What About Crete-Cyprus-Syria?

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title Newest to Oldest

Pages: PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT

Carl S RE:What About Crete-Cyprus-Syria?/Suez & Alexandria 11/12/2005 8:24:55 AM

Hmm..yes I see you are proposing changes far beyond what I am looking at. & the Malta thing is a totaly different strategy than what Student proposed post Crete. I am curious about the viability of Students proposal as it starts with the Luftwaffe in Crete. much closer to Alexandria than Sicilly. And, in a much more limited sense than you are thinking.

Quote Reply

S-2 RE:What About Crete-Cyprus-Syria?/Suez & Alexandria 11/12/2005 12:23:57 PM

What I'm proposing is to leverage the whole bloody southern border of the Soviet Union wide open. Again, if England is defeated in 1940, the following seems possible- 1.) Transit through neutral Spain to capture Gibraltar. In the absence of a British Gov't presiding in Europe, Franco folds like a house of cards. He may even renounce neutrality and assist. Western gates are closed. @.) Attack and eliminate Malta at the first opportunity, whether England is defeated or not. This protects axis shipping to Tripoli while restricting British to only the Cape of Africa route. 3.) Rationalize the axis ground forces such that "high drag-low speed" Italian units are returned to Italy, keeping the best to retain Italian good will and use of the ports, Navy, and merchant shipping. With the absence of a British government in Europe though, less sensitivity to Italian concerns can be afforded. 4.) Transport a panzerarmee/gruppe to North Africa immediately upon elimination of Malta. It's mission is to strike for Egypt, capturing Alexandria, Cairo/Nile Delta, and the Suez. Further capture of Red Sea port of Aqaba/Sharm El-Sheik at the base of the Sinai eliminates last British port of supply via the cape of Africa to the Palestine/Levant. 5.) Panzerarmee forces can now be supplied through Alexandria as they attack east into Palestine. Student can now attack Crete while planning for landings in Cyprus/Rhodes as precursors to Syria. The whole point is to eliminate the British from the Med altogether, seize arabian/Iraqi oil, turn the Soviet southern flank between the Black and Caspian Seas, and seize the Trans-Caucasus, Grozny and Soviet oil. Too, this eliminates lend-lease through Tehran. If England is knocked out, per our earlier discussions, there's no lend-lease through Murmansk either. The Soviet Union, and Ellis, stand no chance under those conditions. 6.) Turkey's entry into the axis becomes probable with the elimination of Egypt, regardless of whether England continues to resist. Even so, should Turkey not enter, or permit axis transit, the way east still lies open through Syria.

Quote Reply

Seeker Couple of observations 11/12/2005 9:57:51 PM

If we follow the earlier threads based on the assumption of KOed UK and RN scattered across the Altantic and Mediteranian. Then the concept of Spain joining the Axis is opened up....leading to the fall of Gibralta. While I'm not throughly convinced of this developement I accept it as likely outcome. At which point Germans control the western Med and can roll the RN up as more KM assets are shifted into the Western Med. First idea is a Spain -Gibralta- N Africa supply line? Who would have to be removed and what deals struck to make such a path secure? Second idea, the entire debacle of poor supply in Med hinges on the assumption of RN control of the Med and Italian lack of fuel supplies to escort Axis merchants combined with the fact that only 50 German Merchants started the war in the Med and allied blockade prevented more....but if we assume Axis control of Spain-Gibralta-NAfrica, surely that makes that whole historical limitation a moote point? Germans would shift fuel tankers with their fleets, as they had a pretty good replenishment at sea. Another thought , if Med fell to the Nazis would that shift Turkeys allegience significantly?

Quote Reply

Seeker RE:What About Crete-Cyprus-Syria?/Suez & Alexandria 11/12/2005 10:14:10 PM

"Over on the Consimworld web site they jokingly refer to this discussion as the North African Logistics Monster. Go there & look up Jeff Lesser," ------------------------------------------------------------ Carl I had a quick peek at this site and it looks massive. Would it be possible to post a URL link to the article in question?

Quote Reply

Carl S RE:Consimworld 11/12/2005 11:00:26 PM

Seeker... it is massive. I'd have to use the seach program avaialble on that site to run down the threads. Probably take me a hour or more. Perhaps he time can made tomorrow evening. The subject is not a specific artical but a series of topic threads interwoven with others. Hard to pin down a starting point, and I am not even sure of which discussion boards the topic has been on. The last time it came up was in 2004, unelss I missed a more recent emergence. Try looking for Jeff Lesser s name in the WWII boards, either in the Board Gaming forum, or the Literary Corner. The search function is fairly effcient there. If you are doing serious research Jeff would respond to a direct contact. Consimworld has a roster of members with email addresess. There are a couple of Italians who post on CSW & have a lot of historical data as well. But their names escape me, and Jeffs is probably better organized and more balanced in his apprasials.

Quote Reply

S-2 RE:Couple of observations/Seeker Reply 11/13/2005 3:33:37 AM

"First idea is a Spain -Gibralta- N Africa supply line? Who would have to be removed and what deals struck to make such a path secure?" My primary supply route still lies from Italy into Tripoli. As my panzerarmee moves east, I'd imagine Alexandria, Haifa, then Latakia coming into the picture. Capturing Gibraltar absolutely closes the western approaches to the Med. However, while important, Malta is numero uno. It must go, quickly. I'd imagine that any initial supply of naval aviation/submarine forces in the Azores would only require consent of the Spanish and Portuguese. Use of N. African ports, such as Casablanca, would require Vichy French and Moroccan royal assent. None of those nations would be in much position to object. Were these events to transpire, I imagine the eventual unfettered, unconvoyed supply of German forces streaming east into Iraq from Syria, at worst case. Best case, and quite likely, would be a favorable Turkish view of the Axis. While this may not include active participation in any attack upon the Soviet Union, Turkey probably would acquiesce to transit rights as a "fait accompli" of the political climate, as would Sweden, btw, when it came time for BARBAROSSA. Were transit rights to specifically allocate the Turkish east-west rail system as a resource, German resupply issues into the southern Soviet Union would be all but eliminated. Without, the Germans may be forced to develop the rail infrastructure between the port of Latakia, Syria, via Damascus-Baghdad, up to Mosul.

Quote Reply

S-2 RE:Couple of observations/Seeker Reply 11/13/2005 3:34:09 AM

Quote Reply

Carl S RE:Consimworld 11/13/2005 7:59:11 PM

Seeker: Try the Italian Military board in the Literary Corner forum, there are some recent posts on the subject there. Back around 940 thru 960. There was long running discussion in the WWII board during 2004, and some earlier discussion on the WWII board in the Boardgaming forum. As I wrote earlier look for the threads where Jeff Lessers name appears, and Austin Lange.

Quote Reply

Seeker Interesting paper 11/18/2005 3:02:42 AM

US military types in a 2002 research paper into SEALOWE.... link They have interesting side angle to consider for this whole 'alternative history' scenario we're throwing around here. 1st : Hitler missed opertunity to bring other countries into combined alliance by failing to get Mussoline into full court press on the RN in the Med prior to Sealion in order to draw off critical RN assets. 2nd : Franco Spain -Hitler dialogue. If he wanted britain badly enough he could have cut a deal. Hitler missed a chance to include Franco which would have controlled western med so Italian navy could contribute directly to Sea Lion [you want our help in N Africa, help us in the channel].Relative to the cost of continued western front warfare for years, the tributes to Franco would have been really good economy. 3rd ; Hitler missed a critial opertunity to strong arm Vichy France into Nazi use of their surface fleet...all those BB/CC/destroyers could have helped immensly.Knowing the animosity many french have towards the brits, its not inconcievable to see some French, Italian and German warships acting together. That kind of severe shift in the battle calculus is exactly the kind of war winning manuever that only politics and a strong leader can supply. Not unlike Hitler-Stalin pact prior to Poland. How many prewar analysis saw that one comming? It could have rewriten the history books. Perhaps if Hitler had stuck to more of that level of warfare than mircomanaging the armed forces , Germany could have won the European aspect of the war. How would a combined German French Italian Navy power be able to fend off USA involvment in the European war?

Quote Reply

Seeker RE:Interesting paper-seperate thread 11/18/2005 3:06:22 AM

Sorry, I realised that this post would side track the Crete-Cyprus-Syria?/Suez & Alexandria thread . I should have been a seperate thread, so I set up a thread to look at that...ignor it here and please respond on the other thread .

Quote Reply

PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT