Alternate History Ideas and Discussion

Zyobot

Just a time-traveling robot stranded on Earth.
‘Soviet Holocaust In Eastern Poland’.

That is, Stalin decides to carry out a full-blown extermination campaign of Soviet-occupied Poland mirroring Hitler's. Know the NKVD dispensed terror campaigns and forced collectivization quite liberally, but to my knowledge, there was no concerted attempt to wipe out the Polish nation and culture wholesale.
 

ATP

Well-known member
‘Soviet Holocaust In Eastern Poland’.

That is, Stalin decides to carry out a full-blown extermination campaign of Soviet-occupied Poland mirroring Hitler's. Know the NKVD dispensed terror campaigns and forced collectivization quite liberally, but to my knowledge, there was no concerted attempt to wipe out the Polish nation and culture wholesale.
Sralin planned to do so,but Hitler backstabbed him before he could do that.
So,after 1945 we were soviet colony,but treated in kid gloves - becouse Sralin planned to start WW3 before 1956 with unexpected attack - which would be not possible,if there would be war in Poland.

But,if he start genociding us more then OTL before 1941,it could change History.
Polish goverment in 1941 would not made peace with soviets,polish partisants woud hunt soviet bandits.Even if Allies sell us to soviets anyway,they would not get info from our agents in Germany.
War would laste longer,and when american would drop A bomb on Berlin in 1945 soviets could be still on Dniepr.

Free Poland,or genocided by soviets Poland.
 

Zyobot

Just a time-traveling robot stranded on Earth.
The above happening could had been triggered by the original borders of the Stalin-Hitler treaty.
See yet another example of Soviet genocide:

Interesting... 🧐

Don't suppose you could elaborate on what the initial spheres of influence they agreed on looked like? Know there was some "back-and-forth" in the negotiations, but not all that much else.

At any rate, I suppose one way to carry it out is for the NKVD to roll out the mass-killings in stages much like their German counterparts. So, a wave of Katyn Massacres throughout eastern Poland to kill off the Polish leadership cadres and intelligentsia, followed by another Holodomor to starve a few million Poles to death while the NKVD shoots the survivors point-blank? Sounds plausible enough to me, I guess.
 

Skallagrim

Well-known member
Sounds about right.

And to think, if Germany hadn’t been run by Hitler and his Nazi fucktards, it could have been the center of a alliance against the USSR. Well, assuming Britain and France didn’t throw a hissy fit over the very idea.

Before the Great War even dawned, Theodore Roosevelt had already predicted the outline of the 20th century. He reasoned that it was in America's best interest to first defeat Germany (on the grounds that Wilhelmine Prussianism was going to be trouble), and to then build it back up as the strong centre of an Atlantic alliance against Russia (which he correctly predicted would be the next great opponent).

If TR had gotten his way, there really only would have been one World War, and the aftermath would be more like that of the second one. No neutered League of Nations, but something more like a proto-NATO to keep Russia contained.

That sure would have spared us all a lot of bullshit and bloodshed.
 

DarthOne

☦️
Before the Great War even dawned, Theodore Roosevelt had already predicted the outline of the 20th century. He reasoned that it was in America's best interest to first defeat Germany (on the grounds that Wilhelmine Prussianism was going to be trouble), and to then build it back up as the strong centre of an Atlantic alliance against Russia (which he correctly predicted would be the next great opponent).

If TR had gotten his way, there really only would have been one World War, and the aftermath would be more like that of the second one. No neutered League of Nations, but something more like a proto-NATO to keep Russia contained.

That sure would have spared us all a lot of bullshit and bloodshed.
Which would have been a mistake to side with the British Empire. As it was far more a threat to the USA then the Germans ever were. Even in our timeline, we came relatively close to going to war with them in the 1920’s and 30’s.
 

ATP

Well-known member
Interesting... 🧐

Don't suppose you could elaborate on what the initial spheres of influence they agreed on looked like? Know there was some "back-and-forth" in the negotiations, but not all that much else.

At any rate, I suppose one way to carry it out is for the NKVD to roll out the mass-killings in stages much like their German counterparts. So, a wave of Katyn Massacres throughout eastern Poland to kill off the Polish leadership cadres and intelligentsia, followed by another Holodomor to starve a few million Poles to death while the NKVD shoots the survivors point-blank? Sounds plausible enough to me, I guess.
To be precise,official numbers are of poles who was tortured,sentenced and executed - and it is 111.000 victims.
But,if some dude died during tortures,he is not counted
If another died fighting his home,he is not counted
If another was send to gulag and died there,he also is not counted.

So,in reality,it must be more then 200.000


Before the Great War even dawned, Theodore Roosevelt had already predicted the outline of the 20th century. He reasoned that it was in America's best interest to first defeat Germany (on the grounds that Wilhelmine Prussianism was going to be trouble), and to then build it back up as the strong centre of an Atlantic alliance against Russia (which he correctly predicted would be the next great opponent).

If TR had gotten his way, there really only would have been one World War, and the aftermath would be more like that of the second one. No neutered League of Nations, but something more like a proto-NATO to keep Russia contained.

That sure would have spared us all a lot of bullshit and bloodshed.

Typical american mistake.United germany would ALWAYS be prussians - which mean,they would start another WW and lost it thanks to their stupidity.

So,good answer to world problems after WW1 would be:
1.Gave freedom to german old states
2.Occupy prussia for next 100 years
3.Carve Russia into smaller states,and gave Siberia to Japan.

No united Russia and Germany,no another WW.
 

Zyobot

Just a time-traveling robot stranded on Earth.
‘1982 US To 1942’.

Be fun to have Reagan in charge of US forces for a change, as opposed to Bush Jr. in the previous ISOT that I suggested a ways back.
 

DarthOne

☦️
To be precise,official numbers are of poles who was tortured,sentenced and executed - and it is 111.000 victims.
But,if some dude died during tortures,he is not counted
If another died fighting his home,he is not counted
If another was send to gulag and died there,he also is not counted.

So,in reality,it must be more then 200.000




Typical american mistake.United germany would ALWAYS be prussians - which mean,they would start another WW and lost it thanks to their stupidity.

So,good answer to world problems after WW1 would be:
1.Gave freedom to german old states
2.Occupy prussia for next 100 years
3.Carve Russia into smaller states,and gave Siberia to Japan.

No united Russia and Germany,no another WW.
Which would have left Poland, a crumbling Austria-Hungary and equally ill Ottoman Empire left. Funny how that works out.
 

stevep

Well-known member
Which would have been a mistake to side with the British Empire. As it was far more a threat to the USA then the Germans ever were. Even in our timeline, we came relatively close to going to war with them in the 1920’s and 30’s.

Not true. The USN and some industrial elements along with the traditional Anglo-phobes rattled their sabres a fair amount but there wasn't a serious desire to attack the UK and Britain was definitely no threat to the US, both from choice and by ~1920 capacity. The only threat Britain posed was in showing an alternative to the American way. ;)

The other big problem with a proto-NATO was that the US simply wasn't interested in international co-operation in that time period. Especially not with binding military commitments. It too WWII for Washington to realise that it couldn't simply ignore the outside world until it was dragged in due to a crisis.
 

ATP

Well-known member
‘1982 US To 1942’.

Be fun to have Reagan in charge of US forces for a change, as opposed to Bush Jr. in the previous ISOT that I suggested a ways back.
Do not do that,it mean FDR in 1982.He would surrender to soviets.

Which would have left Poland, a crumbling Austria-Hungary and equally ill Ottoman Empire left. Funny how that works out.
Just like it worked for Europe in medieval times.No big empire,smaller countries could not start any bigger war.
There would be conflicts,sure - but not anytching like WW2.

Atp is a seething polack, expecting objectivity from him is like squeezing blood from a rock. Not gonna happen.
Sure,my objective teuton.
Oh I know. Doesn’t stop me from pointing out his bullshit for anyone else reading through the thread.
Bullshit? United germany started WW1 and lost thanks to their own stupidity.So they started WW2,and lost thanks to their own stupidity again.
Now,only reason why we do not have WW3 yet are american troops in germany.
Becouse comrade putin,german ally,once told truth - Germany ARE occupied by USA.
And that is why we still have peace.

P.S Told me,how many world wars Poland started,when we were superpower ?
 

Zyobot

Just a time-traveling robot stranded on Earth.
Do not do that,it mean FDR in 1982.He would surrender to soviets.

No, it doesn't.

For one, FDR was only president of 1942 America, which has vanished and been replaced by 1982 America. In '82, Reagan is president — and unlike FDR, I'm quite sure he'll take a hard line against Stalin and Communism as a whole once Nazi Germany is vanquished.
 

ATP

Well-known member
No, it doesn't.

For one, FDR was only president of 1942 America, which has vanished and been replaced by 1982 America. In '82, Reagan is president — and unlike FDR, I'm quite sure he'll take a hard line against Stalin and Communism as a whole once Nazi Germany is vanquished.
Sorry for being unclear.
1942 USA woud go to 1982 - and ,FDR would surrender to soviets from 1982 then.
When in 2002 FDR would not surrender to Putin.
 

stevep

Well-known member
Sorry for being unclear.
1942 USA woud go to 1982 - and ,FDR would surrender to soviets from 1982 then.
When in 2002 FDR would not surrender to Putin.

If the US in 1982 is replaced by its 1942 version and the 1982 boomers and other nukes outside the US are lost then its likely that the Soviets could take over large areas of the world with little-no fighting as they have nukes and no one else other than Britain, France, China and Israel do. Coupled with the lack of support and resupply for US forces in Europe and elsewhere.

What Moscow might do, especially since the transplanted US government is unlikely to realise the abilities of intercontinental nukes, is nuke a city or two in the US to both force its surrender and seek to undermine NATO in Europe. That is if no 1982 US nukes overseas are available. Different matter if they are. The key issue would probably be France as its the most capable nuclear force in the western alliance if the US nuclear forces - included nukes based in Europe - have disappeared.

PS Edited as realised I had failed to complete the final sentence!:oops: However think most people realised what I meant.
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top