simpleton
Chief petty officer
Posts: 111 
Likes: 2
|
Post by simpleton on Sept 1, 2017 21:44:44 GMT
Poland, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia and Bulgaria, all had good size armies and strategic location (close to Romania, Hungary, Germany, Turkey, Italy, etc,) However, they were poorly equipped (few planes, tanks, etc,) and individually, they were no match for Germany-Italy. Accordingly, when Germany annexes Austria, they know thay are next. Stalin knows that after acquiring the industry, mineral resources, grain, labor force, etc, of these countries, Germany will be much stronger and difficult to stop, when it invades the USSR.
On 12 March, 1938, when Germany occupies Austria, Stalin invades Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania and proposes the immediate formation of a formidable Slavic coalition including Poland, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, Bulgaria and the USSR. Coalition members will be safe from german invasion, since Hitler will not dare fight so many countries simultaneously. Moreover, the USSR will sell planes, tanks, AT, AA and field guns, munitions, etc, to coalition members. Coalition members will not trade with Germany to deny it grain, minerals, etc, The coalition will remain secret, until Romania is invaded.
The coalition will invade in rapid sequence:
1) Hungary will be attacked simultaneously on 5 April 1938 by Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia and Poland and fall within days.
2) Immediately after the fall of Hungary, Romania will be attacked by all coalition members from all sides and fall within 20 days.
3) Germany will be attacked in May 1938 by all coalition members and fall within 7 weeks. Poland will invade SIlesia and 1/2 of Saxony. Czechoslovakia will invade 1/3 of Austria, 1/3 of Bavaria and 1/2 of Saxony. Yugoslavia will invade 1/3 of Austria, 1/3 of Bavaria. Bulgaria will invade 1/3 of Austria, 1/3 of Bavaria. The USSR will invade East Prussia, Prussia, Hanover, Hamburg, Friesland, Rhineland, Saar, Ruhr, etc,
4) Turkey will be invaded by the USSR form the S. Caucaus and by Bulgaria, Poland and Yugoslavia. Syria will be invaded by the USSR, Czechoslovakia, Bulgaria and Yugoslavia.
5) The near and middle east will be invaded by all members of the coalition. Northern Italy will be invaded by Yugoslavia and Poland.
Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, Bulgaria and Poland know that French strategy is to defend the Maginot line, rather than attack Germany, if it invades their countries. So they're doomed, unless they join the coalition, buy planes, tanks, etc, and force Germany to fight simultaneously against the whole coalition. Accordingly, they accept Stalin's offer, join the coalition and buy I-16, SBD bombers, BT-7 tanks, etc, to boost their forces.
Hitler is shocked when the Soviets occupy the Baltic Countries and their forces face East Prussia, isolated from the rest of Germany. His plans to invade Czechoslovakiaand acquire its valuable industry and strategic defensive location have been thwarted, since the Soviet threat must be addressed immediately by reinforcing East Prussia and Prussia. While Germany reinforces E. Prussia, Hungary is rapidly invaded and then Romania. Hitler wants to assist Romania (to secure oil, grain, etc, which he is not receiving from the Soviets), but he fears that while he attacks Czechoslovakia, Poland and Yugoslavia, E. Prussia will fall. Moreover, the lack of Romanian and Soviet fuel has left him with inadequate reserves to fight the coalition.
|
|
johnro
Banned
Banned
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
|
Post by johnro on Sept 2, 2017 14:07:48 GMT
Poland, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia and Bulgaria, all had good size armies and strategic location (close to Romania, Hungary, Germany, Turkey, Italy, etc,) However, they were poorly equipped ( few planes, tanks, etc,) Is this a "good size army"? What then is a "bad size army"?  |
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,973
Likes: 49,378
|
Post by lordroel on Sept 2, 2017 14:11:30 GMT
What then is a "bad size army"? The one that losses. |
|
johnro
Banned
Banned
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
|
Post by johnro on Sept 2, 2017 15:29:35 GMT
What then is a "bad size army"? The one that losses. controversially Switzerland has not losses, in the World War I and World War II..... |
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,973
Likes: 49,378
|
Post by lordroel on Sept 2, 2017 15:31:54 GMT
controversially Switzerland has not losses, in the World War I and World War II..... Because it always has focus on a total defense. |
|
simpleton
Chief petty officer
Posts: 111
Likes: 2
|
Post by simpleton on Sept 2, 2017 19:43:19 GMT
johnro,
Relative to population, Switzerland and Finland had good size, well equipped and trained armies. Switzerland did not lose, simply because it was not invaded, otherwise, it would have faired no better than Poland, Belgium, Yugoslavia, Finland, France or Greece in WW II, which also had good size armies. In contrast, in 1939 (and even in 1941) the US army is ridiculous in size, equipment and training, considering that it is the wealthiest nation and has 130 million people. Britain also has a ridiculous army in 1939, relative ro population and wealth (trash compared with Czechoslovakia, Poland, etc,). At least Britain had a much better air force and navy than the US. Holland also had a ridiculous army in 1939, much inferior to Belgium's or even to Holland's in 1940.
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,973
Likes: 49,378
|
Post by lordroel on Sept 2, 2017 19:44:54 GMT
johnro, Holland also had a ridiculous army in 1939, much inferior to Belgium's or even to Holland's in 1940. That is sadly true, the started to late with their rearmament program at a time everybody was already doing that and thus they never got everything they wanted. |
|
simpleton
Chief petty officer
Posts: 111
Likes: 2
|
Post by simpleton on Sept 2, 2017 19:46:17 GMT
They ordered cannon from Germany! which only delivered a handful, before invading Holland
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,973
Likes: 49,378
|
Post by lordroel on Sept 2, 2017 19:50:38 GMT
They ordered cannon from Germany! which only delivered a handful, before invading Holland The Germans also delayed most of the Netherlands orders. |
|
simpleton
Chief petty officer
Posts: 111
Likes: 2
|
Post by simpleton on Sept 3, 2017 17:28:54 GMT
The Nederlands had 2 good fighters, the Fokker D.XXI and the Koolhoven, but did not produce them in useful numbers. They were much better than the Polish fighters which downed several LW planes and the French Caudron (500 hp, so bad and dangerous that even Finland, desperate for planes, refused them), which Polish pilots flew in France to shoot down Bf 109 and Bf 110 and bombers. Dutch pilots were as good as Polish pilots and the LW was split among France, Belgium and Holland, with the strongest part supporting the sickle stroke.
Had Germany not destroyed the Fokker plant duringthe invasion, the tough, inexpensive, low maintenance and quick turn around D.XXI would have been very useful in Barbarossa
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,973
Likes: 49,378
|
Post by lordroel on Sept 3, 2017 17:33:39 GMT
The Nederlands had 2 good fighters, the Fokker D.XXI and the Koolhoven, but did not produce them in useful numbers. They were much better than the Polish fighters which downed several LW planes and the French Caudron (500 hp, so bad and dangerous that even Finland, desperate for planes, refused them), which Polish pilots flew in France to shoot down Bf 109 and Bf 110 and bombers. Dutch pilots were as good as Polish pilots and the LW was split among France, Belgium and Holland, with the strongest part supporting the sickle stroke. Had Germany not destroyed the Fokker plant duringthe invasion, the tough, inexpensive, low maintenance and quick turn around D.XXI would have been very useful in Barbarossa Or the Germans could have sold them to Finland who also oparated the D.XXI. |
|
simpleton
Chief petty officer
Posts: 111
Likes: 2
|
Post by simpleton on Sept 3, 2017 18:20:01 GMT
With fixed landing gear it was excellent for supporting the rapid advance from the primitive airfields in the USSR. It would probably be as useful for dive bombing aginst tanks, MG nests, etc, as the Hs 123 biplane, which proved ideal for Barbarossa and much cheaper than the Stuka. At least the D.XXI has a closed cabin, which the HS 123 didn't! It would also be better to shoot down the slow biplane bombers of the night witches, too slow and maneuverable (after dropping its bombs) for the Bf 109. Hell even 200 CR.42 biplane fighters would have been very helpful in Barbarossa, where the LW was spread extremely thin over a huge front after losing about 5,000 planes in Europe, the Med and over Britain and with many planes badly worn or in need fo repairs before Barbarossa.
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,973
Likes: 49,378
|
Post by lordroel on Sept 3, 2017 18:29:43 GMT
With fixed landing gear it was excellent for supporting the rapid advance from the primitive airfields in the USSR. It would probably be as useful for dive bombing aginst tanks, MG nests, etc, as the Hs 123 biplane, which proved ideal for Barbarossa and much cheaper than the Stuka. At least the D.XXI has a closed cabin, which the HS 123 didn't! It would also be better to shoot down the slow biplane bombers of the night witches, too slow and maneuverable (after dropping its bombs) for the Bf 109. Hell even 200 CR.42 biplane fighters would have been very helpful in Barbarossa, where the LW was spread extremely thin over a huge front after losing about 5,000 planes in Europe, the Med and over Britain and with many planes badly worn or in need fo repairs before Barbarossa. So use the D.XXI as a dive bomber then. |
|
simpleton
Chief petty officer
Posts: 111
Likes: 2
|
Post by simpleton on Sept 3, 2017 23:24:58 GMT
The D.XXI was reported to be the only fighter that could attack a diving Stuka (follow it in a dive). The Hs 123 was designed as a fighter-bomber, but it was slower and less aerodynamic, so it consumed more fuel. Germany wasted a lot of money building expensive white elephants (Bf 110, He 177, Stuka, etc,). It would have been much better served producing a large number of the more primitive, cheap and tough Hs 123 and D.XXI for decisive Barbarossa, the last chance to defeat the USSR, before the US entered the war. The same is true about tanks. Germany spent a lot of money making a few expensive and vulnerable Pz III with a crew of 5 and a 37 mm and then a 50 mm cannon (medium length barrell for Barbarossa), instead of building a large number of cheaper, less tall (more difficult target) and expensive, with a crew of 4 and more powerfully armed STUG III, which proved longer lived and more deadly in Barbarossa, but there were very few of them and with an absurdly short barrel. 2,000 STUG with a long barrel would have been very useful in Barbarossa and a lot more would be produced than Pz III or IV to replace losses during Barbarossa.
|
|
Tipsyfish
Petty Officer 2nd Class
Posts: 46
Likes: 7
|
Post by Tipsyfish on Nov 17, 2017 17:41:17 GMT
Okay, let's pick this apart a bit.
1.) The Little Entente had largely been removed as a viable political force at this point and no amount of strong arming (especially from the USSR) is really going to solve that.
2.) They still see no reason to actually invade any of the nations. None of them (outside of possibly Stalin) wants a war. Trying to convince them to wage an aggression war is going to be near impossible to do. More so since any action would cause British, French and Italian diplomatic efforts to get it resolved. More so if the USSR is known to have influenced this decision.
3.) Poland will NEVER agree to anything that ties them to the USSR. Period.
4.) It's a bit hard to have something to remain secret when all trade is cut off. Especially harder to do when German trade is VERY important to the economy of these nations (Bulgaria the least but still important).
5.) Hungary and Romania aren't even allied with Germany at this point (Hungary does support Germany though) so.. Why would they bother attacking unless this was the USSR trying to just invade Europe as a whole.
Past that point it's just far far far far too un-realistic. Logistics, reality, prevent invasions like this.
Military numbers:
Yugoslavia: The nation had about 4,000 artillery pieces, many were aged and horse-drawn, around 1,700 of these were relatively modern, including 812 Czech 37mm and 47mm anti-tank guns. There were also about 2,300 mortars, including 1,600 modern 81 millimetres pieces, as well as twenty-four 220 millimetres and 305 millimetres pieces each. Of 940 anti-aircraft guns, 360 were 15 millimetres and 20 millimetres Czech and Italian models. All of these arms were imported from different sources, which meant that the various models often lacked proper repair and maintenance facilities. The only mechanized units were 6 motorized infantry battalions in the three cavalry divisions, six motorized artillery regiments, two tank battalions equipped with 110 tanks, one of which had Renault FT models of World War I origin and the other 54 modern French Renault R35 tanks (which out-performed Panzer III's to a large extent) plus an independent tank company with eight Czech SI-D tank destroyers.
Fully mobilized, the Yugoslav Army could have put 28 infantry divisions, three cavalry divisions, and 35 independent regiments in the field. Of the independent regiments, 16 were in frontier fortifications and 19 were organized as combined detachments, around the size of a reinforced brigade. Each detachment had one to three infantry regiments and one to three artillery battalions, with three organised as "alpine" units."
Turkey: Turkey had a peace time army of 174,000 men which didn't start seeing increase until the start of 1940, at that time they mustered ~230,000 men, one armored brigade, and three cavalry brigades with four corps stationed in the eastern "frontiers" of the nation, one corps in Thrace and one in reserve. Almost all of the equipment was pre-WW1 with rifles like the Lee Enfield, Lebel, Masuiers etc. being used, this could easily be remedied with Italian or German made weaponry but it is still something to consider. They had fortifications along the Dardanelles and along the outer regions of the country to the East, including heavy works at Erzurum, Kars, Adana among some others.
The air-force was 370 planes of all type with only about half of them being modern even though they had over 8,000 men in their air-force.
The Turkish navy consisted of the outdated battle cruiser Yavuz (ex-Goeben), 4 destroyers, 5-6 submarines, 2 light cruisers, 3 mine-sweepers, 2 gunboats, 3 motor torpedo boats, 4 minelayers and a surveying vessel.
Turkey had one main rail-line connecting the country that was in pretty decent shape but it was only one rail (from what I found at least) so troop/supply transport would require more lines being laid. Some rail was being laid that would link along the southern coast of the country but that had only been recently in production and was only around 5-10% completed.
Czechoslovakia: 42 Infantry Divisions, Eight Calvary Divisions, 2,200 guns, 500 tanks, and 880 aircraft.
Germany: 50 Infantry Divisions, 15 Calvary divisions, 2,000 tanks, 3,000 guns, and 2,500 aircraft.
|
|
