JBodnar39

If Russia would have attacked into W Germany during the 1970's when the US conventional forces were in such a shambles and that dolt Jimmy Carter was President, the Russians would have won. At the time our conventional forces couldn't have stopped them and there is no way that Carter would have authorized the use of tactical nukes.

Officer of Engineers

In the early to mid 70s, militarily speaking, the Soviets were focused on China.

__________________
Chimo

Lunatock

If things took a turn for the worse then the US Military and CIA could of just resorted to the dirty underhanded tactics that the CIA taught the Muj during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan.

troung

We would not have had 8 years.

__________________
To sit down with these men and deal with them as the representatives of an enlightened and civilized people is to deride ones own dignity and to invite the disaster of their treachery - General Matthew Ridgway

Dago

Perhaps you should specify the corresponding years? Early 50's? Late 60's? Early 80's? etc etc..

master_fx

the alien would've won..... (looking at humans using nukes blowing each other up........ lol)

__________________
Global Defense Forum

Dago

I see you used alien in singular context. Who is Alien?

-{SpoonmaN}-

Nor should he have, as it would have lead to the use of strategic nukes by both sides and the destuction of both nations in a rather complete manner. No victory in ashes, I think most, if not all leaders from the 70s onward would have baulked at a nuclear release in the event of their conventional Forces being overwhlemed. Afterall, I'd take humiliation and a severe discreditation over the death of most of the civilian population of my country any day.

And as for conventional warfare, it would depend on the goals of both sides in the conflict. If the USSR simply aimed to overrun West Germany and ignore the rest of Europe, they may well have been able to do it, albeit with some rather sickening casualty rates, but I don't think they would have been able to keep up their advance across the rest of Europe. Similarly, NATO would have had a reasonable chance of being able to delay the Warsaw Pact's advance long enough for reinforcements to arrive, in which case they probably could have stopped or pushed them back into East Germany.
Pretty much, the USSR might have been able to seize West Germany and call that a victory, and NATO might have been able to stop their advance or turn them back and call that a victory, but I seriously doubt either side would have tried to completely overrun the other.

FOG3

I suppose one question that should be asked is if howitzer and other tactical nuclear weapons, especially of the Enhanced Radiation type were deployed against armor formations, which according to my father were at the gap. Would that have actually directly led to the use of standard nukes against cities, simply because nuclear weapons had been used?

Officer of Engineers

Neturon weapons are nukes.

FOG3

Didn't I say as much?

I just question whether the use of ER tac nukes to take out armored columns at the gap would directly transfer over to use of strategic nuclear weapons. For starters they're hitting military as opposed to civilian targets, and if they did cross the gap they'd have to recognize the possibility of them being used as they at least were there. Plus if the strategic nuclear weapons are launched you automatically enter MAD conditions, but tac nukes not necessarily so.

Anon

According to noted air defense/nuclear weapons expert Stuart Slade, it would escalate one step at a time to total global thermonuclear warfare.

At least.....it did in all the simulations the US did on the subject. Almost regardless of scenario, who, where, why....in any exchange between NATO/WP it ended the same.

They nuke our fwd defenses, we nuke their spearhead...they nuke our reserves we nuke their reserves...they nuke our airbases....we nuke their airbases.....right on up the line to total global thermonuclear war.

I can see it happenin' REAL easy.

Officer of Engineers

Maybe you didn't understand.

Except for an idiot AF officer who coined the term "Limited Nuclear War," neither side adopted such a doctrine. Both sides retained complete and utter nuclear warplans. The Warsaw Pact had envisioned the usage of 100+ nukes in the openning phases of the war. Doesn't really matter at that point whether you call it tactical or strategic.

Anon

Quite true. SAC had exactly one plan to execute a nuclear war, and it was anything but subtle....LOL.

Moroz

Nice forum! Respect to all members!

1)If full-scale nuke war start, that both country could become a desert. If quantity of warhead was reduced to 1200 units each side, that, according MAD, country has done first strike would lose more civilian bcz main targets of first strike are ICBM launchers and other strategic targets. Attacked side have to nuke enemies cities to revenge.
2)The USSR has had defense doctrine to prevent new invasion from Europe like 1941's one by Hitler and 1812's by Napoleon. The SU never was able to do land forces invasion to US, but US has platzdarm in Europe to such invasion to the USSR. However, the SU had numerical land forces superiority enough to reach La Manche.