Yes, the Aral Sea must not be destroyed. I suggest putting nuclear waste there to drive off people.
Red Alert - Our 1953 USSR
- Thread starter panpiotr
- Start date
-
- Tags
- communism soviet union ussr
Chat, call me a pessimistic but I suspect we might need to squeeze our resources dry if we ever want to keep our nation going much less win the cold war. By that, part of the reason I want to do a intervention in Iran soon is try and secure more oil for the Warsaw pact so would not count on saving the Aral Sea.
I think our position is....medium strength for now? We have a nuclear program, thanks to our current head strong popularity, a ideology attracts a lot of people to our cause, some client states and some of the greatest amount of natural resources on the globe.
However we a lot of problems that could decay it fast our armed forces are draining our state dry yet we depend on them a lot given Zhukov, our food situation not the best given the post world war 2 saw a famine, our population is horrifically damaged from everything since world war 1 and fixing the birth-rate is likely impossible but we help reduce the strain, China is likely going to turn on us at some point and split the socialist world in two and we are arguably very much relying on hostile nations to provide us with the capital, food ect to fix our situation while also being hostile enough to not discredit our status to our camp. We are going to have a tightrope.
For fixing our population, I think China might be our best bet, by that the Sino Soviet split has not occurred yet and so getting migrants willing to hope over the border might not be the worst way getting fresh blood in the Union. It's estimated something like 300,000 people in Xinjiang left to Central Asia between 1953 and 1962 before the PRC closed the border. Since the process already began should try and aim for more across the border such as Manchuria and the like.
I think our position is....medium strength for now? We have a nuclear program, thanks to our current head strong popularity, a ideology attracts a lot of people to our cause, some client states and some of the greatest amount of natural resources on the globe.
However we a lot of problems that could decay it fast our armed forces are draining our state dry yet we depend on them a lot given Zhukov, our food situation not the best given the post world war 2 saw a famine, our population is horrifically damaged from everything since world war 1 and fixing the birth-rate is likely impossible but we help reduce the strain, China is likely going to turn on us at some point and split the socialist world in two and we are arguably very much relying on hostile nations to provide us with the capital, food ect to fix our situation while also being hostile enough to not discredit our status to our camp. We are going to have a tightrope.
For fixing our population, I think China might be our best bet, by that the Sino Soviet split has not occurred yet and so getting migrants willing to hope over the border might not be the worst way getting fresh blood in the Union. It's estimated something like 300,000 people in Xinjiang left to Central Asia between 1953 and 1962 before the PRC closed the border. Since the process already began should try and aim for more across the border such as Manchuria and the like.
Gaúcho Maldito
Banned
This may be the worst idea in the history of ideas, maybe ever.
We shouldn't populate our inhabitated border regions with people that would've double loyalties to our neighbour.
Would not call them double loyalties, after all the Second East Turkestan Republic was a soviet client state the people resented their current rulers more than the USSR.
That and was instead thinking of moving them more to the core regions given that would be both safer as well as regions that need more migrants.
Considering the alternative is living in Mao era China getting a bunch of Chinese refugees might be for the best. Also it's not like the Chinese migrants will remain loyal to China considering they left for a reason.
I mean if all else fails taking out China while they are down might be worth it if for no other reason than securing our border and gaining more resources. It would also be much easier than occupying Iran in the long run. If nothing else getting a puppet state Manchuria is a possibility if not more since the Chinese will have a hard time keeping the rest of the periphery of the Chinese core.
I mean if all else fails taking out China while they are down might be worth it if for no other reason than securing our border and gaining more resources. It would also be much easier than occupying Iran in the long run. If nothing else getting a puppet state Manchuria is a possibility if not more since the Chinese will have a hard time keeping the rest of the periphery of the Chinese core.
Yeah Manchuria was one of the more loyal parts of the PRC, also this has a good chance of PRC-USA rapprochement earlier than OTL.
Say guys should our long term plan for the ussr is to make the comiterm more like a world government that will lead into an actual world government
Malenkov seems like an reasonable pick, nothing too outrageous ( outside of being a hardcore stalin fanboy), and seemed very neutral on foreign policy, in favour of expansion of light industry and consumer goods instead of heavy industry, i view him as the competent bureocrat that does things well and doest stay in the limelight unnecessarily, of the Stalinists hes the most tolerabe
Molotov's hands are stained by his part on the Molotov-Ribentropp pact, waaaay to pragmatic to the point of smiling while shaking hands with the devil, would start international incident from selling arms to some genocidal government since "money is money"
Voroshilov's an army man, and the one who managed the desastrous winter war, also possibly the only guy to get into a shouting match with Stalin, actively blame the poor performance of the Red Army in Finland on Stalin purging all the competent generals, and live to see another day, not particularly competent as a general, unknown as an political operative, also conservative Stalinist, would probably just try ( and fail )continue Stalins legacy
Krushev's a disaster waiting to happen, funny corn man is funny untill he starts a diplomatic crisis with China after calling Stalin a dumbass on a state visit to Beijing in front of Mao, also alienating the entirety of the warsaw pact who are still Stalinist, impulsive gaffe machine.
Bulganin's interesting since he initially sided with Krushev, but after whatching the clown car careening down the cliffside worked with opposition to remove Krushev, ultimately hesitated leading to the soft coup failing, seems to be the moderate reformist whos not gonna be a dumbass like Krushev, but also not the status-quo defender like the Stalinist picks.
Kaganovich's the one more people know from TNO than IRL, somehow even more of a Stalin fanboy than all previous Stalinist picks, gleefully took part in the great purges signing off more than 30K peoples executions, might as well be Stalin 2.0 wannabe, should be on a ditch somewhere ASAP with Beria
Mikoyan's a funny one, Krushevs biggest ally, but also repeatedly commented on how stupidly Krushev acted, big proponent of maintaining diplomatic relations with the west and Krushev's biggest wet blanket who allways was there to put out any fires Krushev started with that mouth of his, opposed the nukes in Cuba as it was too much of a escalation and was gonna blow up in Krushev's face ( he was right ), very smart individual, very, very pro de-Stalinization wich is his biggest downside, since that means no working with Mao
Zhukov's gonna be uncoup-able if that matters,s since hes gonna have the red army at his beck and call, outside of that he went really well with Eisenhower so probably very cooperative on foreign policy with the west, i literally know nothing more of his politics, he liked Stalin when Stalin was in power, he liked Krushev when Krushev was in power, dont really think he cared about politics that much past saying whatever would get him in the least ammount of trouble, he serves a better position managing the army and making sure its up to date and professional
Therefore i believe that the best possible candidates for the positions are
1) E: Bulganin as a moderate reformer is the one capable of setting the USSR down a path of gradual reform, without rocking the boat too much like Krushev ( so probably some very limited de-stalinization ), hes also very competent with the CIA praising his tenure of gosbank, hinting to good administrative understanding necessary in a leader
2: Mikoyan should replace Nikolai Shvernik, an important part of governing is making sure that the movers and shakers of the government arent constantly trying to strangle/coup eachother, as shown by his historical opinions of Krushev, Mikoyan is capable of tolerating an incredible ammount of bullshit without breaking so would keep his mouth shut about de-stalinization, also helps that both him and Bulganin lean to the moderate/reformist side of the Soviet political spectrum.
Molotov's hands are stained by his part on the Molotov-Ribentropp pact, waaaay to pragmatic to the point of smiling while shaking hands with the devil, would start international incident from selling arms to some genocidal government since "money is money"
Voroshilov's an army man, and the one who managed the desastrous winter war, also possibly the only guy to get into a shouting match with Stalin, actively blame the poor performance of the Red Army in Finland on Stalin purging all the competent generals, and live to see another day, not particularly competent as a general, unknown as an political operative, also conservative Stalinist, would probably just try ( and fail )continue Stalins legacy
Krushev's a disaster waiting to happen, funny corn man is funny untill he starts a diplomatic crisis with China after calling Stalin a dumbass on a state visit to Beijing in front of Mao, also alienating the entirety of the warsaw pact who are still Stalinist, impulsive gaffe machine.
Bulganin's interesting since he initially sided with Krushev, but after whatching the clown car careening down the cliffside worked with opposition to remove Krushev, ultimately hesitated leading to the soft coup failing, seems to be the moderate reformist whos not gonna be a dumbass like Krushev, but also not the status-quo defender like the Stalinist picks.
Kaganovich's the one more people know from TNO than IRL, somehow even more of a Stalin fanboy than all previous Stalinist picks, gleefully took part in the great purges signing off more than 30K peoples executions, might as well be Stalin 2.0 wannabe, should be on a ditch somewhere ASAP with Beria
Mikoyan's a funny one, Krushevs biggest ally, but also repeatedly commented on how stupidly Krushev acted, big proponent of maintaining diplomatic relations with the west and Krushev's biggest wet blanket who allways was there to put out any fires Krushev started with that mouth of his, opposed the nukes in Cuba as it was too much of a escalation and was gonna blow up in Krushev's face ( he was right ), very smart individual, very, very pro de-Stalinization wich is his biggest downside, since that means no working with Mao
Zhukov's gonna be uncoup-able if that matters,s since hes gonna have the red army at his beck and call, outside of that he went really well with Eisenhower so probably very cooperative on foreign policy with the west, i literally know nothing more of his politics, he liked Stalin when Stalin was in power, he liked Krushev when Krushev was in power, dont really think he cared about politics that much past saying whatever would get him in the least ammount of trouble, he serves a better position managing the army and making sure its up to date and professional
Therefore i believe that the best possible candidates for the positions are
1) E: Bulganin as a moderate reformer is the one capable of setting the USSR down a path of gradual reform, without rocking the boat too much like Krushev ( so probably some very limited de-stalinization ), hes also very competent with the CIA praising his tenure of gosbank, hinting to good administrative understanding necessary in a leader
2: Mikoyan should replace Nikolai Shvernik, an important part of governing is making sure that the movers and shakers of the government arent constantly trying to strangle/coup eachother, as shown by his historical opinions of Krushev, Mikoyan is capable of tolerating an incredible ammount of bullshit without breaking so would keep his mouth shut about de-stalinization, also helps that both him and Bulganin lean to the moderate/reformist side of the Soviet political spectrum.
Last edited:
