The question to ask about The Italians

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Buckrock

Thanks RangerJoe and RFalvo69, that pretty much sums up what I'd seen going back almost 10 pages.

warspite1

You wouldn't be interested anyway Buckrock, it's the 'boring' Mediterranean and not the 'exciting'* Pacific [;)]

* Sorry I can't remember how you referred to the Pacific - but I'm confident I've got your adjective correct for the Med [:)]

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

Plans for a Med Strategy would be made before then, though. Italy entering the war was foreseeable.

Show me where the Germans knew or even wanted the Italians to come into the war, show me the planning that the Germans did with the Italians prior to Italy entering the war. Not a wargame, but historical documents. Show me the planning where Germany thought that Italy entering the war allied with Germany was beneficial. No wargames, historical documents.

warspite1

This is the point. I've provided the quotes from Mussolini and Badoglio on how they saw Italy's role in the war, Italy's need to win her own victories and to fight her own parallel war (and indeed this was reinforced to Mussolini when Hitler refused to give Italy the spoils she thought were coming her way after the fall of France). German assistance was not wanted and not needed (or so they thought [8|]).

If Curtis Lemay can produce anything that suggests anything other than the above then it would at least give some credence to his proposal. But, as far as I know, there is nothing to be produced that in any way would support his view. What we know is that Mussolini wanted - and needed - victory in Egypt to be Italy's victory alone for the reasons mentioned above. This was his thinking in late June 1940.

If Curtis Lemay wants anyone to believe that Mussolini could be TOLD by Hitler that his troops could not attack Egypt, that they must cower in Tripoli* while Germany invades Spain (in Italy's sphere of influence - and I've already shown what that would mean for Mussolini) and that Italy can't make any plans for action against Yugoslavia or Greece, then he needs to provide some evidence to support that view.

* The cowering apparently came after a spiffing wheeze of a honey trap mission in which the Italians would cross into Egypt, display their wares to the British, and then seductively withdraw back into Tripolitania (abandoning Cyrenaica - yeah Mussolini would love that too). The British, all hot under the collar for the Italians, would then advance into Libya. Of course this nonsense pre-supposes quite a lot really doesn't it?

- It supposes that the British don't attack the Italians before they retreat

- Or worse, it supposes the British, more mobile than the Italians, don't catch the Italians while strung out and retreating.....

- It supposes that the British don't actually destroy the Italians in Tripolitania in the way they did in Egypt/Cyrenaica in real life. The problem there of course being that if they did then Tripoli would fall and that would be goodnight Libya and the Italian presence in North Africa, not to mention the loss of the Italian 5th and 10th Armies....Whoops!

Not really thinking this stuff through are you Curtis Lemay?

[Buckrock]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

You wouldn't be interested anyway Buckrock, it's the 'boring' Mediterranean and not the 'exciting'* Pacific [;)]

True dat. Unfortunately though, because of the Med's influence on British Far East military policy, I've previously had to put time in on the '40-41 UK Cabinet, Committee and COS records dealing with strategy and operations in Churchill's Bathtub, sorry I meant to say the Mediterranean. It was a very traumatic experience, leaving some of the info still stuck in my head like an unwanted Spice Girls hook.

I can offer one bit of information that came from my suffering, the Brits rejected the idea of intervening militarily in the Iberian Peninsula if the Germans invaded there during this period, rejecting it both before and after BoB. As you suggested previously, their planning focus was instead on the taking of the Atlantic islands and possibly securing a lodgement in the Spanish territories in NW Africa (including Tangier and Ceuta). There was also a plan to operate the SOE in the Iberian Peninsula of course, as well as supplying weapons and equipment to any resistance groups that formed there (and assumedly after they promised to fight the Germans and not each other).

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Buckrock

ORIGINAL: warspite1

You wouldn't be interested anyway Buckrock, it's the 'boring' Mediterranean and not the 'exciting'* Pacific [;)]

True dat. Unfortunately though, because of the Med's influence on British Far East military policy, I've previously had to put time in on the '40-41 UK Cabinet, Committee and COS records dealing with strategy and operations in Churchill's Bathtub, sorry I meant to say the Mediterranean. It was a very traumatic experience, leaving some of the info still stuck in my head like an unwanted Spice Girls hook.

I can offer one bit of information that came from my suffering, the Brits rejected the idea of intervening militarily in the Iberian Peninsula if the Germans invaded there during this period, rejecting it both before and after BoB. As you suggested previously, their planning focus was instead on the taking of the Atlantic islands and possibly securing a lodgement in the Spanish territories in NW Africa (including Tangier and Ceuta). There was also a plan to operate the SOE in the Iberian Peninsula of course, as well as supplying weapons and equipment to any resistance groups that formed there (and assumedly after they promised to fight the Germans and not each other).

warspite1

Naturally I am very sorry for the suffering you've endured vis-a-vis the Spice Girls, although I think it was Sir Winston Churchill who said it best at the conclusion of one of his most famous speeches.

"I really really really wanna zigazig ah"

WSC
15/09/1940
House of Commons

However, I'm sure that is more than compensated for by Tales from the Mediterranean 1940-42 (a most fascinating time in WWII).

Thanks for the info. It's good to get that confirmation. I would like to think that they would have kept to that (although the involvement in Greece makes me wonder if WSC would have been able to resist sending in a suitably understrength and ill-equipped force had Germany invaded - less likely if Spain went full Nazi.....). There are only so many last ditch withdrawals from the beaches and harbours that the RN could take after all [;)]

I think the best they could do would be to make themselves a nuisance in Gib and Spanish Morocco for as long as possible, but there is no way the Germans wouldn't have kicked them out of both ultimately.

So long as they stopped the Germans getting the islands, that would have been the best they could hope for. And yes, the SOE would have been stirring up whatever trouble they could on the mainland, and I imagine the occupying force would have had as much fun in Sunny Spain as Napoleon's treacherous back-stabbers over 100 years before #Grizzlyends....

With luck, fair winds, crap winter weather and stout Spanish resistance it could be possible that with a September start (and I think that is being generous to Germany for the sake of this scenario), the Germans wouldn't have actually cleared up on the Peninsular and Gibraltar until circa January 1941 - just in time to sort out Mussolini's mess.......

[Zovs]

What about Portugal?

I don't know to much about them but would not they side with the CW and Spain against a German invasion?

[RFalvo69]

ORIGINAL: warspite1
If Curtis Lemay wants anyone to believe that Mussolini could be TOLD by Hitler that his troops could not attack Egypt, that they must cower in Tripoli* while Germany invades Spain (in Italy's sphere of influence - and I've already shown what that would mean for Mussolini) and that Italy can't make any plans for action against Yugoslavia or Greece, then he needs to provide some evidence to support that view.

OK, I'll bite here (source at the end).

Mussolini had a good plan for conquering Greece. It was called the "Guzzoni Plan" from the general who devised it. The plan called for "18 reinforced divisions already in Albania, organized in three corps; an improved infrastructure network so to ensure rapid supply and replacements; and for the campaign to start with the good season (around May). And, oh, having Bulgaria as an ally would have been great."

Hitler didn't want for Mussolini to attack Greece. He A) Was worried by any kind of disturbance in the Balkans and B) Feared that the unavoidable British intervention in Greece would have granted to the British the use of airfields from where they could stage bombings of his precious oilfields in Ploiesti.

Hitler, quite openly, wanted for Mussolini to concentrate all his efforts in North Africa and forget everything else.

Mussolini never had a clear plan in mind. He wanted Greece so to show that he was able to conquer "B level countries". But, no, the sight now was on Yugoslavia! (Greece, however, was still verbally attacked in fascist-controlled media) Meanwhile he ordered over and over to Graziani to start his offensive in Egypt (Graziani knew that it was a losing affair and delayed while always asking for more men).

The result was that Greece mobilised (you know, just in case...) while Italy was demobilising, because, after an unfruitful Summer (warwise), now Italy needed men for the harvest season...

The letters from Mussolini to Hitler were, literally, childish. Every then and now he mentioned, among a score of other topics, the possibility of a war with Greece - almost in fine print. Mussolini knew that openly speaking about starting a war in the Balkans would have sent Hitler against the roof.

Then, fatefully, Hitler occupied Romania. Mussolini (who, once more, had not be informed beforehand) conied one of his most famous sentences: "We will invade Greece now! And this time it will be Hitler who will learn what happens from the newspapers!" (the other one is the classic "We will break Greece's back!" - this one is still used today in a satirical way...)

So, Italy attacked Greece with 9 not reinforced divisions, against a prepared enemy, with no work done to improve the Albanian infrastructures, while demobilising and in late October. What could have gone wrong?

For all of this and MUCH MORE I always suggest "Hollow Legions" by Mario Cervi. It is the rare Italian history book also (available in English (it won a lot of national and international prizes) and, while it is about the Italo-Greek war, it is quite insightful about Mussolini, his generals and the tormented relationship with Hitler. Also, the Appendixes are full of original documents, so you are not asked to "believe" the author: the main characters of the great Italian tragedy speak directly to you.

[Curtis Lemay]

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

So? Hills can be snowed in, so can level ground. Have you ever experienced snow? Freezing rain?

Still waiting for that example of a force being ground to a halt by hills alone.

You don't just sit and hold Alpine hexes, you utilize them for bases of operations, a safe place to retreat to, then operate from the bases there.

Not if they're surrounded and cutoff from supply.

So they did not have to garrison the land yet still they could get resources from it.

Why would they need to garrison Vichy France (now an Axis ally)? Clearly, if the French don't care if the Germans are there, why would the Germans not want to be there?

The French quit on their Allies, that is not honourable. DHC, do you understand anything like that? [8|]

Far more honorable than not fighting at all.

Gallipoli, the Italian campaign with the Bernhardt line which had, among others, Monte la Defensa with the battles along the Sangro river, the Gustav Line with Monte Cassino not to mention the Apennine mountains. Have you ever heard or even read about these places and battles?

The high ground controls the low ground.

All fully occupied by strong defenders - which is what stopped the Allies. Even then, except for Gallipoli, the Allies eventually overcame those defenses and went right over those areas - despite the "road grades".

Show me where the Germans knew or even wanted the Italians to come into the war, show me the planning that the Germans did with the Italians prior to Italy entering the war. Not a wargame, but historical documents. Show me the planning where Germany thought that Italy entering the war allied with Germany was beneficial. No wargames, historical documents.

As I said, Italy entering the war was a foreseeable contingency. The whole purpose of plans are to prep for contingencies.

[Curtis Lemay]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: warspite1

What?

How many ways can you interpret the quote from the US military study????

....based upon the maps I've posted, it is clear that any claim that there is no path from Athens to the Albanian border except via Salonika if false. A blind man can see it - just not you......

warspite1

......or the professional soldiers of the US Army.

Which you've clearly taken an out-of-context snippet from.

[Curtis Lemay]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: warspite1

So you think the British will sit there, allow Spain to be conquered and then, only when Gibraltar is attacked, will they make their move in the Canaries???? You need to think more about what you are saying - and the comment about Crete was a hoot.

I don't think Franco will agree to British possession of their colonies any more than the French allowed them into FNA. They will expect, as the French did, for them to lodge themselves on the mainland - where the war is. If they violate that, Spain would be a real danger to become an Axis ally.

warspite1

Again with the totally mindless, irrelevant mentioning of French North Africa.... totally clueless.

To be fair I understand why you are totally lost in terms of the importance of the Canary Islands in the event Gibraltar is lost - I mean after all, the Canaries are not in the game you played. Perhaps the game makers didn't think the Canaries important - or perhaps they couldn't get them to fit on the map?

So once again, I (and others) give logical, sound reasons why Spain would very much allow the RN the use of the Canaries but you have to play the child and add the word possession.

"I don't think Franco will agree to British possession of their colonies"

You just bring every post down don't you? yet another example of a thoroughly dishonest debating style.

[/quote]
They would possess them. And good luck to the Spanish getting them out. It would be especially egregious since there were plenty of places on the mainland for the British to base.

[Curtis Lemay]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: warspite1

How many ways can you interpret what the German supply officers have said????

]

Again, that was under a friendly Spain. That limited what the Germans could do. A campaign in Spain allows rail repair.

warspite1

Please stop you are just embarrassing yourself. Let's be completely clear on what you've just said.

So if the Spanish invite the Germans in and the Germans want to rebuild/repair the Spanish rail infrastructure (both for the Gibraltar operation and to ensure communications are up to scratch if ever there is an invasion of Spain) the Spanish would deny the Germans the chance to assist with repairing the shattered Spanish railways??

Interesting...... [X(]

Well, rail repair clearly wasn't part of that plan. So, are you now saying that rail repair is somehow impossible in Spain? Not that it matters, since, as I've shown, the whole of Spain is closer to the French border than Tripoli was to El Alamein (or Tobruk, for that matter). The Germans don't even need to repair rail lines to complete the conquest. (I'm not saying they won't, just that whatever repair was completed would be beyond the minimum needs.)

[Curtis Lemay]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: warspite1

The Germans have a narrow front to attack from with no diversion of Spanish force elsewhere. Everything would depend on how long the Spanish could hold the Germans up in the hills and mountains along the border, how much damage they could do to the rail line and roads (destroying bridges and collapsing tunnels) and thus give Spain time to mobilise fully. Much too depends on the response from the British. Do they know how vulnerable the German supply line is in on the border?

Strategic surprise trumps much of that. The tiny Spanish army is in a peacetime deployment - located all over the country.

warspite1

Nope, wrong on all counts, next.

Wow - it's great fun writing pithy one liners that simply say I'm right isn't it?

[/quote]
But SPI agrees with me.

[Curtis Lemay]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

So now you are raising North Africa, where the Germans lost because Rommel didn't understand logistics, and you think that its appropriate to raise this theatre in support of your logistics argument for Spain? Wow.... So you have an entire army group [:D] in Spain being supplied by road now..... My my, that's a lot of trucks the Germans have isn't it?

They still took the Commonwealth to the brink there. And captured Tobruk. And they were facing the Commonwealth, not the puny Spaniards.

Divisions have their own supply assets built in. So, the more divisions in a force, the more supply assets, including trucks. Plus, there will be more than an army group sitting on its hands on the channel. Their truck needs will be greatly reduced, allowing loans to the forces in Spain.

[Curtis Lemay]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: warspite1

I've asked you what you were talking about and you've come up with this. Despite the disingenuous answers above, yes you have said the Germans have until 1942 - "How long will it take? They have till 1942". And you also said "The Germans will be in a rush to get things done".

You seem to have confused yourself and give the usual one line answers in response - just minimal effort every time. Well I don't have the time to keep doing your job and trying to work out what you are talking about, when you can't even be bothered to be clear yourself.

Nothing unclear about that. Of course they want the campaign done as soon as it can be. But that doesn't imply any timeframe. The Pharaoh wants his pyramid as soon as possible - but it still takes 20 years to build.

warspite1

Of course you don't attempt a timeframe - that would mean putting some effort into what you say.

[/quote]

I want to repeat my Pyramid example, because it's so appropriate: "The Pharaoh wants his pyramid as soon as possible - but it still takes 20 years to build."

The Pharaoh doesn't know how long it will take to finish the pyramid. But it still gets built. Same here. I don't know how long the campaign will take. But it will still get done.

[Curtis Lemay]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

So, here is the scenario (and remember, no one is talking about possession of the islands by the British despite your unsubtle and frankly disgusting attempt to put words in my mouth). The Germans have just back-stabbed their allies the Spanish by invading them, an act which - never mind the treachery itself - will lead to starvation. The Germans are now killing Spaniards, bombing civilians, offering up the usual Nazi reprisals for any offence, etc etc - in short, all the hideousness of twentieth century warfare being meted out to the Spanish population.

In response the British (with the US in the wings) are offering whole manner of rewards and as much assistance as they can provide. However they really need to be able to use the Canaries as a naval base because Gibraltar is about to be hors de combat. The use of the base not only helps the British but of course also allows some direct support for Spain.

Now, despite the fact that everyone else who has expressed an opinion sees the nonsense of your view, you maintain that the Spanish would say no to the RN. And furthermore, you think that as a result of the British offering financial and material help in return for the use of the anchorage, the Spanish will not only say no [this is too funny] but in so doing, will actually switch sides and now be BFF's with the Germans who are busy invading their country and killing their citizens....

[/quote]

Let's see....The Romanians started out Axis...lost untold thousands to the Russians...were invaded by the Russians (with all the above carnage)...and finished the war on the side of...the Russians! Same for the Bulgarians.

Weak countries bend with the wind. The wind, in 1940, blows from Germany. And it's even worse with Franco - he really has nowhere else to turn: The Western Democracies are not going to be his friends.

And the British are taking possession of the Canaries, as I've made clear elsewhere. If the Spanish can't get them to leave, that's possession.

[RFalvo69]

I think that this latest streak should unlock an achievement.

[Curtis Lemay]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

So you admit you have absolutely no idea what Vichy France was about, but simply think it would be really neat if the Spanish had one because France did [&:].

No. I think the reason for Vichy was to keep an enclave in France that wasn't under German occupation. Nothing else makes sense. I repeat: If that wasn't the reason, why would the Germans have ever agreed to stay out of that enclave?????

And, again, I don't see Franco having any choice but to make a deal if he doesn't want Spain handed over to the Republicans.

And incredibly you are still thinking in terms of Franco and Hitler making deals after what has just taken place???? Did you really ask why would Franco be so resistant? Did you really say that Franco would have no choice but to make a deal???? If that were true he would have caved in when Germany threatened him wouldn't he? Hitler has threatened Franco in no uncertain terms. Do you really think Franco has any reason to believe that Hitler doesn't follow through on his threats?

I mean he would make a deal after the invasion and conquest. What other choice would he have that leaves him in control of Spain in the future?

NOW, TRY AND PUT YOURSELF IN THEIR SHOES. TRY AND STOP THINKING LIKE A WAR GAMER AND TRY AND THINK OF REAL LIFE - YOU KNOW, REALITY.

Wargames are a supporting factor in my argument, not the only factor. The above is a slur, which your posts are full of. You shame yourself. Stick to the facts and stop making personal comments!!!

a) We have decided that Hitler is going to be persuaded that a Med First is the way to go

Right. And this changes his plans from history. He now knows that he wants Gibraltar if Italy joins the war - even to the point of conquering Spain. That moves negotiations up in his priorities. They will begin ASAP - long before the France operation. Furthermore, he will set a date beyond which negotiations will cease. The appropriate point for that is the instant the invasion force is ready. At that point, either Spain is on board, or invaded.

b) Hitler is now fully on board and, in line with his character, when he wants something then he wants something, and he doesn't take kindly to be told he can't have it
c) Hitler doesn't have the benefit of hindsight, he doesn't know how easy or difficult it will be to take North Africa, he has no idea about taking Turkey and the Middle East, and he doesn't know what the USSR will do and he doesn't know how tough a nut Gibraltar will be. In short he wants Spain/Gibraltar done as quickly as possible. He's delayed Barbarossa once. He will not countenance a second delay.

This plan assumes the Germans conclude that a cross-channel invasion is not feasible. That's all that's necessary to adopt a Med Strategy. It's not an unreasonable assumption.

d) He asks Franco through an intermediary in Spain
e) He asks Franco again though an intermediary in Berlin
f) He goes to see Franco in person to get this sorted
g) His foreign minister asks Franco. Franco makes warm noises and Hitler orders preparations to begin in earnest, including the training of the units that will undertake the assault. More intelligence operations are launched with Franco's assistance. Hitler is now really keen to get this done and thinks he has Franco's buy-in but.....
h) Mussolini is asked to speak to Franco
i) Canaris asks Franco
d) - i) is largely as per history
j) Exasperated, Hitler, desperate to avoid invading his nominal ally, but tired of the prevarication, threatens Franco to make him see reason. Hitler's had a really rubbish summer since the fall of France and time is starting to slip away. His threat to Franco is unambiguous....
k) Hitler, by now in the sort of mood he was in after someone gave him the news about the coup in Yugoslavia, and with any reticence or reluctance to attack Spain overtaken by sheer anger and frustration, gives the order to invade. He orders the bombing of Madrid and calls it Operation Retribution (he will have to come up with another name now for bombing Belgrade or maybe just call that Retribution II [;)])

Invasion on the deadline - sometime in July.

l) The Germans begin the attack and take some losses, but generally start to gain ground. Spanish resistance can't last forever and Franco does what?
m) Franco now surrenders. Really? After standing up to Hitler - even when directly threatened, he now simply throws in the towel????

Again, eventually Spain will be conquered. At that point, Franco will be ripe for a deal - since he has no place to turn.

n) But let's go with that nonsense for a minute. You actually think Hitler, having been pushed down a path of invasion that has done his credibility with his axis and potentially axis countries no good whatsoever, that has cost him time and losses, is just going to roll his eyes and say yeah sure Franco, me ol' mucker, no problem?

If it gets a Vichy Spain, of course!

p) All this assumes that Franco isn't overthrown as soon as he suggests a surrender.

Once Spain is conquered, why would a very favorable deal cause that reaction? Especially from his fascist cronies?

[Curtis Lemay]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

This is the point. I've provided the quotes from Mussolini and Badoglio on how they saw Italy's role in the war, Italy's need to win her own victories and to fight her own parallel war (and indeed this was reinforced to Mussolini when Hitler refused to give Italy the spoils she thought were coming her way after the fall of France). German assistance was not wanted and not needed (or so they thought [8|]).

If Curtis Lemay can produce anything that suggests anything other than the above then it would at least give some credence to his proposal. But, as far as I know, there is nothing to be produced that in any way would support his view. What we know is that Mussolini wanted - and needed - victory in Egypt to be Italy's victory alone for the reasons mentioned above. This was his thinking in late June 1940.

If Curtis Lemay wants anyone to believe that Mussolini could be TOLD by Hitler that his troops could not attack Egypt, that they must cower in Tripoli* while Germany invades Spain (in Italy's sphere of influence - and I've already shown what that would mean for Mussolini) and that Italy can't make any plans for action against Yugoslavia or Greece, then he needs to provide some evidence to support that view.

We've been over this again and again. The Germans adopt a Med Strategy. Obviously, the Italians must be made privy to that strategy if they are to be included in the Spain garrison and partake in the effort to trap the British in Libya. Once Mussolini knows of the German plan to take Suez via Turkey, they would be idiots to make a try at it from Libya.

- It supposes that the British don't attack the Italians before they retreat

- Or worse, it supposes the British, more mobile than the Italians, don't catch the Italians while strung out and retreating.....

The Commonwealth aren't ready for the raid till much later. And its success owed much to the poor deployments the Italians were in. If they retreat soon enough they will be safe.

- It supposes that the British don't actually destroy the Italians in Tripolitania in the way they did in Egypt/Cyrenaica in real life. The problem there of course being that if they did then Tripoli would fall and that would be goodnight Libya and the Italian presence in North Africa, not to mention the loss of the Italian 5th and 10th Armies....Whoops!

By the time the Commonwealth can get there (assuming they do, since they historically stopped far short of Tripoli) Rommel will be in place.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay



....based upon the maps I've posted, it is clear that any claim that there is no path from Athens to the Albanian border except via Salonika if false. A blind man can see it - just not you......

warspite1

......or the professional soldiers of the US Army.

Which you've clearly taken an out-of-context snippet from.

warspite1

....and that comment comes from where? So exactly what was the context that I've missed here? Please tell? No one liners please, I want you to confirm exactly what I've missed.

Secondly, I want you to confirm exactly how the maps you've produced show the US Army to be a bunch of idiots who can't spot something obvious on a WWII Atlas.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay




I don't think Franco will agree to British possession of their colonies any more than the French allowed them into FNA. They will expect, as the French did, for them to lodge themselves on the mainland - where the war is. If they violate that, Spain would be a real danger to become an Axis ally.

warspite1

Again with the totally mindless, irrelevant mentioning of French North Africa.... totally clueless.

To be fair I understand why you are totally lost in terms of the importance of the Canary Islands in the event Gibraltar is lost - I mean after all, the Canaries are not in the game you played. Perhaps the game makers didn't think the Canaries important - or perhaps they couldn't get them to fit on the map?

So once again, I (and others) give logical, sound reasons why Spain would very much allow the RN the use of the Canaries but you have to play the child and add the word possession.

"I don't think Franco will agree to British possession of their colonies"

You just bring every post down don't you? yet another example of a thoroughly dishonest debating style.

They would possess them. And good luck to the Spanish getting them out. It would be especially egregious since there were plenty of places on the mainland for the British to base.




[/quote]warspite1

I am not sure if you believe what you are writing or just attention seeking. Genuinely, your comments are becoming so bizarre the more this goes on.

a) where is the evidence that Britain were going to do that? Perhaps you think they possessed Iceland? or Crete?
b) how many territories were possessed by Britain, France, America as they came back at the Germans in WWII?
c) Every post you just make yourself look more and more 'limited' in your thinking, in your knowledge, in your analysis. So with 800 German aircraft in southern France, if Gibraltar is not going to be a viable port, why do you think Corunna or Cadiz or anywhere else on mainland Spain is going to be? I mean do you EVER bother to think anything through? [/quote]

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay


]

Again, that was under a friendly Spain. That limited what the Germans could do. A campaign in Spain allows rail repair.

warspite1

Please stop you are just embarrassing yourself. Let's be completely clear on what you've just said.

So if the Spanish invite the Germans in and the Germans want to rebuild/repair the Spanish rail infrastructure (both for the Gibraltar operation and to ensure communications are up to scratch if ever there is an invasion of Spain) the Spanish would deny the Germans the chance to assist with repairing the shattered Spanish railways??

Interesting...... [X(]

Well, rail repair clearly wasn't part of that plan. So, are you now saying that rail repair is somehow impossible in Spain? Not that it matters, since, as I've shown, the whole of Spain is closer to the French border than Tripoli was to El Alamein (or Tobruk, for that matter). The Germans don't even need to repair rail lines to complete the conquest. (I'm not saying they won't, just that whatever repair was completed would be beyond the minimum needs.)

warspite1

Whoops Curtis Lemay's credibility has finally fallen through the floor..... You consistently credit me with saying things I haven't said. You are thoroughly dishonest.

Where did you get that rail repair in impossible in Spain. No weasel words, or ignoring the post, please show me where I've said rail repair is impossible.

Again you use the most ridiculous of examples - North Africa - to try and make your case in Spain.

Minimum needs? For an entire army group.... erm..... To be fair, you obviously know more than the US Military and so I guess its only to be expected you know more than the logistics and supply guys that took the German army to the gates of Moscow and the Caucasus.