RE: The question to ask about The Italians

RE: The question to ask about The Italians (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion

Message

Curtis Lemay -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/30/2020 3:49:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RangerJoe You are trying to equate force with logistics. Force is dependent upon logistical support but but logistical support with nothing to use it with and trained people to use it is just a waste. You are the desperate one on this. And no, you don't have to know how much water is to be in each soldier's canteen but you do need to know how many soldiers there will be and thus how many canteens are needed, where there is potable water for resupply. That goes for every other piece of equipment needed plus the supplies needed. Logistic assets are built into the divisions. So, where they go, the logistics assets go as well. And, all I need to know is that the Germans have so much force in France that they can send an overwhelming amount to Spain and still leave plenty to keep the British bracing for an invasion. quote: But the RAF is not timid and they would have flown at night because the did fly at night. They would have flown bombers against any invasion, no matter the odds. The RN is not timid either and would go into Harm's Way because that is what they are there for. They do not have to get out of range since they will have the unattacked Fighter Command for Combat Air Patrols and Radar which could see the Luftwaffe formations as they formed up over France. The Fast Motor Boats of a type not yet described could not do the job that you want them to do. Tell that to the Tokyo Express that sailed into Ironbottom Sound every night - safe from air attacks.

Curtis Lemay -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/30/2020 3:50:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RangerJoe Poland never surrendered. After the occupation, the highest number of people in the Polish military was 249,000 plus at least one brown bear who was promoted to Sergeant. Well, their army sure disappeared.

Curtis Lemay -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/30/2020 3:54:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 [I specifically mentioned Norway as there was around two months - and plenty of fighting - between the fall of Oslo and the surrender of Norwegian forces - and the Norwegians only surrendered then because their Allies left and they were left with little apart from Narvik and the arctic wastes to defend. But you and RangerJoe are quite right, There was additional fighting in France after Paris was occupied and in Poland after Warsaw was captured. The Poles never surrendered, they simply ran out of country to defend and troops to defend with and, whilst we can't say with certainty, there is every reason to believe the Spaniards would have done the same given the circumstances of their betrayal. In addition to the two you mentioned, Belgium continued fighting for a time after Brussels was occupied. I haven't bothered checking the other countries. Of course if we move outside of World War II the examples are many - but just sticking to World War II, these four examples alone gives the lie to "Every other European country did the exact same thing" and simply reflect, once again, that no effort, no fact checking, no detail has gone into this faintly ridiculous 'staff study'. OK, I overlooked Norway. Nevertheless, SPI says they surrender upon the fall of Madrid. But, even if they don't, they're so puny it doesn't matter. Their tiny army will be eliminated in short order.

warspite1 -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/30/2020 4:54:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay Therefore, Japan should go to war with every nation under the sun. warspite1 Why would you possibly suggest that? That seems a rather silly comment to make, and certainly not one that furthers this debate in any sensible way. quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay Clearly, the war in China didn't topple their government during WWII as it sat on the back burner. It can wait. warspite1 Well I don't think that is strictly true (although China was but one reason). Tojo was forced to resign in July 1944. Even the Japanese realised, less than two years into the war, that they really needed to get the hell out of China in order to free up circa a couple of million men. The attempt came to nought because - and we are back to why Japan wouldn't exit China to stop the war in the first place - they couldn't compromise. Having failed to achieve an exit from a war they simply couldn't sustain while battling in Burma, the Central Pacific and the southwest Pacific, Tojo and his government continued into the following year but the die had long been cast and he was out. You see, a war that had the majority of Japan's army manpower sucked into it could not wait forever. As you've been told already, wars are costly in terms of money and resources regardless of the type of warfare being conducted; the only variable is the amount, and that depends on the status of the fighting. So, even the war in China, by its very definition, and even without a full scale offensive, was proving costly to the Japanese and no way could it wait indefinitely while the rest of the war was going so badly. There is nothing difficult to understand about that. The proof of that particular pudding came the following year when the Japanese could only mount a shoestring attack against India from Burma. Yes, the final all out offensive against China - Ichi-go - had some success, but it wasn't anywhere near conclusive and what it achieved came at a cost on other fronts as it required manpower and aircraft that were sorely needed elsewhere. quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay The Japanese can't go to war with the US while the Soviets are unencumbered. warspite1 In the circumstances pertaining to that period of the war (the Soviets are increasingly concerned about what is happening in Europe) then yes, yes it can.

RangerJoe -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/30/2020 5:15:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay quote: ORIGINAL: RangerJoe quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay This was from the designer’s notes from SPI’s Korea wargame about how difficult it was to sever rail supply lines by air: *“Railroads are easier to repair than roads. A thirty-six division CCF army can be supplied by as little as one train of 50 cars per day.”* 36 divisions, by the way, would be what I'd call an Army Group. Now, how many trains can be pushed down a single line in a day? Surely at least 24 (1 per hour for the math challenged). As I've said, a rail line can keep an enormous amount of force supplied. So much so, that it isn't even necessary to check if it's enough. CCF? Do you mean the People's Volunteer Army? Those Chinese divisions number 9,500 men at full strength with little to no heavy equipment. That does not compare to a Western military division in manpower nor supply needs, much less armoured and motorized formations on the move. The US 1st Marine division wrecked at least 6 of those divisions on its own in 1950. The Chinese Army that it was fighting asked for 60,000 replacements and was ineffective for 3 months. After the UN forces were pushed out of North Korea, the Chinese were out of supplies. That does not sound very good for an attacking force. So don't compare Korea to Spain. Check military historians and military publications for better details than a game designed to make money. That was from ONE train per day. A rail line can handle far more than that. So you are trying to equate a German Panzer division's supply requirements with a Chinese division with 9,500 men supply requirements? You men will go hungry and your tanks will not move. The Chinese carried their ammo supply and one weeks worth of food on their backs. Think of all of that gasoline on the back of a tank waiting to be hit and catch on fire . . . The same thing with a motorized infantry division. The infantry sitting on the gas cans on the back of a truck waiting to be part of a gas barbeque. While the rail line may be able to handle more than ONE train per day, it has to unload somewhere then make it back. There is only so much space to do that where the other infrastructure needed is there. Then it has to be guarded and it can't be to close to enemy artillery, much less a man portable 81mm mortar . . . Willey Pete anyone? [:D]

warspite1 -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/30/2020 5:18:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay OK, I overlooked Norway...... warspite1 ..... and France and Poland and Belgium..... quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay ....Nevertheless, SPI says they surrender upon the fall of Madrid..... warspite1 .... well apologies, if rule 13b Surrender conditions for Spain, states that Spain must fall on surrender of the capital then of course it must be true. quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay But, even if they don't, they're so puny it doesn't matter. Their tiny army will be eliminated in short order. warspite1 Well that is the level of detail you've said you would provide so I can't be disappointed with that response. Of course in the real world it matters a very great deal. As the Germans move out of their narrow bridgehead toward the south, elements of the army need to secure the flanks and then to move north west and east. They can't afford to leave the Basques or the Catalans to their own devices. You blandly state puny forces and short order without giving any type of suggested timescale. But for your 'staff study' to have even the most basic of meaning, you have to provide this. There are two very important considerations for the Germans here - time, and cost (manpower and equipment). Every delay gives time to the British, every delay gives time to the Spanish to mobilise, every delay allows the onset of winter, which will further add to the delay every delay reduces flexibility of the Luftwaffe to head to Northern France when the Luftwaffe get badly mauled in trying to pursue a mix of deception (for an invasion) and hurting the RAF, every loss potentially affects the battle to take Gibraltar, every loss affects the war to come in the Mediterranean, and most important of all, every loss affects the only war that matters - the war that is to come; Barbarossa. There is also the potential problem that Operation Compass could start before the Germans are in a position to assist their Italian comrades who have rather short-sightedly encamped just over the Egyptian border in a number of mutually non-supporting camps.....

Bo Rearguard -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/30/2020 5:33:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 .... well apologies, if rule 13b Surrender conditions for Spain, states that Spain must fall on surrender of the capital then of course it must be true. I wonder what SPI says when when the cat prowls my mapsheet during the night and eats one of my Panzer divisions. [image]local://upfiles/28866/8849AB4514CF4295BC348CC3F361E023.jpg[/image]

RangerJoe -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/30/2020 5:34:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 [I specifically mentioned Norway as there was around two months - and plenty of fighting - between the fall of Oslo and the surrender of Norwegian forces - and the Norwegians only surrendered then because their Allies left and they were left with little apart from Narvik and the arctic wastes to defend. But you and RangerJoe are quite right, There was additional fighting in France after Paris was occupied and in Poland after Warsaw was captured. The Poles never surrendered, they simply ran out of country to defend and troops to defend with and, whilst we can't say with certainty, there is every reason to believe the Spaniards would have done the same given the circumstances of their betrayal. In addition to the two you mentioned, Belgium continued fighting for a time after Brussels was occupied. I haven't bothered checking the other countries. Of course if we move outside of World War II the examples are many - but just sticking to World War II, these four examples alone gives the lie to "Every other European country did the exact same thing" and simply reflect, once again, that no effort, no fact checking, no detail has gone into this faintly ridiculous 'staff study'. OK, I overlooked Norway. Nevertheless, SPI says they surrender upon the fall of Madrid. quote: [sm=00000280.gif][sm=00000280.gif][sm=00000280.gif][sm=00000289.gif][sm=00000289.gif][sm=00000289.gif][sm=00000280.gif][sm=00000280.gif][sm=00000280.gif] But, even if they don't, they're so puny it doesn't matter. Their tiny army will be eliminated in short order. [sm=00000280.gif][sm=00000280.gif][sm=00000280.gif][sm=00000289.gif][sm=00000289.gif][sm=00000289.gif][sm=00000280.gif][sm=00000280.gif][sm=00000280.gif] The countries that surrendered before their capitals fell are: Italy Bulgaria Romania Hungary Finland Germany Japan Just what do they all have in common?

RangerJoe -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/30/2020 5:43:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay quote: ORIGINAL: RangerJoe Poland never surrendered. After the occupation, the highest number of people in the Polish military was 249,000 plus at least one brown bear who was promoted to Sergeant. Well, their army sure disappeared. It relocated. As I previously stated, the Polish military had up to 249,000 people and at least one bear. The Polish Army took Monte Cassino in Italy. Polish fighter units participated in the Battle of Britain plus individual Polish fighters in RAF squadrons. The Polish Navy was helping to escort convoys.

RangerJoe -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/30/2020 5:54:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay quote: ORIGINAL: RangerJoe You are trying to equate force with logistics. Force is dependent upon logistical support but but logistical support with nothing to use it with and trained people to use it is just a waste. You are the desperate one on this. And no, you don't have to know how much water is to be in each soldier's canteen but you do need to know how many soldiers there will be and thus how many canteens are needed, where there is potable water for resupply. That goes for every other piece of equipment needed plus the supplies needed. Logistic assets are built into the divisions. So, where they go, the logistics assets go as well. And, all I need to know is that the Germans have so much force in France that they can send an overwhelming amount to Spain and still leave plenty to keep the British bracing for an invasion. Yes, logistical assets are built into divisions. But if the fuel trucks are empty, if there is no ammo, food, medicine, spare equipment to be carried, stored, and distributed, then wht good are those logistical assets? You are confusing logistical assets with logistics. quote: But the RAF is not timid and they would have flown at night because the did fly at night. They would have flown bombers against any invasion, no matter the odds. The RN is not timid either and would go into Harm's Way because that is what they are there for. They do not have to get out of range since they will have the unattacked Fighter Command for Combat Air Patrols and Radar which could see the Luftwaffe formations as they formed up over France. The Fast Motor Boats of a type not yet described could not do the job that you want them to do. Tell that to the Tokyo Express that sailed into Ironbottom Sound every night - safe from air attacks. The Tokyo Express sailed into waters far from their air bases so they had little to no fighters for defense. Since you are invading southern England, the English fighter bases are nearby along with the radar stations and command and control. The information about the air raid could be passed along to the Royal Navy which would actually be out of sight of France so the Germans on shore could not see them unless the Royal Navy was in the channel sinking those little, itty, bitty, barges that do not travel fast. Since the radar could detect the enemy aircraft forming up, the RAF would know that a raid was coming. The RN could be warned and move out. The fighters would be told the altitude of the enemy formation and would be directed to intercept it. The fighters would have the advantage of altitude when the attack the German aircraft. Or are you incapable of understanding all of that?

RangerJoe -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/30/2020 6:49:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay quote: ORIGINAL: RangerJoe Ferry assets? Please define what you mean. They could again use river barges. They would have to be small enough to be craned onto flat-bed rail cars, then trailered to the sea by truck. But that would still make them big enough to handle that sea. In other words, they could not handle much cargo. They could also not take much damage, especially if they were overloaded. quote: Planned the invasion well in advance? Why would they? The quick taking of France surprised the Germans, then they had to take Spain, so why would the German staff be planning this? They've decided from the get-go that they will pursue a Med strategy. Plenty of time to plan - Barbarossa was done in less time. Not true, Hitler wanted to attack the Soviet Union. Even Stalin understood this by his actions. quote: Would Romania even allow this movement through their country? Allow the use of their airfields? Not to mention Bulgaria! Romania isn't necessary. Bulgaria is an Axis nation as of March 1, 1941. Yugoslavia is on the menu. The moment Germany turned south, Turkey was preparing. quote: Anyways. the total distance between the Black Sea and the Med is only 380 kilometers or 235 miles long, with the Sea of Marmora being 280 kilometers × 80 kilometers or 174 miles × 50 miles. With mobile scouts calling in artillery and mortar fire, any vessels making the crossing would have a little difficulty. While mobile infantry and possibly armour forces could be rushing to defensive positions. Not to mention your average Turk with a firearm. A fantasy. In fact, most of the Turkish force is in front of the Bosporus. It's all going to be trapped when these German divisions arrive in their rear at Istanbul. You are the one in fantasy land. In Thrace, the Turkish Army had at least one infantry division, a Cavalry division with T-26 tanks and BA-6 armoured cars both of which could destroy any German tank at the time. Besides an armoured brigade, an infantry brigade an other units. By the way, Istanbul is on the Bosporus. Just look at the map, please? quote: Since the vessels would have to come in by truck, those vessels would not be very large nor would there be that many of them. The forces that come across would most be infantry and they would be disorganized with little supply available. Again, towed by trailers. They can be large enough - larger than a Higgins boat.. And there can be as many as can be gleaned from the rivers of Europe. A lot. But not that many at one time and most of the barges would be larger than that. Much difficult to carry. Not to mention what the Turkish Air Force and Navy would be doing to them. Even a sub on the surface, not to mention civilian water craft pressed into service and armed. Much less a Battlecruiser with 28cm guns. I suggest that you look at an actual map and the Turkish order of battle. Don't rely on a game.

TulliusDetritus -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/30/2020 7:16:26 PM)
I'm surprised some of you assume Spain or Turkey would pull -yes or yes- a guerrilla war. Just because the former did it on the early 1800s. Different societies, regimes will NOT be delivering the same, that's too mechanical. Want a really clear example? Compare the tsarist toothless, pathetic army circa 1914 with the soviet steamroller circa 1944. Just one mere generation apart and yet... This is what different regimes, epochs may offer. I'm with Lemay: these two poor and backward states were an easy prey for the mighty (yes) Werhmacht. Especially Spain, devastated after a civil war. + poverty and backwardness. You cannot fight a modern war with this. I think he got his priorities wrong though. You defeat the main foe = everyone else follows. His diversion of forces is just er... too anticlausewitzian :P And yet the guy with the funny moustache got this part right. Well, more or less.

RangerJoe -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/30/2020 7:49:20 PM)
Take care of the big problem, the little ones will fall into place.

warspite1 -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/30/2020 8:47:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus I'm with Lemay: these two poor and backward states were an easy prey for the mighty (yes) Werhmacht. Especially Spain, devastated after a civil war. + poverty and backwardness. You cannot fight a modern war with this. warspite1 Well we haven't really got to Turkey yet and are still on Spain. But I've certainly never suggested anything other than the Spanish, devastated by the civil war, weakened by a lack of oil, and consisting largely of an infantry army, would be defeated by the Germans. But how you can say they would be 'easy prey' and determine what that means when you have no idea what forces the Germans are bringing to bear, I don't know. You also have no idea what the Germans will be doing against the UK (and thus what the British can assist Spain with). It's all just lacking in any detail. quote: ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus I'm surprised some of you assume Spain or Turkey would pull -yes or yes- a guerrilla war. Just because the former did it on the early 1800s. Different societies, regimes will NOT be delivering the same, that's too mechanical. Want a really clear example? Compare the tsarist toothless, pathetic army circa 1914 with the soviet steamroller circa 1944. Just one mere generation apart and yet... This is what different regimes, epochs may offer. warspite1 Again, forgetting Turkey at this stage, the reason I believe that the Spanish will mount a partisan war is not just because the French were on the receiving end of one in 1808. That does have some bearing of course, but there is far more to it than that. I've tried to make the following points: a) In an echo of 1808, the Spanish have been stabbed in the back, betrayed by their fellow fascists. b) The Spanish were asked to voluntarily join the Axis but declined for good reasons. The Germans, in ignoring the will of the Spanish people, have simply added to the body count from the Civil War that hasn't been ended long, they've destroyed more infrastructure, destroyed more homes, livelihoods and farms and generally added to the misery of the Spanish population. c) Hitler will impose a German lackey on Spain. The Republicans will hate him whoever he is, the Nationalists will hate him for being a German puppet. d) The Spanish economy is already in trouble and the people are being fed thanks to the US and UK. Under Curtis Lemay's 'staff study' the Spanish will be receiving no such assistance and the Germans can't pick up the slack. Hungry people with nothing to lose tend to fight back. e) The British (and US) will be providing whatever they can to stir things up. f) The Spanish terrain is conducive to this type of warfare. Is there any guarantee any of this would happen? No of course not. The point is, one side of the argument is putting a case across, suggesting reasons for actions being taken. The other barely bothers with detail, and when they do, so much is false or mis-placed.

gamer78 -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/30/2020 9:11:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus I'm surprised some of you assume Spain or Turkey would pull -yes or yes- a guerrilla war. Just because the former did it on the early 1800s. Different societies, regimes will NOT be delivering the same, that's too mechanical. Want a really clear example? Compare the tsarist toothless, pathetic army circa 1914 with the soviet steamroller circa 1944. Just one mere generation apart and yet... This is what different regimes, epochs may offer. I'm with Lemay: these two poor and backward states were an easy prey for the mighty (yes) Werhmacht. Especially Spain, devastated after a civil war. + poverty and backwardness. You cannot fight a modern war with this. I think he got his priorities wrong though. You defeat the main foe = everyone else follows. His diversion of forces is just er... too anticlausewitzian :P And yet the guy with the funny moustache got this part right. Well, more or less. I think for Turkey it is more like Cold War debate of what if. A bit different Cyprus dispute, No Turkish forces in Korean War and maybe Cuban missile crisis could be different and more importantly Turkey won't be a Nato member. Which seems currently in 3rd or 4th rank in overall military force analysis for Nato. I think Turkey mostly likely be divided into 2 or 3 sectors not by Werhmacht but by Soviets if any alliance with Germany or assault by Hitler. Just as they did to Germany.

RangerJoe -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/31/2020 12:44:38 AM)
There already was a "Free Spanish" government which continued until 1977. They would have received recognition and help. Another thing about invading Spain, a country friendly with Nazi Germany, is that the other countries friendly with Nazi Germany will ask "Who is next? My country?" The Free Spanish government would then become eligible for Lend Lease aid, much like Free France and Turkey.

warspite1 -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/31/2020 9:36:03 AM)
I'm still interested to find out more about the supply situation and continue to dig around. I saw this comment (and hope to have the article it came from in the next few weeks). The comment comes from a German plan to re-visit Spain (not invasion but assuming Spanish co-operation unlike this scenario) once the Germans had reached a line Kiev-Smolensk-Opotschka in the autumn of 1941 (yeah I know - how optimistic was that!!!!). It says: By Mid-July 1941, the demands of the Eastern Front, added to the problem of supplying and moving these units through the poor Spanish rail system were staggering. POL(?) estimates ran to about 10% of total stockpile earmarked for Russia, this would require 50 trainloads of gasoline alone, plus 8 trainloads for food. Sea transportation routes were considered and Naval officers feared the British control of the sea around Gibraltar was too strong to risk shipping. I've previously mentioned naval supply (which of course was ignored) but clearly the fact that the Germans felt the need to explore this perhaps says much for the rail position - even in a Spain friendly scenario? And all this is with Spain actively helping Germany and not fighting them. This of course in turn would mean: - the size of the force required to be supplied was considerably smaller than would be needed for this scenario - losses not being taken until the units were ready to besiege and then assault Gibraltar - no expenditure of ammunition expended fighting the Spanish that itself then needed to be replaced - no additional expenditure of fuel as there would be no need for forces heading all over Spain to defeat the regular forces and subdue insurgents I'm also interested in the time impact caused by every train wagon of every train having to be loaded in Germany/France and then unloaded in southwest France and then transported to the Spanish train and loaded once again. There is a further comment that says: The Spanish rail system required 12 1/2 days to move a single German division in 1940. I am not sure the context, but assume that would be from France to Gibraltar and under peacetime conditions (well until it reaches Andalucia at any rate)? I hope the wider article provides some more clarity on all this.

TulliusDetritus -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/31/2020 11:47:30 AM)
My understanding is that Spain would be a huge liability. Even after a successful (no doubt) campaign. And what insurgents are you talking about? This is 1940, not 1808. Where's the pool to fill these ranks? WW2 was an utter ideological struggle. The partisans movement across the continent was more ideological than national. The core of these forces was filled with communists Except communism was more important in central and northern Europe. Southern Europe = anarchism ruled. Problem is Spanish fascists had already destroyed the powerful spanish anarchist movement. To fight your wars from your armchair you still need a pool of recruits [;)] Spanish fascists fighting German fascists... I doubt it. And besides, the III Reich already could get everything they wanted from Spain [;)]

RangerJoe -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/31/2020 12:33:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 I'm still interested to find out more about the supply situation and continue to dig around. I saw this comment (and hope to have the article it came from in the next few weeks). The comment comes from a German plan to re-visit Spain (not invasion but assuming Spanish co-operation unlike this scenario) once the Germans had reached a line Kiev-Smolensk-Opotschka in the autumn of 1941 (yeah I know - how optimistic was that!!!!). It says: By Mid-July 1941, the demands of the Eastern Front, added to the problem of supplying and moving these units through the poor Spanish rail system were staggering. POL(?) estimates ran to about 10% of total stockpile earmarked for Russia, this would require 50 trainloads of gasoline alone, plus 8 trainloads for food. Sea transportation routes were considered and Naval officers feared the British control of the sea around Gibraltar was too strong to risk shipping. I've previously mentioned naval supply (which of course was ignored) but clearly the fact that the Germans felt the need to explore this perhaps says much for the rail position - even in a Spain friendly scenario? And all this is with Spain actively helping Germany and not fighting them. This of course in turn would mean: - the size of the force required to be supplied was considerably smaller than would be needed for this scenario - losses not being taken until the units were ready to besiege and then assault Gibraltar - no expenditure of ammunition expended fighting the Spanish that itself then needed to be replaced - no additional expenditure of fuel as there would be no need for forces heading all over Spain to defeat the regular forces and subdue insurgents I'm also interested in the time impact caused by every train wagon of every train having to be loaded in Germany/France and then unloaded in southwest France and then transported to the Spanish train and loaded once again. There is a further comment that says: The Spanish rail system required 12 1/2 days to move a single German division in 1940. I am not sure the context, but assume that would be from France to Gibraltar and under peacetime conditions (well until it reaches Andalucia at any rate)? I hope the wider article provides some more clarity on all this. POL => Petroleum, Oil, Lubricants.

RangerJoe -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/31/2020 12:41:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus My understanding is that Spain would be a huge liability. Even after a successful (no doubt) campaign. And what insurgents are you talking about? This is 1940, not 1808. Where's the pool to fill these ranks? WW2 was an utter ideological struggle. The partisans movement across the continent was more ideological than national. The core of these forces was filled with communists Except communism was more important in central and northern Europe. Southern Europe = anarchism ruled. Problem is Spanish fascists had already destroyed the powerful spanish anarchist movement. To fight your wars from your armchair you still need a pool of recruits [;)] Spanish fascists fighting German fascists... I doubt it. And besides, the III Reich already could get everything they wanted from Spain [;)] The guerillas that were already in Spain plus the Spanish Maqui units that formed in France. At least 10,000 of them in France, plus Gen. LeClerc's division was estimated to have 2,000 Spaniards in it in 1944. In 1944, some of the Spanish Maqui invaded Spain and attempted to draw the Allies into liberating Spain. They failed. 1,000 Spaniards joined the French Foreign Legion. Fascists and Nazis are different.

TulliusDetritus -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/31/2020 1:02:55 PM)
Exactly. They were forced to flee and were very active in the French Resistance. This was an ideological issue, the struggle had to continue. But in Spain itself the movement was destroyed. I just can't see Spanish fascists (a variant of Italian fascism) fighting their ideological allies or nazis (or a variant of Italian fascism)...

RangerJoe -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/31/2020 1:24:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus Exactly. They were forced to flee and were very active in the French Resistance. This was an ideological issue, the struggle had to continue. But in Spain itself the movement was destroyed. I just can't see Spanish fascists (a variant of Italian fascism) fighting their ideological allies or nazis (or a variant of Italian fascism)... I do see them fighting since the Spanish Falangist party is a nationalist party. Plus, as I stated, there already were guerillas fighting in Spain - against the Spanish government. They will like the Germans even less.

warspite1 -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/31/2020 2:18:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus My understanding is that Spain would be a huge liability. Even after a successful (no doubt) campaign. warspite1 Yes and this point has been repeatedly made (and ignored for no good reason) quote: ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus And what insurgents are you talking about? This is 1940, not 1808. Where's the pool to fill these ranks? WW2 was an utter ideological struggle. The partisans movement across the continent was more ideological than national. The core of these forces was filled with communists Except communism was more important in central and northern Europe. Southern Europe = anarchism ruled. Problem is Spanish fascists had already destroyed the powerful spanish anarchist movement. To fight your wars from your armchair you still need a pool of recruits [;)] Spanish fascists fighting German fascists... I doubt it. warspite1 There were still plenty in Spain that fought for a Republican Government and would be prepared to continue the fight. There are now plenty of Fascists that feel betrayed by the Germans. But, you want a pool of recruits? When the Spanish population - Republican or Fascist or whatever - are starving and there is one person to blame, one person to focus your energy and anger on, then you have your perfect recruiting sergeant.

warspite1 -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/31/2020 2:19:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RangerJoe quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 I'm still interested to find out more about the supply situation and continue to dig around. I saw this comment (and hope to have the article it came from in the next few weeks). The comment comes from a German plan to re-visit Spain (not invasion but assuming Spanish co-operation unlike this scenario) once the Germans had reached a line Kiev-Smolensk-Opotschka in the autumn of 1941 (yeah I know - how optimistic was that!!!!). It says: By Mid-July 1941, the demands of the Eastern Front, added to the problem of supplying and moving these units through the poor Spanish rail system were staggering. POL(?) estimates ran to about 10% of total stockpile earmarked for Russia, this would require 50 trainloads of gasoline alone, plus 8 trainloads for food. Sea transportation routes were considered and Naval officers feared the British control of the sea around Gibraltar was too strong to risk shipping. I've previously mentioned naval supply (which of course was ignored) but clearly the fact that the Germans felt the need to explore this perhaps says much for the rail position - even in a Spain friendly scenario? And all this is with Spain actively helping Germany and not fighting them. This of course in turn would mean: - the size of the force required to be supplied was considerably smaller than would be needed for this scenario - losses not being taken until the units were ready to besiege and then assault Gibraltar - no expenditure of ammunition expended fighting the Spanish that itself then needed to be replaced - no additional expenditure of fuel as there would be no need for forces heading all over Spain to defeat the regular forces and subdue insurgents I'm also interested in the time impact caused by every train wagon of every train having to be loaded in Germany/France and then unloaded in southwest France and then transported to the Spanish train and loaded once again. There is a further comment that says: The Spanish rail system required 12 1/2 days to move a single German division in 1940. I am not sure the context, but assume that would be from France to Gibraltar and under peacetime conditions (well until it reaches Andalucia at any rate)? I hope the wider article provides some more clarity on all this. POL => Petroleum, Oil, Lubricants. warspite1 Thanks. I will post as soon as I hear further on this.

Curtis Lemay -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/31/2020 2:27:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 Why would you possibly suggest that? That seems a rather silly comment to make, and certainly not one that furthers this debate in any sensible way. That was sarcasm (lost on you evidently). You were the one suggesting that. quote: Well I don't think that is strictly true (although China was but one reason). Tojo was forced to resign in July 1944. Because of the Pacific War, not China. You see, a war that had the majority of Japan's army manpower sucked into it could not wait forever. But it could clearly wait for years - it did. quote: In the circumstances pertaining to that period of the war (the Soviets are increasingly concerned about what is happening in Europe) then yes, yes it can. The Japs don't know what the Soviets are concerned about. And, Stalin was so concerned he was taken completely by surprise by Barbarossa. We know that Barbarossa was the trigger for occupation of FIC and the Rising Sun offensive. (Wiki article). Without Barbarossa, there is no basis to believe either of those moves will be made. That means no oil embargo and no US at war.

RangerJoe -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/31/2020 2:30:43 PM)
quote: North Atlantic Treaty Organization classes of supply Class I - Items of subsistence, e.g., food and forage, which are consumed by personnel or animals at an approximately uniform rate, irrespective of local changes in combat or terrain conditions. Class II - Supplies for which allowances are established by tables of organization and equipment, e.g., clothing, weapons, tools, spare parts, vehicles. Class III - Petroleum, oil and lubricants (POL) for all purposes, except for operating aircraft or for use in weapons such as flamethrowers, e.g., gasoline, fuel oil, greases, coal, and coke. (Class IIIa - aviation fuel and lubricants) Class IV - Supplies for which initial issue allowances are not prescribed by approved issue tables. Normally includes fortification and construction materials, as well as additional quantities of items identical to those authorized for initial issue (Class II) such as additional vehicles. Class V - Ammunition, explosives, and chemical agents of all types.[1] U.S. Armed Forces classes of supply Class I - Rations - Subsistence (food and drinking water), gratuitous (free) health and comfort items. Class II - Clothing And Equipment - individual equipment, tentage, some aerial delivery equipment, organizational tool sets and kits, hand tools, unclassified maps, administrative and housekeeping supplies and equipment. Class III - POL - Petroleum, Oil and Lubricants (POL) (package and bulk): Petroleum, fuels, lubricants, hydraulic and insulating oils, preservatives, liquids and gases, bulk chemical products, coolants, deicer and antifreeze compounds, components, and additives of petroleum and chemical products, and coal. Class IV - Construction materials, including installed equipment and all fortification and barrier materials. Class V - Ammunition of all types, bombs, explosives, mines, fuses, detonators, pyrotechnics, missiles, rockets, propellants, and associated items. Class VI - Personal demand items (such as health and hygiene products, soaps and toothpaste, writing material, snack food, beverages, cigarettes, batteries, alcohol, and cameras—nonmilitary sales items). Class VII - Major end items such as launchers, tanks, mobile machine shops, some parachute systems and vehicles. Class VIII - Medical material (equipment and consumables) including repair parts peculiar to medical equipment. (Class VIIIa – Medical consumable supplies not including blood & blood products; Class VIIIb – Blood & blood components (whole blood, platelets, plasma, packed red cells, etc.). Class IX - Repair parts and components to include kits, assemblies, and subassemblies (repairable or non-repairable) required for maintenance support of all equipment. Class X - Material to support nonmilitary programs such as agriculture and economic development (not included in Classes I through IX). Miscellaneous - Water, salvage, and captured material.[2] But the most important one is: [sm=00000436.gif] Class VI is usually associated with the liquor store on a U.S. military base, typically a U.S. Army or U.S. Air Force installation.[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classes_of_supply Just in case you see anything like that.

Curtis Lemay -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/31/2020 2:31:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RangerJoe So you are trying to equate a German Panzer division's supply requirements with a Chinese division with 9,500 men supply requirements? You men will go hungry and your tanks will not move. The Chinese carried their ammo supply and one weeks worth of food on their backs. Think of all of that gasoline on the back of a tank waiting to be hit and catch on fire . . . The same thing with a motorized infantry division. The infantry sitting on the gas cans on the back of a truck waiting to be part of a gas barbeque. While the rail line may be able to handle more than ONE train per day, it has to unload somewhere then make it back. There is only so much space to do that where the other infrastructure needed is there. Then it has to be guarded and it can't be to close to enemy artillery, much less a man portable 81mm mortar . . . Willey Pete anyone? [:D] This is ridiculous. It's obvious that a rail line can handle a vast amount of supplies. More than enough for the action required in Spain. Remember, Spain has a tiny army. That means a tiny amount of combat needed to eliminate them. Every urban area has marshalling yards where trains can be held while unloaded. Of course such locations would be behind front lines.

Curtis Lemay -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/31/2020 2:33:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RangerJoe quote: [sm=00000280.gif][sm=00000280.gif][sm=00000280.gif][sm=00000289.gif][sm=00000289.gif][sm=00000289.gif][sm=00000280.gif][sm=00000280.gif][sm=00000280.gif] Happy to have all those professional wargame designers on my side.

Curtis Lemay -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/31/2020 2:36:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RangerJoe The Tokyo Express sailed into waters far from their air bases so they had little to no fighters for defense. Correct. And the Americans had plenty of air assets to use against them. But they couldn't because it was night. Aircraft don't intercept anything very well at night. That's the point.

warspite1 -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/31/2020 2:43:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay That was sarcasm (lost on you evidently). You were the one suggesting that. warspite1 Once again you wilfully mis-represent what I say. Pretty pathetic to be honest. I have suggested nothing of the sort and this behaviour just makes you look bad. quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay But it could clearly wait for years - it did. warspite1 ...and in 'waiting' for years it helped Japan how exactly? quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay Without Barbarossa, there is no basis to believe either of those moves will be made. That means no oil embargo and no US at war. warspite1 Except there kind of is. Japan needed to do something. We know that Barbarossa meant the argument was settled in real life in favour of the south. But you simply refuse to accept (because it doesn't suit your scenario) that in this alternate scenario, Japan still has a choice to make. All the signs, all that is happening and (given all that we know actually happened in terms of the action Japan took) leads us logically to conclude Japan would take the historic route. To not so so is too much of a flight of fantasy. Sorry that it hurts your scenario but there you gp.

Page: << < prev 10 11 [12] 13 14 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.6875