/AKM/ - Guns, weapons and the art of war.

>>2692
what do you think happens? they get nuked to shit.

>>2693
yes but does that mean they lose? does america at the time have enough nukes to make that happen?

keep in mind that vietnam was bombed to shit and the communists still won

>>2696
In 1950 absolutely not, the US has 300 A bombs max, and the best way they have to deliver them is by using B-36s which are plagued with issues, have a limited speed and range, and which probably can be shot down by Mig-15s.

I lost the .pdf but there's a US intelligence document from directly after WW2 outright stating the Soviets very well have the capability to overrun Europe to the Atlantic to little or no resistance, but they speculate they're avoiding doing so due to concerns about their capability to hold said territory in the long term.

Remember that most of the anti-axis resistance in Europe at the time were loyal communists. Actually after WW2 the French resistance kept asking the Soviets for permission to revolt. But the Soviets by that point had pretty much abandoned world revolution and were doing what they could to try and maintain peace with the capitalist world.

>>2722
Pretty much this
While, yes, the Soviets very well could have won the Cold War by heating it up early, you have to remember these are pretty much pipe dreams and alt-history scenarios. Stalin's main concerns at the time were to cuck to the Allies at every turn, not world communism. Even in Eastern Europe, what would later become the Warsaw Pact was more of a proxy zone to secure every potential route into the USSR in case of an invasion.
The way the USSR could have won the Cold War would have been to avoid it entirely along with WW2, if things had gone a little bit different in Warsaw, 1920 we'd be living in a completely different timeline.

>prepare for world war III by 1950

How much could the Soviets do in that time while recovering from the 2nd world war tho?

The question is to win the Cold War so maybe they don't have to sweep all of mainland Europe but just enough to where the Capitalist powers would be weakened and eventually fall, idk ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

>>2693
>>2692
> they get nuked to shit.
In 1950 the USA barely had a couple A-bombs, and the only plane capable of carrying them were special B-29s that had a modified bomb bay. That is in part the reason for initial nuclear attack plans of the USA to be canceled. That's not to mention that the B-29s were fodder for the MiG-15, and the MiG-15 v F-86 air combat had the MiG coming out on top 3/4s of the time. The only problem in the 4chan post is that the USSR itself was not ready to fight a sustained, multi-front war like that, and definitely not China, or is everyone forgetting the impact of WW2 on those 2 countries.

The snipe in the 4chan post about popular front vs united front is ignorant, as the reason popular front got utilized is because most revolutionary states not in the WARSAW Pact were Asian & Latino countries that had markedly lower development and differing culture. The USSR supported grass roots movements across the globe, NATO countriess like the USA, UK & France crushed many like Guatemala, Malaysia, Pakistan and attempted the same in Korea, Vietnam & Cuba.

>>2722
>after WW2 the French resistance kept asking the Soviets for permission to revolt
Source?

>>2723
> Stalin's main concerns at the time were to cuck to the Allies
His main concerns were to rebuild the country and get it back on its feet, something that a multi-front war was incompatible with. Not to mention that the people were tired of war.
>avoid it entirely along with WW2
LMAO WW2 was inevitable. Warsaw, 1920 wouldn't be different because Tukachevsky exposed the Red Army flank, letting Pilsudski flip the tables. Not to mention that the Polish communists did the same thing German communists did, trying to collude with Social Democrats in times of peace, only to be betrayed by said Rose carriers.

Finally everyone seems to forget that the USSR did not have a big blue water navy before or right after WW2. They lacked the ability to force project for some time in areas not near the country. Anyone that says otherwise is ignoring history.