Volunter Soviet army and Conscript USA

Well ignoring how it happened, how would a Red army after ww2 with volunteers mostly and USA Army that is mostly conscript fair against each other. Or if they dont go to war would this change anything?
 
Off the top of my head.....

This must be assuming a more militaristic stance of the post war US administrations.

Given the Economic edge the US has, add a now manpower edge, with the aforementioned overt military activity that would be necessary to cause a conscription military, and the USSR ceases to exist as a Communist power and possibly a country by the 60's.

Of course, the US is most likely not a democracy anymore either.
 
Perhaps joining the armed forces in Soviet Russia would be volunteer, but it could add up to being mandatory if only the best jobs went to veterans? That way they could have a semblance of allowing the freedom, but still get large numbers of recuits?
 
Well, the USA still had conscription in place until the 70s, technically, it just went unused for much of the time. It would be easy to see a system under which, if enough volunteers were not forthcoming, places were filled up by selective draft even in peacetime. It's not quite the same thing as a conscript army, but with the US system and strategic position (emphasis on technology, no militarised borders, strong navy and air force component) it is very hard to see how a conscript army can be accommodated.

As for the Soviet forces, that would require a huge shift in doctrine right off the bat. It would actually very likely have done them good (and yes, of course voluntarism would be voluntary only to a small extent, with military service likely tied to all manner of goodies like higher education, vocational training, preferential housing and job placement, party candidateship and such). A smaller but better military (which would still be larger than NATO's) with a more reliable quality of recruit would cost less (the benwefits accrued to the veterans would only shift costs, not increase them) and would still effectively deter any invasion. I just doubt anyone in the Kremlin would see it that way.
 
Russia's traditional military strength is numbers.

They essential won WW2 using numbers, as they were on the whole technically out-classed by the Germans (compare casualty ratios if you consider this at all controversial).

WW2, or the Great Patriotic War is the event that shaped the post war Red Army and Soviet military doctrine, and even Soviet society - far more so than in the West.

So, you need a pre-WW2 PoD, or a radically different WW2 to make this happen, I think.
 
Off the top of my head.....

This must be assuming a more militaristic stance of the post war US administrations.

Given the Economic edge the US has, add a now manpower edge, with the aforementioned overt military activity that would be necessary to cause a conscription military, and the USSR ceases to exist as a Communist power and possibly a country by the 60's.

Of course, the US is most likely not a democracy anymore either.

democratic nations that use conscripts for overseas deployment face serious troubles at home (see Franch in Vietnam and Algeria, US in Vietnam, Israel in Lebanon, Russia in first Chechen war to a degree). Which is why such countries are switching to volunteer forces.

what could happen in US is some sort mix of volunteer (or long term contractors) and draftees. Former is used for expeditionary warfare (including NATO deployment) later stationed at home but deployable elsewhere if need arises
 
Top