The Italian Spear (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> The War Room



Message

Dogfax -> The Italian Spear (9/18/2015 10:20:53 AM)

Hi all,
recently in a game I played the Italians made a east to west move conquering Greece (then aligning Yugoslavia), Cyprus, Syria, aligning Iraq, aligning Persia, and then capturing southern Russian oil resources. I nicknames this the Italian spear for want of a better name, but wondered if it had an historical links (was this ever dreamed up by the Italian high Command) or had a name that more experience players used?

This obviously meant the Italians did not need to declare war on the CW for quite some time and reduced them to defensive moves in the med, but allowed the Italians to amass a good empire and a lot of resources.



brian brian -> RE: The Italian Spear (9/18/2015 12:49:20 PM)

I think Mussolini was all about Empire, though probably never dreamed of being able to get quite that far from the shores of the Mediterranean, which was more probably his prime strategic focus.



AlbertN -> RE: The Italian Spear (9/18/2015 4:38:41 PM)

Indeed Mussolini, and the "fascist" regime had inspirations to the "Mare Nostrum" of Anciet Rome, even the "Fascio Littorio" emblem of the Fascism hails from Ancient Rome.

But Italy by itself in WiF won't go anywhere, especially if not at war with a Major and thus being limited to rather crappy "Combined" impulses.



Ur_Vile_WEdge -> RE: The Italian Spear (9/24/2015 4:22:32 PM)

Well, in WiF, you basically just described a "42 Barbarossa", which is uusally combined with a drive through Syria and Iraq. It used to be very very common. Nowadays, you still see it, but not nearly as much.


In real life, it was a dream of Mussolini's sure, but one that didn't have much in the way of practicality behind it. You saw how well the Italian troops performed in Greece; and real life Yugoslavia was such a basket case that if it "aligned" with anyone, it would be Germany who had more resources to protect/stabalize it.

As for the North African and middle east campaigns, pure fantasy. The supply infrastructure necessary to drive the British out of Egypt didn't really exist in real life wartime Libya. WiF doesn't really do levels of supply. Either you have a link and you can move as much around as you want, or you don't and you're basically helpless. The historic North African war was dominated by Rommel not having enough fuel and spare parts to do everything he wanted, and a problem that got worse the further east he pushed, until you got an inevitable British pushback.




Jagdtiger14 -> RE: The Italian Spear (9/24/2015 8:54:06 PM)

Trying to understand Axis strategy in real life is crazy...it was once described adequately enough by a friend of mine: The Nazi's were gangsters. Replace FDR with Al Capone as President of the US before and during WWII and imagine the results.




warspite1 -> RE: The Italian Spear (9/25/2015 6:39:58 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dogfax

Hi all,
recently in a game I played the Italians made a east to west move conquering Greece (then aligning Yugoslavia), Cyprus, Syria, aligning Iraq, aligning Persia, and then capturing southern Russian oil resources. I nicknames this the Italian spear for want of a better name, but wondered if it had an historical links (was this ever dreamed up by the Italian high Command) or had a name that more experience players used?

This obviously meant the Italians did not need to declare war on the CW for quite some time and reduced them to defensive moves in the med, but allowed the Italians to amass a good empire and a lot of resources.
warspite1

Dogfax – sounds like Italy were pursuing a west to east move – not the other way around [;)]. The Italian Spear (nice name by the way!) was not what Mussolini had in mind though.

In February 1939, feeling hemmed in by the British within the Mediterranean (Gibraltar and Suez) he announced the need to ‘march to the coast’. But as was said earlier, the Italians could do nothing on their own and, in his calmer moments, I suspect Mussolini knew it.

Of course Italian dreams and reality were about as wide apart as they could be. The intervention in Spain, the move into Ethiopia and excursions to Albania all helped to cripple the Italian economic position. At a time when the Italians needed to be re-arming their forces, they lost over 700 aircraft and nine million rounds of ammunition in Spain alone – and the budget deficit rocketed to 16bn Lira. It was estimated that in June 1940 the Italian army had just 10 divisions that were in any way shape or form up to strength – and of course that term is relative.

Thus the plan was to avoid war until at least 1942 – but Hitler went ahead anyway and Mussolini feared missing out on easy spoils – hence the rather charming ‘I only need a few thousand dead to bring to the peace table’ quote. By declaring war just before it was over he thought he could maximise gain for minimal cost. Except of course Hitler then decided that Vichy could keep Tunisia, Nice and Corsica – and worse still, those pesky British would not surrender.

Italy would need to expand their empire themselves, hence the order to Graziani to move into Egypt. Then, despite the fact that this had achieved nothing (they advanced a few miles across the border then stopped), and angered by Hitler’s success and refusal to consult him on plans, he ordered an attack on Greece – in the mountains… in autumn/winter….. Plans were made for an attack on Yugoslavia (Plan Y) too but Greece was the obvious choice. As later in the desert, so in Greece too, the Italians needed to be rescued by Hitler and from then on, Italian freedom of movement (to the extent it ever existed) was practically non-existent.

Italy is stronger in WIF than in reality for play balance purposes (especially if playing without oil) – but WIF still manages to reflect her position well.



Klydon -> RE: The Italian Spear (9/25/2015 4:04:15 PM)

I don't know that it is exactly fair to say the Italians are stronger than historical due to play balance or if it is a case that the Italians were so bad in terms of leadership that most anything could be a improvement over what actually happen. (Case in point, who invades Greece.. through the mountains.. in late autumn?). Perhaps considering the Italians as a very new player of WiF while many other players are more seasoned and/or good players might be more accurate.



warspite1 -> RE: The Italian Spear (9/25/2015 5:29:22 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Klydon

I don't know that it is exactly fair to say the Italians are stronger than historical due to play balance or if it is a case that the Italians were so bad in terms of leadership that most anything could be a improvement over what actually happen. (Case in point, who invades Greece.. through the mountains.. in late autumn?). Perhaps considering the Italians as a very new player of WiF while many other players are more seasoned and/or good players might be more accurate.
warspite1

If playing without oil they are definitely stronger because in WWII oil was, by 1942, a severe limitation on fleet movements.

But its not an exact science so - even with oil maybe they are or maybe not - but importantly there is no glaring overstatement or understatement.



AlbertN -> RE: The Italian Spear (9/25/2015 7:03:57 PM)

Italy is not "stronger" than it was historically I feel.

They've a lousy economy that does not even allow them to field the historical battleships they've had.
Their units are extremely weak and won't go anywhere on their own unless the enemy is quite weak.

Italy on the other hand has potential - as an industrialized nation. They just need to get hands on resources to produce things.

By how the game goes, if Italy remains with a handful of resources - as historically was - that is where their economy go, and they struggle to even replace losses.
But if Euro-Axis can get in their hands enough resources Italy production can be "decent" (still pretty much the lowest of all besides China, and China -outproduces- Italy in '39 and maybe in '40 too!)

Also - obviously - a player would not disperse forces as much as the Italians did in the war; ultimately achieving nothing.
Italy suffered also an amount of issues at high leadership level (For example the non existant coordination between Regia Aeronautica and Supermarina that costed to the Italians a lot of naval stalemates and defeats).

I think Italy is well mirrored in the game - having a good degree of potential - but that is strictly linked to the reaches and successes of the Euro-Axis combined.

Italy morale lowered over time with the "defeats" of the nation (Greece, for instance, a hard hitting defeat for Italy, and so forth).
A constant stray of victories and successes would have probably drove the nation in different ways, with more motivation to fight maybe (Given the Italians were not really motivated past the taking back the lands that France got from Italy in 1860 - Corsica and Nice zone).
The other "only" feelings Italy really had were about the Dalmatian Coast - ancient colony of Sea Republic of Venice.



warspite1 -> RE: The Italian Spear (9/25/2015 8:17:33 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Cohen

Italy is not "stronger" than it was historically I feel.

They've a lousy economy that does not even allow them to field the historical battleships they've had.

warpite1

I do not understand this. The beauty of WIF is that it does allow them to build their historical navy. But its all about choice. If you do this, then you build less NAV and fighter aircraft and/or land units. The decision is for the player - but there is nothing to stop Italy completing the older battleships, constructing Roma and finishing Littorio and Vittorio Veneto.



AlbertN -> RE: The Italian Spear (9/25/2015 8:20:04 PM)

I think the two "old battleship" in the repair pool should be already in the production spyral as they're finishing their updates in AA and such. That is what I meant.
As it is now Italy has hardly the economy for repairing them - which is in my eyes way too low. Italy produces 2 - 3 BP's the first two turns, that's like half of China ... if not a third.



warspite1 -> RE: The Italian Spear (9/25/2015 8:47:58 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cohen

I think the two "old battleship" in the repair pool should be already in the production spyral as they're finishing their updates in AA and such. That is what I meant.
As it is now Italy has hardly the economy for repairing them - which is in my eyes way too low. Italy produces 2 - 3 BP's the first two turns, that's like half of China ... if not a third.
warspite1

But surely everything is relative? Why too low? In 1940 Italy built just over 2,000 aircraft. The Uk? Over 15,000. In 1940 Italy completed 2 battleships, 2 cruisers and 2 subs. The UK? 2 CV, a BB, 7 CL, 27 destroyers 109 escorts and 15 subs. Italy was incredibly weak - just look at the shopping list Mussolini gave Hitler in order for Italy to join the war.

The naval airforce (and quality) the RA can build is waaaaayy bigger than that Italy actually fielded in the war.

But fair enough, I cannot give exact data here so unless any of us can I guess its just perception and what we feel is right.

Edit: I wrote game instead of war [8|]



Jagdtiger14 -> RE: The Italian Spear (9/25/2015 10:56:23 PM)

The Italians in WiF do have lots of potential and interesting tools. That's why when I play the Germans, I make sure all Italian factories are humming right after the first turn of the game (to the logical .5 round up of course). I even send them BP's on occasion for special projects. Normally, in my group games the Italians repair and finish everything (second cycle)...many times even the Aquila is built. We always see the Roma, Littorio, and VV. Italian frogmen are an awesome weapon!



brian brian -> RE: The Italian Spear (9/26/2015 11:24:30 PM)

good stuff there on Italy's costs in the Spanish Civil War, thanks Warspite. Perhaps I should try a Mussolini biography myself. The incredible evils of the Nazis and the epic scale of their war aims frequently over-shadow the nuts and bolts of Italian activity in the war when studying it later. I think I've probably had more access to material covering Rommel and Kesselring than Italian decision-making.

I've always enjoyed playing Italy in WiF or Third Reich before that. You only have one good strategic attack to make - your enemies are forced to await your decision...plan carefully.



Jagdtiger14 -> RE: The Italian Spear (9/27/2015 6:07:13 AM)

Its amazing after everything they did and spent getting Franco into power that Hitler didn't go to the Pyrenees and at the very least get (bully/guilt trip?) Franco into non-belligerent status. Good bye Gibraltar and methodically the rest of the Med. Instead, Battle of Britain.



warspite1 -> RE: The Italian Spear (9/27/2015 8:55:47 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jagdtiger14

Its amazing after everything they did and spent getting Franco into power that Hitler didn't go to the Pyrenees and at the very least get (bully/guilt trip?) Franco into non-belligerent status. Good bye Gibraltar and methodically the rest of the Med. Instead, Battle of Britain.
warspite1

I do not understand the non-belligerency point – although may have read your post wrong. Franco did announce non-belligerent status for Spain. Whilst not a full ally, Spain provided the Germans with much assistance in WWII – including key supplies of Wolfram and the use of ports to refuel and harbour U-boats + of course the Spanish ‘Blue’ division (more than 40,000 served on the Eastern Front and almost a third were casualties).

Also the idea that Spain coming into the war (as a full ally of Germany) would automatically lead to the fall of Gibraltar (leading to job done) and that Hitler should have realised this, is taking hindsight too far. The situation in the autumn of 1940 for Hitler was more complicated than that.

In no particular order:

1. Spain was economically wrecked as a result of the Spanish Civil War – and militarily so too. She had very little in the way of aircraft, mechanised forces or much of a navy – she also had no oil.

2. History showed (with Mussolini and Italy) what the addition of an economically and militarily weak nation can do – or more accurately not do. Italy was a liability – Spain would have been worse – much worse.

3. As for Hitler being able to bully Franco, this was not really possible. The Caudillo gave Hitler a huge shopping list as a price for entry into the war. This list contained not only economic and military aid (which the Spanish desperately needed but the Germans could not afford to give) but, importantly, the handing of Morocco to Spain. Mussolini was thwarted in receiving parts of the French Empire – but had already joined the war and so had to live with Hitler’s need to keep Vichy on-side. But Franco hadn’t. For Spain, taking over Morocco was a pre-requisite for entry into the war. Hitler feared that Spain would not be able to defend Morocco – and it was better to allow the Vichy French to keep their Empire – and defend it. Remember the attack on Dakar had taken place only the previous month. What was better for Germany? A liability like Spain or a Vichy France regime that had successfully defended Dakar? No contest.

4. If the price was right, sure Hitler would have welcomed another ally, but the price was far from right, and in any case, by October 1940 Hitler had already begun turning his attention east and his raison d’etre - Lebensraum. Sealion had been ‘postponed’ and a Mediterranean strategy was not floating his boat.

5. We can also add to the mix that Franco’s position was not yet totally secure and many of his generals were far from keen on joining the Axis. Franco’s plan was not unlike Mussolini’s in June 1940. Spain would enter the war when it was right for Spain i.e. just before final victory. Franco was a fully paid up member of the Hitler admiration society – and hoped and believed in German victory late into the war, but he was also in charge of a country broken and on its knees following three years of bloody civil war.






Jagdtiger14 -> RE: The Italian Spear (9/28/2015 2:12:46 AM)

I in no way think Spain coming onto the side of the Axis would have happened, or would even have been a good idea for the Axis or especially for Spain (too much to lose), so no need to debate your 1-5.

Spain announced non-belligerent status to the world? If so, this is news to me, and I have no reason to doubt you and waste my time looking it up. This makes it even crazier that Hitler didn't move into Spain and take Gibraltar (post French surrender, pre-Vichy).

Could the Germans (not Spain) have taken Gibraltar? Absolutely, and it would not have taken long to do it...it would have taken longer to get the tools down there than the actual attack. See the "impregnable" fortress Eben-Emael. Gibraltar would not have equaled Sevastopol.

Soon after Gibraltar falls, Malta falls too (about a month later?). Then its just a question as to what happens in the eastern Med. Thanks to Italian Frogmen, the Axis actually had superiority in the eastern Med for a while.



warspite1 -> RE: The Italian Spear (9/28/2015 6:42:17 AM)

Yes Spain officially changed her stance from neutral to non-belligerent in June 1940 (quelle surprise….) but remember, the term non-belligerency is not recognised in international law.

A non-belligerent shows sympathies with, and makes commitments to, a nation at war but is effectively neutral herself and has to ensure that those sympathies and commitments do not affect her neutrality. Thus Spain could not simply allow the Germans to walk into Spain to attack Gibraltar while being neutral/non-belligerent. Indeed there are reports that Franco stationed troops in the Pyrenees to guard against the possibility that Hitler may take matters into his own hands.

As to the Germans adopting a Mediterranean strategy (even without Spain), I agree that this would seem likely to provide Hitler with the best possibility of really hurting the Commonwealth (although I think the result would have been an abandoning of the Mediterranean theatre and not a defeat of the UK).

quote:

Thanks to Italian Frogmen, the Axis actually had superiority in the eastern Med for a while.


Yes, the attack on the Queen Elizabeth and Valiant in December 1941 was highly successful - as was the Barchini attack on HMS York the previous March. However, in war things are never guaranteed. Have you read about the SLC and midget craft attacks that were not quite so successful? The SLC operations G.A 1 or G.A 2? Or how about Operations B.G 1, B.G 2 or B.G 3? There was also the disastrous attack on Malta along with small attack craft in July 1941? The first successful SLC attack was not actually carried out until September 1941.



Finarfïn -> RE: The Italian Spear (9/28/2015 7:21:37 AM)

I'll take a look but if i remember correctly, Italians didn't known Alexandria's operation was a success and so count the 2 BB as active.
Obviously this can't happens in MWIF.

Fin



Klydon -> RE: The Italian Spear (9/28/2015 5:12:20 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Finarfïn

I'll take a look but if i remember correctly, Italians didn't known Alexandria's operation was a success and so count the 2 BB as active.
Obviously this can't happens in MWIF.

Fin


Part of that was a result of CW deception. The Royal Navy did everything they could to mislead the Italians as to the true state of the ships.



Jagdtiger14 -> RE: The Italian Spear (9/28/2015 5:21:54 PM)

I'm not sure (probably not) that the Axis knew they had a 6 month advantage...but it existed non the less. The point I'm making is that the Axis could very easily have controlled the Med late '40. Take away the stupid "Battle of Britain" and the war on Greece, and replace that with Gibraltar and Malta, and then what ever in the eastern Med (Cyprus/Syria?) and on.

What naval assets would the Brits have sent around Africa and into Egypt to contest the eastern Med (if any)? Would that impact the battle for the Atlantic?...especially if the German fleet is rebased in Gibraltar?

As for Spain, its only choice was to do what it did...diplomacy and subterfuge (Canaris), and aiding the Axis to minor degree's. If Hitler had instead decided to push the issue, and had the Wehrmacht on the French side of the Pyrenees poised for invasion (or really just a move through because the Spanish organized military units would have been useless to resist even in mountainous terrain...the best the Spanish could have done is a longer term partisan resistance), Franco probably would have given in to Hitler and attempted to use the non-belligerent status (even though not international law) as a possible out with the Allies if things went badly for the Axis.



warspite1 -> RE: The Italian Spear (9/28/2015 5:41:20 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Finarfïn

I'll take a look but if i remember correctly, Italians didn't known Alexandria's operation was a success and so count the 2 BB as active.
Obviously this can't happens in MWIF.

Fin
warspite1

Yes, they sank in shallow water and iirc the Italian reconnaissance didn't pick up on the fact they were on the harbour bed.



warspite1 -> RE: The Italian Spear (9/28/2015 5:43:07 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Klydon


quote:

ORIGINAL: Finarfïn

I'll take a look but if i remember correctly, Italians didn't known Alexandria's operation was a success and so count the 2 BB as active.
Obviously this can't happens in MWIF.

Fin


Part of that was a result of CW deception. The Royal Navy did everything they could to mislead the Italians as to the true state of the ships.
warspite1

Including using an old de-militarised battleship dressed as a KGV-class for convoy escort duty [:)]



warspite1 -> RE: The Italian Spear (9/28/2015 6:08:48 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jagdtiger14

I'm not sure (probably not) that the Axis knew they had a 6 month advantage...but it existed non the less. The point I'm making is that the Axis could very easily have controlled the Med late '40. Take away the stupid "Battle of Britain" and the war on Greece, and replace that with Gibraltar and Malta, and then what ever in the eastern Med (Cyprus/Syria?) and on.

What naval assets would the Brits have sent around Africa and into Egypt to contest the eastern Med (if any)? Would that impact the battle for the Atlantic?...especially if the German fleet is re-based in Gibraltar?

As for Spain, its only choice was to do what it did...diplomacy and subterfuge (Canaris), and aiding the Axis to minor degree's. If Hitler had instead decided to push the issue, and had the Wehrmacht on the French side of the Pyrenees poised for invasion (or really just a move through because the Spanish organized military units would have been useless to resist even in mountainous terrain...the best the Spanish could have done is a longer term partisan resistance), Franco probably would have given in to Hitler and attempted to use the non-belligerent status (even though not international law) as a possible out with the Allies if things went badly for the Axis.
warspite1

As said, I agree that a Mediterranean strategy would have been the best approach but I disagree with phrases like 'very easily'. Nothing is guaranteed in war, nothing is guaranteed in naval war - and NOTHING is guaranteed where the Italian armed forces were concerned [;)].

What would happen if the German fleet was at Gibraltar? Well first off you are assuming that the British have simply left the place usable? I doubt that very much - but if Spain is conquered by the Germans then they could use Ferrol or Cadiz etc anyway - again assuming that the Spanish have not taken measures to deny their use. You are assuming that the German fleet - and that did not amount to much in the autumn of 1940 - actually reaches Gibraltar. But if they did, it makes things very difficult...

Its conversations like this that should make people at least appreciate what Churchill was thinking re the attack at Mers-el-Kebir.....

Back to Spain, you can't be a little bit pregnant. Spain either resisted (to the extent it could) or it became a German ally with all that meant for it. Would Hitler really have declared war on a fellow fascist nation? Maybe... but contrary to popular belief, the Nazi-Soviet pact took some explaining as it was....

Remember too what happened to Napoleon when he stabbed the Spanish in the back. If history were to repeat itself, Spanish partisan activity would have been brutal. Would Franco have shrugged his shoulders, let out a wry grin, rolled his eyes playfully and said [adopts camp tone] Oh Adolf, you are a tease.....

As for take away the Battle of Britain and the war on Greece. There comes point at which this becomes a 'let's suppose the Germans never made a mistake and conducted the war as though Hitler had the power of hindsight' scenario.

Why would the war on Greece not happen? Remember Mussolini undertook that largely out of a feeling of umbridge because Hitler wouldn't let him in on his plans. Why would the inclusion of Spain suddenly make Adolf treat Italy like a partner and the Axis form a coherent plan of action known to all? The Italian half-hearted 'advance' into Egypt has already happened - an advance that leads to disaster.

No Greece may actually help the Commonwealth. One of the reasons the British never kicked Italy out of Africa in 1941 is because Churchill ordered the cream of Wavell's command to Greece. So suppose he doesn't and Compass does not stop short of Tripolitania? Instead the Commonwealth forces keep going and Mussolini's 5th Army joins the 10th Army as POW's?

So many possibilities open up - nothing is ever a given in war....



Klydon -> RE: The Italian Spear (9/28/2015 8:44:38 PM)

I don't think there is any way the Germans could have declared war on Spain after supporting them in the civil war. It would have been political suicide on a world scale.

What was left of the German surface fleet was in dry dock for most of the summer and fall of 1940. Most of the German heavy units were damaged during the Norway campaign and the lack of most any surface fleet figured heavily into the decision to cancel Sea Lion.

The issue for the Axis in 1940 in the Med was the lack of air bases and aircraft that didn't have sufficient range for the most part to impose their will on the sea area of the Med. The Germans still have the same issue they had with the Battle of Britain. The Stuka may be a fine dive bomber, but any fighter opposition and they are meat and the Axis simply didn't have a fighter with any range. The Axis could not directly attack Gibraltar without going through Spain and they could not directly attack the CW bases around Alexandria. They could not even stop the CW from sending a lot of troops and material to Greece.

Had the Germans been given permission to enter Spain with the objective of taking Gibraltar, I don't think there would be anyway for the British to stop them longer term. It is one thing to defend someplace that enemy air can't easily reach nor can their artillery, but quite another to try to defend someplace that enemy artillery and aircraft are right on the door step. Gibraltar would have eventually been starved out. The other issue would have been what type of defense could have been mounted against a airborne attack ala Eben Emal?

I don't think there is any doubt that the Axis could have taken Malta in 1940. Doing so would not likely be decisive by itself. It would have only made the Axis supply routes to Africa more secure, although still subject to interdiction by Royal Naval forces operating from both ends of the Med.



Jagdtiger14 -> RE: The Italian Spear (9/28/2015 9:09:51 PM)

Sorry, I didn't mean "very easily" in that it would have been an easy task (tactics), I meant "very easily" that from a strategic sense, it could very easily (high chance of success) have happened IF the Axis had taken Gib/Mal and dedicated the mandatory resources (which they had) to the task. You are correct, nothing is ever guaranteed in war. As for the Italians, I think the Germans would have requested and probably gotten the special tools Italy had.

In my opinion, the Brits would have begun to destroy critical things in Gibraltar once the Germans cross over into Spain. I would assume everything possible would be destroyed and the Brits simply abandon Gibraltar by the time the Germans arrive. There would not even be a fight (it would be suicide to stay there). After Germany repairs and builds what it needs in Gibraltar, I think the Germans could very well have reached Gibraltar with their fleet under heavy air cover and close to shore...jumping from port to port...taking into account enemy subs and mines (mine sweepers, destroyers and x-craft). Anything the Brits throw at them has the very high likely chance of being destroyed themselves. I also understand the German fleet was not much to speak of in the Fall of '40, but still useful and a threat...enough in my opinion to keep the vast majority of the Brit fleet in the Atlantic and not in Egypt...more and more of the German fleet as it comes on line gets down there the same way.

I completely agree with what Churchill did at Mers-el-Kebir. In my opinion he was the greatest leader in WWII, and this took real leadership to make this decision.

Ok, role play Franco...and not from your Brit perspective. Someone who worked very hard to become the dictator of Spain. With the German army on the border, not wanting to fight you, but wanting to get at what Spain has always wanted since? Do you run to England in exile, and do the Brits restore you if the win the war?...or do you do what Hitler wants...the guy that got you into your position? I highly doubt Franco would have resisted Hitler.

As for Napy, his problem was he didn't fully commit the proper resources to Spain before his war with Russia(probably not worth it monetarily?). His big problem was going to war with Russia while still fighting in Spain...more accurately going to war with Russia, period. If he had brought le Grande Armee and stationed it in Madrid...

As for supposing no mistakes, I think its a no brainer to have limited the Battle of Britain to only the English Channel, and perhaps the coastal stations. There were respected voices advising against an air war into Britain...such as Adolph Galland...who pointed out very logical reasons to not do it. Greece...even Hitler didn't want to do that. If the Med strategy had played out Fall/Winter '40, perhaps the whole Greek issue would not even have been a blip...the Brits would not have wanted to get trapped on Crete, and the Germans might (should have) control of the eastern Med.



AlbertN -> RE: The Italian Spear (9/28/2015 11:03:01 PM)

Brits evacuated Malta when Italy declared war, deeming it non tenable.

Mussolini, convinced of the impending surrender of both France and UK, did not bothered to have it assaulted.

Then the Brits, seeing that the Italians "forgot" of Malta, got back there.



warspite1 -> RE: The Italian Spear (9/29/2015 6:25:21 AM)

quote:

Ok, role play Franco...and not from your Brit perspective.


I would like to think that my posts are not from any ‘Brit’ perspective but from an historical perspective.

quote:

The issue for the Axis in 1940 in the Med was the lack of air bases and aircraft that didn't have sufficient range for the most part to impose their will on the sea area of the Med.


I would agree with this – unless the Germans/Italians adopted the kind of Mediterranean strategy being discussed (remember the lack of airbases is a British problem too). I don’t mean some half-hearted response, shoring up the Italians here, and sending the Fliegerkorps X there and letting Supermarina do what it wanted (all as per real life), I mean a proper co-ordinated Axis Mediterranean strategy which Hitler would have to understand would likely postpone Barbarossa until 1942 (this is of course the big obstacle but we will assume Hitler sees the big picture more clearly and determines not to make the same mistake as Napoleon i.e. turning on Russia before those pesky British are defeated).

Taking Gibraltar would help immensely – but as we have discussed, Franco was not for playing ball – and Hitler was not going to attack his Fascist counterpart. So without Gibraltar was a Mediterranean strategy winnable?

It would be good to discuss this on this thread. So the situation is:

It’s mid-October 1940. Hendaye has happened and Spain is not going to join the Axis yet.

Everything that has happened in the war so far has happened.

The Italian attack on Greece has not started and Hitler can avoid this calamity by bringing Mussolini into the fold and treating him like a proper ally (again this stretches reality as the Germans never trusted their Italian counterparts to keep anything secret) but for the purposes of this scenario, Hitler realises he needs to lean heavily on the Italian fleet and naval air units.

The two leaders and their staffs meet in Vienna to discuss Operation Kick the British out of Egypt.

Discuss…….



Jagdtiger14 -> RE: The Italian Spear (9/29/2015 5:12:25 PM)

I think first we should agree on the premise that mid-October or some other time should be the starting point. I think we can all agree how stupid the NAZI's were in their strategy. Can/should we use logic without 20/20 hindsight? Why would it be logical for Germany to sit around for 4 months and do nothing (or little) in the way of major obectives? If we are looking at a Med strategy for the Axis, lets look at what they can do.

1. Hostilities cease in France June 25. Goal #1 I assume would be Gibraltar followed by Malta. Question: How long would it take for the Wehrmacht to move to the Spanish-French border including the tools it needs to take Gibraltar? Necessary to the task German forces begin their move in the direction of the Pyrenees June 26.

2. When the move to the Pyrenees is completed, Germany gives Franco 24 hours to make up his mind (which should take about 5 seconds in my opinion).

3. Franco's answer will determine what happens to Franco and if the Germans need to A) conduct hostile actions on their way to Gibraltar, B) clear the supply path of partisans (on-going), and C) clear the rest of Spain.

Out of curiosity: Did Hitler make an appearance with Franco in a French border town?...not sure when that happened. I remember seeing a photo of that meeting...both sitting at a table, Franco having a weird look on his face (not looking at Hitler) while Hitler was smiling looking at him. Its funny how leaders' body language and looks on their face communicate things...we saw some of that recently (Obama/Putin)...Putin was all smiles, Obama not so much.




warspite1 -> RE: The Italian Spear (9/29/2015 5:35:12 PM)

Hendaye - October 23rd 1940.

The Nazis wouldn't be sitting around doing nothing.

France falls so fast there is hardly time to grasp the enormity of what's happened, let alone have decided on what course the war takes from here on in.

So....

1. Hitler still wants peace with Britain and makes one last generous offer of peace [8|]

2. Churchill tells Adolf very politely where he can stick his offer - ouch! [X(]

3. Hitler, knowing the British have suffered an enormous defeat at Dunkirk and 'knowing' (thanks to Goering bending his ear) that the RAF can be easily crushed, goes for the obvious. A quick war ending move against Blighty, allowing him to move against the Soviet Union without fear of fighting on two fronts.

4. The Battle of Britain starts. Well, who'd a thought it? Turns out that genius Goering was talking sloblocks and the British were not so easily beaten.

5. Without control of the air, Sealion is beginning to make the Charge of the Light Brigade look like a sensible military operation. Hitler, now with a large and ever growing hard on for the USSR, decides to turn his attention east.

6. He still worries about the UK though and seeks out his ol' mucker Franco for a bit of a chin wag and to find out his price for joining the war.

7. Ouch part II! [X(] Well he was rubbish wasn't he boys and girls?
Hitler realises Spain is more trouble than she's worth, gets bored, and turns his attention to where its at..... Lebensraum.

I think that as it is, Hitler deciding on a potentially long term Med strategy is pushing plausibility. The idea that he would choose such a strategy straight away is too much I think. But that's just my tuppence.



Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.796875