The question to ask about The Italians

Gamers can also use this forum to chat about any game related subject, news, rumours etc.

Moderator: maddog986

User avatar
RangerJoe
Posts: 18173
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 2:39 pm
Location: Who knows?

RE: The question to ask about The Italians

Post by RangerJoe »

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay
ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

Ferry assets? Please define what you mean.

They could again use river barges. They would have to be small enough to be craned onto flat-bed rail cars, then trailered to the sea by truck. But that would still make them big enough to handle that sea.

In other words, they could not handle much cargo. They could also not take much damage, especially if they were overloaded.
Planned the invasion well in advance? Why would they? The quick taking of France surprised the Germans, then they had to take Spain, so why would the German staff be planning this?

They've decided from the get-go that they will pursue a Med strategy. Plenty of time to plan - Barbarossa was done in less time.

Not true, Hitler wanted to attack the Soviet Union. Even Stalin understood this by his actions.
Would Romania even allow this movement through their country? Allow the use of their airfields? Not to mention Bulgaria!

Romania isn't necessary. Bulgaria is an Axis nation as of March 1, 1941. Yugoslavia is on the menu.

The moment Germany turned south, Turkey was preparing.
Anyways. the total distance between the Black Sea and the Med is only 380 kilometers or 235 miles long, with the Sea of Marmora being 280 kilometers × 80 kilometers or 174 miles × 50 miles. With mobile scouts calling in artillery and mortar fire, any vessels making the crossing would have a little difficulty. While mobile infantry and possibly armour forces could be rushing to defensive positions. Not to mention your average Turk with a firearm.

A fantasy. In fact, most of the Turkish force is in front of the Bosporus. It's all going to be trapped when these German divisions arrive in their rear at Istanbul.

You are the one in fantasy land. In Thrace, the Turkish Army had at least one infantry division, a Cavalry division with T-26 tanks and BA-6 armoured cars both of which could destroy any German tank at the time. Besides an armoured brigade, an infantry brigade an other units.

By the way, Istanbul is on the Bosporus. Just look at the map, please?

Since the vessels would have to come in by truck, those vessels would not be very large nor would there be that many of them. The forces that come across would most be infantry and they would be disorganized with little supply available.

Again, towed by trailers. They can be large enough - larger than a Higgins boat.. And there can be as many as can be gleaned from the rivers of Europe. A lot.

But not that many at one time and most of the barges would be larger than that. Much difficult to carry. Not to mention what the Turkish Air Force and Navy would be doing to them. Even a sub on the surface, not to mention civilian water craft pressed into service and armed. Much less a Battlecruiser with 28cm guns.

I suggest that you look at an actual map and the Turkish order of battle. Don't rely on a game.
Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing! :o

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
:twisted: ; Julia Child
Image
User avatar
TulliusDetritus
Posts: 5581
Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2004 1:49 am
Location: The Zone™

RE: The question to ask about The Italians

Post by TulliusDetritus »

I'm surprised some of you assume Spain or Turkey would pull -yes or yes- a guerrilla war. Just because the former did it on the early 1800s.

Different societies, regimes will NOT be delivering the same, that's too mechanical. Want a really clear example? Compare the tsarist toothless, pathetic army circa 1914 with the soviet steamroller circa 1944. Just one mere generation apart and yet... This is what different regimes, epochs may offer.

I'm with Lemay: these two poor and backward states were an easy prey for the mighty (yes) Werhmacht. Especially Spain, devastated after a civil war. + poverty and backwardness. You cannot fight a *modern* war with this.

I think he got his priorities wrong though. You defeat the main foe = everyone else follows. His diversion of forces is just er... too anticlausewitzian :P And yet the guy with the funny moustache got this part right. Well, more or less.
"Hitler is a horrible sexual degenerate, a dangerous fool" - Mussolini, circa 1934
User avatar
RangerJoe
Posts: 18173
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 2:39 pm
Location: Who knows?

RE: The question to ask about The Italians

Post by RangerJoe »

Take care of the big problem, the little ones will fall into place.
Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing! :o

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
:twisted: ; Julia Child
Image
User avatar
warspite1
Posts: 42129
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:06 pm
Location: England

RE: The question to ask about The Italians

Post by warspite1 »

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus

I'm with Lemay: these two poor and backward states were an easy prey for the mighty (yes) Werhmacht. Especially Spain, devastated after a civil war. + poverty and backwardness. You cannot fight a *modern* war with this.
warspite1

Well we haven't really got to Turkey yet and are still on Spain. But I've certainly never suggested anything other than the Spanish, devastated by the civil war, weakened by a lack of oil, and consisting largely of an infantry army, would be defeated by the Germans.

But how you can say they would be 'easy prey' and determine what that means when you have no idea what forces the Germans are bringing to bear, I don't know. You also have no idea what the Germans will be doing against the UK (and thus what the British can assist Spain with). It's all just lacking in any detail.
ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus

I'm surprised some of you assume Spain or Turkey would pull -yes or yes- a guerrilla war. Just because the former did it on the early 1800s.

Different societies, regimes will NOT be delivering the same, that's too mechanical. Want a really clear example? Compare the tsarist toothless, pathetic army circa 1914 with the soviet steamroller circa 1944. Just one mere generation apart and yet... This is what different regimes, epochs may offer.
warspite1

Again, forgetting Turkey at this stage, the reason I believe that the Spanish will mount a partisan war is not just because the French were on the receiving end of one in 1808. That does have some bearing of course, but there is far more to it than that. I've tried to make the following points:

a) In an echo of 1808, the Spanish have been stabbed in the back, betrayed by their fellow fascists.
b) The Spanish were asked to voluntarily join the Axis but declined for good reasons. The Germans, in ignoring the will of the Spanish people, have simply added to the body count from the Civil War that hasn't been ended long, they've destroyed more infrastructure, destroyed more homes, livelihoods and farms and generally added to the misery of the Spanish population.
c) Hitler will impose a German lackey on Spain. The Republicans will hate him whoever he is, the Nationalists will hate him for being a German puppet.
d) The Spanish economy is already in trouble and the people are being fed thanks to the US and UK. Under Curtis Lemay's 'staff study' the Spanish will be receiving no such assistance and the Germans can't pick up the slack. Hungry people with nothing to lose tend to fight back.
e) The British (and US) will be providing whatever they can to stir things up.
f) The Spanish terrain is conducive to this type of warfare.

Is there any guarantee any of this would happen? No of course not. The point is, one side of the argument is putting a case across, suggesting reasons for actions being taken. The other barely bothers with detail, and when they do, so much is false or mis-placed.
Now Maitland, now's your time!

Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
gamer78
Posts: 795
Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2011 5:33 am

RE: The question to ask about The Italians

Post by gamer78 »

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus

I'm surprised some of you assume Spain or Turkey would pull -yes or yes- a guerrilla war. Just because the former did it on the early 1800s.

Different societies, regimes will NOT be delivering the same, that's too mechanical. Want a really clear example? Compare the tsarist toothless, pathetic army circa 1914 with the soviet steamroller circa 1944. Just one mere generation apart and yet... This is what different regimes, epochs may offer.

I'm with Lemay: these two poor and backward states were an easy prey for the mighty (yes) Werhmacht. Especially Spain, devastated after a civil war. + poverty and backwardness. You cannot fight a *modern* war with this.

I think he got his priorities wrong though. You defeat the main foe = everyone else follows. His diversion of forces is just er... too anticlausewitzian :P And yet the guy with the funny moustache got this part right. Well, more or less.


I think for Turkey it is more like Cold War debate of what if. A bit different Cyprus dispute, No Turkish forces in Korean War and maybe Cuban missile crisis could be different and more importantly Turkey won't be a Nato member. Which seems currently in 3rd or 4th rank in overall military force analysis for Nato. I think Turkey mostly likely be divided into 2 or 3 sectors not by Werhmacht but by Soviets if any alliance with Germany or assault by Hitler. Just as they did to Germany.
User avatar
RangerJoe
Posts: 18173
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 2:39 pm
Location: Who knows?

RE: The question to ask about The Italians

Post by RangerJoe »

There already was a "Free Spanish" government which continued until 1977. They would have received recognition and help.

Another thing about invading Spain, a country friendly with Nazi Germany, is that the other countries friendly with Nazi Germany will ask "Who is next? My country?"

The Free Spanish government would then become eligible for Lend Lease aid, much like Free France and Turkey.
Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing! :o

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
:twisted: ; Julia Child
Image
User avatar
warspite1
Posts: 42129
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:06 pm
Location: England

RE: The question to ask about The Italians

Post by warspite1 »

I'm still interested to find out more about the supply situation and continue to dig around. I saw this comment (and hope to have the article it came from in the next few weeks). The comment comes from a German plan to re-visit Spain (not invasion but assuming Spanish co-operation unlike this scenario) once the Germans had reached a line Kiev-Smolensk-Opotschka in the autumn of 1941 (yeah I know - how optimistic was that!!!!).

It says:

By Mid-July 1941, the demands of the Eastern Front, added to the problem of supplying and moving these units through the poor Spanish rail system were staggering. POL(?) estimates ran to about 10% of total stockpile earmarked for Russia, this would require 50 trainloads of gasoline alone, plus 8 trainloads for food. Sea transportation routes were considered and Naval officers feared the British control of the sea around Gibraltar was too strong to risk shipping.

I've previously mentioned naval supply (which of course was ignored) but clearly the fact that the Germans felt the need to explore this perhaps says much for the rail position - even in a Spain friendly scenario?

And all this is with Spain actively helping Germany and not fighting them. This of course in turn would mean:

- the size of the force required to be supplied was considerably smaller than would be needed for this scenario
- losses not being taken until the units were ready to besiege and then assault Gibraltar
- no expenditure of ammunition expended fighting the Spanish that itself then needed to be replaced
- no additional expenditure of fuel as there would be no need for forces heading all over Spain to defeat the regular forces and subdue insurgents

I'm also interested in the time impact caused by every train wagon of every train having to be loaded in Germany/France and then unloaded in southwest France and then transported to the Spanish train and loaded once again.

There is a further comment that says: The Spanish rail system required 12 1/2 days to move a single German division in 1940. I am not sure the context, but assume that would be from France to Gibraltar and under peacetime conditions (well until it reaches Andalucia at any rate)?

I hope the wider article provides some more clarity on all this.


Now Maitland, now's your time!

Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
User avatar
TulliusDetritus
Posts: 5581
Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2004 1:49 am
Location: The Zone™

RE: The question to ask about The Italians

Post by TulliusDetritus »

My understanding is that Spain would be a huge liability. Even after a successful (no doubt) campaign. And what insurgents are you talking about? This is 1940, not 1808. Where's the pool to fill these ranks? WW2 was an utter ideological struggle. The partisans movement across the continent was more ideological than national. The core of these forces was filled with *communists* Except communism was more important in central and northern Europe. Southern Europe = anarchism ruled. Problem is Spanish fascists had already destroyed the powerful spanish anarchist movement. To fight your wars from your armchair you still need a pool of recruits [;)] Spanish fascists fighting German fascists... I doubt it.

And besides, the III Reich already could get everything they wanted from Spain [;)]
"Hitler is a horrible sexual degenerate, a dangerous fool" - Mussolini, circa 1934
User avatar
RangerJoe
Posts: 18173
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 2:39 pm
Location: Who knows?

RE: The question to ask about The Italians

Post by RangerJoe »

ORIGINAL: warspite1


I'm still interested to find out more about the supply situation and continue to dig around. I saw this comment (and hope to have the article it came from in the next few weeks). The comment comes from a German plan to re-visit Spain (not invasion but assuming Spanish co-operation unlike this scenario) once the Germans had reached a line Kiev-Smolensk-Opotschka in the autumn of 1941 (yeah I know - how optimistic was that!!!!).

It says:

By Mid-July 1941, the demands of the Eastern Front, added to the problem of supplying and moving these units through the poor Spanish rail system were staggering. POL(?) estimates ran to about 10% of total stockpile earmarked for Russia, this would require 50 trainloads of gasoline alone, plus 8 trainloads for food. Sea transportation routes were considered and Naval officers feared the British control of the sea around Gibraltar was too strong to risk shipping.

I've previously mentioned naval supply (which of course was ignored) but clearly the fact that the Germans felt the need to explore this perhaps says much for the rail position - even in a Spain friendly scenario?

And all this is with Spain actively helping Germany and not fighting them. This of course in turn would mean:

- the size of the force required to be supplied was considerably smaller than would be needed for this scenario
- losses not being taken until the units were ready to besiege and then assault Gibraltar
- no expenditure of ammunition expended fighting the Spanish that itself then needed to be replaced
- no additional expenditure of fuel as there would be no need for forces heading all over Spain to defeat the regular forces and subdue insurgents

I'm also interested in the time impact caused by every train wagon of every train having to be loaded in Germany/France and then unloaded in southwest France and then transported to the Spanish train and loaded once again.

There is a further comment that says: The Spanish rail system required 12 1/2 days to move a single German division in 1940. I am not sure the context, but assume that would be from France to Gibraltar and under peacetime conditions (well until it reaches Andalucia at any rate)?

I hope the wider article provides some more clarity on all this.

POL => Petroleum, Oil, Lubricants.
Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing! :o

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
:twisted: ; Julia Child
Image
User avatar
RangerJoe
Posts: 18173
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 2:39 pm
Location: Who knows?

RE: The question to ask about The Italians

Post by RangerJoe »

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus

My understanding is that Spain would be a huge liability. Even after a successful (no doubt) campaign. And what insurgents are you talking about? This is 1940, not 1808. Where's the pool to fill these ranks? WW2 was an utter ideological struggle. The partisans movement across the continent was more ideological than national. The core of these forces was filled with *communists* Except communism was more important in central and northern Europe. Southern Europe = anarchism ruled. Problem is Spanish fascists had already destroyed the powerful spanish anarchist movement. To fight your wars from your armchair you still need a pool of recruits [;)] Spanish fascists fighting German fascists... I doubt it.

And besides, the III Reich already could get everything they wanted from Spain [;)]

The guerillas that were already in Spain plus the Spanish Maqui units that formed in France. At least 10,000 of them in France, plus Gen. LeClerc's division was estimated to have 2,000 Spaniards in it in 1944. In 1944, some of the Spanish Maqui invaded Spain and attempted to draw the Allies into liberating Spain. They failed. 1,000 Spaniards joined the French Foreign Legion.

Fascists and Nazis are different.
Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing! :o

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
:twisted: ; Julia Child
Image
User avatar
TulliusDetritus
Posts: 5581
Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2004 1:49 am
Location: The Zone™

RE: The question to ask about The Italians

Post by TulliusDetritus »

Exactly. They were forced to flee and were *very* active in the French Resistance. This was an ideological issue, the struggle had to continue. But in Spain itself the movement was destroyed. I just can't see Spanish fascists (a variant of Italian fascism) fighting their ideological allies or nazis (or a variant of Italian fascism)...
"Hitler is a horrible sexual degenerate, a dangerous fool" - Mussolini, circa 1934
User avatar
RangerJoe
Posts: 18173
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 2:39 pm
Location: Who knows?

RE: The question to ask about The Italians

Post by RangerJoe »

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus

Exactly. They were forced to flee and were *very* active in the French Resistance. This was an ideological issue, the struggle had to continue. But in Spain itself the movement was destroyed. I just can't see Spanish fascists (a variant of Italian fascism) fighting their ideological allies or nazis (or a variant of Italian fascism)...

I do see them fighting since the Spanish Falangist party is a nationalist party. Plus, as I stated, there already were guerillas fighting in Spain - against the Spanish government. They will like the Germans even less.
Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing! :o

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
:twisted: ; Julia Child
Image
User avatar
warspite1
Posts: 42129
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:06 pm
Location: England

RE: The question to ask about The Italians

Post by warspite1 »

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus

My understanding is that Spain would be a huge liability. Even after a successful (no doubt) campaign.
warspite1

Yes and this point has been repeatedly made (and ignored for no good reason)
ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus

And what insurgents are you talking about? This is 1940, not 1808. Where's the pool to fill these ranks? WW2 was an utter ideological struggle. The partisans movement across the continent was more ideological than national. The core of these forces was filled with *communists* Except communism was more important in central and northern Europe. Southern Europe = anarchism ruled. Problem is Spanish fascists had already destroyed the powerful spanish anarchist movement. To fight your wars from your armchair you still need a pool of recruits [;)] Spanish fascists fighting German fascists... I doubt it.
warspite1

There were still plenty in Spain that fought for a Republican Government and would be prepared to continue the fight. There are now plenty of Fascists that feel betrayed by the Germans.

But, you want a pool of recruits? When the Spanish population - Republican or Fascist or whatever - are starving and there is one person to blame, one person to focus your energy and anger on, then you have your perfect recruiting sergeant.
Now Maitland, now's your time!

Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
User avatar
warspite1
Posts: 42129
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:06 pm
Location: England

RE: The question to ask about The Italians

Post by warspite1 »

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

ORIGINAL: warspite1


I'm still interested to find out more about the supply situation and continue to dig around. I saw this comment (and hope to have the article it came from in the next few weeks). The comment comes from a German plan to re-visit Spain (not invasion but assuming Spanish co-operation unlike this scenario) once the Germans had reached a line Kiev-Smolensk-Opotschka in the autumn of 1941 (yeah I know - how optimistic was that!!!!).

It says:

By Mid-July 1941, the demands of the Eastern Front, added to the problem of supplying and moving these units through the poor Spanish rail system were staggering. POL(?) estimates ran to about 10% of total stockpile earmarked for Russia, this would require 50 trainloads of gasoline alone, plus 8 trainloads for food. Sea transportation routes were considered and Naval officers feared the British control of the sea around Gibraltar was too strong to risk shipping.

I've previously mentioned naval supply (which of course was ignored) but clearly the fact that the Germans felt the need to explore this perhaps says much for the rail position - even in a Spain friendly scenario?

And all this is with Spain actively helping Germany and not fighting them. This of course in turn would mean:

- the size of the force required to be supplied was considerably smaller than would be needed for this scenario
- losses not being taken until the units were ready to besiege and then assault Gibraltar
- no expenditure of ammunition expended fighting the Spanish that itself then needed to be replaced
- no additional expenditure of fuel as there would be no need for forces heading all over Spain to defeat the regular forces and subdue insurgents

I'm also interested in the time impact caused by every train wagon of every train having to be loaded in Germany/France and then unloaded in southwest France and then transported to the Spanish train and loaded once again.

There is a further comment that says: The Spanish rail system required 12 1/2 days to move a single German division in 1940. I am not sure the context, but assume that would be from France to Gibraltar and under peacetime conditions (well until it reaches Andalucia at any rate)?

I hope the wider article provides some more clarity on all this.

POL => Petroleum, Oil, Lubricants.
warspite1

Thanks. I will post as soon as I hear further on this.
Now Maitland, now's your time!

Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
User avatar
Curtis Lemay
Posts: 14762
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 3:12 pm
Location: Houston, TX

RE: The question to ask about The Italians

Post by Curtis Lemay »

ORIGINAL: warspite1

Why would you possibly suggest that? That seems a rather silly comment to make, and certainly not one that furthers this debate in any sensible way.

That was sarcasm (lost on you evidently). You were the one suggesting that.
Well I don't think that is strictly true (although China was but one reason). Tojo was forced to resign in July 1944.
Because of the Pacific War, not China.

You see, a war that had the majority of Japan's army manpower sucked into it could not wait forever. [/quote]

But it could clearly wait for years - it did.
In the circumstances pertaining to that period of the war (the Soviets are increasingly concerned about what is happening in Europe) then yes, yes it can.

The Japs don't know what the Soviets are concerned about. And, Stalin was so concerned he was taken completely by surprise by Barbarossa.

We know that Barbarossa was the trigger for occupation of FIC and the Rising Sun offensive. (Wiki article).

Without Barbarossa, there is no basis to believe either of those moves will be made. That means no oil embargo and no US at war.
My TOAW web site:

Bob Cross's TOAW Site
User avatar
RangerJoe
Posts: 18173
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 2:39 pm
Location: Who knows?

RE: The question to ask about The Italians

Post by RangerJoe »

North Atlantic Treaty Organization classes of supply

Class I - Items of subsistence, e.g., food and forage, which are consumed by personnel or animals at an approximately uniform rate, irrespective of local changes in combat or terrain conditions.
Class II - Supplies for which allowances are established by tables of organization and equipment, e.g., clothing, weapons, tools, spare parts, vehicles.
Class III - Petroleum, oil and lubricants (POL) for all purposes, except for operating aircraft or for use in weapons such as flamethrowers, e.g., gasoline, fuel oil, greases, coal, and coke. (Class IIIa - aviation fuel and lubricants)
Class IV - Supplies for which initial issue allowances are not prescribed by approved issue tables. Normally includes fortification and construction materials, as well as additional quantities of items identical to those authorized for initial issue (Class II) such as additional vehicles.
Class V - Ammunition, explosives, and chemical agents of all types.[1]

U.S. Armed Forces classes of supply

Class I - Rations - Subsistence (food and drinking water), gratuitous (free) health and comfort items.
Class II - Clothing And Equipment - individual equipment, tentage, some aerial delivery equipment, organizational tool sets and kits, hand tools, unclassified maps, administrative and housekeeping supplies and equipment.
Class III - POL - Petroleum, Oil and Lubricants (POL) (package and bulk): Petroleum, fuels, lubricants, hydraulic and insulating oils, preservatives, liquids and gases, bulk chemical products, coolants, deicer and antifreeze compounds, components, and additives of petroleum and chemical products, and coal.
Class IV - Construction materials, including installed equipment and all fortification and barrier materials.
Class V - Ammunition of all types, bombs, explosives, mines, fuses, detonators, pyrotechnics, missiles, rockets, propellants, and associated items.
Class VI - Personal demand items (such as health and hygiene products, soaps and toothpaste, writing material, snack food, beverages, cigarettes, batteries, alcohol, and cameras—nonmilitary sales items).
Class VII - Major end items such as launchers, tanks, mobile machine shops, some parachute systems and vehicles.
Class VIII - Medical material (equipment and consumables) including repair parts peculiar to medical equipment. (Class VIIIa – Medical consumable supplies not including blood & blood products; Class VIIIb – Blood & blood components (whole blood, platelets, plasma, packed red cells, etc.).
Class IX - Repair parts and components to include kits, assemblies, and subassemblies (repairable or non-repairable) required for maintenance support of all equipment.
Class X - Material to support nonmilitary programs such as agriculture and economic development (not included in Classes I through IX).
Miscellaneous - Water, salvage, and captured material.[2]

But the most important one is:


Class VI is usually associated with the liquor store on a U.S. military base, typically a U.S. Army or U.S. Air Force installation.[3]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classes_of_supply

Just in case you see anything like that.
Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing! :o

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
:twisted: ; Julia Child
Image
User avatar
Curtis Lemay
Posts: 14762
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 3:12 pm
Location: Houston, TX

RE: The question to ask about The Italians

Post by Curtis Lemay »

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

So you are trying to equate a German Panzer division's supply requirements with a Chinese division with 9,500 men supply requirements? You men will go hungry and your tanks will not move. The Chinese carried their ammo supply and one weeks worth of food on their backs. Think of all of that gasoline on the back of a tank waiting to be hit and catch on fire . . .

The same thing with a motorized infantry division. The infantry sitting on the gas cans on the back of a truck waiting to be part of a gas barbeque.

While the rail line may be able to handle more than ONE train per day, it has to unload somewhere then make it back. There is only so much space to do that where the other infrastructure needed is there. Then it has to be guarded and it can't be to close to enemy artillery, much less a man portable 81mm mortar . . .
Willey Pete anyone? [:D]

This is ridiculous. It's obvious that a rail line can handle a vast amount of supplies. More than enough for the action required in Spain. Remember, Spain has a tiny army. That means a tiny amount of combat needed to eliminate them.

Every urban area has marshalling yards where trains can be held while unloaded. Of course such locations would be behind front lines.
My TOAW web site:

Bob Cross's TOAW Site
User avatar
Curtis Lemay
Posts: 14762
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 3:12 pm
Location: Houston, TX

RE: The question to ask about The Italians

Post by Curtis Lemay »

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

Happy to have all those professional wargame designers on my side.
My TOAW web site:

Bob Cross's TOAW Site
User avatar
Curtis Lemay
Posts: 14762
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 3:12 pm
Location: Houston, TX

RE: The question to ask about The Italians

Post by Curtis Lemay »

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

The Tokyo Express sailed into waters far from their air bases so they had little to no fighters for defense.

Correct. And the Americans had plenty of air assets to use against them. But they couldn't because it was night. Aircraft don't intercept anything very well at night. That's the point.
My TOAW web site:

Bob Cross's TOAW Site
User avatar
warspite1
Posts: 42129
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:06 pm
Location: England

RE: The question to ask about The Italians

Post by warspite1 »

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

That was sarcasm (lost on you evidently). You were the one suggesting that.
warspite1

Once again you wilfully mis-represent what I say. Pretty pathetic to be honest. I have suggested nothing of the sort and this behaviour just makes you look bad.
ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

But it could clearly wait for years - it did.
warspite1

...and in 'waiting' for years it helped Japan how exactly?
ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

Without Barbarossa, there is no basis to believe either of those moves will be made. That means no oil embargo and no US at war.
warspite1

Except there kind of is. Japan needed to do something. We know that Barbarossa meant the argument was settled in real life in favour of the south. But you simply refuse to accept (because it doesn't suit your scenario) that in this alternate scenario, Japan still has a choice to make. All the signs, all that is happening and (given all that we know actually happened in terms of the action Japan took) leads us logically to conclude Japan would take the historic route. To not so so is too much of a flight of fantasy.

Sorry that it hurts your scenario but there you gp.
Now Maitland, now's your time!

Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
Post Reply

Return to “General Discussion”