RE: The question to ask about The Italians

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

All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion

Message

warspite1 -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/11/2020 5:40:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 You don’t have to read my mind. I did spell it out. You have chosen to ignore what you don’t like as usual. In post 527 you tried to make the point (using a game map) that: quote: Note the terrain is much tougher than Spain and no better than Turkey. Claims that the Germans have never faced anything but flat tank country are false. In Post 529 I said I’d never made the point about flat tank country, ... But others did. quote: but did make the following pertinent observation: quote: As has been said before, look at the short distance that the Axis troops needed to travel - remember the Germans attacked the poor Yugoslavs from Germany, Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria, while the Italians came at the Yugoslavs from Italy and Albania. They were almost completely surrounded. It was not the one axis of attack that confronts the Germans in Spain..... There were no mountains or hills that blocked the path to the capital from the north either. Once again, you’ve been shown to be wrong so you, not very subtly, simply ignored Yugoslavia and moved onto Greece in post 555: You're so desperate to find some sort of error in my posts that you resort to inventing them. The above is a straw man. I've never said anything contrary to the above. All I said was that the terrain in Yugoslavia and Greece was worse than Spain and at least equal to Turkey. And, the Yugoslavia attackers had to cross lots of Yugoslavia to get to Greece. quote: I responded in Post 560 that you were wrong about Greece too, and quoted from the Centre of Military History – United States Army’s The German Campaign in the Balkans. This made clear: Whereas an invader thrusting from Albania can be stopped with relatively small forces in the high Pindus Mountains, the northeastern part of the country is difficult to defend against an attack from the north. That only concerns the area east of Salonika - which the Greeks were fools to try to defend. The Germans have to get to Athens to force Greek surrender. quote: So your thinking that “Hills are all the way in Greece” I was specifically referring to Athens. quote: But furthermore, that extract from the US military study went further. It clearly stated: Eastern Macedonia and western Thrace are narrow strips of land that can be cut off from the rest of Greece by an advance following the course of the Vardar River. Salonika, the only efficient port in northern Greece, is situated within this vulnerable area. The supply system of the Greek forces fighting in Albania was based on Salonika. The capture of the port would cut their supply lines and isolate them in their exposed positions. How did you respond? quote: They still could have been supplied through Athens. How arrogant is that? Even the game map you provided shows no rail or road link but you simply ignore this and blandly state the opposite of what a military study concluded. Again, that is if they had deployed in the interior, instead of at their frontier. What can't be escaped is that the terrain in Yugoslavia and Greece is worse than the terrain in Spain and at least equal to the terrain in Turkey. warspite1 Believe me I am not looking for factual errors in your posts - they are easily found with little need for searching. In fact, quite the opposite, I am seeking consensus - some reasonable give and take - because after all we are dealing with what might have happened given one change in decision from Hitler. Basically everything is "you are right" (or rather the game makers are right). Example: if the game makers say Spain is conquered on the fall of the capital then that MUST be right. Instead of asking well hold on warspite1, why are you suggesting they are wrong and we can discuss, you simply spout your 'fact' about no European country ever fighting on after the fall of their capital. When you were shown this was total rubbish, there was no "fair enough, let's review that and see what it means for Spain". You simply sulk and say something to the effect "it doesn't matter, they're toast anyway" or somesuch unhelpful throwaway line. So you see why this is so frustrating? In response to your scenario: - Churchill can't do anything because he's seen a barge or two in Ostend and a Bf-109 fly within 5 miles of the English coast so automatically puts on his tin hat and cowers under the table - Stalin can't do anything because.... er he didn't in real life, so no matter what happens in your scenario and no matter how problematical for the Soviets, he couldn't possibly do anything different i.e. nothing BUT conveniently: - Goering becomes a level-headed tactical genius not at all interested in making the Luftwaffe look more important than the army or navy - and in his over eagerness to do that, making some really dumbarse moves - Mussolini stops making gonorrhoea-inspired dumb moves, he stops having any thoughts for Italy and suddenly subordinates his country, his army and everything to the Germans - Tojo decides acting in Japan's interest is boring and also becomes a simple extension of Germany and will do what Germany needs it to do. I'm sure all of us here having something to contribute - some areas of knowledge that we can bring. It would be good to try and use that collective knowledge to make this as fun as possible.

Curtis Lemay -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/12/2020 2:34:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 - Churchill can't do anything because he's seen a barge or two in Ostend and a Bf-109 fly within 5 miles of the English coast so automatically puts on his tin hat and cowers under the table I do think it's going to be very hard for the British to leap to the conclusion that no invasion is coming regardless of what they feel is missing that may seem to them to be essential prep for such an invasion. There are simply too many options for how such an invasion could be prosecuted. Nevertheless, their options, if they reach that conclusion, don't seem to be very significant: Put some part of their very limited ground forces back into a continental ground war maelstrom with the Germans. quote: - Stalin can't do anything because.... er he didn't in real life, so no matter what happens in your scenario and no matter how problematical for the Soviets, he couldn't possibly do anything different i.e. nothing As I said, if Stalin initiates the war, it's a very different war than historical. SPI calls it "Limited War". And, by limited, they especially mean production. Limited War production is only marginally greater than peacetime production. And the bad news is that they don't get to go to Total War until they've lost three production centers. So, they can be fatally compromised before that happens. So, either way Stalin turns, it's good for the Axis. quote: BUT conveniently: - Goering becomes a level-headed tactical genius not at all interested in making the Luftwaffe look more important than the army or navy - and in his over eagerness to do that, making some really dumbarse moves Goring is not the Supreme Commander. Hitler is. Why would he launch a strategic bombing campaign if they've decided not to make a cross-channel attempt? quote: - Mussolini stops making gonorrhoea-inspired dumb moves, he stops having any thoughts for Italy and suddenly subordinates his country, his army and everything to the Germans Again, it's clear that Mussolini can be enticed by German plans (see Barbarossa). The German plans for the Med will be just such. quote: - Tojo decides acting in Japan's interest is boring and also becomes a simple extension of Germany and will do what Germany needs it to do. Again, it's the threat of an unencumbered Soviet Union that will impact just what Japan's "interests" are. Finally, let's be clear that Greece and Yugoslavia (not to mention Norway) did include extensive fighting in hills, regardless of what distances those fights crossed, or that some fighting may have been in non-hill terrain. Any claim that the Germans never faced the terrain of Spain or Turkey are false.

warspite1 -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/12/2020 5:10:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay Nevertheless, their options, if they reach that conclusion, don't seem to be very significant: Put some part of their very limited ground forces back into a continental ground war maelstrom with the Germans. I do think it's going to be very hard for the British to leap to the conclusion that no invasion is coming regardless of what they feel is missing that may seem to them to be essential prep for such an invasion. There are simply too many options for how such an invasion could be prosecuted. warspite1 First paragraph - agreed. When you have a small army, when that army has been sent into headlong retreat and loses all its heavy weapons, the options for future action aren’t exactly bountiful. At the same time, they will do what they believe they can, and what they believe they can will be more if they don’t expect an invasion any time soon. If the Germans are doing nothing other than sitting around allowing the British to re-build then - apart from being dumb from the German point of view - that is going to be suggesting to the British that whatever they are doing in Spain is taking all their attention. Let’s be clear, even if the British don’t expect an invasion imminently they are still not going to be sending everything they’ve got overseas because there could be an invasion in the future. This is what happened in real life and I don't believe its right to magically alter Churchill's MO any more than I do Goering's. BUT All of that can be discussed as things develop in Spain and elsewhere. Before we get to that we need to understand what the Germans would have done in this scenario. And for that…… quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay Goring is not the Supreme Commander. Hitler is. warspite1 …but I don’t understand where this comment comes from, I really don’t. No, Goering was not Supreme Commander. But he was a vain boastful man who held extremely high office – he happened to be Hitler’s nominated successor – and we know he had great influence with Hitler. Just two examples: Dunkirk In truth, there was plenty of blame to go around. On May 23 Field Marshal Hermann Göring had phoned Hitler and demanded his Luftwaffe be given primary responsibility for destroying the Allied forces around Dunkirk. Göring’s boasts about the Luftwaffe convinced Hitler the British couldn’t escape Dunkirk anyway. Source History.Net Stalingrad Major discussion about air supply for Stalingrad. Goering bound himself to supply Army. On the average one could manage 300 tonnes [illegible, might be 500 tonnes]. Everything would be thrown in, even the Ju 90s from the commercial runs. Zeitzler was doubtful, thought that 300 [or 500] tonnes would not be enough, talked about the weather situation and losses. However, Reichsmarschall was enormously strong, said he would fly in any weather conditions. Demyansk and other cases had proved it possible. Source Diary of Major Engel – Fuhrer Headquarters November 1942. Not the Supreme Commander? No he wasn't - but that did not mean he was able to use his power and position to persuade Hitler to his way of thinking - particularly when he was telling Hitler what was comforting for the Fuhrer to hear. quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay Why would he launch a strategic bombing campaign if they've decided not to make a cross-channel attempt? warspite1 I haven’t said what the Germans would do would be a strategic bombing campaign. I said that sitting in Northern France in July 1940 is simply unbelievable in my opinion and, given the situation, given the characters involved, the Germans just wouldn’t do that. I suspect the most likely option is that the tactics employed to beat Fighter Command in real life would be the tactics employed here. Why? Because this is about Goering defeating Fighter Command and not about Sea Lion. I suspect as per real life the bombing of cities may come later – but it wouldn’t be the initial plan. So they would do something and they would take the fight to Fighter Command because they believed they were almost finished anyway. Moreover, Goering didn’t believe in Sea Lion and believed that the defeat of Fighter Command would see Britain come to the peace table. Add to this that Hitler likely didn’t really believe in the project as it was too risky for his liking. So he’s got Goering constantly in his ear about what the Luftwaffe can do and these boasts actually tell Hitler what he wants to hear. I say yet again, the Battle of Britain was not something foisted upon Goering because of Sea Lion. Goering believed the hype, he believed his own press and he believed the dodgy intelligence. Fighter Command was there for the taking and that is why a Battle of Britain type scenario would have happened even with a Med first strategy. quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay Again, it's clear that Mussolini can be enticed by German plans (see Barbarossa). The German plans for the Med will be just such. warspite1 Mussolini in the summer of 1941 is a completely different animal (in terms of his relationship with Hitler) than in 1940. There are two important reasons why Hitler was keen to offer troops to Germany for Barbarossa: - He was no friend of Communism and the Soviet Union was his enemy (although interestingly this move did not help his popularity in Italy). This is no different from him offering aircraft for the Battle of Britain. - But the main reason, the absolutely key reason, is that by the summer of 1941 North Africa had happened, Taranto and Matapan had happened, Greece had happened. Here was a man who needed some brownie points, he needed to ingratiate himself with Hitler. After the first year of Italy’s war, the balance sheet was in massive deficit and Mussolini was under no illusions what Italy could or couldn’t do. That is NOT the case in June 1940 when he was constantly bending Graziani’s ear to attack Egypt. And even after this debacle, he launched an invasion of Greece with no planning (iirc the air force and navy weren’t even told about the operation with two weeks before its start!!). In June 1940 he thought the war was over and he needed to stake his claim. He ordered an attack on the French and then the British. At that time Mussolini and Italy were not mere extensions of Nazi Germany. To suggest they were is, in my opinion, wrong. quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay Again, it's the threat of an unencumbered Soviet Union that will impact just what Japan's "interests" are. warspite1 No point discussing Japan further unless we know this project will ever get off the ground. quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay As I said, if Stalin initiates the war, it's a very different war than historical. SPI calls it "Limited War". And, by limited, they especially mean production. Limited War production is only marginally greater than peacetime production. And the bad news is that they don't get to go to Total War until they've lost three production centers. So, they can be fatally compromised before that happens. So, either way Stalin turns, it's good for the Axis. warspite1 No point discussing what Stalin would or wouldn’t do unless we know this project will ever get off the ground. quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay Finally, let's be clear that Greece and Yugoslavia (not to mention Norway) did include extensive fighting in hills, regardless of what distances those fights crossed, or that some fighting may have been in non-hill terrain. Any claim that the Germans never faced the terrain of Spain or Turkey are false. warspite1 And again, I don’t know if you are answering someone else, but assume you are referring to me as its in response to my post, but to be equally clear, I have never suggested otherwise.

Curtis Lemay -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/13/2020 3:31:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 I haven’t said what the Germans would do would be a strategic bombing campaign. I said that sitting in Northern France in July 1940 is simply unbelievable in my opinion and, given the situation, given the characters involved, the Germans just wouldn’t do that. I suspect the most likely option is that the tactics employed to beat Fighter Command in real life would be the tactics employed here. Why? Because this is about Goering defeating Fighter Command and not about Sea Lion. I suspect as per real life the bombing of cities may come later – but it wouldn’t be the initial plan. So they would do something and they would take the fight to Fighter Command because they believed they were almost finished anyway. Moreover, Goering didn’t believe in Sea Lion and believed that the defeat of Fighter Command would see Britain come to the peace table. Add to this that Hitler likely didn’t really believe in the project as it was too risky for his liking. So he’s got Goering constantly in his ear about what the Luftwaffe can do and these boasts actually tell Hitler what he wants to hear. I say yet again, the Battle of Britain was not something foisted upon Goering because of Sea Lion. Goering believed the hype, he believed his own press and he believed the dodgy intelligence. Fighter Command was there for the taking and that is why a Battle of Britain type scenario would have happened even with a Med first strategy. This is nonsense. The whole point of the BoB was to secure Air Superiority over the Channel for an invasion. They're not doing the invasion. Why would they do the BoB? - especially with the air force that they had? With an invasion planned, the BoB was a logical step. Without it, it's madness. You're saying Goring is insane and he will take nonsensical steps regardless of circumstances. I think that's wishful thinking on your part. quote: Mussolini in the summer of 1941 is a completely different animal (in terms of his relationship with Hitler) than in 1940. There are two important reasons why Hitler was keen to offer troops to Germany for Barbarossa: - He was no friend of Communism and the Soviet Union was his enemy (although interestingly this move did not help his popularity in Italy). This is no different from him offering aircraft for the Battle of Britain. - But the main reason, the absolutely key reason, is that by the summer of 1941 North Africa had happened, Taranto and Matapan had happened, Greece had happened. Here was a man who needed some brownie points, he needed to ingratiate himself with Hitler. After the first year of Italy’s war, the balance sheet was in massive deficit and Mussolini was under no illusions what Italy could or couldn’t do. That is NOT the case in June 1940 when he was constantly bending Graziani’s ear to attack Egypt. And even after this debacle, he launched an invasion of Greece with no planning (iirc the air force and navy weren’t even told about the operation with two weeks before its start!!). In June 1940 he thought the war was over and he needed to stake his claim. He ordered an attack on the French and then the British. At that time Mussolini and Italy were not mere extensions of Nazi Germany. To suggest they were is, in my opinion, wrong. I guess you're going to twist Mussolini's motives to suit your desires. Mussolini's motives are unknown. We only know the facts: He joined a German operation (Barbarossa) that he thought sounded promising. He later sent reinforcements to that operation when requested. Therefore, he was persuadable. That's all the German Med plan needs. Clearly, if Suez is going to be taken via Turkey, then there is no point in a dash for the Pyramids from Libya. Again, you require Mussolini, like Goring, to be insane. I'm sure neither man was.

warspite1 -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/13/2020 5:46:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 I haven’t said what the Germans would do would be a strategic bombing campaign. I said that sitting in Northern France in July 1940 is simply unbelievable in my opinion and, given the situation, given the characters involved, the Germans just wouldn’t do that. I suspect the most likely option is that the tactics employed to beat Fighter Command in real life would be the tactics employed here. Why? Because this is about Goering defeating Fighter Command and not about Sea Lion. I suspect as per real life the bombing of cities may come later – but it wouldn’t be the initial plan. So they would do something and they would take the fight to Fighter Command because they believed they were almost finished anyway. Moreover, Goering didn’t believe in Sea Lion and believed that the defeat of Fighter Command would see Britain come to the peace table. Add to this that Hitler likely didn’t really believe in the project as it was too risky for his liking. So he’s got Goering constantly in his ear about what the Luftwaffe can do and these boasts actually tell Hitler what he wants to hear. I say yet again, the Battle of Britain was not something foisted upon Goering because of Sea Lion. Goering believed the hype, he believed his own press and he believed the dodgy intelligence. Fighter Command was there for the taking and that is why a Battle of Britain type scenario would have happened even with a Med first strategy. This is nonsense. The whole point of the BoB was to secure Air Superiority over the Channel for an invasion. They're not doing the invasion. Why would they do the BoB? - especially with the air force that they had? With an invasion planned, the BoB was a logical step. Without it, it's madness. You're saying Goring is insane and he will take nonsensical steps regardless of circumstances. I think that's wishful thinking on your part. warspite1 Nonsense? Not really. You still think that what became the Battle of Britain was part of Sea Lion? As Kesselring wrote: No definitive instructions were given about what my Air Fleet had to expect in the way of tactical assignments or what provision had been made for co-operation with the army and navy. I found this the more disheartening because, in the light of verbal instructions given me on 6 August, I could presume the air offensive which started two days later was intended to be the prelude to Sea Lion. But in the very first days of the offensive it was conducted on lines quite at variance with those instructions and never harmonised with the requirements of an invasion. And we know the reason. Goering wasn't interested in Sea Lion, but he was desperate to destroy Fighter Command for all the reasons previously outlined and totally ignored by you. But you carry on believing what you want to believe. You carry on ignoring all the evidence. You carry on spouting facts that turn out to be total toss. I'm bored with trying to reason with you, because there is no reasoning. You are not interested in history, historical characters and their motivations and desires. You are not interested in taking history and trying to work out alternate outcomes with different scenarios. All you care about is your dream Axis fanboy scenario. Well its simple. Really simple - and I don't need some board game to tell me this. Re-run WWII with Hitler and his cronies making no mistakes, with Mussolini and Tojo as his fully subordinate lackeys, with German commanders suddenly acting ahistorically for no reason, with the Allies hamstrung and unable to make different choices no matter what the Axis do - and you can make a case for Germany winning. Well done. Well I'm interested to know what would have happened historically if Germany invaded Sweden. So I'm off to play WIF because of course its a board game so what it says must be true right, and if Rule 64(a) Victory Conditions, says its so, then I guess there is no arguing with that is there? [8\|]

Zovs -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/13/2020 7:17:06 PM)
I am just learning MWIF and it seems like a great game. Between MWIF and CWIE2 I may be able answer some questions, which I don’t know, lol.

Torplexed -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/13/2020 7:27:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Zovs I am just learning MWIF and it seems like a great game. Between MWIF and CWIE2 I may be able answer some questions, which I don’t know, lol. Be glad its available in computer format now. Learning the game isn't as stacked against you as it used to be. [:D] [img]https://cf.geekdo-images.com/imagepage/img/blg2JH5zlqIEYJnOa4RC3rg52iY=/fit-in/900x600/filters:no_upscale()/pic1209966.jpg[/img]

MrRoadrunner -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/14/2020 12:45:33 PM)
"Well I'm interested to know what would have happened historically if Germany invaded Sweden. So I'm off to play WIF because of course its a board game so what it says must be true right, and if Rule 64(a) Victory Conditions, says its so, then I guess there is no arguing with that is there?" warspite1 I had a friend who used to roll dice like he controlled them. He'd call for the result he needed, rolled, and sure enough the result came out. Then when it was your turn to roll he would call the worst result possible and sure enough you would roll it. Hitler rolled good dice up until the winter of '41. After that he had average or below average rolls. "What if" discussions always boil down to words. Words don't win wars or war games. Rolling the dice does! [8\|] RR

Curtis Lemay -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/14/2020 2:06:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay This is nonsense. The whole point of the BoB was to secure Air Superiority over the Channel for an invasion. They're not doing the invasion. Why would they do the BoB? - especially with the air force that they had? With an invasion planned, the BoB was a logical step. Without it, it's madness. You're saying Goring is insane and he will take nonsensical steps regardless of circumstances. I think that's wishful thinking on your part. And add that part of the Luftwaffe is needed for Spain. So they would have had to have launched the BoB with less than the full Luftwaffe. [X(]

warspite1 -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/14/2020 3:14:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay And add that part of the Luftwaffe is needed for Spain. So they would have had to have launched the BoB with less than the full Luftwaffe. [X(] warspite1 Lolz..... so you use that argument when it suits...suddenly massive numbers of German aircraft are needed for Spain. Honestly you twist and turn like a....... twisty, turny thing Back to reality. a) The Luftwaffe was vastly superior in numbers compared to the RAF b) The Luftwaffe believed (and their own ahem..'intelligence' confirmed) that the RAF was on its last legs. The full Luftwaffe wasn't even required. c) Goering thought he would smash the RAF in a matter of weeks. d) As you yourself have said, the Luftwaffe would be expected to destroy the Spanish air force largely on the ground. The numbers of aircraft required for Spain, relatively, was small - At least until Gib was ready for assault. e) The need to save bombers for Gibraltar is no different to the real life requirement to keep bombers for the invasion of Britain, so you can't use that argument.

Zovs -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/14/2020 7:50:40 PM)
Some more misinformation that Bob Cross (Curtis Lemay) has spread about board war game designers (read some of the nonsense above), is proven false by James F. Dunningan himself in 1974 for the game Seelowe. The two most striking characteristics of Seelowe are the absence of the Royal Navy and Royal Air Force. As most people are aware, Britain, in effect, won the Battle of Britain in the skies during early September, and the navy never had to enter in order to thwart a German invasion. This game posits two elements in a new scenario, one of them with a high degree of possibility, the other almost impossible to consider or to have actually occurred. First, the German Air Force kept up its bombardment of the air bases during early September rather than switch in revenge to attacks upon British cities. At the rate of loss that the British were suffering in the first week of September, they would have been whittled down to an almost insignificant force by September 20th. In point of fact, British contingency plans (that have survived to this day) demonstrate that they planned on pulling back their Air Force after falling below a certain critical point, and not attempting to defend Southern England, but only England north of roughly the Thames-Bristol line. In the game, this is assumed to have happened. However, there still remains the British Navy. At that time the British Navy was supreme on the sea. There were no conceivable challenges from any other European power. Moreover, everything which has survived to this day concerning the possible use of the Navy shows that the British government fully intended to, if necessary, sacrifice the British Navy in the Channel in order to stop the Germans from instituting an invasion. No probable scenario can be pictured in which the British Navy fails to intervene. However, if the British Navy were to intervene, Seelowe would not be a game. It would merely be a futile exercise of how to exterminate troops on the beach. There is little doubt that the British Navy could have successfully steamed into the Channel, despite heavy losses by 1940 standards, and bombarded the troops on the beaches. Moreover, they would have been able to completely wreck the irreplaceable German invasion fleet. Not only would the German invasion of England have been turned back, but it would have been a crippling blow to the internal European economy, and would have affected the entire German production for the remainder of the year. It could well have shortened the war by a year or two. Thus, it became necessary to remove the British Navy from the game, in order to make it a game. There are few rather unlikely scenarios which would allow some rationalization of this move. One of these would be that Churchill was not Prime Minister at this time. Certain other men in England at the time, who had previously held a high office, proposed that the British Navy, in order to safe-guard it and to continue to fight over seas, be removed to Canada. Authors of fictional accounts relate other possible scenarios, such as the British fleet removing itself in pursing various German squadrons left out into the Atlantic. These are found to be incomplete since the destroyers locally based would have probably proved sufficient to defeat any invasion. The Germans undoubtedly could have gotten the troops ashore. It was their survival that was in doubt. ... The Germans had concentrated between 50 and 80% of the available sea transport in Occupied Europe at that time for the invasion. Even so, the ere capable only of landing two fully-equipped divisions on the first day. Moreover, much of this fragile transport was essentially one-way. Another large section of transport would have to be immediately returned to the civilian sector of the economy so that the home front would not fall apart due to the lack of mobility. These factors, combined with the probable losses on the beaches, drastically reduced the German ability to put troops and supplies ashore after the first day.

Zovs -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/14/2020 7:53:49 PM)
The main point being: However, there still remains the British Navy. At that time the British Navy was supreme on the sea. There were no conceivable challenges from any other European power. Moreover, everything which has survived to this day concerning the possible use of the Navy shows that the British government fully intended to, if necessary, sacrifice the British Navy in the Channel in order to stop the Germans from instituting an invasion. No probable scenario can be pictured in which the British Navy fails to intervene. However, if the British Navy were to intervene, Seelowe would not be a game. It would merely be a futile exercise of how to exterminate troops on the beach. There is little doubt that the British Navy could have successfully steamed into the Channel, despite heavy losses by 1940 standards, and bombarded the troops on the beaches. Moreover, they would have been able to completely wreck the irreplaceable German invasion fleet. Not only would the German invasion of England have been turned back, but it would have been a crippling blow to the internal European economy, and would have affected the entire German production for the remainder of the year. It could well have shortened the war by a year or two. Thus, it became necessary to remove the British Navy from the game, in order to make it a game.

warspite1 -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/15/2020 5:28:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Zovs The main point being: However, there still remains the British Navy. At that time the British Navy was supreme on the sea. There were no conceivable challenges from any other European power. Moreover, everything which has survived to this day concerning the possible use of the Navy shows that the British government fully intended to, if necessary, sacrifice the British Navy in the Channel in order to stop the Germans from instituting an invasion. No probable scenario can be pictured in which the British Navy fails to intervene. However, if the British Navy were to intervene, Seelowe would not be a game. It would merely be a futile exercise of how to exterminate troops on the beach. There is little doubt that the British Navy could have successfully steamed into the Channel, despite heavy losses by 1940 standards, and bombarded the troops on the beaches. Moreover, they would have been able to completely wreck the irreplaceable German invasion fleet. Not only would the German invasion of England have been turned back, but it would have been a crippling blow to the internal European economy, and would have affected the entire German production for the remainder of the year. It could well have shortened the war by a year or two. Thus, it became necessary to remove the British Navy from the game, in order to make it a game. warspite1 Well Curtis Lemay hasn't said there will be a Sea Lion in his scenario, but there is a point to be mentioned here. Note: I've already raised this but of course was brushed aside, even though it was a fact, it didn't fit with his Dream Axis Fanboi Scenario. The removal of the barges from the internal waterways did have a very real economic impact on the German economy. Now clearly in real life the Germans decided that as there was a possibility of Sea Lion happening (assuming Goering's boasts came true about destroying Fighter Command, but that didn't bring the British to heel), they would take this cost on the chin. But what Lemay wants us to believe is that, as part of this absurd, undefined 'policy of demonstration' the Germans, with no thoughts of Sea Lion, would still remove the barges. And so, for deception purposes only, the barges would be removed from the internal waterways, many would be sunk (in real life the British destroyed about 10% of the fleet) and the Germans would harm their own economy - and all for a deception operation - a deception operation remember, that means the Germans will simply leave the UK alone to re-build in peace after Dunkirk.

Aurelian -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/15/2020 2:30:42 PM)
Today is Battle of Britain Day: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Britain_Day

warspite1 -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/15/2020 2:48:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aurelian Today is Battle of Britain Day: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Britain_Day warspite1 [&o][&o] [image]local://upfiles/28156/8211AFAB06F540778B530FC1754DA5F4.jpg[/image]

Curtis Lemay -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/15/2020 3:58:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 a) The Luftwaffe was vastly superior in numbers compared to the RAF Not in terms of four-engine, heavily defended bombers. Not in terms of long range escorts vs. interceptors. quote: b) The Luftwaffe believed (and their own ahem..'intelligence' confirmed) that the RAF was on its last legs. The full Luftwaffe wasn't even required. c) Goering thought he would smash the RAF in a matter of weeks. Again, adopting a Med strategy nixes any need for a BoB. Any air reckoning will happen over the Med - more favorably for the Axis. d) As you yourself have said, the Luftwaffe would be expected to destroy the Spanish air force largely on the ground. The numbers of aircraft required for Spain, relatively, was small - At least until Gib was ready for assault. After achieving air superiority, the planes would be needed as tactical support for the ground forces. quote: e) The need to save bombers for Gibraltar is no different to the real life requirement to keep bombers for the invasion of Britain, so you can't use that argument. The invasion of Britain wouldn't happen till after the BoB was successful. The invasion of Spain, on the other hand, would be happening concurrently with it. The planes needed for Spain wouldn't be available for the channel till Spain was finished.

Aurelian -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/15/2020 4:00:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 quote: ORIGINAL: Aurelian Today is Battle of Britain Day: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Britain_Day warspite1 [&o][&o] [image]local://upfiles/28156/8211AFAB06F540778B530FC1754DA5F4.jpg[/image] [sm=00000436.gif]

Curtis Lemay -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/15/2020 4:01:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Zovs Some more misinformation that Bob Cross (Curtis Lemay) has spread about board war game designers (read some of the nonsense above), is proven false by James F. Dunningan himself in 1974 for the game Seelowe. The two most striking characteristics of Seelowe are the absence of the Royal Navy and Royal Air Force. As most people are aware, Britain, in effect, won the Battle of Britain in the skies during early September, and the navy never had to enter in order to thwart a German invasion. This game posits two elements in a new scenario, one of them with a high degree of possibility, the other almost impossible to consider or to have actually occurred. First, the German Air Force kept up its bombardment of the air bases during early September rather than switch in revenge to attacks upon British cities. At the rate of loss that the British were suffering in the first week of September, they would have been whittled down to an almost insignificant force by September 20th. In point of fact, British contingency plans (that have survived to this day) demonstrate that they planned on pulling back their Air Force after falling below a certain critical point, and not attempting to defend Southern England, but only England north of roughly the Thames-Bristol line. In the game, this is assumed to have happened. However, there still remains the British Navy. At that time the British Navy was supreme on the sea. There were no conceivable challenges from any other European power. Moreover, everything which has survived to this day concerning the possible use of the Navy shows that the British government fully intended to, if necessary, sacrifice the British Navy in the Channel in order to stop the Germans from instituting an invasion. No probable scenario can be pictured in which the British Navy fails to intervene. However, if the British Navy were to intervene, Seelowe would not be a game. It would merely be a futile exercise of how to exterminate troops on the beach. There is little doubt that the British Navy could have successfully steamed into the Channel, despite heavy losses by 1940 standards, and bombarded the troops on the beaches. Moreover, they would have been able to completely wreck the irreplaceable German invasion fleet. Not only would the German invasion of England have been turned back, but it would have been a crippling blow to the internal European economy, and would have affected the entire German production for the remainder of the year. It could well have shortened the war by a year or two. Thus, it became necessary to remove the British Navy from the game, in order to make it a game. There are few rather unlikely scenarios which would allow some rationalization of this move. One of these would be that Churchill was not Prime Minister at this time. Certain other men in England at the time, who had previously held a high office, proposed that the British Navy, in order to safe-guard it and to continue to fight over seas, be removed to Canada. Authors of fictional accounts relate other possible scenarios, such as the British fleet removing itself in pursing various German squadrons left out into the Atlantic. These are found to be incomplete since the destroyers locally based would have probably proved sufficient to defeat any invasion. The Germans undoubtedly could have gotten the troops ashore. It was their survival that was in doubt. ... The Germans had concentrated between 50 and 80% of the available sea transport in Occupied Europe at that time for the invasion. Even so, the ere capable only of landing two fully-equipped divisions on the first day. Moreover, much of this fragile transport was essentially one-way. Another large section of transport would have to be immediately returned to the civilian sector of the economy so that the home front would not fall apart due to the lack of mobility. These factors, combined with the probable losses on the beaches, drastically reduced the German ability to put troops and supplies ashore after the first day. First, the fact that SPI's Sealowe game was a fantasy, and was described as such above, says nothing like that for their War in Europe game. And I'd say that Dunnigan sounds pretty knowledgeable above. Way beyond the amateurs on this board.

warspite1 -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/15/2020 6:16:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay quote: ORIGINAL: Zovs Not only would the German invasion of England have been turned back, but it would have been a crippling blow to the internal European economy, and would have affected the entire German production for the remainder of the year. Moreover, much of this fragile transport was essentially one-way. Another large section of transport would have to be immediately returned to the civilian sector of the economy so that the home front would not fall apart due to the lack of mobility. And I'd say that Dunnigan sounds pretty knowledgeable above. Way beyond the amateurs on this board. warspite1 ....and thank you for proving my point. Even when the war game designers that you set so much store by, support what I've said and what you've ignored, you won't budge from your Dream Axis Fanbois Scenario.

warspite1 -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/15/2020 6:36:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay Not in terms of four-engine, heavily defended bombers. Not in terms of long range escorts vs. interceptors. warspite1 Did you just say "four-engined heavily defended bombers"? I think you actually just said "four-engined (whether heavily defended or otherwise is immaterial) bombers" [X(][8\|] I can't wait for the explanation of this. Did you just say "Not in terms of long range escorts vs. interceptors". You know the Battle of Britain was real life yes? You know it wasn't just something that happened in a war game or a fictional film? Do you actually know anything about World War II? Wow.... The Luftwaffe heavily out-numbered the RAF. Goering, not in the slightest bit interested in Sea Lion, knew exactly what he had, and he set out to destroy fighter command for all the reasons stated, with what he had. quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay Again, adopting a Med strategy nixes any need for a BoB. Any air reckoning will happen over the Med - more favorably for the Axis. warspite1 Just because you keep repeating the same tired, worn out comments, while stubbornly refusing to accept you can actually be wrong, doesn't alter anything. Increasingly you just show a basic lack of understanding of WWII (fact after fact is just plain wrong - the four-engined bombers comment is disturbing) and a basic lack of understanding of what happened and why. But worse, are the often contradictory, unthinking, make it up on the spot comments that you spout when having to change your mind - while at the same time being careful not to be seen to change your mind (because you can never be wrong) [X(][sm=dizzy.gif] So let's get this right. According to you, the barges tied up in port and the vast bulk of the Luftwaffe (not required in Spain) but doing nothing in Northern France, have WSC pressing the panic button. INVASION!!!! Call the militia!!!! - such that the British won't be able to react to the Med War.... ... and at the same time you've said the 'air reckoning will happen over the Med'.... ... but how, when according to your confused logic, there will be no air reckoning because the German 'demonstration' in Northern France will mean Churchill not sending any reinforcements to said Med theatre. But it's the bit in bold that is my favourite. I mean that just spells out everything anyone needs to know about you and your Dream Axis Fanbois Scenario. For the billionth time, it is what Goering believed at the time that is important - not what you know 80 years later. Goering 'knew' fighter command was finished, so NO he wouldn't be thinking in terms of his Luftwaffe, that had swept all before them, losing an air war over Britain. It is you with your hindsight that are playing that stupid game. quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay The invasion of Britain wouldn't happen till after the BoB was successful..... warspite1 ....and still, despite quote after quote, you stick to the rather quaint notion that the BoB was all about Sea Lion.

warspite1 -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/15/2020 8:05:23 PM)
So I am getting lost with your twisting and turning so can you just clarify please? You say that Goering won't act in line with his historical character and won't attack Britain (which will be left totally alone to recover in peace) despite knowing in his own mind he can finish Fighter Command in weeks - and in doing so there is no need for a Sea Lion that only factions of the army even believe in anyway? BUT The Germans, although not interested in Sea Lion WILL remove their barges to Northern France (as part of a cunning deception plan) to make the British think there will be an invasion. In so doing they do serious damage to their own economy. But they don't even have to do this because, according to you, if they don't make the British think there will be an invasion there is more chance of the British sending small scale reinforcements piecemeal to the Med which will be beaten more easily than attacking Britain..... so why exactly are they doing this anyway? So they are at war with Britain, they need to smash Britain's ability to wage war, but are instead, leaving Britain untouched, while at the same time hurting their own economy and not defeating British forces in any great number..... And I won't even go over the arguments again about Spain/Gibraltar at this point. Call me old fashioned, but I don't think you are really on top of your thinking here are you?

Curtis Lemay -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/16/2020 2:41:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay quote: ORIGINAL: Zovs Not only would the German invasion of England have been turned back, but it would have been a crippling blow to the internal European economy, and would have affected the entire German production for the remainder of the year. Moreover, much of this fragile transport was essentially one-way. Another large section of transport would have to be immediately returned to the civilian sector of the economy so that the home front would not fall apart due to the lack of mobility. And I'd say that Dunnigan sounds pretty knowledgeable above. Way beyond the amateurs on this board. warspite1 ....and thank you for proving my point. Even when the war game designers that you set so much store by, support what I've said and what you've ignored, you won't budge from your Dream Axis Fanbois Scenario. Again, if you have a point SPELL IT OUT!! I can't read your mind. How does the use of barges EXACTLY as they were used historically, result in any impact beyond what occurred historically?!!

Curtis Lemay -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/16/2020 2:53:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 Did you just say "four-engined heavily defended bombers"? I think you actually just said "four-engined (whether heavily defended or otherwise is immaterial) bombers" [X(][8\|] I can't wait for the explanation of this. If the Germans had fleets of four-engined heavily defended bombers - like the Lancaster - please let me know. quote: Did you just say "Not in terms of long range escorts vs. interceptors". You know the Battle of Britain was real life yes? You know it wasn't just something that happened in a war game or a fictional film? Do you actually know anything about World War II? Wow.... Are you saying the Germans had effective long range escorts?!! quote: So let's get this right. According to you, the barges tied up in port and the vast bulk of the Luftwaffe (not required in Spain) but doing nothing in Northern France, have WSC pressing the panic button. INVASION!!!! Call the militia!!!! - such that the British won't be able to react to the Med War.... ... and at the same time you've said the 'air reckoning will happen over the Med'.... ... but how, when according to your confused logic, there will be no air reckoning because the German 'demonstration' in Northern France will mean Churchill not sending any reinforcements to said Med theatre. That would only last, assuming it worked, for the duration of the Spain operation. There will be close to two years before Barbarossa, wherein the Med will be the main theater. And it favors the Axis because they have internal lines. They can fly their groups to the Med. The British have to ship them there. That nimbleness enables the Axis to create huge superiorities. quote: But it's the bit in bold that is my favourite. I mean that just spells out everything anyone needs to know about you and your Dream Axis Fanbois Scenario. For the billionth time, it is what Goering believed at the time that is important - not what you know 80 years later. Goering 'knew' fighter command was finished, so NO he wouldn't be thinking in terms of his Luftwaffe, that had swept all before them, losing an air war over Britain. It is you with your hindsight that are playing that stupid game. As an aside: I'm not making personal comments about you. Can you just stick to the facts? If they were really on your side you wouldn't have to be so vile. And, again, the rationale for the BoB was for a cross-channel invasion. That's not happening. And if Goring wants a showdown with the RAF he can still have it, but far better for it to occur in the Med.

Curtis Lemay -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/16/2020 2:55:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 So I am getting lost with your twisting and turning so can you just clarify please? You say that Goering won't act in line with his historical character and won't attack Britain (which will be left totally alone to recover in peace) despite knowing in his own mind he can finish Fighter Command in weeks - and in doing so there is no need for a Sea Lion that only factions of the army even believe in anyway? BUT The Germans, although not interested in Sea Lion WILL remove their barges to Northern France (as part of a cunning deception plan) to make the British think there will be an invasion. In so doing they do serious damage to their own economy. But they don't even have to do this because, according to you, if they don't make the British think there will be an invasion there is more chance of the British sending small scale reinforcements piecemeal to the Med which will be beaten more easily than attacking Britain..... so why exactly are they doing this anyway? So they are at war with Britain, they need to smash Britain's ability to wage war, but are instead, leaving Britain untouched, while at the same time hurting their own economy and not defeating British forces in any great number..... And I won't even go over the arguments again about Spain/Gibraltar at this point. Call me old fashioned, but I don't think you are really on top of your thinking here are you? They have adopted a Med strategy. That changes everything post France.

warspite1 -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/16/2020 2:57:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay quote: ORIGINAL: Zovs Not only would the German invasion of England have been turned back, but it would have been a crippling blow to the internal European economy, and would have affected the entire German production for the remainder of the year. Moreover, much of this fragile transport was essentially one-way. Another large section of transport would have to be immediately returned to the civilian sector of the economy so that the home front would not fall apart due to the lack of mobility. And I'd say that Dunnigan sounds pretty knowledgeable above. Way beyond the amateurs on this board. warspite1 ....and thank you for proving my point. Even when the war game designers that you set so much store by, support what I've said and what you've ignored, you won't budge from your Dream Axis Fanbois Scenario. Again, if you have a point SPELL IT OUT!! I can't read your mind. How does the use of barges EXACTLY as they were used historically, result in any impact beyond what occurred historically?!! warspite1 And you say I am rude and vile???? But you keep doing this: I have made my point so many times I can't believe you said I haven't. The barges were not mere additions providing picturesque shots of the River Rhine to be featured in beer commercials. These barges were part of the economy, they were important, they served a vital purpose. This is not me talking, this is borne out by your war game friend above. This is born out by German historians such as Schenk. In removing these barges from the waterways of Europe, they had an economic impact. Now, suffering that economic hit because you need the barges to launch an invasion is one thing. Doing that for a deception operation (that based on what you've said yesterday actually makes no sense anyway) is the height of stupidity. After all, they would be leaving Britain untouched while harming their own economy and war making capacity. Nice double whammy there - and even worse, you are keeping those in Northern France for two years and so doubling the effect on the economy. There. Does that (which I've said so many times already) sufficiently spell it out for you??????

warspite1 -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/16/2020 3:03:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 Did you just say "four-engined heavily defended bombers"? I think you actually just said "four-engined (whether heavily defended or otherwise is immaterial) bombers" [X(][8\|] I can't wait for the explanation of this. If the Germans had fleets of four-engined heavily defended bombers - like the Lancaster - please let me know. warspite1 What the hell has the Lancaster bomber - or any 4-engined bomber - got to do with the RAF in 1940???? And for the avoidance of doubt just in case you try and deflect by saying I am not making my point clear - here is the conversation in which we were talking about the respective fleets in the summer of 1940: w1: The Luftwaffe was vastly superior in numbers compared to the RAF CL: Not in terms of four-engine, heavily defended bombers. w1: Did you just say "four-engined heavily defended bombers"? I can't wait for the explanation of this. CL: If the Germans had fleets of four-engined heavily defended bombers - like the Lancaster - please let me know. For someone who seeks to lecture anyone over what was or wasn't possible in the summer of 1940, that response was very illuminating.

warspite1 -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/16/2020 3:06:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay Are you saying the Germans had effective long range escorts?!! warspite1 NO!!!!!!!!! I am saying that Goering believed he had what was needed in July 1940 to defeat the RAF - and what Goering believed is what is important. You did this with the Japan scenario, constantly asking what I would do or what I think. Who cares what I would do or what I think, it is irrelevant. With the weaponry at his disposal, Goering believed he could destroy the RAF in weeks (in fact he told Hitler he just needed 4 days of clear weather!!. The fact that we know otherwise 80 years later is simply not of any relevance to what the German High Command were thinking or thought they knew in the summer of 1940. The Me-110 - the Zerstorer - was his favourite aircraft it was something of a shock when the truth about its performance became evident.

warspite1 -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/16/2020 3:12:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay That would only last, assuming it worked, for the duration of the Spain operation. There will be close to two years before Barbarossa, wherein the Med will be the main theater. warspite1 But why does it matter if its the main theatre? The whole point of your deception operation (which will be seriously damaging the German war economy for two years) is that the British won't move anything away from the UK because they are scared of invasion. Again, sorry to interject facts into the argument but have a look at when large scale reinforcements were sent overseas. Notice anything about the timing? Sorry but you don't think your arguments through.

warspite1 -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/16/2020 3:22:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 But it's the bit in bold that is my favourite. I mean that just spells out everything anyone needs to know about you and your Dream Axis Fanbois Scenario. For the billionth time, it is what Goering believed at the time that is important - not what you know 80 years later. Goering 'knew' fighter command was finished, so NO he wouldn't be thinking in terms of his Luftwaffe, that had swept all before them, losing an air war over Britain. It is you with your hindsight that are playing that stupid game. As an aside: I'm not making personal comments about you. Can you just stick to the facts? If they were really on your side you wouldn't have to be so vile. And, again, the rationale for the BoB was for a cross-channel invasion. That's not happening. And if Goring wants a showdown with the RAF he can still have it, but far better for it to occur in the Med. warspite1 What was vile or personal about that? The way you have approached this 'staff study' is nothing more than an Dream Axis Fanoboi Scenario. That is not rude - it is certainly not vile. What else can I logically call a scenario where [repeat same old comments - Axis never make a mistake, Allies bound by their real life decisions regardless of any change, historical characters acting outside of reality for no reason, Italians and Japanese totally subordinate to anything Germany want to do etc etc etc]. If you wanted to be dispassionate, if you wanted to approach this as a proper debate, you wouldn't simply rubbish everything that is said. You wouldn't continually ask me to explain (because you are not a mind reader) even though I have clearly explained and on more than one occasion. I am the one here that is trying to stick to facts and am producing quotes and articles. Despite everything, EVERYTHING that has been said about Goering, what he believed, what others in the High Command believed about him, what do you say? quote: And, again, the rationale for the BoB was for a cross-channel invasion. I don't think you doing that is vile, I just think its rude and ignorant. You have provided not one comment, not one quote in support of that argument (whereas I have produced a number against) you just quote it as though, because Curtis Lemay said it, it must be fact. It's like when I pointed out what the military staff study concluded about the Greeks being unable to supply their troops on the Albanian front if Salonika had fallen. Your response? quote: They could have supplied them via Athens. And in saying this you provide no proof, no counter argument to support what you say, just that one single sentence. That is arrogant in the extreme. I produce a comment from a US military study and you provide.... well you don't even provide one of your game maps - because if you recall correctly, there was no road or rail link from Athens to the Albanian front. You just effectively simply state that what Curtis Lemay says is fact - no evidence, proof or justification required.

warspite1 -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/16/2020 3:27:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 So I am getting lost with your twisting and turning so can you just clarify please? You say that Goering won't act in line with his historical character and won't attack Britain (which will be left totally alone to recover in peace) despite knowing in his own mind he can finish Fighter Command in weeks - and in doing so there is no need for a Sea Lion that only factions of the army even believe in anyway? BUT The Germans, although not interested in Sea Lion WILL remove their barges to Northern France (as part of a cunning deception plan) to make the British think there will be an invasion. In so doing they do serious damage to their own economy. But they don't even have to do this because, according to you, if they don't make the British think there will be an invasion there is more chance of the British sending small scale reinforcements piecemeal to the Med which will be beaten more easily than attacking Britain..... so why exactly are they doing this anyway? So they are at war with Britain, they need to smash Britain's ability to wage war, but are instead, leaving Britain untouched, while at the same time hurting their own economy and not defeating British forces in any great number..... And I won't even go over the arguments again about Spain/Gibraltar at this point. Call me old fashioned, but I don't think you are really on top of your thinking here are you? They have adopted a Med strategy. That changes everything post France. warspite1 Except it doesn't. Instead of simply repeating the same one-liners why not spend some time writing out - as I've tried to do - a timeline of events as you see it? What conversations are being had when and by who, how is all this developing amongst the competing personalities, the Spanish, the French, the Italians? Your thinking doesn't seem to allow for the fact that no one in 1940 knew what was going to happen - they don't have the knowledge we do. As a result events are dynamic, they are fluid. For example we know what Franco will say to a German request to enter the war. But Hitler doesn't. But because you know, you simply ignore what, logically would have happened in the summer to get to a point where Hitler declares war on Spain (with all that means). You think you can just go from victory in France to attacking Spain. Sorry, life doesn't work like that and its that sort of thing that makes me call this a Dream Axis Fanboi Scenario. Surely, you must understand what invading Spain means for Germany from every possible viewpoint - military, economic, political? This is huge. Yet you treat it as nothing. You are actually putting forward the case (with your proposed timetable) that Hitler goes straight from defeat of France to attacking Spain. No preliminaries, no discussions, nothing. You don't want me to conclude that this is just a Dream Axis Fanboi Scenario? Right, okay, put some effort into it. Give an outline timetable and why you think the action being taken at each point is reasonable.

Page: << < prev 19 20 [21] 22 23 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.859375