WI:Soviets win WW3

Just reading back over Amerigo Vespucci's excellent Cuban Missle War Timeline I was wondering what would happen if a similar scenario unfolded yet the Soviets emerged victorious?

For this to happen we'd have to have America isolationist in WW2. So let's have FDR assassinated in 1933 leading to Garner becoming President with a less radical New Deal, however some improvements to the US economy are made. However Dewey manages to win in '36 and whilst condemning the Japanese invasion of China he fails to get a oil and steel embargo passed in late 1941.

Meanwhile in Europe, Britain makes peace in late 1940 when Prime Minister Halifax announces that Britian is alone and must attempt to reach a satisfying peace. In June 1941 Germany invades the USSR and although they reach Moscow the Soviets defend the capital fanatically and in the Winter manage to launch a counter offensive which cuts off the majority of Army Group Centre after the Soviets reach Smolensk. With the Germans butchered they retreat backward all over the Soviet Union however only in late 1943 do the Soviets reach the Rhine and after taking the German surrender march all the way to the Pyrenees and after a brief interlude also succeed in crushing Spain and in 1944; pushing the Japanese off the Asian mainland.

With a shorter less destructive war Stalin is able to pump much more resources into the Soviet Atomic Bomb project and by 1946 manages to achieve the first Atomic detonation which is used on Tokyo, ending the war in the Pacific.

Whilst the British and American projects had lagged behind the Soviets with the Atomic destruction of Tokyo they're funding is boosted massively with the British and Americans agrreing to a mutual defense pact in 1947.

By 1949 the American project bears fruit with a successful test in New Mexico, worried about losing their nuclear advantage the Soviets and their European puppets cause an incident over Gibraltar leading to war between the Soviets and the Anglo-American alliance. The war lasts mere weeks before London is destroyed by a Soviet bomb leading to an immediate British surrender. Without hesitating the Soviets launch a massive pre-emptive on the US east coast, using the rockets designed by German scientists whihwere originally designed to give the Nazis dominance over America. 16 cities are destroyed by the attack, including Washington, New York, Chicago and Boston.

Although Stalin wants to continue until America either surrenders unconditionally or is glowing rubble an America offer in mid-1950 stating that the Soviets could keep Britain and effectively it's Empire as long as Soviet troops do not enter North America. If he does not agree the Americans state that they will bomb Moscow, Stalingrad and Leningrad immediately.

Stalin agrees to this deal which leaves him with all of Europe and the British Empire and leaves America a ruin.

Pretty implausible I know, absurd maybe but what I'd like to ask is what do you think happens next. What sort of regime do the Soviets impos on their takings? What will the Americans do?
 
I don't know about your timeline, but I once read a novel (no idea of the name now) where the American President decided, and kept very quiet about it, that there were no circumstances under which he would ever launch a nuclear attack on the Soviet Union. Not even in response to a Soviet launch on the USA.

He basically felt that any life is better that total anihilation. Even were America to fall or be destroyed in a Soviet attack, at least if earth and the human race survived, there would always be a chance to get out from under the Sov's rule at a latter stage.

That's really about the only way I coudl ever see the Soviets "winning" WW3. But given the level of gun ownership in the USA, and the apparent attitudes of so many particularly in the south, I'm not sure I'd want to be a Soviet soldier on occupation duty........ (though I'm sure you wouldn't be on duty for very long.....).
 
To be honest I think more then one leader think like that. If there's 10 000 nukes on their way towards your country, what's the point of retaliation?

MAD is irrational.
 
How is the war shorter and less destructive with only the Sovs fighting? That implies that the UK and America actually hindered the sovs...:confused:

If you want a POD that puts the Sovs in a stronger postion...

Hell, kill Hiltler before Barbarrossa and have the sovs sit out the fighting until Germany is bombed flat, then attack.

Yeah, kill Hitler,

Saner heads call off invasion of Russia.

More focus on England

Maybe they even try you know what:eek:

But regardless let the war drag on until the allies bomb Germany flat then let the Russians attack.

Maybe have D-Day be an utter failure and let the russians occupy all of Germany and Austria.

France seems a country to far.
 
How is the war shorter and less destructive with only the Sovs fighting? That implies that the UK and America actually hindered the sovs...:confused:

If you look at the actual scenario I have the Soviets destroy the majority of Army Group Centre in 1941, this didn't happen in OTL and it would speed up the war likely ending it in 1943 even if the Soviets were alone.
 
If you look at the actual scenario I have the Soviets destroy the majority of Army Group Centre in 1941, this didn't happen in OTL and it would speed up the war likely ending it in 1943 even if the Soviets were alone.

But as the Soviet forces advance the Germans would have all the forces that OTL were tied up by the allies available to move to the Eastern Front...
 
But as the Soviet forces advance the Germans would have all the forces that OTL were tied up by the allies available to move to the Eastern Front...

Those werent exactly massive, especially in 1942 and to a lesser extent '43. They won't be able to replace army group centre.
 
Top