Infinity Worlds: How strong would a communist Europe be?

[Athelstan]

Is for an alternative world war 2 between US and a communist europe. Not sure how the US would react and act.

[robkelk]

You'd need to set up a change point that allows for both Germany not being the aggressor (unless they're the communists) and the USA not being isolationist until being pulled into the war. Depending on which change point you choose, the communist nation(s) could be of almost any strength.

[ericthered]

What do you mean by Europe? Do you count Russia? do you count the UK?

You said WWII, so I'm going to assume that WWI goes down pretty much as expected, and the turbulent politics of the 30's result in a series of united socialist governments.

If you have all four of France, Germany, Russia, and the UK, all fully on board, any war will be defensive, and a fight for survival. The US will need to scramble to find allies to win the war at all. Japan is probably a good bet in this case.

Things look more interesting if you give one of those four as an ally.

[mr beer]

Originally Posted by ericthered

If you have all four of France, Germany, Russia, and the UK, all fully on board, any war will be defensive, and a fight for survival. The US will need to scramble to find allies to win the war at all. Japan is probably a good bet in this case.

I think it would be a draw as neither side would be likely to mount a successful invasion. If it dragged on long enough, it could go nuclear of course, in which case that would likely be pretty bad news for the losers of that race.

[Tyneras]

Well, if Europe never exported communism to Russia, then it could be Communist France, Germany and UK vs Capitalist/Traditionalist USA, Czarist Russia and Imperial Japan.

Or, if the USA went Islamic then Atheist Communist Europe aggression against the mid east could pull the USA into war with them. The same works if the USA is economically dependent enough on the ME that attacking them is an existential threat to the USA.

[Angle]

There are enough variables here that you can make things go pretty much any way.

First, as other people have noted, what do you mean by Europe?

Second, what do you mean by communism? Are we talking soviet style autocracy, or a more democratically inclined socialism? How competent are these governments? Have they seen a series of spectacularly failing five year plans, famine, industrial collapse, and engineers and scientists fleeing the continent or being purged? Or have they been blessed with competent leadership and capable followers, and managed a successful economic transition that keeps their population and industrial capacity intact? How are they on science? Are they filled with silly nonsense like Lyshenkoism, or are they generally sensible? How willing are their leaders to face difficult facts and change their minds? How capable are they of reigning in members that need to be reigned in?

Third, how united are they? Is this a deep and abiding alliance that will stand the test of time, or is communist Germany going to stab communist France in the back first chance it gets?

Fourth, whats the rest of the world like? Still the same? Or have they responded to the rise of communist Europe in highly divergent ways?

[arcticJKL]

The US could be a staunch anti-communist nation or it could be divided between pro and anti-communist sides. Perhaps the government goes to war against the Reds and rioting breaks out in US cities.

[PTTG]

Originally Posted by Tyneras

Or, if the USA went Islamic then Atheist Communist Europe aggression against the mid east could pull the USA into war with them.

That's an interesting idea. What would bring that about? I might imagine something Thomas Jefferson, but even then... Well... Maybe if someone sold it as "Catholicism Plus," it might take early on.

[Michele]

This is all very far-fetched; not the less so because you'd need a reason for war. The fact alone that all of Europe has gone Communist isn't, by itself, reason enough for the USA to go to war. Choosing the casus belli would help you in defining how strong both sides are for the sort of confrontation that would develop from that specific casus belli.

For instance, a very likely flash point is in the various European colonies that are pretty near the USA, in the Caribbean for instance. While the USA will of course be very preoccupied by a collection of Communist governments in Europe, they'll be much more likely to be worried enough to actually do something when it comes to having Communist colonies next door; places from where the revolution could be exported to the USA.

Therefore, this could be a colonial/naval war; neither side being able to seriously harm, let alone invade, the other side's industrial heartland, it would be a series of colonial campaigns in assorted islands, accompanied by war on the oceans against the other side's shipping.
Then, given the outlook, both sides would probably seek to build a large long-range bomber fleet, and to secure suitable air bases within range of the enemy's core territory. They would need to be able to defend such air bases from the enemy's naval and land forces. For instance, a campaign for the control of Iceland and Greenland would be likely.

This situation is bad news for Mexico. A left-leaning ruler like Cárdenas would be under strong international pressure to side with a Communist alliance. On the other hand, the second it stops being a US-friendly neutral, it gets invaded. The Communists cannot effectively oppose this with sizable and conventional land forces, but Mexico is wide and full of hot-blooded Mexicans; it would become this war's partisan country.

A parallel war would take place in Asia, with Japan being the de facto or de iure ally of the USA. The Japanese would be welcome to take over the Communist colonies of the British, Dutch and French, and at the same time they'd be fighting the Chinese Communists; eventually the Soviets in their Far East. That's a full plate, but they wouldn't be fighting the USA, and on the contrary US Lend-Lease help would go to the Japanese allies.

Eventually, the side that develops nukes first is the winner. For a really dystopian outcome, both sides might end up capable of using them, and both sides might use them more or less at the same time.

[Fred Brackin]

Originally Posted by PTTG

That's an interesting idea. What would bring that about? I might imagine something Thomas Jefferson, but even then... Well... Maybe if someone sold it as "Catholicism Plus," it might take early on.

Why would that help? The original 13 colonies were 12-to-1 Protestant and individual numbers may have been an even higher ratio.

You might be able to more accurately characterize Islam as "Protestantism Plus" but existing Protestant versions were radical enough for anyone's take. A significant number of settlers to the early US were avoiding European wars of religion anyway (Some of which were inter-Protestant).

Add in the requirement to learn not just a new language (Classical Arabic) but a radically different alphabet and I just can't see it at all.