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: 15437
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Germany could win Barbarossa by suppressing Italy

Post by ljadw » 10 Sep 2021 05:38

It was not in 1913 : von der Goltz was there already in 1885.
The Ottoman Empire had become a German ally because Germany was the only country that could protect her against Russia . Britain had ceased to do this .

ljadw
Member
Posts: 15437
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Germany could win Barbarossa by suppressing Italy

Post by ljadw » 10 Sep 2021 05:43

Tom from Cornwall wrote:
09 Sep 2021 21:42
ljadw wrote:
09 Sep 2021 20:49
I did not say that they were members of the Triple Entente, but they were allies of Germany :German officers reorganized the Ottoman army (von der Goltz, Liman von Sanders ) Liman von Sanders became before the war military commander of the Ottoman capital which caused a lot of hostile reactions in Russia .
By that logic, I assume you think they were allies of Great Britain due to the role of the British in assisting the Turkish Navy?

Regards

Tom
Both can not be compared : the Turkish navy existed only on paper and Britain had no longer any influence in Istanbul .
There were the plans for the railroad Berlin-Baghdad,there were the visits of the Kaiser,did the British King visit Istanbul ?

User avatar
EKB
Member
Posts: 712
Joined: 20 Jul 2005 17:21
Location: United States

Re: Germany could win Barbarossa by suppressing Italy

Post by EKB » 10 Sep 2021 05:45


ljadw
Member
Posts: 15437
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Germany could win Barbarossa by suppressing Italy

Post by ljadw » 10 Sep 2021 09:03

You can't found your foreign policy on dislike of racism, militarism,tyranny,etc.
There is racism in all countries,thus you must be hostile to all countries ?
The situation in Ethiopia was worse, much worse than in fascist Italy,was this a reason not to defend Ethiopia ?
If you accept as allies only those who have the same regime as you, the result will be that you are alone .Without allies .
There was no reason to impose sanctions on Italy,if I am not wrong there were also no sanctions against Japan after what happened in Nanking, no sanctions against Spain after it crushed with the help of France the rebellion in Morocco and used poison gas .But when Italy used poison gas, a universal hypocritical cry of dislike overwhelmed US,France and Britain .

User avatar
Takao
Member
Posts: 3776
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 19:27
Location: Reading, Pa

Re: Germany could win Barbarossa by suppressing Italy

Post by Takao » 10 Sep 2021 10:51

ljadw wrote:
10 Sep 2021 05:38
It was not in 1913 : von der Goltz was there already in 1885.
The Ottoman Empire had become a German ally because Germany was the only country that could protect her against Russia . Britain had ceased to do this .
But you have said allies are irrelevant, or does your contrariness only make British allies irrelevant, while German allies are relevant.

Liman von Sanders was 1913...

Also, the sending of military missions does not make the two Allies, it does make Turkey a client state of Germany.

If Turkey was truly an ally, Germany should have done a better job training Turkey's army, they lost several wars in the run up to WW1.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 15437
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Germany could win Barbarossa by suppressing Italy

Post by ljadw » 10 Sep 2021 11:17

Was it possible for Germany to have done a better job training Turkey's army ?
It is easy to blame Germany more than 100 years after the facts .
And, about allies being relevant/irrelevant : the importance of Germany for Turkey was much bigger ,already before the war, than the importance of Turkey for Germany .
The importance of Russia for France was only relevant in war time,not in peace time .
For France ,Russia was only important if Germany attacked France, while the importance of France for Russia was much less,as Germany had no reason to make Russia its principal target .
It was the same for Turkey :a war between France and Germany would not involve Turkey, but a war between Russia and Germany ( such a war could only start if Germany attacked Russia ) would involve Turkey :a German defeat would be very bad for Turkey,but a Turkish defeat ( there were two of them before 1914 ) would have only minor consequences for Germany .
AH was in the same position as Turkey :Germany did not need AH to defeat France, but AH needed Germany in case of war with Russia .
Italy, OTOH, needed no one ,as neither AH, neither France, Britain or Russia would attack Italy .Italy could chose the allies who were giving them the biggest benefits. It did chose the Entente, but the Entente did not keep its promises .

Gooner1
Member
Posts: 2760
Joined: 06 Jan 2006 12:24
Location: London

Re: Germany could win Barbarossa by suppressing Italy

Post by Gooner1 » 10 Sep 2021 11:48

ljadw wrote:
10 Sep 2021 11:17
The importance of Russia for France was only relevant in war time,not in peace time .
For France ,Russia was only important if Germany attacked France, while the importance of France for Russia was much less,as Germany had no reason to make Russia its principal target .
France was by far and away Russias biggest foreign investor before 1914. Russia was Germanys principal target because only Russia could supplant Germany as the continents strongest power.
Italy, OTOH, needed no one ,as neither AH, neither France, Britain or Russia would attack Italy .Italy could chose the allies who were giving them the biggest benefits. It did chose the Entente, but the Entente did not keep its promises .
Not that again. Italy got most of what it was promised by the Entente, the Central Powers could offer Italy very little.

Ружичасти Слон
Member
Posts: 488
Joined: 24 Jan 2020 16:31
Location: Изгубљени

Re: Germany could win Barbarossa by suppressing Italy

Post by Ружичасти Слон » 10 Sep 2021 11:53

Tom from Cornwall wrote:
09 Sep 2021 21:42
ljadw wrote:
09 Sep 2021 20:49
I did not say that they were members of the Triple Entente, but they were allies of Germany :German officers reorganized the Ottoman army (von der Goltz, Liman von Sanders ) Liman von Sanders became before the war military commander of the Ottoman capital which caused a lot of hostile reactions in Russia .
By that logic, I assume you think they were allies of Great Britain due to the role of the British in assisting the Turkish Navy?

Regards

Tom
Maybe they can to be allys maybe can not to be allys . Everything must to depend on ljadw imaginations story . Ljadw can invent words for to make explains on everythying .

No + no + no = yes
Not ally = ally
Peoples what was think fascism was be bad = bad people
Congratulate fascist attacks invasions and oppressions = good idea

Ружичасти Слон
Member
Posts: 488
Joined: 24 Jan 2020 16:31
Location: Изгубљени

Re: Germany could win Barbarossa by suppressing Italy

Post by Ружичасти Слон » 10 Sep 2021 12:00

ljadw wrote:
10 Sep 2021 05:38
It was not in 1913 : von der Goltz was there already in 1885.
Gedik Ahmed Pasha was on Italy on 1480.year. On ljadw logic Ottoman and Italy must to be allys.

User avatar
Terry Duncan
Forum Staff
Posts: 6263
Joined: 13 Jun 2008 22:54
Location: Kent

Re: Germany could win Barbarossa by suppressing Italy

Post by Terry Duncan » 10 Sep 2021 12:24

ljadw wrote:
10 Sep 2021 11:17
Italy, OTOH, needed no one ,as neither AH, neither France, Britain or Russia would attack Italy .Italy could chose the allies who were giving them the biggest benefits. It did chose the Entente, but the Entente did not keep its promises .
In the July Crisis Austria and Germany discussed giving any territory demanded to Italy in order to ensure she joined them, as they could always attack Italy afterwards and retake any territory ceded to Italy.

User avatar
Takao
Member
Posts: 3776
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 19:27
Location: Reading, Pa

Re: Germany could win Barbarossa by suppressing Italy

Post by Takao » 10 Sep 2021 13:26

ljadw wrote:
10 Sep 2021 11:17
Was it possible for Germany to have done a better job training Turkey's army ?
It is easy to blame Germany more than 100 years after the facts .
And, about allies being relevant/irrelevant : the importance of Germany for Turkey was much bigger ,already before the war, than the importance of Turkey for Germany .
The importance of Russia for France was only relevant in war time,not in peace time .
For France ,Russia was only important if Germany attacked France, while the importance of France for Russia was much less,as Germany had no reason to make Russia its principal target .
It was the same for Turkey :a war between France and Germany would not involve Turkey, but a war between Russia and Germany ( such a war could only start if Germany attacked Russia ) would involve Turkey :a German defeat would be very bad for Turkey,but a Turkish defeat ( there were two of them before 1914 ) would have only minor consequences for Germany .
AH was in the same position as Turkey :Germany did not need AH to defeat France, but AH needed Germany in case of war with Russia .
Italy, OTOH, needed no one ,as neither AH, neither France, Britain or Russia would attack Italy .Italy could chose the allies who were giving them the biggest benefits. It did chose the Entente, but the Entente did not keep its promises .
You now go from contrariness to flip-flopping.

So now you are back-tracking from your previous statement that allies were irrelevant.

You are also back-tracking from another statement, that Italy joined Germany unwillingly - as you have now stated that Italy willingly joined for the biggest benefits.

User avatar
joeylonglegs
Member
Posts: 36
Joined: 01 May 2021 14:18
Location: Pittsburgh PA

Re: Germany could win Barbarossa by suppressing Italy

Post by joeylonglegs » 10 Sep 2021 15:17

ljadw wrote:
05 Sep 2021 09:33
Sid Guttridge wrote:
04 Sep 2021 22:49
Hi ljadw,

You continue to use the war-era racial bigotry of British politicians, diplomats, soldiers and sailors from the British ruling classes to try to substitute for evidence about the post-war British historians you are attacking.

What I have learnt from this so far is that you have an irrational and undifferentiated bias against the British collectively, not that British historians are collectively displaying bias against the Italians.

Your position is so irrational that you repeatedly and knowingly include an Israeli author as British. Just because somebody who is not British happens to have come to the same conclusions as people who actually are British doesn't make them "culturally Anglo-Saxon", and not just because they are Jewish with a Dutch surname! 2+2=4 in anybody's language!

Cheers,

Sid.
The racial bigotry is not limited to the ruling classes, but exists also in the British public ,and it is the public, not the historian,that decides the content of the books from the historian, otherwise no one would buy his book .
It is the same for the media : there are no equivalents of Fawtly Towers and Allo Allo outside Britain : both are still successful ,because they strength the bias of the public and , no one is protesting against the picture they give of Germans and Italians .Hostility to everything that is German and contempt for everything that is Italian is the reality in Britain .
Saying that Italy performed poorly in World War 2 when they factually did is not "racial bigotry".

Criticizing Fascist Italy for the genocidal state it was is not "racial bigotry".

Peter89
Member
Posts: 2369
Joined: 28 Aug 2018 05:52
Location: Europe

Re: Germany could win Barbarossa by suppressing Italy

Post by Peter89 » 10 Sep 2021 15:49

ljadw wrote:
10 Sep 2021 11:17
AH was in the same position as Turkey :Germany did not need AH to defeat France, but AH needed Germany in case of war with Russia .
AH was not in the same position as Turkey.

AH was needed by Germany if they were going to be successful against France; AH had to absorb the first Russian blows until Germany wins in the West.

OTOH, AH did not need Germany for its national security, because the AH did not want to go to war against Russia.
"Everything remained theory and hypothesis. On paper, in his plans, in his head, he juggled with Geschwaders and Divisions, while in reality there were really only makeshift squadrons at his disposal."

ljadw
Member
Posts: 15437
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Germany could win Barbarossa by suppressing Italy

Post by ljadw » 10 Sep 2021 15:53

1 Compared to its possibilities, Italy did not bad, even good .
2 Fascist Italy was not a genocidal state.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 15437
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Germany could win Barbarossa by suppressing Italy

Post by ljadw » 10 Sep 2021 16:00

Gooner1 wrote:
10 Sep 2021 11:48
ljadw wrote:
10 Sep 2021 11:17
The importance of Russia for France was only relevant in war time,not in peace time .
For France ,Russia was only important if Germany attacked France, while the importance of France for Russia was much less,as Germany had no reason to make Russia its principal target .
France was by far and away Russias biggest foreign investor before 1914. Russia was Germanys principal target because only Russia could supplant Germany as the continents strongest power.
Italy, OTOH, needed no one ,as neither AH, neither France, Britain or Russia would attack Italy .Italy could chose the allies who were giving them the biggest benefits. It did chose the Entente, but the Entente did not keep its promises .
Not that again. Italy got most of what it was promised by the Entente, the Central Powers could offer Italy very little.
1 7 German armies were concentrated in the West, only one in the East .Russia the continent's strongest power ?? In your dreams .
Besides : Germany was Russia's biggest importer and exporter .
2 Italy felt betrayed by the Entente and Wilson .

Return to “What if”