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

All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion



Message


GaryChildress -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/23/2020 3:02:55 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zap

Having the similar quality equipment as the Germans and tanks equal to Panzer IVs would the War outcome been significantly different?

My, answer is Yes! the war may have actually been won by the axis side. In the least, it would have carried on for some years more.


I'm not the expert by far on this stuff but from what little I know, it seems to me that the only thing that could have potentially given the Axis victory (or perhaps a stalemate) in WW2 was if Germany hadn't attacked the USSR. With all those men and all that material focused on the Western Front, I would think they would have given the Western Allies quite a run for our money. I suppose, with the aid of the US, the UK may have eventually won but even then, it seems to me like it would have been a little bit iffy, I would think. Or at least maybe it would have protracted the war another few years or so or even ended with the Western Allies negotiating peace or something.

But like I say I'm no expert by far and more knowledgeable people like Warspite1 are welcome to correct me if I'm wrong.





GaryChildress -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/23/2020 3:19:20 AM)

Of course, there's also the issue of the Atomic Bomb. It doesn't seem like Germany or Japan got very far in their quests for it, however, once the US had it, then I would think it would have been a game-changer, leading either to an Allied victory or else bringing the Axis to the negotiating table (although, unconditional surrender maybe wouldn't have been a realistic option for the Western Allies to pursue at that point.)

So even then, maybe there really was no way that the Axis could have won. But, of course, I think most of us here today are considerably happier in the fact that they didn't.




RangerJoe -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/23/2020 3:28:59 AM)

Japan may have been a lot closer to The Bomb than most people think. One program was wiped out by American bombing but the other one moved to North Korea - and might have been able to detonate one in an underground test on an island. I do believe that all of the equipment was captured by the Soviets and I am not sure where the people involved went.

I do believe Heisenberg helped to deflect the German program.




GaryChildress -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/23/2020 3:39:51 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

Japan may have been a lot closer to The Bomb than most people think. One program was wiped out by American bombing but the other one moved to North Korea - and might have been able to detonate one in an underground test on an island. I do believe that all of the equipment was captured by the Soviets and I am not sure where the people involved went.

I do believe Heisenberg helped to deflect the German program.


Most of the greatest minds in physics at that point were aligned with the Western Allies and even then producing a bomb didn't come too easily. They were only able to build two devices at first. Did Japan have the same intellectual capital at their disposal?




Bo Rearguard -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/23/2020 3:58:46 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: GaryChildress
Most of the greatest minds in physics at that point were aligned with the Western Allies and even then producing a bomb didn't come too easily. They were only able to build two devices at first. Did Japan have the same intellectual capital at their disposal?


Japan had some capable physicists, including Yukawa Hideki, who predicted the existence of the meson and would be awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1949. Physicists Arakatsu Bunsaku and Hagiwara Tokutaro were performing cyclotron experiments as early as 1939.

However, obtaining uranium was the biggest stumbling block Japan faced. The most promising mine was near Seoul, but it was found that even at maximum production the mine could only produce a mere 10 kg of refined uranium oxide per month. Some 4,500 tons of tin mining tailings from Malaya were shipped to Japan but proved to contain little uranium. Another 100 pounds of uranium was obtained from Japanese ceramics shops, while 200 pounds were allegedly obtained on the Shanghai black market.

Finally, the Japanese Ambassador to Germany arranged for two tons of pitchblende and 1,200 pounds of uranium oxide to be sent to Japan by submarine, but the first submarine was sunk en route and the second submarine(a German U-boat) surrendered to the U.S. Navy upon the German capitulation. The Japanese officers on board committed suicide, the Germans just surrendered.

So, no uranium...and ultimately no bomb.




GaryChildress -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/23/2020 3:59:12 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: wodin


quote:

ORIGINAL: Zap

Having the similar quality equipment as the Germans and tanks equal to Panzer IVs would the War outcome been significantly different?

My, answer is Yes! the war may have actually been won by the axis side. In the least, it would have carried on for some years more.



Well if Germany had treated it's Allies, aswell as the people who fell under German controlled territory esp in places like the Ukraine as an equal, and then kitted them out with the same equipment as they used, then yes, I think it's more than likely Germany would have won the War.


That's a good point too. Although, I wonder if it would have really made that much of an impact as to give Germany victory? Germany lost by a pretty large margin to the combined efforts of the USSR and the Western Allies. I've heard arguments that even if Moscow had fallen the Soviets wouldn't have capitulated. And the US was pretty much untouchable for the most part.




warspite1 -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/23/2020 4:19:17 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: GaryChildress

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zap

Having the similar quality equipment as the Germans and tanks equal to Panzer IVs would the War outcome been significantly different?

My, answer is Yes! the war may have actually been won by the axis side. In the least, it would have carried on for some years more.


I'm not the expert by far on this stuff but from what little I know, it seems to me that the only thing that could have potentially given the Axis victory (or perhaps a stalemate) in WW2 was if Germany hadn't attacked the USSR. With all those men and all that material focused on the Western Front, I would think they would have given the Western Allies quite a run for our money. I suppose, with the aid of the US, the UK may have eventually won but even then, it seems to me like it would have been a little bit iffy, I would think. Or at least maybe it would have protracted the war another few years or so or even ended with the Western Allies negotiating peace or something.

warspite1

The war in Europe was decided on the Eastern Front, so one can reasonably ask what would have happened if Hitler hadn't attacked the Soviet Union. But it's the wrong question.

Lebensraum was Hitler's raison d'etre. Germany was to be self sufficient like the US and never again to be put into a position where she could be blockaded.

For this to be achieved Hitler didn't need territories in Western Europe - attacking the west was simply a means to an end - he wanted the bread basket of the Ukraine, the coal of the Don, the oil of the Caucasus and all the other myriad resources found in the east.

So for Hitler, NOT attacking the Soviet Union was not really an option.




GaryChildress -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/23/2020 4:54:54 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


quote:

ORIGINAL: GaryChildress

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zap

Having the similar quality equipment as the Germans and tanks equal to Panzer IVs would the War outcome been significantly different?

My, answer is Yes! the war may have actually been won by the axis side. In the least, it would have carried on for some years more.


I'm not the expert by far on this stuff but from what little I know, it seems to me that the only thing that could have potentially given the Axis victory (or perhaps a stalemate) in WW2 was if Germany hadn't attacked the USSR. With all those men and all that material focused on the Western Front, I would think they would have given the Western Allies quite a run for our money. I suppose, with the aid of the US, the UK may have eventually won but even then, it seems to me like it would have been a little bit iffy, I would think. Or at least maybe it would have protracted the war another few years or so or even ended with the Western Allies negotiating peace or something.

warspite1

The war in Europe was decided on the Eastern Front, so one can reasonably ask what would have happened if Hitler hadn't attacked the Soviet Union. But it's the wrong question.

Lebensraum was Hitler's raison d'etre. Germany was to be self sufficient like the US and never again to be put into a position where she could be blockaded.

For this to be achieved Hitler didn't need territories in Western Europe - attacking the west was simply a means to an end - he wanted the bread basket of the Ukraine, the coal of the Don, the oil of the Caucasus and all the other myriad resources found in the east.

So for Hitler, NOT attacking the Soviet Union was not really an option.



Good points. Although, I would think pretty much anything is an option to a head of state with absolute power. Had Hitler not been as aggressive and played his cards more prudently could he have won? Could he have maintained neutral relations with the Soviets and perhaps obtained some of the resources he needed through trade to continue the war? I sort of wonder how long Germany would have been able to hold out against the Western Allies alone just on the resources available to it in Europe? If Germany hadn't attacked the USSR, could it have gotten what it needed though trade with the Soviets? Sort of like the resources they obtained through Sweden. And with that kind of trade, could they have held their own against the Western Allies? Or at least ground things down to a stalemate? Or could Germany have focused more resources on and won in Africa and pushed further into the oil and resources of the Middle East?

Although, I suppose Germany probably lacked sufficiently in the merchant marine department so capturing the Middle East maybe wouldn't do a lot of good as far as being able to move the resources?




Bo Rearguard -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/23/2020 5:06:57 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: GaryChildress


Good points. Although, I would think pretty much anything is an option to a head of state with absolute power. Had Hitler not been as aggressive and played his cards more prudently could he have won? Could he have maintained neutral relations with the Soviets and perhaps obtained some of the resources he needed through trade to continue the war? I sort of wonder how long Germany would have been able to hold out against the Western Allies alone just on the resources available to it in Europe? If Germany hadn't attacked the USSR, could it have gotten what it needed though trade with the Soviets? Sort of like the resources they obtained through Sweden. And with that kind of trade, could they have held their own against the Western Allies? Or at least ground things down to a stalemate? Or could Germany have focused more resources on and won in Africa and pushed further into the oil and resources of the Middle East?


All these alternate strategies require Hitler not to be Hitler. Hitler told one of his generals in June 1940 that the victories in western Europe "finally freed his hands for his important real task: the showdown with Bolshevism" It was the goal he had been working towards his entire political life.

You would pretty much have to kidnap the real Hitler and replace him with a real convincing body double to ever get Germany off this course.




GaryChildress -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/23/2020 5:10:13 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bo Rearguard


quote:

ORIGINAL: GaryChildress


Good points. Although, I would think pretty much anything is an option to a head of state with absolute power. Had Hitler not been as aggressive and played his cards more prudently could he have won? Could he have maintained neutral relations with the Soviets and perhaps obtained some of the resources he needed through trade to continue the war? I sort of wonder how long Germany would have been able to hold out against the Western Allies alone just on the resources available to it in Europe? If Germany hadn't attacked the USSR, could it have gotten what it needed though trade with the Soviets? Sort of like the resources they obtained through Sweden. And with that kind of trade, could they have held their own against the Western Allies? Or at least ground things down to a stalemate? Or could Germany have focused more resources on and won in Africa and pushed further into the oil and resources of the Middle East?


All these alternate strategies require Hitler not to be Hitler. Hitler told one of his generals in June 1940 that the victories in western Europe "finally freed his hands for his important real task: the showdown with Bolshevism" It was the goal he had been working towards his entire political life.

You would pretty much have kidnap the real Hitler and replace him with a real convincing body double to ever get Germany off this course.



Yeah. I suppose it would be delving pretty far into the nether realms of alternative history.




warspite1 -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/23/2020 6:32:45 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: GaryChildress

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


quote:

ORIGINAL: GaryChildress

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zap

Having the similar quality equipment as the Germans and tanks equal to Panzer IVs would the War outcome been significantly different?

My, answer is Yes! the war may have actually been won by the axis side. In the least, it would have carried on for some years more.


I'm not the expert by far on this stuff but from what little I know, it seems to me that the only thing that could have potentially given the Axis victory (or perhaps a stalemate) in WW2 was if Germany hadn't attacked the USSR. With all those men and all that material focused on the Western Front, I would think they would have given the Western Allies quite a run for our money. I suppose, with the aid of the US, the UK may have eventually won but even then, it seems to me like it would have been a little bit iffy, I would think. Or at least maybe it would have protracted the war another few years or so or even ended with the Western Allies negotiating peace or something.

warspite1

The war in Europe was decided on the Eastern Front, so one can reasonably ask what would have happened if Hitler hadn't attacked the Soviet Union. But it's the wrong question.

Lebensraum was Hitler's raison d'etre. Germany was to be self sufficient like the US and never again to be put into a position where she could be blockaded.

For this to be achieved Hitler didn't need territories in Western Europe - attacking the west was simply a means to an end - he wanted the bread basket of the Ukraine, the coal of the Don, the oil of the Caucasus and all the other myriad resources found in the east.

So for Hitler, NOT attacking the Soviet Union was not really an option.



Good points. Although, I would think pretty much anything is an option to a head of state with absolute power (anything is an option if one is prepared to look at it as an option - Hitler wanted Lebensraum and that is where the story starts and finishes for him). Had Hitler not been as aggressive and played his cards more prudently could he have won? (Won what? He wanted Lebensraum) Could he have maintained neutral relations with the Soviets and perhaps obtained some of the resources he needed through trade to continue the war? (But the only reason he is fighting a war in the west is because the west won't let him get on and do his thang in the east). I sort of wonder how long Germany would have been able to hold out against the Western Allies alone just on the resources available to it in Europe? (but if he's not going to attack the Soviet Union (and Poland on the way there) then there is no war) If Germany hadn't attacked the USSR, could it have gotten what it needed though trade with the Soviets? (Yes! As we know today, Germany is the most powerful country in Europe, the most successful - but that is not what Hitler wanted. Trade relies on well... trading with people. And trading with people means you are subject to their whims and wants. Being in any way shape or form reliant on the USSR was not something he was going to live with). Sort of like the resources they obtained through Sweden. And with that kind of trade, could they have held their own against the Western Allies? (See previously, if Hitler's goal wasn't the USSR then there is no war) Or at least ground things down to a stalemate? Or could Germany have focused more resources on and won in Africa and pushed further into the oil and resources of the Middle East? (Hitler wanted Lebensraum, he wanted what the USSR had (and he also lets not forget) wanted rid of the cancer of Communism. He was going to achieve either playing around in the sand).

Although, I suppose Germany probably lacked sufficiently in the merchant marine department so capturing the Middle East maybe wouldn't do a lot of good as far as being able to move the resources? (Not a factor - as per above, Hitler wasn't interested)
warspite1

Answers in red




Zorch -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/23/2020 12:02:10 PM)

Never in the history of forums has so much been said by so many about so little.
Fact is, Italy was the least important of the 'major' belligerents. Which, as someone pointed out, is why this thread has gone so far from Rome.




GaryChildress -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/23/2020 1:11:38 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

quote:

ORIGINAL: GaryChildress

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


quote:

ORIGINAL: GaryChildress

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zap

Having the similar quality equipment as the Germans and tanks equal to Panzer IVs would the War outcome been significantly different?

My, answer is Yes! the war may have actually been won by the axis side. In the least, it would have carried on for some years more.


I'm not the expert by far on this stuff but from what little I know, it seems to me that the only thing that could have potentially given the Axis victory (or perhaps a stalemate) in WW2 was if Germany hadn't attacked the USSR. With all those men and all that material focused on the Western Front, I would think they would have given the Western Allies quite a run for our money. I suppose, with the aid of the US, the UK may have eventually won but even then, it seems to me like it would have been a little bit iffy, I would think. Or at least maybe it would have protracted the war another few years or so or even ended with the Western Allies negotiating peace or something.

warspite1

The war in Europe was decided on the Eastern Front, so one can reasonably ask what would have happened if Hitler hadn't attacked the Soviet Union. But it's the wrong question.

Lebensraum was Hitler's raison d'etre. Germany was to be self sufficient like the US and never again to be put into a position where she could be blockaded.

For this to be achieved Hitler didn't need territories in Western Europe - attacking the west was simply a means to an end - he wanted the bread basket of the Ukraine, the coal of the Don, the oil of the Caucasus and all the other myriad resources found in the east.

So for Hitler, NOT attacking the Soviet Union was not really an option.



Good points. Although, I would think pretty much anything is an option to a head of state with absolute power (anything is an option if one is prepared to look at it as an option - Hitler wanted Lebensraum and that is where the story starts and finishes for him). Had Hitler not been as aggressive and played his cards more prudently could he have won? (Won what? He wanted Lebensraum) Could he have maintained neutral relations with the Soviets and perhaps obtained some of the resources he needed through trade to continue the war? (But the only reason he is fighting a war in the west is because the west won't let him get on and do his thang in the east). I sort of wonder how long Germany would have been able to hold out against the Western Allies alone just on the resources available to it in Europe? (but if he's not going to attack the Soviet Union (and Poland on the way there) then there is no war) If Germany hadn't attacked the USSR, could it have gotten what it needed though trade with the Soviets? (Yes! As we know today, Germany is the most powerful country in Europe, the most successful - but that is not what Hitler wanted. Trade relies on well... trading with people. And trading with people means you are subject to their whims and wants. Being in any way shape or form reliant on the USSR was not something he was going to live with). Sort of like the resources they obtained through Sweden. And with that kind of trade, could they have held their own against the Western Allies? (See previously, if Hitler's goal wasn't the USSR then there is no war) Or at least ground things down to a stalemate? Or could Germany have focused more resources on and won in Africa and pushed further into the oil and resources of the Middle East? (Hitler wanted Lebensraum, he wanted what the USSR had (and he also lets not forget) wanted rid of the cancer of Communism. He was going to achieve either playing around in the sand).

Although, I suppose Germany probably lacked sufficiently in the merchant marine department so capturing the Middle East maybe wouldn't do a lot of good as far as being able to move the resources? (Not a factor - as per above, Hitler wasn't interested)
warspite1

Answers in red



Thanks for the answers, Warspite. I had originally thought that WWII in Europe was mostly the result of a more modest cause of wanting to open the Danzig corridor to East Prussia which Poland refused to go along with. But reading about Lebensraum, it says that it was a popular concept in Germany from the 1800s to 1940s and the main reason for the war. I didn't realize it was the driving force behind the war in Europe. I knew Hitler was bad news but I guess I still underestimated just how bad. [X(]

Good to know.




Zap -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/23/2020 1:16:46 PM)

By your reply it seems you missed the point of the OP ",me. Being the weaker does not completely eliminate asking the question if bolstering up Italians forces (they had a large army) could not that have made a difference in the length of the war or changed the out come. I think its feasible.

If the original war plans focus was different; beginning with the early stages and more support given to the italians. Its not out of the realm of possibility.
Actually, a lot of reading historical accounts(study) was behind many posters replies. Good discussion, from where I sit. It helps someone like me, who admits to not having a deep knowledge on the subject.

And why not Discuss it? Or would another "Whats your favorite game thread" be more interesting?




warspite1 -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/23/2020 1:19:30 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: GaryChildress


quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

quote:

ORIGINAL: GaryChildress

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


quote:

ORIGINAL: GaryChildress

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zap

Having the similar quality equipment as the Germans and tanks equal to Panzer IVs would the War outcome been significantly different?

My, answer is Yes! the war may have actually been won by the axis side. In the least, it would have carried on for some years more.


I'm not the expert by far on this stuff but from what little I know, it seems to me that the only thing that could have potentially given the Axis victory (or perhaps a stalemate) in WW2 was if Germany hadn't attacked the USSR. With all those men and all that material focused on the Western Front, I would think they would have given the Western Allies quite a run for our money. I suppose, with the aid of the US, the UK may have eventually won but even then, it seems to me like it would have been a little bit iffy, I would think. Or at least maybe it would have protracted the war another few years or so or even ended with the Western Allies negotiating peace or something.

warspite1

The war in Europe was decided on the Eastern Front, so one can reasonably ask what would have happened if Hitler hadn't attacked the Soviet Union. But it's the wrong question.

Lebensraum was Hitler's raison d'etre. Germany was to be self sufficient like the US and never again to be put into a position where she could be blockaded.

For this to be achieved Hitler didn't need territories in Western Europe - attacking the west was simply a means to an end - he wanted the bread basket of the Ukraine, the coal of the Don, the oil of the Caucasus and all the other myriad resources found in the east.

So for Hitler, NOT attacking the Soviet Union was not really an option.



Good points. Although, I would think pretty much anything is an option to a head of state with absolute power (anything is an option if one is prepared to look at it as an option - Hitler wanted Lebensraum and that is where the story starts and finishes for him). Had Hitler not been as aggressive and played his cards more prudently could he have won? (Won what? He wanted Lebensraum) Could he have maintained neutral relations with the Soviets and perhaps obtained some of the resources he needed through trade to continue the war? (But the only reason he is fighting a war in the west is because the west won't let him get on and do his thang in the east). I sort of wonder how long Germany would have been able to hold out against the Western Allies alone just on the resources available to it in Europe? (but if he's not going to attack the Soviet Union (and Poland on the way there) then there is no war) If Germany hadn't attacked the USSR, could it have gotten what it needed though trade with the Soviets? (Yes! As we know today, Germany is the most powerful country in Europe, the most successful - but that is not what Hitler wanted. Trade relies on well... trading with people. And trading with people means you are subject to their whims and wants. Being in any way shape or form reliant on the USSR was not something he was going to live with). Sort of like the resources they obtained through Sweden. And with that kind of trade, could they have held their own against the Western Allies? (See previously, if Hitler's goal wasn't the USSR then there is no war) Or at least ground things down to a stalemate? Or could Germany have focused more resources on and won in Africa and pushed further into the oil and resources of the Middle East? (Hitler wanted Lebensraum, he wanted what the USSR had (and he also lets not forget) wanted rid of the cancer of Communism. He was going to achieve either playing around in the sand).

Although, I suppose Germany probably lacked sufficiently in the merchant marine department so capturing the Middle East maybe wouldn't do a lot of good as far as being able to move the resources? (Not a factor - as per above, Hitler wasn't interested)
warspite1

Answers in red



Thanks for the answers, Warspite. I had originally thought that WWII in Europe was mostly the result of a more modest cause of wanting to open the Danzig corridor to East Prussia which Poland refused to go along with. But reading about Lebensraum, it says that it was a popular concept in Germany from the 1800s to 1940s and the main reason for the war. I didn't realize it was the driving force behind the war in Europe. I knew Hitler was bad news but I guess I still underestimated just how bad. [X(]

Good to know.
warspite1

Yeah, everything from the time he came to power was a stepping stone. Yes, he wanted Versailles ripped up and wanted the restoration of the old German borders, but these were not goals themselves. That was the mistake that the Western Allies, the German populace, and frankly just about everyone, made. They thought Hitler could be negotiated with, that he was like every other leader - and he would want the moon but ultimately satisfied with something reasonable.....That is why it is so wrong that Chamberlain and Daladier get such a bad ride - Hitler wasn't to be negotiated with and no one realised it until it was too late.




Curtis Lemay -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/23/2020 2:24:48 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

Where do we start![:@]

The Battle of Britain started in July, according to the British and the Germans. They should know, they were the ones fighting it.


Pure semantics. The battle for Air Superiority, with strikes over England didn't begin till mid-August.

quote:

Famous wargame designers? How many of them are/were military trained combat and staff officers? They would know a lot more.


I don't know. They sounded like they had military backgrounds. Regardless, it's history backgrounds that matter. They had that.

quote:

A country would use infantry not armour to garrison an area. Lower quality infantry with less heavy equipment, much less than front line infantry units facing enemy combat units.


First time into an area, you can't be too careful. It is absurd to think that spotting a tank south of Paris is a sign of impending invasion. And that's the best they'd be able to do.

quote:

The Netherlands Dutch East Indies also cut of oil and fuel shipments to Japan. The Soviet Union was sending oil to Germany. So where was Japan buying oil from? The Arabs? They did not have much production at the time.


I don't know, but, as I said, they had stocks for two years. And there would be oil on the market - where is the embargoed oil going?

quote:

As far as the RN fighting the Kriegsmarine off Norway, read about Glowworm. The Captain of the Hipper recommended that the Captain of the Glowworm receive the Victoria Cross. It was awarded. Read about Warspite when he himself went into the Narvik area and helped wipe out half of the German destroyer force.


All after the fact. Had the RN been tipped off, overwhelming force would have bushwhacked the invasion.

quote:

The Belgians and Dutch knew that the invasion was coming, but they did not want to believe it. Some units were caught unprepared plus the military did not have the best avail equipment.

The Soviets were told of the invasion by their won spies among others, Stalin chose not to believe them.


There is no military difference between not believing and not knowing. As I said at the start, what matters was what their behavior was. Clearly, the evidence wasn't convincing enough.

quote:

Monty had a big ego and did not want to be told that he was wrong. So soldiers paid with their lives and the war dragged on.-


No body ever walked into Monty's HQ and told him that the II SS Panzer Corps was in Arnhem. That's because the tanks that were spotted didn't have a big sign on them saying they were part of the entire II SS Panzer Corps. If you spot a tank, all you spotted was a tank. It's a big leap to concluding what else is in the area. That's why it's very hard to figure out where anything is - and why there are all those examples of intel failures I've given.

quote:

Of course the Spaniards would expect a limited number of occupation troops to be in the border area but not an entire Army Group. There was no way that the would be surprised.


They will have far less chance of tumbling to an invasion than any of the other failed attempts I've listed.

quote:

Did you Green button me?


I ought to, with all the insults you've hurled.




Curtis Lemay -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/23/2020 2:39:18 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

No, it's not rubbish. The Germans are trying to put on a deception operation to make the British think an invasion is going to take place. For that to happen they need to obtain air superiority over the south coast.


You completely ignored my point: How will the British know they're not going for a night invasion? No airforces involved.

quote:

No one threw a fit about anything. Once again you’ve simply failed to understand the point. You are launching whole manner of operations that will involve the Luftwaffe in anti-shipping operations. They have their real life day job in the North Sea and the Bay of Biscay, they are to be thrown into an attack in Spain, they will need to subdue Malta, they will need to get involved in Greece/Crete, they will be involved in the Eastern Mediterranean. I know you believe the Germans are superhuman, but anti-shipping operations are specialised, the men need training, they will take losses, those losses need replacing, they will need rest and refit as aircraft are taken out and replaced with better aircraft. All the normal requirements of war that you simply dismiss.


Not dismissing them at all. But since there's no BoB, there's a lot of excess margin for air production/training of all sorts.

quote:

Once again you are all over the place chronologically. But regardless, and as said, the Japanese leaders of WWII were dumb as fence-posts, but they were not conducting national policy on the basis that the US would roll their eyes, give a cheeky grin and announce the end of the embargo as they didn’t really mean it.

Regardless of the nonsensical manner in which you have people behaving, as per real life, the moment Roosevelt announces the embargo, the British and Dutch are there too. You think 20% of Japan’s oil will be getting through? Behave yourself. Maybe 10-12% if they are lucky. When conversations come up about Italy - you can always rely on the 'oil' comment. People don't tend to say the same about Japan - which is strange. Ever considered why the Japanese use of their battlewagons wasn't as extensive as it should have been? You seriously expect Japan to be taking ages to decide on her next move while waging war in China, keeping a watching brief in Manchuria and planning how to obtain resources in the south, and all the while the Japanese hope that the US will change their mind? No. Of course not, and in the same way - and as per historically, Japan had to attack the US because they couldn't guarantee the US wouldn't come in if Japan attacked Britain/NEI.


Again, with the Soviets unencumbered, they have to reach a different conclusion.

quote:

Yes they could. But they won’t or why didn’t they do so historically?


Because the Soviets looked to be on the verge of collapse. They had a freer hand.

quote:

I think you are missing the woods for the trees. Spain will not take this utter betrayal, this Napoleonesque stab in the back lightly and they will fight – and continue to fight once the regular army are beaten. As said, the reason why this is a real problem for Hitler – and Hitler knew this – was that this will mean German troops having to garrison Spain and Spanish Morocco – possibly Portugal too. Hitler doesn’t need this dispersal of forces with one eye on Barbarossa. Factor in too the loss of the Atlantic islands. The Germans can try and occupy these - that would be fun to watch.


As I said, there will be plenty of Italians for garrison duty - something they would be much better suited for than combat. And Gibraltar is worth it if it closes off the Med.

quote:

No you are not, because circumstances haven’t changed at this stage. It’s July and the Germans are rest and refitting for a likely move into Spain if they can’t get Franco to play ball. As per real life, Mussolini is keen to ensure his forces get the glory befitting his New Roman Empire; they will march on Egypt as soon as Graziani gets his butt in gear. Apart from the fact Hitler is encroaching in the south which Il Duce is a little miffed about (Mussolini will probably demand some Italian contribution in Spain (as he did for Battle of Britain)) Mussolini will also conduct his parallel war. Hitler has no reason to dissuade him from doing so and won't attempt to. To re-dress the German move into Spain, Mussolini starts to mull over plans for Greece or maybe even Yugoslavia too.....


Of course he still invades Egypt. But after Spain, he clears out ahead of Compass.




RangerJoe -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/23/2020 3:02:50 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay


quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

Where do we start![:@]

The Battle of Britain started in July, according to the British and the Germans. They should know, they were the ones fighting it.


Pure semantics. The battle for Air Superiority, with strikes over England didn't begin till mid-August.

Semantics, the meaning of words. If the words do not mean what they are supposed to mean, then they are the words of a liar.

quote:

Famous wargame designers? How many of them are/were military trained combat and staff officers? They would know a lot more.


I don't know. They sounded like they had military backgrounds. Regardless, it's history backgrounds that matter. They had that.

Sounds like having a military background and having a military background are two different things. Military history background would help, but not just a history background. The military background are things like logistical planning to include things like:

What route can the loaded trucks take? What about our other vehicles? What is the maximum percentage of slope on that road? What is the length for that percentage of slope? What is the expected rate of travel on that road? Is it a paved hardball road, a clinker road, a Class III gravel road, or is it a dirt road? Are the roads one lane or two lane? Or more lanes? Where are the bridges? What types are the bridges? What is the maximum carrying weight for the bridge? What is the width of the bridge? What is the driving surface of the bridge? Where are the possible detours? What are the limitations for the detours?

Where can we set up supply dumps? Is there an adequate rail network to that area? How about the road network to that area?


quote:

A country would use infantry not armour to garrison an area. Lower quality infantry with less heavy equipment, much less than front line infantry units facing enemy combat units.


First time into an area, you can't be too careful. It is absurd to think that spotting a tank south of Paris is a sign of impending invasion. And that's the best they'd be able to do.

Germany basically only occupied the land that the captured. So of course there was armour there then, but not that much. You would need much more for an invasion. Since there was no large population center right in the border area, why would a military concentration be there? Why would there be supply dumps being set up there when they would have the risk of being destroyed while those destroying it would be able to cross into neutral Spain?

quote:

The Netherlands Dutch East Indies also cut of oil and fuel shipments to Japan. The Soviet Union was sending oil to Germany. So where was Japan buying oil from? The Arabs? They did not have much production at the time.


I don't know, but, as I said, they had stocks for two years. And there would be oil on the market - where is the embargoed oil going?

Yes, they had stocks for two years and they waited 6 months before attacking the US. Who said that the embargoes oil that would otherwise go to Japan was going anywhere else? The US was rearming and the DEI was Allied so the oil from the DEI could go to other Allied countries.

quote:

As far as the RN fighting the Kriegsmarine off Norway, read about Glowworm. The Captain of the Hipper recommended that the Captain of the Glowworm receive the Victoria Cross. It was awarded. Read about Warspite when he himself went into the Narvik area and helped wipe out half of the German destroyer force.


All after the fact. Had the RN been tipped off, overwhelming force would have bushwhacked the invasion.

The RN did see the Kriegsmarine and offloaded the troops on board because they misreading of the German intentions. The RN thought that the Kriegsmarine was trying to do a mass breakout into the Atlantic to raid the North Atlantic convoy routes. That and the beautiful winter weather helped the Kriegsmarine. If you read about the Glowworm, you could understand about the nice winter weather and its astounding visibility.

quote:

The Belgians and Dutch knew that the invasion was coming, but they did not want to believe it. Some units were caught unprepared plus the military did not have the best avail equipment.

The Soviets were told of the invasion by their won spies among others, Stalin chose not to believe them.


There is no military difference between not believing and not knowing. As I said at the start, what matters was what their behavior was. Clearly, the evidence wasn't convincing enough.

True. But what makes you think that Franco would be like the others, not reacting to the threat? He did not rule a democracy.

quote:

Monty had a big ego and did not want to be told that he was wrong. So soldiers paid with their lives and the war dragged on.-


No body ever walked into Monty's HQ and told him that the II SS Panzer Corps was in Arnhem. That's because the tanks that were spotted didn't have a big sign on them saying they were part of the entire II SS Panzer Corps. If you spot a tank, all you spotted was a tank. It's a big leap to concluding what else is in the area. That's why it's very hard to figure out where anything is - and why there are all those examples of intel failures I've given.

The British had victory disease, many Americans had it as well. They thought that the war would be over by Christmas. But The British Army stopped for two weeks, let German units escape a trap, the Germans used that time and the escaped units to reform, reequip, and set up defenses.

By the way, it was not an intelligence failure. It was the failure to believe the intelligence because it did not fit into their perceptions.


quote:

Of course the Spaniards would expect a limited number of occupation troops to be in the border area but not an entire Army Group. There was no way that the would be surprised.


They will have far less chance of tumbling to an invasion than any of the other failed attempts I've listed.

They would have had a greater chance since the chief of the German spies was giving them information. There were several thousand Spanish maquis fighting the Nazis, there were refugees trying to come in, the Spanish were at peace with the Germans and could easily have had people travel to the area.

quote:

Did you Green button me?


I ought to, with all the insults you've hurled.


I wanted to ask since you seemed not to answer my questions.

You never did answer if you know what PMCS means.[&:]

Insults? I don't hurl those, grenades are much more fun.[:'(]

Does the movie One Flew Over the Cuckuo's Nest disturb you?




warspite1 -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/23/2020 3:30:47 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

You completely ignored my point: How will the British know they're not going for a night invasion? No airforces involved.

warspite1

Two things spring to my as I try desperately to make sense of what is going on in Northern France:

a) Just what is going on in Northern France? [;)] So you say no BoB - so what are the Luftwaffe doing exactly? I mean seriously what is this spiffing wheeze that seemingly isn't causing them losses but is causing the British serious concern that an invasion is about to suddenly materialise from nowhere?

b) A night invasion... how does that work then? No air forces involved... so one night a bunch of Germans rock up and take the UK, no follow-up forces, no supplies, no reinforcements... nothing - or does all that happen at night also. Sorry I am totally perplexed here as to what is being suggested - although I assume its not being suggested because there is no BoB let alone a Sea Lion??

quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

Not dismissing them at all. But since there's no BoB, there's a lot of excess margin for air production/training of all sorts.

warspite1

But X Fliegerkorps didn't have much involvement in real life BoB so where is that any saving? As said, you are very vague about what aircraft are doing here so I don't really know what is going on. Without understanding that I'm at a loss where to take this aspect.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

Again, with the Soviets unencumbered, they have to reach a different conclusion.

warspite1

No they don't. You remain totally inconsistent (to the benefit of the Germans of course). Stalin signed the NS pact. You say that no matter what happens in your scenario Stalin will stick to that pact and isn't going to do anything different - he will just let Hitler surround him.

But the same Stalin also signed the Soviet-Japanese Neutrality Pact in April 1941. So worried was he by potential war on two fronts he wouldn't invade the defenceless Poles until two weeks after he should have. Reason? There was still some - albeit relatively small scale - fighting going on in Nomonhan. Only when the Molotov-Togo agreement was signed, and a cease fire arranged for the 16 September 1939, did the Soviets invade Poland on the 17th - this is defenceless Poland remember. Stalin made no effort to break that pact and Japan will have had absolutely no indication whatsoever that Stalin is looking east (because he isn't). Everything that is happening in Europe would reinforce the Japanese leadership in that view, everything. Stalin is looking west. Japan can safely deduce this.

Oil is a major issue for Japan. It is the major issue. There is nothing that's happened to make events diverge from reality. Japan needs the oil, they can't run the risk the US will attack if Japan attacks the British and Dutch. They therefore take the action they did historically. If they don't get the oil all bets are off anyway so if Japan go down, they will go down fighting. And anyway the forces required for Malaya/NEI/Philippines aren't going to make a major difference to the Kwantung Army and what's the very worst case? The Soviets do attack in which case the Japanese would still have needed the oil anyway. They haven't improved their position any by not proceeding with the historical. Not to mention that the Japanese Navy aren't going to be fighting in Manchuria are they? So you've created an ahistorical barrier that doesn't stand up to scrutiny for one purpose only - making the conditions better for the Germans to win this scenario.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

As I said, there will be plenty of Italians for garrison duty - something they would be much better suited for than combat. And Gibraltar is worth it if it closes off the Med.

warspite1

PLEASE stop treating this as a WWII board game where, as the German player, you can exploit the rules and order the cardboard Italians around anywhere you like to suit Germany. In this game, Italy are their own player, they have their own goals and until things happen to make even Mussolini realise he's in charge of a pup, Italy will pursue its goals. Hell even after the disaster of Compass, real life Mussolini didn't wake up and smell the Greek coffee. Why is he going to now?

At this stage of the war, for the reasons outlined previously in detail, the Italians are not anyone's lackey's (at least in Il Duce's mind) and no, he's got Egypt and - who knows - maybe even Greece in due course to deal with. His New Roman Army is not for garrisoning duties - it's for marching into downtown Cairo with Il Duce at its head mounted on a white stallion......

But regardless of all that, lets get back to Hitler's folly in attacking his nominal ally. Do you have any idea how many Italian (and German) divisions were required to garrison Yugoslavia/Greece? Do you know how effective (and by that I mean not effective) the Italians were at that? Well it would certainly be interesting to hear your thoughts on the number of divisions required - German and Italian - to garrison Spain and Spanish Morocco.....

.... and speaking of Spanish Morocco, what do the Germans do about this territory just a stone's throw from Southern Spain?

And as for the last comment.... NO as I've explained already, the Med is for all intents and purposes closed to through traffic. What will benefit Germany is the ultimate demise of Malta, but that is not yet.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

Of course he still invades Egypt. But after Spain, he clears out ahead of Compass.

warspite1

...except of course he doesn't - and Hitler isn't going to even suggest it. Until Compass happens and the Italians suddenly realise (Oh ****, our army and equipment and leaders are all a bit rubbish) then nothing has changed. There is no reason for Mussolini to play the lap dog. He will play his allotted historical role until its time for him to understand... and even then it will probably take a beating closer to home before he does so.




RangerJoe -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/23/2020 3:39:47 PM)

Hitler did not just want the old German borders restored, he wanted more than that. He wanted all ethnic Germans in Germany, including the German Swiss. But not just in Germany, he wanted the lands that they lived on as well. He also included the Dutch as being German. He also wanted the living room that the Ukraine represented but was also a place where the Germans (Goths) came from.




warspite1 -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/23/2020 3:44:13 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

Hitler did not just want the old German borders restored, he wanted more than that. He wanted all ethnic Germans in Germany, including the German Swiss. But not just in Germany, he wanted the lands that they lived on as well. He also included the Dutch as being German. He also wanted the living room that the Ukraine represented but was also a place where the Germans (Goths) came from.
warspite1

I'll tell you what Hitler wanted. He wanted a damn good smack on the bottom - he was a very naughty boy.




Bo Rearguard -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/23/2020 3:52:20 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


- he was a very naughty boy.



What did the Nazis ever do for us? [:D]


[img]https://66.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mejmw3pcAS1rx05pso1_250.gif[/img]




warspite1 -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/23/2020 3:55:20 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Bo Rearguard


quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


- he was a very naughty boy.



What did the Nazis ever do for us? [:D]


[img]https://66.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mejmw3pcAS1rx05pso1_250.gif[/img]
warspite1

I think that prior to joining the NSDAP, Hitler was a founder member of the People's Front of Judea (PFJ) or was it the Judean People's Front (JPF).




RangerJoe -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/23/2020 4:05:37 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


quote:

ORIGINAL: Bo Rearguard


quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


- he was a very naughty boy.



What did the Nazis ever do for us? [:D]


[img]https://66.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mejmw3pcAS1rx05pso1_250.gif[/img]
warspite1

I think that prior to joining the NSDAP, Hitler was a founder member of the People's Front of Judea (PFJ) or was it the Judean People's Front (JPF).



I thought that he would be a Judean People's Group (aka, JPG) member?




RangerJoe -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/23/2020 7:43:24 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

Hitler did not just want the old German borders restored, he wanted more than that. He wanted all ethnic Germans in Germany, including the German Swiss. But not just in Germany, he wanted the lands that they lived on as well. He also included the Dutch as being German. He also wanted the living room that the Ukraine represented but was also a place where the Germans (Goths) came from.
warspite1

I'll tell you what Hitler wanted. He wanted a damn good smack on the bottom - he was a very naughty boy.


I swift kick in the gonads would have worked much better.

Did you know that his own son fought against Germany? Think if what would have happened if the Germans caught him and tortured him. Adolf would probably have been conflicted. Maybe the torturer and his son would have stood next to each other in front of a firing squad.
[sm=fighting0083.gif]




GaryChildress -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/23/2020 10:42:04 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

Hitler did not just want the old German borders restored, he wanted more than that. He wanted all ethnic Germans in Germany, including the German Swiss. But not just in Germany, he wanted the lands that they lived on as well. He also included the Dutch as being German. He also wanted the living room that the Ukraine represented but was also a place where the Germans (Goths) came from.
warspite1

I'll tell you what Hitler wanted. He wanted a damn good smack on the bottom - he was a very naughty boy.


I swift kick in the gonads would have worked much better.

Did you know that his own son fought against Germany? Think if what would have happened if the Germans caught him and tortured him. Adolf would probably have been conflicted. Maybe the torturer and his son would have stood next to each other in front of a firing squad.
[sm=fighting0083.gif]


Interesting. Apparently there is some contention among historians as to whether Hilter had any children but the story of Charlotte Lobjoie does sound kind of convincing.




Curtis Lemay -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/24/2020 5:10:22 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

Semantics, the meaning of words. If the words do not mean what they are supposed to mean, then they are the words of a liar.


"The Battle of Britain" is just a phrase. It can mean any number of things. What matters is when Air Superiority combat began - planes flying over the English interior. And that began in mid-August.

quote:

Sounds like having a military background and having a military background are two different things. Military history background would help, but not just a history background. The military background are things like logistical planning to include things like:

What route can the loaded trucks take? What about our other vehicles? What is the maximum percentage of slope on that road? What is the length for that percentage of slope? What is the expected rate of travel on that road? Is it a paved hardball road, a clinker road, a Class III gravel road, or is it a dirt road? Are the roads one lane or two lane? Or more lanes? Where are the bridges? What types are the bridges? What is the maximum carrying weight for the bridge? What is the width of the bridge? What is the driving surface of the bridge? Where are the possible detours? What are the limitations for the detours?

Where can we set up supply dumps? Is there an adequate rail network to that area? How about the road network to that area?


All that matter is that those designers were superior to anyone on this board. The difference between professionals and amateurs.

quote:

Germany basically only occupied the land that the captured. So of course there was armour there then, but not that much. You would need much more for an invasion. Since there was no large population center right in the border area, why would a military concentration be there? Why would there be supply dumps being set up there when they would have the risk of being destroyed while those destroying it would be able to cross into neutral Spain?


Again, none of this can be detected by ground observers. The Spanish will not know the size of the force in the area or its intent any more than Stalin did before Barbarossa.

quote:

The RN did see the Kriegsmarine and offloaded the troops on board because they misreading of the German intentions. The RN thought that the Kriegsmarine was trying to do a mass breakout into the Atlantic to raid the North Atlantic convoy routes. That and the beautiful winter weather helped the Kriegsmarine. If you read about the Glowworm, you could understand about the nice winter weather and its astounding visibility.


So, in other words, they weren't tipped off!!

quote:

True. But what makes you think that Franco would be like the others, not reacting to the threat? He did not rule a democracy.


Neither did Stalin.

quote:

By the way, it was not an intelligence failure. It was the failure to believe the intelligence because it did not fit into their perceptions.


It was an intelligence failure. As I have said, it's a huge leap from seeing a tank to concluding the entire II SS Panzer Corps is in the area. The Spaniards will have the same issue.

quote:

They would have had a greater chance since the chief of the German spies was giving them information. There were several thousand Spanish maquis fighting the Nazis, there were refugees trying to come in, the Spanish were at peace with the Germans and could easily have had people travel to the area.


They won't even have aerial info, which Monty had in spades. Spies didn't work for anybody else. It's the same old issue of who can you believe. And the operation would have been Need To Know Only. Who knows who that excludes.




Curtis Lemay -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/24/2020 5:27:36 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

b) A night invasion... how does that work then? No air forces involved... so one night a bunch of Germans rock up and take the UK, no follow-up forces, no supplies, no reinforcements... nothing - or does all that happen at night also. Sorry I am totally perplexed here as to what is being suggested - although I assume its not being suggested because there is no BoB let alone a Sea Lion??


It would be the opposite of a day invasion. Had they obtained air superiority, they would have done everything by day - no night operations due to the RN. In a night invasion, they do everything at night. That way the RAF is not engaged.

The point is that the British can't rule out any option. They have a huge force staring across the channel at them. There's no way they can discount it. They just saved the BEF by the skin of their teeth. Are they really going to risk it in Spain?!! They didn't stick it back into France in some desperate bid to save them.

quote:

But X Fliegerkorps didn't have much involvement in real life BoB so where is that any saving? As said, you are very vague about what aircraft are doing here so I don't really know what is going on. Without understanding that I'm at a loss where to take this aspect.


If there's no BoB, aircraft production that historically was needed to replace those losses, could be redirected to other aircraft production. Why is that so hard to grasp?

quote:

No they don't. You remain totally inconsistent (to the benefit of the Germans of course). Stalin signed the NS pact. You say that no matter what happens in your scenario Stalin will stick to that pact and isn't going to do anything different - he will just let Hitler surround him.

But the same Stalin also signed the Soviet-Japanese Neutrality Pact in April 1941. So worried was he by potential war on two fronts he wouldn't invade the defenceless Poles until two weeks after he should have. Reason? There was still some - albeit relatively small scale - fighting going on in Nomonhan. Only when the Molotov-Togo agreement was signed, and a cease fire arranged for the 16 September 1939, did the Soviets invade Poland on the 17th - this is defenceless Poland remember. Stalin made no effort to break that pact and Japan will have had absolutely no indication whatsoever that Stalin is looking east (because he isn't). Everything that is happening in Europe would reinforce the Japanese leadership in that view, everything. Stalin is looking west. Japan can safely deduce this.

Oil is a major issue for Japan. It is the major issue. There is nothing that's happened to make events diverge from reality. Japan needs the oil, they can't run the risk the US will attack if Japan attacks the British and Dutch. They therefore take the action they did historically. If they don't get the oil all bets are off anyway so if Japan go down, they will go down fighting. And anyway the forces required for Malaya/NEI/Philippines aren't going to make a major difference to the Kwantung Army and what's the very worst case? The Soviets do attack in which case the Japanese would still have needed the oil anyway. They haven't improved their position any by not proceeding with the historical. Not to mention that the Japanese Navy aren't going to be fighting in Manchuria are they? So you've created an ahistorical barrier that doesn't stand up to scrutiny for one purpose only - making the conditions better for the Germans to win this scenario.


This is getting repetitive. No way the Japs tackle the US with the USSR unencumbered. They have other options, as I've listed.

quote:

PLEASE stop treating this as a WWII board game where, as the German player, you can exploit the rules and order the cardboard Italians around anywhere you like to suit Germany.


Mussolini will be let in on the full plan (which includes Turkey), so that he can cooperate in trapping the British deep into Libya. That will be a huge coup for him.

quote:

.... and speaking of Spanish Morocco, what do the Germans do about this territory just a stone's throw from Southern Spain?


Nothing. French NW Africa blocks it from the Med. And the Spanish will surrender after Madrid falls. Just like France. Maybe a Vichy Spain.




warspite1 -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/24/2020 9:28:25 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

It would be the opposite of a day invasion. Had they obtained air superiority, they would have done everything by day - no night operations due to the RN. In a night invasion, they do everything at night. That way the RAF is not engaged.

warspite1

Firstly you totally, and pointedly, ignore the question of what the Luftwaffe are actually doing in Northern France. No detail, nothing. They must be doing something, right? But what?

But you also continue to mention a night invasion. I can’t have understood correctly what you are suggesting so I’ll await clarification before commenting further. I don’t know the relevance of this, what a night invasion is and who is contemplating this...

quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

They didn't stick it back into France in some desperate bid to save them.

warspite1

Are you being ironic? Is that a joke? What do you mean by this?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

If there's no BoB, aircraft production that historically was needed to replace those losses, could be redirected to other aircraft production. Why is that so hard to grasp?

warspite1

Well for one thing you’ve not said what the Luftwaffe are doing in Northern France so that’s a bit of a black hole at present. As for aircraft production, you need Goering to understand what aircraft he needs and the training required to man them. There is very little in Goering’s performance in World War II to suggest he has the intelligence to grasp what Hitler will be asking of him and what that means for his Luftwaffe. There is also the added complication of his non-relationship with the Kriegsmarine – pretty important in the real war – far, far more important in this alternate scenario.

But as said, at the moment all I know is that there are a couple of air fleets possibly in Northern France doing [insert when known].

quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

This is getting repetitive. No way the Japs tackle the US with the USSR unencumbered. They have other options, as I've listed.

warspite1

You are right, this is getting repetitive beyond belief. You appear confused over some of the chronology (certainly when the oil embargo started) and you don’t seem to understand the limitations that the embargo had on the Japanese economy, not to mention the earlier embargo on strategic materials. Let me try and make it easier for you. We’ll break it down into bite size chunks.

Firstly let me start with the bleedin’ obvious. Neither of us know what would have happened because a potential new variable has been added to the mix. Barbarossa does not take place in 1941. But what we can do is look at what actually happened and then try and work through the likely effects the new variable would have – and whether this would likely have led to an altering of the situation.

So what does that mean for Japan, the USSR and the USA?

Well, I think it’s obvious – and hopefully even you can concede – that Stalin is not going to get involved in the Far East. He only signed a treaty with Japan in April and with Germany seemingly winning everywhere on the European continent, there is no way Stalin will take any risks.

Of course Stalin knowing this and what the Japanese think they know can be two different things. But, given Japan’s situation do we really need to worry about that? The answer of course is no.

Japan is not going to withdraw from China. We know this. We know every action taken by Japan in the build-up and then during World War II, makes crystal clear that this is not up for negotiation with the people who hold power.

The US embargo strategic materials in July 1940 (and added scrap iron in September) and this quickly starts to hurt the Japanese. This can’t continue forever and the Japanese have to start thinking about what to do. Operations in the south are studied as early as late 1940.

The Japanese and the USSR signed a peace treaty in April 1941. The Japanese are free to move south but of course there is no guarantee it will be safe to do so.

In real life in June 1941 Germany invaded the USSR and that meant that the Japanese could be certain that the USSR would not be attacking Manchuria. Hence the move the following month in seizing the airfields in FIC.

What has changed between real life and this scenario? Well Germany hasn’t launched Barbarossa. The Japanese are still having strategic materials embargoed. Not good. Oil has yet to be embargoed but without scrap iron and vital lubricants etc the Japanese military will start to fail.

So what are the options?

1. Leave China. We know they won’t.

2. Don’t leave China but don’t take aggressive action against the US, British and Dutch. In deciding on this path they must accept the current difficult economic and military situation and have good grounds to believe the Americans will later up the ante too. We know they can’t accept this – they need the embargoed materials and the longer they leave it the less chance they will have of taking action because of the effects the existing embargo have had in the meantime.

3. Launch the southern attack anyway, starting with the capture of airfields in FIC (which leads to the freezing of assets and the oil embargo) and then attack either the British and/or Dutch and/or the US.

At the same time they will reinforce Manchuria to the extent they can just in case (as they did in real life). In taking this action they will see what Germany are achieving in Europe and North Africa and will, quite reasonably conclude, that the USSR would be mad to attack them at this time.

They need the oil of the NEI as a minimum. So the only question is, do they attack just the NEI? Well there are two massive problems here a) without Malaya/Singapore and The PI, attacking the NEI is all the more difficult and b) they leave themselves open to surprise attack from the British and US.

Quite clearly these two problems can be overcome by a) attacking the NEI after stepping stones have been created in PI and Malaya, and b) achieving that by surprising the British and US instead.

Quite why you see no Barbarossa as a reason to attack the NEI but not to attack the US is absolutely beyond me. It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. If the Japanese weren’t going to attack the US (because they were scared of a non-existent Soviet threat), then they wouldn’t attack the British/NEI either would they?

But iirc you have suggested two paths for the Japanese in this alternate scenario. Either option makes no sense and gives them the biggest problems (ignoring of course what we know, i.e. the Japan was screwed regardless).

a) They do nothing and gradually the embargo bites deeper, the military becomes worse and worse off, until possibly the US run out of patience and embargo oil too anyway

b) They attack the NEI (and maybe British too, who knows?) and so leave themselves open to a surprise attack by a reinforced PI.

You are desperate for the US not to join the war in December 1941 so you have contrived a set of moves that simply defy logic and beggar belief.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

Mussolini will be let in on the full plan (which includes Turkey), so that he can cooperate in trapping the British deep into Libya. That will be a huge coup for him.

.... and speaking of Spanish Morocco, what do the Germans do about this territory just a stone's throw from Southern Spain?

Nothing. French NW Africa blocks it from the Med. And the Spanish will surrender after Madrid falls. Just like France. Maybe a Vichy Spain.

warspite1

Same applies to Mussolini. I am not going to repeat all that I have said about why Mussolini won’t act the way you want him to - all of which remains firmly relevant. But you appear to believe now that the plan is one big trap to lure the British into Libya…..

What a great plan. So what you are now saying is that Mussolini and his 10th Army saps are the bait in the German masterpiece. They move into Egypt and encamp – how long for? Who decides when they turn tail?…. And on what basis do they know that the British will follow them?… of course in your mind the British will follow them at just the right time (for the barely mobile Italians) won’t they? I mean they won’t attack before the Italians retreat (Compass re-visited) they won’t attack just as the Italians are retreating (so Compass re-visited but a bigger massacre of on-the-move, strung out Italians) and they won’t simply not attack?

But in determining what the British will do, do you actually know what Compass was designed to achieve? Have you even bothered to look up the original scope of the raid? The size of the force? You just appear to assume that the British intended all along to drive on Tripoli (where, according to you, Graziani has fallen back to).

I notice you make no response to the numbers of troops required to garrison Spain. How very telling. Scarily high figure isn’t it? You think Spain will be much different? And you think Hitler will leave such a strategic holding to be covered by the Italians?

According to you Germany will do nothing about French Morocco….. Really? Yeah that’s right, Hitler felt the same way about Crete. Couldn’t see the need to own an island from which Ploesti could be bombed…. And what? You think he’s happy for any strategic openings through the holding of Gibraltar to be negated by the enemy holding the southern side of the Straits? In which world does that make sense?

Well given you believe Hitler would have even considered invading Spain, and that despite his monstrous betrayal, Franco is going to be welcomed back in the Axis fold and all is forgotten, I can see why such simplistic nonsense appeals. I mean you’ve totally forgotten that Spain are without oil and food and are only surviving in real life thanks to the US and Britain. Now, with your mate Franco back on the throne as Hitler’s puppet (and a fully paid up member of the Axis) there is now a humanitarian crisis on the cards… but hey, never mind a few thousand more Spanish troops dead – courtesy of their ‘friends’ the Germans - to add to the butcher’s bill from the civil war, a great many more women and children slaughtered, homeless, starving… no probs – we’ve got Gibraltar so all is good……

You’ve been playing with cardboard counters and pixels for too long – you seem to have completely forgotten about the real world, real life concerns, real life motivations and what actually matters.

The easy part (relatively) was to defeat the regular Spanish forces and occupy Spain. The more difficult bit was subduing the countryside to secure supply lines and allow for an assault on Gibraltar to take place without distraction. The harder part still was taking The Rock as the British have air bases in French Morocco to harry the attackers and support the Royal Navy.

But then the German problems really start. No one that accepts the Germans will be willingly supported as leader of Spain following this outrageous betrayal..... You thought (assuming you gave it any thought) that the manpower drain in the Balkans was heavy? Welcome to the Iberian Peninsular, where the people are hungry, starving, and really rather quite angry....






RangerJoe -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (8/25/2020 12:38:10 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

Semantics, the meaning of words. If the words do not mean what they are supposed to mean, then they are the words of a liar.


"The Battle of Britain" is just a phrase. It can mean any number of things. What matters is when Air Superiority combat began - planes flying over the English interior. And that began in mid-August.

quote:

Sounds like having a military background and having a military background are two different things. Military history background would help, but not just a history background. The military background are things like logistical planning to include things like:

What route can the loaded trucks take? What about our other vehicles? What is the maximum percentage of slope on that road? What is the length for that percentage of slope? What is the expected rate of travel on that road? Is it a paved hardball road, a clinker road, a Class III gravel road, or is it a dirt road? Are the roads one lane or two lane? Or more lanes? Where are the bridges? What types are the bridges? What is the maximum carrying weight for the bridge? What is the width of the bridge? What is the driving surface of the bridge? Where are the possible detours? What are the limitations for the detours?

Where can we set up supply dumps? Is there an adequate rail network to that area? How about the road network to that area?


All that matter is that those designers were superior to anyone on this board. The difference between professionals and amateurs.

quote:

Germany basically only occupied the land that the captured. So of course there was armour there then, but not that much. You would need much more for an invasion. Since there was no large population center right in the border area, why would a military concentration be there? Why would there be supply dumps being set up there when they would have the risk of being destroyed while those destroying it would be able to cross into neutral Spain?


Again, none of this can be detected by ground observers. The Spanish will not know the size of the force in the area or its intent any more than Stalin did before Barbarossa.

quote:

The RN did see the Kriegsmarine and offloaded the troops on board because they misreading of the German intentions. The RN thought that the Kriegsmarine was trying to do a mass breakout into the Atlantic to raid the North Atlantic convoy routes. That and the beautiful winter weather helped the Kriegsmarine. If you read about the Glowworm, you could understand about the nice winter weather and its astounding visibility.


So, in other words, they weren't tipped off!!

quote:

True. But what makes you think that Franco would be like the others, not reacting to the threat? He did not rule a democracy.


Neither did Stalin.

quote:

By the way, it was not an intelligence failure. It was the failure to believe the intelligence because it did not fit into their perceptions.


It was an intelligence failure. As I have said, it's a huge leap from seeing a tank to concluding the entire II SS Panzer Corps is in the area. The Spaniards will have the same issue.

quote:

They would have had a greater chance since the chief of the German spies was giving them information. There were several thousand Spanish maquis fighting the Nazis, there were refugees trying to come in, the Spanish were at peace with the Germans and could easily have had people travel to the area.


They won't even have aerial info, which Monty had in spades. Spies didn't work for anybody else. It's the same old issue of who can you believe. And the operation would have been Need To Know Only. Who knows who that excludes.


Here you are, redefining what things mean just to suit your reality, which is different than the participants.

You claim that the professional military planners aren't as good as war game designers, many of who are part time, probably have had little to no actual military experience, maybe no cultural training for that geographichal area, may have no political education training, may only do a quick search on the subject, try to make a balanced game that will sell so they can make enough money to do it again. Then you claim that I insulted you? Why don't we just turn over our respective military, business, and political systems over to these game designers who know everything?

Are allowed you to play with maps with a plastic covering and grease pencils or crayons?

How is your supply of your pharmaceuticals holding out?

Does this song Helen Reddy's Angie Baby sound familiar? Bring back any memories?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kHDZ6yNf1CE





Page: <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.375