Should the Allies have handled Post-WW2 differently?

[Ned]

Cookie, I have no doubt that you are right. However, Roosevelt was doing everything in his power to get Stalin to attack the Japanese in the East. Thus he conceded all points.

In retrospect, this was a mistake and Churchill was right.

[realpolitic]

Originally posted by David Floyd
Actually, in a conventional war in Europe in May of 1945, the Western Allies would have absolutely destroyed the Red Army. No question. Further, US strategic bombers would have devastated the Soviet Union itself.

Well, it's sometimes hard to get the Europeans to agree to fight.

[Myrddin]

Unlike Americans who have a habit of turning up late for Wiorld Wars

[Ned]

Originally posted by Arrian
Lots of things should probably have been done differently, now that we look back on the Cold War from our 21st century vantage point.

But changing one thing would inevitably lead to new unexpected consequences. Perhaps if we had "stood up to" Stalin, this would have pushed the Soviets into a corner, and resulted eventually in the WWIII we thankfully managed to avoid.

-Arrian

Well, Eisenhower's policy clearly was to abide by agreements with the USSR and to not help revolts within the USSR sphere (Hungary) even while challenging them in areas where they had no agreement with the US (Lebanon).

If Roosevelt and Truman, though, had made different agreements, the USSR may have been pushed out of Eastern Europe much sooner.

I don't think this would have lead to WWIII because neither side wanted to directly challenge the other.

[Serb]

Originally posted by David Floyd
Actually, in a conventional war in Europe in May of 1945, the Western Allies would have absolutely destroyed the Red Army. No question. Further, US strategic bombers would have devastated the Soviet Union itself.

In any case, while I don't believe we should have fought WW2 to begin with, we certainly should not have allowed Stalin to set up puppet communist nations in Eastern Europe.

[Serb]

Originally posted by David Floyd
Actually, in a conventional war in Europe in May of 1945, the Western Allies would have absolutely destroyed the Red Army. No question. Further, US strategic bombers would have devastated the Soviet Union itself.

In any case, while I don't believe we should have fought WW2 to begin with, we certainly should not have allowed Stalin to set up puppet communist nations in Eastern Europe.

In Europe in May of 1945 Red Army would have absolutely f*cked pathetic, less numbered, ****ty equiped, unexperienced Western Allies.
And your leaders perfectly knew this and didn't dare to attack.

Should you have handled post war Europe differently?
Actually the question is COULD you? You couldn't.

[David Floyd]

Oh good, Serb is back

[Serb]

Yeah...I'm back.

[Alexander's Horse]

one small problem with your analysis is for 4 years the Western allies had nukes and Sovs didn't.

[Saras]

I get my arse handed to my the russkies every time I play US in SP:WAW "The Victors" campaign. The best I manage are draws and minor victories.

[Ted Striker]

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
Just imagine D Day with a panzer army up your clacker and you'll get the idea Ted.

Imagine a nonstop rain of fire coming down on your heads and that's what happens when the US/UK doesn't tie down the west and the south.

Wouldn't have mattered how big and bad the red army was. No sky control would have just meant bigger death counts.

[Serb]

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
one small problem with your analysis is for 4 years the Western allies had nukes and Sovs didn't.

Oh sure

1) How much nukes they had in 1945, after Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
A single? A couple?
2) Had they capability to bomb the territory of Soviet Union?
3) Were they ready to use nukes in Europe and how it would affect relations between European countries and USA?
4) In case of nuclear attack, SU would used its bio&chem arsenals vs. Allied forces in Europe and vs. GB.
5) In this sceanrio Soviets would get nukes, much earlier... from ruins of Washington D.C. actually.

[Saras]

Originally posted by Ned
I don't know. If we had insisted that the USSR withdraw from the Baltic states, from Romania, Hungary, Czechoslovakia and Poland, anything could have happened. The Soviets may have had to fight indigenous revolutions supported by the US if they did not have a legal agreement from the US to stay.

[Serb]

[Saras]

Oh serb, you're such a nostalgic crybaby

Btw, did you know that a recent survey said 42% of Russian people would support a bolshevik revolution now, and only 10% would actively resist it?