How would a war (conventional weapons) between NATO and Warsaw Pact ,have been fought & won ? any scenarios ?

Answer 1

To counter the numerical superiority of Red Army tanks and infantry division, the use of tactical nukes was the basis for equalizing the battlefield. Without the nukes, the Red Army had the numerical advantage...

Answer 2

Having spent 7 years in Europe (Holland 77-81), Turkey (83-84) and Belgium (84-87), it looked like both sides would have went nuclear, possibly chemical. The Warsaw Pact had plans to take out the major air bases in Germany, take out the ports while the Red Horde tried to roll across Europe.

Tactical nukes were the order of the day. I remeber the campaign against enhanced radiation weapons that supposedly killed people and left buildings intact. The Russians orchestrated a propaganda campaign and Jimmy Carter wimped out and did not use these weapons. Fact is, at ground zero, any nuke will radiate an area. With enhanced radiation, the dissipation rates were faster and you could move through an area sooner, but you would still be exposed.

The NATO alliance did not have the numbers to hold back the Warsaw Pact with conventional weapons.

Answer 3

There are too many scenarios that could have happened w/ a war w/ NATO and the Warsaw Pact. You cant really predict what would happen, if you wanted to go in depth you could look at the Soviets style of warfare in WWII compared to the US and Britain's.

NATO, led by American/British forces would have knocked back the Pact right at the border line and wouls keep driving back. Then the Soviets would have their armies mobilized to head to the east where NATO invaded. They would be disowned by the US and Britain loosing hundreds of thousands/millions of Troops (w/ their tactics of just throwing troops at the enemy hoping to overrun them), and the Soviets would turn to the (dont remember what its called, when they would burn all their land and cities and retreat so the enemy had nothing to live off of; what they did to the Nazis in WWII). NATO would probably get the idea of what was going on and set up the troops, and slowly take more and more land but not rush into it like Hitler did until the Soviets either surrendered or were forced too far East and had to fight. Where both sides would loose many Troops, but NATO would come out on top.

Answer 4

I spent 27 months at the Hanua end of the Fulda Gap. Back then there was a couple of bunkers full of Tactical Nukes. Some were 8" for firing from the tracked 105's some were for the engineers to blow roadway. I now know they were dial a yield from 1KT to 40KT, at least some were. It was known as NATO site 5. Don't know if there were 4 others or not. It would have been very close to Armageddon.

One of Colin Powells first assignments was within that area of the 3rd AD, he was in charge of a 280mm Nuclear Cannon. These were big mothers and they moved them around to keep them hidden from the Soviets. One is on display at FT Sill OK.

The Air Force would do gun runs on the ADA unit at Fliegerhorst. One day the guy came over the main post and went vertical with afterburners right over the Motor Pool. We had a bank of windows facing that way. There was a flash, an explosion and we just sat at the work benches looking at each other. One guy shrugged his shoulders and says "We're dead" a moment later one of the flight line crew comes running in yelling "that was so cool did you guys see it?" Funny how numb we were to being speed bumps. We went back to work and that was that.

SSG US Army 73-82

Answer 5

From Ivan's side, the idea was to repeat what he last did in World War II -- rush the defenses, and exploit any breakthroughs. which happened. (hey, it worked before, right?) Traditional attacks were once done at a 3:1 ratio; Ivan had a mind to attack at 15:1, locally. Why? On the German's Eastern Front (against Russia), Ivan didn't get anywhere unless he exceeded 5:1.

Well, before -- it was only the Germans, who were getting their industrial base flattened by British and American bombing, sorely outnumbered, and -- they still cost Ivan dearly.

By the time I last served in Germany (1979-1983), the Americans and Brits (and the French) had caught on to the (German) idea of mobile warfare. (The Germans were still the masters, though. They haven't lost a thing since Rommel.)

So, Ivan would have been up against some big guns that could move fast. The American air force? They were lined up to concern themselves with cutting down, if not outright destroying the second wave of Russians.

The first wave? We were to trade space for time, and destroy them by a series of fall-backs and ambushing strongpoints. Mobile defense, as opposed to a static, linear defense.

The official phrase was "Fire and manuever". The unofficial description was more apt: "Shoot and Scoot".

If and when we could, the idea was to attack and take back ground. Again, shoot & scoot -- don't hang around and present a target to them.

The Germans? In every joint briefing I ever attended with our left flank guys (The German V Panzer), they kept cautioning us not to give up too much ground too quickly.

(I got the distinct impression they intended not to defend, but to attack! ) I figured they had plans to laager just short of Warsaw, Poland.

The best chance Ivan had would have been somewhere in the early 1970's, if he had any chance at all.

Ronald Reagan put the impetus on deploying everything we ever developed (but had to defer) under Jimmy Carter. By 1991, we were technologically so far ahead of Ivan that it would have been an out-and-out rout for him.

This was evidenced in the first Gulf War, to retake Kuwait. Saddam Hussein had the best of Russian export equipment,training, satellite assistance from Ivan -- and he got clobbered. Even the Russian satellites were still showing Schwarzkopf's army at their jump-off points -- when Schwarzkopf was already in Kuwait. (In short, Ivan's satellite codes had been hacked --and far, far worse: spoofed.)

The Americans and their allies went through the best of Russian doctrine like it was butter. That fact wasn't lost on the Russians. Gorbachev was pushing for 'glasnost' within days.
I don't know who the poor SOB was that had to walk into the kremlin and say, "Comrades, based on what happened in Kuwait, if it comes to World War III, we can't stop them -- we won't even know where they are. We cannot militarily defend the Motherland. You will need ot arrive at a political solution."

For a military type, that's some hard words to choke out.

glanost was sudden -- and, driven.

Thanks, Ron.

wsulliva

Answer 6

The Warsaw %. could have rolled over The NATO forces. the prevalent forces weren't sufficient to stand up to a massed attack by using the Warsaw %.. NATO coverage became very of course spelled out that they could go nuclear if such an adventure befell. Stalin or Lenin (uncertain which) had an incredible quote that defined Soviet militia coverage on the time, "quantity has a high quality all of its very own."

Answer 7

Think this through. There can be no winners. Except of course the usual war profiteers and those that share Henry Kissinger's agenda of world depopulation of 75% to 95%. Plenty of the ruling elite share this sediment. Google it....Mary

Answer 8

It would have probably gone nuclear as soon as the Russians forced the Fulda Gap, probably not more than a week.

Answer 9

There were a lot of simulations, mostly centering on Fulda Gap.

Answer 10

good question ,,.a thinking one ..here is what i believe would of happened....1,troop build up around allies side of BERLIN to starve them out ,..2,troop build up on east and west sides of GERMAN border,NATO on west PACT on east.3,PACT sends troops to USSR far west coast facing CANADA and the U.S ,also.PACT sends troops and ships to CUBA to throw the U.S off the build up of PACT troops in EUROPE and USSR WEST COAST4,PACT sends people to MEXICO to talk to them for help with the war.they say okay.5 west BERLIN falls PACT attacks U.S.N base in CUBA and it falls .6 fighting starts in EUROPE .to a stand still ...7 NATO ATTACKS CUBA and wins base back..8 PACT troops starts its attack on CANADA and ALASKA they take ALASKA and most of WESTERN CANADA 9 MEXICO changes it mind about helping the PACT..fighting starts BETWEEN MEXICO and PACT troops U.S sends help to MEXICO ,PACT troops are defeated 10MEXICO ,U.S and CANADA attack PACT troops in ALASKA and WESTERN CANADA ..,PACT TROOPS ARE DEFEATED 11being attacked on both fronts PACT troops fall back to staging areas ...12 NATO and PACT nations talk ....peace comes to the world and GERMANY becomes one again ...and BERLIN is the capital of GERMANY again ......JUST ONE OF MANY SCENARIOS THAT COULD OF HAPPENED (THIS ONE IS SET IN THE 60s TIME FRAME )...WHAT WOULD YOURS BE....THIS IS IF A-BOMBS WERE NEVER MADE