Quote:
Originally Posted by Mussolini
Not sure how to answer that last post/question, but i do agree Malta should have been on the priority list. It provided an Airbase and with interception of communications, the Axis were only receiving 1/4 of the Supplies they needed, with a lot of it being sunk or shot down by forces from Malta. I think if the Axis had taken Malta, their African Campaign would have done much better. Not to mention one less base for the Brits to operate out of - it acted like a stepping stone between Gibraltar/Suez.
Well, to address part of the question. If Malta falls and DAK are more successful, then I can see them being used to drop near the Suez in coordination of a land based strike. Put pressure on defending Brits on both sides of the Canal. Now, i don't know what the Suez Canal looks like, or how large it is, or what sort of defenses it had, but i also can't see the British destroying it as it wouldn't really prevent the Germans from using it to their advantage - that would really stop the British from being able to supply Indian forces/Pacific w/o having to go across Atlantic or southern tip of Africa.
|
You answered the question, it was a matter of hitting the British resupply of Malta and Crete, starving them of ammo and food so that when they invaded they would face a less capable opfor. Thought about the canal too and maybe drops behind the rear supply areas, raids to cause more attention and have to strip some of the forces facing Rommel. To do that Russia would have to wait and it would have helped the Axis had Il Duce discussed with Hitler before hand his plans for Afrika. Alot of wasted infantry that could have held down stuff grabbed by the Germans. Foolish non supportive Italian festung tactics they were destroyed piece meal.