Hungary was forced into Axis when Germans were invading Yugoslavia? the same would be effected here with Romania being invaded.Sid Guttridge wrote:Hungary achieved almost all its territorial claims by June 1941. It never needed, or wanted, to occupy Romania proper. Neither did the Bulgarians evince any interest in occupying Romania. Hungary was never going to be a wholehearted member of the Axis if that meant war with a USSR against which it had absolutely no territorial claims, because it had already largely got what it wanted without fighting by May 1941.
Not only would occupying Romania cost Germany the support of the third most important Axis army, navy and air force in Europe, it would require Germany to find occupation forces potentially as large as those that were eventually built up in Yugoslavia. (The differential in divisions is of the order of up to 45 - minus some 30 Romanian divisions and an occupation force of perhaps 15 Axis divisions). On top of that, oil production was likely to be severely disrupted and put at permanent risk of sabotage, and Britain and France, which guaranteed Romania at the same time as they guaranteed Poland, would presumably have been brought into the war.
Your plans for an invasion of Romania, as opposed to Poland, largely ignore historic context. They are also counterproductive for the Axis on military and economic levels.
again this scenario does not envision an invasion of Poland OR an invasion of USSR, the goal is stable or improved relations with Poland and non-aggression pact with USSR (similar to their pact with Japan.)
how counterproductive were those two invasions?
(this leaves the Polish army intact, would the Soviets try to attack Germany THROUGH Poland? OR would Poland take action against Germany during (any) invasion of France with Soviets at their back?)