JHicks

During the cold war many people belived that a war between the Soviet Union and the United States would have been fought with nukes and would have been the end of the world

But I cant help but wonder which side would have won in a conventional war with no nukes between the USSR and USA

Who do you think would have won ?

POTUS

Difficult to say, depending on the main front of the war, but I would say the US, simply because of the Naval superiority. With the US's superior navy and her allies (UK and most european countries have good navies) the USSR's ports would be strangled and major cities bombed constantly with the aircraft carriors and Cruise missiles. The only advantage the USSR would have would be it's size and massive army and field weapons (AK-47).

Bucephalus

I believe it is out of print now, but you should be able to find a copy of Tom Clancy's Red Storm Rising online or in a used book store. It was published in 1986, and the events of the past 22 years have made many of the presumptions of that book obsolete, but it is a fascinating novelization of what an actual conventional war between the Warsaw Pact and Nato could have been (and fortunately never was)...

POTUS

I believe I saw that the other day at the book store, I love Tom Clancy but I have not read that one...definatly will now.

Toltec

the question would depend on where the war would be fought.

Belisarius

The USSR would have won a conventional war in Europe, without doubt. A large part of NATO strategy involved the use of tactical nuclear weapons to prevent this result.

POTUS

Yes, definitely. If the war was a more Naval oriented war, I believe the US would easily win.

Soldiers Valhala

Europe and the Pacific Ocean.

Toltec

I think Europe is the one theatre the Soviets had no hope of winning a conventional war.

Western European countries would become involved. The industrial and financial base of Europe plus the US vs Russia plus the paltry eastern Europe. US gains some serious recourses, the soviets don't.

In WWII Britain started WWII with around 800 fighters and built 10,000's during the war. Initial numbers were irrelevant industrial base, money, resources, raw materials and productions rate are what count in modern war.

So any war where you add serious money and resources to the US, they kick arse.

US would struggle alone in Asia. History has proven this. In Africa it would be hard fought, but they would have the advantage. South America a US walkover. And Europe a Soviet catastrophe. The best Soviet army is the 9th Shock army and the spearhead of their European attack. It was equipped with t-80's themselve armed with HEAT missles. It was opposite the British first armoured division which delveloped Chobham armour and made the missles completely ineffective as well as outclassing them in gunnery. So they were screwed.

galteeman

the warsaw pact had massive supieriority in armour and troops in europe but what about airpower the most important of all? wouldn't their tanks have been sitting ducks if they didn't control the skies?