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 (9/20/2020 4:20:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RangerJoe quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 Are you purposely trying to be obtuse? How did the Germans get to Athens? Well they didn't take the route we are talking about (but you've somehow decided to totally ignore). So let's be clear. A US military study - you know, logistics guys, staff officers, that sort of thing - decide that the Greek troops facing the Italians in the Northwest of the country were reliant upon supply from Salonika. Unlike the northeast of the country, the northwest is very mountainous and communication is difficult. That is what the US military guys who studied this came up with. But, quite clearly you've done your own in-depth analysis of the terrain and the logistical issues - you've looked at an SPI map.... Having looked, really hard, at that map, how do you answer (yet again) this point? Are you seriously saying that supply lines are blocked by HILLS?!! If you can move normal military units (not Mountain units) over terrain, the supply columns can follow. warspite1 No. I am not. I have never been in the military, I've never been to the hills of northwestern Greece/Albania. That is why I may have an opinion and I may offer up an opinion, but it is purely that. When I read what professional soldiers - who have made a study of the terrain and know what is involved in supplying a Greek army - have to say, I tend to take notice of it and not simply dismiss it out of hand because it doesn't fit what I want it to say. Note that Axis units were able to move all over Greece, including across the spine of the main mountain chain. As I said, if a military unit (with towed artillery) can move through terrain, so can supply columns. Regardless, supplies could have run from Athens to the west coast, then to the Albanian front. [image]local://upfiles/14086/96EB052515A341ABABE127034CFC28D0.jpg[/image] The real reason they couldn't be supplied via Athens is because the German lines had advanced so quickly they interdicted any supply path. And, the key point here is: Note all the combat across rugged terrain that ensued. I repeat, claims that the Germans never encountered terrain like in Spain or Turkey were false. As can be seen from an actual, real map with the arrows of the German movements, they went through the river valleys between the mountains and not over them. They also attacked where the majority of the Allied military was not. Here is something to read about loaded truck operations on grades: http://onlinepubs.trb.org/Onlinepubs/trr/1987/1106v2/1106v2-011.pdf Oh! They just took the rivers and left the hills themselves to the enemy?? Are you out of your mind? Of course they had to clear the hills too. And Turkey and Spain have rivers through the hills too. And they will attack where the Spanish and Turks are not as well. Do you have a link about loaded trucks pulling artillery on grade? Are you seriously saying the German army is going to be ground to a halt by ROAD GRADES!!!??? Talk about desperation.

Curtis Lemay -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/20/2020 4:28:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 As I have made crystal clear, options were presented Hitler (why do you say they weren't?) Not the specific option I'm proposing - which is what I actually said, had you read it. quote: and indeed he ultimately did decide that he wanted to take out Gibraltar. If you'd bothered to read what I wrote, two of the occasions Jodl mentions Gibraltar are before Italy is even in the war. But not until late summer was Hitler seemingly much interested. But Franco wouldn't play ball. He tried very hard to make Franco change his mind, but Franco would not budge on demands that Hitler either couldn't accept (military hardware), wouldn't accept (food - although that was probably pushing it too) or could accept but would cause him too many problems (French Morocco). Furthermore Hitler's own shopping list (including the transfer of one Canary Island!) was too much for Franco. Despite a summer of intense frustration where he'd seen Goering let him down on his boasts and a lot of the hard won victories were being negated by months of stagnation and wasted time (which Germany didn't have to spare) and defeat, Hitler still refused to countenance attacking Spain. The issue is when such a "staff Study" was to be prepared. I have tried to make my case for when - if you believe this should have been top of Hitler's priority list in 1939, why don't YOU try and put some effort in for a change and make YOUR case. When it is prepared will make a difference as to whether it can convince Hitler. If it is prepared from the get go, it has a much better chance of being adopted. As I have said, all that is required to tumble to it is a recognition that they don't have reasonable chances to get across the channel and they will need Middle Eastern oil. Also, if Italy joins up, making the Med an Axis lake will greatly reduce the threat to them.

Curtis Lemay -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/20/2020 4:30:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 And we're back to not bothering to read my posts again. When I have suggested otherwise then sure, you can post that comment as relevant in responses to me. But once again. And for the hundredth time. And for the avoidance of doubt (I wish [8\|]) I have never said anything to the contrary. Others did. You're not the only one I'm up against.

Curtis Lemay -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/20/2020 4:41:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 Did you not read the section on the Balkans???? So which part of the Balkans is in Northern Europe???? Yugoslavia and Greece were in the Italian sphere of interest. Hitler made numerous plans in the Balkans and never involved Mussolini. Are you seriously counting Romania - or indeed any part of the Balkans as Northern Europe???? So if I say Northern Europe as opposed to the Med, you're going to parse that in the most craven fashion just to gain brownie points? I have to list every country Mussolini would not need to be informed about? Good grief! quote: As history showed, Italy would be involved in plans to the extent that Hitler believed Mussolini should be involved. That's all I ever meant. And the Germans adopting a Med strategy would definitely be one of those cases.

Curtis Lemay -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/20/2020 4:48:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 And that ladies and gentlemen is about as naīve a post as any written in this entire thread. Sentence one - you have no clue and this is proven by the use of the word Axis. One of the main reasons I've said this is a DAFS is because everyone in your scenario is happy to subordinate themselves entirely to Germany. NO, Mussolini won't be happy that Franco has been replaced with a German puppet. And that German puppet now controls the keys to the western exit. Italy is in the war and it is definitely better for Gibraltar to be controlled by an Axis power than an Allied power from their perspective. quote:* Sentence two and three - erm.... I tell you what, I'll leave that and allow you time to think about it. I stand by them. Why would the Germans care about the Med if Italy is not in the war? Italy stays neutral the Germans can move straight on to Turkey. quote: * Which I seem to recall you doing when trying to disingenuously make the claim that Japan was bound by the armistice in its dealings with Vichy France. No, Curtis Lemay, Axis and Germany are not the same thing. As well you know. Japan was part of the Axis, and Axis capture of a Vichy colony didn't have any impact on Vichy status. To say that Japan's Axis status was irrelevant to Vichy is nonsense.

Curtis Lemay -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/20/2020 4:50:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 I bow to your in depth knowledge of the geography of northwest Greece. Next time I have a choice between you and an SPI game map and a US military study, I'll be sure to kick the army professionals into the tall grass. How about that map I posted? It sure seems to show the Axis marching all over Greece. Maybe you didn't read those professionals right.

warspite1 -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/20/2020 5:44:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay So if I say Northern Europe as opposed to the Med, you're going to parse that in the most craven fashion just to gain brownie points? I have to list every country Mussolini would not need to be informed about? Good grief! warspite1 Craven? Brownie points? What is wrong with you? This has nothing to do with such childish antics. YOU said Hitler didn't have to tell Mussolini about things that didn't concern him. Well the Balkans DID concern Mussolini - and Hitler felt he didn't need to tell him about moves he was making in the Balkans. So no, this had nothing to do with childish point scoring - and everything to do with the fact that you don't seem to understand where anywhere is and therefore, why Mussolini felt he should be consulted.

RangerJoe -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/20/2020 6:32:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 Another aspect of the staff study that suspends disbelief perhaps the biggest is that Hitler would even consider attacking Spain. Many have commented on this thread that they simply dont believe Hitler would have considered this. German Military Strategy and Spain in World War II (Burdick) brings this into focus. I wont repeat the reasons why such a move would have been so difficult for Hitler to have ordered. These have been outlined numerous times and, lets face it, are pretty obvious. There was one reason that I considered that Hitler might just have thrown all those arguments out of the window and just ordered the operation anyway. I have kept in mind that in making this decision, Barbarossa would be postponed (which is another massive leap but again lets suspend disbelief and just go with that too). Hitler was not a man who liked to be said no to, and it could be argued that he was particularly aggrieved at Francos stance. Why? Well, German blood helped to install Franco in the first place and Franco, in refusing, was simply being ungrateful and unreasonable. Okay. but what could tip Hitler over the edge? Well in addition to the above, by late September, when Hitler was actually sold on the need for taking Gibraltar, there was also the following to consider: - Hitler had seen the summer months of 1940 wasted following the armistice with France. - Hitlers dream of bringing the UK to heel were dashed - Worse, in being dashed, the Luftwaffe had been severely mauled - The Kriegsmarine had been severely mauled in Norway - Mussolini had declared war and Hitler expected this announcement to be followed by a surprise attack on Corsica or Malta. but instead, Mussolinis forces had done..... nothing, other than a recent march over the border into Egypt, whereupon they set up camp. So, added to Francos ungratefulness we have Hitler who is now in a very bad mood about how things are not panning out. As we enter the New Year and move into January and February, Franco is still stalling - despite making positive noises - and to add to the above: - The Battle of Britain has been a bit of a disaster - The Italian attack on Greece has failed and indeed they are in danger of losing Albania! - Part of the Italian fleet has been crippled at Taranto - The Italians have suffered defeat after defeat and have been pushed back out of Egypt, out of Cyrenaica and back into Tripolitania. - Hitler has already had to send the first of two divisions to Libya to stop a complete collapse. Finally Hitler snaps, gets real and admits that Germany cant possibly open up a second front with the USSR with all this going on. Incensed by everything going wrong, Hitler postpones Barbarossa, and the attack on Spain happens in the Spring of 1941. Again, this is just a suggestion to make the scenario work and not my personal opinion of what was possible. What the book makes clear are the tortured back and forwards between Franco and Hitler. I hadnt realised that the Germans had not only selected the forces and commanders (this I knew from various war games), but that the assault forces had actually undergone specific training (at locations that best mirrored the target). There was also extensive intelligence, reconnaissance and survey work carried out, not only targeting Gibraltar, but also the state of Spains infrastructure and how difficult it was going to be to get down to Gibraltar even in the non-hostile environment envisaged. If you read that link about the roads, while it deals with logging trucks in the Western United States in the mountains, you can relate it somewhat to the European roads, especially those pictures of trucks in the Western Soviet Union after a rainstorm. Only a person in the DAFT area would think that the main roads back then are like the main roads now. This is also not mentioning cobble stone roadways which are very fun when they are wet or icy.

RangerJoe -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/20/2020 6:38:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 I bow to your in depth knowledge of the geography of northwest Greece. Next time I have a choice between you and an SPI game map and a US military study, I'll be sure to kick the army professionals into the tall grass. How about that map I posted? It sure seems to show the Axis marching all over Greece. Maybe you didn't read those professionals right. From what I saw, the Germans did not march all over Greece. It would be difficult to march all over Greece, it could result in excessive injuries and it did not have to be done. The Germans went through the valleys more than anywhere else. BTW, how is your pharmaceutical supply holding up? I would not want use to run out of anything.

RangerJoe -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/20/2020 7:00:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay quote: ORIGINAL: RangerJoe quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 Are you purposely trying to be obtuse? How did the Germans get to Athens? Well they didn't take the route we are talking about (but you've somehow decided to totally ignore). So let's be clear. A US military study - you know, logistics guys, staff officers, that sort of thing - decide that the Greek troops facing the Italians in the Northwest of the country were reliant upon supply from Salonika. Unlike the northeast of the country, the northwest is very mountainous and communication is difficult. That is what the US military guys who studied this came up with. But, quite clearly you've done your own in-depth analysis of the terrain and the logistical issues - you've looked at an SPI map.... Having looked, really hard, at that map, how do you answer (yet again) this point? Are you seriously saying that supply lines are blocked by HILLS?!! If you can move normal military units (not Mountain units) over terrain, the supply columns can follow. warspite1 No. I am not. I have never been in the military, I've never been to the hills of northwestern Greece/Albania. That is why I may have an opinion and I may offer up an opinion, but it is purely that. When I read what professional soldiers - who have made a study of the terrain and know what is involved in supplying a Greek army - have to say, I tend to take notice of it and not simply dismiss it out of hand because it doesn't fit what I want it to say. Note that Axis units were able to move all over Greece, including across the spine of the main mountain chain. As I said, if a military unit (with towed artillery) can move through terrain, so can supply columns. Regardless, supplies could have run from Athens to the west coast, then to the Albanian front. [image]local://upfiles/14086/96EB052515A341ABABE127034CFC28D0.jpg[/image] The real reason they couldn't be supplied via Athens is because the German lines had advanced so quickly they interdicted any supply path. And, the key point here is: Note all the combat across rugged terrain that ensued. I repeat, claims that the Germans never encountered terrain like in Spain or Turkey were false. As can be seen from an actual, real map with the arrows of the German movements, they went through the river valleys between the mountains and not over them. They also attacked where the majority of the Allied military was not. Here is something to read about loaded truck operations on grades: http://onlinepubs.trb.org/Onlinepubs/trr/1987/1106v2/1106v2-011.pdf Oh! They just took the rivers and left the hills themselves to the enemy?? Are you out of your mind? Of course they had to clear the hills too. And Turkey and Spain have rivers through the hills too. And they will attack where the Spanish and Turks are not as well. Do you have a link about loaded trucks pulling artillery on grade? Are you seriously saying the German army is going to be ground to a halt by ROAD GRADES!!!??? Talk about desperation. If the enemy units stay on the hills, they would eventually be cut off from supplies, surrounded and wiped out. It also depends upon how wide the river valleys are as to whether the hills would have to be immediately cleared. Yes, the German army would be ground to a halt on ROAD GRADES. Even the modern American Army would be halted by ROAD GRADES as far as moving equipment and supplies on steep grades. It is not just the ROAD GRADES, it is also what the road surface is made from as well as the road bed itself - not to mention drainage systems to remove excess water. Ever see a tank or an armoured vehicle slipping on an icy road? They can easily slide off a road, lose a track, then block the road. Mud is also slippery whether it is black dirt or wet clay. Then even lose rock on a road surface can cause trouble. Would you have a tank assigned to pull a loaded truck up a steep grade? How about a enemy rifleman shooting up the truck? Take out the radiator and the engine overheats and locks up. How about the brakes? Are there pull offs for the trucks to cool their brakes? How about tires and a flat tire? How about that enemy rifleman shooting out a tire causing a blowout? What happens to the truck on a turn when the outside steer tire blows out? Off the road it goes. If it is on a switchback, then it can then tumble down the hill, crossing the road and possibly meeting other vehicles. What happens to the load? Fuel would be trouble, ammo or explosives could be a blast, and personnel on a truck could be flung all over - which could ruin their whole day. BTW, how is your pharmaceutical supplies holding out?

warspite1 -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/20/2020 7:02:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay Not the specific option I'm proposing - which is what I actually said, had you read it. warspite1 Well of course Hitler wasn't shown the option you have set out in the "staff study". It doesn't have to be the exactly the same option does it? The important thing is that the matter of a Med-first strategy is proposed, and that this starts with Spain (with a view to gaining Gibraltar). You've said the detail is not required here and that instead the staff study is a working document from which plans are worked out. If the concept of a Med first strategy is promising then it can be developed from there.

warspite1 -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/20/2020 7:09:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay When it is prepared will make a difference as to whether it can convince Hitler. If it is prepared from the get go, it has a much better chance of being adopted. As I have said, all that is required to tumble to it is a recognition that they don't have reasonable chances to get across the channel and they will need Middle Eastern oil. Also, if Italy joins up, making the Med an Axis lake will greatly reduce the threat to them. warspite1 In which case you and I are so far apart on what is reasonable and what is likely, we will never bridge that gap. You seriously think if Hitler had been shown what you've presented in September 1939 (the get go), before Poland, before France, with no indication of an invasion of Britain ever being on the cards, with no Italy in the war, with the countries of the Balkans that lead to Turkey, either neutral or pro/anti-Axis to a greater or lesser extent, you think that is going to be so relevant to Germany's then current situation that its going to occupy more than a momentary glance by Hitler?

warspite1 -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/20/2020 7:12:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 And we're back to not bothering to read my posts again. When I have suggested otherwise then sure, you can post that comment as relevant in responses to me. But once again. And for the hundredth time. And for the avoidance of doubt (I wish [8\|]) I have never said anything to the contrary. Others did. You're not the only one I'm up against. warspite1 In which case fine - answer THEIR posts and don't use this argument in response to my post and so disingenuously make it look like it's an argument I am trying to make. This is the second time you've done it and the second time I'm asking you not to.

warspite1 -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/20/2020 7:19:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay That's all I ever meant. And the Germans adopting a Med strategy would definitely be one of those cases. warspite1 And Italy is conducting her own parallel war. The extent to which Hitler brings Mussolini into his confidence about moving into the Med will, as said, be for him to decide. There is absolutely no reason to believe that Mussolini would agree to subordinate his desire for 'glory' in Egypt to Germany, and - at this stage of the scenario - no reason for Hitler to dissuade Mussolini from taking that action.

warspite1 -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/20/2020 7:24:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay Italy is in the war and it is definitely better for Gibraltar to be controlled by an Axis power than an Allied power from their perspective. warspite1 Better Germany than Britain? In the immediate term, yes. But that is not what this is about, and again to suggest otherwise evidences that you just seem incapable of looking at any country, any leader, other than Germany and Hitler in trying to think about national interest. How many more examples do you need of Italy's (and of course Mussolini's) feelings toward Germany. How many more examples do you need of Mussolini's relationship with Franco and the understanding that Mussolini got from Franco in terms of Italy's place in the Med? You just ignore everything and have this tunnel-vision about Germany and Hitler and how what is good for them is clearly, and by definition, good for everyone else.

warspite1 -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/20/2020 7:31:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay I stand by them. Why would the Germans care about the Med if Italy is not in the war? Italy stays neutral the Germans can move straight on to Turkey. warspite1 Well, I could answer this but that just gets me drawn into Turkey again and I'm just not prepared to even entertain that if we can't even agree on ANYTHING about Spain/Gibraltar/Battle of Britain/Sea Lion.

warspite1 -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/20/2020 7:32:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay Japan was part of the Axis, and Axis capture of a Vichy colony didn't have any impact on Vichy status. To say that Japan's Axis status was irrelevant to Vichy is nonsense. warspite1 As per the answer above, I am not getting drawn into the whole Japan thing again if we can't even get past June 1940.

warspite1 -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/20/2020 7:39:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 I bow to your in depth knowledge of the geography of northwest Greece. Next time I have a choice between you and an SPI game map and a US military study, I'll be sure to kick the army professionals into the tall grass. How about that map I posted? It sure seems to show the Axis marching all over Greece. Maybe you didn't read those professionals right. warspite1 Maybe I did. I post this again...... 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.* .... or maybe I didn't.....

warspite1 -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/20/2020 7:48:05 PM)
So Curtis Lemay, I'd be interested to have your feed back on posts 688 and 689 when you have the chance, particularly as these centre on the start date for the operation.

RangerJoe -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/20/2020 8:11:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay quote: ORIGINAL: RangerJoe Maybe quit calling it a Dream Axis Fanboi Scenario and call it a *Dream Axis Fanboi Territory* and thus *DAFT* then anybody favoring it would then be a *DAFT* person. Maybe he should not grow up, maybe he should mature a little. I, for obvious reasons, won't state mature a little more. Anybody still under the illusion that this isn't an insult? Of course it's an insult. And everyone who takes the German side of a historical argument is eventually smeared with it. I expect it from this character - every post he makes contains an insult. He's not fit to have a conversation with. But I thought Warspite1 was finer stuff. You did not like the acronym DAFS so I suggested another one, *DAFT*. So how is that an insult? You claim that every post that I make contains an insult. Apparently you have not bothered to read all of my posts. That is an insult to me then by stating that every post that I make contains an insult unless you insult me by claiming that just by me posting anything is insulting. To my knowledge, no one else has accused me of posting insults. You are the one calling me a character when I am a person. Are you also confusing me with Warspite1? That can also be insulting. BTW, do you have or have ever had a clock that had a little birdie come out and announce the hour and half hour? They are relatively well known clocks from the Black Forest in Germany.

warspite1 -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/21/2020 8:06:49 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay Italy is in the war and it is definitely better for Gibraltar to be controlled by an Axis power than an Allied power from their perspective. warspite1 Better Germany than Britain? In the immediate term, yes. But that is not what this is about, and again to suggest otherwise evidences that you just seem incapable of looking at any country, any leader, other than Germany and Hitler in trying to think about national interest. How many more examples do you need of Italy's (and of course Mussolini's) feelings toward Germany. How many more examples do you need of Mussolini's relationship with Franco and the understanding that Mussolini got from Franco in terms of Italy's place in the Med? You just ignore everything and have this tunnel-vision about Germany and Hitler and how what is good for them is clearly, and by definition, good for everyone else. warspite1 Just to expand on the above. I think it might be helpful if you read up on Italy and Mussolini more. Hopefully it would make you understand this most fundamental of points. Germany and Italy fought together as part of the Axis in World War II. But they were fighting for themselves. When Mussolini and Hitler met at the Brenner Pass in March 1940, Mussolini confirmed that Italy would enter the war - and a conduct a "parallel war" for Italy's "honour and interests" - Mediterranean hegemony. The Germans had suggested the Italian army play a role in Case Yellow along the Upper Rhine - but this, effectively supporting role opposite the Maginot Line - was something the Italians rejected as it simply didn't accord with Mussolini's wish to pursue a parallel war. Even Badoglio realised the dangers before the Italian declaration of war. in a meeting on the 9 April in which hew emphasised the dangers of too close a co-operation with the "arrogant and domineering Germans". He said that in the event of a Franco-British collapse that the Italians would have to make their move alone "If we were to have recourse to German help, we would not only lose our dignity, but we would expose ourselves to having to pay our debt very clearly indeed". Of the invitation to join in Case Yellow he said: "We would be going there to act the part of second echelon troops" and he did not think that Mussolini could "possibly consent to the employment of our armed forces in this manner". The German offer was never answered formally by the Italians.... If Mussolini had any doubts about the need to win victories for Italy herself, then the armistice with France blew those doubts away once and for all. Having gone to war for "the booty", Italy had contributed nothing to victory over France (the Germans weren't stupid enough to fall for the "few thousand dead" routine and realised their Alps debacle was nothing more than that), and Italy's "prizes" reflected that truth. German victories meant that Germany would decide on the spoils. And Hitler did..... What you are suggesting with your scenario is that Italy, having declared war, is not allowed to play anymore than a secondary, bit part role (acting as bait in a trap to lure the British into Tripolitania) that will see the Germans first conquer Spain and Gibraltar, then go on to conquer the Balkans, Turkey, the Middle East and then most important of all, Suez and Egypt. Having done so, you believe it is also reasonable for Italian troops to be happy to act as mere occupation troops to protect the German won prizes?? Sorry Curtis Lemay, I just don't think you have a grasp on the fact that countries act for themselves, they have their own goals, their own desires. Yes, Italy was a member of the Axis, but real life examples evidence, time and again, exactly the opposite of what you believe to be rationale decisions by the Italians in your scenario. I say again, until the point in time in which Mussolini had made such a horlicks of the situation, that he no longer had the power to properly act unilaterally, he was NOT going to allow Italy to play a subordinate role, allow the Germans to conquer everywhere, and then to be reliant on Hitler's good will at the peace table. That gamble failed after the fall of France, he wasn't going to let that happen again. You will answer of course, that the Germans would have given territory to Italy at the peace table. But firstly, from the conversations Mussolini had with Hitler prior to the French armistice, Mussolini was expecting rewards that weren't forthcoming then and secondly, Mussolini knows from that there is no guarantee that things will be different in future. Hitler will keep for himself what he has conquered and decides he wants to keep. Does any of this prove that Mussolini wouldn't have agreed to this subservient, bit part role that you suggest? No of course not, as has been said repeatedly, we can't PROVE anything because it didn't happen. But once again I am using historical examples to try and support my case.

Curtis Lemay -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/21/2020 2:33:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 Lemay has also admitted that the Spain part of the strategy is only possible with Italy in the war he said The only reason Spain needs to be included in the plans is to protect Italy. If Italy stays neutral, Spain is safe. Okay so, on that basis, there would have been no conversations about Spain until 10 June, when Mussolini decided to enter a war on the basis it was already won. As we know, in the weeks and months leading up to the fall of France, Hitler had had his plate full he certainly had no time to consider operations that werent even possible at that time. The plan would obviously have covered the contingency that Italy would join the war - a very likely event. quote: Lemay believes a July start date for an attack on Spain is possible because, as we know, he ignores the political and the economic, and he also ignores that not everyone in World War II was working for Germanys benefit. You keep repeating this nonsense. Japan and Italy are not working for Germany's benefit. Rather, what constitutes their benefit is impacted by Germany's actions. Postponing Barbarossa changes Japan's best course of action. Adopting a Med Strategy changes Italy's best course of action. quote: But it has also been touched upon that hes ignored the military and the time it would take for the Germans to rest and refit after Yellow and Red. They rested and refitted after the Fall of France because they could - no other reason. If France had lasted longer, they would have carried on as long as it took. Take Barbarossa: continuous combat from late June to the end of October, with perhaps four weeks stopped. Take the Allies in France in 1944: From early June to the end of September before any pause. There is no requirement to rest entire divisions because tanks need repair. You just pull individual tanks out of the line, service them, and send them on to catch up once they're back in condition. quote: But what this book makes clear is that hes also ignored what the German military felt it necessary to do to prepare for Felix i.e. an operation against Gibraltar remember, with active and full Spanish co-operation. The amount of undercover intelligence gathering and reconnaissance work was huge. The amount and more importantly the length - of specialist training that the proposed assault forces undertook, meant a July start would have been simply impossible. Why? There may be weeks between the start of the Spanish campaign and getting to Gibraltar. And once at Gibraltar, only a relatively small force will be necessary - not the entire invasion force. Gibraltar can be deconstructed at a leisurely pace. I'm not discounting how difficult it will be, just that there is no rush. quote: But perhaps even more worrying for Lemays staff study are the comments about the Spanish infrastructure and no, this is not confined to the rail roads which we've touched upon, and which are in even poorer shape than has so far been outlined, but also roads and bridges. We can look at this more in another post. A July start date? Based on historical German records and documents thats a definite no. Compare to Russia. And, actually, the Spanish army is so thin, it's doubtful they could do the bridge-blowing that occurs in most campaigns. Rails will be repaired and bridges rebuilt or pontooned. (And Spain seems sort of dry to me).

Curtis Lemay -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/21/2020 2:39:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 Another aspect of the staff study that suspends disbelief perhaps the biggest is that Hitler would even consider attacking Spain. Many have commented on this thread that they simply dont believe Hitler would have considered this. German Military Strategy and Spain in World War II (Burdick) brings this into focus. I wont repeat the reasons why such a move would have been so difficult for Hitler to have ordered. These have been outlined numerous times and, lets face it, are pretty obvious. There was one reason that I considered that Hitler might just have thrown all those arguments out of the window and just ordered the operation anyway. I have kept in mind that in making this decision, Barbarossa would be postponed (which is another massive leap but again lets suspend disbelief and just go with that too). Hitler was not a man who liked to be said no to, and it could be argued that he was particularly aggrieved at Francos stance. Why? Well, German blood helped to install Franco in the first place and Franco, in refusing, was simply being ungrateful and unreasonable. Okay. but what could tip Hitler over the edge? Well in addition to the above, by late September, when Hitler was actually sold on the need for taking Gibraltar, there was also the following to consider: - Hitler had seen the summer months of 1940 wasted following the armistice with France. - Hitlers dream of bringing the UK to heel were dashed - Worse, in being dashed, the Luftwaffe had been severely mauled - The Kriegsmarine had been severely mauled in Norway - Mussolini had declared war and Hitler expected this announcement to be followed by a surprise attack on Corsica or Malta. but instead, Mussolinis forces had done..... nothing, other than a recent march over the border into Egypt, whereupon they set up camp. So, added to Francos ungratefulness we have Hitler who is now in a very bad mood about how things are not panning out. As we enter the New Year and move into January and February, Franco is still stalling - despite making positive noises - and to add to the above: - The Battle of Britain has been a bit of a disaster - The Italian attack on Greece has failed and indeed they are in danger of losing Albania! - Part of the Italian fleet has been crippled at Taranto - The Italians have suffered defeat after defeat and have been pushed back out of Egypt, out of Cyrenaica and back into Tripolitania. - Hitler has already had to send the first of two divisions to Libya to stop a complete collapse. Finally Hitler snaps, gets real and admits that Germany cant possibly open up a second front with the USSR with all this going on. Incensed by everything going wrong, Hitler postpones Barbarossa, and the attack on Spain happens in the Spring of 1941. Again, this is just a suggestion to make the scenario work and not my personal opinion of what was possible. What the book makes clear are the tortured back and forwards between Franco and Hitler. I hadnt realised that the Germans had not only selected the forces and commanders (this I knew from various war games), but that the assault forces had actually undergone specific training (at locations that best mirrored the target). There was also extensive intelligence, reconnaissance and survey work carried out, not only targeting Gibraltar, but also the state of Spains infrastructure and how difficult it was going to be to get down to Gibraltar even in the non-hostile environment envisaged. I don't think it takes much foresight for the Germans to realize, right from the start, that they don't have realistic chances to get across the Channel. So, a staff study that has a good alternate should have had real chances to be adopted.

Curtis Lemay -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/21/2020 2:41:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay So if I say Northern Europe as opposed to the Med, you're going to parse that in the most craven fashion just to gain brownie points? I have to list every country Mussolini would not need to be informed about? Good grief! warspite1 Craven? Brownie points? What is wrong with you? This has nothing to do with such childish antics. YOU said Hitler didn't have to tell Mussolini about things that didn't concern him. Well the Balkans DID concern Mussolini - and Hitler felt he didn't need to tell him about moves he was making in the Balkans. So no, this had nothing to do with childish point scoring - and everything to do with the fact that you don't seem to understand where anywhere is and therefore, why Mussolini felt he should be consulted. Hitler had no reason to consult Mussolini about the Balkans. His forces alone were more than sufficient for the job. But getting to Gibraltar and Suez are another matter.

Curtis Lemay -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/21/2020 2:49:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RangerJoe If the enemy units stay on the hills, they would eventually be cut off from supplies, surrounded and wiped out. It also depends upon how wide the river valleys are as to whether the hills would have to be immediately cleared. How would they be wiped out if the Germans can't enter the hills? Sounds like the Germans would have been cutting themselves off from supply! quote: Yes, the German army would be ground to a halt on ROAD GRADES. [X(] quote: Even the modern American Army would be halted by ROAD GRADES as far as moving equipment and supplies on steep grades. It is not just the ROAD GRADES, it is also what the road surface is made from as well as the road bed itself - not to mention drainage systems to remove excess water. Ever see a tank or an armoured vehicle slipping on an icy road? They can easily slide off a road, lose a track, then block the road. Mud is also slippery whether it is black dirt or wet clay. Then even lose rock on a road surface can cause trouble. Would you have a tank assigned to pull a loaded truck up a steep grade? How about a enemy rifleman shooting up the truck? Take out the radiator and the engine overheats and locks up. How about the brakes? Are there pull offs for the trucks to cool their brakes? How about tires and a flat tire? How about that enemy rifleman shooting out a tire causing a blowout? What happens to the truck on a turn when the outside steer tire blows out? Off the road it goes. If it is on a switchback, then it can then tumble down the hill, crossing the road and possibly meeting other vehicles. What happens to the load? Fuel would be trouble, ammo or explosives could be a blast, and personnel on a truck could be flung all over - which could ruin their whole day. And, yet, here the Germans are, sweeping through Yugoslavia and Greece over the same terrain as Turkey and much worse than Spain. Pulling their artillery behind them on loaded trucks. quote: BTW, how is your pharmaceutical supplies holding out? Not as well as your, evidently.

Curtis Lemay -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/21/2020 2:52:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 I bow to your in depth knowledge of the geography of northwest Greece. Next time I have a choice between you and an SPI game map and a US military study, I'll be sure to kick the army professionals into the tall grass. How about that map I posted? It sure seems to show the Axis marching all over Greece. Maybe you didn't read those professionals right. warspite1 Maybe I did. I post this again...... 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.* .... or maybe I didn't..... Until they established new supply lines via alternate paths - clearly possible from the map I posted. You've got to read between the lines. They didn't do that, because the German advances cut of those paths too.

Curtis Lemay -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/21/2020 2:55:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 And we're back to not bothering to read my posts again. When I have suggested otherwise then sure, you can post that comment as relevant in responses to me. But once again. And for the hundredth time. And for the avoidance of doubt (I wish [8\|]) I have never said anything to the contrary. Others did. You're not the only one I'm up against. warspite1 In which case fine - answer THEIR posts and don't use this argument in response to my post and so disingenuously make it look like it's an argument I am trying to make. This is the second time you've done it and the second time I'm asking you not to. I will make that point whenever it is beneficial. If you were dealing with multiple posters, you would do the same.

warspite1 -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/21/2020 3:01:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 And we're back to not bothering to read my posts again. When I have suggested otherwise then sure, you can post that comment as relevant in responses to me. But once again. And for the hundredth time. And for the avoidance of doubt (I wish [8\|]) I have never said anything to the contrary. Others did. You're not the only one I'm up against. warspite1 In which case fine - answer THEIR posts and don't use this argument in response to my post and so disingenuously make it look like it's an argument I am trying to make. This is the second time you've done it and the second time I'm asking you not to. I will make that point whenever it is beneficial. If you were dealing with multiple posters.... warspite1 Up to you, I will keep repeating that it's not my point [>:].

warspite1 -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/21/2020 3:07:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 I bow to your in depth knowledge of the geography of northwest Greece. Next time I have a choice between you and an SPI game map and a US military study, I'll be sure to kick the army professionals into the tall grass. How about that map I posted? It sure seems to show the Axis marching all over Greece. Maybe you didn't read those professionals right. warspite1 Maybe I did. I post this again...... 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.* .... or maybe I didn't..... Until they established new supply lines via alternate paths - clearly possible from the map I posted. You've got to read between the lines. They didn't do that, because the German advances cut of those paths too. warspite1 Curtis Lemay it's a game map! What is clearly possible can't be found definitively in a game map. If what you are saying is true, then I would expect the military study to say something along the lines of: The supply system of the Greek forces fighting in Albania was based on Salonika. Although supply through the mountains from southern Greece was possible. the capture of that port would heavily impact the ability to keep those troops in the northeast supplied. It doesn't say that.

warspite1 -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (9/21/2020 3:15:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 quote: ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay So if I say Northern Europe as opposed to the Med, you're going to parse that in the most craven fashion just to gain brownie points? I have to list every country Mussolini would not need to be informed about? Good grief! warspite1 Craven? Brownie points? What is wrong with you? This has nothing to do with such childish antics. YOU said Hitler didn't have to tell Mussolini about things that didn't concern him. Well the Balkans DID concern Mussolini - and Hitler felt he didn't need to tell him about moves he was making in the Balkans. So no, this had nothing to do with childish point scoring - and everything to do with the fact that you don't seem to understand where anywhere is and therefore, why Mussolini felt he should be consulted. Hitler had no reason to consult Mussolini about the Balkans. His forces alone were more than sufficient for the job. But getting to Gibraltar and Suez are another matter. warspite1 You refuse to read what I write or you do read it and simply ignore it. Shame on you. The Balkans was seen as Mussolini's sphere of influence - and Mussolini had his own plans (yes, shock horror, the Italians weren't working for the Germans) for Yugoslavia as well as Greece - and these plans were shared with Hitler. So yes, Hitler did have reason to consult his ally on matters pertaining to the Balkans. But I've explained the reasons he didn't. You are saying German forces alone were sufficient for defeating Yugoslavia and Greece (true, but Italy provided forces regardless) but not Gibraltar or Suez?? THAT is priceless. So tell me, in an environment where there is no Barbarossa and its just Germany vs Britain, tell me exactly which Italian units the Germans couldn't possibly have done without.....

Page: << < prev 22 23 [24] 25 26 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.609375