Battle Plans: How the Soviet Union could have Won the Cold War

Join me on the general's armchair and undo the past using the battle plans that communism needed to win the Cold War, featuring key players like Stalin, Tito, and Truman. Dive into the strategies that the USSR could have used to crush the USA and it's allies and change the course of history.
Chapters:
00:00 Intro
00:50 What wouldn't work
02:12 Defining the Problem
03:54 Step 1
07:22 Turning the Tide
08:51 Mending the Rift
09:38 Step 2
10:40 Sabotage
13:02 Going Public
14:53 Step 3
16:59 Coup de Grace
#USSR #coldwar #sovietunion #Communism #ColdWartactics #capitalism #strategies #history #military #coldwar #politics #strategy #Soviet #economy #conflict #superpowers #negotiations #alliances #espionage #influence #foreignpolicy #analysis #Stalin #Tito #GreekCivilWar #Truman #Marshall #MarshallPlan #Italy #CommunistParty #france #frenchcommunistparty #albania #usa #nato #ww2

[@scottstallings5029]

WE❤LOVE ❤YOUR ❤CHANNEL 😊

[@ToW314]

Thank you I really appreciate it!

[@scottstallings5029]

@@ToW314 ABSOLUTELY! Great work! You look a little like Czar Nicholas II. He was very handsome. Take care 🙂

[@kws1957]

I lived 24 years in a communist economy and it was a big pain.

[@PedroOliveira-hx7tl]

awesome video!

[@ToW314]

Thank you!

[@MrPacosTacoz]

Another amazing video about a topic I had no idea I was interested in. GREAT job. I love the use of the stock film and image overlays. The last video was by no means anything less than great, and this one is LEAPS AND BOUNDS better. Especially your cadence! I felt as if I was actually getting to know your personality. You're going to have a massive channel my friend. Keep it up!

[@ToW314]

Thank you so much! I’ll do my best so that the videos will get better with every iteration.

[@stephenhall3515]

Liberal Communism (like in Yugoslavia) could have been a "sellable" idea in both Europe and N.America if Stalin had retired or died before 1953. The simplistic Communist doctrine of Marx was just a guidebook to socialism but had been ham-fistedly applied by a rather weak Lenin when Russia's morale was at its lowest and he made the further error of doctrinally sticking to the Marx script except during the NEP. Had Lenin been less narrow minded and learned from the NEP that aspects of what Mark called capitalism was actually just trade it would have been possible to tap into a whole range of expertise while waiting for a new 'class system' to emerge. Given that Lenin swallowed Marx's idea of strength being in the 'proletariat' but ignoring the fact that agricultural workers were vastly more numerous than the German 'proletariat' in a rapidly industrializing Prussian dominated unifying country, the early Soviet leaders could have re-branded the 'Russian empire's' classification of people and freed the serfs and tenant farmers without them actually doing much different on the ground. In this way production would have recovered, schooling would be provided ensuring the training of vast numbers of young people to apply mechanized agricultural by evolution and because machines would be needed, the rush to industrial production of materials without clear purposes would not have happened. Making steel sheets and ingots was more a matter of propaganda than real progress because steel for railways, locomotives, mining advances, state owned tractors and of course tanks and armaments would have ensured full employment, advancement and innovation when the 'capitalist' west was heading for slump and agricultural ruin in the late 1920s and into the 1930s. Indeed, the USA was saved by the emerging European and Japanese war urge from the mid-30s. Trotsky had ensured that a developed military was necessary but when he was chased out by Stalin, Russia could not compete against the German and Italian developments in technology and production. Stalin had to fight the Nazis later than was ideal and continuous development might even have prevented Nazi action in the east. Had Stalin been more open to listening he would have taken advantage of the UK and US slump to make treaties over oil in the middle east and get at least one foot in the door, also undertaking to put down the various risings and riots in mandate areas which the British empire and French colonial shreds were in no fit state to tackle. This would have left Causasian crude in reserve and probable oil/gas fields in north Russia which had not been properly surveyed at the time. Because the British had a giant navy it would not unduly perturbed London that the USSR was willing to police and import oil products. Traditionally, Russia and the USSR were not big navy enthusiasts but proven abilities in very cold regions (surveying and exploring, sometimes on behalf of colonial powers) could have helped Denmark during the slump period with currency and discounted staples in return for surveying Iceland -- for which it would have needed supply bases under royal leases. These would been in Iceland and the Faroes and the Soviets could have 'softly' built bases in Greenland, giving winter employment to the Greenlanders who had kinship with certain Russian ethnic groups. Just imagine the strategic advantage that would come to have by 1939 and though the 1940s. The USA eventually limped into WW2 in Europe but had cashed in on Britain's lonely plight with lend lease with merchant convoys. Would the USSR side with the Axis or the Allies? If left alone by the Nazis under the infamous Pact which obliterated Poland from the map in the process we do not know. It is also worth remembering that the Soviets had developed (somewhat crude) 4-engine large utility aircraft which could tow gliders far bigger than the 'Horsa', originally intended for Arctic and general Siberian transport -- but some were able bombers in cold air. A glance at a polar view map shows interesting possibilities.

[@ToW314]

Very interesting proposition! I did not want to get into fiddling with the ideology because there is a vast literature of socialist philosophy and statecraft that I am mostly unfamiliar with, so I am not the right person to do it. It is possible that if Russia industrialized earlier they would have changed the fate of the world wars, but I don’t know if it would have made a difference in the World Wars, but perhaps combined with more competent leaderships and tactics they could have had better results in WW1 and thus avoid the costly civil war and revolution that followed, setting them up to become an economic powerhouse for the rest of the century.

[@comentedonakeyboard]

Except this scenario would still not solve the soviet unions ever increasing dependence on the american economy, particularly the food imports. So in the long run the comunist block plus western europe would have still failed due to its own homegrown inaptitude.

[@ToW314]

Funny you should mention it, this is one of the topics I touched on in the Politics Poison Science video. The US and the USSR traded to various degrees throughout the 20th century, but they would more often than not have a relatively low trade volume. The US did sell a massive amount of grain to the USSR in the 70s, but that was in the context of a global famine.

[@comentedonakeyboard]

@@ToW314 never mind that soviet food shortages started long before the 70s and continued well into the 80s (btw realy odd that 20th century famines had such a tendency to hit socialist countrys). And thats just the tip of a hole iceberg of economic and technological dependencies that made comunism a no win scenario.

[@ToW314]

It is true they had shortages before the 70s due to some failed agricultural experimental policies. The drought also hit India and Africa particularly hard as well. After the collapse of the Soviet Union it is tempting to claim that it was a foregone conclusion, but the sentiment of both citizens and rulers during the cold war was far less confident. Think of all the uncertainties that we face today, I’d be reluctant to say that things will definitely play out in one way or another.

[@GeneralGayJay]

The fundamental problem is that the Soviet Union was not attractive. By making the Soviet system truly for the people ruled by the people with full freedom they could have won. But instead they focused on militarism, heavy industry, oppression etc.

[@ToW314]

People are attracted to prosperity and they would trade almost anything for it. The opposite is also true.

[@laurences.d.1176]

Your historical naration concerning Greece is wrong!

[@ToW314]

In which respective?

[@laurences.d.1176]

I'm Greek, I know our history well and you make several mistakes, e.g. the civil war ended in 1949 not in 1948 and several other things....! But OK, I believe that your intentions are good and the subject isn't GR, so, your naration is more or less within the subject.

[@ToW314]

I apologize for my mistake! I strive to thoroughly research any topic that I touch upon in order to do it proper justice. Any mistake I might have missed is either out of ignorance or an attempt to synthesize a complex topic into a short essay. I have no intention of misleading my viewers.

[@laurences.d.1176]

OK, no problem. Yes, I can assume you don't do it in purpose but be careful because being in youtube you become public.....

[@GeneralGayJay]

The Soviet Union was a monarchy or serfdom I believe. It was only communist by name.

[@ToW314]

Well, at least compared to all other countries the Soviets were communist through and through. It’s just that all totalitarian regimes are the same, just with different justifications as to why.

[@peterfireflylund]

Isn’t that true of all Communist countries?

[@GeneralGayJay]

@@peterfireflylund Yupp they abused the good concept of socialism. Marx would turn in his grave if he heard what Stalin did.

[@ToW314]

Yugoslavia under Tito was rather liberal, as communist countries go, for instance.

[@mohammedsaysrashid3587]

Communism as political, economical, and social ideology was a failure ideology for creating a modernized , stabilized , and justified lifestyle.. exceptions of far left wing totalitarian regime foundation, exploding poverty, economical mobility, and social-self decisiveness society. Cannot establishing batter lifestyle of people's....for that internal prosecutions, rebellions feedings ,and border wars is invatable .the same thing about the far right and theocratic regimes .. Internal prosecutions and abroad wars are invatable ... Greek issues inside communism failed world wasn't such important .