Italy doesn't need German help.

[Kingfish]

The assumption of this statement is, that Stalin would just wait and do nothing, which is at least questionable.

No, there is no assumption to his statement. It is factual, pure and simple. Whether German suspicions justified their invasion is beside the point. The fact is Germany was bled white in the meat grinder that was the Ost Front.

[glenn239]

This is an incredibly naive take on Stalin and the USSR. Stalin invaded multiple countries the second the pact gave him breathing room to do so. Why suppose his ambitions stopped at Finnland, the Baltics, Bessarabia, the Turkish Straits? It's particularly naive given that we know exactly how conquest-hungry Stalin showed himself to be OTL - recall the whole Iron Curtain thing. It wasn't as if Stalin suddenly discovered a desire to dominate half of Europe in 1945.

What the term, "suicide for fear of death" means is taking some action that is likely to be fatal in order to avoid a situation that might not occur. In this instance, the act of attacking the USSR was almost certainly to be the end of Nazi Germany, while the threat of a Soviet attack on Germany was one of a number of theoretical possibilities. Another - and the more likely - possibility was that Germany could purchase the neutrality of the Soviets well into the future, at the expense of third powers.

Plus Stalin was ready to join an anti-Hitler alliance in 1939; the only thing that prevented it was Polish refusal to allow the Red Army to cross its border. [this isn't a criticism of the Poles, btw. They believed they didn't need to make such a drastic bargain because France/UK would come charging at the West Wall before Hitler swallowed them. They were wrong about that but not unreasonably so...]

So Stalin was both hell bent on aggression in Europe, but, in the period of 1935 when a French alliance was available and Germany could have been utterly crushed by the Red Army, also somehow respected the authority of the comparatively weak Polish army? Seems like a verystrange combination of traits this man had. Also, which Polish army are you proposing was blocking Stalin from a massive attack on Germany between October 1939 and May 1940? That is to say, how exactly are you suggesting that a Polish army which did not exist could prevent Stalin from allying with France and Britain in October 1939? Because Stalin intended to honour the neutrality pact with Germany signed in August, correct?

[TheMarcksPlan]

This is an incredibly naive take on Stalin and the USSR. Stalin invaded multiple countries the second the pact gave him breathing room to do so. Why suppose his ambitions stopped at Finnland, the Baltics, Bessarabia, the Turkish Straits? It's particularly naive given that we know exactly how conquest-hungry Stalin showed himself to be OTL - recall the whole Iron Curtain thing. It wasn't as if Stalin suddenly discovered a desire to dominate half of Europe in 1945.

What the term, "suicide for fear of death" means is taking some action that is likely to be fatal in order to avoid a situation that might not occur. In this instance, the act of attacking the USSR was almost certainly to be the end of Nazi Germany, while the threat of a Soviet attack on Germany was one of a number of theoretical possibilities. Another - and the more likely - possibility was that Germany could purchase the neutrality of the Soviets well into the future, at the expense of third powers.

Plus Stalin was ready to join an anti-Hitler alliance in 1939; the only thing that prevented it was Polish refusal to allow the Red Army to cross its border. [this isn't a criticism of the Poles, btw. They believed they didn't need to make such a drastic bargain because France/UK would come charging at the West Wall before Hitler swallowed them. They were wrong about that but not unreasonably so...]

So Stalin was both hell bent on aggression in Europe, but, in the period of 1935 when a French alliance was available and Germany could have been utterly crushed by the Red Army, also somehow respected the authority of the comparatively weak Polish army? Seems like a verystrange combination of traits this man had. Also, which Polish army are you proposing was blocking Stalin from a massive attack on Germany between October 1939 and May 1940? That is to say, how exactly are you suggesting that a Polish army which did not exist could prevent Stalin from allying with France and Britain in October 1939? Because Stalin intended to honour the neutrality pact with Germany signed in August, correct?

Read your history. Specifically regarding the UK/France/USSR alliance talks in the summer of 1939.

[Baldir]

Had Italy remained neutral then by 1943 the Allied would have increasingly wooed Rome to declare war on Germany just as a large Allied army was ready to land in Italy...

If so, why didn't we see this in Spain? Yes, Churchill would dream about it, but even Mussolini wasn't stupid enough to do that. Maybe on the end, like Turkey and Bulgaria, but certainly not when Germany was in position to inflict serious damage on Italy.

[glenn239]

Read your history. Specifically regarding the UK/France/USSR alliance talks in the summer of 1939.

You stated that the Polish army was a barrier to a Soviet attack on Germany. I nodded and asked what Polish army you were referring to by October 1939?

You also appear to be suggesting that the alliance talks of 1939 were impossible to resume in the winter of 1939/1940 once the annoyance of Polish obstruction had been swept away. The Anglo-French in the West, the Russians in the east - Hitler is doomed if Stalin allies with France in January 1940 and then uses the winter to mobilize at his leisure for the 1940 campaign. Yet, he does not. Why would that be? The only thing to say would be that Stalin intended to honour his neutrality pact with Hitler. Yet, if Stalin intended to do that, then the argument he intended to attack Hitler is unsustainable.

[glenn239]

If so, why didn't we see this in Spain? Yes, Churchill would dream about it, but even Mussolini wasn't stupid enough to do that. Maybe on the end, like Turkey and Bulgaria, but certainly not when Germany was in position to inflict serious damage on Italy.

Italy was perfectly positioned for an air campaign into Germany, and with an army that weighed on the scales as significant if propped up by strong Anglo-American forces landing in Italy. Spain was too far from Germany to be of similar interest, IMO.

[Baldir]

Yes, Italy was perfectly positioned. But that's a bad argument for pro German fascist regime to take casualties for Anglo-Americans, especially since the northern Italy was also perfectly positioned for Germans to repeat WWI scenario. Spain was to far from Germany for air campaign, but it was still perfecty positioned for landing, far more than risky Normandy. Yet, GB and USA respected spanish neutrality, instread of establish second front there in 43' or even in 42'.

If Italy decided to stay neutral, Anglo-Americans could hardly do anything to get it into the war on their side. More likely they would be quite happy with italian neutrality.

[glenn239]

Yes, Italy was perfectly positioned. But that's a bad argument for pro German fascist regime to take casualties for Anglo-Americans, especially since the northern Italy was also perfectly positioned for Germans to repeat WWI scenario. Spain was to far from Germany for air campaign, but it was still perfecty positioned for landing, far more than risky Normandy. Yet, GB and USA respected spanish neutrality, instread of establish second front there in 43' or even in 42'.

If Italy decided to stay neutral, Anglo-Americans could hardly do anything to get it into the war on their side. More likely they would be quite happy with italian neutrality.

There might have been a point in 1943 that a landing in Spain made some degree of sense, but they landed in Italy instead.

In terms of Mussolini electing to staying neutral, and the Allies "hardly" being able to do anything about that, some degree of realism about Allied options needs to be maintained. If the Allied supreme command had contacts in Italy and decided that an alliance there with a sudden landing could be a war winner, and the obstacle was Mussolini, then they'd have "Darlaned" him.

[thaddeus_c]

a (somewhat) uninformed question, what was Italy expected to do without German help?

I mean they had plans to operate from Aden and the Canaries, but they had plans for everything, so was the concern of being evicted from the Med very serious?

[Baldir]

[/quote]
There might have been a point in 1943 that a landing in Spain made some degree of sense, but they landed in Italy instead.

In terms of Mussolini electing to staying neutral, and the Allies "hardly" being able to do anything about that, some degree of realism about Allied options needs to be maintained. If the Allied supreme command had contacts in Italy and decided that an alliance there with a sudden landing could be a war winner, and the obstacle was Mussolini, then they'd have "Darlaned" him.
[/quote]

It wouldn't be that easy to get rid of Mussolini and even so, most of the people was against the war. The best way to get Italy into the war was to offer Mussolini new lands for his 'empire', but even so he would probably wait until the allied victory was certain. At that time, nobody really knew how weak Italy really was, so any hostile move against it from any side doesn't seem to be realistic. Even Churchill wrote that going to the war was stupid and neutrality would be much better for Italy (if I recall correctly, they were even ready to offer some collonies to keep Italy out of the war). Italy on Allied side, especially before '45 is very unlikely scenario.

[glenn239]

a (somewhat) uninformed question, what was Italy expected to do without German help?

I mean they had plans to operate from Aden and the Canaries, but they had plans for everything, so was the concern of being evicted from the Med very serious?

I don't think the Germans expected much of anything from the Italians without German help, just to maintain their position while Hitler had his quick war in the east. Sideshows such as the invasion of Greece were not welcome.