Operation Artemis

[Hakinda Herseyi Duymak istiyorum]

I want to join the operation with the banner of no to war, yes to sex.

I bet that'll deter the Wehrmacht.

Conscientious objection is a good thing, I don't understand why people fight. There is a concept called orgasm, but imperialist fascists prefer to kill people.

[Infected Mushroom]

So here's a plan for Europe.

Poland, Hungary, Romania, Albania, Yugoslavia, Bulgaria and Greece need to attack and quickly knock Germany out of the war using 21st weapons, tech and doctrines, exploiting what they know about Germany's historical strategies in this era.

Make an estimation for how many minimal soldiers will be needed to form an effective defence line against the USSR and gun hard for Berlin and then Paris. Turkey and China need to invade the USSR from two sides and make them divert troops from Eastern Europe (creating as much psychological impact and shock and awe from modern weapons as possible). Japan can be contained indefinitely by the PLN and China's missile assets. Since USSR from China's side is mostly empty land, poke and threaten India to divert British attention.

Alternatively, for history buffs, think of a way we can use historical knowledge of India's factions and independence movement to try and get the Indians to side with the Greeks and the Chinese.

USA? Light the Atlantic up. Grab some territory in Iceland/Greenland etc for naval bases and then fight the Royal and French navies. Use your immense production to crank out warships and keep it going.

The game plan? We need to take Berlin and Paris, and then hold those positions until China and the USA both get huge. I don't recommend gunning for Moscow, ideally we'd want to annex a line from France to some eastern half of Europe and fortify it with modern weapons. Take the war from the beginning and gun hard with the modern weapons, throw them off balance.

Unlike with the historical Nazis who didn't take advantage of hatred for Stalin, we will use it to mobilise paramilitaries.

[Ifreann]

So here's a plan for Europe.

Poland, Hungary, Romania, Albania, Yugoslavia, Bulgaria and Greece need to attack and quickly knock Germany out of the war using 21st weapons, tech and doctrines, exploiting what they know about Germany's historical strategies in this era.

Make an estimation for how many minimal soldiers will be needed to form an effective defence line against the USSR and gun hard for Berlin and then Paris. Turkey and China need to invade the USSR from two sides and make them divert troops from Eastern Europe (creating as much psychological impact and shock and awe from modern weapons as possible). Japan can be contained indefinitely by the PLN and China's missile assets. Since USSR from China's side is mostly empty land, poke and threaten India to divert British attention.

Alternatively, for history buffs, think of a way we can use historical knowledge of India's factions and independence movement to try and get the Indians to side with the Greeks and the Chinese.

USA? Light the Atlantic up. Grab some territory in Iceland/Greenland etc for naval bases and then fight the Royal and French navies. Use your immense production to crank out warships and keep it going.

The game plan? We need to take Berlin and Paris, and then hold those positions until China and the USA both get huge. I don't recommend gunning for Moscow, ideally we'd want to annex a line from France to some eastern half of Europe and fortify it with modern weapons. Take the war from the beginning and gun hard with the modern weapons, throw them off balance.

Unlike with the historical Nazis who didn't take advantage of hatred for Stalin, we will use it to mobilise paramilitaries.

Just play Hearts of Iron.

[Infected Mushroom]

So here's a plan for Europe.

Poland, Hungary, Romania, Albania, Yugoslavia, Bulgaria and Greece need to attack and quickly knock Germany out of the war using 21st weapons, tech and doctrines, exploiting what they know about Germany's historical strategies in this era.

Make an estimation for how many minimal soldiers will be needed to form an effective defence line against the USSR and gun hard for Berlin and then Paris. Turkey and China need to invade the USSR from two sides and make them divert troops from Eastern Europe (creating as much psychological impact and shock and awe from modern weapons as possible). Japan can be contained indefinitely by the PLN and China's missile assets. Since USSR from China's side is mostly empty land, poke and threaten India to divert British attention.

Alternatively, for history buffs, think of a way we can use historical knowledge of India's factions and independence movement to try and get the Indians to side with the Greeks and the Chinese.

USA? Light the Atlantic up. Grab some territory in Iceland/Greenland etc for naval bases and then fight the Royal and French navies. Use your immense production to crank out warships and keep it going.

The game plan? We need to take Berlin and Paris, and then hold those positions until China and the USA both get huge. I don't recommend gunning for Moscow, ideally we'd want to annex a line from France to some eastern half of Europe and fortify it with modern weapons. Take the war from the beginning and gun hard with the modern weapons, throw them off balance.

Unlike with the historical Nazis who didn't take advantage of hatred for Stalin, we will use it to mobilise paramilitaries.

Just play Hearts of Iron.

With modern-day level populations from those areas allied to Greece, the numbers odd is not so bad.

Remember, though the British and French Empires have a lot of people on paper, historically they were unable to arm the majority of them due to fear of colonial uprisings.

[Heloin]

Just play Hearts of Iron.

With modern-day level populations from those areas allied to Greece, the numbers odd is not so bad.

The population of the Balkans now is still less then the number of soldiers fielded in ww2. Now no nation in history has every fielded it’s entire population in war, that’s just impossible. Turkey is the only country in Europe in this scenario that has a chance to hold out, and they really don’t have any chance.

Remember, though the British and French Empires have a lot of people on paper, historically they were unable to arm the majority of them due to fear of colonial uprisings.

Why do nations 80 years ago keep their political divisions while modern ones seemingly have theirs disappear?

[The Huskar Social Union]

With modern-day level populations from those areas allied to Greece, the numbers odd is not so bad.

The population of the Balkans now is still less then the number of soldiers fielded in ww2. Now no nation in history has every fielded it’s entire population in war, that’s just impossible. Turkey is the only country in Europe in this scenario that has a chance to hold out, and they really don’t have any chance.

Remember, though the British and French Empires have a lot of people on paper, historically they were unable to arm the majority of them due to fear of colonial uprisings.

Why do nations 80 years ago keep their political divisions while modern ones seemingly have theirs disappear?

Because it suits the answer IM wants everyone to pick.

[Heloin]

The population of the Balkans now is still less then the number of soldiers fielded in ww2. Now no nation in history has every fielded it’s entire population in war, that’s just impossible. Turkey is the only country in Europe in this scenario that has a chance to hold out, and they really don’t have any chance.


Why do nations 80 years ago keep their political divisions while modern ones seemingly have theirs disappear?

Because it suits the answer IM wants everyone to pick.

Why does that so often happen to be the answer that’s impossible.

[The Huskar Social Union]

Because it suits the answer IM wants everyone to pick.

Why does that so often happen to be the answer that’s impossible.

Welcome to the world of imagination!

[Heloin]

Why does that so often happen to be the answer that’s impossible.

Welcome to the world of imagination!

My tilda key is worn out from paradox games but I recognise turning Armenian into a global superpower in HoI isn’t particularly realistic.

[Kannap]

Maths is maths.


Not really.


Not really.


Yes a tactic used for hundreds of years and really perfected in the Second World War… Clearly the Greeks finally have an advantage here when everyone can do it.

The laws of Newtonian physics as applicable to artillery and the math hasn’t changed. It doesn’t mean we haven’t grown exponentially better at exploiting them in warfare.

We haven't. The goal now is was the same as the goal was then: Hit the target. Modern descendants of WW2 artillery have the advantage of having a computer that can run calculations quicker than people can - but experience artillery crews in WW2 could already do that quickly - in a couple minutes or less - so it's still not a huge improvement.

I'd assume modern artillery has a greater chance of hitting its target on first attempt and probably takes less attempts to re-adjust if the first shot misses, but...

...A quick Google search suggests that nearly half of the Hellenic army's current artillery arsenal (669 pieces out of 1,406 pieces) are literally 155mm and 105mm howitzers from WW2. The other half of their artillery isn't much better, most of it looking like equipment from the 1970s.

Next you’ll tell me a catapult to an artillery shell doesn’t demonstrate substantial tech advancement because the trajectories of both projectile types can be calculated in a middle school physics class.

I'm genuinely concerned you may seriously believe this is a valid comparison so I need you to explicitly assure me that you understand the difference of tech gap between WW2 and now and between 886 AD and now. As well as assuring me you understand the difference between a middle school physics class and trained artillery operators.

[Ifreann]

The laws of Newtonian physics as applicable to artillery and the math hasn’t changed. It doesn’t mean we haven’t grown exponentially better at exploiting them in warfare.

We haven't. The goal now is was the same as the goal was then: Hit the target. Modern descendants of WW2 artillery have the advantage of having a computer that can run calculations quicker than people can - but experience artillery crews in WW2 could already do that quickly - in a couple minutes or less - so it's still not a huge improvement.

I'd assume modern artillery has a greater chance of hitting its target on first attempt and probably takes less attempts to re-adjust if the first shot misses, but...

...A quick Google search suggests that nearly half of the Hellenic army's current artillery arsenal (669 pieces out of 1,406 pieces) are literally 155mm and 105mm howitzers from WW2. The other half of their artillery isn't much better, most of it looking like equipment from the 1970s.

Next you’ll tell me a catapult to an artillery shell doesn’t demonstrate substantial tech advancement because the trajectories of both projectile types can be calculated in a middle school physics class.

I'm genuinely concerned you may seriously believe this is a valid comparison so I need you to explicitly assure me that you understand the difference of tech gap between WW2 and now and between 886 AD and now. As well as assuring me you understand the difference between a middle school physics class and trained artillery operators.

Reminder that IM only recently learned that invisibility technology isn't real.

[Kannap]

No it wouldn’t. Artillery hasn’t really changed much since WW1

We have super computers, they didn’t. Counter-battery and targeting is godlike compared to those days.

Counter-battery is a battlefield tactic rose to prominence in WW1. Greek artillery operators being aware of this tactic doesn't make them any better at it than WW2 artillery operators.

I wouldn't say targeting is "godlike" compared to WW2 days, it's improved - sure - but not as much as you have somehow let yourself believe.

We have modern mobile rocket artillery platforms, they didn’t.

Rocket artillery dates back to Medieval China, of course we found ways to make it mobile and put it on vehicles by WW2.

The Soviets had Katyusha rocket artillery in service by 1941

The Nazis had mobile rocket artillery as well, Panzerwerfers and Wurfrahmen 40s

The Americans put rockets on fucking tanks: T34 Calliope and T40 Whizbang

We have self-propelled artillery, they didn’t.

The British had self-propelled artillery in WW1. Then they made some newer ones for WW2, Bishop and Sexton.

The Nazis had self-propelled artillery in WW2 as well, Wespe and Hummel.

The Soviets had the SU-85 and SU-100 for self-propelled artillery of their own.

The Americans had the M7 Priest

And so much more had changed.

Everything you've named so far was existent during WW2

What do you count as “really changed”? If we had these things in WWII, we could have won the war much sooner.

We had all of these things during WW2, so this is an asinine statement to make.

Might as well say, "Could you imagine if we'd had planes and ships during WW2? That'd be wild, huh?"

[Northern Socialist Council Republics]

There is a convincing argument to be made that the fundamental realities of modern warfare hasn't changed much since the beginning of the (20th) Century and that the tactics used to adapt to that reality hasn't undergone any drastic revolutions since the end of the Second World War.

I mean, it's 1939. These people are well familiar with industrialised mass firepower, the military applications thereof.

[Ethel mermania]

There is a convincing argument to be made that the fundamental realities of modern warfare hasn't changed much since the beginning of the (20th) Century and that the tactics used to adapt to that reality hasn't undergone any drastic revolutions since the end of the Second World War.

I mean, it's 1939. These people are well familiar with industrialised mass firepower, the military applications thereof.

Night optics, laser targeting, drones, composite Armour, personal communications nets and systems, fire and forget.

Big differences

[Chan Island]

There is a convincing argument to be made that the fundamental realities of modern warfare hasn't changed much since the beginning of the (20th) Century and that the tactics used to adapt to that reality hasn't undergone any drastic revolutions since the end of the Second World War.

I mean, it's 1939. These people are well familiar with industrialised mass firepower, the military applications thereof.

Night optics, laser targeting, drones, composite Armour, personal communications nets and systems, fire and forget.

Big differences

Yeah, but they are hardly as large as, say, the differences between a WW2 army and a Franco-Prussian war army even though they are comparable spans of time apart. The fundamentals aren't too dissimilar.

[Ethel mermania]

Night optics, laser targeting, drones, composite Armour, personal communications nets and systems, fire and forget.

Big differences

Yeah, but they are hardly as large as, say, the differences between a WW2 army and a Franco-Prussian war army even though they are comparable spans of time apart. The fundamentals aren't too dissimilar.

The results would be.

[Infected Mushroom]

We have super computers, they didn’t. Counter-battery and targeting is godlike compared to those days.

Counter-battery is a battlefield tactic rose to prominence in WW1. Greek artillery operators being aware of this tactic doesn't make them any better at it than WW2 artillery operators.

I wouldn't say targeting is "godlike" compared to WW2 days, it's improved - sure - but not as much as you have somehow let yourself believe.

We have modern mobile rocket artillery platforms, they didn’t.

Rocket artillery dates back to Medieval China, of course we found ways to make it mobile and put it on vehicles by WW2.

The Soviets had Katyusha rocket artillery in service by 1941

The Nazis had mobile rocket artillery as well, Panzerwerfers and Wurfrahmen 40s

The Americans put rockets on fucking tanks: T34 Calliope and T40 Whizbang

We have self-propelled artillery, they didn’t.

The British had self-propelled artillery in WW1. Then they made some newer ones for WW2, Bishop and Sexton.

The Nazis had self-propelled artillery in WW2 as well, Wespe and Hummel.

The Soviets had the SU-85 and SU-100 for self-propelled artillery of their own.

The Americans had the M7 Priest

And so much more had changed.

Everything you've named so far was existent during WW2

What do you count as “really changed”? If we had these things in WWII, we could have won the war much sooner.

We had all of these things during WW2, so this is an asinine statement to make.

Might as well say, "Could you imagine if we'd had planes and ships during WW2? That'd be wild, huh?"

With all due respect, exists =/= exists in anything resembling its modern 21st century iteration

Even where Greece is using 1970s tech, that's still 30+ into the future and its doctrines and tactics wouldn't be those of the 1970s, it would be of the modern day. You'e discounting almost 100 years of advancement in technology. A computer in the 1930s is a piece of junk compared to a modern computer; the same would apply to military tactics.

I mean looking at how badly the Allies blundered the opening stages of WWII and how the Nazis had serious weaknesses in lack of long range air, it was clear that military doctrines were being tested and figured out as the war progressed. Meanwhile, the Greek side would have their stuff together from square 1.

[Infected Mushroom]

There is a convincing argument to be made that the fundamental realities of modern warfare hasn't changed much since the beginning of the (20th) Century and that the tactics used to adapt to that reality hasn't undergone any drastic revolutions since the end of the Second World War.

I mean, it's 1939. These people are well familiar with industrialised mass firepower, the military applications thereof.

Looking at how things like the Battle of France and how they were surprised at how some naval engagements turned out (figuring out how air power worked etc), I'd say they had a lot of learning to do.

[Infected Mushroom]

Yeah, but they are hardly as large as, say, the differences between a WW2 army and a Franco-Prussian war army even though they are comparable spans of time apart. The fundamentals aren't too dissimilar.

The results would be.

Exactly,

[Untecna]

Counter-battery is a battlefield tactic rose to prominence in WW1. Greek artillery operators being aware of this tactic doesn't make them any better at it than WW2 artillery operators.

I wouldn't say targeting is "godlike" compared to WW2 days, it's improved - sure - but not as much as you have somehow let yourself believe.



Rocket artillery dates back to Medieval China, of course we found ways to make it mobile and put it on vehicles by WW2.

The Soviets had Katyusha rocket artillery in service by 1941

The Nazis had mobile rocket artillery as well, Panzerwerfers and Wurfrahmen 40s

The Americans put rockets on fucking tanks: T34 Calliope and T40 Whizbang



The British had self-propelled artillery in WW1. Then they made some newer ones for WW2, Bishop and Sexton.

The Nazis had self-propelled artillery in WW2 as well, Wespe and Hummel.

The Soviets had the SU-85 and SU-100 for self-propelled artillery of their own.

The Americans had the M7 Priest



Everything you've named so far was existent during WW2



We had all of these things during WW2, so this is an asinine statement to make.

Might as well say, "Could you imagine if we'd had planes and ships during WW2? That'd be wild, huh?"

With all due respect, exists =/= exists in anything resembling its modern 21st century iteration

Even where Greece is using 1970s tech, that's still 30+ into the future and its doctrines and tactics wouldn't be those of the 1970s, it would be of the modern day. You'e discounting almost 100 years of advancement in technology. A computer in the 1930s is a piece of junk compared to a modern computer; the same would apply to military tactics.

I mean looking at how badly the Allies blundered the opening stages of WWII and how the Nazis had serious weaknesses in lack of long range air, it was clear that military doctrines were being tested and figured out as the war progressed. Meanwhile, the Greek side would have their stuff together from square 1.

If they are modern Greeks they would be in disarray as well.

[New Baltenstein]

I mean looking at how badly the Allies blundered the opening stages of WWII and how the Nazis had serious weaknesses in lack of long range air, it was clear that military doctrines were being tested and figured out as the war progressed. Meanwhile, the Greek side would have their stuff together from square 1.

Erm, no? Present-day Greece with its present day army is in no position to fight a major conventional war that starts like a day from now. No European nation is, really. Greece's entire military doctrine is geared towards countering a Turkish military incursion against the Aegean Sea, coming from the East (a scenario in which Greece would probably still lose anyway). Why would they have their stuff together when suddenly faced with a land invasion of 30,000,000+ soldiers from the North?
(Nevermind that the Greek population would be considerably pre-occupied with the questions of A) why did we suddenly land in the 1940ies and B) why does everyone want us dead for no reason)

You have been asked this before: Why do the WW2 actors keep their historic IRL issues (like ethnic minorities hating Stalin and such) while 21st Century Greece somehow performs on an completely ideal level?

[Heloin]

Yeah, but they are hardly as large as, say, the differences between a WW2 army and a Franco-Prussian war army even though they are comparable spans of time apart. The fundamentals aren't too dissimilar.

The results would be.

No, they really wouldn’t.

[Kannap]

So here's a plan for Europe.

Poland, Hungary, Romania, Albania, Yugoslavia, Bulgaria and Greece need to attack and quickly knock Germany out of the war using 21st weapons, tech and doctrines, exploiting what they know about Germany's historical strategies in this era.

Let's take a quick Google search of the 21st century weapons each of these nations have militarily (quantities in bold if they're listed):

Land forces:
-VIS 100 (pistol)
-FB MSBS Grot (assault rifle): 48,000
-UKM-2000 (machine gun): 1,200
-Bor rifle (sniper rifle): 196
-WKW Wilk (sniper rifle): 80
-PPZR Piorun (handheld anti-air missile launcher): 420
-M120 Rak (self-propelled mortar): 64
-AHS Krab (self-propelled artillery): 72
-WR-40 Langusta (self-propelled artillery): 75
-SPZR Poprad (self-propelled anti-air): 77
-KTO Rosomak (infantry fighting vehicle): 903

Air Force: N/A

Navy:
-offshore patrol vessel: 1
-minehunter: 1
-mine countermeasure/forces command ship: 1

Overall, it appears that the overwhelming majority of the Polish military's equipment is dated back to the 1960s and 1970s. A lot of it being old Soviet equipment. The entire navy is pretty much pre-21st century and the planes in their air force are all pre-21st century.

Ground Forces:
-CZ Scorpion Evo 3 (submachine gun)
-CZ 805 BREN (assault rifle)
-M110 Semi Automatic (sniper rifle)
-H&K M320 (grenade launcher)
-EXPAL M-08 Combi (60mm mortar): 96
-Gidrán (armored combat vehicle): 10
-Skylark 1 (drone): 9

Air Force: N/A

Overall, Hungary is similar to Poland but in even worse shape because its smaller size. A lot of its equipment is outdated Soviet tech or tech from other countries from the 1970s and 1980s. Notably, unlike Poland, Hungary still has some active equipment from WW2 in its arsenal. The air force is entirely outdated.

Land Forces:
-Piranha V (armored fighting vehicle): 68

Naval Forces: N/A
Air Forces: N/A
Overall, as with Hungary and Poland, a lot of Romania's military equipment is outdated Soviet tech or tech from other countries from the 1960s-1980s. A sizable chunk of their artillery equipment is WW2 artillery. Their navy largely consists of ships from the 1980s. Their air force is likewise outdated.

Ground Forces
-Beretta Px4 Storm (pistol)
-Beretta ARX160 (assault rifle)
-H&K HK417 (battle rifle)
-Beretta ARX160 (grenade launcher)

Air Forces: N/A
Naval Forces: N/A

Overall, same criticisms as the aforementioned militaries. Notably, the standard issue assault rifles are 1950s tech and the country's 40 tanks are 1950s Chinese tech. The air forces and naval forces are likewise out of date, even worse so than the aforementioned nations.

Reminder that you've been told already that Yugoslavia no longer exists in the modern day. I'll assume you mean the six countries that were formerly Yugoslavia: Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, North Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia, and Slovenia.

Ground Forces
-FN SCAR (assault rifle)
-T91 (assault rifle)

Air Force and Air Defense: N/A

Overall, same as before. A lot of the tech of this nation's armed forces is from the 1970s-1980s or earlier, a lot of it being old Soviet and Yugoslavian tech. Almost all of their artillery is WW2 tech. Their air force is virtually non-existent except for some helicopters; their anti-air technology is from WW2 or the 1970s. I can't find that they have a navy.

Army
-HS Produkt VHS (assault rifle): 7,800
-HS Produkt VHS-2 (assault rifle): 20,000
-HK416 (assault rifle): 550
-HK417 (sniper rifle): 150

Air Force: N/A

Navy
-Omiš-class patrol boat: 1

Overall, once again largely consisting of 1960s-1980s tech and a lot of it being old Soviet or Yugoslavian tech.

Army
-Zastava M21 (assault rifle): 500

Air Force: N/A

Overall, same story as before. A lot of 1960s-1980s tech in their military supply, a lot of it being old Soviet and Yugoslavian tech.

Ground Army
-MPT-76 (assault rifle): 30
-HK416 (assault rifle)

Navy: N/A

Air Force N/A

Overall, again same story. Lots of old 1960s-1980s tech and old Soviet/Yugoslavian tech.

Army
-PASARS-16 (short range air defense): 2
-HQ-22 (surface-to-air missile system): 4
-Zastava M21 (assault rifle): 25,000
-Zastava M19 (assault rifle)
-Zastava M07 (sniper rifle)
-CH-92 (UAV): 6
-CH-95 (UAV)
-Aeronautics Defense Orbiter (UAV): 10
-Vrabac Mini UAV: 50

Air Force: N/A

River Flotilla: N/A

Same shit, different country. A lot of the tech is 1950s-1970s and a lot of it is old Soviet/Yugoslavian tech.

Ground Forces
-FN SCAR (assault rifle)

Navy: N/A

Air Force N/A

Same as before, less Yugoslavian/Soviet tech but still mainly 1950s-1980s tech in their military.

Land Forces
-FN 303 (semi-auto less-lethal riot gun)

Navy: N/A

Air Force: N/A

Same as before: A lot of 1970s tech and a lot of old Soviet tech

Hellenic Army: N/A

Hellenic Navy
-Roussen-class fast attack craft: 7
-Osprey HSY-56A-class gunboat: 4

Hellenic Air Force: N/A
A lot of 1950s-1970s equipment in this military. Some leftover WW2 tech, like some of the aforementioned countries. Quite a bit of old Soviet and West German equipment. Best navy out of this whole list of nations, unsurprisingly, but that's not saying a lot.

So, uh, 21st century equipment is not going to be a deciding factor here. Unless you're telling me you expect these countries to overcome the Soviet Union, Nazi Germany, Japan, Italy, Britain, and France relying on *check notes* 384 pieces of artillery, 13 ships, and 6 anti-aircraft guns as "superior 21st century technology."

I suppose the question you're really asking with this hypothetical is "Can a handful of countries with relatively small supplies of Cold War weaponry and equipment take down almost the entire world when that world has lots of WW2 equipment?" To which I'd answer: No, that's ridiculous, why'd you ask?

Make an estimation for how many minimal soldiers will be needed to form an effective defence line against the USSR

Just gonna pull the first numbers I find via Google:

• Greece has a wartime strength of 750,000 soldiers in the modern day. Only 100,000 soldiers are active duty in peacetime.
• Albania has 8,500 active duty personnel.
• North Macedonia has 6,100 active duty personnel; 12,500 reserves
• Bulgaria has 33,112 active duty personnel.
• Serbia has 17,850 active duty; 50,000 in reserves
• Bosnia and Herzegovina has 10,000 active duty personnel; 6,000 reserves
• Poland has 65,000 active duty personnel; 45,000 reserves
• Hungary has 37,650 active duty personnel
• Croatia has 7,514 active duty personnel; 6,000 reserves
• Romania has 68,500 active duty personnel; 53,000 reserves
• Slovenia has 7,300 active duty personnel; 1,500 reserves
• Montenegro has 2,400 active duty personnel

Now let's compare those to their enemies (again pulling first numbers I find):

• Nazi Germany had 13,600,000 soldiers
• Great Britain and her dominions had 8,586,000 soldiers
• France had mobilized 5,000,000 soldiers at the start of the war
• Japan had 1,700,000 soldiers
• By war's end, the Soviet army had 11,365,000 soldiers
• Italy had 2,560,000 soldiers

You want me to believe 1.3 million soldiers stand a chance against 42.8 million soldiers?

and gun hard for Berlin and then Paris.

Hahahahahaha

Oh, you're serious? Let me laugh harder

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Turkey and China need to invade the USSR from two sides and make them divert troops from Eastern Europe (creating as much psychological impact and shock and awe from modern weapons as possible).

I can't be arsed to go about looking up Turkey and China's modern arsenal, you should've listed them with the rest of the countries I did above.

Alternatively, for history buffs, think of a way we can use historical knowledge of India's factions and independence movement to try and get the Indians to side with the Greeks and the Chinese.

Wait, are these countries just automatically getting sent back via time traveling or are they given far enough warning in advance to study Indian history in depth and memorize it before losing access to the internet?

USA? Light the Atlantic up. Grab some territory in Iceland/Greenland etc for naval bases and then fight the Royal and French navies. Use your immense production to crank out warships and keep it going.

The game plan? We need to take Berlin and Paris, and then hold those positions until China and the USA both get huge. I don't recommend gunning for Moscow, ideally we'd want to annex a line from France to some eastern half of Europe and fortify it with modern weapons. Take the war from the beginning and gun hard with the modern weapons, throw them off balance.

Unlike with the historical Nazis who didn't take advantage of hatred for Stalin, we will use it to mobilise paramilitaries.

This is your brain on Hearts of Iron IV

[Infected Mushroom]

So here's a plan for Europe.

Poland, Hungary, Romania, Albania, Yugoslavia, Bulgaria and Greece need to attack and quickly knock Germany out of the war using 21st weapons, tech and doctrines, exploiting what they know about Germany's historical strategies in this era.

Let's take a quick Google search of the 21st century weapons each of these nations have militarily (quantities in bold if they're listed):

Land forces:
-VIS 100 (pistol)
-FB MSBS Grot (assault rifle): 48,000
-UKM-2000 (machine gun): 1,200
-Bor rifle (sniper rifle): 196
-WKW Wilk (sniper rifle): 80
-PPZR Piorun (handheld anti-air missile launcher): 420
-M120 Rak (self-propelled mortar): 64
-AHS Krab (self-propelled artillery): 72
-WR-40 Langusta (self-propelled artillery): 75
-SPZR Poprad (self-propelled anti-air): 77
-KTO Rosomak (infantry fighting vehicle): 903

Air Force: N/A

Navy:
-offshore patrol vessel: 1
-minehunter: 1
-mine countermeasure/forces command ship: 1

Overall, it appears that the overwhelming majority of the Polish military's equipment is dated back to the 1960s and 1970s. A lot of it being old Soviet equipment. The entire navy is pretty much pre-21st century and the planes in their air force are all pre-21st century.

Ground Forces:
-CZ Scorpion Evo 3 (submachine gun)
-CZ 805 BREN (assault rifle)
-M110 Semi Automatic (sniper rifle)
-H&K M320 (grenade launcher)
-EXPAL M-08 Combi (60mm mortar): 96
-Gidrán (armored combat vehicle): 10
-Skylark 1 (drone): 9

Air Force: N/A

Overall, Hungary is similar to Poland but in even worse shape because its smaller size. A lot of its equipment is outdated Soviet tech or tech from other countries from the 1970s and 1980s. Notably, unlike Poland, Hungary still has some active equipment from WW2 in its arsenal. The air force is entirely outdated.

Land Forces:
-Piranha V (armored fighting vehicle): 68

Naval Forces: N/A
Air Forces: N/A
Overall, as with Hungary and Poland, a lot of Romania's military equipment is outdated Soviet tech or tech from other countries from the 1960s-1980s. A sizable chunk of their artillery equipment is WW2 artillery. Their navy largely consists of ships from the 1980s. Their air force is likewise outdated.

Ground Forces
-Beretta Px4 Storm (pistol)
-Beretta ARX160 (assault rifle)
-H&K HK417 (battle rifle)
-Beretta ARX160 (grenade launcher)

Air Forces: N/A
Naval Forces: N/A

Overall, same criticisms as the aforementioned militaries. Notably, the standard issue assault rifles are 1950s tech and the country's 40 tanks are 1950s Chinese tech. The air forces and naval forces are likewise out of date, even worse so than the aforementioned nations.

Reminder that you've been told already that Yugoslavia no longer exists in the modern day. I'll assume you mean the six countries that were formerly Yugoslavia: Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, North Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia, and Slovenia.

Ground Forces
-FN SCAR (assault rifle)
-T91 (assault rifle)

Air Force and Air Defense: N/A

Overall, same as before. A lot of the tech of this nation's armed forces is from the 1970s-1980s or earlier, a lot of it being old Soviet and Yugoslavian tech. Almost all of their artillery is WW2 tech. Their air force is virtually non-existent except for some helicopters; their anti-air technology is from WW2 or the 1970s. I can't find that they have a navy.

Army
-HS Produkt VHS (assault rifle): 7,800
-HS Produkt VHS-2 (assault rifle): 20,000
-HK416 (assault rifle): 550
-HK417 (sniper rifle): 150

Air Force: N/A

Navy
-Omiš-class patrol boat: 1

Overall, once again largely consisting of 1960s-1980s tech and a lot of it being old Soviet or Yugoslavian tech.

Army
-Zastava M21 (assault rifle): 500

Air Force: N/A

Overall, same story as before. A lot of 1960s-1980s tech in their military supply, a lot of it being old Soviet and Yugoslavian tech.

Ground Army
-MPT-76 (assault rifle): 30
-HK416 (assault rifle)

Navy: N/A

Air Force N/A

Overall, again same story. Lots of old 1960s-1980s tech and old Soviet/Yugoslavian tech.

Army
-PASARS-16 (short range air defense): 2
-HQ-22 (surface-to-air missile system): 4
-Zastava M21 (assault rifle): 25,000
-Zastava M19 (assault rifle)
-Zastava M07 (sniper rifle)
-CH-92 (UAV): 6
-CH-95 (UAV)
-Aeronautics Defense Orbiter (UAV): 10
-Vrabac Mini UAV: 50

Air Force: N/A

River Flotilla: N/A

Same shit, different country. A lot of the tech is 1950s-1970s and a lot of it is old Soviet/Yugoslavian tech.

Ground Forces
-FN SCAR (assault rifle)

Navy: N/A

Air Force N/A

Same as before, less Yugoslavian/Soviet tech but still mainly 1950s-1980s tech in their military.

Land Forces
-FN 303 (semi-auto less-lethal riot gun)

Navy: N/A

Air Force: N/A

Same as before: A lot of 1970s tech and a lot of old Soviet tech

Hellenic Army: N/A

Hellenic Navy
-Roussen-class fast attack craft: 7
-Osprey HSY-56A-class gunboat: 4

Hellenic Air Force: N/A
A lot of 1950s-1970s equipment in this military. Some leftover WW2 tech, like some of the aforementioned countries. Quite a bit of old Soviet and West German equipment. Best navy out of this whole list of nations, unsurprisingly, but that's not saying a lot.

So, uh, 21st century equipment is not going to be a deciding factor here. Unless you're telling me you expect these countries to overcome the Soviet Union, Nazi Germany, Japan, Italy, Britain, and France relying on *check notes* 384 pieces of artillery, 13 ships, and 6 anti-aircraft guns as "superior 21st century technology."

I suppose the question you're really asking with this hypothetical is "Can a handful of countries with relatively small supplies of Cold War weaponry and equipment take down almost the entire world when that world has lots of WW2 equipment?" To which I'd answer: No, that's ridiculous, why'd you ask?

Make an estimation for how many minimal soldiers will be needed to form an effective defence line against the USSR

Just gonna pull the first numbers I find via Google:

• Greece has a wartime strength of 750,000 soldiers in the modern day. Only 100,000 soldiers are active duty in peacetime.
• Albania has 8,500 active duty personnel.
• North Macedonia has 6,100 active duty personnel; 12,500 reserves
• Bulgaria has 33,112 active duty personnel.
• Serbia has 17,850 active duty; 50,000 in reserves
• Bosnia and Herzegovina has 10,000 active duty personnel; 6,000 reserves
• Poland has 65,000 active duty personnel; 45,000 reserves
• Hungary has 37,650 active duty personnel
• Croatia has 7,514 active duty personnel; 6,000 reserves
• Romania has 68,500 active duty personnel; 53,000 reserves
• Slovenia has 7,300 active duty personnel; 1,500 reserves
• Montenegro has 2,400 active duty personnel

Now let's compare those to their enemies (again pulling first numbers I find):

• Nazi Germany had 13,600,000 soldiers
• Great Britain and her dominions had 8,586,000 soldiers
• France had mobilized 5,000,000 soldiers at the start of the war
• Japan had 1,700,000 soldiers
• By war's end, the Soviet army had 11,365,000 soldiers
• Italy had 2,560,000 soldiers

You want me to believe 1.3 million soldiers stand a chance against 42.8 million soldiers?

and gun hard for Berlin and then Paris.

Hahahahahaha

Oh, you're serious? Let me laugh harder

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Turkey and China need to invade the USSR from two sides and make them divert troops from Eastern Europe (creating as much psychological impact and shock and awe from modern weapons as possible).

I can't be arsed to go about looking up Turkey and China's modern arsenal, you should've listed them with the rest of the countries I did above.

Alternatively, for history buffs, think of a way we can use historical knowledge of India's factions and independence movement to try and get the Indians to side with the Greeks and the Chinese.

Wait, are these countries just automatically getting sent back via time traveling or are they given far enough warning in advance to study Indian history in depth and memorize it before losing access to the internet?

USA? Light the Atlantic up. Grab some territory in Iceland/Greenland etc for naval bases and then fight the Royal and French navies. Use your immense production to crank out warships and keep it going.

The game plan? We need to take Berlin and Paris, and then hold those positions until China and the USA both get huge. I don't recommend gunning for Moscow, ideally we'd want to annex a line from France to some eastern half of Europe and fortify it with modern weapons. Take the war from the beginning and gun hard with the modern weapons, throw them off balance.

Unlike with the historical Nazis who didn't take advantage of hatred for Stalin, we will use it to mobilise paramilitaries.

This is your brain on Hearts of Iron IV

Sorry I really want to give a good reply to this but it's getting too long for me. I mean you can disagree with me if you want but I'll just add that these are just starting forces. 21st century nations could go into total war mode too (the WWII countries didn't look that good with their starting forces either in 1939). Plus in this one the USA wouldn't be lend-leasing the Soviets, they'd be on our side.

[Infected Mushroom]

I mean looking at how badly the Allies blundered the opening stages of WWII and how the Nazis had serious weaknesses in lack of long range air, it was clear that military doctrines were being tested and figured out as the war progressed. Meanwhile, the Greek side would have their stuff together from square 1.

Erm, no? Present-day Greece with its present day army is in no position to fight a major conventional war that starts like a day from now. No European nation is, really. Greece's entire military doctrine is geared towards countering a Turkish military incursion against the Aegean Sea, coming from the East (a scenario in which Greece would probably still lose anyway). Why would they have their stuff together when suddenly faced with a land invasion of 30,000,000+ soldiers from the North?
(Nevermind that the Greek population would be considerably pre-occupied with the questions of A) why did we suddenly land in the 1940ies and B) why does everyone want us dead for no reason)

You have been asked this before: Why do the WW2 actors keep their historic IRL issues (like ethnic minorities hating Stalin and such) while 21st Century Greece somehow performs on an completely ideal level?

These are not unreasonable points. I think that our side would at least have the benefit of hindsight of history about how these WWII countries are likely to go about this.