lordroel
Administrator
Member is Online
Posts: 67,996
Likes: 49,391
|
Post by lordroel on Apr 28, 2019 8:46:47 GMT
Another thing too: would the Germans allow Saudi Arabia to annex the Gulf States? Or would Hitler allow the Gulf states to retain their independence? Only i assume if Saudi Arabia becomes very Pro-German.
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,836
Likes: 13,225
|
Post by stevep on Apr 28, 2019 11:55:07 GMT
Another thing too: would the Germans allow Saudi Arabia to annex the Gulf States? Or would Hitler allow the Gulf states to retain their independence?
Independent non-Ayran states, especially ones containing important resources [oil supplies] and with an alien culture in a Nazi victory world. Isn't that a contradiction in terms?
|
|
James G
Squadron vice admiral
Posts: 7,608
Likes: 8,833
|
Post by James G on Apr 28, 2019 11:58:15 GMT
I am sure that the current Gulf States were rather just mini kingdoms under UK control at that time. They weren't independent like they are now.
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,836
Likes: 13,225
|
Post by stevep on Apr 28, 2019 12:05:13 GMT
I am sure that the current Gulf States were rather just mini kingdoms under UK control at that time. They weren't independent like they are now.
Yes they were the Trucial States protectorates. However they were largely self governing internally and Saudi was pretty much so although following the British line in foreign issues. However especially once important oil discoveries are made in the region I can't see them staying even semi-independent in a Nazi dominated world.
|
|
James G
Squadron vice admiral
Posts: 7,608
Likes: 8,833
|
Post by James G on Apr 28, 2019 12:08:15 GMT
I was reading the other night about Egypt's king at the time. Lordroel called him pro-Italian. He was kind of. He was a bit all over the place though. His final years of rule were even more crazy than the Shah of Iran's. At one point, the Egyptian king called for German victory and to have them take over Egypt. At the end of the war, Egypt joined the allies and declared war. So I think Egypt's fate would be to see Germany take them, give Italy a piece, and see the silly king manipulated fully to allow for even less independence than they had under British control.
|
|
|
Post by Middlesex_Toffeeman on Apr 28, 2019 16:44:58 GMT
I am sure that the current Gulf States were rather just mini kingdoms under UK control at that time. They weren't independent like they are now.
Yes they were the Trucial States protectorates. However they were largely self governing internally and Saudi was pretty much so although following the British line in foreign issues. However especially once important oil discoveries are made in the region I can't see them staying even semi-independent in a Nazi dominated world.
Depends what the Nazi line towards Arabs is - perhaps KSA as a third power selling oil to the highest bidder? Add in some Shah Palavi reforms and you have a libertarian Saudi state, even as a British/American ally.
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,836
Likes: 13,225
|
Post by stevep on Apr 28, 2019 21:23:39 GMT
Yes they were the Trucial States protectorates. However they were largely self governing internally and Saudi was pretty much so although following the British line in foreign issues. However especially once important oil discoveries are made in the region I can't see them staying even semi-independent in a Nazi dominated world.
Depends what the Nazi line towards Arabs is - perhaps KSA as a third power selling oil to the highest bidder? Add in some Shah Palavi reforms and you have a libertarian Saudi state, even as a British/American ally.
MT
Not sure how practical that would be. If Germany has won big it will control the area and unless the regime changes its behaviour radically once the strategic important of the gulf oil stockpiles are realised its not going to be happy with the kingdom, or any other state in the region being able to do what Berlin wants with such materials.
Also given how deeply the dynasty is tied to the Wahhabist movement I can't really see it trying to introduce a more libertarian system, even given Mohamed's previous role as a merchant. Think the mullah's would bitterly oppose anything like that.
Steve
|
|
|
Post by Middlesex_Toffeeman on Apr 29, 2019 5:50:46 GMT
Depends what the Nazi line towards Arabs is - perhaps KSA as a third power selling oil to the highest bidder? Add in some Shah Palavi reforms and you have a libertarian Saudi state, even as a British/American ally.
MT
Not sure how practical that would be. If Germany has won big it will control the area and unless the regime changes its behaviour radically once the strategic important of the gulf oil stockpiles are realised its not going to be happy with the kingdom, or any other state in the region being able to do what Berlin wants with such materials.
Also given how deeply the dynasty is tied to the Wahhabist movement I can't really see it trying to introduce a more libertarian system, even given Mohamed's previous role as a merchant. Think the mullah's would bitterly oppose anything like that.
Steve
Shah Palavi's Iran did move towards that kind of government with oil, so it is possible.
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Member is Online
Posts: 67,996
Likes: 49,391
|
Post by lordroel on Apr 29, 2019 15:07:21 GMT
Another thing too: would the Germans allow Saudi Arabia to annex the Gulf States? Or would Hitler allow the Gulf states to retain their independence? I would not be surprise if Iraq and Iran get some new territory, but do not know if Saudi Arabia will be among them who gets to expand.
|
|
|
Post by EwellHolmes on Apr 30, 2019 20:31:34 GMT
Lehi repeatedly attempted to form an alliance with the Germans, offering to stage an Anti-British uprising and citing their similar political system as a ideological basis of the alliance. As for the Italians, in general they performed rather well but their various failures at times tend to obscure their overall performance. The Greek campaign is a great example of this, in that by the time of the German intervention the Italians had, despite the initial Greek successes, said Greeks on the ropes; their forces were dangerously overextended both strategically and logistically, without fixed defenses, and they had a few weeks of munitions left. Concurrent to this, much is made of Operation Compass but what gets left out of that discussion is that the British offensive had reached the end of its logistical lines and was about to slam into well prepared Italian defenses, numerically superior and IIRC more than a match firepower wise. You see this play out throughout the war as a whole as well. Rommel was notoriously dismissive of the Italians as a whole, especially their officer corps, but specifically noted the Italian soldiers were good fighters. This is backed up Western accounts, which note the tenacious, to the point of being suicidal, defense of Italian units in Tunisia; given the majority of Rommel's forces were Italians, this makes sense. On the Russian steppe, the 8th Army fought on even after being encircled, to the point the Russians in some cases were literally forced to overrun positions with their tanks. The Italians then burnt their unit standards as a fuck you to the Reds, and then staged a breakout on their own that saw some manage to escape which is a feat not many on the Axis side could claim in the Winter of 1942. When the RSI became a thing, their units developed a reputation as being the premier tank hunters of any side in the war and they used this to their advantage in December of 1944 to stage the last successful large scale offensive on the Axis side.
The Italians had some good troops despite their officers and their equipment but the latter is vital in a N African position. They simply didn't have the logistics and the armour especially to force their way into the delta region unless Britain really fouls it up even more than OTL with the diversions, 1st to E Africa and then to Greece.
Lehi may have been mad enough to trust the Nazis but I doubt if many other Jews would have, especially when their nowhere near Palestine.
At least in terms of 1940, the Italian Army was well positioned to overrun Egypt had a more competent commander been in charge. The equipment, logistics, numerical superiority and even doctrine was there for them to do so:
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,836
Likes: 13,225
|
Post by stevep on May 1, 2019 8:40:28 GMT
The Italians had some good troops despite their officers and their equipment but the latter is vital in a N African position. They simply didn't have the logistics and the armour especially to force their way into the delta region unless Britain really fouls it up even more than OTL with the diversions, 1st to E Africa and then to Greece.
Lehi may have been mad enough to trust the Nazis but I doubt if many other Jews would have, especially when their nowhere near Palestine.
At least in terms of 1940, the Italian Army was well positioned to overrun Egypt had a more competent commander been in charge. The equipment, logistics, numerical superiority and even doctrine was there for them to do so:
In theory it could have done that but while it possibly had the material resources for such an operation, albeit at the end of a very long supply line, it didn't have the training at just about all levels.
Also they still have the question of getting past El Alamein, which is a natural blocking point that can't be outflanked and hence are forced into a frontal assault.
|
|
|
Post by EwellHolmes on May 2, 2019 0:16:39 GMT
In theory it could have done that but while it possibly had the material resources for such an operation, albeit at the end of a very long supply line, it didn't have the training at just about all levels.
Also they still have the question of getting past El Alamein, which is a natural blocking point that can't be outflanked and hence are forced into a frontal assault.
The Italians had developed the concept in the 1930s and had actually used it in Ethiopia, so the training and experience was there. You can read much of the study here, if you'd like.
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,836
Likes: 13,225
|
Post by stevep on May 2, 2019 9:01:17 GMT
In theory it could have done that but while it possibly had the material resources for such an operation, albeit at the end of a very long supply line, it didn't have the training at just about all levels.
Also they still have the question of getting past El Alamein, which is a natural blocking point that can't be outflanked and hence are forced into a frontal assault.
The Italians had developed the concept in the 1930s and had actually used it in Ethiopia, so the training and experience was there. You can read much of the study here, if you'd like.
I read through the 2nd chapter, on the development of the doctrine and skimmed through the historical data in the 1st chapter but that was the limit of what I can see. It does point out that while the Italian army developed a doctrine as a result of the fighting in Ethiopia and Spain they hadn't had a chance to test it in areas such as the Libyan desert or against a modern enemy. Most of the training after Spain were elite forces were developed were in relatively limited areas in northern Italy rather than the problems that would be faced in Libya/Egypt. Although some experience had been gained again the Ethiopians on the southern front in the Ogden desert.
Also it points out that while the Libyan army realised a much better tank was needed than the L3 but they were struggling to develop and deploy it.
I noticed one very dubious statement, like the suggestion that the Senussi rebels against Italian rule were supported by the British government in Egypt. Never seem any suggestion of this before and it would be extremely unlikely, at least before Italy entered the war against Britain in 1940. In WWI both powers were allied against the Senussi rebellion as it extended into Egyptian territory. Also that this suggestion was made without any supporting reference.
Since I can't see what it says about the actual campaign in 1940 and why Graziani didn't use a doctrine he had an hand in developing its difficult to judge but would suspect this would be either because of orders from above or because he lacked the resources to do so. Such a doctrine in a situation like the western desert needed not only the mobile forces to exploit a breakthrough or maneuver around a flank but also a lot of mobile units to supply them and I wonder if those existed. Noticeably while they had constructed a coastal road across much of Libya the Italians hadn't yet built a railway to link up their colony, which would have eased their supply problems, at least up until the Egyptian border.
Also there is still the point that if the Italians had developed and deployed such forces then Britain could have withdrawn to the El Alamein and the Italians would have been forced into a frontal assault against such a position, with a supply line reaching through the western desert back to Libya.
|
|
James G
Squadron vice admiral
Posts: 7,608
Likes: 8,833
|
Post by James G on May 5, 2019 21:53:49 GMT
What fate awaits Morocco in such a scenario? France and Spain both have control over parts of that nation but I'm sure a victorious Germany and Italy would have ambitions there too?
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,836
Likes: 13,225
|
Post by stevep on May 6, 2019 11:10:12 GMT
What fate awaits Morocco in such a scenario? France and Spain both have control over parts of that nation but I'm sure a victorious Germany and Italy would have ambitions there too?
Depending on Franco's behaviour but if he's not considered "helpful" enough I can see parts of N Morocco and/or Gibraltar going to either Germany or Italy to control access to the Med and give a base for operations in the Atlantic. Also whether Hitler values Vichy as a useful puppet in which case he might respect at least some parts of the French empire. One advantage of this is if it was dismantled pretty much totally I can see the US reacting - presuming it still exists - to take over French colonies in the Americas to prevent them falling into Axis hands. They would have an excuse for this as it would definitely contravene the Monroe Doctrine. As such places like Martinique could possibly be used as based for some German naval units calling in if still in French control but if Germany tried to take them over directly expect a strong US reaction.
Depends here on what is meant by an Axis Victory. Very unlikely to see it overrun the Americas, at least in the 1940's so thinking it means Britain and Russia and other states in the eastern hemisphere are defeated and pretty much under total Axis control but N America is still free.
|
|