Hey guys, we are working very hard to bring you 2 videos per week with more animation and superior quality, but we need your help to do that. Please, consider supporting us on patreon: www.patreon.com/thecoldwar
Is there anything on the healthcare system of the soviet union during the late sixties and early seventies? I have no idea what it was like. All i hear about is nuclear weapons and space race. How were soviet civillians treated in urban and rural areas.
@@gabrielnieves3972 And Barbarossa was described as a swift military success by Hitler's generals. They thought that the Soviet Union would fall quickly, which they didn't
Considering their love fest with the Soviets😧😳 toward the end of the war,I could imagine alot of payback feeling.But, also a hell of a lot of trepidation.
You are correct that the Soviets outnumbered the Western Allies, buy by April 1945 most soviet divisions were half to a third of the size of a western division. So comparing division numbers isn't a very accurate way of getting a troop ratio.
Plus the Soviet Union was almost entirely supplied by the West via railroad in the Middle East up through the caucs. It wouldn’t be a couple of years until the Soviets were able to independently supply themselves and a couple more to rebuild its army and infrastructure.
I think he considered size when he said "equivalent". The Soviets had somewhere on the order of 400 divisions in total, which would equate to about 200 western divisions in size, so 120 -150 western equivalent divisions in Europe would have been about right. The quality of these units varied greatly, with the Guards units being rated equal to their western counterparts. At the tactical level, Soviet weaknesses would include inferior aviation fuel, electronics, air-ground coordination, and artillery fire control. At the operational level their lack of an effective Navy and advanced heavy bombers would have put littoral regions and key industry at severe risk. An even greater problem for Soviet forces was their logistical pipeline, which was overstretched and quite vulnerable. The greatest potential threat they faced, and one for which they had absolutely no defense or counter-capability, was atomic bombs. Their mere existence created a strategic problem for Stalin that would only be solved in 1949 when his scientists developed a Soviet bomb. The Soviets were well aware of this problem in 1942, which is why they developed such an effective spy apparatus in the USA and Great Britain. It successfully penetrated the Manhattan Project and saved the USSR years of research and development. What's particularly maddening is our own counterintelligence services knew about much of this but were hamstrung in trying to stop the penetrations. The resulting cold war, proxy wars, and Red Scare became hallmarks of the 1950s and 60s.
When the Germans invaded the Soviet Union in 1941, they had more than 100 divisions and the Soviets were unprepared both from a material aspect and from a leadership standpoint. In 1945, the Soviet Army was gigantic, composed of hardened veterans, lead by professionals and was equipped with some of the best armor and artillery on earth. Seeing as the Western Allies had less manpower than the Germans had in 1941, and were had inferior equipment (except in the air) I can't see how the Western Allies could have expected that their chances against the Russian bear would be any better than the one the Germans had. And Germany's invasion ended in collossal failure.
The US never took this plan seriously - the US was still fighting in the Pacific - so it was very much Unthinkable. Also although there were worries about the USSR - overall the US and UK population still looked at the Soviets as allies not adversaries in 1945.
@@carl-os4603 Pardon. Ukraine did not pick a fight with Russia. They haven't stolen any Russian territory by force. What they did do is rather naively give up their 1800 ICBM nuclear arsenal for a promise from Clinton over US and UK help in the event of a war with Russia, which was apparently worth less than the paper it was written on. What you said is a bit like blaming Mannerheim and Stalin equally for the 1940 Winter War against Finland.
@@DrCruel I am an ukrainian and I have my own opinion about tension between Russia and Ukraine (there is a big discussion). And also, you should blame both sides in Winter war, since Soviet government had a diplomatic mission (set borders away from Lenningrad by ~ 80km, I dont remember right, and we will give you a few good islands) but finn government denied, whole conflict was stupid.
@@carl-os4603 Yeah. Right. Baltic states had it coming. Stalin did nothing wrong. The Czechs should have accepted the Sudetenland Plan to avoid the Second World War - oh wait, they did have it forced down their throats, didn't they? How did that work out. Pointless to discuss this with some people.
It was Patton's idea in the first place, and he was all for it, you dumb Yank! XD Nothing make me guffaw more that a Yank who doesn't have a clue about their own history - thnaks to the internet I guffaw a lot. XD
~ plans ordered by Winston Churchill ~ "Patton's idea...you dumb Yank...a Yank who doesn't have a clue about their own history" That's a nice glass house you're throwing stones in, @@sunnyjim1355
Churchill was a traitorous occuItist. Not only did he plan to stab Soviets in the back in 1945, he also betrayed royalist Serbian Chetniks over Tito. In his free time he liked to bow down to the dark Iord, I think this sums up what kind of a man he was.
@@enitivy for good reasons they had invaded Poland , Baltic states , Finland , Ukraine (in 1919) , transcaucasian states (in 1920) annexed Moldova (from Romania) by that point
@@xBlade87x yes but when your leadership and very foundation has been glassed off the face of the earth do you really keep fighting? The us only attacked those two cities in Japan because it had a high kill count of military to hopefully make the japanese surrender but imagine they nuked Kyoto or tokyo. Gg
SierraDelta6 did you even see Ussr on the map? And just look at first American atomic bombs. How can you destroy Ussr by a few bombs in 1945? Also you forgot the fact that for strategic bombing air superiority is required. There was no fighters that could fly on such a big ranges. Also soviets had a very strong air forces so this missions was impossible.
@@АмирАхмет-б5ц Allied control of the Baltic Sea answers the distance problem and, as is said here, the Soviet air force was dependent on the US for fuel - no fuel, no fly. Two bombs - Moscow and Leningrad would take care of it and the US had 2 ready to go in September 1945.
This video is far from factual on so many levels. But yes you are absolutely correct Iran was occupied by a joint British soviet invasion. Also he doesn't understand how airpower works on infrastructure and effects the speed of retreat. Or that nukes existed at this point or that America was fighting Japan alone
@@Rays_Bad_Decisions America was not fighting Japan alone. Britain was busy fighting an intense ground war in Burma against the Japanese, handing the Japanese one of their most significant defeats in the war. Not to mention a British Pacific fleet had been assembled to assist the USN. The Soviets were also preparing for an invasion from Manchuria.
Meanwhile in hoi4 operation unthinkable mode: [°] New Zealand declared war to United States of America, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and Republic of China [°]
@@schrodingerbracat2927 German generals copied Napoleon in 1941. Hitler knew that Ukrainian grain and Caucasian oil is needed to win the war. Yet his generals convinced him he should strike Moscow witch Napoleon captured. A year later at Stalingrad Hitler struggles to finally get that oil, and generals say he should use the rest of it for a retreat, so that they can attack again in summer without any oil reserves (witch is impossible. Later Hitler said his generals know nothing about strategic aspects of the war. Heres a video about it: ruclips.net/video/kVo5I0xNRhg/видео.html
Ummm, no mention of allied use of Nuclear weapons? The Allies possessed nukes that the Soviets did not have until the 50's if my memory serves...surely they would have utilised this significant strategic advantage?
@@jplegend98 How would dropping an atomic bomb on the Soviets speed up their nuclear program? Don't quite understand that. Perhaps if the Allies delayed the deployment of operation unthinkable by a few years, enough to restock their nuclear arsenal, then hit the key Russian targets outlined in this video, destroying Moscow and annihilating the central committee and the industrial areas. Severing the supply lines to the millions of soviet troops withdrawing may lead them to surrender. Plus he sheer dear factor of nuclear annihilation...if it can make the Japanese surrender, with their Bonsai mindset, the starved, lost soviet people may also feel that control of eastern Europe is not worth the effort. With the loss is the totalitarian leadership, there would be no one to enact the dictatorial forcefullness that drove the fanaticism of the USSR.
@@dudemighster747 what i mean is if unthinkable happened shortly before or after japan surrendered (lets say they continued firebombing and saved fat man and little boy for russia). Russia already knew about the bomb and had captured german scientist's who worked on hitlers nuclear program. The american bombers at the time wouldnt be able to hit moscow from the nearest allied airbases at the time. So if they hit a less important city or some military bases the soviets would of instantly spent every last penny they could on their nuclear prodject. Also if they went woth tje full plan (50 nuclear bombings on the ussr) while at war you still have a shit tonne of russian soilders in eastern europe. They would kill and murder and rape as many people as they can (like east germany pre-ocupation) before being fored to surrender or going underground. Also nuclear bombings on europe will me the rest of europe hate the british and american.
Not only that, but even the Allies still didn't understand the implications of dropping an atomic bomb in terms of radiation fallout. So with that ignorance they would have dropped them when they saw fit.
Western propaganda heavily promoted the idea of helping the Soviets throughout the entire war. It would be difficult for a Western regime to convince it's people that the Soviets are the enemies after just recently helping and supporting their now new enemy. Especially in a war of aggression. As we've seen in the Vietnam War, public support in Western regimes can quickly drop once a war is seen as pointless and casualties start mounting.
@Heroin Bob Iraq was known to have chemical weapons -- we'd sold or brokered the deals, during their war with Iran. Those were purchased in the 80's and were well past their use-by date; the invasion of Iraq was sold on the false premise that they were manufacturing NEW weapons.
@Heroin Bob Except the term "WMD" is entirely a bullshit term that was just used to make Iraq sound scary. The term has no clear definition and is sometimes interchangeable with NBC, however originally the term referred to mass bombing during WWII like the kind the allies did (which btw under this definition the US would have been guilty of using WMDs against Iraq). No treaty however has ever defined the term which means that it's not a term you can reliably use in international politics. You can say that chemical weapons are WMDs but that statement carries no weight or authority to it as WMD is not a technical term, and I can just as easily say that a WMD has to be particularly destructive not just be chemical. What is however clear is that Bush wasn't using WMD to just mean NBC he was clearly trying to give the impression that Iraq also possessed some sort of long range delivery system by showing "suspected ICBM sites". What is also clear is that even if we accept this definition of WMD as meaning that the country possessed chemical weapons at some point that may or may not be useful anymore then the US is a massive fucking hypocrite for condemning other countries for it as it is the only country to not sign the treaty banning chemical weapons and itself maintains a stockpile of them. You make yourself look like a fucking idiot by trying to one up people and make them look like idiots by using meaningless buzzwords instead of actual precise technical language. You're not the intellectual rational mastermind speaking down to the hapless masses you're just a fucking dipshit that swallowed the propaganda hook line and sinker and it's clear as day to everyone here.
I have heard it said that General Patton wanted to fight the U.S.S.R. while the US Army was still in Europe. I had no idea that others 'may' have shared his 'alleged' opinion. An absolutely fascinating episode, thank you.
Helps you see Russias view against NATO as they saw it as threat to their motherland...we have an ocean so we can't fathom being invaded really on land by great powerful neighbors
@@Nperez1986 Yeah by that logic, you can also say the Nazi view is legitimate. Because the Allies were a "threat to their fatherland." Simple fact is: Russia doesn't have any fear, they want to build an empire. And they thought the West was too weak-willed to stop them, especially after they got away with multiple other conquests. Just like Hitler thought, up until they drew the line in the sand at Poland.
@@seventh-hydra Lmfao no. unlike Nazi Germany, there was clear evidence that the west wanted to wipe the Soviet Union off the earth. Even more so when you realize that in the beginning, most major countries viewed the Nazi State as harmless, whereas most countries at the end of the Russian Revolution were so scared of them that they sent soldiers to attempt to crush the Red State in the east, and but ultimately failing to do so. The reality of it all is that the west were 10 times more hungry for blood than the Soviet Government and people were at most of any time of the lifespan of the USSR. The west was more willing to destroy its "opposition" than live in a multi polar world. Of course, that's not to say the USSR was not also imperialistic, however its important to not equate them. I mean, even in this scenario, who forgave the Nazi's?
Correct, but the "unthinkable" part of the operation, was convincing the U.S. to fight Britain's anti-Communist fight, which originally failed as the Allied intervention to the Russian Civil War (1917-1924); the right-winger Churchill ignored what the Allies agreed in the Yalta and Potsdam agreements and lied that the fiendish USSR had welshed on said agreements, and thus "The West" (i.e. the U.S.) had to "liberate" fascist eastern Europe from the Judaeo-Bolshevik International Conspiracy . . . lest The Communists conquer the world.
@@Aggelos-tv3ep He is refering to the British support that gave to the crown to defeat EAM...i guess...still this happened because Greece was isolated with 3 communist regimes in her borders...not for a puppet state that never was the case...Greece was the first Cold War bettleground and the domino effect was a scary scenario (plus the geographic importance of Greece)
0:40 "Entrusted with the protection of the slavic people of Eastern Europe" Highlights Hungary and Romania as well Hungarians and romanians: *TRIGGERED AF* But seriously, we aren't slavic!
@@teeno91 Look it up the sources are around but the records are not up to normal standards. Think about it what the affect of millions of dead have on the running of a country the affects are still hitting Russia today. I'm in the comment section and on my phone so I can't link shitall. Nation doesn't have unlimited manpower.
@@robert18productions Harrison mark 2003 counting sovietdeath in the great patriotic war. Andrew, daraskii and kharkova 1993 naselenie sovetskogo soiuza 1922-1991.
“Stalin, we want you to hold elections” “Ah yes, elections, of course” “And these elections will be free and fair, right?” “Ah yes, free and fair, definitely free and fair”
@@matheusvillela9150 It's pretty good and chill in here actually, low crime rates, plenty of opportunity, even on a surface level, the post communist Poland I was born in looks nothing like it did in the 90', although there is still work to do, unlike Russia which is basically a 3rd world country in many ways.
Владимир Новиков actually his plan removed the vast majority of German divisions and basically all of the Panzer divisions and made them move to Greece, look up operation mince meat, it’s fascinating and Tom Scott made an excellent video explaining it
Sad as it is, the defeat at Gallipoli may have been a blessing in disguise. The British agreed beforehand to give the straits to the Russian Empire had that operation succeeded. Please excuse my misspellings. Fascinating stuff!
Excellent video. If I may add, when I studied this very period of history people were tired of war. Drafting was not a popular measure, despite what Hollywood and comics tell us today. The West, mainly the US, UK, and France had men power but were not willing to fight. Germany not so much.
The allies still needed the Red Army in July 1945 to finish the war against Japan...the other enemy. The Soviet invasion of Manchuria has been underrated by historians. After this, the Japanese lost not only a large part of their military but many of their raw materials as well. This also played an equal part in Japan's defeat.
All the elite Troops were fighting against the Americans. The Japanese Troops left in Manchuria were only some regular troops. Also the kwantung army was a lot of smaller taxtet the majority was sent to the pacific. Under this circumstances the Japanese had no chance against the ussr
Operation unthinkable was going on betw us and britain during war.wedge btw friendship was created by churchill. Bcs roosevelt and stalin are getting closer.and churchill felt lost
@only good communist are buried in forgotten graves that is why there is paranoia today in the west. Fun fact - western countries killed far more people in the same timeframe, and also tried military intervention into Russia during revolution. However, socialism is coming for you!
@only good communist are buried in forgotten graves Errm, not really. I mean in the first half of the 20th century, you have british concentration camps in South Africa during the Boer Wars, the starvation of indians, slaughtering people in middle east for wanting independence, of course there is the whole set of war crimes of carpet bombing german cities. You had the belgians cutting hands in Congo. US also rounded up japanese and put them in concentration camps, even if they were technically american citizens.
Operation Unthinkable didn't call for an invasion of the Soviet Union like the Nazis, they could bomb the Urals with long range bombers the closer they get to the front, and they didn't need to attack pointless locations like the Caucuses, just bomb them. The Allies had something the Soviets and the Nazis didn't, wealth.
@@carl-os4603 The soviets could definitely win battles but it's another question if they could win a war. War primarily in modern day is based on economics and logistics.
@@carl-os4603 It worked with the Japanese Empire. The Soviets had the highest causalities during the entire war, do you really think Stalin would allow it to continue? No, he most certainly wouldn't, he would sue for immediate peace. Just think, one of your cities disappears in the blink of an eye AND you're 100% hopeless to stop it. Do you really truly believe the Soviets would continue to crush on? It would be so pointless, how would you expect to hold an effective counterattack and even be successful all the way back to France? It's just not possible, the Soviets would have no choice but to give in.
“Ending occupation of Eastern Europe” well, that’s wasn’t unthinkable, after the grievous losses the Soviets had at that point. Pushing them back into Russia wasnt that unthinkable..
@@Watcher4111 xdd if allies attacked ussr they would capitulate in like 2 weeks. USSR just smashed unstoppable Germany army. Keep remember that France with help of allies fall faster than one house in Stalingrad. 10 million army with socialistic economic and with that much resources is strongest army in history and nobody were even close If it not, why didn’t allies attack?
@@piecekeeper5317 The soviet army at that time was literally unkillable. Most soldiers were well trained as they already experienced combat for many years and suffered the most.
@@daddymccrackin4677 Eventually soviet union would have been depleted from manpower, where the British Empire and USA would not. Keep in mind the soviet union had already lost 40 Million people in WW2, UK and USA just 300k.
Jônatas Pereira this was all I could think throughout this video. Their population is literally still declining today from the amount of men they lost in WW2 and a variety of other factors. I find it extremely hard to believe they would be able to muster the amount of divisions this video claims.
@@11leeson I don't think they would have problems mustering those divisions in the start of the war, the problem comes after the losses begin to mount. They wont have men to replenish them.
@Nathan Bernacki The U.S. would have been part of this, so they'd have been committed. They wouldn't have held anything back. Then again, this was a contingency plan, so 'improbable' really doesn't matter.
@Nathan Bernacki Because this was never a battleplan! It was a contingency plan for if hostilities broke out. The British General Staff didn't make it with the intention of actually trying to start another war with the USSR. It was something Churchill thought up, so they made an outline. The plausibility of it being used wasn't the point. The point was to see what they could do.
@@mxn1948 Dude, that plan exists, and having the US military play a big part was integral to it. Nuke or not you tell me why they would have made a plan at all without consulting the Americans about their role.
@Nathan Bernacki Maybe they would have considered it if they had the foresight to recognise that the USSR would be their primary enemy for the next four decades. I mean it would be an awful idea but the US clearly had an interest in curtailing the power of the Soviet Union. So it wasn't just 'Churchill's stupid war', it was the beginning of the Cold War.
Yes, it is true that the Soviets wouldn't have been able to hold their positions in Germany against an allied attack and would have needed to make a fighting withdrawal. Yes, it's true that, on balance, the allies would have had air superiority and inflicted significant damage on deficient Soviet logistics. However, note the statistic in the video reminding us that the Soviets actually outnumbered the US in the air. The US heavy bomber force wouldn't have been making attacks with impunity, because even if the Soviet fighters couldn't reach them and fight them effectively at high altitudes, the allies wouldn't have been able to fly the intensive AAA suppression missions that made their heavy bombers so effective against the Germans in the late war, nor would they have been able to count on fighter-bombers strafing Soviet armor into submission (at least, no more than Soviet attack planes would've done to their own ground forces). By 1945 the Soviets had developed cluster bombs that made their IL-3s and similar planes very effective tank hunters. Even if the Soviets lost most of their ground attack planes in the first few weeks of fighting they would do a lot to blunt the momentum of the allied armored divisions. Another factor: the largest and most devoted anti-Nazi partisan armies in the west, in France and (especially) in Italy, were in fact composed of communists. The handful of divisions that Churchill's plan called for leaving behind to maintain order would've been inadequate to defend the allied rear and supply lines against veterans with such a home-field advantage. Furthermore there would most likely have been major campaigns of industrial sabotage and espionage by pro-communist civilians and officials in England and the United States proper. Conversely, the largest potential partisan force that could've helped undermine the Soviets in Eastern Europe, the Polish Home Army, had been reduced to a shadow of its former self after Stalin (treacherously, or shrewdly, depending on your point of view) deliberately halted his advance and allowed them to be destroyed by the Wehrmacht. Although it is true that the Soviet supply situation would've quickly grown dire, the U.S. and England also had a major "supply problem" that would've made fighting a long war impossible for them: not a shortage of steel, fuel, or any kind of raw materials, but a shortage of money. The U.K. was already in a deep, dark pit of debt by this point and the U.S., which had mostly been successful funding the conflict with war bonds up until this point, would've been put in the uncomfortable position of suddenly needing to default on its debts, nationalize factories, and take other heavy-handed measures. If Truman had been convinced to join Churchill in this quixotic war, the Soviets would've known they only needed to hold the line until the next round of American elections in which Truman would have been thrown out in a historic landslide. Likewise, the U.K. public would've turned against such a war with breathtaking swiftness even if enough initial support could be mustered to launch the attack. Granted, the leadership of both the American and British militaries were politically on the far-right (in the case of Patton in particular, it is not hyperbole to say that he was essentially an American Nazi) and probably would've gone along, but the populace at large would've revolted.
@@bennshephard8682 let that sink in. Using an atomic bomb on a nation that just survived extermination by Nazi Germany and that had lost 30 million people. Let that sink in. Places the US and its allies in Nazi Germany's shoes
@@randall172 Additionally the US didn't have the infrastructure in place to mass produce them, let alone the ability to deliver them to worthwhile targets.
Thanks dark7, this is an excellent summary. I would like to add to your supply chapter by saying that the western allied forces were already slowed down just a few months after D-Day because of supplying problems, their advance eastwards halted from september 1944 until march 1945. They didnt have the capacity even though by that time the German forces were on its last legs and had zero airforce or navalforce to speak of.
This plan was a great idea, I'm sure that after fighting a World war the Germans, the French, the Americans and the British were looking forward to fighting another, it's not like they were still fighting Japan, it's not that neither Soviets nor the European allies had rebuilt their nations, it's not that Britain's war dept was around the corner, it's that "muh nukes" would've carried the team to victory!
Imagine being a german wehrmacht soldier. Having to fight against russia, advancing nearly to moscow, being beaten at stalingrad, surviving the retreat and the loss of the war just to return attacking russia under the rule of the western allies that kicked you out of france and africa. It would have been an oh so hilariously strange turn in history.
Wait, so after attacking Soviet Forces and pushing them back from the hard earned land, Churchill expected NOT A TOTAL WAR with USSR? Was that guy insane or what? Also, not sure how relevant Carrier forces would be here. I mean, why sail a carrier straight up the Baltic sea, to be attacked by soviet subs and planes when you can just put the planes on land. Attacking Leningrad would have yeilded almost nothing
Churchill own Generals said NO in no uncertain terms ... a rare rebuke to their political leader ... and yeah ... I thought the same about the carrier group in Baltic Sea too ... very easy for Soviets to eventually track it down and hammer it with its own Fighter bombers ...
Diverting valuable aircraft to deal with the carriers wouldn'tve been an option, more a suicide mission for all soviet forces in Europe. The combined huge royal navy and US navy + the other allied ships. The subs wouldn'tve gotten close..
@Nathan Bernacki The Allied navies would get into the baltic way before the soviets managed to close it off. They probably already had loads of ships in anyway, but reinforcements would be a few hours away. A push to the strait from the red army wouldn't be very fast without every single aircraft on the front.
@Dex4Sure - Трудовые отношения ? Это и есть"социал-демократы"?! Ну они никакие не коммунисты (а быть они не могут по определению) это просто название (это как современная Российская коммунистическая партия-дань традиции форма с капиталистическим содержанием) партия целиком стоящая на позициях капитализма) так что профсоюзное название "Лейбористская партия" это дань английской Профсоюзной традиции. Так что ты-предмет для шуток. Не называйте Лейбористскую партию "коммунистами". Назовите лопату лопатой "капитал искал рынок для реактивных двигателей" давайте начнем с этого (для начала) . Во-вторых, в мире по-прежнему мало стран, нуждающихся в двигателях для реактивных самолетов. По этому английскому бизнесу нашлось возможным продавать двигатели . За нашу дорогую и любимую страну Советов. Это бизнес (прецедент был уже в тридцатых годах в торговле с США), поэтому я думаю, что ваш ответ неверен.
I remember my German girlfriend’s father telling me about how he was demobbed by the British in the British Occupation Zone in 1945;only to be re-called up shortly afterwards and along with many other former German Army soldiers, sent to a big army base in Schleswig Holstein, where he learnt that they would be sent eastwards to fight the Soviets.. This is a piece of primary evidence to the subject.
@Sari Çizmeli Mehmet Ağa Churchill almost got himself beheaded by the Pashtuns in Afghanistan. His military career was mired with near death experiences and spectacular failures.
The plan was drawn up by the British Imperial General Staff, not Churchill. Allied air superiority would have been so total over Europe that the Soviet logistics would have resembled those of the Wehrmacht at Stalingrad. Good luck fielding 30 armored divisions and 24 tank brigades if you can't put fuel in them. The Soviets already could not use all of their forces at once against the Germans during Operation Bagration due to not having enough supplies. Several Fronts were stopped dead in Romania while Bagration was underway. Cut off from Lend Lease and with their trucks and trains obliterated by Allied air power the Red Army would have lost operational mobility and began running out of ammunition in the first 2-4 weeks. If you want to see what would happen after that look up Operation Compass, the first British counterattack against the Italians in North Africa. The Italians outnumber the British by about 120k to 30k but the Western Desert Force ran rings around them and completely destroyed them.
JJ Brooks ur talking about the U fucking S, we invaded vietnam for sum bullshit. We’d help the fuckin poles if we could. Most americans wanted to stay out of the war. Like that dude said, european war, european problem. Gtfoh
Allied generals: Hey Churchill what's your plan to defeat Stalin. Churchill: We are going to swiftly invade Russia, just like Napoleon and Hitler. Allied generals: Oh shit here we go again.
Excellent video, as always. It's so rare for a presentation to touch upon the lack of aviation fuel in this scenario. The war would have been a disaster for everyone, but I believe that the west would have inevitably won. The Soviets had many strengths including the vast experience its soldiers and officers had by this point. However, I believe the United Nations (Really just the British) vastly overestimated the numerical superiority of the Soviets. On paper, in 1945, a Soviet rifle division had a compliment of 11,780. In reality there had been so much chaos, death, and shortages that divisional compliments had been reorganized seven times during the war. The bulk of Soviet rifle divisions followed the Number 04/55 template that specifies a rifle division was to have 9,435 personal assigned to it. The Red Army had approximately 300 rifle divisions in 1945, though there are many contradictions that range from 200 - 400. The number of divisions isn't necessary the important part, but rather the condition of them. In the Far-East it was a completely different situation, but in Europe just 10% of Soviet rifle divisions were at 80% strength or above. The vast majority were at or below 50% strength. The same could be said of guard divisions with the added concern of poor maintenance standards, lack of parts, and an inability to keep-up with repair demands meant considerably lower states of readiness beyond merely lacking personal. Keep in mind that Churchill was resigned to delay any meaningful invasion of Europe until it seemed that the Red Army had turned the tide. The Red Army was in no condition to wage another large-scale conflict with relatively fresh major powers. Worse still is that the industrial might of the United States dwarfed the Soviets. Indeed, the United States provided 35% of all aircraft, 23% of all AFV, 50% of all 1/2 ton trucks, 75% of all 1/4 ton trucks, and enough munitions, rations, clothing, and other supplies to keep 50 divisions fighting indefinitely. This is ontop of an even larger contribution made to the Commonwealth. Despite lend lease, the United States still had the manufacturing capabilities to outfit itself with the most mechanized army in history. By the end of the war it had the largest navy and airforce in history despite essentially having to build it all from scratch in just 3.5 years. More importantly, as it proved itself a major advantage in WW2, the American homeland was virtually immune from damages. It's the only power who could claim this and doubtlessly played an instrumental role in its production figures. While the Soviets would need to deal with strategic bombing, the Americans would continue to just be concerned with sabotage.There would be no ceasing production to rebuild the facilities or having to relocate machinery to other facilities due to vulnerabilities. The UN, as the democratic power on the offensive, would also find support from occupied territory. The anti-communist sentiments would be burning harder than ever after the rape of East Germany and the plundering of Romania, Hungry, Bulgaria, and even Poland. Actual manpower would be quite limited, but intelligence and partisan cooperation proved vital during the French liberation. Critically, the Soviets would need to allocate forces to suppress them and people called away to protect bridges a thousand miles away do not help repel an invasion. I do not think Stalin would be foolish enough to strike into Iran, Iraq, and Turkey. Nor do I think he would fight to the end. After the initial push Stalin may have settled upon allowing Poland to have free elections whilst negotiating that the former Axis allies should stay with them. Given that few gave two shits about former enemies, I think Churchill would have been satisfied dealing a blow to the Soviets and liberated Poland and Czechoslovakia.
What nonsense did you write? What is it ? Let's start with your lies about the UN. You don’t even know that the creation of the UN was an initiative of the USSR. And here is fucking England? Further comment on your nonsense?
I racked my brain for a whole of 10 seconds and it came up with more negatives than positives. Counting men, tanks and aircraft is useful but not an answer. Using atomic weapons in the European theatre would be disastrous too. But then again: Britain couldn't afford to hold India or any of its colonies shortly after the war. What about the fascist and communist forces inside the US? Why would the US risk everything instead of just the good old cordon sanitaire? You know, you need a world in the first place for a world order to exist in which you can become the dominant power. What about the rest of the world? The neutral and the semi neutral nations who stood on the sidelines more or less so far? I also remembered that many years after this war using much better weapons, lots of money and resources and with utter ruthlessness toward both the Vietnamese and their own. The US failed to subjugate a tiny country called Vietnam! Only to be called a "paper tiger". Then comes an old guy who's way past his prime as a political leader who couldn't even secure the July 1945 elections wishing to commit the world to this reckless or even criminal endeavor. What about Pendergast's office boy in the senate? Would he had the stomach to accept millions of losses in such a war? Sure he had the stomach to drop not one but two bombs on the Japanese but he didn't lose a single soldier doing that. I mean the US suffered between 15 to 20 thousand dead on a tiny island called Okinawa attacking a much smaller and inferior albeit well entrenched force. The same US that was waiting for the Russian to share the brunt of the causalities, again, of the Japanese home islands invasion. Compare that to the European and the Eurasian killing fields and you'll find counting men and tanks quite useless. I think Mr. Churchill was being plain silly!
Another episode where people should be thankful that cooler heads did prevail and this didnt happen. However such a scenario would be good for the Hearts of Iron series
I like how Russians are so outraged that thos plan existed; as if the reason for it, the Soviet takeover of half of Europe (including Allied nations) wasn't outrageous at all.
@@alpha3488 Yeah, and left it to be freely governed by its people as they saw fit, according to their free political, cultural and economic interests and traditions, definitely without Soviet-style institutions, NKVD proxy services etc. Nobody was branded a fascist or nazi sympathizer and persecuted for desiring just that, either. ^it's a sarcasm, comrade.
@@Mira-K Hungary, Bulgaria or Poland had a strong workers movement or/and famous communists long before WW2. And it's not like the western Allies were any better in securing their zone of influence, for example in Greece.
@@alpha3488 In Bulgaria the "worker's movement" murdered off the government which had refused to participate in war against USSR. But they and Hungarians were axis, allright. In Romania the king who overthrew Antonescu and joined Allies got soviet medal... and exile at a guinpoint. In Poland communist movement was inded strong before regaining independence (1905 revolution, many Polish bolsheviks), and it was tied to desire for independence, primarily from Russia. Marx himself wanted Poland not only free but even as monarchy if need be. Communism was previously viewed as way to liberation from Russia, now turned to be viewed as means of subjugation to (red) Russia and marginalised. Many prominent Polish leaders from former Tsardom had brief Bolshevik episode before being completely freaked out by what they saw happening in Russia. Political moods after WW2 were indeed strongly to the left, but absolutely not pro-soviet. Gomułka despaired in late 40s: "people who'd otherwise endorse our ideas reject us as foreign goons". Czechoslovakia? The single real democracy in the region, with Soviet-friendly but democratic and independent government first reduced to mere yesmen and then overthrown by Soviet-sponsored coup. Greece was the sole positive example of Allies rescuing their members, because the fools were walking willingly into what most other Easterners tried in vain to avoid. Whatever follies of the new regime, it was Greeks, and only theirs, own doing, without big brothers meddling.
I imagine that if it did happen the allies would just send Soviet troops back to the Soviet border and just leave after making sure that Stalin wouldn't try anything else.
By 1945 the Western Allies had 4.5 million soldiers stationed on continental Europe; The USSR had almost triple of that with over 12 million soldiers... Just so you get an idea of how unthinkable such operation was...
This was the dillusional side of Churchill that cropped up every once and a while. The Pacific War was still going on, while the Soviets had a strong position in "Eastern Europe" due to the success of Operation Bagration, the invasion of the Balkans and the Vistula-Oder offensive. Greece would have been completely exposed to a riposte (as mentioned in the video), and maybe locales south of occupied Iranian Azerbaijan... Pushing into eastern Soviet Union was a non-starter. But fundamentally, neither the public of Great Britain nor of the Commonwealth, nor of the US would have accepted that kind of opportunistic pivot that totalitarian regimes were capable of - just turning around and trying to stab prior partners in the back with invasion, the kind of actions that Orwell wrote about in 1984 ...
I think this plan is aptly named, although I do wonder about the idea of the allies pushing the Soviets back into the USSR and then stopping at the border.
Well to everyone who thought nukes would have brought the Russians to their knees, their winter is their ultimate weapon, not their tanks, not their men. It's that winter beyond which even Napolean and Hitler couldn't advance.
Youre right. No way they could've won.On the other hand,it would encourage people who were under colonial rule to turn to communism.(UK is nothing without colonies) It's hilarious to see "Reddit fat-boys" sitting on their couch talking about wars
Cringe. You wouldn’t need to conduct a full ground invasion of the Soviet Union with nukes. The same way the Americans didn’t need to naval invade Japan thanks to the nuclear bomb. And Japan were NEVER going to surrender if it wasn’t for the nuclear bomb.
I'm the airforce in 45 wasnt in disarray as it was in 1940. The airforce was purged same time as the army. The front line fighter in 45 was the la9, which was very comparable to the p51. Also the yak9ut, the close support in 45 was the il10, which was a flying tank, the pe8, tu2 were the strategic bombers in 45 Pe3 were were medium bombers and heavy fighters, used in several roles. The tu4 was also in production. Operation unthinkable was Churchill warmongering plan to try and keep the british empire the dominant power in the world for another 50 years
If you wanted to defeat the Soviet Union in 1945, all you would have needed to do is to nuclear-destruct Moscow. Then as now, there are only two primary cities in Russia: (Moscow and St. Petersburg (then Leningrad).
Hey guys, we are working very hard to bring you 2 videos per week with more animation and superior quality, but we need your help to do that. Please, consider supporting us on patreon: www.patreon.com/thecoldwar
@@ДушанМихајловић-й6щ Neither is Romania and Albania (I'm not too sure about the latter).
I hope your family is fine thank you for the episode!
HOI4 music 😩
Is there anything on the healthcare system of the soviet union during the late sixties and early seventies? I have no idea what it was like. All i hear about is nuclear weapons and space race. How were soviet civillians treated in urban and rural areas.
is this HoI4 music
German soldiers fighting for the allies: ah shit here we go again
Hahahhaha
Dang!
But this time having pretty much guaranteed "victory".
just imagine countless king tigers being produced by usa and send to europe lol
@@AzraelGFG KT wont be necessary. Imagine the sheer amount of Panthers replacing Shermans on the field.
@@aykutdans3151 and the heawy bombers and the fuel... those were indeed strange tim3s
"Operation Unthinkable envisioned a swift military success"
Well, where have I heard that before?
France fell in 6 weeks
Operation Barbarossa wasn't finished in 6 weeks
@@comradetachanka8872 barbarossa was the one in russia not france
@@gabrielnieves3972 And Churchill was talking about the USSR
@@gabrielnieves3972 And Barbarossa was described as a swift military success by Hitler's generals. They thought that the Soviet Union would fall quickly, which they didn't
German: "Thank god ive survived the war"
...
"What do you mean were heading east again??"
Considering their love fest with the Soviets😧😳 toward the end of the war,I could imagine alot of payback feeling.But, also a hell of a lot of trepidation.
Oh nein
@@peteroca6737i think they would glad to go after berlin
@peteroca6737
Yeah, the hate is wild 😅
did you use hearts of iron 4 music?
I thought for a minute that I accidentally opened HoI4's launcher
i thought the same, but HOI 3 music
Honestly each time I see a new video I love this channel more, you can clearly see the guy's making the videos are awesome for details like this
Reminds me of HoI 3 Operation Unthinkable scenario
i am literally playing HoI4 right now and got really confused for a second lol
You are correct that the Soviets outnumbered the Western Allies, buy by April 1945 most soviet divisions were half to a third of the size of a western division. So comparing division numbers isn't a very accurate way of getting a troop ratio.
Plus the Soviet Union was almost entirely supplied by the West via railroad in the Middle East up through the caucs. It wouldn’t be a couple of years until the Soviets were able to independently supply themselves and a couple more to rebuild its army and infrastructure.
Yeah, it took them a couple of decades to rebuild. In some regards, like their skewed demogragphics, they still haven't recovered.
I think he considered size when he said "equivalent". The Soviets had somewhere on the order of 400 divisions in total, which would equate to about 200 western divisions in size, so 120 -150 western equivalent divisions in Europe would have been about right. The quality of these units varied greatly, with the Guards units being rated equal to their western counterparts. At the tactical level, Soviet weaknesses would include inferior aviation fuel, electronics, air-ground coordination, and artillery fire control. At the operational level their lack of an effective Navy and advanced heavy bombers would have put littoral regions and key industry at severe risk. An even greater problem for Soviet forces was their logistical pipeline, which was overstretched and quite vulnerable. The greatest potential threat they faced, and one for which they had absolutely no defense or counter-capability, was atomic bombs. Their mere existence created a strategic problem for Stalin that would only be solved in 1949 when his scientists developed a Soviet bomb. The Soviets were well aware of this problem in 1942, which is why they developed such an effective spy apparatus in the USA and Great Britain. It successfully penetrated the Manhattan Project and saved the USSR years of research and development. What's particularly maddening is our own counterintelligence services knew about much of this but were hamstrung in trying to stop the penetrations. The resulting cold war, proxy wars, and Red Scare became hallmarks of the 1950s and 60s.
@@JLAvey Heavy Industry surpassed pre war level already in like '49. Other Industries and Comodities not so much
When the Germans invaded the Soviet Union in 1941, they had more than 100 divisions and the Soviets were unprepared both from a material aspect and from a leadership standpoint. In 1945, the Soviet Army was gigantic, composed of hardened veterans, lead by professionals and was equipped with some of the best armor and artillery on earth. Seeing as the Western Allies had less manpower than the Germans had in 1941, and were had inferior equipment (except in the air) I can't see how the Western Allies could have expected that their chances against the Russian bear would be any better than the one the Germans had. And Germany's invasion ended in collossal failure.
The US never took this plan seriously - the US was still fighting in the Pacific - so it was very much Unthinkable.
Also although there were worries about the USSR - overall the US and UK population still looked at the Soviets as allies not adversaries in 1945.
@Ua la Halizeti If only. At the moment, NATO looks the other way while Putin treats Ukrainians like his bitch.
@@DrCruel both sides are awful, both sides looking for conflicts to test military tech and to solve crisis problems.
@@carl-os4603 Pardon. Ukraine did not pick a fight with Russia. They haven't stolen any Russian territory by force. What they did do is rather naively give up their 1800 ICBM nuclear arsenal for a promise from Clinton over US and UK help in the event of a war with Russia, which was apparently worth less than the paper it was written on.
What you said is a bit like blaming Mannerheim and Stalin equally for the 1940 Winter War against Finland.
@@DrCruel I am an ukrainian and I have my own opinion about tension between Russia and Ukraine (there is a big discussion).
And also, you should blame both sides in Winter war, since Soviet government had a diplomatic mission (set borders away from Lenningrad by ~ 80km, I dont remember right, and we will give you a few good islands) but finn government denied, whole conflict was stupid.
@@carl-os4603 Yeah. Right. Baltic states had it coming. Stalin did nothing wrong. The Czechs should have accepted the Sudetenland Plan to avoid the Second World War - oh wait, they did have it forced down their throats, didn't they? How did that work out.
Pointless to discuss this with some people.
"made this plan obsolete"
more like unthinkable amiright
tee hee
I read this as it was said in the video lol
It was Patton's idea in the first place, and he was all for it, you dumb Yank! XD Nothing make me guffaw more that a Yank who doesn't have a clue about their own history - thnaks to the internet I guffaw a lot. XD
Ba Dum tsss
~ plans ordered by Winston Churchill
~ "Patton's idea...you dumb Yank...a Yank who doesn't have a clue about their own history"
That's a nice glass house you're throwing stones in, @@sunnyjim1355
Churchill's request for the paln was so supprising and questionable that the British intelligence even questioned Churchill's state of mind.
Had British Intelligence taken him seriously, perhaps we wouldn't be on the brink of ww3 today. There was nothing wrong with his state of mind.
@@willatkinson9729 or you are another delusional idiot like churchill
But hey Go ahead invade Russia two big idiots before you tried and failed
Churchill was a traitorous occuItist. Not only did he plan to stab Soviets in the back in 1945, he also betrayed royalist Serbian Chetniks over Tito. In his free time he liked to bow down to the dark Iord, I think this sums up what kind of a man he was.
Churchill hated Russia
@@enitivy for good reasons they had invaded Poland , Baltic states , Finland , Ukraine (in 1919) , transcaucasian states (in 1920) annexed Moldova (from Romania) by that point
Churchill: I wonder was the russian plan is?
USSR: Rush B
Rush 🅱erlin
Rush Britain?
Rush 🅱rooklyn
Rush Brandenburg
Rush the back door of America(Alaska)
You forgot the fact that the USSR did not have nukes in 1945
SierraDelta6 true but i do wonder if the allies would've be willing to use another nuke again although i do think it would be likely tho
@YOAN SLAVEIKOV Think the Japanese share your mindset? Nukes are nukes, doesn't matter how many you have. Also, you can always build more.
@@xBlade87x yes but when your leadership and very foundation has been glassed off the face of the earth do you really keep fighting? The us only attacked those two cities in Japan because it had a high kill count of military to hopefully make the japanese surrender but imagine they nuked Kyoto or tokyo. Gg
SierraDelta6 did you even see Ussr on the map? And just look at first American atomic bombs. How can you destroy Ussr by a few bombs in 1945? Also you forgot the fact that for strategic bombing air superiority is required. There was no fighters that could fly on such a big ranges. Also soviets had a very strong air forces so this missions was impossible.
@@АмирАхмет-б5ц Allied control of the Baltic Sea answers the distance problem and, as is said here, the Soviet air force was dependent on the US for fuel - no fuel, no fly. Two bombs - Moscow and Leningrad would take care of it and the US had 2 ready to go in September 1945.
Says slavic people, adds non slavic countries into it... BRUH
Jerries are slavs tho
FreeBird0964 he excluded the Germans but included Romanians, Hungarians, and Albanians while mapping out the “Slavs”
But also to "protect" while oppressing most
@@FreeBird-ws2ye Germans Slavic? Go to Berlin and ask people in the street - LOL.
@@aussiejim1616 Yeah. Western Slavs
Churchill: Hey guys look at my plan
Churchill’s Generals: 🤣
Lol
@@blitzkrupp8583 CHURCHILL IS ACTUALLY A IDIOT
@@tranhieuanhlam5638 NOT! You are
@@romanlegion2621 ok kid
@@tranhieuanhlam5638 ok boy
7:28
Well, the Soviets had already occupied northern Iran.
This video is far from factual on so many levels. But yes you are absolutely correct Iran was occupied by a joint British soviet invasion. Also he doesn't understand how airpower works on infrastructure and effects the speed of retreat. Or that nukes existed at this point or that America was fighting Japan alone
@@Rays_Bad_Decisions yeah yeah... just accept the fact that Soviets were unbeatable even for once.
@@Rays_Bad_Decisions America was not fighting Japan alone. Britain was busy fighting an intense ground war in Burma against the Japanese, handing the Japanese one of their most significant defeats in the war. Not to mention a British Pacific fleet had been assembled to assist the USN. The Soviets were also preparing for an invasion from Manchuria.
@@oreroundpvp896 there was less then 100,000 British troops in burma
@@oreroundpvp896 not to mention the burma campaign supply lines were disrupted by us sub action and the island hopping campaign
Ah HOI 3 Music in Operation Unthinkable scenario , I see you are a man of culture as well.
ilhamionur I think this is HOI4 music?
Ho4 as well
Imagine If he had really used op unthinkable music
What is hoi 3?? I know hoi 4 But no 3...
Meanwhile in hoi4 operation unthinkable mode:
[°] New Zealand declared war to United States of America, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and Republic of China [°]
Churchill: Hey can I copy your homework?
Hitler: Sure just change it a little so the teacher doesn't notice.
Churchill:
lul
i'm sure someone will get wooooshed here
Hitler copied Napoleon, but didnt know his solutuion was wrong.
Yeah that fat ass lost his British empire so wanted me to lose mine.
@@schrodingerbracat2927 German generals copied Napoleon in 1941. Hitler knew that Ukrainian grain and Caucasian oil is needed to win the war. Yet his generals convinced him he should strike Moscow witch Napoleon captured. A year later at Stalingrad Hitler struggles to finally get that oil, and generals say he should use the rest of it for a retreat, so that they can attack again in summer without any oil reserves (witch is impossible. Later Hitler said his generals know nothing about strategic aspects of the war. Heres a video about it:
ruclips.net/video/kVo5I0xNRhg/видео.html
Ummm, no mention of allied use of Nuclear weapons? The Allies possessed nukes that the Soviets did not have until the 50's if my memory serves...surely they would have utilised this significant strategic advantage?
Exactly
@@jplegend98 How would dropping an atomic bomb on the Soviets speed up their nuclear program? Don't quite understand that. Perhaps if the Allies delayed the deployment of operation unthinkable by a few years, enough to restock their nuclear arsenal, then hit the key Russian targets outlined in this video, destroying Moscow and annihilating the central committee and the industrial areas. Severing the supply lines to the millions of soviet troops withdrawing may lead them to surrender. Plus he sheer dear factor of nuclear annihilation...if it can make the Japanese surrender, with their Bonsai mindset, the starved, lost soviet people may also feel that control of eastern Europe is not worth the effort. With the loss is the totalitarian leadership, there would be no one to enact the dictatorial forcefullness that drove the fanaticism of the USSR.
@@jplegend98 bullshit nonsense dude
@@dudemighster747 what i mean is if unthinkable happened shortly before or after japan surrendered (lets say they continued firebombing and saved fat man and little boy for russia). Russia already knew about the bomb and had captured german scientist's who worked on hitlers nuclear program. The american bombers at the time wouldnt be able to hit moscow from the nearest allied airbases at the time. So if they hit a less important city or some military bases the soviets would of instantly spent every last penny they could on their nuclear prodject. Also if they went woth tje full plan (50 nuclear bombings on the ussr) while at war you still have a shit tonne of russian soilders in eastern europe. They would kill and murder and rape as many people as they can (like east germany pre-ocupation) before being fored to surrender or going underground. Also nuclear bombings on europe will me the rest of europe hate the british and american.
Not only that, but even the Allies still didn't understand the implications of dropping an atomic bomb in terms of radiation fallout. So with that ignorance they would have dropped them when they saw fit.
Western propaganda heavily promoted the idea of helping the Soviets throughout the entire war.
It would be difficult for a Western regime to convince it's people that the Soviets are the enemies after just recently helping and supporting their now new enemy. Especially in a war of aggression.
As we've seen in the Vietnam War, public support in Western regimes can quickly drop once a war is seen as pointless and casualties start mounting.
@The Jester - Fool Of Hearts The invasion of Iraq is a prime example ("WMDs") and the attack on Vietnam is also based on false info.
@Parker Hetzel so. And what? 😊
@The Jester - Fool Of Hearts Geneva Convention, as I know, including a paragraph about this kind of weapon only since 90th. (sorry for bad english)
@Heroin Bob Iraq was known to have chemical weapons -- we'd sold or brokered the deals, during their war with Iran. Those were purchased in the 80's and were well past their use-by date; the invasion of Iraq was sold on the false premise that they were manufacturing NEW weapons.
@Heroin Bob Except the term "WMD" is entirely a bullshit term that was just used to make Iraq sound scary. The term has no clear definition and is sometimes interchangeable with NBC, however originally the term referred to mass bombing during WWII like the kind the allies did (which btw under this definition the US would have been guilty of using WMDs against Iraq). No treaty however has ever defined the term which means that it's not a term you can reliably use in international politics. You can say that chemical weapons are WMDs but that statement carries no weight or authority to it as WMD is not a technical term, and I can just as easily say that a WMD has to be particularly destructive not just be chemical. What is however clear is that Bush wasn't using WMD to just mean NBC he was clearly trying to give the impression that Iraq also possessed some sort of long range delivery system by showing "suspected ICBM sites". What is also clear is that even if we accept this definition of WMD as meaning that the country possessed chemical weapons at some point that may or may not be useful anymore then the US is a massive fucking hypocrite for condemning other countries for it as it is the only country to not sign the treaty banning chemical weapons and itself maintains a stockpile of them.
You make yourself look like a fucking idiot by trying to one up people and make them look like idiots by using meaningless buzzwords instead of actual precise technical language. You're not the intellectual rational mastermind speaking down to the hapless masses you're just a fucking dipshit that swallowed the propaganda hook line and sinker and it's clear as day to everyone here.
I have heard it said that General Patton wanted to fight the U.S.S.R. while the US Army was still in Europe. I had no idea that others 'may' have shared his 'alleged' opinion. An absolutely fascinating episode, thank you.
Look at what's going on now. Patton was right.
Helps you see Russias view against NATO as they saw it as threat to their motherland...we have an ocean so we can't fathom being invaded really on land by great powerful neighbors
@@Nperez1986 Yeah by that logic, you can also say the Nazi view is legitimate. Because the Allies were a "threat to their fatherland."
Simple fact is: Russia doesn't have any fear, they want to build an empire. And they thought the West was too weak-willed to stop them, especially after they got away with multiple other conquests. Just like Hitler thought, up until they drew the line in the sand at Poland.
@@seventh-hydra Lmfao no. unlike Nazi Germany, there was clear evidence that the west wanted to wipe the Soviet Union off the earth. Even more so when you realize that in the beginning, most major countries viewed the Nazi State as harmless, whereas most countries at the end of the Russian Revolution were so scared of them that they sent soldiers to attempt to crush the Red State in the east, and but ultimately failing to do so.
The reality of it all is that the west were 10 times more hungry for blood than the Soviet Government and people were at most of any time of the lifespan of the USSR. The west was more willing to destroy its "opposition" than live in a multi polar world. Of course, that's not to say the USSR was not also imperialistic, however its important to not equate them.
I mean, even in this scenario, who forgave the Nazi's?
I mean Churchill pretty much gave weapons and power to collaborators in Greece, i don't see how unthinkable that was for him
Correct, but the "unthinkable" part of the operation, was convincing the U.S. to fight Britain's anti-Communist fight, which originally failed as the Allied intervention to the Russian Civil War (1917-1924); the right-winger Churchill ignored what the Allies agreed in the Yalta and Potsdam agreements and lied that the fiendish USSR had welshed on said agreements, and thus "The West" (i.e. the U.S.) had to "liberate" fascist eastern Europe from the Judaeo-Bolshevik International Conspiracy . . . lest The Communists conquer the world.
Can you say more about the weapons that Churchill gave to the collaborators in greece?
@@Aggelos-tv3ep He is refering to the British support that gave to the crown to defeat EAM...i guess...still this happened because Greece was isolated with 3 communist regimes in her borders...not for a puppet state that never was the case...Greece was the first Cold War bettleground and the domino effect was a scary scenario (plus the geographic importance of Greece)
Jim Troy you win with this comment lmaooooo
I mean Churchill did nothing wrong, unlike your hero Stalin
Allies and Comintern: Finally, we will have lasting peace!
Churchill: Oh no you don’t!
then he lost the general election!
@Confederate Fleet It would have been nice if Germany had not been crushed.
_stares in Polish_
@@gunarsmiezis9321 It would have been nice to have both USSR and Germany crushed into pieces.
Actually the comintern, was not a faction in ww2. (Yes HOI ist wrong.) The SU was part of the allies.
Ok the thumbnail implies Churchill himself is gonna personally eliminate the red army 😂
The plan tore down by the new premier Attlee after he won the election.
Who knows what he might do next
Is there any doubt of that?
THE FANTASIES of A DRUNKARD ARISTOCRAT. | Yes, well . . . Winston always had a better public image than personal substance.
I don't doubt he'd try
0:40 "Entrusted with the protection of the slavic people of Eastern Europe"
Highlights Hungary and Romania as well
Hungarians and romanians: *TRIGGERED AF*
But seriously, we aren't slavic!
Bulgarians are also not 100% Slavic. Russian propaganda.
Not in the eyes of the Soviet Union
Exactly
Baltic states ain't slavic as well.
like it's in the word Baltic, were not called slavic states lol
The Soviet Union was an imperial project like any other, regardless of how much they then, and the Russian Federation after them, insist they weren't.
The Soviet Union had already lost 60% of its 20-26 year old fighting force. It's unlikely it could continue to fight another attritional war.
Who counted and openly gave that statistic though? The Soviets?
justlolit especially since they required western resources in WW2 in the first place
@@teeno91 Look it up the sources are around but the records are not up to normal standards. Think about it what the affect of millions of dead have on the running of a country the affects are still hitting Russia today. I'm in the comment section and on my phone so I can't link shitall. Nation doesn't have unlimited manpower.
What is your source on the 60% statistic?
@@robert18productions Harrison mark 2003 counting sovietdeath in the great patriotic war. Andrew, daraskii and kharkova 1993 naselenie sovetskogo soiuza 1922-1991.
Allies: Finally the war is over...
Winston Churchill: Hey guys, wanna declare war on the USSR?
Allies: Ah shit, here we go again.
The main reason was the British were pissed they started the war because the poles were occupied only to end the war with them still occupied.
Can you next do a video about the Middle east crisis and the withdrawal of allies forces from Iran Iraq and Syria
I think he has a few more to go before that but I hope he does this and the dealing with the iran and the shaw
“Stalin, we want you to hold elections”
“Ah yes, elections, of course”
“And these elections will be free and fair, right?”
“Ah yes, free and fair, definitely free and fair”
*Insert Anakin and Padme meme*
If that's not free and fair, I don't know what is?
Communist, Communist, Communist, Communist. “If that’s not fair I don’t known what
Is
Churchill had a good plan , we´d follow it
Soviet union: we are here to protect eastern europe....
Poland:"chukles" im in danger, again
Soviet Union was protecting Poland from freedom and prosperity. Not anymore fortunately
@@Watcher4111 Yes, because Poland became so prosperous after the fall of the USSR...
@@matheusvillela9150 It's pretty good and chill in here actually, low crime rates, plenty of opportunity, even on a surface level, the post communist Poland I was born in looks nothing like it did in the 90', although there is still work to do, unlike Russia which is basically a 3rd world country in many ways.
@@matheusvillela9150 yes Poland is prosperous unlike when occupied
The last time Churchill made an invasion plan gallipoli happened
Edit: holy shit the most likes I ever had.
rafi ibnul actually operation mince meat was one of his plans and that allowed the allies to take Sicily and then head all the way into Italy
Владимир Новиков actually his plan removed the vast majority of German divisions and basically all of the Panzer divisions and made them move to Greece, look up operation mince meat, it’s fascinating and Tom Scott made an excellent video explaining it
This so much
Sad as it is, the defeat at Gallipoli may have been a blessing in disguise. The British agreed beforehand to give the straits to the Russian Empire had that operation succeeded. Please excuse my misspellings. Fascinating stuff!
rafi ibnul General Eisenhower would more than likely be in charge in the scenario
WW2 ends
Churchill: that was nice, how ’bout another round?
Excellent video. If I may add, when I studied this very period of history people were tired of war. Drafting was not a popular measure, despite what Hollywood and comics tell us today. The West, mainly the US, UK, and France had men power but were not willing to fight. Germany not so much.
Anderson Andrighi Since Germany was split into two
Winston goes to generals, says I have a plan.... Generals sigh, take winston by the hand and lead him to the bar.
No chance of that because he lost the General election.
"An iron curtain has descended upon my liquor cabinet..."
Alyodarbelongtome - most underrated comment
I have a cunning plan...
He was like we need to defeat soviets
General passing him a bottle of vodka
Winston: well seems like those russians are not bad after all
The allies still needed the Red Army in July 1945 to finish the war against Japan...the other enemy. The Soviet invasion of Manchuria has been underrated by historians. After this, the Japanese lost not only a large part of their military but many of their raw materials as well. This also played an equal part in Japan's defeat.
All the elite Troops were fighting against the Americans. The Japanese Troops left in Manchuria were only some regular troops. Also the kwantung army was a lot of smaller taxtet the majority was sent to the pacific. Under this circumstances the Japanese had no chance against the ussr
Americans didnt believe....they are tought what govt want to ..soviets were there best allies than british..they are not that bad. What u think..
@@Prabh120 The Soviets are the reason the war got that far in the first place. If they were a true ally, they wouldn't have invaded Poland.
Operation unthinkable was going on betw us and britain during war.wedge btw friendship was created by churchill. Bcs roosevelt and stalin are getting closer.and churchill felt lost
@@supergoodadvice853 Why did Poland help Germany partition the Czechs and tell the Soviets to fuck off when they were concerned about it?
Video: Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania are Slavic
Me: Wait, that's Illigal.
Can I into nordic?
@@willywodka1924 NO
As a pure blood latvietis I gladly accept the name slav and call my self one all the time. Slava = glory, reputation, prestige, honor, valor, ....
Gunārs Miezis Lithuanian is not Slavic though
No mention of Romania or Moldova?
So, Soviet Union wasn't actually paranoid at all.
@only good communist are buried in forgotten graves that is why there is paranoia today in the west. Fun fact - western countries killed far more people in the same timeframe, and also tried military intervention into Russia during revolution. However, socialism is coming for you!
@only good communist are buried in forgotten graves Errm, not really. I mean in the first half of the 20th century, you have british concentration camps in South Africa during the Boer Wars, the starvation of indians, slaughtering people in middle east for wanting independence, of course there is the whole set of war crimes of carpet bombing german cities. You had the belgians cutting hands in Congo. US also rounded up japanese and put them in concentration camps, even if they were technically american citizens.
@only good communist are buried in forgotten graves Fun facts .. you are butthurt and your original statement makes no sense at all ...
@only good communist are buried in forgotten graves Fun fact ... you are *STILL BUTTHURT* ... and now *crying like a baby..*
Omega Alpha I guess it’s alright for Germany to bomb allied cities but its not ok for the allies to bomb German cities back
invading Russia?
because that always ends well
Operation Unthinkable didn't call for an invasion of the Soviet Union like the Nazis, they could bomb the Urals with long range bombers the closer they get to the front, and they didn't need to attack pointless locations like the Caucuses, just bomb them. The Allies had something the Soviets and the Nazis didn't, wealth.
jabber1990 it ended well for the invader several Times in history
@@Litany_of_Fury it wouldnt work because you cannot win the war by bombing and expecting that foe will stay still.
@@carl-os4603 The soviets could definitely win battles but it's another question if they could win a war.
War primarily in modern day is based on economics and logistics.
@@carl-os4603 It worked with the Japanese Empire. The Soviets had the highest causalities during the entire war, do you really think Stalin would allow it to continue? No, he most certainly wouldn't, he would sue for immediate peace.
Just think, one of your cities disappears in the blink of an eye AND you're 100% hopeless to stop it. Do you really truly believe the Soviets would continue to crush on? It would be so pointless, how would you expect to hold an effective counterattack and even be successful all the way back to France? It's just not possible, the Soviets would have no choice but to give in.
2:34 this was the most Russian "Bydgoszcz" I have heard in my whole life.
Sounds fine to me forvo.com/search/Bydgoszcz/ sound like Polish
@@andraslibal tones of how he says it are very off
@@PaulRakoczi what do you think of the forvo pronunciation? Nice last name btw :)
@@andraslibal lmao thanks, and the forvo pronunciation is spot on.
“Ending occupation of Eastern Europe” well, that’s wasn’t unthinkable, after the grievous losses the Soviets had at that point. Pushing them back into Russia wasnt that unthinkable..
Pushing soviets back to russia was good plan. Baltic states and Germany would be free
@@Watcher4111 yeah, In czechia we would have 45 less years of opression by the Soviets
@@Watcher4111 xdd if allies attacked ussr they would capitulate in like 2 weeks. USSR just smashed unstoppable Germany army. Keep remember that France with help of allies fall faster than one house in Stalingrad. 10 million army with socialistic economic and with that much resources is strongest army in history and nobody were even close
If it not, why didn’t allies attack?
"if new surprise attack was favourable"
like a Barbarossa Round 2?
jesus christ...
Since zhukov already knew about this attack it would be more like operation bagration 2.0 push towards atlantic lol
Stalin: why the f.ck do these idiots want our motherland
Dmitry: gas and oil
Another video without sources in the description...
F
Wikipedia is their sole source.
@@dzejrid wikipedia is not good source.
@@Dawid-kn6mv Yes. My point exactly.
Just make your own research ffs
Why does eveyone has to do it for you
Astana didn’t exist yet. Almaty did , but very well done
ey, someone did call this out
Americans can’t use maps. For some reason they always modern names for cities, countries and regions.
hgkghk hgkgh astana’s modern name is nursultan btw
Mehmet Demirci fuck that shit
Astana doesn't exist anymore either ;-)
No one:
The soviet union: *Hey wanna see me do it again?*
Yes! with no lend- lease or allied major powers
@@piecekeeper5317 The soviet army at that time was literally unkillable. Most soldiers were well trained as they already experienced combat for many years and suffered the most.
@@daddymccrackin4677 Eventually soviet union would have been depleted from manpower, where the British Empire and USA would not. Keep in mind the soviet union had already lost 40 Million people in WW2, UK and USA just 300k.
Jônatas Pereira this was all I could think throughout this video. Their population is literally still declining today from the amount of men they lost in WW2 and a variety of other factors. I find it extremely hard to believe they would be able to muster the amount of divisions this video claims.
@@11leeson I don't think they would have problems mustering those divisions in the start of the war, the problem comes after the losses begin to mount. They wont have men to replenish them.
Also Churchill knew about the atomic bomb and wanted it dropped on Russia first.
@Nathan Bernacki The U.S. would have been part of this, so they'd have been committed. They wouldn't have held anything back. Then again, this was a contingency plan, so 'improbable' really doesn't matter.
@Nathan Bernacki Because this was never a battleplan! It was a contingency plan for if hostilities broke out. The British General Staff didn't make it with the intention of actually trying to start another war with the USSR. It was something Churchill thought up, so they made an outline. The plausibility of it being used wasn't the point. The point was to see what they could do.
@@creatoruser736 then did they make a plan for when the Americans dont go along with their stupid plan A?
@@mxn1948 Dude, that plan exists, and having the US military play a big part was integral to it. Nuke or not you tell me why they would have made a plan at all without consulting the Americans about their role.
@Nathan Bernacki Maybe they would have considered it if they had the foresight to recognise that the USSR would be their primary enemy for the next four decades. I mean it would be an awful idea but the US clearly had an interest in curtailing the power of the Soviet Union. So it wasn't just 'Churchill's stupid war', it was the beginning of the Cold War.
Yes, it is true that the Soviets wouldn't have been able to hold their positions in Germany against an allied attack and would have needed to make a fighting withdrawal. Yes, it's true that, on balance, the allies would have had air superiority and inflicted significant damage on deficient Soviet logistics.
However, note the statistic in the video reminding us that the Soviets actually outnumbered the US in the air. The US heavy bomber force wouldn't have been making attacks with impunity, because even if the Soviet fighters couldn't reach them and fight them effectively at high altitudes, the allies wouldn't have been able to fly the intensive AAA suppression missions that made their heavy bombers so effective against the Germans in the late war, nor would they have been able to count on fighter-bombers strafing Soviet armor into submission (at least, no more than Soviet attack planes would've done to their own ground forces). By 1945 the Soviets had developed cluster bombs that made their IL-3s and similar planes very effective tank hunters. Even if the Soviets lost most of their ground attack planes in the first few weeks of fighting they would do a lot to blunt the momentum of the allied armored divisions.
Another factor: the largest and most devoted anti-Nazi partisan armies in the west, in France and (especially) in Italy, were in fact composed of communists. The handful of divisions that Churchill's plan called for leaving behind to maintain order would've been inadequate to defend the allied rear and supply lines against veterans with such a home-field advantage. Furthermore there would most likely have been major campaigns of industrial sabotage and espionage by pro-communist civilians and officials in England and the United States proper. Conversely, the largest potential partisan force that could've helped undermine the Soviets in Eastern Europe, the Polish Home Army, had been reduced to a shadow of its former self after Stalin (treacherously, or shrewdly, depending on your point of view) deliberately halted his advance and allowed them to be destroyed by the Wehrmacht.
Although it is true that the Soviet supply situation would've quickly grown dire, the U.S. and England also had a major "supply problem" that would've made fighting a long war impossible for them: not a shortage of steel, fuel, or any kind of raw materials, but a shortage of money. The U.K. was already in a deep, dark pit of debt by this point and the U.S., which had mostly been successful funding the conflict with war bonds up until this point, would've been put in the uncomfortable position of suddenly needing to default on its debts, nationalize factories, and take other heavy-handed measures. If Truman had been convinced to join Churchill in this quixotic war, the Soviets would've known they only needed to hold the line until the next round of American elections in which Truman would have been thrown out in a historic landslide. Likewise, the U.K. public would've turned against such a war with breathtaking swiftness even if enough initial support could be mustered to launch the attack. Granted, the leadership of both the American and British militaries were politically on the far-right (in the case of Patton in particular, it is not hyperbole to say that he was essentially an American Nazi) and probably would've gone along, but the populace at large would've revolted.
dark7element Allies had nuclear bombs the soviets didn’t
@@bennshephard8682 let that sink in. Using an atomic bomb on a nation that just survived extermination by Nazi Germany and that had lost 30 million people. Let that sink in. Places the US and its allies in Nazi Germany's shoes
@@bennshephard8682 the nukes of 1945 were not game changers, they only became game changers once boosted fission and fusion bombs then ICBMS.
@@randall172 Additionally the US didn't have the infrastructure in place to mass produce them, let alone the ability to deliver them to worthwhile targets.
Thanks dark7, this is an excellent summary. I would like to add to your supply chapter by saying that the western allied forces were already slowed down just a few months after D-Day because of supplying problems, their advance eastwards halted from september 1944 until march 1945. They didnt have the capacity even though by that time the German forces were on its last legs and had zero airforce or navalforce to speak of.
Churchill: *pokes the bear*
Stalin: So you have chosen... Death?
iosif Stalin too bad the bear can’t swim
Excellent video!
Thank god operation Unthinkable
was just Unthinkable.
Hearts of iron music puts a smile to my face.
Soviet Union: we are here to protect slavic people
Poland:
Hard for a Polish woman to laugh while being raped by a Red Army protector.
@@kreuzritter4898 to zwykły ruski troll
@@DrCruel "it's ok because we thought she was German"
- actual red army excuse
@@DrCruel Your mom?)
And Hungary or Romania are not even Slavic...
I can`t focus on the video because of hearts of iron 4 music
The Cold War: ( plays music most commonly heard in hoi4)
Me: Wait a minute?
This plan was a great idea, I'm sure that after fighting a World war the Germans, the French, the Americans and the British were looking forward to fighting another, it's not like they were still fighting Japan, it's not that neither Soviets nor the European allies had rebuilt their nations, it's not that Britain's war dept was around the corner, it's that "muh nukes" would've carried the team to victory!
The War debt could not be called upon during war.
Imagine being a german wehrmacht soldier. Having to fight against russia, advancing nearly to moscow, being beaten at stalingrad, surviving the retreat and the loss of the war just to return attacking russia under the rule of the western allies that kicked you out of france and africa. It would have been an oh so hilariously strange turn in history.
Pretty much the premise of Konflict '47 and Dust.
Blibla Blubb siege of itter castle
Silversnake Productions : Ah yes, were a ragtag force of wehrmacht and allies fought against SS troops to protect these french VIP prisoners, no?
Wait, so after attacking Soviet Forces and pushing them back from the hard earned land, Churchill expected NOT A TOTAL WAR with USSR? Was that guy insane or what?
Also, not sure how relevant Carrier forces would be here. I mean, why sail a carrier straight up the Baltic sea, to be attacked by soviet subs and planes when you can just put the planes on land.
Attacking Leningrad would have yeilded almost nothing
Churchill own Generals said NO in no uncertain terms ... a rare rebuke to their political leader ... and yeah ... I thought the same about the carrier group in Baltic Sea too ... very easy for Soviets to eventually track it down and hammer it with its own Fighter bombers ...
Diverting valuable aircraft to deal with the carriers wouldn'tve been an option, more a suicide mission for all soviet forces in Europe. The combined huge royal navy and US navy + the other allied ships. The subs wouldn'tve gotten close..
@Nathan Bernacki The Allied navies would get into the baltic way before the soviets managed to close it off. They probably already had loads of ships in anyway, but reinforcements would be a few hours away. A push to the strait from the red army wouldn't be very fast without every single aircraft on the front.
@Dex4Sure And with here " Western the Communists." Which side they belonged to the production of jet engines ? Explain ?
@Dex4Sure - Трудовые отношения ? Это и есть"социал-демократы"?! Ну они никакие не коммунисты (а быть они не могут по определению) это просто название (это как современная Российская коммунистическая партия-дань традиции форма с капиталистическим содержанием) партия целиком стоящая на позициях капитализма) так что профсоюзное название "Лейбористская партия" это дань английской Профсоюзной традиции. Так что ты-предмет для шуток. Не называйте Лейбористскую партию "коммунистами". Назовите лопату лопатой "капитал искал рынок для реактивных двигателей" давайте начнем с этого (для начала) . Во-вторых, в мире по-прежнему мало стран, нуждающихся в двигателях для реактивных самолетов. По этому английскому бизнесу нашлось возможным продавать двигатели . За нашу дорогую и любимую страну Советов. Это бизнес (прецедент был уже в тридцатых годах в торговле с США), поэтому я думаю, что ваш ответ неверен.
I remember my German girlfriend’s father telling me about how he was demobbed by the British in the British Occupation Zone in 1945;only to be re-called up shortly afterwards and along with many other former German Army soldiers, sent to a big army base in Schleswig Holstein, where he learnt that they would be sent eastwards to fight the Soviets.. This is a piece of primary evidence to the subject.
''Wait the Allies are doing WHAT? And they want us to- No way man, I'm not going back to Stalingrad''
Wouldn’t it be awesome to have a Steel Division 2 type-game set in 1945-46, retracing a fictional operation unthinkable across multiple theaters?
I love how people think this plan would of worked when it was created by a politician while all the military people thought it was stupid.
@Sari Çizmeli Mehmet Ağa Churchill almost got himself beheaded by the Pashtuns in Afghanistan. His military career was mired with near death experiences and spectacular failures.
The plan was drawn up by the British Imperial General Staff, not Churchill. Allied air superiority would have been so total over Europe that the Soviet logistics would have resembled those of the Wehrmacht at Stalingrad. Good luck fielding 30 armored divisions and 24 tank brigades if you can't put fuel in them. The Soviets already could not use all of their forces at once against the Germans during Operation Bagration due to not having enough supplies. Several Fronts were stopped dead in Romania while Bagration was underway. Cut off from Lend Lease and with their trucks and trains obliterated by Allied air power the Red Army would have lost operational mobility and began running out of ammunition in the first 2-4 weeks. If you want to see what would happen after that look up Operation Compass, the first British counterattack against the Italians in North Africa. The Italians outnumber the British by about 120k to 30k but the Western Desert Force ran rings around them and completely destroyed them.
*have
@@Jayce_Alexander Virgin
With this being covered, could you also make a video on "Plan Totality" (American nuclear attack on Russia just after the war)?!
Plan totality isnt an actual ppan to invade Russia it was part of Trumans deception of the USSR
The British wanted to come and aid the Polish? Unthinkable!!
Yes we did but we couldn’t do it alone you poles always say it was Britain that left you to the Soviets it wasn’t it was the US
JJ Brooks Very True!
@William Wykoff Do you know how and why the USA joined bough World Wars?
@William Wykoff Most certainly.
JJ Brooks ur talking about the U fucking S, we invaded vietnam for sum bullshit. We’d help the fuckin poles if we could. Most americans wanted to stay out of the war. Like that dude said, european war, european problem. Gtfoh
Stalin is responsible for sooo many deaths and so many issues we still have to this day.
Peace my friend
@Aniruddh i agree but Stalin killed around 70 million not 30 million. The USA killed 2.8 million indians. The rest went to reservations.
I love that it was called "operation unthinkable."
Allied generals: Hey Churchill what's your plan to defeat Stalin.
Churchill: We are going to swiftly invade Russia, just like Napoleon and Hitler.
Allied generals: Oh shit here we go again.
In hindsight, Operation Unthinkable should have become thinkable.
Read up on the intervention war brainlet.
Excellent video, as always. It's so rare for a presentation to touch upon the lack of aviation fuel in this scenario. The war would have been a disaster for everyone, but I believe that the west would have inevitably won. The Soviets had many strengths including the vast experience its soldiers and officers had by this point. However, I believe the United Nations (Really just the British) vastly overestimated the numerical superiority of the Soviets. On paper, in 1945, a Soviet rifle division had a compliment of 11,780. In reality there had been so much chaos, death, and shortages that divisional compliments had been reorganized seven times during the war. The bulk of Soviet rifle divisions followed the Number 04/55 template that specifies a rifle division was to have 9,435 personal assigned to it. The Red Army had approximately 300 rifle divisions in 1945, though there are many contradictions that range from 200 - 400. The number of divisions isn't necessary the important part, but rather the condition of them. In the Far-East it was a completely different situation, but in Europe just 10% of Soviet rifle divisions were at 80% strength or above. The vast majority were at or below 50% strength. The same could be said of guard divisions with the added concern of poor maintenance standards, lack of parts, and an inability to keep-up with repair demands meant considerably lower states of readiness beyond merely lacking personal.
Keep in mind that Churchill was resigned to delay any meaningful invasion of Europe until it seemed that the Red Army had turned the tide. The Red Army was in no condition to wage another large-scale conflict with relatively fresh major powers. Worse still is that the industrial might of the United States dwarfed the Soviets. Indeed, the United States provided 35% of all aircraft, 23% of all AFV, 50% of all 1/2 ton trucks, 75% of all 1/4 ton trucks, and enough munitions, rations, clothing, and other supplies to keep 50 divisions fighting indefinitely. This is ontop of an even larger contribution made to the Commonwealth. Despite lend lease, the United States still had the manufacturing capabilities to outfit itself with the most mechanized army in history. By the end of the war it had the largest navy and airforce in history despite essentially having to build it all from scratch in just 3.5 years.
More importantly, as it proved itself a major advantage in WW2, the American homeland was virtually immune from damages. It's the only power who could claim this and doubtlessly played an instrumental role in its production figures. While the Soviets would need to deal with strategic bombing, the Americans would continue to just be concerned with sabotage.There would be no ceasing production to rebuild the facilities or having to relocate machinery to other facilities due to vulnerabilities.
The UN, as the democratic power on the offensive, would also find support from occupied territory. The anti-communist sentiments would be burning harder than ever after the rape of East Germany and the plundering of Romania, Hungry, Bulgaria, and even Poland. Actual manpower would be quite limited, but intelligence and partisan cooperation proved vital during the French liberation. Critically, the Soviets would need to allocate forces to suppress them and people called away to protect bridges a thousand miles away do not help repel an invasion.
I do not think Stalin would be foolish enough to strike into Iran, Iraq, and Turkey. Nor do I think he would fight to the end. After the initial push Stalin may have settled upon allowing Poland to have free elections whilst negotiating that the former Axis allies should stay with them. Given that few gave two shits about former enemies, I think Churchill would have been satisfied dealing a blow to the Soviets and liberated Poland and Czechoslovakia.
What nonsense did you write? What is it ? Let's start with your lies about the UN. You don’t even know that the creation of the UN was an initiative of the USSR. And here is fucking England?
Further comment on your nonsense?
word wall ahead
yep the Red army was lacking massively in reserves of manpower, the Wehrmacht had pretty much bled them white
0:40
"Entrusted with the protection of the Slavic people in Eastern Europe"
>also highlights the Baltic States
:(
it is all russian clay
Churchill was totally right, he just lacked the means... unfortunately.
👍👍👍
Please stop including Latvians and Lithuanians when you talk about "Slavic people." Both nations are Baltic, and not Slavic.
Indeed, but Stalin would insist that they were Slavic...
@@caad5258 wouldnt surprise me if Stalin called France slavic as a excuse to invade
They are Balto-SLAVIC!
@@LionKing-ew9rm There's no such thing.
@@Legitpenguins99 We all know that Baguette and Croissant are the dominant food in slavic states ;)
But Churchill had strongly counted on the Western Nuclear monopoly!
Lion King wasn’t enough at the time
Churchill had a good plan , we´d follow it
Eastern Front 2: Electric Boogaloo
5:52 yeah.... pushing forward to beat the soviets.. now where have I heard that before 🤔🤔
Congrats on the new channel. Churchill's plan is news to me. Thanks for covering the plan.
I racked my brain for a whole of 10 seconds and it came up with more negatives than positives. Counting men, tanks and aircraft is useful but not an answer. Using atomic weapons in the European theatre would be disastrous too. But then again: Britain couldn't afford to hold India or any of its colonies shortly after the war. What about the fascist and communist forces inside the US? Why would the US risk everything instead of just the good old cordon sanitaire? You know, you need a world in the first place for a world order to exist in which you can become the dominant power. What about the rest of the world? The neutral and the semi neutral nations who stood on the sidelines more or less so far? I also remembered that many years after this war using much better weapons, lots of money and resources and with utter ruthlessness toward both the Vietnamese and their own. The US failed to subjugate a tiny country called Vietnam! Only to be called a "paper tiger".
Then comes an old guy who's way past his prime as a political leader who couldn't even secure the July 1945 elections wishing to commit the world to this reckless or even criminal endeavor. What about Pendergast's office boy in the senate? Would he had the stomach to accept millions of losses in such a war? Sure he had the stomach to drop not one but two bombs on the Japanese but he didn't lose a single soldier doing that. I mean the US suffered between 15 to 20 thousand dead on a tiny island called Okinawa attacking a much smaller and inferior albeit well entrenched force. The same US that was waiting for the Russian to share the brunt of the causalities, again, of the Japanese home islands invasion. Compare that to the European and the Eurasian killing fields and you'll find counting men and tanks quite useless. I think Mr. Churchill was being plain silly!
I really wonder how different the world would look like today if this plan was approved and succeeded.
rebellions in all Western countries because nobody was in the mood of a third great war.
"We fought against wrong enemy."
General George Patton
Unthinkable? This happens in every HOI4 playthrough!
Is HOI4 really good ... ? I was thinking of getting it ... I would appreciate it if u got back ... Thanks ...
@@Hero.Lone-Wolf not as good as EU4. Doesn't have as much replay value. Only buy as a steamsale or ... Yarrrrr! ;-)
@@Barwasser Thanks Bro ..
Given the Red Army’s advantage in time and distances Unthinkable was insane
This would make a fantastic alternate history FPS.
finally something about ww2 i havent heard 100 times!
Another episode where people should be thankful that cooler heads did prevail and this didnt happen. However such a scenario would be good for the Hearts of Iron series
Wow cool video big like man!
Hoi4 ost 👌👌
I like how Russians are so outraged that thos plan existed; as if the reason for it, the Soviet takeover of half of Europe (including Allied nations) wasn't outrageous at all.
Yeah but the west agreed to it at Yalta.
No takeover, they freed it from german facism!
@@alpha3488 Yeah, and left it to be freely governed by its people as they saw fit, according to their free political, cultural and economic interests and traditions, definitely without Soviet-style institutions, NKVD proxy services etc. Nobody was branded a fascist or nazi sympathizer and persecuted for desiring just that, either.
^it's a sarcasm, comrade.
@@Mira-K Hungary, Bulgaria or Poland had a strong workers movement or/and famous communists long before WW2. And it's not like the western Allies were any better in securing their zone of influence, for example in Greece.
@@alpha3488 In Bulgaria the "worker's movement" murdered off the government which had refused to participate in war against USSR. But they and Hungarians were axis, allright. In Romania the king who overthrew Antonescu and joined Allies got soviet medal... and exile at a guinpoint.
In Poland communist movement was inded strong before regaining independence (1905 revolution, many Polish bolsheviks), and it was tied to desire for independence, primarily from Russia. Marx himself wanted Poland not only free but even as monarchy if need be. Communism was previously viewed as way to liberation from Russia, now turned to be viewed as means of subjugation to (red) Russia and marginalised. Many prominent Polish leaders from former Tsardom had brief Bolshevik episode before being completely freaked out by what they saw happening in Russia. Political moods after WW2 were indeed strongly to the left, but absolutely not pro-soviet. Gomułka despaired in late 40s: "people who'd otherwise endorse our ideas reject us as foreign goons".
Czechoslovakia? The single real democracy in the region, with Soviet-friendly but democratic and independent government first reduced to mere yesmen and then overthrown by Soviet-sponsored coup.
Greece was the sole positive example of Allies rescuing their members, because the fools were walking willingly into what most other Easterners tried in vain to avoid. Whatever follies of the new regime, it was Greeks, and only theirs, own doing, without big brothers meddling.
I imagine that if it did happen the allies would just send Soviet troops back to the Soviet border and just leave after making sure that Stalin wouldn't try anything else.
By 1945 the Western Allies had 4.5 million soldiers stationed on continental Europe; The USSR had almost triple of that with over 12 million soldiers... Just so you get an idea of how unthinkable such operation was...
Accept the west had complete air superiority, nukes, complete naval supremacy and better supply of manpower.
This was the dillusional side of Churchill that cropped up every once and a while. The Pacific War was still going on, while the Soviets had a strong position in "Eastern Europe" due to the success of Operation Bagration, the invasion of the Balkans and the Vistula-Oder offensive. Greece would have been completely exposed to a riposte (as mentioned in the video), and maybe locales south of occupied Iranian Azerbaijan... Pushing into eastern Soviet Union was a non-starter.
But fundamentally, neither the public of Great Britain nor of the Commonwealth, nor of the US would have accepted that kind of opportunistic pivot that totalitarian regimes were capable of - just turning around and trying to stab prior partners in the back with invasion, the kind of actions that Orwell wrote about in 1984 ...
I think this plan is aptly named, although I do wonder about the idea of the allies pushing the Soviets back into the USSR and then stopping at the border.
I tried to attempt this in conflict of nations it actually went really well
Proof that video games can be inaccurate
Well to everyone who thought nukes would have brought the Russians to their knees, their winter is their ultimate weapon, not their tanks, not their men. It's that winter beyond which even Napolean and Hitler couldn't advance.
Cringe.
Youre right. No way they could've won.On the other hand,it would encourage people who were under colonial rule to turn to communism.(UK is nothing without colonies)
It's hilarious to see "Reddit fat-boys" sitting on their couch talking about wars
Cringe. You wouldn’t need to conduct a full ground invasion of the Soviet Union with nukes. The same way the Americans didn’t need to naval invade Japan thanks to the nuclear bomb. And Japan were NEVER going to surrender if it wasn’t for the nuclear bomb.
this was a great video!!
The Allies had B-29s and the sole nuclear capability. It may have been winnable for a horrendous cost.
It wouldn't have been ww3 though, it would have just been seen as a continuation of ww2.
I'm the airforce in 45 wasnt in disarray as it was in 1940.
The airforce was purged same time as the army.
The front line fighter in 45 was the la9, which was very comparable to the p51. Also the yak9ut, the close support in 45 was the il10, which was a flying tank, the pe8, tu2 were the strategic bombers in 45
Pe3 were were medium bombers and heavy fighters, used in several roles.
The tu4 was also in production.
Operation unthinkable was Churchill warmongering plan to try and keep the british empire the dominant power in the world for another 50 years
Nine, nine, nine. The Soviets did not withdraw luring the Germans deep into the Soviet Union, they fought every step of the way.
"...the Slavic people of Eastern Europe..." Includes Romania, Hungary, and the Baltic countries now I suppose.
The hoi4 music makes me wanna go back to the 1.4 days. Back when you didn't have 5k hours and could have fun in the game...
0:15 The USSR invaded a bit of German Norway in the Laplands war.
The western block has a new leader and is called *the british empire*
Great video 👍
If you wanted to defeat the Soviet Union in 1945, all you would have needed to do is to nuclear-destruct Moscow. Then as now, there are only two primary cities in Russia: (Moscow and St. Petersburg (then Leningrad).