed to military advisor to Russia instead of Philippines like in our timeline. MacArthur who flees the Soviet Union after the German invasion said "I shall return". Once the Soviets asked for US assistance MacArthur and 5000 troops were dispatched with supplies to aid the struggling Soviet Union from collapsing. MacArthur on why he was in the Soviet Union later stated "The Nazis were trapped in the Russian winter with dwindling supplies, the Nazis were busy fighting us on the Land sea and air and it was my job to exhaust and exasperate the Nazi war machine while the Western front chipped its way to Berlin". MacArthur was there in a more advisory role to the Soviet effort, US troops who were Russian speaking were sent since very few Soviet soldiers spoke English.

It's an interesting concept but I don't think the Germans ever had the amount of bombers necessary to cause a Dresden or Hamburg-type firestorm. You would need a PoD back in the mid '30s where they put more effort into medium and heavy bombers. Which might result in a loss in France, without so many CAS planes the French could probably mount a better defense.
 
This is plausible I think

Highly implausible.
1. If Germany can produce sufficient bombers to reduce Moscow, it is unlikely for it to have the capacity to build sufficient army equipment and fighters, which would hamper Nazi operation on land.

2. It does not make sense to send Macarthur, a old Asia/ Pacific hand, to Russia and it is likely Mac AND Marshall would object to such plan strongly.

Also, why the hell would USA send military advisor to a major power that ideologically was very different and had their own vibrant military thinkers? WTH can USA teach USSR? Naval stuff that the Soviets did not need too much? The US Army in the 1930s was much smaller and technically inferior to the Soviet Army.

3. If, in a very unlikely unevent, USSR request deployment US troops deployment, 5000 is just a figure too low. At the very least a corps would have to be deployed to make such aid meaningful and the logisitics would be very difficult to manage.

This is not the ASB sub forum and handwavism is not condusive to good discussion.
 
Last edited:
Highly implausible.
1. If Germany can produce sufficient bombers to reduce Moscow, it is unlikely for it to have the capacity to build sufficient army equipment and fighters, which would hamper Nazi operation on land.

2. It does not make sense to send Macarthur, a old Asia/ Pacific hand, to Russia and it is likely Mac AND Marshall would object to such plan strongly.

Also, why the hell would USA send military advisor to a major power that ideologically was very different and had their own vibrant military thinkers? WTH can USA teach USSR? Naval stuff that the Soviets did not need too much? The US Army in the 1930s was much smaller and technically inferior to the Soviet Army.

3. If, in a very unlikely unevent, USSR request deployment US troops deployment, 5000 is just a figure too low. At the very least a corps would have to be deployed to make such aid meaningful and the logisitics would be very difficult to manage.

This is not the ASB sub fora and handwavism is not condusive to good discussion.
Perhaps Stalin's purges were worse in this timeline and he had no competent military thinkers to call on. That was a typo it was supposed to be 50,000
 
Perhaps Stalin's purges were worse in this timeline and he had no competent military thinkers to call on. That was a typo it was supposed to be 50,000

If they where any worse then OTL, there's a good chance that even without sparkling unicorn vaporware resources, the Germans with their OTL resources could probably beat the Soviets. If that becomes the case, Stalin might end up getting overthrown.

On another tangent, if you had done any research at all on WW2, you would know that the Japanese could not successfully attack the Soviets, at least not beyond a few odd bombing raids and border scirmishes. The bulk of their deployable troops where either in China, or needed to overrun the US, British, and Dutch colonies where the resources they desperately needed where at. Outside of maybe two or three divisions and support, they don't have the resources to tangle with the Soviets.
 
Soviets lose Stalingrad and retreat, the British and Americans land where?

Indeed, the Brits had plans to deploy an Army Group into Iran to prevent them from flipping and to prevent the Germans from invading by moving said Army Group into the Caucasus.

The basis for this plan was underway. The establishment of the Persian Lend Lease route had a double purpose. It could just as easily been the port of entry and supply route for Allied armies in Iraq & Persia. The Brits had set up regional command HQ & skeleton field forces by way of sitting on the Iraqi & Persian governments. Had the Red Army on Caucasuss front actually collapsed the west Allies would have been building that skeleton into a couple army groups. Those would have included surviving Red Army soldiers who managed to escape the debacle.
 
The basis for this plan was underway. The establishment of the Persian Lend Lease route had a double purpose. It could just as easily been the port of entry and supply route for Allied armies in Iraq & Persia. The Brits had set up regional command HQ & skeleton field forces by way of sitting on the Iraqi & Persian governments. Had the Red Army on Caucasuss front actually collapsed the west Allies would have been building that skeleton into a couple army groups. Those would have included surviving Red Army soldiers who managed to escape the debacle.

Red Army forces was deployed in late August 1941 to invade and occupy Iran too, so there would be complete formations in Iran for regrouping.
 
Stalin and MacArthur. You’ve just given half the posters here an aneurism.
latest
 
Perhaps Stalin's purges were worse in this timeline and he had no competent military thinkers to call on. That was a typo it was supposed to be 50,000

Why would Stalin, someone who was paranoid about securing his power, allowing foreigners with hostile ideology to come into contact AND TEACH the members and leaders of the forces that are supposed to protect the regime by lethal forces if necessary?

As I said above, handwavism has no place in this sub-forum.
 
One of the issues is that even as late as 43 the US Army was quite short on deployable trained divisions

Deploy a trained division a year earlier than OTL and that’s 2 to 4 less divisions able to be deployed 1-2 years later

The US Army was building up to 90 plus divisions by late 44 from a standing start from virtually nothing and even by late 44 some of those divisions were as green as grass and barely fit for combat ops

So by the time the US Army can provide meaningful numbers of troops to deploy in such a scenario Russia would have likely have passed the point where such a deployment was required

The British were also struggling – the reason the Japanese ran riot over Imperial units in Malay and Burma is that the ‘Divisions’ used in those theatres in 42 were very poor formations (in terms of personnel, training , experience and equipment) relative to those fighting in North/East Africa and training in the UK. In addition to this the Empire training scheme was not really delivering pilots and aircrew until mid-1942 again meaning that until 1943 the Air forces were also stretched.

So the British are too busy and the US is not ready – I cannot see any meaningful numbers of troops able to be deployed much before 1944 and this in a detrimental fashion to ongoing ops and future ops such as the Invasion of Italy and the Normandy campaign.

I am not saying that they couldn’t deploy Division and even Corps size formation but that it is unlikely that they would.
 
One of the issues is that even as late as 43 the US Army was quite short on deployable trained divisions

Deploy a trained division a year earlier than OTL and that’s 2 to 4 less divisions able to be deployed 1-2 years later

...

That does not seem to be the case. I'm looking at Stauntons 'US Army OB in WWII' - activation schedules for the Army ground combat divisions. A quick count shows eighteen of the existing divisions in July 1942 tapped for large cadres for new divisions. Those new units completed their training cycles by mid 1943. In 1943 eleven new divisions were activated. Of the 38 divisions active 7 Dec 1941 (all mobilized in 1940) twentyfour were never spit for cadres, eight were split once, in 1941. By the end of the first quarter of 1943 it looks like some 43 divisions have completed the mobilization/training cycle & were not subsequently split, by the end of September 43 that number is over 55, & the end of the year its 78.

Counting the splits it looks like 24 divisions were never split for cadres, ten were split once, nine were split twice, and four split three or more times. Of the last category these were the 89nth Inf, 82 AB, 8th & 9th Armored

... and even by late 44 some of those divisions were as green as grass and barely fit for combat ops ...

About half the divisions deployed to the ETO for the entire war had never been in combat in late 1944. On 5 June 1944 only US eight divisions had combat experience in the ETO & three of those had a month or less of actual combat experience. The other 40+ deployed against the German army in NW Europe had exactly zero combat experience. Up to June 1944 most of the US Army in combat was in the Pacific. Previous to June 1944 only four divisions in the MTO accumulated more than sixty days of experience in combat operations, & three more than 90 days.
 

elkarlo

Banned
Have the Soviets lose Stalingrad?
Plus maybe before the first winter offensive the Germans fall back a bit to a defensible line and the Soviets take more losses and the Germans take less than IOTL? Then Stalingrad campaign comes about and the Soviets are seriously on the ropes and in danger of collapse
 
Red Army forces was deployed in late August 1941 to invade and occupy Iran too, so there would be complete formations in Iran for regrouping.

I need to find some info on the size & composition of the Soviet occupation forces in northern Iran. Mostly service units I'm guessing, with security & intelligence units, and a few combat units for emergency? Somewhere I have a OB for the British occupation force.
 
Sending actual combat formations to fight in Russia makes little sense. You have to send men and equipment and then supply them. The USSR already has plenty of men. Just send them equipment (as was done) and they will supply the men.

Of course, if Churchill had gotten his way and the Allies made a push through the Balkans in 1944 they might have possibly linked up with the Russians in a final drive against Germany. Unlikely, but not completely impossible.
 
Top