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
badenbaden
Member
Posts: 41
Joined: 12 Jan 2007, 08:07
Location: U.S.

#106

Post by badenbaden » 17 Feb 2007, 11:35

Turkey could not join war till Germany controled Balkan for Turkey and British and French colonies bordered on each other; accordingly the nation would join in '41 or '42.
In that case, Germany could have invaded Syria and Iraq diverting part of troops for Barbarossa to this operation. I suppose Britain would have yielded when Germnay had occupied Egypt and Middle-East. However, As Turkish military quality must be inferior to even Italy, Turkey would help little.
Not to say, if Germany surrenders to Russia, it lose all benefits. I cannot help concluding that Deutsch expanded its fronts excessively.

User avatar
Christian W.
Member
Posts: 2494
Joined: 10 Aug 2004, 19:26
Location: Vantaa, Finland

#107

Post by Christian W. » 17 Feb 2007, 14:25

Turkish military quality must be inferior to even Italy
According to what? And it pisses me off when people generalize Italian "quality".


User avatar
Tim Smith
Member
Posts: 6177
Joined: 19 Aug 2002, 13:15
Location: UK

#108

Post by Tim Smith » 17 Feb 2007, 18:15

Christian W. wrote:
Turkish military quality must be inferior to even Italy
According to what? And it pisses me off when people generalize Italian "quality".
According to fact.

The Turkish Army in 1940 was even worse EQUIPPED than the Italians.

Which isn't to say that the Turks weren't brave - I'm sure they were - and the Italians were brave too.

But it's tough to stop a battalion of Matilda II's with nothing but bravery. The Germans had 88mm guns for that job - the Italians and Turks didn't.

In 1940, the Turks didn't have any gun that could penetrate the 78mm armour of the Matilda.

The Matilda II was to the Italians (and would be to the Turks) what the KV-1 was to the Germans during Barbarossa. A very formidable opponent indeed - practically invulnerable to 37mm and 47mm anti-tank guns. That's why it was called 'Queen of the Battlefield'.

The Turks would have to destroy Matilda II's the way the Germans had to destroy KV-1's in 1941 - first shooting off the tracks to immobilise the tank (difficult to do by itself except at dangerously close range), then destroying them by placing satchel charges and mines on the rear decking (the engine cover) and detonating them. Possible to do it, but you need brave infantry willing to suffer appallingly heavy casualties as the Matildas will be spraying machine gun fire all around them, mowing down scores of the attacking enemy.

The Matilda II was the main cause of the Italian defeat in Libya in 1940.

User avatar
Andy H
Forum Staff
Posts: 15326
Joined: 12 Mar 2002, 21:51
Location: UK and USA

#109

Post by Andy H » 17 Feb 2007, 20:11

The British were courting the Turks harder than the Germans in my estimation, and even though the British promised equipment, the Turks were not going to side with the British till such promises were fulfilled. Given that set of Turkish requirements it seems equally dubiuos that the Germans could supply the Turks without seriously damaging there own (and existing Axis partners) equipment schedules.

Drawing arrows on a map is easy, but achieving them in reality is far more difficult and laborious a task.

Regards

Andy

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

#110

Post by Paul Lakowski » 17 Feb 2007, 20:54

And did that KV 1 or even the 1000 T-34s stop the germans in the summer of 1941 or even the fall, I think not. A campaign is based much more than a few isolated instances of un penetrable tanks. If the Brits land a Armored Division in Turkey you can bet a Panzer Korps will not be long in coming. Turkey would help in Barbarossa as a launch point into to the caucasus. For the Germans it would be well worth the investment.

User avatar
Christian W.
Member
Posts: 2494
Joined: 10 Aug 2004, 19:26
Location: Vantaa, Finland

#111

Post by Christian W. » 17 Feb 2007, 22:46

Indeed, if it were the Turkish who would get into trouble and not the Italians, it would not take long until the Germans would intervene. Supplying this expeditionary force would also be much more easier than one to North Africa, because ships bringing supplies would only need to cross the narrow strait of Bosphorus.

User avatar
Tim Smith
Member
Posts: 6177
Joined: 19 Aug 2002, 13:15
Location: UK

#112

Post by Tim Smith » 18 Feb 2007, 01:36

OK.

So, Rommel and the Africa Korps go to Turkey instead of Libya, and invade Palestine instead of Cyrenaica? (er.....they wouldn't be called 'Africa Korps' then...........what about 'Asien Korps'?)

Sounds reasonable. Probably easier (with the Turks help) to come at the Suez Canal from the opposite side!

While the Italians in Libya most likely just sit on the defensive until the Germans and Turks defeat most of the British forces, then advance to El Alamein and Cairo afterwards when the British are weak enough.

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

#113

Post by Paul Lakowski » 18 Feb 2007, 21:08

The transportation rail/road network through Palestine is probably a world better than North Africa, which would solve one of Rommels most basic problems fighting in the desert.

PS : I wonder if we could see a German 'O'rance', probably not, there is only one Peter O Toole. Just kidding 8-)

User avatar
Baltasar
Member
Posts: 4614
Joined: 21 Feb 2003, 16:56
Location: Germany

#114

Post by Baltasar » 20 Feb 2007, 00:56

Not to mention that the initial goal of the Wehrmacht during Barbarossa wasn't the Caucasus but Moskow, which made it unreasonable from their point of view to have a large number of forces on the eastern Turkish border. The aim was to catch as many russian units near the border and to destroy those formations before continuing the advance. If there'd been an initial front in the Caucasus, it would undoubtly have drawn German units there (propably a Corps of three divisions, assisting the Turkish army). The area also has a lot of mountains which would require infantry or even Gebirgsjäger Divisions to penetrate at any recognisable speed.
Adding a sort of Africa Corps here, while the Italians would undoubtly try their stunt in Egypt, would strech the supply lines even more. The Italians might even be doubtful about their aggrements with Germany, because Turkey is bordering the med and has a large strip of coast there. Rome wanted the med for itself while Turkey might want to retake the pre-WWI borders of the Ottoman Empire. You can't just have both, the only solution might have been a division of the med between the western roman empire (Italy) and the eastern roman Empire (Turkey).

However, I wonder if the shippment of supplies would've been feasible. You'd have to transport the whole stuff basically from central Europe to the borders of todays Syria an Georgia. And there's not only the German stuff coming along, there'll be Turkish supplies too and a lot more of them.

PS: Somehow I get a headache thinking about all the directions from where the British could attack here 8O

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

#115

Post by Paul Lakowski » 20 Feb 2007, 05:55

Baltasar wrote:Not to mention that the initial goal of the Wehrmacht during Barbarossa wasn't the Caucasus but Moskow, which made it unreasonable from their point of view to have a large number of forces on the eastern Turkish border. The aim was to catch as many russian units near the border and to destroy those formations before continuing the advance. If there'd been an initial front in the Caucasus, it would undoubtly have drawn German units there (propably a Corps of three divisions, assisting the Turkish army). The area also has a lot of mountains which would require infantry or even Gebirgsjäger Divisions to penetrate at any recognisable speed.
Adding a sort of Africa Corps here, while the Italians would undoubtly try their stunt in Egypt, would strech the supply lines even more. The Italians might even be doubtful about their aggrements with Germany, because Turkey is bordering the med and has a large strip of coast there. Rome wanted the med for itself while Turkey might want to retake the pre-WWI borders of the Ottoman Empire. You can't just have both, the only solution might have been a division of the med between the western roman empire (Italy) and the eastern roman Empire (Turkey).

However, I wonder if the shippment of supplies would've been feasible. You'd have to transport the whole stuff basically from central Europe to the borders of todays Syria an Georgia. And there's not only the German stuff coming along, there'll be Turkish supplies too and a lot more of them.

PS: Somehow I get a headache thinking about all the directions from where the British could attack here 8O
The aim of Hitler was always to occupy USSR for its resoures , the Germans were drawing up plans for increasing oil production with and without Russian oil in June 1941, so they were planning for oil occupation from the start! If Turkey opened up a direct route to the Russian oil, a way would have been found to get it from the start. The longer they wait the more of these fields the soviets would be able to destroy before the Germans arrive.

What ever the cost of suppling forces through South Eastern Europe ,Turkey and Palastine can't even come close to the cost of shipping the same tonnage over seas getting the Italian navy to fight through the RN fleets. Barbarrosa lacked a decisive maneuver and it would only take one army with 2 mountain corps and a motorized corps reinforced with an airborn division or two, to furfill the mission. Could the Turks provide a mountain corps? The distance from the Turkish boarder to Baku is about the same distance as from the Polish-Russian Boarder to Smolensk, so they could get there by end of July 1941.

User avatar
Ironmachine
Member
Posts: 5821
Joined: 07 Jul 2005, 11:50
Location: Spain

#116

Post by Ironmachine » 20 Feb 2007, 09:39

Paul Lakowski wrote:The aim of Hitler was always to occupy USSR for its resoures , the Germans were drawing up plans for increasing oil production with and without Russian oil in June 1941, so they were planning for oil occupation from the start! If Turkey opened up a direct route to the Russian oil, a way would have been found to get it from the start. The longer they wait the more of these fields the soviets would be able to destroy before the Germans arrive.
The Soviets can destroy the oil fields whenever Axis forces reach a certain distance, be it in 1941 or 1942. The only advantage of a quick capture of the fields would be that the Soviets would have less time to obtain oil from them, and perhaps that the Germans would have more time to repair them. But it is quite probably that they would become a vital objective for Soviet recovery, and the Germans would need quite a sizeable force to defend them, detracting from their capacity in the main Russian front.
Paul Lakowski wrote:Barbarrosa lacked a decisive maneuver and it would only take one army with 2 mountain corps and a motorized corps reinforced with an airborn division or two, to furfill the mission. Could the Turks provide a mountain corps? The distance from the Turkish boarder to Baku is about the same distance as from the Polish-Russian Boarder to Smolensk, so they could get there by end of July 1941.
As important as the oil was for the Germans, the Caucasus would be a secondary theater for Barbarrosa. As courageous as the Turk Army was, it would be just like the Italians, Romanians or Hungarians given its equipment. Given the Soviet forces present in the zone:
http://niehorster.orbat.com/012_ussr/41 ... sasus.html
http://niehorster.orbat.com/012_ussr/41 ... casus.html
the Germans would have to provide a strong force, weakening the main effort, and the supply of that force in the zone would be quite problematic. Yes, the distance from the Turkish boarder to Baku could be the same as from the Polish-Russian border to Smolensk, but terrain and orography were completely different. A campaign there would be in favour of the defender, as the Turks learnt in World War I.

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

#117

Post by Paul Lakowski » 21 Feb 2007, 10:40

Ironmachine wrote:
Paul Lakowski wrote:The aim of Hitler was always to occupy USSR for its resoures , the Germans were drawing up plans for increasing oil production with and without Russian oil in June 1941, so they were planning for oil occupation from the start! If Turkey opened up a direct route to the Russian oil, a way would have been found to get it from the start. The longer they wait the more of these fields the soviets would be able to destroy before the Germans arrive.
The Soviets can destroy the oil fields whenever Axis forces reach a certain distance, be it in 1941 or 1942. The only advantage of a quick capture of the fields would be that the Soviets would have less time to obtain oil from them, and perhaps that the Germans would have more time to repair them. But it is quite probably that they would become a vital objective for Soviet recovery, and the Germans would need quite a sizeable force to defend them, detracting from their capacity in the main Russian front.
Paul Lakowski wrote:Barbarrosa lacked a decisive maneuver and it would only take one army with 2 mountain corps and a motorized corps reinforced with an airborn division or two, to furfill the mission. Could the Turks provide a mountain corps? The distance from the Turkish boarder to Baku is about the same distance as from the Polish-Russian Boarder to Smolensk, so they could get there by end of July 1941.
As important as the oil was for the Germans, the Caucasus would be a secondary theater for Barbarrosa. As courageous as the Turk Army was, it would be just like the Italians, Romanians or Hungarians given its equipment. Given the Soviet forces present in the zone:
http://niehorster.orbat.com/012_ussr/41 ... sasus.html
http://niehorster.orbat.com/012_ussr/41 ... casus.html
the Germans would have to provide a strong force, weakening the main effort, and the supply of that force in the zone would be quite problematic. Yes, the distance from the Turkish boarder to Baku could be the same as from the Polish-Russian border to Smolensk, but terrain and orography were completely different. A campaign there would be in favour of the defender, as the Turks learnt in World War I.

There in lays the dilema. do you save moscow or the oil? You know that 26mot Corps had only 184 old tanks , while 28 tank corps had 869 old tanks. Given the poor performance of much better equiped Russian corps at that same time, I would not hold out much hope for resistance to stall the Germans that much. It would probably take the Germans 5-6 weeks to get there.

User avatar
Ironmachine
Member
Posts: 5821
Joined: 07 Jul 2005, 11:50
Location: Spain

#118

Post by Ironmachine » 21 Feb 2007, 13:56

There in lays the dilema. do you save moscow or the oil? You know that 26mot Corps had only 184 old tanks , while 28 tank corps had 869 old tanks. Given the poor performance of much better equiped Russian corps at that same time, I would not hold out much hope for resistance to stall the Germans that much. It would probably take the Germans 5-6 weeks to get there.
How many German troops would be detached to that front? Armored units are out of the question due to the orography, and those 184 tanks of the 26th Tank Corps could cause serious damage to infantry or mountain divisions, not to mention the Turkish troops.
As I have said before, due to orography and the lack of good means of transport in the zone, the Germans would have problems to support an advance there even without any Soviet resistance. All the troops and supplies would have to cross half Europe from Germany, then cross all of Turkey, and then you still have the Caucasus. The Soviet could stall any offensive here with relatively few troops, and if the Germans would be able to increase their forces in the zone they would be reducing them in the main front, with which they would be releasing Soviet forces that could be sent to the Caucasus if needed.

User avatar
Christian W.
Member
Posts: 2494
Joined: 10 Aug 2004, 19:26
Location: Vantaa, Finland

#119

Post by Christian W. » 21 Feb 2007, 14:25

The Soviet could stall any offensive here with relatively few troop
The Soviets did not stop List's historical advance from northern Caucasus with ease.

User avatar
Tim Smith
Member
Posts: 6177
Joined: 19 Aug 2002, 13:15
Location: UK

#120

Post by Tim Smith » 21 Feb 2007, 15:41

Christian W. wrote:
The Soviet could stall any offensive here with relatively few troop
The Soviets did not stop List's historical advance from northern Caucasus with ease.
Irrelevant. The northern Caucasus is not the southern Caucasus, is it? Look at a map - the terrain is different.

Post Reply

Return to “What if”