RE: OT:German imports from Spain/Turkey?

RE: OT:German imports from Spain/Turkey? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition

Message

warspite1 -> RE: OT:German imports from Spain/Turkey? (7/2/2021 12:36:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mind_messing We'll need to disagree here. Gibraltar changes the nature of the war in the Med in a pretty fundamental way, Malta and North Africa will look quite different as a result. warspite1 Indeed we will. The loss of Gibraltar (and Malta will succumb shortly thereafter) is simply not the game changer that you seem to believe. Indeed there is an argument that not having to supply Malta actually massively helps the RN and RAF given the colossal losses suffered trying to keep the island in the war. The British always assumed the Med would be closed if Italy joined the war (in practice it was only really closed to through traffic once the Germans came to play). The problems with taking Suez remains. Not to mention all the other problems that will almost certainly arise from an invasion of Spain.

warspite1 -> RE: OT:German imports from Spain/Turkey? (7/2/2021 12:43:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mind_messing I suppose it's relative - it's an interesting thought exercise as to how important the disasters of June 1941 were on rapidly reforming the Red Army. 1942 would see a Red Army substantially better equipped and trained, but the organisational and leadership problems remaining. Second Kharkov writ large? warspite1 But let's he kind to the Germans and assume the Soviets are in no better position in 1942. The problem is that the Germans will be definitely worse off. You have occupation needs in: France Spain Spanish Morocco Morocco You have the losses from taking Spain and Gib, you have the losses from taking Turkey, you have roughly the same number of Germans, now even less concentrated, from Finland to Turkey - and I would like to see an answer on the Turkish logistical nightmare You have Stalin's reaction to the Germans taking the Straits and moving into Turkey - you really believe he will do nothing about this? I don't think he would necessarily threaten war, but I think we can assume that Soviet supplies under the NS pact are suddenly cut-off - and that means oil.

mind_messing -> RE: OT:German imports from Spain/Turkey? (7/2/2021 4:31:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 quote: ORIGINAL: mind_messing I don't think so - continental France is effectively controlled by the Germans. The overseas territories and much of the military is splintering off to the Vichy Regime or joining the Free French. warspite1 We will agree to disagree. I think you've totally underestimated the problems of Vichy, Spain and Italy and why Hitler was so keen not to upset Vichy. Plus even if you ignore all this (which I don't believe you can) then you've just created yet more occupation duties for the Germans. Wow, the numbers available for Barbarossa are dwindling rapidly. I wouldn't have ever described Hitler as "keen" in regards to upsetting Vichy. The diplomatic relationship between the two was not remotely traditional and even if it had been, the terms of Compičgne were such that good relations were likely unattainable without major revisions on the terms from the Germans. The importance of the French fleet has (at least in my view) tended to be overblown. I've always seen the German approach as a pragmatic decision on asset denial than anything resembling a realistic attempt to rebuild their naval strength at the expense of the rump French regime. As for the occupation duties, that depends on how any Spanish adventure is handled. Is this a full-on war on conquest, or a replacement of Franco, or a fait acompli (a la Austria?). That determines how much (if any?) occupation forces are needed. Given the civil war and German involvement in it, Spain seems a much more likely candidate for changing the top leadership of the Nationalist movement to be more pro-German rather than requiring occupation forces. Worth remembering that German troops only occupied selected regions of France before Case Anton. I could see Spain being a similar case where strategic areas in the North-West and South are under German control, in the event of an occupation being necessary. quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 quote: ORIGINAL: mind_messing We'll need to disagree here. Gibraltar changes the nature of the war in the Med in a pretty fundamental way, Malta and North Africa will look quite different as a result. warspite1 Indeed we will. The loss of Gibraltar (and Malta will succumb shortly thereafter) is simply not the game changer that you seem to believe. Indeed there is an argument that not having to supply Malta actually massively helps the RN and RAF given the colossal losses suffered trying to keep the island in the war. The British always assumed the Med would be closed if Italy joined the war (in practice it was only really closed to through traffic once the Germans came to play). The problems with taking Suez remains. Not to mention all the other problems that will almost certainly arise from an invasion of Spain. I think the ramifications of Gibraltar in German hands play out far more in the Atlantic than they do in the Med. The British logistical tail to Egypt is already pretty long, but now there's potentially German naval units operating from Spain as a matter of routine. At the very least there's now a lot more ocean that needs covered during the critical 1940-41. No Gibraltar (and therefore no Malta?) makes the Axis logistical position that bit more straightforward and threatens the British position that much more. German heavy units in the Atlantic can then move to reinforce the Med, or for the Italian fleet to redeploy to the Atlantic. That alone has massive ramifications on RN deployments for convoy escorts etc. quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 quote: ORIGINAL: mind_messing I suppose it's relative - it's an interesting thought exercise as to how important the disasters of June 1941 were on rapidly reforming the Red Army. 1942 would see a Red Army substantially better equipped and trained, but the organisational and leadership problems remaining. Second Kharkov writ large? warspite1 But let's he kind to the Germans and assume the Soviets are in no better position in 1942. The problem is that the Germans will be definitely worse off. You have occupation needs in: France Spain Spanish Morocco Morocco You have the losses from taking Spain and Gib, you have the losses from taking Turkey, you have roughly the same number of Germans, now even less concentrated, from Finland to Turkey - and I would like to see an answer on the Turkish logistical nightmare What makes you think there will be occupation needs in Morocco? The Germans were content to leave the French colonies in the hands of the Vichy regime, and it was a source of no end of awkwardness for the Allies. That's presupposing the Germans need to go down the route of a full military occupation however. I wonder if that would be at all likely given that there would likely be one (or more) of the factions in the Nationalist camp that would form a pro-German government as a means to power, and Franco was at the head of a collection of very unlikely political groups. Far more likely however that Franco is just removed from the picture by his opponents within the Nationalist camp (with some encouragement from the Germans). There's options in terms of both the radicals within the Falange movement. I can't claim to know enough of Spanish politics of this period to say much about the other movements. The "Turkish logistical nightmare" based on a German campaign in Central Anatolia. There's no need for the Germans to campaign in Central Anatolia. They don't even need to go past Ankara. The major Turkish population and industrial centres are in the West, the geography of the Bosporus and Dardanelles are such that the Axis can cross under air cover alone while the Turkish Navy and Air Force is not sufficiently prepared to offer sustained resistance. Once the Aegean region of Turkey is in German hands, there's no need for further advances into Turkey. The benefit of any Turkish campaign is in free movement of naval assets from the Med into the Black Sea to pressure Soviet Russia, not from a grand overland campaign. The additional scope of the war cuts both ways - the British now have additional commitments to respond appropriately to German entry into Spain. Turkey will need substantial investment to modernize its armed forces which needs to come from somewhere (if not a stiffening of British or Soviet troops) and the Soviet Union needs to reinforce the regions around the Black Sea. I think the problem is that a lot of the ramifications can't neatly be accounted for in terms of commitments of manpower. Nor can you simplify it as having 100,000 men less on the Eastern Front, but complete freedom to conduct naval operations in the Black Sea... quote: You have Stalin's reaction to the Germans taking the Straits and moving into Turkey - you really believe he will do nothing about this? I don't think he would necessarily threaten war, but I think we can assume that Soviet supplies under the NS pact are suddenly cut-off - and that means oil. Well, from what I've read on June '41, Stalin was mortally afraid of any provocation of Germany as the prelude to war - even after the invasion. His behaviour then doesn't lead me to think he'd be willing to sanction Germany. A repudiation of the ML pact seems to fall quite firmly in this category, and I would suspect that Stalin would be pragmatic enough to exchange Turkey for an extra six months of time to build the Red Army.

Evoken -> RE: OT:German imports from Spain/Turkey? (7/2/2021 4:56:39 PM)
There is no way you are invading Turkey with 100k troops there M_M. Turkey has 41 Infantry , 3 Cavalry Divisions with 1.3m active standing army , with really rough terrain that you need to pass through constantly. If Germans thought they could have invaded Turkey as easily as you stated , they would have. It opens a direct path to Middle east and Caucasian oil , a backdoor to Africa front. Operation would require an entire army group that would suffer casualties at least comparable to Soviet campaign if not worse. Thats not a luxury Germans can afford. Istanbul would likely be another Stalingrad for Germans. Anyways thats enough alt-history for me today , peace

warspite1 -> RE: OT:German imports from Spain/Turkey? (7/2/2021 6:49:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mind_messing I wouldn't have ever described Hitler as "keen" in regards to upsetting Vichy. The diplomatic relationship between the two was not remotely traditional and even if it had been, the terms of Compičgne were such that good relations were likely unattainable without major revisions on the terms from the Germans. The importance of the French fleet has (at least in my view) tended to be overblown. I've always seen the German approach as a pragmatic decision on asset denial than anything resembling a realistic attempt to rebuild their naval strength at the expense of the rump French regime. As for the occupation duties, that depends on how any Spanish adventure is handled. Is this a full-on war on conquest, or a replacement of Franco, or a fait acompli (a la Austria?). That determines how much (if any?) occupation forces are needed. Given the civil war and German involvement in it, Spain seems a much more likely candidate for changing the top leadership of the Nationalist movement to be more pro-German rather than requiring occupation forces. Worth remembering that German troops only occupied selected regions of France before Case Anton. I could see Spain being a similar case where strategic areas in the North-West and South are under German control, in the event of an occupation being necessary. warspite1 I don't think you are giving sufficient thinking to why Vichy was set up, and why Hitler was keen not to rock the boat. There is absolutely NOTHING traditional about the relationship - and that entirely misses the point to suggest it's important. The French fleet in hindsight was overblown for the same reason that your idea that the Atlantic is the main issue is overblown. Regardless of the number of ships, regardless of the access to what seaways, oil is oil. Franco had more sense than to join the Axis. Hitler could not give him what he needed - and there is no suggestion that Hitler would have invaded. It is a HUGE leap into the unknown to go along with an invasion for the purposes of this scenario. The impact of any invasion will be unpleasant for both sides.....

warspite1 -> RE: OT:German imports from Spain/Turkey? (7/2/2021 6:57:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mind_messing What makes you think there will be occupation needs in Morocco? The Germans were content to leave the French colonies in the hands of the Vichy regime, and it was a source of no end of awkwardness for the Allies. That's presupposing the Germans need to go down the route of a full military occupation however. I wonder if that would be at all likely given that there would likely be one (or more) of the factions in the Nationalist camp that would form a pro-German government as a means to power, and Franco was at the head of a collection of very unlikely political groups. Far more likely however that Franco is just removed from the picture by his opponents within the Nationalist camp (with some encouragement from the Germans). There's options in terms of both the radicals within the Falange movement. I can't claim to know enough of Spanish politics of this period to say much about the other movements. The "Turkish logistical nightmare" based on a German campaign in Central Anatolia. There's no need for the Germans to campaign in Central Anatolia. They don't even need to go past Ankara. The major Turkish population and industrial centres are in the West, the geography of the Bosporus and Dardanelles are such that the Axis can cross under air cover alone while the Turkish Navy and Air Force is not sufficiently prepared to offer sustained resistance. Once the Aegean region of Turkey is in German hands, there's no need for further advances into Turkey. The benefit of any Turkish campaign is in free movement of naval assets from the Med into the Black Sea to pressure Soviet Russia, not from a grand overland campaign. The additional scope of the war cuts both ways - the British now have additional commitments to respond appropriately to German entry into Spain. Turkey will need substantial investment to modernize its armed forces which needs to come from somewhere (if not a stiffening of British or Soviet troops) and the Soviet Union needs to reinforce the regions around the Black Sea. I think the problem is that a lot of the ramifications can't neatly be accounted for in terms of commitments of manpower. Nor can you simplify it as having 100,000 men less on the Eastern Front, but complete freedom to conduct naval operations in the Black Sea... warspite1 I think we are so far removed from what we think likely in Spain. I really don't understand your logic. As for Turkey, ditto. I will ignore the 100,000 men comment as this simply bears no relation to anything, much less a 'blitz' through Turkey. IF the Germans aren't going to use Turkey to attack the Caucasus then why invade in the first place? And if they are not going to secure their Chromium resources then where do they get replaced from. And a Turkey not beaten? What are they going to be doing? It simply makes no sense whatsoever.

warspite1 -> RE: OT:German imports from Spain/Turkey? (7/2/2021 7:00:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mind_messing Well, from what I've read on June '41, Stalin was mortally afraid of any provocation of Germany as the prelude to war - even after the invasion. His behaviour then doesn't lead me to think he'd be willing to sanction Germany. A repudiation of the ML pact seems to fall quite firmly in this category, and I would suspect that Stalin would be pragmatic enough to exchange Turkey for an extra six months of time to build the Red Army. warspite1 And this is one of the problems with this type of what-if. Stalin did adopt a policy of extreme caution with Germany. But this is different. Turkey was not up for discussion, the Straits were not up for discussion. Such a development is likely to change Stalin's thinking dramatically - it's a real game changer.

mind_messing -> RE: OT:German imports from Spain/Turkey? (7/2/2021 9:31:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Evoken There is no way you are invading Turkey with 100k troops there M_M. Turkey has 41 Infantry , 3 Cavalry Divisions with 1.3m active standing army , with really rough terrain that you need to pass through constantly. If Germans thought they could have invaded Turkey as easily as you stated , they would have. It opens a direct path to Middle east and Caucasian oil , a backdoor to Africa front. Operation would require an entire army group that would suffer casualties at least comparable to Soviet campaign if not worse. Thats not a luxury Germans can afford. Istanbul would likely be another Stalingrad for Germans. Anyways thats enough alt-history for me today , peace You may want to peruse Chapter 2 of Turkish Foreign Policy During the Second World War Your 1.3 million many army looks good on paper, but the messages referenced in pages 38-39 suggests that this was a lofty ambition rather than anything approaching realistic. The further comments on the condition of transport capabilities reinforces that notion - an armed force in the middle of transitioning from "caravans to baggage trains" is not that of a force prepared for a modern war or even remotely close to it. There's no doubt that the Germans could have taken Thrace - you've grossly over-estimated the combat ability of the Turkish military in the early 1940's. There is no need for a German overland campaign to the Middle East - that's an armchair fantasy. The advantage of German seizure of the western regions of Turkey is in facilitating the movement of shipping (and more importantly) supplies into the Black Sea to support operations in the wider Black Sea region. quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 quote: ORIGINAL: mind_messing What makes you think there will be occupation needs in Morocco? The Germans were content to leave the French colonies in the hands of the Vichy regime, and it was a source of no end of awkwardness for the Allies. That's presupposing the Germans need to go down the route of a full military occupation however. I wonder if that would be at all likely given that there would likely be one (or more) of the factions in the Nationalist camp that would form a pro-German government as a means to power, and Franco was at the head of a collection of very unlikely political groups. Far more likely however that Franco is just removed from the picture by his opponents within the Nationalist camp (with some encouragement from the Germans). There's options in terms of both the radicals within the Falange movement. I can't claim to know enough of Spanish politics of this period to say much about the other movements. The "Turkish logistical nightmare" based on a German campaign in Central Anatolia. There's no need for the Germans to campaign in Central Anatolia. They don't even need to go past Ankara. The major Turkish population and industrial centres are in the West, the geography of the Bosporus and Dardanelles are such that the Axis can cross under air cover alone while the Turkish Navy and Air Force is not sufficiently prepared to offer sustained resistance. Once the Aegean region of Turkey is in German hands, there's no need for further advances into Turkey. The benefit of any Turkish campaign is in free movement of naval assets from the Med into the Black Sea to pressure Soviet Russia, not from a grand overland campaign. The additional scope of the war cuts both ways - the British now have additional commitments to respond appropriately to German entry into Spain. Turkey will need substantial investment to modernize its armed forces which needs to come from somewhere (if not a stiffening of British or Soviet troops) and the Soviet Union needs to reinforce the regions around the Black Sea. I think the problem is that a lot of the ramifications can't neatly be accounted for in terms of commitments of manpower. Nor can you simplify it as having 100,000 men less on the Eastern Front, but complete freedom to conduct naval operations in the Black Sea... warspite1 I think we are so far removed from what we think likely in Spain. I really don't understand your logic. As for Turkey, ditto. I will ignore the 100,000 men comment as this simply bears no relation to anything, much less a 'blitz' through Turkey. IF the Germans aren't going to use Turkey to attack the Caucasus then why invade in the first place? And if they are not going to secure their Chromium resources then where do they get replaced from. And a Turkey not beaten? What are they going to be doing? It simply makes no sense whatsoever. See above comment regarding the grand overland campaign being a pipedream. What Turkey facilitates is increased naval involvement in the Black Sea, both in terms of supplies and naval operations. Considering the impact that fairly small Axis naval involvement in the Black Sea had, I think that's actually quite an important strategic consideration (even more so given the fairly weak state of Soviet naval forces in the region). Now, do I think that the trade-off's required to bring it about are worthwhile? Probably not, but certainly feels like a realistic consideration. quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 quote: ORIGINAL: mind_messing Well, from what I've read on June '41, Stalin was mortally afraid of any provocation of Germany as the prelude to war - even after the invasion. His behaviour then doesn't lead me to think he'd be willing to sanction Germany. A repudiation of the ML pact seems to fall quite firmly in this category, and I would suspect that Stalin would be pragmatic enough to exchange Turkey for an extra six months of time to build the Red Army. warspite1 And this is one of the problems with this type of what-if. Stalin did adopt a policy of extreme caution with Germany. But this is different. Turkey was not up for discussion, the Straits were not up for discussion. Such a development is likely to change Stalin's thinking dramatically - it's a real game changer. Stalin is not going to lift a finger in the event of a German invasion of Turkey. Austria, Czechoslovakia, Poland, the Netherlands, Belgium, Denmark, Norway and France. Given the list above, I doubt that it will be Turkey that causes a complete volte face, if it all it was likely. Stalin's Road to Damascus moment was on June 21st 1941, and he was recovering for quite some time.

rustysi -> RE: OT:German imports from Spain/Turkey? (7/3/2021 1:16:45 AM)
I love it when these two get into 'debate mode'.[:D] And the subject of this thread has certainly taken a turn, which is fine.[:)] But to me, this pretty much covers it all... quote: Lebensraum is Hitlers raison d’etre, its his Holy Grail. And he was not going to deviate from it at all. Just read his book. He states it time and time again.[sm=vomit-smiley-020.gif]

mattj78 -> RE: OT:German imports from Spain/Turkey? (7/3/2021 2:11:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 quote: ORIGINAL: mind_messing I don't think so - continental France is effectively controlled by the Germans. The overseas territories and much of the military is splintering off to the Vichy Regime or joining the Free French. warspite1 We will agree to disagree. I think you've totally underestimated the problems of Vichy, Spain and Italy and why Hitler was so keen not to upset Vichy. Plus even if you ignore all this (which I don't believe you can) then you've just created yet more occupation duties for the Germans. Wow, the numbers available for Barbarossa are dwindling rapidly. 100% agree there is just so many issues it does not make any sense politically and strategically all it does is hurts the axis turkey played both sides very well Spain did to but went out of its way to help the axis

RangerJoe -> RE: OT:German imports from Spain/Turkey? (7/3/2021 3:45:19 AM)
I could ask a certain someone to chime in. He would mention all of the expert wargames to state that it is easy for Germany to capture Spain and Turkey plus Little Bennie to send troops to occupy the those areas with Italian troops.

Orm -> RE: OT:German imports from Spain/Turkey? (7/3/2021 9:37:54 AM)
I think the political fallout from Germany occupying Vichy, and Spain, is downplayed. I am sure that US would react negatively to both, but I have no clue what they would do practically. To the USSR it send the signal that Germany has no issue with breaking their pact as soon as they see any benefit. I suggest that this would change the Soviet WWII policy at once. I think that the Soviet Union was willing to let the Axis, and Allies to wear themselves down in the hope of getting some spoils at low cost for themselves. But after that harsh treatment of Spain, and Vichy, I think Stalin would change the policy to stab Germany in the back as soon as they could do so. In other words, I do not think that Stalin would have waited for a '42 Barbarossa. He would have attacked before that. And I also think it would have impacted other, minor, countries. I doubt that Finland would have joined with Germany after that.

warspite1 -> RE: OT:German imports from Spain/Turkey? (7/3/2021 1:00:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Orm I think the political fallout from Germany occupying Vichy, and Spain, is downplayed. I am sure that US would react negatively to both, but I have no clue what they would do practically. To the USSR it send the signal that Germany has no issue with breaking their pact as soon as they see any benefit. I suggest that this would change the Soviet WWII policy at once. I think that the Soviet Union was willing to let the Axis, and Allies to wear themselves down in the hope of getting some spoils at low cost for themselves. But after that harsh treatment of Spain, and Vichy, I think Stalin would change the policy to stab Germany in the back as soon as they could do so. In other words, I do not think that Stalin would have waited for a '42 Barbarossa. He would have attacked before that. And I also think it would have impacted other, minor, countries. I doubt that Finland would have joined with Germany after that. warspite1 Indeed. And the consequences are different in each. No of course Hitler doesn't give a fig about the French per se, but there were reasons for Vichy and these suited both parties. Ending Vichy just months after declaring it, simply sends Vichy towards the Allied cause and Hitler does not need this diversion of resource with Barbarossa ahead. For Spain, yes there are also very real manpower and resource considerations, but as you say, the treatment of Franco would be a major eye opener to Finland, Hungary, Bulgaria, Romania and the USSR, not to mention Sweden, Yugoslavia, Greece, and Turkey. Quite how this would play out would be uncertain - but best case it would be unhelpful to Germany.

RangerJoe -> RE: OT:German imports from Spain/Turkey? (7/3/2021 1:44:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 . . . it would be unhelpful to Germany. Just a wee bit of understatement, eh?

warspite1 -> RE: OT:German imports from Spain/Turkey? (7/3/2021 2:49:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mind_messing What Turkey facilitates is increased naval involvement in the Black Sea, both in terms of supplies and naval operations. Considering the impact that fairly small Axis naval involvement in the Black Sea had, I think that's actually quite an important strategic consideration (even more so given the fairly weak state of Soviet naval forces in the region). Now, do I think that the trade-off's required to bring it about are worthwhile? Probably not, but certainly feels like a realistic consideration. warspite1 But this started with the 'blitz through Turkey'. If you don't agree that a blitz through Turkey would be possible then that's good. The problem, as said above, is what is the purpose of an invasion of another country - an invasion that gives the Allies another friend, that will need occupation troops (and troops to continue the fighting as Turkey hasn't actually surrendered), and that disrupts vital resources? Against that, realistically what benefit is there in Black Sea naval involvement? Involvement by who and to what purpose? The Regia Marina are hardly likely to pile into the Black Sea with the RN still at Alexandria - even once the Straits are secured. And one obvious thing that doesn't seem to have been considered but is important if Germany are only occupying western Turkey. If Hitler was so worried about Ploesti that he invaded Crete, why would he be happy for British (Soviet?) bombers to operate from Turkey against these precious oilfields?

warspite1 -> RE: OT:German imports from Spain/Turkey? (7/3/2021 2:57:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mind_messing Stalin is not going to lift a finger in the event of a German invasion of Turkey. Austria, Czechoslovakia, Poland, the Netherlands, Belgium, Denmark, Norway and France. Given the list above, I doubt that it will be Turkey that causes a complete volte face, if it all it was likely. Stalin's Road to Damascus moment was on June 21st 1941, and he was recovering for quite some time. warspite1 But you don't know that? And you are basing your view on what happened in the west (Poland aside and that was agreed as part of the NS Pact). Yes, absolutely Stalin's plan to have the Germans and the Allies fight themselves to a standstill, is looking sick. But that simply makes it all the more important that Germany keeps its nose out of the Straits. What was the outcome of the 'discussions' on the Straits during the NS Pact and afterwards? You seriously believe that Stalin was going to roll over on the Straits question?

DesertWolf101 -> RE: OT:German imports from Spain/Turkey? (7/3/2021 4:36:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Orm The political cost for this operation seems very high to me. Not only declaring war Spain to consider here. There is also the question of Vichy France. Had AH, and Germany, planned for Spain, and Gibraltar, before they begun peace talks with France then passage for an Army going into Spain would, in my humble opinion, not been any real issue for Vichy France. But since they did not, I suspect the Vichy leadership would have strongly objected. So how would the world react to Germany entering a treaty with France, and break it before the ink dried up. And then, without any cause, advance into Spain. UK might very well have won the war by this, even if it cost them Gibraltar. FYI, German forces wouldn't need to go through Vichy territory to enter Spain. They had the ability to march through the Bordeaux-Biarritz corridor in the German occupied zone of France.

DesertWolf101 -> RE: OT:German imports from Spain/Turkey? (7/3/2021 4:52:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 quote: ORIGINAL: mind_messing I don't think Vichy objections would rank high in terms of obstacles at all, nor the wider diplomatic consequences. warspite1 I think Vichy considerations weighed very, very heavily. But before all that, there is the rather key question of whether Hitler could have taken the massive leap that is declaring war on Spain. Of course he didn’t take that route in real life and its pretty much impossible, to me at any rate, that there are circumstances in which he would have been persuaded to do so. Correct. The historical record shows that Hitler and his government were very much concerned about Vichy and were determined to not alienate it. This was the case from the beginning, but was especially reinforced when Vichy French forces defeated the British/Free French Dakar operation. It was not until the Torch landings and related events in North Africa that German strategy towards Vichy fundamentally changed.

warspite1 -> RE: OT:German imports from Spain/Turkey? (7/3/2021 5:04:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesertWolf101 quote: ORIGINAL: Orm The political cost for this operation seems very high to me. Not only declaring war Spain to consider here. There is also the question of Vichy France. Had AH, and Germany, planned for Spain, and Gibraltar, before they begun peace talks with France then passage for an Army going into Spain would, in my humble opinion, not been any real issue for Vichy France. But since they did not, I suspect the Vichy leadership would have strongly objected. So how would the world react to Germany entering a treaty with France, and break it before the ink dried up. And then, without any cause, advance into Spain. UK might very well have won the war by this, even if it cost them Gibraltar. FYI, German forces wouldn't need to go through Vichy territory to enter Spain. They had the ability to march through the Bordeaux-Biarritz corridor in the German occupied zone of France. warspite1 Indeed, and this didn't help their logistics situation (only one rail line - plus Spanish rail was a different gauge and there was a bridge that was susceptible to attack that needed to be heavily defended). In addition to the logistics, attacking out of one relatively small bridgehead wasn't the best start for any attack.

DesertWolf101 -> RE: OT:German imports from Spain/Turkey? (7/3/2021 5:11:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 quote: ORIGINAL: mind_messing I suppose it's important to define what we mean by invasion regarding Spain - is it a coerced "invitation" to deal with Gibraltar or an outright invasion? That changes the dynamic substantially. warspite1 It's a blitz through Spain. As per real life, Spain says no to Germany's offer (although the person proposing the strategy believes that Franco could have had his mind changed....) and Hitler decides to invade the country, and the regime that German blood was spilled to install, just the previous year. Simples I don’t know exactly what the rest of this person’s views are to respond to them, but he is not wrong about the Franco bit. Franco was a huge Germanophile who was halfway towards joining the war on the Axis side even before the Hendaye negotiations. Spanish demands to join the war on the German side were for military and economic assistance and for colonial concessions, most notably in French Morocco and around Oran. I could go into much more detail on this if interested, but essentially the Germans chose to not accept these demands since they believed that, given significant Spanish military and economic weaknesses, it was not worth the risk of alienating Vichy to gain Spanish belligerence.

warspite1 -> RE: OT:German imports from Spain/Turkey? (7/3/2021 6:31:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesertWolf101 quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 quote: ORIGINAL: mind_messing I suppose it's important to define what we mean by invasion regarding Spain - is it a coerced "invitation" to deal with Gibraltar or an outright invasion? That changes the dynamic substantially. warspite1 It's a blitz through Spain. As per real life, Spain says no to Germany's offer (although the person proposing the strategy believes that Franco could have had his mind changed....) and Hitler decides to invade the country, and the regime that German blood was spilled to install, just the previous year. Simples I don’t know exactly what the rest of this person’s views are to respond to them, but he is not wrong about the Franco bit. Franco was a huge Germanophile who was halfway towards joining the war on the Axis side even before the Hendaye negotiations. Spanish demands to join the war on the German side were for military and economic assistance and for colonial concessions, most notably in French Morocco and around Oran. I could go into much more detail on this if interested, but essentially the Germans chose to not accept these demands since they believed that, given significant Spanish military and economic weaknesses, it was not worth the risk of alienating Vichy to gain Spanish belligerence. warspite1 There is another take on this which is perhaps just as valid. Franco made demands he knew the Germans could not meet. Not, did not want to meet (although I believe that to be the case) but could not, meet. Hitler did not have the wheat, the oil and the armaments to spare that Spain needed. So Hitler pulled back, but Spanish demands had made it impossible for them to join the war. Which was the actual reason? Opinion is divided and depends to an extent on whether one believes Franco was a realist (and did not want to join the war while Britain was still alive) but was not prepared to upset Hitler with a blank refusal, and so wanted to appear keen to join - but presented inflated demands so he didn't have to) or desperate to join the Axis, and his requests were genuine (his country was a total mess) but didn't realise Germany's position sufficiently.

rustysi -> RE: OT:German imports from Spain/Turkey? (7/3/2021 7:07:22 PM)
quote: Franco made demands he knew the Germans could not meet. I recall watching some documentary years back that Hitler supposedly said, after their meeting, he rather have his teeth pulled than go through it again.

DesertWolf101 -> RE: OT:German imports from Spain/Turkey? (7/3/2021 7:27:55 PM)
Careful lads, you are falling for Francoist propaganda! [:D] In the aftermath of World War II, the Fascists in Spain deliberately built up the narrative that Franco was the savior who kept the country out of the war through a policy of 'astute caution'. This was both to buoy up domestic support during a tense political period as well as for external consumption as Franco sought to shift the country's alignment with the West. This narrative that Franco was a realist that brilliantly played the Nazis has however effectively been discredited over the past few decades and is no longer considered valid. For some easily accessible reading on this, check out this link: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/213287.pdf

warspite1 -> RE: OT:German imports from Spain/Turkey? (7/3/2021 8:01:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesertWolf101 Careful lads, you are falling for Francoist propaganda! [:D] In the aftermath of World War II, the Fascists in Spain deliberately built up the narrative that Franco was the savior who kept the country out of the war through a policy of 'astute caution'. This was both to buoy up domestic support during a tense political period as well as for external consumption as Franco sought to shift the country's alignment with the West. This narrative that Franco was a realist that brilliantly played the Nazis has however effectively been discredited over the past few decades and is no longer considered valid. For some easily accessible reading on this, check out this link: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/213287.pdf warspite1 Not saying this isn't the correct one of the two versions, but if this was it then it was certainly lucky for Franco if it was simply his lack of realism that caused him to ask for too much and for Hitler to pull back [X(]. Talk about lucky break......[;)] Personally I always find it funny that toward the end of the war, Franco believed that Hitler was still his 'friend' and didn't realise that Hitler would have killed him as soon as look at him. What a bozo.

RangerJoe -> RE: OT:German imports from Spain/Turkey? (7/3/2021 9:18:39 PM)
The Soviet Union did send tanks to Turkey. I am sure that there would easily have been other items sent. The rail line from occupied France and Spain did not connect. There was a rail line from each country going to the other country but they did not connect nor were they of the same gauge. A rail line that went through Vichy France to Spain went through a long, deep tunnel which could have been blocked. It is easy to sabotage a rail line, you don't even need explosives but a nice pry bar with leverage. Shall I invite a certain person to chime in here and tell everyone how easy it would be?

fcooke -> RE: OT:German imports from Spain/Turkey? (7/3/2021 9:44:24 PM)
Interesting debate. The route into Spain has some serious mountains, limiting the advantage of armor. Italy thought it could take out Greece and had rear handed to them, and then had to be bailed out by Germany, which delayed the invasion of the USSR. Invading Spain would likely add more delay to the USSR invasion. And I am not convinced that the Rock falls if Spain falls. After all Spain has wanted Gibraltar for a long time but the place is a fortress where armor would be largely useless. So an infantry assault against a very well fortified position. That won't be cheap. As for opening up the Black Sea to get naval assets in to pressure the USSR? What naval assets? Germany would not supply the Italian navy with enough oil to operate effectively in the Med, never mind the Black sea. And unless Germany seizes the Vichy fleet there are really not enough German naval assets to matter. Subs in the Black sea are not really going to accomplish much. And the garrison requirements would also hurt. Yugoslavia was a fairly small country and proved to be a significant pain for Germany. Countries with populations of Spain and Turkey would be a serious problem if the people decided to fight.

warspite1 -> RE: OT:German imports from Spain/Turkey? (7/3/2021 10:02:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: fcooke Interesting debate. The route into Spain has some serious mountains, limiting the advantage of armor. Italy thought it could take out Greece and had rear handed to them, and then had to be bailed out by Germany, which delayed the invasion of the USSR. Invading Spain would likely add more delay to the USSR invasion. And I am not convinced that the Rock falls if Spain falls. After all Spain has wanted Gibraltar for a long time but the place is a fortress where armor would be largely useless. So an infantry assault against a very well fortified position. That won't be cheap. As for opening up the Black Sea to get naval assets in to pressure the USSR? What naval assets? Germany would not supply the Italian navy with enough oil to operate effectively in the Med, never mind the Black sea. And unless Germany seizes the Vichy fleet there are really not enough German naval assets to matter. Subs in the Black sea are not really going to accomplish much. And the garrison requirements would also hurt. Yugoslavia was a fairly small country and proved to be a significant pain for Germany. Countries with populations of Spain and Turkey would be a serious problem if the people decided to fight. warspite1 The only comment I would disagree on is the fall of The Rock. However that is only because of the artillery and aircraft that the Germans were planning to utilise. They would have got Gibraltar to surrender I have no doubt. The problem of course is that the 'blitz' through Spain - and remember this is what M_M believes is possible - isn't much of a blitz. And if its not a blitz that can be achieved speedily and with little cost, then its not going to assist the next dominoes that needed toppling - the taking of Turkey and North Africa. The 1942 Barbarossa then potentially becomes a worse proposition for Germany - and that is the very thing that this 'blitz' is trying to avoid!!

fcooke -> RE: OT:German imports from Spain/Turkey? (7/3/2021 10:23:58 PM)
I don't know - the Rock is quite 'solid' so I don't think arty/airpower would be very effective. And the tunnel system there is impressive. And then the Germans would have to take out the monkeys as well. In fairness the monkeys are pretty friendly, so likely not a problem. A fairly interesting place to visit if you have been already. You're pretty close, but don't fly to Gibraltar directly - that is one terrifying airfield. And then holiday in southern Spain.

Orm -> RE: OT:German imports from Spain/Turkey? (7/4/2021 6:20:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesertWolf101 quote: ORIGINAL: Orm The political cost for this operation seems very high to me. Not only declaring war Spain to consider here. There is also the question of Vichy France. Had AH, and Germany, planned for Spain, and Gibraltar, before they begun peace talks with France then passage for an Army going into Spain would, in my humble opinion, not been any real issue for Vichy France. But since they did not, I suspect the Vichy leadership would have strongly objected. So how would the world react to Germany entering a treaty with France, and break it before the ink dried up. And then, without any cause, advance into Spain. UK might very well have won the war by this, even if it cost them Gibraltar. FYI, German forces wouldn't need to go through Vichy territory to enter Spain. They had the ability to march through the Bordeaux-Biarritz corridor in the German occupied zone of France. Thank you. [:)] [&o] Yes. They could have. I think it was concluded in a previous discussion that just using that corridor was not practical when attempting to blitz through Spain in short time so I did not include this possibility in my post. If this is considered the invasion route, then I will amend my thinking accordingly.

warspite1 -> RE: OT:German imports from Spain/Turkey? (7/4/2021 6:59:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: fcooke I don't know - the Rock is quite 'solid' so I don't think arty/airpower would be very effective. And then the Germans would have to take out the monkeys as well. In fairness the monkeys are pretty friendly, so likely not a problem. warspite1 Yes, I admit 'The Rock' is tres formidable, and that they would need a lot of artillery and air power. I am not sure the Barbary Apes are as friendly as you remember them though.... The Rock visiting Gibraltar Zoo with his pet Barbary Ape, Brian, in March 1941 [image]local://upfiles/28156/F0945A2583384D05BCA925355F884B90.jpg[/image]

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

9.625