|
ashkpa -> RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR (8/16/2016 7:08:11 PM)
|
quote:
Actually, the most important reason to not Vichy France is that if one wants to invade Spain, Vichy is a major obstacle.
The Axis has several alternatives:
1) Don't invade Spain;
2) Create Vichy, collapse Vichy, and invade Spain;
3) Delay creation of Vichy until after the invasion of Spain.
4) Never creating Vichy, and invading Spain.
I will not discuss alternative 1 in this post. The problem with alternative two is the massive US entry hit. Number three is having one's cake and eating it; if you set up to pull it off, the Allies will probably surrender France first, so number three rarely happens. If one wants to invade Spain, then not creating Vichy is much superior to creating it. The Allied response is a strong defense of the Pyrenees, particularly Bayonne and Toulouse. A strong defense here can force the Axis to declare Vichy. Then, if the Axis has decided on a close the Med strategy, then they can collapse Vichy at the cost of a lot of US entry chits. This is a viable Axis strategy. However, attacking Spain without creating Vichy is a much better one, if the Allies let you do it. A major goal of the Allied defense of France is to force the Axis to declare Vichy to get rid of French hold out units in the south. If the whole French army is quickly killed defending Paris, then don't declare Vichy, charge for the Spanish border and take Gibraltar without getting the US in the war too early.
Thanks, that is a nice summary for why not to declare Vichy. What I had never heard, at least relative to France, was a reason for not conquering France (isolating a factory and leaving it), so that was the main question.
|
|
|
|
