Could USA defeat USSR before the WW2 begun??

However I would think around 1930 the Soviets would have been able to go agianst America and win however around 1935 they defintly could
 
If they were to have a war it would most definetly be fought in Alaska. And at the time they would have taken most of Alaska due to the fact we had little ways in means of transportation to get there, but the American people would mobilize and would most likely force USSR out of Alaska and force them to a peace treaty.
 
Not true, a Rode was consturcted in WW2 from Americas to Alaska, going through Canada to conect seven American Bases along the way.

Interesting Fact Japan caught 3 American islands wich were Alaskan Land, However it was gotten back of course.
 
Hey, first post here so I hope i dont bring down anyones wrath. And do forgive spelling mistakes :? Just try not to shoot me down too badly ok :oops:

As usual, the answer is always more grey than black and white, but IMHO I believe the US would have most definately lost, and badly, if the war was fought on russian soil.

Size of forces aside, the USSR had, in the 30's been at the fore front of mechanized developement and were already developing the weapons and resources which aided them in winning vs the Werhmacht. Their developement of mechanized tactics were also ahead of most nations.

Fair enough that Stalin had a fit and the mechanized elements of the red army were put on the back burner just prior to Barbarossa, we've seen how quickly that was remedied and the formation of tank armies became the norm.

The massive human and materail resources available to the USSR would also be a deciding factor, as the black soil regions and caucasus oilfields were not threatened by Germany and were totally available for the ruthless mobilisation we have all learnt about.

Sorry i cant give too many examples, no access to my library at the moment :cry:

"If they were to have a war it would most definetly be fought in Alaska. And at the time they would have taken most of Alaska due to the fact we had little ways in means of transportation to get there, but the American people would mobilize and would most likely force USSR out of Alaska and force them to a peace treaty."

Soviet ability in winter fighting, would tip the balance infavour of USSR here I believe. The US would mobilise, yes though i do still think the USSR would have the numbers in the end. I'm not sure how effectively each would resupply due to natural obstacles for both sides.
 
If they had landed in Alaska they would have had to send troops through Canada, if they sent troops through Canada they would invade Canada, if they Invaded Canada they would make the UK mad, who still had a majority control over the world at that time. So if they had made it to Alaksa they till have to go through Canada to get troops in. And that would be a horrible mistake.
 
Going through Canada is the ONLY way to win a quick victory for the USSR and a pretty smart one actually. Pissing off the UK in the process? Well, lets be honest. The USSR and USA were the most unlikely 2 nations to go to war of any 2 nations on earth prior to 1939 so the whole scenario is mostly in the rhelm of fantasy. But okay, bring the UK into the scenario -- they wouldn't have been in any position to stop the USSR from rolling right through Canada in into the USA. If the war continues thereafter as a UK vs USSR scenario, the two sides are are in absolutely terrible position to actually attack each other. Anyone care to tell me where the front line might be? The Royal Navy isn't in any position to threaten the Soviets ... maybe in North America.
 
The UK still owned land around the USSR I believe, some in China and a little in the Middle East with some troops in iraq I believe. They would have been close to the USSR.


Howevere if the USSr did manage to ge past the Ice that seperates Alaska with the Russia, and did manage to get troops and stuff thier at that point in time it would have taken a while to get enough to invade Canada and then make it to the USA.
 
Welkl that wouldn't be much of a war. America could send more supplies in from the Soviets and the Brit's and the Canadians would probably help just to defend thier own land.
 
First of all Russia wouldnt go to attack vs USA because they had enough casualties vs the German's and all they wanted to do is take a rest and rebuild itself. And if they did go to Alaska, they could prolly try to sign some pact with Canada vs the USA, i guess something like that, but it prolly wouldt work. So i think unless USA and USSR were on the same continent they wouldnt have went to war. And if they were on the same continent and they went to war, USSR would win it all.
 
World War 2 hadn't begun so they lost no casulties to the Germans in like 20 years. Also i agree that Canada never would have signed a pact with the USSR. and if they did America would try to get Canada and stop the Russian invasion.
 
Does anyone know how many people may have lived in Alaska in 1939 or if thier were any ajor troops bases thier in 1939?
 
Dameon said:
The UK still owned land around the USSR I believe, some in China and a little in the Middle East with some troops in iraq I believe. They would have been close to the USSR.
Click to expand...
No they didn't. Hong Kong was the only portion that the UK really had and that was a timed lease. There were other places where the UK had established itself, but the British Empire didn't border the USSR at all as nearly as I can tell, except one thing I'm not entirely sure of -- Persia/Iran. Was Persia part of the British Empire? I don't know for certain ... Middle Eastern holdings was as close as you're going to get to having a common border though. Iraq was a French colony BTW.

Howevere if the USSR did manage to ge past the Ice that seperates Alaska with the Russia, and did manage to get troops and stuff thier at that point in time it would have taken a while to get enough to invade Canada and then make it to the USA.
Click to expand...
Well consider that no military is more accustomed to winter fighting and immense distances than the Russians. On problem is that committing forces to invading Alaska might leave the USSR open to the Japanese from Manchuria and (depending on what year were talking about) the Germans.
 
Thats very true they were accustomed to fighting in the Winter. One major thing the USSR may have agianst them is the fact they WOULD have Japan around them who would want to attack them. However the UK had Hong Kong and some other nation had a part of China as for Iran....I am not sure I will look that up. Some nation in that area was thrown out a few years ago from the Commenwealth for miscounduct. Not sure if it was them...
 
Well the Russians would have a really hard time BEFORE WW2 to fight anybody I man they really didnt have a decent army or air force or navy for that matter.
 
airmanpatroler said:
Well the Russians would have a really hard time BEFORE WW2 to fight anybody I man they really didnt have a decent army or air force or navy for that matter.
Click to expand...
They had the biggest of all of those except navy. At least double that of anybody else. 3 times as many tanks as anyone else. 3 times as many combat aircraft. They had a terrifying military force actually. Most of the world had no idea how gigantic their military truly was.
 
It would be great if we could find the actualy numbers from back then....


However the USSR did stand a chance if they made land fall and could continue to supply the troops.
 
Opperation Barbarossa's official tally is as close as we can know. The German Army accounted for 17,000 (minimum) and 20,000 (maximum) tanks killed; 12,000 (minimum) and 15,000 (maximum) combat aircraft killed; and 9,000,000 Russian POW's. The actual numbers would have HAD to have been larger than that because the Red Army still had tanks remaining, still had some (though not very many) aircraft, and still had a tremendous numbers of men left.

Those numbers are confirmed by Soviet Sources as being pretty close to accurate.

Contrast that to Germany, who invaded with roughly 4,000 Tanks, 4,000 Combat Aircraft and 3.5 million men.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top