WWII Hypothetical: The Mediterranean Strategy

[David Floyd]

Franco had a battle hardened army which would have been very handy for the Axis.

Possibly, once the Axis - namely Germany - supplied Spain with some quality equipment.

Spain joining the war would have opened the possibility of another peninsula war like in the Napoleonic wars, Churchill actually seriously proposed an invasion of Spain to open a second front in 1943,

Churchill proposed all kinds of things, from going back into Greece to sailing a battlefleet into the Baltic. None of this actually ever happened, and the Americans certainly wouldn't have allowed an invasion of Spain. Hell, if Spain joined the war and the Brits lost Gibraltor and Egypt and the Middle East, Churchill would have probably lost power.

[SKILORD]

Well, David. Someone has finally Really replied to a post of mine. (We shan't count J. Miller's attempts)

Thge Timeline is probably a little off since I don't have a real timeline written down. It's all off of the top of my head there.

As for the Jasp joining the Germans, well the Germans control the Middle Eastern Oil so they can always try to bribe the Japs with that.

I grant that you may have some point regarding the duifficulty of conquering Britain. However as AH noted at the beginning it would only require a sufficient humiliation (Let us say Suez now)

As for the Mexican 'Immigrant Superpower' It was intended lightly, not as a serious counterfactual.

[David Floyd]

HOw does Turkey play into all of this?

They were in the same boat as Spain. Actually, they had a resource Germany badly needed - chromium - as well as occupying a strategic position. However, they were not likely to join the war until it had already been won (which, historically, they did, on the Allies' side). Like the Spanish, they would have required MAJOR German arms and resources shipments, and would have given the Germans even less material aid than the Spanish, in the context that by the time they would have given the aid, the Germans wouldn't have needed it.

[Alexander's Horse]

Originally posted by Ted Striker
HOw does Turkey play into all of this?

Ah thank you Ted

Once the Middle East fell, Germany would have been in a strong position to get Turkey to either join the axis or collaborate with German plans for the eventual attack on Russia - the Black Sea, the Crimea and the Caucasus are all cracked wide open once the Dardanelles are under Axis control.

[David Floyd]

As for the Jasp joining the Germans, well the Germans control the Middle Eastern Oil so they can always try to bribe the Japs with that.

First of all, the Germans would have needed much of this oil for themselves and their allies. Secondly, I fail to see how the Germans are going to ship oil from the Middle East to Japan - remember that a LARGE proportion of oil was refined at the Abadan complex, which the British surely would have destroyed if the Germans were likely to take it. Further, the Japanese aren't going to want to be reliant on a European power for their existance - Germany could control Japanese moves by threatening to cut off the oil. Japan needed it's OWN source of oil.

I grant that you may have some point regarding the duifficulty of conquering Britain. However as AH noted at the beginning it would only require a sufficient humiliation (Let us say Suez now)

No, losing Suez MIGHT bring about Churchill's fall from power, but it certainly wouldn't mean the English would simply surrender.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by SKILORD
In the Spring of 1943, their forces well amassed, Germany declares war on the Soviet Union

That would most likely be pre-empted by a Soviet offensive on Nazi Germany. Not deployed in defensive positions, it would be likely that many German divisions got crushed during the beginning attacks, much like what happened during Barbarosa.

The USSR will attack Germany if Germany didn't attack first. Hilter knew this. In fact, many contend that, the Soviet Union was within weeks of launching an attack when Barbarosa started. Perhaps Hitler got wind of this, and knew that he couldn't wait any longer.

In fact, the longer you wait, the further the pendulum will swing to the USSR's side, as they would recover more from Stalin's purge.

[David Floyd]

Once the Middle East fell, Germany would have been in a strong position to get Turkey to either join the axis or collaborate with German plans for the eventual attack on Russia - the Black Sea, the Crimea and the Caucasus are all cracked wide open once the Dardanelles are under Axis control.

The problem here is that the Turkish army was worse off than the Spanish army. Weak Red Army forces in the Caucasus would have probably shredded any Turkish offensive. Major operations against the Crimea would have required a good deal more shipping and amphibious assets than the entire Axis even had, and even if they got ashore, I don't see where they could have gotten air cover from (unless of course the front lines are close enough by that point, which sorta seems like an amphibious operation against the Crimea would be of limited value).

And remember that Turkey was going NOWHERE without promises of German hardware, and if Germany failed to deliver, Turkey could have achieved little or nothing.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
Once the Middle East fell, Germany would have been in a strong position to get Turkey to either join the axis or collaborate with German plans for the eventual attack on Russia - the Black Sea, the Crimea and the Caucasus are all cracked wide open once the Dardanelles are under Axis control.

This of course ignores the fact that, if Germany didn't attack the Soviets, they would be free to swing through Turkey to attack North Africa. Particularly if they were stupid enough to join the Axis.

[David Floyd]

In fact, the longer you wait, the further the pendulum will swing to the USSR's side, as they would recover more from Stalin's purge.

On the other hand, if commanders such as Budenny and Voroshilov and other "political reliables" were running a Red Army offensive, my guess is that it wouldn't fare too well.

[Alexander's Horse]

Originally posted by David Floyd


Possibly, once the Axis - namely Germany - supplied Spain with some quality equipment.

No need - the idea would be to use Spanish troops for second and third order priorities like occupation work thus freeing up German troops for higher priority activities.

Hell, if Spain joined the war and the Brits lost Gibraltor and Egypt and the Middle East, Churchill would have probably lost power.

Exactly - you are now arguing the case for the Mediterranian strategy very well

Part of the plan was precisely to inflict such humilating and demoralising defeats on British forces as to cause the fall of Churchill's government. If the British 8th army had been defeated in 1941, combined with the loss of Singapore and much of Britain's Eastern empire in early 1942, it is difficult to see how Churchill's government could have survived. Churchill himself believed if he lost Egypt he would lose government.

[Ted Striker]

I think the whole reason this was never implemented is because the Italians were supposed to take care of North Africa and Greece (Mediterranean) but they continuously kept messing up everything.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by David Floyd
On the other hand, if commanders such as Budenny and Voroshilov and other "political reliables" were running a Red Army offensive, my guess is that it wouldn't fare too well.

That's true, though I still think it's safe to say that a lot of German air assets would be destroyed on the ground by Soviet air forces during the initial salvo, much like what happened in Barbarosa.

Now, given that the Soviets outproduce Nazi Germany, and that a large contingent of troops would be needed in the UK to guard against uprisings, the worst case scenario is probably an attrition war that Germany loses slowly.

[David Floyd]

No need - the idea would be to use Spanish troops for second and third order priorities like occupation work thus freeing up German troops for higher priority activities.

Of course, German occupation troops in the West were largely either the dregs of the Germans army, shattered divisions, or soldiers recuperating from wounds, so I'm not sure what putting these guys on a major front achieves, except more casualties. The Germans still have to supply the equipment for the occupation troops.

Putting these guys on occupation duty in the East is a possibility, I suppose, but the large-scale use of the Spanish Army on occupation duty in the Soviet Union during the winter would probably be largely opposed by Franco.

Part of the plan was precisely to inflict such humilating and demoralising defeats on British forces as to cause the fall of Churchill's government. If the British 8th army had been defeated in 1941, combined with the loss of Singapore and much of Britain's Eastern empire in early 1942, it is difficult to see how Churchill's government could have survived. Churchill himself believed if he lost Egypt he would lose government.

Possibly, but a fall of the Churchill government doesn't lead to the fall of Britain. And in any case, if we're talking about a 1942 timescale now, then the US is already in the war - making a British loss impossible and outside the realm of the imagination.

And losing Egypt does NOT guarantee the fall of Churchill, by the way.

But all of this is predicated on the notion that Spain would join the Axis PRIOR to a major Axis victory in the Mediterranean, and I've already pointed out that this was quite unlikely. If Germany can take Egypt on its own, what's the point of buying off Spain so it can take out Gibraltor, and if Germany can't take Egypt on its own, Spain probably won't join the war. It's kind of a catch-22.

[David Floyd]

Now, given that the Soviets outproduce Nazi Germany, and that a large contingent of troops would be needed in the UK to guard against uprisings, the worst case scenario is probably an attrition war that Germany loses slowly

This assumes two things. First, that the production difference in favor of the Soviets exceeds the "destruction of equipment" difference in favor of the Germans, and that Germany is occupying Great Britain. The first is quite unlikely, with the German Army on the defensive in its prime, and the second is quite impossible.

[David Floyd]

Oh, and by the way, the Soviets didn't outproduce Germany by as much as you seem to think they did, and without Lend Lease, this production difference would be even slighter.