Communist German/Soviet Pact against Allies in 1939

**Mihais** · 27 Mar 12,, 22:47

I'm sure they were.

It puts R-M into new light,doesn't it?

Z's scenario is nice,but here's what I'd like to in an alternate universe.Germany,Romania and Poland join in 1939 against USSR.That would have been a game to play.Doesn't matters who attacks whom.

**1979** · 27 Mar 12,, 23:28

Originally Posted by zraver

Western advantages, powerful surface fleet, better tanks overall, better pilots overall than the Russians. Larger potential manpower pool. Economic advantage from an area even more secure than factories located behind the Urals.

1. the french fleet would run to England after the army overruns the ports.
2. slow tanks with weak guns .
3. quantity has a quality of his own
4. to bad they did not have enough rifles to go around for the whites .
5. see above ^^^

**Tarek Morgen** · 27 Mar 12,, 23:34

Z, shall I edit the title to avoid further confusion about the scenario?

**zraver** · 28 Mar 12,, 00:18

Originally Posted by Tarek Morgen

Z, shall I edit the title to avoid further confusion about the scenario?

Please!

**zraver** · 28 Mar 12,, 00:21

Originally Posted by 1979

1. the french fleet would run to England after the army overruns the ports.
2. slow tanks with weak guns .

If the communist army overran the ports. Soviet mass gives the Germans a numbers edge but adds a whole hell of a lot of friction and the German panzers are much less suited for blitzkrieg in this scenario.

3. quantity has a quality of his own

Yup, but often that quality is markedly inferior despite the maxim.

4. to bad they did not have enough rifles to go around for the whites .
5. see above ^^^

See references to getting the US in to the war.

**Tarek Morgen** · 28 Mar 12,, 00:23

Originally Posted by zraver

Please!

Changed to "Communist German/Soviet Pact against Allies in 1939", but I am open for suggestions.

**snapper** · 28 Mar 12,, 08:34

Didn't the Battle of Warsawa in 1920 prevent such a situation?

**Mihais** · 28 Mar 12,, 08:43

Yes it did.

That could have been even nastier,given the general exhaustion in Europe.

In Z's scenario at least there are armies somewhat prepared to fight.

**Gun Boat** · 28 Mar 12,, 11:47

I would see the Germans teaming up with the Soviets as a lot like the German/Italian alliance in terms of how the Germans viewed the ally (inferior figthing ability)

The Soviets would provide a lot more rescourses and manpower of course.

But I cant see the German's adopting to much Soviet equipment for to long. The Germans would still have an appetite for their native designs. A german perfected T-34 with 3 man turret and radio would be good ah la Panther/VK3002DB.

The western allies would stand no chance against this alliance but only if they could be unified. From the early stages I think plans for Germany leaving the alliance would be in the making within Germany itself. I just cant see them playing nice for to long. I think Stalin would be treating Germany like a puppet rather than an ally and the Germans wouldn't like that.

If this did occur I could see a massive secret operation that would have the Russian armies in Europe inturned by the Germans and a Barbarossa occuring some time after France and England were beaten.

**astralis** · 28 Mar 12,, 14:20

oops, my bad.

OK, for this scenario...

how autonomous is the "GUSR"? in the period of the 1920s-30s, communist movements outside the USSR took orders from the USSR pretty seriously. i am only half-joking when i say that if stalin had ordered the french communists to give away their wives/sisters as sex slaves to the capitalists, the french commies would have done it.

**1979** · 28 Mar 12,, 18:42

Originally Posted by zraver

If the communist army overran the ports. Soviet mass gives the Germans a numbers edge but adds a whole hell of a lot of friction and the German panzers are much less suited for blitzkrieg in this scenario.

OK so it is winter and Czech tanks had not bean included yet , but i still argue for Germany to attack for the following reasons:

-There are the weaknesses in the french AA and ATG equipment that would be corrected (in part) until MAY.
-for each INF division Germany gets until MAY, the french would add one as well.
-the french have only five battalions of tanks with high velocity 47 mm guns (s-35, char B-1)
-the Belgian and Dutch armed forces are expanding, (30 new divisions would be combat ready until may ) any delay leads to more diversion of combat strength on the northern flank and less force at the center of gravity.
-KW-line is not completed yet nor is it manned.
-3 days with bad weather would conceal/cover Germany columns as they move trough Luxemburg .
- until march the latest , the french problem would be dealt with, even without soviet assistance ,besides nobody wants to be the junior partner in a relationship *

Originally Posted by zraver

See references to getting the US in to the war.

Is up to the members of the discussion to come up with ways to draw US assistance ?

**zraver** · 29 Mar 12,, 19:05

Originally Posted by astralis

oops, my bad.

OK, for this scenario...

how autonomous is the "GUSR"? in the period of the 1920s-30s, communist movements outside the USSR took orders from the USSR pretty seriously. i am only half-joking when i say that if stalin had ordered the french communists to give away their wives/sisters as sex slaves to the capitalists, the french commies would have done it.

Lets just say the headquarters of the GUSR's version of the Gestapo has a Moscow mailing address... It is the 1930's after all.

1979

No, its not up to the members to come up with ways, to, but to debate the ability of the periods leaders to do so.

Gunboat, the East Germans used Soviet kit for almost 50 years, the Me109 used a british designed engine and the Germans invaded Russia with French and American trucks... Add in Stalin's desire to keep the Germans behind the USSR technologically in most areas and using Soviet kit is very doable.

**Red Team** · 29 Mar 12,, 23:28

With respect to provoking a US intervention, would the Tripartite Pact between Germany, Italy, Japan (and for this scenario the Soviets) still be in place? I understand that the Soviet/Japanese diplomatic relationship was rocky at best during 1939. If that's the case, a corresponding Pearl Harbor event would still draw the Americans in with the Allied Powers.

As to who would win this war? Well let's just hope that the US can adjust quickly from whiskey to vodka...

**zraver** · 30 Mar 12,, 00:11

Originally Posted by Red Team

With respect to provoking a US intervention, would the Tripartite Pact between Germany, Italy, Japan (and for this scenario the Soviets) still be in place? I understand that the Soviet/Japanese diplomatic relationship was rocky at best during 1939. If that's the case, a corresponding Pearl Harbor event would still draw the Americans in with the Allied Powers.

As to who would win this war? Well let's just hope that the US can adjust quickly from whiskey to vodka...

Japan is an ally of the west against the communists.

**zraver** · 30 Mar 12,, 00:11

Originally Posted by Red Team

With respect to provoking a US intervention, would the Tripartite Pact between Germany, Italy, Japan (and for this scenario the Soviets) still be in place? I understand that the Soviet/Japanese diplomatic relationship was rocky at best during 1939. If that's the case, a corresponding Pearl Harbor event would still draw the Americans in with the Allied Powers.

As to who would win this war? Well let's just hope that the US can adjust quickly from whiskey to vodka...

Japan is an ally of the west against the communists.