OT:German imports from Spain/Turkey?

[RangerJoe]

I could ask a certain someone to chime in. He would mention all of the expert wargames to state that it is easy for Germany to capture Spain and Turkey plus Little Bennie to send troops to occupy the those areas with Italian troops.

[Orm]

I think the political fallout from Germany occupying Vichy, and Spain, is downplayed.

I am sure that US would react negatively to both, but I have no clue what they would do practically.

To the USSR it send the signal that Germany has no issue with breaking their pact as soon as they see any benefit. I suggest that this would change the Soviet WWII policy at once. I think that the Soviet Union was willing to let the Axis, and Allies to wear themselves down in the hope of getting some spoils at low cost for themselves. But after that harsh treatment of Spain, and Vichy, I think Stalin would change the policy to stab Germany in the back as soon as they could do so. In other words, I do not think that Stalin would have waited for a '42 Barbarossa. He would have attacked before that.

And I also think it would have impacted other, minor, countries. I doubt that Finland would have joined with Germany after that.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Orm

I think the political fallout from Germany occupying Vichy, and Spain, is downplayed.

I am sure that US would react negatively to both, but I have no clue what they would do practically.

To the USSR it send the signal that Germany has no issue with breaking their pact as soon as they see any benefit. I suggest that this would change the Soviet WWII policy at once. I think that the Soviet Union was willing to let the Axis, and Allies to wear themselves down in the hope of getting some spoils at low cost for themselves. But after that harsh treatment of Spain, and Vichy, I think Stalin would change the policy to stab Germany in the back as soon as they could do so. In other words, I do not think that Stalin would have waited for a '42 Barbarossa. He would have attacked before that.

And I also think it would have impacted other, minor, countries. I doubt that Finland would have joined with Germany after that.

warspite1

Indeed. And the consequences are different in each.

No of course Hitler doesn't give a fig about the French per se, but there were reasons for Vichy and these suited both parties. Ending Vichy just months after declaring it, simply sends Vichy towards the Allied cause and Hitler does not need this diversion of resource with Barbarossa ahead.

For Spain, yes there are also very real manpower and resource considerations, but as you say, the treatment of Franco would be a major eye opener to Finland, Hungary, Bulgaria, Romania and the USSR, not to mention Sweden, Yugoslavia, Greece, and Turkey. Quite how this would play out would be uncertain - but best case it would be unhelpful to Germany.

[RangerJoe]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

. . . it would be unhelpful to Germany.

Just a wee bit of understatement, eh?

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

What Turkey facilitates is increased naval involvement in the Black Sea, both in terms of supplies and naval operations.

Considering the impact that fairly small Axis naval involvement in the Black Sea had, I think that's actually quite an important strategic consideration (even more so given the fairly weak state of Soviet naval forces in the region).

Now, do I think that the trade-off's required to bring it about are worthwhile? Probably not, but certainly feels like a realistic consideration.

warspite1

But this started with the 'blitz through Turkey'. If you don't agree that a blitz through Turkey would be possible then that's good.

The problem, as said above, is what is the purpose of an invasion of another country - an invasion that gives the Allies another friend, that will need occupation troops (and troops to continue the fighting as Turkey hasn't actually surrendered), and that disrupts vital resources?

Against that, realistically what benefit is there in Black Sea naval involvement? Involvement by who and to what purpose?

The Regia Marina are hardly likely to pile into the Black Sea with the RN still at Alexandria - even once the Straits are secured.

And one obvious thing that doesn't seem to have been considered but is important if Germany are only occupying western Turkey. If Hitler was so worried about Ploesti that he invaded Crete, why would he be happy for British (Soviet?) bombers to operate from Turkey against these precious oilfields?

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Stalin is not going to lift a finger in the event of a German invasion of Turkey.

Austria, Czechoslovakia, Poland, the Netherlands, Belgium, Denmark, Norway and France.

Given the list above, I doubt that it will be Turkey that causes a complete volte face, if it all it was likely. Stalin's Road to Damascus moment was on June 21st 1941, and he was recovering for quite some time.

warspite1

But you don't know that? And you are basing your view on what happened in the west (Poland aside and that was agreed as part of the NS Pact).

Yes, absolutely Stalin's plan to have the Germans and the Allies fight themselves to a standstill, is looking sick. But that simply makes it all the more important that Germany keeps its nose out of the Straits. What was the outcome of the 'discussions' on the Straits during the NS Pact and afterwards? You seriously believe that Stalin was going to roll over on the Straits question?

[DesertWolf101]

ORIGINAL: Orm

The political cost for this operation seems very high to me. Not only declaring war Spain to consider here. There is also the question of Vichy France. Had AH, and Germany, planned for Spain, and Gibraltar, before they begun peace talks with France then passage for an Army going into Spain would, in my humble opinion, not been any real issue for Vichy France. But since they did not, I suspect the Vichy leadership would have strongly objected.

So how would the world react to Germany entering a treaty with France, and break it before the ink dried up. And then, without any cause, advance into Spain. UK might very well have won the war by this, even if it cost them Gibraltar.

FYI, German forces wouldn't need to go through Vichy territory to enter Spain. They had the ability to march through the Bordeaux-Biarritz corridor in the German occupied zone of France.

[DesertWolf101]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

I don't think Vichy objections would rank high in terms of obstacles at all, nor the wider diplomatic consequences.

warspite1

I think Vichy considerations weighed very, very heavily. But before all that, there is the rather key question of whether Hitler could have taken the massive leap that is declaring war on Spain. Of course he didn’t take that route in real life and its pretty much impossible, to me at any rate, that there are circumstances in which he would have been persuaded to do so.

Correct. The historical record shows that Hitler and his government were very much concerned about Vichy and were determined to not alienate it. This was the case from the beginning, but was especially reinforced when Vichy French forces defeated the British/Free French Dakar operation. It was not until the Torch landings and related events in North Africa that German strategy towards Vichy fundamentally changed.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: DesertWolf101

ORIGINAL: Orm

The political cost for this operation seems very high to me. Not only declaring war Spain to consider here. There is also the question of Vichy France. Had AH, and Germany, planned for Spain, and Gibraltar, before they begun peace talks with France then passage for an Army going into Spain would, in my humble opinion, not been any real issue for Vichy France. But since they did not, I suspect the Vichy leadership would have strongly objected.

So how would the world react to Germany entering a treaty with France, and break it before the ink dried up. And then, without any cause, advance into Spain. UK might very well have won the war by this, even if it cost them Gibraltar.

FYI, German forces wouldn't need to go through Vichy territory to enter Spain. They had the ability to march through the Bordeaux-Biarritz corridor in the German occupied zone of France.

warspite1

Indeed, and this didn't help their logistics situation (only one rail line - plus Spanish rail was a different gauge and there was a bridge that was susceptible to attack that needed to be heavily defended). In addition to the logistics, attacking out of one relatively small bridgehead wasn't the best start for any attack.

[DesertWolf101]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

I suppose it's important to define what we mean by invasion regarding Spain - is it a coerced "invitation" to deal with Gibraltar or an outright invasion? That changes the dynamic substantially.

warspite1

It's a blitz through Spain. As per real life, Spain says no to Germany's offer (although the person proposing the strategy believes that Franco could have had his mind changed....) and Hitler decides to invade the country, and the regime that German blood was spilled to install, just the previous year.

Simples

I don’t know exactly what the rest of this person’s views are to respond to them, but he is not wrong about the Franco bit. Franco was a huge Germanophile who was halfway towards joining the war on the Axis side even before the Hendaye negotiations. Spanish demands to join the war on the German side were for military and economic assistance and for colonial concessions, most notably in French Morocco and around Oran. I could go into much more detail on this if interested, but essentially the Germans chose to not accept these demands since they believed that, given significant Spanish military and economic weaknesses, it was not worth the risk of alienating Vichy to gain Spanish belligerence.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: DesertWolf101

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

I suppose it's important to define what we mean by invasion regarding Spain - is it a coerced "invitation" to deal with Gibraltar or an outright invasion? That changes the dynamic substantially.

warspite1

It's a blitz through Spain. As per real life, Spain says no to Germany's offer (although the person proposing the strategy believes that Franco could have had his mind changed....) and Hitler decides to invade the country, and the regime that German blood was spilled to install, just the previous year.

Simples

I don’t know exactly what the rest of this person’s views are to respond to them, but he is not wrong about the Franco bit. Franco was a huge Germanophile who was halfway towards joining the war on the Axis side even before the Hendaye negotiations. Spanish demands to join the war on the German side were for military and economic assistance and for colonial concessions, most notably in French Morocco and around Oran. I could go into much more detail on this if interested, but essentially the Germans chose to not accept these demands since they believed that, given significant Spanish military and economic weaknesses, it was not worth the risk of alienating Vichy to gain Spanish belligerence.

warspite1

There is another take on this which is perhaps just as valid. Franco made demands he knew the Germans could not meet. Not, did not want to meet (although I believe that to be the case) but could not, meet. Hitler did not have the wheat, the oil and the armaments to spare that Spain needed.

So Hitler pulled back, but Spanish demands had made it impossible for them to join the war.

Which was the actual reason? Opinion is divided and depends to an extent on whether one believes Franco was a realist (and did not want to join the war while Britain was still alive) but was not prepared to upset Hitler with a blank refusal, and so wanted to appear keen to join - but presented inflated demands so he didn't have to) or desperate to join the Axis, and his requests were genuine (his country was a total mess) but didn't realise Germany's position sufficiently.

[rustysi]

Franco made demands he knew the Germans could not meet.

I recall watching some documentary years back that Hitler supposedly said, after their meeting, he rather have his teeth pulled than go through it again.

[DesertWolf101]

Careful lads, you are falling for Francoist propaganda! [:D]

In the aftermath of World War II, the Fascists in Spain deliberately built up the narrative that Franco was the savior who kept the country out of the war through a policy of 'astute caution'. This was both to buoy up domestic support during a tense political period as well as for external consumption as Franco sought to shift the country's alignment with the West. This narrative that Franco was a realist that brilliantly played the Nazis has however effectively been discredited over the past few decades and is no longer considered valid.

For some easily accessible reading on this, check out this link: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/213287.pdf

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: DesertWolf101

Careful lads, you are falling for Francoist propaganda! [:D]

In the aftermath of World War II, the Fascists in Spain deliberately built up the narrative that Franco was the savior who kept the country out of the war through a policy of 'astute caution'. This was both to buoy up domestic support during a tense political period as well as for external consumption as Franco sought to shift the country's alignment with the West. This narrative that Franco was a realist that brilliantly played the Nazis has however effectively been discredited over the past few decades and is no longer considered valid.

For some easily accessible reading on this, check out this link: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/213287.pdf

warspite1

Not saying this isn't the correct one of the two versions, but if this was it then it was certainly lucky for Franco if it was simply his lack of realism that caused him to ask for too much and for Hitler to pull back [X(].

Talk about lucky break......[;)]

Personally I always find it funny that toward the end of the war, Franco believed that Hitler was still his 'friend' and didn't realise that Hitler would have killed him as soon as look at him. What a bozo.

[RangerJoe]

The Soviet Union did send tanks to Turkey. I am sure that there would easily have been other items sent.

The rail line from occupied France and Spain did not connect. There was a rail line from each country going to the other country but they did not connect nor were they of the same gauge. A rail line that went through Vichy France to Spain went through a long, deep tunnel which could have been blocked. It is easy to sabotage a rail line, you don't even need explosives but a nice pry bar with leverage.

Shall I invite a certain person to chime in here and tell everyone how easy it would be?

[fcooke]

Interesting debate. The route into Spain has some serious mountains, limiting the advantage of armor. Italy thought it could take out Greece and had rear handed to them, and then had to be bailed out by Germany, which delayed the invasion of the USSR. Invading Spain would likely add more delay to the USSR invasion. And I am not convinced that the Rock falls if Spain falls. After all Spain has wanted Gibraltar for a long time but the place is a fortress where armor would be largely useless. So an infantry assault against a very well fortified position. That won't be cheap. As for opening up the Black Sea to get naval assets in to pressure the USSR? What naval assets? Germany would not supply the Italian navy with enough oil to operate effectively in the Med, never mind the Black sea. And unless Germany seizes the Vichy fleet there are really not enough German naval assets to matter. Subs in the Black sea are not really going to accomplish much. And the garrison requirements would also hurt. Yugoslavia was a fairly small country and proved to be a significant pain for Germany. Countries with populations of Spain and Turkey would be a serious problem if the people decided to fight.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: fcooke

Interesting debate. The route into Spain has some serious mountains, limiting the advantage of armor. Italy thought it could take out Greece and had rear handed to them, and then had to be bailed out by Germany, which delayed the invasion of the USSR. Invading Spain would likely add more delay to the USSR invasion. And I am not convinced that the Rock falls if Spain falls. After all Spain has wanted Gibraltar for a long time but the place is a fortress where armor would be largely useless. So an infantry assault against a very well fortified position. That won't be cheap. As for opening up the Black Sea to get naval assets in to pressure the USSR? What naval assets? Germany would not supply the Italian navy with enough oil to operate effectively in the Med, never mind the Black sea. And unless Germany seizes the Vichy fleet there are really not enough German naval assets to matter. Subs in the Black sea are not really going to accomplish much. And the garrison requirements would also hurt. Yugoslavia was a fairly small country and proved to be a significant pain for Germany. Countries with populations of Spain and Turkey would be a serious problem if the people decided to fight.

warspite1

The only comment I would disagree on is the fall of The Rock. However that is only because of the artillery and aircraft that the Germans were planning to utilise. They would have got Gibraltar to surrender I have no doubt. The problem of course is that the 'blitz' through Spain - and remember this is what M_M believes is possible - isn't much of a blitz. And if its not a blitz that can be achieved speedily and with little cost, then its not going to assist the next dominoes that needed toppling - the taking of Turkey and North Africa. The 1942 Barbarossa then potentially becomes a worse proposition for Germany - and that is the very thing that this 'blitz' is trying to avoid!!

[fcooke]

I don't know - the Rock is quite 'solid' so I don't think arty/airpower would be very effective. And the tunnel system there is impressive. And then the Germans would have to take out the monkeys as well. In fairness the monkeys are pretty friendly, so likely not a problem. A fairly interesting place to visit if you have been already. You're pretty close, but don't fly to Gibraltar directly - that is one terrifying airfield. And then holiday in southern Spain.

[Orm]

ORIGINAL: DesertWolf101

ORIGINAL: Orm

The political cost for this operation seems very high to me. Not only declaring war Spain to consider here. There is also the question of Vichy France. Had AH, and Germany, planned for Spain, and Gibraltar, before they begun peace talks with France then passage for an Army going into Spain would, in my humble opinion, not been any real issue for Vichy France. But since they did not, I suspect the Vichy leadership would have strongly objected.

So how would the world react to Germany entering a treaty with France, and break it before the ink dried up. And then, without any cause, advance into Spain. UK might very well have won the war by this, even if it cost them Gibraltar.

FYI, German forces wouldn't need to go through Vichy territory to enter Spain. They had the ability to march through the Bordeaux-Biarritz corridor in the German occupied zone of France.

Thank you. [:)] [&o]

Yes. They could have. I think it was concluded in a previous discussion that just using that corridor was not practical when attempting to blitz through Spain in short time so I did not include this possibility in my post. If this is considered the invasion route, then I will amend my thinking accordingly.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: fcooke

I don't know - the Rock is quite 'solid' so I don't think arty/airpower would be very effective. And then the Germans would have to take out the monkeys as well. In fairness the monkeys are pretty friendly, so likely not a problem.

warspite1

Yes, I admit 'The Rock' is tres formidable, and that they would need a lot of artillery and air power. I am not sure the Barbary Apes are as friendly as you remember them though....


The Rock visiting Gibraltar Zoo with his pet Barbary Ape, Brian, in March 1941