Jump to content


Photo

Gibraltar 1940?


  • Please log in to reply
419 replies to this topic

#401 Marek Tucan

Marek Tucan

    Powerpoint Ranger, Chairborne

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,839 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Versailles, France

Posted 18 December 2017 - 1537 PM

Spain is a hellhole and replaces Greece as German 1941 offensive before the USSR to root out the commie foothold?
  • 0

#402 RETAC21

RETAC21

    A la lealtad y al valor

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 12,696 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Madrid, Spain
  • Interests:Military history in general

Posted 18 December 2017 - 1558 PM

Pretty much, a Spanish republic would be dominated by the Communist after 1937, and the Nationalist side wouldn't have gone down quietly so the place would be devastated and the regime, hostile to the Italians and the Germans. After France you can bet Adolf and Benito would finish the business with help from Portugal. Then, by 1941/42 Gibraltar gets handed the short stick.


  • 0

#403 Marek Tucan

Marek Tucan

    Powerpoint Ranger, Chairborne

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,839 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Versailles, France

Posted 19 December 2017 - 0138 AM

Not so sure about the help from Portugal. Then again by end of 1941 Gibraltar is not that vital... As with Republican Spain invaded by Germany Canaries go to Allies by default (and if PT joins in, Azores too).
  • 0

#404 seahawk

seahawk

    military loving leftist peace monkey

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,317 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The land where time stands still

Posted 19 December 2017 - 0839 AM

Imho it changes the whole came? Would France turn left before the war, when the communists win? Would Britain honour the alliance to a communist regime in France?


  • 0

#405 Marek Tucan

Marek Tucan

    Powerpoint Ranger, Chairborne

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,839 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Versailles, France

Posted 20 December 2017 - 0325 AM

Not sure there would be enough time for France to turn Left. In real life the Spanish Civil War ended in April 1939... And Republican victory would likely take longer than that, so maybe the question to ask is not "What if Republicans won" but "What if they held out until 1940"... In which case it would be a full on DE/IT intervention after the Fall of France.


  • 0

#406 seahawk

seahawk

    military loving leftist peace monkey

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,317 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The land where time stands still

Posted 20 December 2017 - 0345 AM

And that would probably give them Spain as an ally with a limited investment of resources. But then it might focus the Italians away from the Balkans and north Africa.


  • 0

#407 Marek Tucan

Marek Tucan

    Powerpoint Ranger, Chairborne

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,839 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Versailles, France

Posted 20 December 2017 - 0351 AM

More Germans, Mussolini would probably try to get Greece anyway... Might not have anyone to save him there though. Africa would still happen I guess as the alternative would be losing Libya in 1941.
  • 0

#408 Ken Estes

Ken Estes

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,240 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle
  • Interests:USMC Tanker, Historian

Posted 20 December 2017 - 0441 AM

An intact and victorious Republic of Spain could give fighting room and sanctuary to French forces sufficient to refit them with US arms already purchased plus Lend-Lease. France would remain in the war, with its fleet assisting the RN in dominating the Med, hence no N African campaign except for occupation of Italian colonies. The Blitzkrieg would thus show its weakness in 1940 vice 1941, so no Barbarossa campaign either.

 

With such a what-if, there are almost infinite outcomes.

 

The irony of the coming of the European War in 1939 was not lost on the leaders of the French Republic, as they led their followers north into French refugee camps. 


  • 0

#409 RETAC21

RETAC21

    A la lealtad y al valor

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 12,696 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Madrid, Spain
  • Interests:Military history in general

Posted 20 December 2017 - 1411 PM

Not so sure about the help from Portugal. Then again by end of 1941 Gibraltar is not that vital... As with Republican Spain invaded by Germany Canaries go to Allies by default (and if PT joins in, Azores too).

 

The Spanish Republic was sympathetic to Portuguese revolutionaries and supportive of Franco, so there wouldn't be any love lost

 

https://en.wikipedia...36_Naval_Revolt


  • 0

#410 Andres Vera

Andres Vera

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,578 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Becoming a helicopter pilot for the Pinochet administration

Posted 20 December 2017 - 1755 PM

The problem with Axis logistics in North Africa was because of the Russian campaign. All the supplies and replacements were going there. Its not like the Axis had entire armories and divisions that they could not send Rommel because the Ports were inadequate. The Ports only compounded a horrible logistical situation, not created it. The Italian Army that was destroyed around Stalingrad was about half the size of the Axis forces in el-Alamein.

 

The British were able to supply their forces in the Med because it was their primary focus, Hitler thought it was a sideshow.


  • 0

#411 R011

R011

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 5,661 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Posted 20 December 2017 - 2053 PM

An intact and victorious Republic of Spain could give fighting room and sanctuary to French forces sufficient to refit them with US arms already purchased plus Lend-Lease. France would remain in the war, with its fleet assisting the RN in dominating the Med, hence no N African campaign except for occupation of Italian colonies. The Blitzkrieg would thus show its weakness in 1940 vice 1941, so no Barbarossa campaign either.
 
With such a what-if, there are almost infinite outcomes.
 
The irony of the coming of the European War in 1939 was not lost on the leaders of the French Republic, as they led their followers north into French refugee camps. 

An intact and victorious Republican Spain might also be taking their guidance from Moscow. The Molotov Ribbentrop Pact might well keep them safe for a time while still sealing the border to retreating French forces.

The post war situation with Spain in the Warsaw Pact instead of Nato might be interesting.
  • 0

#412 Rich

Rich

    intellectual bully ilk

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 4,063 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:WW II, Current Defense Issues, Military History in General

Posted 21 December 2017 - 0415 AM

The problem with Axis logistics in North Africa was because of the Russian campaign. All the supplies and replacements were going there.

 

Not exactly. Remember, the North African Campaign began four months prior to Barbarossa and its planning began just a few weeks after Hitler resolved on the attack on Russia. To do so he allocated about 10% of the Panzerwaffe, along with most of the newest production.

 

 

Its not like the Axis had entire armories and divisions that they could not send Rommel because the Ports were inadequate. The Ports only compounded a horrible logistical situation, not created it.

 

Of course not, but then it wasn't just the North African ports, as I've mentioned a number of times. It was also the overnight loss of 27% of the Italian merchant marine. It was also the lack of suitable escorts. It was also the loss of shipping efficiency the simple act of convoying caused. It was also the refusal to unload at night. It was also the limitations of the Italian railways and ports. It was also that those over strained Italian resources were also supporting extensive operations in Albania and Greece. The power of the Axis "armories and divisions" were primarily land-based and unequal to projecting power across to the far shore of the Med.

 

 

The Italian Army that was destroyed around Stalingrad was about half the size of the Axis forces in el-Alamein.
 

 

Sorry, but no. ARMIR was c. 235,000 men as of November 1942. The German contingent of the D-I Panzerarmee was 46,853 as of 20 October 1942 and the Italian contingent was 51,223.

 

 

The British were able to supply their forces in the Med because it was their primary focus, Hitler thought it was a sideshow.

 

No, they were able to supply their forces in the Med because they had control of the seas, a source of supply from South Africa and India that could not easily be interdicted, and a merchant marine easily ten times the size of the Italian.


  • 0

#413 Ken Estes

Ken Estes

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,240 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle
  • Interests:USMC Tanker, Historian

Posted 21 December 2017 - 0925 AM

A howler hat trick.


  • 0

#414 Ken Estes

Ken Estes

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,240 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle
  • Interests:USMC Tanker, Historian

Posted 21 December 2017 - 0929 AM

 

An intact and victorious Republic of Spain could give fighting room and sanctuary to French forces sufficient to refit them with US arms already purchased plus Lend-Lease. France would remain in the war, with its fleet assisting the RN in dominating the Med, hence no N African campaign except for occupation of Italian colonies. The Blitzkrieg would thus show its weakness in 1940 vice 1941, so no Barbarossa campaign either.
 
With such a what-if, there are almost infinite outcomes.
 
The irony of the coming of the European War in 1939 was not lost on the leaders of the French Republic, as they led their followers north into French refugee camps. 

An intact and victorious Republican Spain might also be taking their guidance from Moscow. The Molotov Ribbentrop Pact might well keep them safe for a time while still sealing the border to retreating French forces.

The post war situation with Spain in the Warsaw Pact instead of Nato might be interesting.

 

 

Well, one needs to ask how the II Republic might have won. Continued and much expanded aid from France, end of the neutrality patrol, alliances with other countries, would be contributors to final victory, and probably no later than 1937.


  • 0

#415 RETAC21

RETAC21

    A la lealtad y al valor

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 12,696 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Madrid, Spain
  • Interests:Military history in general

Posted 21 December 2017 - 1400 PM

 

 

An intact and victorious Republic of Spain could give fighting room and sanctuary to French forces sufficient to refit them with US arms already purchased plus Lend-Lease. France would remain in the war, with its fleet assisting the RN in dominating the Med, hence no N African campaign except for occupation of Italian colonies. The Blitzkrieg would thus show its weakness in 1940 vice 1941, so no Barbarossa campaign either.
 
With such a what-if, there are almost infinite outcomes.
 
The irony of the coming of the European War in 1939 was not lost on the leaders of the French Republic, as they led their followers north into French refugee camps. 

An intact and victorious Republican Spain might also be taking their guidance from Moscow. The Molotov Ribbentrop Pact might well keep them safe for a time while still sealing the border to retreating French forces.

The post war situation with Spain in the Warsaw Pact instead of Nato might be interesting.

 

 

Well, one needs to ask how the II Republic might have won. Continued and much expanded aid from France, end of the neutrality patrol, alliances with other countries, would be contributors to final victory, and probably no later than 1937.

 

 

In war who knows, but there was a windown of opportunity in 1937 if the Brunete battle had gone as planned, surrounding the very substantial forces in Madrid. Had those forces been destroyed, the Republican divisions defending Madrid would have been freed for other battles such as Belchite or Plan P (the cutting in half of the Nationalist zone in Extremadura). A victory in either may have kept Asturias and Santander in Republican hands, tying up Nationalist forces and isolating Souther Spain.

 

A campaign in 1938 could conceivably end up with either the Nationalist hold on Aragon or Andalusia, and 1939 could easily see a mop up action in the remaining zone. This is not far fetched as the Republicans weren't exactly short of weapons and had the lion's share of the fleet so they should have been able to prevail militarily if they could have brough some order and discipline to the militias and the regional governments, which was something only the Communist could do with enough ruthlesness. 

 

In any case, such victory was unlikely to happen before 1939 and the terrain over which ti would be fought would have meant that moving North to South would be a major chore for any invading Army.


  • 0

#416 Marek Tucan

Marek Tucan

    Powerpoint Ranger, Chairborne

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,839 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Versailles, France

Posted 21 December 2017 - 1441 PM

The problem with Axis logistics in North Africa was because of the Russian campaign. All the supplies and replacements were going there. Its not like the Axis had entire armories and divisions that they could not send Rommel because the Ports were inadequate. The Ports only compounded a horrible logistical situation, not created it. The Italian Army that was destroyed around Stalingrad was about half the size of the Axis forces in el-Alamein.

 

The British were able to supply their forces in the Med because it was their primary focus, Hitler thought it was a sideshow.

But it is like that, as detailed earlier (I think by Rich?). Units scheduled for Africa generally had to endure long slow transport through Italy, then wait for convoy etc...

 

It's also not like Axis would schedule more troops to go down there when troops already travelling were catching major delays.


  • 0

#417 seahawk

seahawk

    military loving leftist peace monkey

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,317 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The land where time stands still

Posted 22 December 2017 - 0556 AM

Any book recommendations in English about the Spanish Civil War? I think I want to learn more about the subject.


  • 0

#418 RETAC21

RETAC21

    A la lealtad y al valor

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 12,696 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Madrid, Spain
  • Interests:Military history in general

Posted 22 December 2017 - 0652 AM

Hugh Tomas work is old but good: https://www.amazon.c...s/dp/B002ADRJB8

 

Beevor has one but personally I dislike his style: https://www.amazon.e...9/dp/0753821656


  • 0

#419 Ken Estes

Ken Estes

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,240 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle
  • Interests:USMC Tanker, Historian

Posted 22 December 2017 - 0708 AM

For one thing, Beevor seems to have never seen a personal account that he does not like, including some rather suspect ones, and so he uses them with alacrity.


  • 0

#420 seahawk

seahawk

    military loving leftist peace monkey

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,317 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The land where time stands still

Posted 22 December 2017 - 0714 AM

I was looking at the work from Hugh Tomas in the kindle edition


  • 0




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users