Germany could win Barbarossa by suppressing Italy

Discussions on alternate history, including events up to 20 years before today. Hosted by Terry Duncan.
ljadw
Member
Posts: 12034
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Germany could win Barbarossa by suppressing Italy

Post by ljadw » 24 Jul 2021 06:57

No proof : if the Italians had collapsed ,it would not be needed to use the three new divisions .Besides : there is no proof that the three Compass divisions could have advanced to Tripoli,if the Italian resistance continued .
But the Italians did not collapse: they sent 2 new divisions to NA .
If they had collapsed, Britain would not have gone on the defensive .
The outcome was not decided by Britain, but by Italy .
It is the same for September 1944 : the Patton lobby is still telling us that the only reason why he did not invade Germany in 1944,was that Ike gave his POL to Montgomery.
The real reason is that the Germans had recovered ( as did the Italians ) and that even with more fuel,Patton would still fail .
It is the same for the Halt Order at Dunkirk . Or for Market Garden . Or the Battle of Britain, the U Boat war, D Day , Barbarossa , the Schlieffen Plan , Pearl Harbour, etc,etc ..
The opponent is always ignored and the reason for defeat/failure is always laid to some one of the own camp .To heal the wounded pride it is better to look for a scapegoat .

User avatar
Kingfish
Member
Posts: 3087
Joined: 05 Jun 2003 16:22
Location: USA

Re: Germany could win Barbarossa by suppressing Italy

Post by Kingfish » 24 Jul 2021 11:51

ljadw wrote:
24 Jul 2021 06:57
there is no proof that the three Compass divisions could have advanced to Tripoli,if the Italian resistance continued .
Proof? No. It is a hypothetical after all.

Reasonable expectation? Yes

Prior to the start of Compass there was no proof that the WDF operating on a shoestring of logistics could make it as far as Beda Fomm.
Yet...they made it as far as Beda Fomm, bagging an Italian army four times its size in the process.
If they had collapsed, Britain would not have gone on the defensive .
Unless they were ordered to, which they were.
The gods do not deduct from a man's allotted span the hours spent in fishing.
~Babylonian Proverb

User avatar
MarkF617
Member
Posts: 173
Joined: 16 Jun 2014 21:11
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Germany could win Barbarossa by suppressing Italy

Post by MarkF617 » 24 Jul 2021 13:40

I believe O'Connor thought he could do it and was gutted when he was forced to give up units even though he knew it was going to happen.

Thanks

Mark.
You know you're British when you drive your German car to an Irish pub for a pint of Belgian beer before having an Indian meal. When you get home you sit on your Sweedish sofa and watch American programs on your Japanese TV.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 12034
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Germany could win Barbarossa by suppressing Italy

Post by ljadw » 24 Jul 2021 21:01

Kingfish wrote:
24 Jul 2021 11:51
ljadw wrote:
24 Jul 2021 06:57
there is no proof that the three Compass divisions could have advanced to Tripoli,if the Italian resistance continued .
Proof? No. It is a hypothetical after all.

Reasonable expectation? Yes

Prior to the start of Compass there was no proof that the WDF operating on a shoestring of logistics could make it as far as Beda Fomm.
Yet...they made it as far as Beda Fomm, bagging an Italian army four times its size in the process.
If they had collapsed, Britain would not have gone on the defensive .
Unless they were ordered to, which they were.
The three Compass divisions could not go to Tripoli,even if the Italian resistance was broken : they were at Benghazi and had already advanced 840 km in 2 months . Without Italian resistance , they would need more than 2 months ,probably 5, to go to Tripoli : the distance between Benghazi and Tripoli was 1000 km ,but for the supplies which had to come from Egypt, the distance was 1840 km .
Only a battalion, or a brigade group could go to Tripoli if the Italians were on the run ( the smaller the unit, the bigger the advance ).
If the Italians were not on the run, which was the reality, there was no possibility for an advance in February 1941 to Tripoli .

User avatar
Kingfish
Member
Posts: 3087
Joined: 05 Jun 2003 16:22
Location: USA

Re: Germany could win Barbarossa by suppressing Italy

Post by Kingfish » 24 Jul 2021 22:58

ljadw wrote:
24 Jul 2021 21:01
The three Compass divisions could not go to Tripoli,even if the Italian resistance was broken : they were at Benghazi and had already advanced 840 km in 2 months . Without Italian resistance
What do you mean "without Italian resistance"?
They fought battles at Sidi Barrani, Bardia, Tobruk, Derna and Beda Fomm.
they would need more than 2 months ,probably 5, to go to Tripoli : the distance between Benghazi and Tripoli was 1000 km ,but for the supplies which had to come from Egypt, the distance was 1840 km .
So the British can run supply convoys to Malta, but can't do so to Benghazi?
Only a battalion, or a brigade group could go to Tripoli if the Italians were on the run ( the smaller the unit, the bigger the advance ).
If the Italians were not on the run, which was the reality, there was no possibility for an advance in February 1941 to Tripoli .
Same as above. The Germans can push the British all the way to the Egyptian frontier, but somehow the British can't do the same to the Italians in reverse.
The gods do not deduct from a man's allotted span the hours spent in fishing.
~Babylonian Proverb

ljadw
Member
Posts: 12034
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Germany could win Barbarossa by suppressing Italy

Post by ljadw » 25 Jul 2021 06:11

I said : without Italian resistance ( in February 1941 ) the Compass divisions would need 5 months to go to Tripoli : they were exhausted .
The difference between Malta and Benghazi is that Malta had a big harbour,while the port of Benghazi was insignificant : it could not be used to supply the 3 Compass divisions .
The difference between the Germans and the British was that the Italian and German divisions were new and strong while the Compass divisions were totally exhausted .How many British tanks were operational in February 1941 ? How many trucks ? Tanks and trucks that advanced 800 km can't advance an other 1000 km .

User avatar
Kingfish
Member
Posts: 3087
Joined: 05 Jun 2003 16:22
Location: USA

Re: Germany could win Barbarossa by suppressing Italy

Post by Kingfish » 25 Jul 2021 19:18

ljadw wrote:
25 Jul 2021 06:11
I said : without Italian resistance ( in February 1941 ) the Compass divisions would need 5 months to go to Tripoli : they were exhausted .
Only 7th armored would fit that description. Both 4th Indian and 6th Australian were actively campaigning well into the summer of '41 and there is no reason they couldn't put forth the same effort in a drive towards Tripoli.
The gods do not deduct from a man's allotted span the hours spent in fishing.
~Babylonian Proverb

ljadw
Member
Posts: 12034
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Germany could win Barbarossa by suppressing Italy

Post by ljadw » 26 Jul 2021 10:15

'' Only 20 per cent of the vehicles with which the WDF had begun Compass,remained serviceable to any degree .''
Source : Tobruk : The Great Siege 1941-1942 by William F.Buckingham .
In two months the WDF had advanced 800 km and defeated an Italian force that theoretically had a 500 percent numerical superiority .
If the WDF was able to go in February to Tripoli ( an other advance, of 1000 km ) ,why was the WDF not going to Tripoli BEFORE February ?
The reason was that the WDF was exhausted and faced by stronger Italian forces ( the Ariete division ) that in March ,with the help of a small German force, pushed them back to the border with Egypt .

ljadw
Member
Posts: 12034
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Germany could win Barbarossa by suppressing Italy

Post by ljadw » 26 Jul 2021 15:58

bam wrote:
10 Apr 2021 00:31
The soviet armies were able to restock their manpower in 1943-5 because they reconquered lost territory and immediately enlisted every male they found into the army, trained or not. And recruited the partisans and cut off soldiers that were in western ussr. If the Soviets were stuck around the AA line, or between there and Moscow, their manpower pool is greatly reduced from the actual position they had in 1943/4. They couldn't have sustained their western army at 6 million (it was never 10 mil, or 8 even..)

The red army was consciously trying to lessen infantry losses in 1944/5, by substituting massed armour and artillery, due to the horrendous losses of males aged 18-50. They were stretched for infantry, divisions were often continyally about 50% fully manned....they did not have endless manpower, even with the influx of reconquered territory which returned about a third of USSR prewar population to soviet control
.
maybe the Japanese are too afraid to attack at all because the British Empire is unconstrained by a ground war against Nazi Germany
Well that just helps Germany even more. Keeping Japan out of the war altogether, or keeping them away from the British, makes it hard for USA to join war against germany. Politically, there was no U.S. appetite fir another war with germany, and until hitler gifted them the solution by unilaterally declaring war, Roosevelt was unsure how to get the USA to fight Germany.

In all of this, it's worth remembering that Britain and the US didn't start to hurt Germany much before 1943, if you exclude Africa and the Med, which are excluded in a no-italy scenario. A few British coastal raids on France is not going to make any difference to 150 German divisions in the east. And as for invading Norway...good luck. I can't think of a worse place to try and fight....no roads, lots of mountains, foul weather...jyst a few gebirgs divs could tie you down for months or years.
Meanwhile, without the Afrika Corps, North Africa falls to the British in 1941.
No...without Italy fighting Britain, there's no African war. Britain is stuck in Egypt, blocked from the balkans by neutral states, and facing southern France which is Vichy territory. North Africa doesn't fall to the British, unless they want to declare war on France, and how would they physically get to Algeria & Tunisia, as Libya stays neutral with Italy anyway?

The liberation of the western territories did not result in a significant increase of the Red Army : most adult males of these territories had already left for the east and the others were working in the German factories or murdered by the Germans .
War between the US and Germany was inevitable and coming very fast : why were the US having the Atlantic Fleet ?
UK and US were hurting Germany already strongly BEFORE 1943 :a big part of the WM was tied in the west .
And for Norway : your knowledge of the geography of Norway is seriously failing . No roads ?? Foul weather ? Why do you think that the Germans had in June 1941 a force of 300000 men in Norway ?
The Germans invaded Norway in April 1940,why would Britain not be able to do the same later ?
If Italy remained neutral,there would still be a war in the Mediterranean because Greece and Yugoslavia would not remain neutral .
About French North Africa : in 1942 Britain and US invaded Morocco and Algeria ( operation Torch ) without passing trough Libya .
Last point : Italy would not remain neutral : it would ally to Germany if Germany was winning ( it did this in June 1940 ) or to Britain and France if these were winning : it joined Britain and France in 1915 because Germany was not able to win .

mezsat2
Member
Posts: 129
Joined: 05 Jun 2009 12:02

Re: Germany could win Barbarossa by suppressing Italy

Post by mezsat2 » 26 Jul 2021 18:04

ljadw wrote:
23 Jul 2021 13:29
MarkF617 wrote:
22 Jul 2021 20:32
IIRC cunningham was ecstatic when he was told he could use Suda Bay.
RAF Bombers could bomb Ploiesti from Crete and light bombers could cover more of the mainland than from Cyprus. They could even have fighter cover over southern Greece.

Thanks

Mark.
There was also Alexandria : to use 2 bases, the RN needed more aircraft .
And, about Ploesti : it is the same : to attack Ploesti from Crete,the RAF needed more bombers than it had in the HTL.
Agreed. Impossible for GB to establish airfields on Crete to bomb Ploesti in the face of the Luftwaffe in Greece, just like it was impossible
for Stalin to launch raids from the Crimea with no effective strategic air capability. Malta captured, Crete and the Crimea bypassed, possible success of Barbarossa.

User avatar
Kingfish
Member
Posts: 3087
Joined: 05 Jun 2003 16:22
Location: USA

Re: Germany could win Barbarossa by suppressing Italy

Post by Kingfish » 26 Jul 2021 23:43

ljadw wrote:
26 Jul 2021 10:15
'' Only 20 per cent of the vehicles with which the WDF had begun Compass,remained serviceable to any degree .''
Source : Tobruk : The Great Siege 1941-1942 by William F.Buckingham .
Bear in mind that the 4th Indian and 6th Australian Both took their vehicles with them, and had Compass been planned for a deeper exploitation an increase in lift capacity could have been allocated.
The reason was that the WDF was exhausted and faced by stronger Italian forces ( the Ariete division ) that in March ,with the help of a small German force, pushed them back to the border with Egypt .
Please explain how a division that is "exhausted" is sent to another theater of operations, where it continues fighting for a further 2-3 months.
4th Indian was part of Compass for a total of 2 days before being withdrawn.
The gods do not deduct from a man's allotted span the hours spent in fishing.
~Babylonian Proverb

User avatar
T. A. Gardner
Member
Posts: 2517
Joined: 02 Feb 2006 00:23
Location: Arizona

Re: Germany could win Barbarossa by suppressing Italy

Post by T. A. Gardner » 27 Jul 2021 06:21

mezsat2 wrote:
26 Jul 2021 18:04
Agreed. Impossible for GB to establish airfields on Crete to bomb Ploesti in the face of the Luftwaffe in Greece, just like it was impossible
for Stalin to launch raids from the Crimea with no effective strategic air capability. Malta captured, Crete and the Crimea bypassed, possible success of Barbarossa.
Actually, the British likely could establish airfields on Crete and at least carry out a few raids on Greece, Ploesti, etc. That would force the Luftwaffe to move aircraft to Greece and elsewhere in that region to counter the British. All the British have to do really is keep the pressure on the Luftwaffe to deploy planes there and keep a war of attrition going.

Once the US enters the war, the US can move aircraft to Crete, pave the island over if necessary, and then start launching much more frequent raids on that region.

Of course, this assumes that Germany invades Greece at all in this scenario.

If Germany doesn't and Greece remains neutral, then the real issue becomes can the British transit the Bosporus with ships?

ljadw
Member
Posts: 12034
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Germany could win Barbarossa by suppressing Italy

Post by ljadw » 27 Jul 2021 06:32

Kingfish wrote:
26 Jul 2021 23:43
ljadw wrote:
26 Jul 2021 10:15
''
The reason was that the WDF was exhausted and faced by stronger Italian forces ( the Ariete division ) that in March ,with the help of a small German force, pushed them back to the border with Egypt .
Please explain how a division that is "exhausted" is sent to another theater of operations, where it continues fighting for a further 2-3 months.
British forces left NA for Greece at the end of March 1941 and left Greece at the end of April 1941,thus 1 month, not 2/3 months .
And it is obvious that these divisions received new trucks,tanks, etc and replacements for their big losses ( the combat losses were only a small part of the total and were greatly surpassed by the non combat losses :the Afrika Korps lost in its first 2 months in NA 1178 combat losses and 1450 non combat losses and its manpower was less than half of the WDF ,and there is no reason to assume that the Germans became faster sick than the British/Australians )

Erwinn
Member
Posts: 134
Joined: 17 Dec 2014 09:53
Location: Istanbul

Re: Germany could win Barbarossa by suppressing Italy

Post by Erwinn » 27 Jul 2021 07:09

T. A. Gardner wrote:
27 Jul 2021 06:21
If Germany doesn't and Greece remains neutral, then the real issue becomes can the British transit the Bosporus with ships?
If Brits tries to violate Bosphorus treaty, Germans gets the perfect reason to invade Turkey. Without allocating their forces to Greece, Germans can invade Turkey successfully. However, road situation was much much worse in the Eastern part and there was only a single rail line crossing Turkey at that point. It would be problematic for them, especially if they want to advance into Syria and Iraq.(Maybe into Iran to cut off Lend Lease)

User avatar
Kingfish
Member
Posts: 3087
Joined: 05 Jun 2003 16:22
Location: USA

Re: Germany could win Barbarossa by suppressing Italy

Post by Kingfish » 27 Jul 2021 10:03

ljadw wrote:
27 Jul 2021 06:32
British forces left NA for Greece at the end of March 1941 and left Greece at the end of April 1941,thus 1 month, not 2/3 months .
...and continued fighting in Crete for a further month, while other elements of 6th Australian took part in Operations Brevity and Exporter, both occurring in June '41.

4th Indian transferred to Sudan in December and then fought continuously until the end of April with the fall of Massawa.

Where is the exhaustion you keep mentioning?
And it is obvious that these divisions received new trucks,tanks, etc and replacements for their big losses
Which also means these new trucks, tanks, etc would be available to support a push towards Tripoli.
The gods do not deduct from a man's allotted span the hours spent in fishing.
~Babylonian Proverb

Return to “What if”