Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

NATO vs. Warsaw Pact

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • NATO vs. Warsaw Pact

    Out of curiousity, what year do you guys think the Warsaw Pact (or the Soviet Union before Warsaw Pact officially existed) had the best chance of driving the evils of capitalism out of Europe?

    I'm debating putting together a team to work on a BF:V mod, and I'm trying to decide when to place it historically... Think of the possible dates being from 1955 - 1980.
    “To discriminate against a thoroughly upright citizen because he belongs to some particular church, or because, like Abraham Lincoln, he has not avowed his allegiance to any church, is an outrage against that liberty of conscience which is one of the foundations of American life.”

  • #2
    According to a Polish AF colonel who was here talking to the local World Affairs group last year, the WP only had a chance in the late 50's through late-60's. Once the 70's rolled around, he said they were so far behind technologically that they wouldn't have taken the chance and actually kept puffing offense to hide the fact they had become defensive in nature. They still had the numbers after that, but apparently only on paper and for May Day parades. Actually readiness and combat ability (except for a few Guards divisions and some select AF and Naval units) was too far below Western levels to have numbers make it up alone.

    Keep in mind this was a Polish officers take on the subject who had served from the 70's on.
    If voting could really change things, it would be illegal.

    Comment


    • #3
      Who cares we would all be dead, the nukes would have eventully been unleashed, by the losing side. and the planet would have become a nuculer waste land.

      Comment


      • #4
        I would say sometime in the late 40’s. Certainly before the Korean war. The U.S. had “downsized” the military to a dangerously low level. I’m not sure that if it came down to it that the Europeans would have let us Nuc their continent.:nonono:
        Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedy. -- Ernest Benn

        Comment


        • #5
          Yeah, I'm thinking just in terms of conventional warfare (maybe tactical nukes).
          “To discriminate against a thoroughly upright citizen because he belongs to some particular church, or because, like Abraham Lincoln, he has not avowed his allegiance to any church, is an outrage against that liberty of conscience which is one of the foundations of American life.”

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Overseer
            Yeah, I'm thinking just in terms of conventional warfare (maybe tactical nukes).
            There was no such thing as a tactical Nuc in those days. They were all about the size of the Hiroshima/Nagasaki bombs (why go little when you can destroy a city).
            Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedy. -- Ernest Benn

            Comment


            • #7
              I agree with chrisvalla. 50's through late 60's.

              Comment


              • #8
                I bet, with the best frame as the late 50s through late 60s, then the best time would be the late 60s, like 1966-1969. The U.S. was so embroiled in Vietnam and our forces in Europe when in such disrepair. Getting the majority of our military out of Vietnam to fight the Warsaw Pact would have been difficult enough, and the European forces would be little more than a roadblock. Maybe see the Reds get as far as the English Channel (possibly but not likely). Then, barring a full-scale nuclear war, within 5 years the Soviets and their allies would be crushed under Western military power.
                "Anything worth fighting for is worth fighting dirty for"
                "The journey of a thousand miles begins with one step, and a lot of bitching"

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by tsar
                  I would say sometime in the late 40’s. Certainly before the Korean war. The U.S. had “downsized” the military to a dangerously low level. I’m not sure that if it came down to it that the Europeans would have let us Nuc their continent.:nonono:
                  Soviet Union had no Nuclear Weapon in tha time, it could be real suicide to bgin war in such conditions.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Andrey is right. Even by 1962 during the October Cuba crisis, the US greatly outnumbered the USSR in nuclear warheads. Any numbers out there?
                    http://canadiangenealogyandresearch.ca

                    Soviet and Canadian medal collector!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by dannybou
                      Andrey is right. Even by 1962 during the October Cuba crisis, the US greatly outnumbered the USSR in nuclear warheads. Any numbers out there?
                      My figure is only a guess, maybe Hogdriver or somebody can answer this better, but I think America in 1962 had about (approx.) 3250 warheads/bombs in the nuclear arsenal while the USSR may have had as few as 80 or at the most a few hundred. I'm not sure. I read it somehwere, perhaps someone can come up with the actual, definitive numbers...

                      However the missile/warhead gap was clearly to the advantage of the US. That is true.

                      One interesting thing I found out was some documents on the SAC website (non official) at:

                      http://www.strategic-air-command.com/home.htm

                      ...It pertained to the use of SAC as a FIRST STRIKE FORCE!

                      Have a read...

                      http://www.strategic-air-command.com/ike.htm
                      "To know the weapons the enemy has is already to beat them!"

                      http://www.anft.net/f-14/f14-photo-vf213-01l.jpg

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: NATO vs. Warsaw Pact

                        Originally posted by Overseer
                        Out of curiousity, what year do you guys think the Warsaw Pact (or the Soviet Union before Warsaw Pact officially existed) had the best chance of driving the evils of capitalism out of Europe?

                        I'm debating putting together a team to work on a BF:V mod, and I'm trying to decide when to place it historically... Think of the possible dates being from 1955 - 1980.
                        Just a quick estimate, I would say in the late 1970s - the US is still stinging from Vietnam, the Euroepan NATO allies all have some degree of social unrest, and the Soviet Union is not yet embroiled in Afghanistan. A sudden, massive strike could have rapidly driven NATO back, possibly as far as the frontiers of the Netherlands and Belgium. Of course there is no telling what the French would have done, having withdrawn from the military section of NATO in 1966.
                        Mens Est Clavis Victoriae
                        (The Mind Is The Key To Victory)

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by dannybou
                          Andrey is right. Even by 1962 during the October Cuba crisis, the US greatly outnumbered the USSR in nuclear warheads. Any numbers out there?
                          All reports I recall seeing indicated a 5 to 1 superiority, and we had a functional and accurate (for the time) ICBM (the Atlas), while the Soviets were still working out the bugs in theirs. If I recall correctly, they had several accidents related to the liquid fuel, as did we, but neither so many nor so severe. In regards to nuclear use, I doubt that we would have had more than a cursory meeting with the Germans (whose territory would most likely have been the target of any US nuclear weapon(s). If we felt nuclear use was the only way to stop the Warsaw Pact, or to achieve our objective(s), we would have done so.
                          Mens Est Clavis Victoriae
                          (The Mind Is The Key To Victory)

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by dannybou
                            Andrey is right. Even by 1962 during the October Cuba crisis, the US greatly outnumbered the USSR in nuclear warheads. Any numbers out there?
                            In 1962 USSR had no enough means of carrying of warheads to US territory. It was like to have shells but to not have howitzers. Reason of Cuba crisic was attempt to place nuclear missiles in Cuba. To count only warheads is not good idea.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by hogdriver
                              In regards to nuclear use, I doubt that we would have had more than a cursory meeting with the Germans (whose territory would most likely have been the target of any US nuclear weapon(s). If we felt nuclear use was the only way to stop the Warsaw Pact, or to achieve our objective(s), we would have done so.
                              I have to admit I hadn’t thought about that. I just took it for granted that we would ask before Nuc’ing Germany.:crazy:
                              Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedy. -- Ernest Benn

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X