Marcurix wrote:Just want to go over a few thing here:
God Kefka wrote:If the Soviets had invaded Europe, the USA would have talked big but they would have done nothing. They are not stupid. See, once the Soviets played the invasion card, the US has two options since they can't beat the Soviets on the ground in a conventional war (way outnumbered).
Having greater numbers does not automatically ensure victory.
1) Start a nuclear war, destroy the Soviet Union but basically be COMPLETELY DESTROYED in retaliation
Congratulations, you understand the
Mutually Assured Destruction Doctrine.
2) Suck it up and let some Europeans deal with communism.
and have everything they did in Europe in WW1 and WW2 be for nothing.
What would you choose if you were president?
A
I don't think many rational people would choose option 1). Because let's face it... everyone wants to live. If you go with ''1)''... you will probably die with you know... the rest of the entire nation. So it's a stupid irrational choice.
Probably why the Soviets wouldn't risk invading Europe in the first place.
So I think the Soviets really missed out big.
On starting a nuclear war.
They could have won the Cold War by simply invading the rest of Western Europe.
Costing yet more lives, resources and so on. They didn't emerge unscathed from WW2 you know.
There was a time frame before the French and the English got nukes to do it.
Which measuring from the first Russian bomb detonated to the first UK bomb detonated would be three years, one month and four days if memory serves.
They missed this window.
Or they probably couldn't have done it in this window.
Had they invaded while only they and the USA had nukes the USA wouldn't have done a thing.
Prove it. Remember, if you're wrong the world burns.
They are a democracy after all and democracies don't have the guts to get nuked. Their leaders want to live and be re-elected.
Pretty sure every leader of every country in the world wants to live. Including the USSR.
Had the Soviets absorbed France and the rest of Germany into their empire they may well have had enough resources to beat the USA in the Cold War.
Shame really that their leaders didn't play Chicken and Dare.
I know right? We could all be living in a Fallout universe.
Wait, that would suck.
The USA is led by humans after all.
Are you implying the USSR wasn't?
And humans aren't altruistic enough to get themselves destroyed just to back up some lofty promises to help people a whole continent away.
Explaining to their home populations that their sons and fathers died for nothing might be a hard selling point though.
I don't understand how the whole MAD theory prevented war. If you think about it... it should have promoted war in Europe.
If you attack me or vice versa we both die, nobody wins. Not really sure whats so hard about that.
A and B both have nukes. B invades Europe... what's A going to do? Nuke B just because they promised they would nuke B?
Pretty much.
What would then happen? Well A and B would both be destroyed.
That's the point.
A knows that would happen if it nukes so it won't. A wants to exist.
So does B.
B would have won big. What's the problem with this logic?
That starting a nuclear war is winning big.