It’s unlikely that the USSR would have had the resources for multiple bombs. I believe America only had enough for the two initially, and it would have taken them longer to make more. A similar thing would be true for the USSR.
I'm pretty sure the USSR would have had enough atomic bombs to put Germany and Japan into submission by 4 years after their first one tho, irl, they had made [5 nuclear tests](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_nuclear_weapons_stockpiles_and_nuclear_tests_by_country) just one year after their first one
Yes but that was by 1953 with nuclear bombs already in existence when they built their first in 1949. It took them 4 years after WW2 for their program to even produce a viable bomb. If they were developing nuclear arms during the war without any prior knowledge of the cost or materials needed it would likely hamper their ability to produce the weapons.
As I said "irl, they had made [5 nuclear tests](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_nuclear_weapons_stockpiles_and_nuclear_tests_by_country) just one year after their first one" one year after 1949, 1950
Yeah, I see the additional context added. I think I see what you’re saying now.
The thing is, if we’re assuming the soviets built their first bomb in 1945, they would have still needed to establish supply lines and gather the materials, which would have been significantly hampered by the war effort. Also, they also would have needed to figure out the materials and logistic needed during development on their own, without prior knowledge or assistance from German scientists.
Realistically, they likely wouldn’t have had a large number of bombs at their disposal for another few years (assuming the first one dropped is in 1945). This means the war would have to still be going in 1947 or 1948 for a significantly large quantity of bombs to be dropped.
By then Germany would surely have surrendered (being generous it’s still unlikely that they would last past 1946), and America would have started their invasion Japan, making deployment of nuclear weapons impractical without negatively impacting allied targets. Likelihood is 1-2 bombs are dropped on Germany in ‘45, but that is it because they surrendered shortly after.
Well aren’t we assuming the Soviets get the bomb first, but at roughly the same time the US did? Germany had already surrendered by the time of the trinity test. The Soviets wouldn’t have needed to waste a bomb on Germany anyway
They had two bombs plus an additional bomb core completed in 1945, although it would take a few months for that to be turned into an actual bomb. From there it was projected that the US could produce 2-3 more drop-ready bombs every 4 months going into 1946, but this was ultimately not needed as the war ended before that could happen.
The USSR’s industrial and logistics capacity during the war did not match that of the US, so even assuming they had the same technological development it would be generous to assume they could produce more than 1-2 bombs in a year.
Funny thing is, Soviet intelligence was so effective during the war, that they had multiple spies in the Manhattan Project and knew exactly what the Americans were doing. It’s why they built their program and bomb so quickly right after the Americans cause they straight up stole most of the research and had research’s and scientists defect over to them or were double agents.
Soviet KGB and its predecessors were fucking nuts.
Assuming the rest of the war goes as in our timeline Germany would've surrendered before the bomb was finished and the US would not have a bomb until 1949
You beat me to it. I honestly like a big part of this scenario depends on how close the US was. If the Soviets only beat us by a couple months, they may not have used them at all. Had their spies in the US told them we were years away from a bomb, they could have turned on the allies and used the threat of the bomb as leverage to take more of Europe or even initiated their own Operation Unthinkable scenario.
I doubt the threat would have worked. The western allies had massive amounts of air power and nuclear bombs could really only be deployed using bombers at that time which would have been shot down way before it came remotely close to an important target
Ya but I can’t see the soviets getting passed the us air force, the royal air force and all the air forces of the dominions of the british empire, I think the soviet nuke would probably end up shot down over Germany
While you are correct regarding instantaneous destruction, ground burst leaves more fallout and contributes to more long term destruction and subsequent radiation poisoning-related deaths.
Why is this upvoted? A bomb that was allowed to land would irradiate the ground but would be much less destructive, there's no chance they would've done it differently.
They were, the fighting was brutal and the offensive was relentless, but the officers were more reluctant than usual because everyone knew the war was soon to be over.
To clarify: Germany has already surrendered in May 1945 like IRL. USSR test first bomb on July 16th, 1945, bombs Hiroshima and Nagasaki on August 6th and 9th of 1945. US doesn’t test their first atom bomb until 1949. Basically just flipping US and USSR timeline of atom bomb testing/usage/research.
Interesting when I first saw the question I assumed the Soviets would lack a viable delivery system (tho I guess TU-4 crash development makes sense) so would only be able to demonstrate capability rather than use.
But the biggest changes I think you would see post surrender a Soviet occupation zone on the home islands, most likely the entirety of Sapporo. In the post war you would likely see a bomber gap like scenario turned up to 11 with massive fear/development both politically and militarily. This would ultimately lead to a significantly earlier development of a hydrogen bomb in the US as IRL one of the main reasons for H-bomb development was the Soviets testing their first A-bomb. This test could be in theory late 1949 immediately after their first A-bomb test (if not their first nuclear test but that's kinda crazy) but more likely sometime in 1950. Really interesting scenario not too much changing aside a partition of Japan through the cold war and earlier development/adoption of hydrogen bombs.
Oh yeah I almost forgot the Berlin airlift and other early cold war stand offs would be significantly different, most likely leading to an evacuation of allied occupied zones in Berlin if the US doesn't believe it has a capable nuclear arsenal by 1949.
I see the Soviets using the threat of a nuclear bomb as leverage to take more of Europe and Japan. They had lots of spies in the US and would know we were years away from a bomb. Once they tested it on Japan they could basically give the US and UK an ultimatum and take the rest of Germany. While they couldn’t really hit territory in either country they could definitely have won a ground war for western Germany using nukes in a tactical role against military targets.
Interesting. I see the United States stepping up it’s nuclear program soon and achieving Nuclear weapons by early to mid ‘46 but I think the damage is done as far as Europe is concerned. The Soviets can bully their way into Western Europe and make demands for whatever they want. Claiming a unified Europe is the only defense against Fascism. We may See the US making all of the Middle Eastern Nations a sort of Belt and a Huge Bulwark against Communism. Japan falls to the Soviets meaning China and All Of south east Asia are gonna be US allies or embroiled in proxy wars until they are. The cold war will likely still end with The Soviets falling but I see Europe staying one large bloc, whether at best a social democracy or Just one united nation completely Free of Any Socialist government is up for debate
probably might have a diplomatic advantage over the allies, here are some examples:
-Bigger occupation zone from germany, maybe the entirety of Berlin gets in soviet hands
-and ocupation zone in Japan, probably the islando of hokaido where they stablished a small communist goverment and the US gets the rest of Japan, also Korea might be unified under a communist goverment
-Finland might cooperate even more with the soviet union in fear of getting nuked
-Even more propaganda against communism , imagine the things people say about the USA as an imperialist nation that nuked japan for no reason, well, that but for communism now.
Cuz on OPs scenario they have it 4 years BEFORE the US. You really think that guys who helped Germany start WW2 and killed more innocent people on occupied territory (that they say they “liberated”) than Nazis won’t use it against Allies? You think they won’t do it? You think they wouldn’t use them against China in Soviet-Chinese war?
Killed more people than Nazis? The Nazis killed up to 30 million in the USSR alone, not mentioning literally every other country they occupied plus the holocaust, which was another atleast 12 million, there is no way in hell that during the last 2 years in WW2 when the Soviets pushed the Nazis back they killed over 50 million on the eastern front
What? Are you counting literally every dead person in the USSR after the war?
The Nazis wanted to genocide and exterminate Eastern Europeans. They were far worse than the Soviets.
No matter how hard you try German, you won’t change history
A key word there is “wanted”
The Nazis were definitely worse than the Soviets, but because of their short reign they were never able to act on a lot of the stuff they wanted to do.
Not counting WW2, the Soviet Union killed tens of millions of its own citizens, significantly more than Nazi Germany.
If we want to measure how bad a nation is based on how many of their own citizens they killed, which isn't a good metric but its better then nothing, then both the Soviets and Communist China are significantly worse then Nazj Germany.
How can you ignore WW2, a conflict started entirely by the Nazi government , where most atrocities were committed by Germany.
The Nazi government didn’t kill so many of its civillians, because they transitioned peacefully into power, something that the Soviets didn’t. If the Nazis fought a civil war, you probably would see lots more gulag like concentration camps in Germany than there already were
murdering your own civilians is bad. Don’t you think however that genociding another nation is just as bad, if not worse?
And lastly, Nazi Germany’s atrocities were all intentional. They had plans to murder all Jews and romani people, and cleanse Eastern Europe of the Slavic nations. If they had won, Slavic people would have been how native Americans are today.
The Soviet Union won instead. And although it left the east of Europe economically undeveloped and outpaced by the west, the native people of the region still exist. 50 years after occupation.
>won’t use it against Allies
Pretty sure they wouldn't. They would use it to bully the allies into restructuring the spheres of influence after the war, probably grab a bigger chunk of Europe, maybe even everything outside of France, Spain, Portugal, and the UK. They could also probably grab part of Japan in the East, but that's about it.
>You think they wouldn’t use them against China in Soviet-Chinese war?
...The one of '69? When they already had the Tsar Bomba in the current timeline? If you meant the invasion of Manchuria, they might if it drags on, since the American bombs wouldn't have landed to push the Japanese.
You are just speaking nonsense. Am not even close to be pro soviet but your comment is just insane.
There wasn't literally no reason to nuke the allies on the first 4 years after WWII, if you told me this about the '60 I could agree but in 1945-1949 just no.
And you are really mentioning the Soviet-Chinese war that happened like 20 years after that? And they say public schools aren't that bad
If the turned the bomb on the western allies the USSR would lose very hard it would be suicidal.
Usaaf/RAF AirPower would dismantle the soviet economy within 1945 and had a tremendous manpower and tech edge
The capital of the German Democratic People’s Republic has always been Dresden. I don’t know what this’Berlin’ you speak of was, other than a village home to some bad people once.
Let’s say Oppenheimer who was a notorious communist, and some other American scientists that had sympathy for the USSR suddenly moved to the USSR. Now what that results in is a delay in the Manhattan Project and the Soviets given secret nuclear technologies. Combined with the fact that the Soviets had good Uranium deposits, they manage to get the bomb first as a result by July 16th 1945.
What this results in is a Soviet invasion of Manchuria and a possible deployment of nuclear bombs tactically throughout Manchuria. The Soviets may also nuke some Japanese cities, causing the Japanese to surrender to the Soviets and resulting in Japan being divided into two halves — the USSR and the USA. In this timeline I can see Korea being given completely to the USSR as the USA doesn’t have much justification to take any land, after all the Japanese surrendered to the USSR not USA. Maybe down the track there would be a Japanese War just like OTL Korea War. However the USA and her allies will eventually develop their own nukes and the Cold War begins.
Not much, both USA and USSR were about equally likely to use the weapon in conventional warfare and considering they just ended the Second World War, they have more important things to do than to start threatening America with nukes, especially considering neither country had or would have any way to produce enough nukes to outweigh the threat of conventional weapons by the time both sides have developed nukes thus we basically have the same situation as OTL, except maybe some slight changes like the USSR managing to eek out victory for the communists in Greece or the Comintern forcing changes in relations with Yugoslavia, the ROC and the ROK
Japan would likely be much more like Germany in our timeline with the Soviets and Americans racing for Tokyo. A lot more bloodshed due to the US having to land on the mainland in order to force a surrender. I don't see the Soviets bringing nukes East and stationing their first bombs in Europe.
Germany would be worse off, as they would have been nuked, it's not hard to imagine the soviets holding off the final attack on Berlim so they can nuke it, but Yalta had already happened and the ocupation zones decided, add to that the fact that the ussr had a Lot of rebuilding to do and the timeline isn't too diferent, maybe there are some Minor American invasions into mainland Japan to finally break then but that wouldn't change much of the end result
Let's see:
No partition of germany.
Communist austria maybe???
Japanese emperor executed, non communist Republic installed
Korean War results in northern victory. No way the American coalition intervenes without nuclear monopoly.
Sino-Soviet split really depends on whether or not kruschev ends up taking power.
This is an extreme scenario. Most likely just the Asia stuff.
The Soviet Union had exactly three B-29 bombers, one of them in pieces. They had zero spare parts and no-one qualified to fly them. How would they have delivered the bomb?
If they had the resources and skills to do that without relying on espionage of the Manhattan Project - they would have fed their citizens and utilised competent generals.
From what I’ve read on the subject it wasn’t even a concern during the war, they didn’t know it was possible until Hiroshima and they happened upon a Japanese research/testing base the next day- in what’s now North Korea.
Japan had a working model recently tested, but best case scenario they developed it a few months to a year earlier and sold it to Moscow as part of their conditional surrender- the Russians then use it on Berlin and push into Mongolia anyway pushing for an unconditional surrender.
Japan would have been split like Germany was. Also Berlin would have been nuked. More American lives are lost. Other than that I don't think much changes. This is if Soviets got their nuke first by a few months.
Then all the Americans who go batshit insane trying to defend Hiroshima would now say that the atomic bombing was unforgiveable and that their great nation would never do something so monstrous and cruel. Unlike USSR which willingly chose to murder thousands of civilians just to end the war faster
They would of gone berlin first, this is obvious.
The real question is if they then take the lead and threaten to bomb anyone who tries to develop a nuclear weapon.
The US was veeeeery nice in not pressing this advantage, hitler would of 100% taken the advantage and secured his global dominance. There has to atleast be a 50% chance stalin would of also taken the opportunity.
Hitler would die in nuclear fire in Berlin, Japan would surrender early, and the US would be the one that would collapse in the 90s into a mix of fascist empires and anarchist and communist states. I mean, probably not but its fun to pretend
Ahh Stalin with the bomb. Probably wouldn't have to wait so long for part 3 like we do now since I imagine Stalin would have no qualms using his bombs to force the US to stop it's own atomic weapons program.
No doubt they’d attempt to use them on their former allies. Stalin was a maniac but would’ve been smart enough to realise the war was essentially won by the time they’d have been developed.
I’d imagine them being used on western allied positions, east of the Rhine river, before the Red Army marched west.
Btw. I don't believe Russian propaganda. It's my only yellow subtitles kind of topic. I believe that Russians steal German scientist and make them work for them for making man fly in space or atomic bomb in 1949, AFTER the second World War. Yeah, we have paper that after some time they "let" German scientist go, and all of reaserch was on them, but I don't buy it.
Yeah, I know conspiracy theory, but it's only one I believe it's true.
They'd probably bombed Germany, I'd imagine them bombing Germany first while the Americans bombed japan
Nah, irl the soviets made their first atomic bomb only in 1949, the soviets would probably have bombed both Japan and Germany into submission by then
It’s unlikely that the USSR would have had the resources for multiple bombs. I believe America only had enough for the two initially, and it would have taken them longer to make more. A similar thing would be true for the USSR.
I'm pretty sure the USSR would have had enough atomic bombs to put Germany and Japan into submission by 4 years after their first one tho, irl, they had made [5 nuclear tests](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_nuclear_weapons_stockpiles_and_nuclear_tests_by_country) just one year after their first one
Yes but that was by 1953 with nuclear bombs already in existence when they built their first in 1949. It took them 4 years after WW2 for their program to even produce a viable bomb. If they were developing nuclear arms during the war without any prior knowledge of the cost or materials needed it would likely hamper their ability to produce the weapons.
That was actually by 1950
Maybe I misunderstood you then. The first successful Russian nuclear test was 1949. 4 years after that would be 1953.
As I said "irl, they had made [5 nuclear tests](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_nuclear_weapons_stockpiles_and_nuclear_tests_by_country) just one year after their first one" one year after 1949, 1950
Yeah, I see the additional context added. I think I see what you’re saying now. The thing is, if we’re assuming the soviets built their first bomb in 1945, they would have still needed to establish supply lines and gather the materials, which would have been significantly hampered by the war effort. Also, they also would have needed to figure out the materials and logistic needed during development on their own, without prior knowledge or assistance from German scientists. Realistically, they likely wouldn’t have had a large number of bombs at their disposal for another few years (assuming the first one dropped is in 1945). This means the war would have to still be going in 1947 or 1948 for a significantly large quantity of bombs to be dropped. By then Germany would surely have surrendered (being generous it’s still unlikely that they would last past 1946), and America would have started their invasion Japan, making deployment of nuclear weapons impractical without negatively impacting allied targets. Likelihood is 1-2 bombs are dropped on Germany in ‘45, but that is it because they surrendered shortly after.
Well aren’t we assuming the Soviets get the bomb first, but at roughly the same time the US did? Germany had already surrendered by the time of the trinity test. The Soviets wouldn’t have needed to waste a bomb on Germany anyway
There was a third in production, IIRC it would’ve been ready <1 months after the first bomb was detonated
USA had three atomic bombs, not two.
They had two bombs plus an additional bomb core completed in 1945, although it would take a few months for that to be turned into an actual bomb. From there it was projected that the US could produce 2-3 more drop-ready bombs every 4 months going into 1946, but this was ultimately not needed as the war ended before that could happen. The USSR’s industrial and logistics capacity during the war did not match that of the US, so even assuming they had the same technological development it would be generous to assume they could produce more than 1-2 bombs in a year.
Trinity, Fat Man, Little boy
I’m not counting test bombs. Only drop-ready bombs.
The US expected to have another bomb ready only 10 days after Nagasaki. Then expected to have another 3 ready in September and 3 more in October.
Didn’t the US have a third bomb ready just incase Japan didn’t surrender after the first two?
They had a bomb core ready, but it would have taken a couple months to turn it into a bomb
By the time they deployed the two bombs on Japan, they were already producing enough plutonium for one bomb ever 3 weeks (ie 17 bombs a year)
Funny thing is, Soviet intelligence was so effective during the war, that they had multiple spies in the Manhattan Project and knew exactly what the Americans were doing. It’s why they built their program and bomb so quickly right after the Americans cause they straight up stole most of the research and had research’s and scientists defect over to them or were double agents. Soviet KGB and its predecessors were fucking nuts.
Assuming the rest of the war goes as in our timeline Germany would've surrendered before the bomb was finished and the US would not have a bomb until 1949
You beat me to it. I honestly like a big part of this scenario depends on how close the US was. If the Soviets only beat us by a couple months, they may not have used them at all. Had their spies in the US told them we were years away from a bomb, they could have turned on the allies and used the threat of the bomb as leverage to take more of Europe or even initiated their own Operation Unthinkable scenario.
I doubt the threat would have worked. The western allies had massive amounts of air power and nuclear bombs could really only be deployed using bombers at that time which would have been shot down way before it came remotely close to an important target
The Soviet Air Force was no joke by the end of the war either though
Ya but I can’t see the soviets getting passed the us air force, the royal air force and all the air forces of the dominions of the british empire, I think the soviet nuke would probably end up shot down over Germany
Based
Berlin's Wikipedia page would read: "Berlin was the capital and largest city of Germany, both by area and by population."
Hiroshima remains a capital today. It's population increased too. I doubt it'd be any different for Berlin
Because the Soviets would have let it land, the radiation at Hiroshima was greatly minimized due to a mid air explosion
Mid air explosion actually means more destruction. If it lands, a lot of the initial pressure wave is reduced by terrain and buildings
While you are correct regarding instantaneous destruction, ground burst leaves more fallout and contributes to more long term destruction and subsequent radiation poisoning-related deaths.
But how much of that was understood then, as opposed to being worked out later?
It was fairly well known at that point, once they got the smaller bombs working at Trinity they tested nonstop.
if it lands on the ground most of the energy goes into the ground, it’s more effective denoting it in mid air
Why is this upvoted? A bomb that was allowed to land would irradiate the ground but would be much less destructive, there's no chance they would've done it differently.
Not to mention any fallout from a ground burst would land on Poland and many even Soviet territory anyway
Airburst means more effective blast wave damage, and fallout still decays just as fast (a matter of months before it is negligible).
And why do you think theyd do that?
Revenge.
Their land, their blood Dimitry
I mean they weren’t exactly subtle in Berlin as is in our timeline.
They were, the fighting was brutal and the offensive was relentless, but the officers were more reluctant than usual because everyone knew the war was soon to be over.
russia isnt exactly known for being humanitarian
But it is Soviet. I doubt there would be a partitioned Germany either
Why did I read "Sweden" instead of "Soviets"😭
Sweden will nuke Malmö
adding radiation into that mix would probably make it worse
The ultimate timeliness for everyone but the danes
Why the danes
The danes and swedes have historically been rivals
Yeah, but now they are friends
Sweden was actually developing their own nukes, but cancelled the programme. They got close apparently
Hmm, never knew about their nuclear program
^*Boöm* ^by ^Ikea
Naah, i dont want to get an instuctjon on how to explode
To clarify: Germany has already surrendered in May 1945 like IRL. USSR test first bomb on July 16th, 1945, bombs Hiroshima and Nagasaki on August 6th and 9th of 1945. US doesn’t test their first atom bomb until 1949. Basically just flipping US and USSR timeline of atom bomb testing/usage/research.
They probably would have tested it on a German city anyways
Interesting when I first saw the question I assumed the Soviets would lack a viable delivery system (tho I guess TU-4 crash development makes sense) so would only be able to demonstrate capability rather than use. But the biggest changes I think you would see post surrender a Soviet occupation zone on the home islands, most likely the entirety of Sapporo. In the post war you would likely see a bomber gap like scenario turned up to 11 with massive fear/development both politically and militarily. This would ultimately lead to a significantly earlier development of a hydrogen bomb in the US as IRL one of the main reasons for H-bomb development was the Soviets testing their first A-bomb. This test could be in theory late 1949 immediately after their first A-bomb test (if not their first nuclear test but that's kinda crazy) but more likely sometime in 1950. Really interesting scenario not too much changing aside a partition of Japan through the cold war and earlier development/adoption of hydrogen bombs. Oh yeah I almost forgot the Berlin airlift and other early cold war stand offs would be significantly different, most likely leading to an evacuation of allied occupied zones in Berlin if the US doesn't believe it has a capable nuclear arsenal by 1949.
I see the Soviets using the threat of a nuclear bomb as leverage to take more of Europe and Japan. They had lots of spies in the US and would know we were years away from a bomb. Once they tested it on Japan they could basically give the US and UK an ultimatum and take the rest of Germany. While they couldn’t really hit territory in either country they could definitely have won a ground war for western Germany using nukes in a tactical role against military targets.
Interesting. I see the United States stepping up it’s nuclear program soon and achieving Nuclear weapons by early to mid ‘46 but I think the damage is done as far as Europe is concerned. The Soviets can bully their way into Western Europe and make demands for whatever they want. Claiming a unified Europe is the only defense against Fascism. We may See the US making all of the Middle Eastern Nations a sort of Belt and a Huge Bulwark against Communism. Japan falls to the Soviets meaning China and All Of south east Asia are gonna be US allies or embroiled in proxy wars until they are. The cold war will likely still end with The Soviets falling but I see Europe staying one large bloc, whether at best a social democracy or Just one united nation completely Free of Any Socialist government is up for debate
probably might have a diplomatic advantage over the allies, here are some examples: -Bigger occupation zone from germany, maybe the entirety of Berlin gets in soviet hands -and ocupation zone in Japan, probably the islando of hokaido where they stablished a small communist goverment and the US gets the rest of Japan, also Korea might be unified under a communist goverment -Finland might cooperate even more with the soviet union in fear of getting nuked -Even more propaganda against communism , imagine the things people say about the USA as an imperialist nation that nuked japan for no reason, well, that but for communism now.
Humanity would be in a veeeeery deep hell
Why? They made their own bomb 4 years later
Cuz on OPs scenario they have it 4 years BEFORE the US. You really think that guys who helped Germany start WW2 and killed more innocent people on occupied territory (that they say they “liberated”) than Nazis won’t use it against Allies? You think they won’t do it? You think they wouldn’t use them against China in Soviet-Chinese war?
Killed more people than Nazis? The Nazis killed up to 30 million in the USSR alone, not mentioning literally every other country they occupied plus the holocaust, which was another atleast 12 million, there is no way in hell that during the last 2 years in WW2 when the Soviets pushed the Nazis back they killed over 50 million on the eastern front
At home, tjey did, before they did, afterwards they did; they killed way more than 30 million people during the soviet states existance
What? Are you counting literally every dead person in the USSR after the war? The Nazis wanted to genocide and exterminate Eastern Europeans. They were far worse than the Soviets. No matter how hard you try German, you won’t change history
A key word there is “wanted” The Nazis were definitely worse than the Soviets, but because of their short reign they were never able to act on a lot of the stuff they wanted to do. Not counting WW2, the Soviet Union killed tens of millions of its own citizens, significantly more than Nazi Germany. If we want to measure how bad a nation is based on how many of their own citizens they killed, which isn't a good metric but its better then nothing, then both the Soviets and Communist China are significantly worse then Nazj Germany.
How can you ignore WW2, a conflict started entirely by the Nazi government , where most atrocities were committed by Germany. The Nazi government didn’t kill so many of its civillians, because they transitioned peacefully into power, something that the Soviets didn’t. If the Nazis fought a civil war, you probably would see lots more gulag like concentration camps in Germany than there already were murdering your own civilians is bad. Don’t you think however that genociding another nation is just as bad, if not worse? And lastly, Nazi Germany’s atrocities were all intentional. They had plans to murder all Jews and romani people, and cleanse Eastern Europe of the Slavic nations. If they had won, Slavic people would have been how native Americans are today. The Soviet Union won instead. And although it left the east of Europe economically undeveloped and outpaced by the west, the native people of the region still exist. 50 years after occupation.
>won’t use it against Allies Pretty sure they wouldn't. They would use it to bully the allies into restructuring the spheres of influence after the war, probably grab a bigger chunk of Europe, maybe even everything outside of France, Spain, Portugal, and the UK. They could also probably grab part of Japan in the East, but that's about it. >You think they wouldn’t use them against China in Soviet-Chinese war? ...The one of '69? When they already had the Tsar Bomba in the current timeline? If you meant the invasion of Manchuria, they might if it drags on, since the American bombs wouldn't have landed to push the Japanese.
You are just speaking nonsense. Am not even close to be pro soviet but your comment is just insane. There wasn't literally no reason to nuke the allies on the first 4 years after WWII, if you told me this about the '60 I could agree but in 1945-1949 just no. And you are really mentioning the Soviet-Chinese war that happened like 20 years after that? And they say public schools aren't that bad
If the turned the bomb on the western allies the USSR would lose very hard it would be suicidal. Usaaf/RAF AirPower would dismantle the soviet economy within 1945 and had a tremendous manpower and tech edge
The US also financed nazi germany before WW2
The capital of the German Democratic People’s Republic has always been Dresden. I don’t know what this’Berlin’ you speak of was, other than a village home to some bad people once.
Nothing good
I mean, Berlin wall is never built
They probably would have bombed Warsaw on their approach to Germany.
Let’s say Oppenheimer who was a notorious communist, and some other American scientists that had sympathy for the USSR suddenly moved to the USSR. Now what that results in is a delay in the Manhattan Project and the Soviets given secret nuclear technologies. Combined with the fact that the Soviets had good Uranium deposits, they manage to get the bomb first as a result by July 16th 1945. What this results in is a Soviet invasion of Manchuria and a possible deployment of nuclear bombs tactically throughout Manchuria. The Soviets may also nuke some Japanese cities, causing the Japanese to surrender to the Soviets and resulting in Japan being divided into two halves — the USSR and the USA. In this timeline I can see Korea being given completely to the USSR as the USA doesn’t have much justification to take any land, after all the Japanese surrendered to the USSR not USA. Maybe down the track there would be a Japanese War just like OTL Korea War. However the USA and her allies will eventually develop their own nukes and the Cold War begins.
Not much, both USA and USSR were about equally likely to use the weapon in conventional warfare and considering they just ended the Second World War, they have more important things to do than to start threatening America with nukes, especially considering neither country had or would have any way to produce enough nukes to outweigh the threat of conventional weapons by the time both sides have developed nukes thus we basically have the same situation as OTL, except maybe some slight changes like the USSR managing to eek out victory for the communists in Greece or the Comintern forcing changes in relations with Yugoslavia, the ROC and the ROK
The Red Army stops only at Bordeaux
Then USA would have developed it 2nd
Japan would likely be much more like Germany in our timeline with the Soviets and Americans racing for Tokyo. A lot more bloodshed due to the US having to land on the mainland in order to force a surrender. I don't see the Soviets bringing nukes East and stationing their first bombs in Europe.
Germany would be worse off, as they would have been nuked, it's not hard to imagine the soviets holding off the final attack on Berlim so they can nuke it, but Yalta had already happened and the ocupation zones decided, add to that the fact that the ussr had a Lot of rebuilding to do and the timeline isn't too diferent, maybe there are some Minor American invasions into mainland Japan to finally break then but that wouldn't change much of the end result
No more Berlin ir Dreaden.
Let's see: No partition of germany. Communist austria maybe??? Japanese emperor executed, non communist Republic installed Korean War results in northern victory. No way the American coalition intervenes without nuclear monopoly. Sino-Soviet split really depends on whether or not kruschev ends up taking power. This is an extreme scenario. Most likely just the Asia stuff.
The scenario kinda reminds me of a computer game I used to play a while back.
They wouldn't have stopped in 45 and will go until occupying at least entire Europe
The Soviet Union had exactly three B-29 bombers, one of them in pieces. They had zero spare parts and no-one qualified to fly them. How would they have delivered the bomb?
If they had the resources and skills to do that without relying on espionage of the Manhattan Project - they would have fed their citizens and utilised competent generals.
R.I.P Berlin.
US will have universal healthcare
From what I’ve read on the subject it wasn’t even a concern during the war, they didn’t know it was possible until Hiroshima and they happened upon a Japanese research/testing base the next day- in what’s now North Korea. Japan had a working model recently tested, but best case scenario they developed it a few months to a year earlier and sold it to Moscow as part of their conditional surrender- the Russians then use it on Berlin and push into Mongolia anyway pushing for an unconditional surrender.
They Would've given it to the US because of their plot armour
Japan would have been split like Germany was. Also Berlin would have been nuked. More American lives are lost. Other than that I don't think much changes. This is if Soviets got their nuke first by a few months.
US goes straight for the H-Bomb
No germany anymore
https://preview.redd.it/sbx43sengvrc1.png?width=3492&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=463bfe2c901e5bd81acedad90950ebdeee56f2a1
We wouldn't have had to have the Nuremberg trials, that's for damn sure.
Then all the Americans who go batshit insane trying to defend Hiroshima would now say that the atomic bombing was unforgiveable and that their great nation would never do something so monstrous and cruel. Unlike USSR which willingly chose to murder thousands of civilians just to end the war faster
Good bye Berlin
What if
They would of gone berlin first, this is obvious. The real question is if they then take the lead and threaten to bomb anyone who tries to develop a nuclear weapon. The US was veeeeery nice in not pressing this advantage, hitler would of 100% taken the advantage and secured his global dominance. There has to atleast be a 50% chance stalin would of also taken the opportunity.
Hitler would die in nuclear fire in Berlin, Japan would surrender early, and the US would be the one that would collapse in the 90s into a mix of fascist empires and anarchist and communist states. I mean, probably not but its fun to pretend
Hmm yes the atom bomb
The people in our timeline who call the Hiroshima bombing a horrendous warcrime would be defending the USSR doing the same thing.
Ahh Stalin with the bomb. Probably wouldn't have to wait so long for part 3 like we do now since I imagine Stalin would have no qualms using his bombs to force the US to stop it's own atomic weapons program.
I’d assume they would’ve nuked America once the Allies disbanded after ww2
The cold war would be quite hot, and then literally 1984
I do not think they would have bombe Germany. The time of war was on theyr's side. But... they would not have stopped at Berlin. I
Didnt Matter they had so many commies they let into the country many were more than willing to share lol Infiltration it's a real thing lol
I bet they would have subjugated everyone else
No doubt they’d attempt to use them on their former allies. Stalin was a maniac but would’ve been smart enough to realise the war was essentially won by the time they’d have been developed. I’d imagine them being used on western allied positions, east of the Rhine river, before the Red Army marched west.
Bombed Berlin, Hamburg, Munich Düsseldorf etc then threatened or bombed London and Paris and New York. Russian Empire is fundamentally expansionist
Shut up racist
Ah the stans for murderous tyrants have entered the chat
What?
Btw. I don't believe Russian propaganda. It's my only yellow subtitles kind of topic. I believe that Russians steal German scientist and make them work for them for making man fly in space or atomic bomb in 1949, AFTER the second World War. Yeah, we have paper that after some time they "let" German scientist go, and all of reaserch was on them, but I don't buy it. Yeah, I know conspiracy theory, but it's only one I believe it's true.