Could Soviet Union take Asia in 1939-40s ?

Korwar

Banned
They were defending a very defensible terrain, which they had much time to fortify. In normal battlefield conditions they performance would be different.
After all the underdeveloped Chinese army had its share of victories over Japanese.
 
They were defending a very defensible terrain, which they had much time to fortify. In normal battlefield conditions they performance would be different.
After all the underdeveloped Chinese army had its share of victories over Japanese.

Dont you think that by the time japan is forced back to korea they would have build forts so there troops were fortified
 
Hard, but not impossible.
The war would probably go like this:
-Early Soviet victories, advances.
-Then, as the war goes past the first month or so, the Japanese start getting tougher and tougher, and we get a stalemate.
-However, the Soviet Army learns, and starts getting better (like with Germany). Small breakthroughs happen.
-The Soviet Union finally uses it's strength against the Japanese and a bloody campaign is waged, with the Soviets coming out on top after a while.
 
Last edited:
The Japanese forces in the area in 45 were a mere shell of their former mediocrity. This will be harder.

The west won't stop selling oil & steel over Japan fighting the reds. There could be some very interesting times if they're still fighting when Hitler attacks.
 
This is the same railway that the Russians used to smash the Japanese in 45, isn't it?

Right but think who were the troops that were sent to the East in 1945 They were troops who were lead by men that had fought 4 years of the dirtiest war in histoery . They could of walk all over the Soviet troops of 1939 -40 with no truble . Rember the officers of the 1945 army were lt's and captins in 1939-40 and they gained there rank the hard way by learning on the Job though 4 years of war . Also The japanies army in Aisia in 1945 had been mostly striped of it aircraft and best troops . How long do you think it would take that japanies Military to build tanks to fight the Russians of 1939 -40 if it became a war with tanks . We are not talking about a japan on the ropes here we are talking about a japan that full of fight And the Soviets do not have a large navy and Japan dose in the pacific . The Japaniese fighting a war agaist the Soviets would not be cut off from US Steel or oil And I can see Japan buying French and other Europien tanks and weapons .
As I said I can see the Japanies pushed back to Korea but not much futher

I think you will see a war in aisia that would make the eastern frount in Europe look like a day on the beach . It would be a no barred slog match to the death and think of how the Japanise military fought in the Pacific Islands . Also look at how bad the USSR troops did in the Winter War in 1940 the sovied army was not ready to fight a major war They were still tring to get it together after the pruges of the 1930's . To see how bad the Soviets were in 1939 read about how they moved into poland They were a mess moving in to Poland .

Your conclusion breaks with every established knowledge of the comparison between the Red Army and the IJA. In 1939 the Soviets DID fight the Japanese.

And crushed them.

That's a fact, pure and simple, no matter what comparison you make with the Winter War, the invasion of Eastern Poland or the Pacific War. Fact is that the Japanese and the Soviets went toe to toe in '39 and the Soviets won a major victory.
 
In 1939, the Soviets are able to gather a handful of divisions to crush a couple of IJA divisions. And this was right at the border of the USSR and Japanese controled territory. The Soviet equipment is superior to the Japanese, so it must follow that the Soviets can steamroll over the poorly-equipped IJA.

But what about logistics? The Soviet takeovers of eastern Poland and Bessarabia, as well ar the war in Finland show the lack of Soviet logistic abilities in areas where roads and railroads are scarce (in the invasion of the Baltic states, roads and railroads are much better). How far could the soviets advance before supply is a pronlem. Remember, the IJA is falling back onto reinforcements and supplies. And a Soviet attack would mean even more supplies and men from Japan would be sent into this area.

In 1939-1940. I doubt the Soviets could advance more than 100-200 miles before being stopped by the IJA. The question would then be, would Stalin commit more troops to the Far East while Hitler is gaining strength on his western borders?
 

Faeelin

Banned
But what about logistics? The Soviet takeovers of eastern Poland and Bessarabia, as well ar the war in Finland show the lack of Soviet logistic abilities in areas where roads and railroads are scarce (in the invasion of the Baltic states, roads and railroads are much better). How far could the soviets advance before supply is a pronlem. Remember, the IJA is falling back onto reinforcements and supplies. And a Soviet attack would mean even more supplies and men from Japan would be sent into this area.

Well, how did the Soviets supply their forces in the area in 1945?

What stops them? The Japanese still have no heavy weaponry compared to Sivet armor, after all. Maybe they're stopped in Northern Korea, but Harbin will assuredly fall.

The question would then be, would Stalin commit more troops to the Far East while Hitler is gaining strength on his western borders?


The original poster was musing about a No-Hitler world.
 
It seems to me that if the logistics exist the Soviets need just keep throwing manpower at the problem untill the Japanese collapse.

Which would occur quickly or otherwise depending on weather conditions since all the Japanese have going for them is somewhat superior air power.

I tend to think the performance of the Winter war isn't a great measure of the Red Army. Yes the army performed badly but that was due to the spinelessness of the generals involved and the insanity of the USSR's political master.

Only the USSR launched attacks in winter in that part of the world. All other states atleast cared somewhat for the well being of their soldiers and wouldn't waste them on something which could be accomplished easilly by just waiting three months.
 
Only the USSR launched attacks in winter in that part of the world. All other states atleast cared somewhat for the well being of their soldiers and wouldn't waste them on something which could be accomplished easilly by just waiting three months.

Umm, no it does not. Winter or not, Soviet forces were not in their prime in Finnish conditions, whether 1939 or 1941. Attacking during winter in main theater, Karelian Isthmus, made task of the attacker significantly easier as frozen ground, lakes and rivers allowed more tank movement, important in terrain rich in both swamps and lakes. Finally, and dramatically, Soviet forces made an "amphibious" envelopment at Gulf of Viipuri across frozen Bay of Viipuri, impossible task during summer for Soviet forces.
 
Top