stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,835 
Likes: 13,224
|
Post by stevep on Aug 15, 2016 11:45:18 GMT
By that time Britain is starting to get more capable strategic bombers and although accuracy is still abysmal the great increase in bomb load against a target such as a large oil producing area could be nasty, especially since I remember reading once a report from an American oil expert visiting there that safety standards were so poor that it sounded like it was very vulnerable. However the bigged object to this idea is why? Pike at that point would be pointless. You [i,e. Britain/Churchill] knows from Ultra and the like that a German attack on the Soviets is coming. [About the only person who didn't was Stalin who was in acuate denial about it. As such, unless you want to weaken the Soviets, who many experts thought would collapse similarly to France, and make them even more mistrustful of Britain I can't see any point. Being ready to try and devastate it in 42-43 if the Soviet position collapsed and it looked like Baku would fall into German hands without Soviet demolitions being effect yes. But in May-June 41 against a still officially neutral state you expect to be anally soon it looks totally counter-productive. Unless I'm missing something, which is always possible as I'm very short of sleep currently.  |
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,973
Likes: 49,378
|
Post by lordroel on Aug 15, 2016 12:07:50 GMT
By that time Britain is starting to get more capable strategic bombers and although accuracy is still abysmal the great increase in bomb load against a target such as a large oil producing area could be nasty, especially since I remember reading once a report from an American oil expert visiting there that safety standards were so poor that it sounded like it was very vulnerable. I do not think the the Soviet are just sitting by and have not good AA defense in the Baku, probably more in 1941 than in 1940. |
|
|
|
Post by kubocaskett on Aug 16, 2016 3:40:10 GMT
I've got a good question, I wonder what would have been the ideal time to launch this nutty plan anyway?
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,973
Likes: 49,378
|
Post by lordroel on Aug 16, 2016 3:42:28 GMT
I've got a good question, I wonder what would have been the ideal time to launch this nutty plan anyway? Before the Battle of France most likely. |
|
|
|
Post by kubocaskett on Aug 16, 2016 3:46:50 GMT
I've got a good question, I wonder what would have been the ideal time to launch this nutty plan anyway? Before the Battle of France most likely. Seems so, but even so, France might still fall to the Germans, perhaps even harder than OTL's with more Soviet produced materials; almost to the scale of how the Low Countries, Denmark, and Norway went OTL. |
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,973
Likes: 49,378
|
Post by lordroel on Aug 16, 2016 3:50:27 GMT
Before the Battle of France most likely. Seems so, but even so, France might still fall to the Germans, perhaps even harder than OTL's with more Soviet produced materials; almost to the scale of how the Low Countries, Denmark, and Norway went OTL. I think the Germans and Soviets will divide who gets what with the Soviet Union being allowed to steam roll the Middle East while Germany gets Western Europe. |
|
|
|
Post by kubocaskett on Aug 16, 2016 4:03:49 GMT
I've got a good question, I wonder what would have been the ideal time to launch this nutty plan anyway? Before the Battle of France most likely. Seems so, but even so, France might still fall to the Germans, perhaps even harder than OTL's with more Soviet produced materials; almost to the scale of how the Low Countries, Denmark, and Norway went OTL. Come to think of it, I wonder how would Japan respond to the USSR being more cooperative with Nazi Germany? |
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,973
Likes: 49,378
|
Post by lordroel on Aug 16, 2016 13:49:26 GMT
Before the Battle of France most likely. Seems so, but even so, France might still fall to the Come to think of it, I wonder how would Japan respond to the USSR being more cooperative with Nazi Germany? Maybe Japan and the Soviet Union will sign the Soviet–Japanese Neutrality Pact a year earlier allowing Japan to trade with both the Soviet Union and Germany and thereby strengthening itself for the upcoming war they will fight. |
|
|
|
Post by kubocaskett on Aug 16, 2016 21:19:44 GMT
Seems so, but even so, France might still fall to the Come to think of it, I wonder how would Japan respond to the USSR being more cooperative with Nazi Germany? Maybe Japan and the Soviet Union will sign the Soviet–Japanese Neutrality Pact a year earlier allowing Japan to trade with both the Soviet Union and Germany and thereby strengthening itself for the upcoming war they will fight. Come to think of it, the Soviet's might supply Japan with a lot of weaponry that might make their military forces more formidable than OTL's, even if slightly more so, such as Yaks, T-34s, and PPsh-41s. That would definitely change up the Asian-Pacific theatre, provided if Japan still continues with its Southern Strategy thing. |
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,973
Likes: 49,378
|
Post by lordroel on Aug 17, 2016 2:53:13 GMT
Maybe Japan and the Soviet Union will sign the Soviet–Japanese Neutrality Pact a year earlier allowing Japan to trade with both the Soviet Union and Germany and thereby strengthening itself for the upcoming war they will fight. Come to think of it, the Soviet's might supply Japan with a lot of weaponry that might make their military forces more formidable than OTL's, even if slightly more so, such as Yaks, T-34s, and PPsh-41s. That would definitely change up the Asian-Pacific theatre, provided if Japan still continues with its Southern Strategy thing. Would think the Japanese need raw resources more than tanks. |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,835
Likes: 13,224
|
Post by stevep on Aug 17, 2016 13:46:07 GMT
The Soviets could provide the Japanese with the raw materials they require but I can't see them doing that unless their desperate. Definitely can't see them supplying weapons. Both because of the political differences and the fact they see the Japanese as a threat to themselves but also because their heavy supporters of the Chinese against Japan.
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,973
Likes: 49,378
|
Post by lordroel on Aug 17, 2016 13:58:14 GMT
The Soviets could provide the Japanese with the raw materials they require but I can't see them doing that unless their desperate. Definitely can't see them supplying weapons. Both because of the political differences and the fact they see the Japanese as a threat to themselves but also because their heavy supporters of the Chinese against Japan. I think the Germans will send more martial to Japan than the Soviet Union. |
|
|
|
Post by kubocaskett on Aug 17, 2016 23:02:41 GMT
The Soviets could provide the Japanese with the raw materials they require but I can't see them doing that unless their desperate. Definitely can't see them supplying weapons. Both because of the political differences and the fact they see the Japanese as a threat to themselves but also because their heavy supporters of the Chinese against Japan. The Soviets could provide the Japanese with the raw materials they require but I can't see them doing that unless their desperate. Definitely can't see them supplying weapons. Both because of the political differences and the fact they see the Japanese as a threat to themselves but also because their heavy supporters of the Chinese against Japan. I think the Germans will send more martial to Japan than the Soviet Union. True but in the event of the US getting involved in WWII, I would see the Soviets being content to constantly throw wrenches into Allied plans with supplying the Japanese in their efforts to wage war against the US and the allies; that and the Soviets backstabbing the Axis when the latter are being defeated. |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,835
Likes: 13,224
|
Post by stevep on Aug 17, 2016 23:13:05 GMT
kubocasket
Presuming Hitler backstabs Stalin while the best units of the Red Army are fighting the British in say Iran and Afghanistan then I can't see Stalin openly helping a US enemy since they will still want every bit of Lend-Lease aid they can get. Espcially in the 1st couple of years after the attack during which they could still be fighting for their survuival.
|
|
|
|
Post by kubocaskett on Aug 17, 2016 23:29:32 GMT
kubocasket Presuming Hitler backstabs Stalin while the best units of the Red Army are fighting the British in say Iran and Afghanistan then I can't see Stalin openly helping a US enemy since they will still want every bit of Lend-Lease aid they can get. Espcially in the 1st couple of years after the attack during which they could still be fighting for their survuival. I meant Stalin backstabbing the Axis powers not the other way around; besides if the Axis are too busy fighting the Allies and hadn't taken the chance to wage war against the USSR then they would take advantage of the Nazi-Soviet Pact that would be reinforced by the Pike operation. Not that they'll forget about that plan, there's a saying that the enemy of my enemy is my friend and the Axis would do everything they can to weaken US will; that or just be content with an isolationist US. |
|
