From: brian@coombs.anu.edu.au (Brian)
Subject: Re: NATO/Warsaw Pact forces (was Re: Greatest Prez...)
Organization: Computer Services Centre, Australian National University
Date: 22 Jul 92 06:55:13 GMT

fiddler@concertina.Eng.Sun.COM (steve hix) writes:

>In article <1992Jul21.201752.12569@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> bx916@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Ross W. Starkey) writes:
>>
>>I believe the 10-1 figure either refers to the massive numerical superiority
>>of WP artillery to NATO artillery (wasn't it more like 11-1?) or the ratio
>>of WP tanks in Europe to UNITED STATES tanks in Europe.  

>The Soviets sure do like their arty...

	Commonly referred to as the "God of War" by them (and with good reason).

>>However US forces
>>stationed in Europe made up only one quarter of NATO forces stationed in 
>>Europe in the mid eighties (West German forces making up one third and UK
>>forces also accounting for one quarter).  Thus the numerical superiority
>>of WP tanks in Europe to NATO tanks in Europe was on the order of 2.5 to 1.
>>the 2.5 to 1 figure does not include French tanks or US tanks not stationed
>>in Europe.  I do not know whether it includes UK tanks stationed in Britain.
>>I also do not recall whether it includes Soviet tanks stationed in the USSR.

>It didn't.  As to how quickly the remainder could have been transported
>west for use, I don't recall. (A couple of days to get the first ones
>in action, though.)

	Indeed, however, you are prepresuming that a war of this nature would
be over well before such tanks could reach Europe.  Even in WWII it took
several weeks for the Germans who started much further west and against a 
much less prepared enemy to reach the Atlantic coast.  The Soviets would 
have found it very difficult to make much headway against the NATO forces
opposing them. 

>>Many WP tanks were more than 20 years old and were hopelessly outclassed by
>>modern NATO tanks.

>Not all American tanks in Europe were M1's, and until fairly recently,
>the remainder weren't all M60A3's either.  Not all of NATO's tanks were the
>most modern types, as far as that goes.

	Which rather evens the matter out even further.  However if we
compare the performance of the Soviet made vehicles which have taken part
in battles over the whole period since WWII we find that they have in the
main been outclassed by their western opposition time and time again.  Whilst
quality and numerical superiority are factors which must be considered you
should never forget the quality of the troops themselves.  As has come to 
light since re-unification and the collapse of the USSR, the quality of their
troops left an awful lot to be desired.  I rather suspect that in fact what
we saw in the Gulf would have been what we would would have seen in Europe
if the ballon had gone up (although with perhaps increased western casualities
becuase of much tougher counter-air and air-defence systems in use which
would have prevented air superority being achieved). 

>There was no absolute assurance that the French would have stepped in
>should WP forces move over the border, or that U.S. tanks out of
>theater could have been moved to Europe quickly enough to make any
>difference.

	There was no assurance beyond the fact that the French are only too
well aware of the dangers of allowing the Soviets to get any nearer to their
borders.  BTW, what would have happened to the French forces stationed in 
Germany?  Do you really think that the Soviets wouldn't have shot at them? 

>Remember that an attacking force can pick where it's going to hit, while
>the defender must spread out to cover likely attack points, which makes
>for at least some local superiority of forces for the agressor at the
>beginning.

	Which ignores that there are only a few terrain corridors which
channel large armoured forces on the Norther European Plain.  Or had you
forgotten the Fulda "gap"?  In addition, the positioning of the best NATO
forces on the main flank of the Warsaw Pact where they would be ideally
 positioed thrust northwards and turn the Pact's flank would have made it 
pretty damn difficult for them achieve much IMO.


--
Brian Ross____________________________________________________________________
"I express many absurd opinions.  But I am not the first man to do it; 
	American freedom consists largely of talking nonsense."
____________________________________ E.W.Howe, Preaching from the Audience____
Newsgroups: soc.history