Turkey joins the Axis in 1940-41

Discussions on alternate history, including events up to 20 years before today. Hosted by Terry Duncan.
Post Reply
User avatar
Terranix
Member
Posts: 72
Joined: 27 Jan 2003, 15:17
Location: Scotland

#46

Post by Terranix » 21 Sep 2005, 22:09

Goeben was pretty legendary after its WWI explots too. I wonder if any of its original German crew (the younger ones, of course) were still aboard.

Tosun Saral
Member
Posts: 4079
Joined: 02 Nov 2005, 20:32
Location: Ankara/Turkey
Contact:

#47

Post by Tosun Saral » 06 Nov 2005, 20:57

I think Turkey's alliance to both sides would prolong the war as in WW1. In 1940's Turkey was a very poor country. It is sure that Turks would fight till the bitter end as Germans did in WW2. For What? The Turkish Statemen knew that policy very well. President Ismet Inonu was a fox then every fox in the stage. He knew the Germans very well. Because he fought with them on the same trench. Inonu knew british also very well. Churchhill came to Adana to persue Inonu to be on their side. Before Adana meeting they met in Cahiro. Rosewelt was also in the meeting. Inonu asked for tanks, airplanes, modern eguipment. They refused to give. Because they didnt have extra war material. Germans were at the gates on Bulgar and greek borders. They were on Caucasus. The Aegean islands were occupied by them.German Ambassador to Ankara Franz von Papen, who was a German Officer in Turkish service during WW1 pursuated Hitler not to attack Turkey. He told him that it would be a early desaster for Germans. Inonu did the best political maneuvre in all Turkish History. Stayed neutral. But on the last day of the war he declared war to Germany to be able to take part in the San Fransisco Conference.

What Inonu could do that he could easly occupy the Aegean Islands as a partner of allies. Some people say that there were no boots for landing the Turkish troops. A team was enough for every island. Becasuse Italians and Germans were ready to abondon the islands to Turks. Italian government told Turkish Ambassador in Rome "Come and take your islands". The Aegean islands which were Turkish in the last 400 yeras were under Italian occupation since 1911. Turks never landed. Greeks got the islands as war demage. On the other hand Turks could easly move to Bulgaria, West Trace, Macedonia and Rumania. The Romenian diktator General Antenescu send a secret message in 1944 to Ankara wishing that Turks should occupy Rumenia before the Russians.

Turkey passed the change. If Turkey entered Balkans at the end of WW2 Russia couldn't build a iron curtain for 50 years.

Inonu never wanted to send a single soldier to the old frontiers. He said later while he was the leader of the opponent party to a journalist."My opponents say that I killed the manhood of the Turkish nation. It is not true. I only saved the fathers and left no orphans behind."


User avatar
Roddoss72
Member
Posts: 1367
Joined: 21 Jul 2005, 06:44
Location: Australia

#48

Post by Roddoss72 » 07 Nov 2005, 04:36

Gott wrote:
Zepas wrote:Nazi aircraft and tanks would be good at skilled hands.Just check out what happened with Russians weapons Soviets supplied to Egyptians, Syrians and to others "enemies of world imperialism".They just droped them without starting to use (at 6 day war at 1967) :) I think with Turk it would happen the same as at WW1.The Soviets would push them couple tens miles away from the border and later events would depend on situation at Eastern front.I don`t think Stalin would go into Turk depth, but Black Sea coast cities would be occupied, and of course ,he would put his paw on Istanbul and Bosporus.It`s apart that that he would provide "friendly" background to British allies at Syria .And as a second consequense Hitler probably would call back Rommel and evacuate Afrika korps without meaningless fighting.At resume my opinion the Turks would be such useful for Nazis as they would waste Russians time to kick their underbacks.
Are you aware that the Turks was successful at Gallipolli in the FWW? If I recalled correctly, the Turks also did cast plently of damage to the Russian Black Sea Fleet in the FWW. Though their military is small, The Turkish military in the FWW and afterwards were rather well-trained.

On a geographical view, Stalin would have cared more about defending cities in western Russia which were being invaded by the Wehrmacht, what the Turks can endangered were the Trancaucasian republics. I suppose in case the Turks invaded the USSR, the Soviets would put up a mild defence, only to collapse later on. As you should know, oil from that area was Hitler's dream.
And made the Dardenelles impassable the allies could not get in and the Russian Black Sea Fleet was trapped could not breakout into the Med Sea

User avatar
Roddoss72
Member
Posts: 1367
Joined: 21 Jul 2005, 06:44
Location: Australia

#49

Post by Roddoss72 » 07 Nov 2005, 04:43

Zepas wrote:The problem is not turks are untermenschen or not for Nazis, the problem is if they could influent the WWII in a remarcable way.As mostly agreed,turks hardly could make rickety Russians from the Caucasus.Could they ensure the supply at Wehrmacht 1942 offensive and enable him to hang on the North Caucasus?They need to know then a condition and a net of railroads(probably no railroads, just mountain goat trails overthere) at east Turkey,Turkish navy ability to fight against Russian one, if the Nazi aircraft could be located and act from Turkish side.Any historians could comment this?
Zepas you did exactly say that the Turks in your opinion were to the Germans were Untermensch, Moslems were never considered subhuman under the Nazi era infact they were encouraged to join the Ausslander unit in the wehrmacht, and remember that beat the crap out of the allies in WWI.

User avatar
Roddoss72
Member
Posts: 1367
Joined: 21 Jul 2005, 06:44
Location: Australia

#50

Post by Roddoss72 » 07 Nov 2005, 04:48

Deterance wrote:
Reviewer wrote:
Kurt_Steiner wrote: In 1941, the blitzkrieg would have been able to seize the Caucasian oil fields easely.
I dont know about easily, the would have to attack through Armenia SSR and every Armenian would have been fighting the Turks very very hard in a defensive battle.

The oil fields, however would probably fall unless something extraordinary happened. If Russia was pushed to the brink of disaster and Turks attacked British forces attacked in Palestine, Syria and Iraq....

I bet U.S. forces being sent to Guadacanal, Australia and Mororocco would be rushed to the Middle East. In short, almost every U.S. Divison both trained and partially trained would be immediatly deployed. U.S. Mobile Divisions, British Indian / African Divisions and Arab militia forces could then counter attack and defeat Turkish infantry forces in the Middle East through envelopments etc. Turkish defeats in the Middle East would then take pressure off Russia and may even prevent the Turkish siezure of the oil fields.
If you are refering to American Forces at the time of beginning Barbarossa then i am afraid America was a neutral nation and as of yet had not fully mobilized her army that wasn't until 1942, please get your dates right.

Paul Lakowski
Member
Posts: 1441
Joined: 30 Apr 2003, 06:16
Location: Canada

#51

Post by Paul Lakowski » 28 Jun 2006, 02:14

Tosun Saral wrote:I think Turkey's alliance to both sides would prolong the war as in WW1. In 1940's Turkey was a very poor country. It is sure that Turks would fight till the bitter end as Germans did in WW2. For What? The Turkish Statemen knew that policy very well. President Ismet Inonu was a fox then every fox in the stage. He knew the Germans very well. Because he fought with them on the same trench. Inonu knew british also very well. Churchhill came to Adana to persue Inonu to be on their side. Before Adana meeting they met in Cahiro. Rosewelt was also in the meeting. Inonu asked for tanks, airplanes, modern eguipment. They refused to give. Because they didnt have extra war material. Germans were at the gates on Bulgar and greek borders. They were on Caucasus. The Aegean islands were occupied by them.German Ambassador to Ankara Franz von Papen, who was a German Officer in Turkish service during WW1 pursuated Hitler not to attack Turkey. He told him that it would be a early desaster for Germans. Inonu did the best political maneuvre in all Turkish History. Stayed neutral. But on the last day of the war he declared war to Germany to be able to take part in the San Fransisco Conference.

What Inonu could do that he could easly occupy the Aegean Islands as a partner of allies. Some people say that there were no boots for landing the Turkish troops. A team was enough for every island. Becasuse Italians and Germans were ready to abondon the islands to Turks. Italian government told Turkish Ambassador in Rome "Come and take your islands". The Aegean islands which were Turkish in the last 400 yeras were under Italian occupation since 1911. Turks never landed. Greeks got the islands as war demage. On the other hand Turks could easly move to Bulgaria, West Trace, Macedonia and Rumania. The Romenian diktator General Antenescu send a secret message in 1944 to Ankara wishing that Turks should occupy Rumenia before the Russians.

Turkey passed the change. If Turkey entered Balkans at the end of WW2 Russia couldn't build a iron curtain for 50 years.

Inonu never wanted to send a single soldier to the old frontiers. He said later while he was the leader of the opponent party to a journalist."My opponents say that I killed the manhood of the Turkish nation. It is not true. I only saved the fathers and left no orphans behind."
Very well written and to the point, Inonu did a very good job navigating some tricky waters to stay Neutral. One question. If the UK had been occupied in 1940 and Germany able to focus on east, could President Ismet Inonu have been convinced to look the other way while a German Mountain Army backed up by Luftwaffe airlanding corps launched advanced through the mountains to Baku in order to sieze the oilfields in the fall of 1941?

Tosun Saral
Member
Posts: 4079
Joined: 02 Nov 2005, 20:32
Location: Ankara/Turkey
Contact:

#52

Post by Tosun Saral » 28 Jun 2006, 17:41

Dear Paul, Ismet Inonu was a democratic and civilized man. He would never do with a dictator who ruined his own land and killed millions of Germans and others. Turks collaborated with Germans in the WW1 knowing that they are on the side of a nation rich in culture. Turks wanted to gain the lost territories with this comradeship. But since 1933 every body knew that Hitlers Nazi party was barbaric and brutal. Turkey hosted since 1933 many German intellectuals Jews or Christians who escaped from Nazi terror. These facts were well known in Turkey. If the Germans invaded the UK at the top of their power, Turks would have never collaborated with the Nazi regime. They would fight againts them for democracy and humanity.
Those who rule with terror lost at the end.

christopher nelson
Member
Posts: 284
Joined: 29 Jun 2005, 16:37
Location: mystic,ct USA

Turkey joins the axis in 1940-41

#53

Post by christopher nelson » 29 Jun 2006, 16:21

The pressure that Turkey would be under would be unbelievable and if the British were on the ropes or knocked out of the war Turkey might very well have felt that it had little choice but to enter the war on Germany's side. Let me point out that while Turkey war prepared to join with the allies in 1940 conditions changed and Turkey opted to remain neutral. I have little doubt that a lot of the Turkish population would not support the Nazis but to fight them would be something else, especially if Germany was constantly winning.

User avatar
Lkefct
Member
Posts: 1294
Joined: 24 Jun 2004, 23:15
Location: Frederick MD

#54

Post by Lkefct » 29 Jun 2006, 17:45

This may be a little off the path of the discussion, but Syria is probably the key to the Med, and an attack into Southern Russia, not so important.

the reasonsing is the follwoing. First, it is my understanding that the Med fleet's main supply of oil comes from Iraq through Syria (that or Lebanon/Paelstine). If the Turks take that, the British still have plenty of supplies of oil, but getting them to the far end fo the Med starts to become much more difficult. The main supplies for oil are in the America's, and that means a huge transit to get them through the red sea. Not impossible, but difficult. Also, did the British have large storage facilities in place for their fleet. Certainly they have enough for short term operations (months?) but do they have enough to feel like they are secure.

Also, does the capture of such a pipline direct the Turks to take the oil at the other end of the pipeline? They are also in the position to help the Iraqies start up, and then that would provide the sort of oil supply and secure supply lines to Central Europe that Hitler never had access to.

AS far as Russia goes, it is my understanding that many of the probelms that the Turks had in WWI was due to teh poor supply lines that exist to the ourthern part of the causciusas. While these could and should be prepared for supplying an couple of field armies (1 german, 1 turkish?). I am not sure that it would be a huge sap on teh Rusians. The terrain certainly favors the defenders in the area. And the troops to man it are likely some of the troops that would have been lost in many of the ineffective Russian counter attacks that marked the early stage of Barborossa. Russia had plenty of men, it was their por employment that got them into such poor shape initally. So ina ll likelyhood, one or more of the large encirclements would have had many fewer men and material lost in them. In the Caucusas, I imagine that Stialin and his brain trust would be very happy to see a stalemate so far away from the main action.

User avatar
Paul kyre
Member
Posts: 130
Joined: 23 May 2006, 08:30
Location: Philippines

#55

Post by Paul kyre » 01 Jul 2006, 08:03

Maybe The allies will arm Greece. and invade the european part of turkey as well as the lands classified as Greek territories according to the Megali Idea. As well as The Soviets will recapture the Territories (in Armenia) lost by Turkey.

User avatar
nuyt
Member
Posts: 1667
Joined: 29 Dec 2004, 14:39
Location: Europe
Contact:

turkish armament

#56

Post by nuyt » 09 Jul 2006, 23:37

So, entering this discussion a bit late, what was the state of the armed forces of Turkey in/around 1940?
How was the Turkish Army equipped and organised, espcially in terms of machineguns, artillery, AT and AA. Were they well equipped or would Germany have to re-equip the new allies' forces?
Turkish artillery as much as I know was basically of WW1 vintage except for some Bofors mountain guns and Skoda heavy guns.
Any comments welcome,
Kind regards,
Nuyt

Paul Lakowski
Member
Posts: 1441
Joined: 30 Apr 2003, 06:16
Location: Canada

#57

Post by Paul Lakowski » 13 Jul 2006, 20:39

Tosun Saral wrote:Dear Paul, Ismet Inonu was a democratic and civilized man. He would never do with a dictator who ruined his own land and killed millions of Germans and others. Turks collaborated with Germans in the WW1 knowing that they are on the side of a nation rich in culture. Turks wanted to gain the lost territories with this comradeship. But since 1933 every body knew that Hitlers Nazi party was barbaric and brutal. Turkey hosted since 1933 many German intellectuals Jews or Christians who escaped from Nazi terror. These facts were well known in Turkey. If the Germans invaded the UK at the top of their power, Turks would have never collaborated with the Nazi regime. They would fight againts them for democracy and humanity.
Those who rule with terror lost at the end.
How well could they have resisted a German invasion?

User avatar
Mehmet Fatih
Member
Posts: 832
Joined: 29 Jul 2004, 15:11
Location: Ankara/Turkiye

#58

Post by Mehmet Fatih » 13 Jul 2006, 23:17

Paul, to give some idea about the Turkis strength, here is the situation in 1943

Turkish army in 1943 was consisted of :

3 Armies
15 Army Corps
41 Infantry Divisions
3 Cavalry Divisions
1 Armor Division
3 Infantry Brigades
1 Armor Brigade
1 Cavalry Brigade

Total number of soldiers in active duty was 1.300.000. About 500.000 in reserves.

Unit Deployments:

Trache and Straits: 23 Infantry divisions, 1 Cavalry division, 3 infatry brigades
Eastern Anatolia: 15 Infantry divisions, 2 cavalry divisions, 1 infantry brigades
Agean Coasts: 1 Infantry divison
High command reserves: 1 Infantry division

Turkish Navy in 1943 was consisted of:

Battle Cruiser: Yavuz

Cruisers: Hamidiye, Mecidiye

Torpedo Cruisers: Peyk-i Þevket, Berk-i Satvet

Battleship: 4 Tepe class (Adatepe, Kocatepe, Týnaztepe, Zafer);
2 Hisar (“I”) class (Sultanhisar, Demirhisar)

Submarines: 2 Inönü (Feijenoord) class (1. Ýnönü, II. Ýnönü);
2 Sakarya (Bernardis) class (Sakarya, Dumlupýnar);
1 Gür class (Gür);
1 Ay (Germania) class (Saldýray);

2 Reis (Patrol) class (Oruçreis, Muratreis)

Assault boats: 3 Doðan class (Doðan, Martý, Denizkuþu);
5 Bora class (Yýldýrým, Þimþek, Bora, Kasýrga, Tayfun)

Mine layers: 1 Intibah class (Ýntibah);
1 Nusret class (Nusret);
1 Atak class (Atak I);
2 Sivrihisar class (Sivrihisar, Turgutreis)

Mine sweepers: 2 Çanak class (Çanak, Kavak)

Turkish Air Force in 1943 was consisted of:

Note: The word Tayyare Bölüðü means aircraft company in Turkish. Consider this note for the info below.

1st Air Division: Eskiþehir


1st Air Regiment: Eskiþehir


I. Battalion
1. Tayyare Bölüðü: Heinkel He 111F-1
2. Tayyare Bölüðü: Heinkel He 111F-1

II. Battalion
3. Tayyare Bölüðü: Fairey Battle.I
4. Tayyare Bölüðü: Fairey Battle.I

IX. Battalion
1. Tayyare Bölüðü: Martin 139WT
2. Tayyare Bölüðü: Boeing B-24D Liberator

101. Reconnaissance Group
1. Tayyare Bölüðü: Westland Lysander.II
2. Tayyare Bölüðü: Westland Lysander.II

2nd Air Regiment: Kütahya


I. Battalion
1. Tayyare Bölüðü: Vultee V-11GBT
2. Tayyare Bölüðü: Vultee V-11GBT

II. Battalion
3. Tayyare Bölüðü: Vultee V-11GBT
4. Tayyare Bölüðü: Vultee V-11GBT

4th Air Regiment: Merzifon


I. Battalion
1. Tayyare Bölüðü: Hawker Hurricane.IIC
2. Tayyare Bölüðü: Hawker Hurricane.IIC

II. Battalion
3. Tayyare Bölüðü: Hawker Hurricane.IIB
4. Tayyare Bölüðü: Hawker Hurricane.IIB

5th Air Regiment: Bursa


Training Group: Curtiss Wright CW-22R

I. Battalion
1. Tayyare Bölüðü: Focke Wulf FW 190A-3
2. Tayyare Bölüðü: Focke Wulf FW 190A-3

II. Battalion
3. Tayyare Bölüðü: Focke Wulf FW 190A-3
4. Tayyare Bölüðü: Focke Wulf FW 190A-3

Air Force College: Westland Lysander.II



2nd Air Division: Izmir



3rd Air Regiment: Gaziemir


Training Group: Curtiss Wright CW-22R, Avro Anson

I. Battalion
1. Tayyare Bölüðü: Bristol Blenheim.I
2. Tayyare Bölüðü: Bristol Blenheim.I

II. Battalion
3. Tayyare Bölüðü: Bristol Blenheim.I/IV
4. Tayyare Bölüðü: Bristol Blenheim.I

6th Air Regiment: Gaziemir


I. Battalion
1. Tayyare Bölüðü: Curtiss Tomahawk.IIB
2. Tayyare Bölüðü: Curtiss Tomahawk.IIB

II. Battalion
3. Tayyare Bölüðü: Curtiss Kittyhawk.I
4. Tayyare Bölüðü: Curtiss Kittyhawk.I


Naval Air Command: Guzelyalý

105th Torpedo Group
1. Tayyare Bölüðü: Bristol Blenheim.V
2. Tayyare Bölüðü: Bristol Blenheim.V
1. Naval Aircraft Company: Supermarine Walrus.II

Note:There were 10-15 aircrafts in every Tayyare Bölüðü.


So I think a powerful Germany of 1941 would defeat a lonestanding Turkey. But a clever person like Ismet Pasha would probably arrange something with the Allies and get their help. But I doubt if the result would change anyway.

By the way, Turkish government was closer to the Allies than Germans. But even Inonu wouldn't keep Turkey, allying from Germany if the Germans defeated British in Egypt and come to our borders from middle east. Turkish people had sympathy against the Germans. The poll results show that the people of Turkey would decide to be allied with Germany rather than the allies.

Best Regards
Fatih

User avatar
nuyt
Member
Posts: 1667
Joined: 29 Dec 2004, 14:39
Location: Europe
Contact:

Turkish army 1940

#59

Post by nuyt » 14 Jul 2006, 16:06

That's an interesting OOB, but it is 1943. How would the OOB look like in 1940, especially in terms of numbers and types of artillery. The armour were treated above (T26, Ba6, Vickers lights, Renaults - all light but up to date).

And how was the average combat soldier equipped in 1940?

Kind regards,
Nuyt

Paul Lakowski
Member
Posts: 1441
Joined: 30 Apr 2003, 06:16
Location: Canada

#60

Post by Paul Lakowski » 16 Jul 2006, 07:13

Thanks for that extensive OOB Mehmet Fatih! The answer to nuyt question would be helpful.

I'm not quite clear on your last statement. From what little I've read Inonu was a smart operator who wanted to steer the middle ground between each side to keep Turkey out of the war for as long as possible. ....In that task he succeeded. It seems the Americans were extremely frustrated with his sidestepping , even as late as 1944 when it was clear the Axis was in defeat.

Are you saying that if Axis sieze UK after the fall of france and convinced Spain to enter on Axis side to close down the western Med, would Turkey have bowed to pressure and allow German axis to the Caucauses in 1941 or would they have dug in their heels and fought to the death rather than let Hitler in.

Also the same question , but remove the Nazis and consider a right wing non nazi German dictatorship was leading the Axis war.

Post Reply

Return to “What if”