Torch in Sardinia & Corsica, instead of N Africa

So the idiot would land in Bone, but go for distant Morocco anyway, priceless.
Yes, everybody and his sister were concerned about Spain being willing to starve itself and being bombed to the ground by joining the losing axis against the most formidable alliance in history. Franco just couldn't wait to stop receiving bribes, food, fuel, etc, in order to get one of the new 1,000 bomber raids Hitler got and the naval shelling and the bombing and navy and army trouncing Mussolini got. After all the better equipped Italian army had saved Franco's troops, if Italy can take a trouncing, Spain certainly can.

 

You're still mixed up. Deploying Patton's Western Task Force to Bone, would require at least an additional two days, probably three - its an additional 940-odd miles. So they can't land on the 8th. Furthermore, they're only landing with light tanks - and have further problems with port capacity and shallow harbors. Bone never was very important - Philippeville was, but it required dredging to a minimum 22-foot depth before it could be used.

AND THEY ARE STILL 150+ ROAD MILES FROM BIZERTA AND TUNIS. And on the wrong side of the Atlas Mountains, with inadequate port, rail, and road facilities to support an advance. Minimum four days and more likely a week to get there, which is long after the first German and Italian forces are in place.

Air? He's got 107 embarked F4F on Ranger, Santee, Suwanee, and Sangamon. Chenango can land its 72 P40 at Bone, which have about a five to ten minute endurance operating over Bizerta. To face the 197 Bf 109 and 48 FW 190 of JG 2, 51, 53, and 77.

What "force in Youlon"? The Vichy Fleet? Which was split pro-Axis and pro-Allied? Like the Vichy forces in North Africa? How were they "wasted'? By whom? The Axis? The Germans attempted to seize the fleet. They failed. The pro-Allied French attempted to escape. They failed. So guess what?

THEY AREN'T UNDER AXIS OR ALLIED CONTROL.

Neither side can use them to do anything, with or without "air support and armor"?

BTW, how does "armor" help naval forces?

Um, Dieppe was bloody, and arguably had no real point, the Dodecanese was an abject failure, Tarawa was a bloody success, and Salerno was a success. Only the Dodecanese was "wiped out".

What "waste of resources" and "pointless losses"?

 

So now its idiotic to land in Bone. Yes, your arguments are truly priceless; you can't even agree with yourself.

Yes, indeed, everybody was concerned about the Spanish reaction. And the French. Where is the evidence for the "losing axis". The Soviets are still barely hanging on in Stalingrad nad it appears the Caucasian oilfields are about to be overrun. The Combined Bomber offensive is barely managing pinpricks. The US Navy is running out of carriers.

BTW, the six divisions of the CTV? The Nationalist Army at the end of the Civil War? 60 divisions. The first major battle of the CTV was a disaster and thereafter they were integrated with Spanish troops...so its arguable who saved whom.

You continue to rely upon your hindsight to condemn a lack of foresight. Yes indeed, priceless.

 

It's really unfortunate that you go out of your way to misunderstand a short sentence. Eisenhower is an idiot because after landing next to Tunisia and surprising the axis, he goes for distant, useless, well defended Morocco. Just a few and very clear words.

I already mentioned some of the clear evidence that the axis has lost the war, here is a more complete list.
El Alamein I, Alam Halfa, el Alamein II, E Libya, stalling in Moscow, Leningrad (where Hitler begged for Spanish troops, a clear sign that he is desperate), the Caucasus, Stalingrad (where Franco knows that despite stripping AGC of tanks and planes and using 2 poorly equipped Italian divs in the Don and Romanian divs Germany cannot take a damn city), wasting tens of thousands of men and 8 months taking just Sevastopol (until enough planes finally arrived for a while), Germany being unable to defeat poorly armed Yugoslav and Greek partisans, Germany, Italy, Romania, occupied France, etc, taking scores of bombing raids in 1942 (including 1,000 plane raids in Cologne, Hamburg, etc,), the Italian navy lacking fuel and guts to sortie after being trounced and the devastated German navy hiding Tirpitz, etc, in Norway (instead of usingt them), the arrival of Spitfires in Malta (Wasp's second batch) stopping bombing raids and dooming Rommel's supplies, the battles of Changsha early in 1942, Midway, Guadalcanal, Milne Bay, Kukuma trail, the simple fact that the allies can afford to attack neutral France in the middle of the war and that a huge allied fleet entered the Med and a large force debarked in Algeria opposed by only a few U-boats and Italian subs and that strong French forces surrendered after losing a lot more warships and planes in 3 days than Franco has, sends a clear message that Franco would not last a week if he declared war.

Only a person who goes out of his way not to understand that Franco is barely controlling millions of former Communists, Anarchists, Socialists, Republicans, etc, and that Spain starves, freezes and its transportation is paralyzed in the winter 1942-43 without British bribes, food, coal, petrol, etc, can even consider Franco going to war in Nov 1942.

Again, Franco preferred to risk an attack in July-Sept 1940 by an extremely strong axis (still receiving Soviet oil, grain, ores, rubber, etc, and Japanese goods delivered through the USSR), than to declare war on the British Empire alone, yet you insist that he may join the axis and declare war on the US, USSR, Brazil, British Empire (now receiving billions of dollars worth of L-L goods, not available in 1940), etc, in late 1942, after Germany and Italy have lost millions of men and are being trounced.

 

Politically:
First off the US needs a sure win.
The British want the Desert war over as quickly as possible with the British forces as intact as possible.
To be able to announce the Allies had liberated an entire continent makes for a great morale boost.

Training
The US army in 1939 numbered some 180,000. It had grown by leaps and bounds and needed to be blooded in a fight that could not be lost.
The army was inexperienced in the complexities of seaborne invasions.

Planning
Planning began over a year ahead of time long before the high water mark of axis conquest and power.

 

Wars are not won with absurd propaganda, but with rapid, successful campingns and the axis was not in Tunisia, until the allies invaded Morocco and Algeria and Laval allowed the Germans to invade Tunisia (he did not allow the Italians, but the Germans brought them in anyway).

Assuming that the allies are going to get a quick win and a lot of propaganda by invading distant, neutral Morocco is absurd. Like I wrote, Patton and Augusta could have gone down if the shells which splashed Patton with yellow die had hit Augusta. Landing extremely far from Tunisia ensures a slow victory and plenty of time for axis occupation and reinforcement of Tunisia, rather than a quick victory. Attacking a strong force in useless Casablanca is far more risky than invading weak and much more useful Majorca-Corsica-Sardinia or Bone.

Rommel was beaten in Libya. He was only revived by the allies landing in French N Africa, inducing Germany to occupy Tunisia and providing time for them to do so.

Going back to ATL the allies invading weak Majorca, Corsica and Sardinia on Nov 8, 1942 but not strong French N Africa at all:
A Polish and Canadian divs land in Corsica, securing Ajaccio, etc, in a day. They offer air support, armor, reinforcements, etc, to hold a beachhead in Toulon.
Germany has to invade Vichy and attack toulon against strong naval artillery, air support and the Poles and Canadians landing at night in Toulon (while fresh American divs relieve them in Corsica. After securing Sardinia, Patton's armor heads for Toulon.

In Africa, Rommel's small, battered force is pinned down in W Libya w/o supplies. His force cannot enter Tunisia w/o French permission. Monty need not even attack Rommel, (pushing him into Tunisia). Germany forgets about Rommel, with the allies in Corsica, Sardinia and Toulon
It is smarter to let Rommel's force starve (even water had to be transported to Tripoli, which is impossible past RAF and RN) and to embark Monty's armor in Tobruk to arrive in Toulon and help Patton expand the beachhead.

The French in N Africa are much more likely to join the aliies, while they kick butt in Toulon and if the allies destroy French forces in N Africa and leavy Toulon to the Germans.

Again, Corsica and Toulon were Hitler's soft underbelly on Nov 8:1942. He was lucky to have time correcting this weakness, while the allies fooled around in Morocco and W Algeria.

Even Petain, Laval & Darlan would have reacted completely differently with the allies in Corsica than in Morocco and W Algeria.

 

Propaganda lost Vietnam.

The will to fight is the most important first step in war.

Edit

Propaganda pulled Russia out of WW1 and into a civil war.
Propaganda was instrumental in starting the 2nd Gulf War.
German propaganda kept the German populous in line throughout WW2.
Japanese propaganda resulted in only a few hundred soldiers surrendering for ten's of thousands dead.

 

No, a corrupt, incompetent S Vietnam, micro management by amateur McNamara, not declaring war and a very long conflict lost Vietnam. Which is why in Iraq the politicians let the generals lead, plan and kick butt rapidly against a much stronger enemy than Vietnam. It's funny that the US lost a war it never declared or really fought and on which it wasted billions bombing Hanoi, etc, trying to sign a peace treaty! when there was no war declaration.
Instead of learning the lesson from WW II that bombing civilians can hardly win a war, while the army certainly can, the US adopted British strategy and instead of using well the army, it wasted huge resources dropping more bombs on Vietnam in peacetime than on Germany!

The US military could have easily taken the ports where Soviet materiel arrived, Hanoi, etc, and occuped the whole country (as Mac did rapidly. briefly in Korea), had war been declared.

The American people took many years of absurd propaganda, ensuring that the N was defeated, only to see the massive Tet Offensive deep in the S.

The British and American public were not as dumb as Churchill and FDR thought. They knew that French Africa was not occupied by the axis (until Torch) and that fighting the neutral French and a small axis force in Africa was a pathetic sideshow, while millions of Soviets died in 1941 and 42 facing millions of Germans, Romanians, Italians, etc,
There was strong public pressure in Britain to open a 2nd front in continental France in late 1942 and in 1943 and 44, yet Churchill would have delayed D-day until 1945 (preferring French N Africa, Sicily, Italy, the Dodecanese, Yugoslavia, etc,) had not FDR forced it to take place in June 1944.

The public also knew that the Doolitle raid was a pathetic move and that it was real battles like Midway, which won a war.

 

No, I understand your sentences all too well.

For example, now you are claiming the Allies surprised their opponents, when just yesterday, you said:

Yes, its really funny how your position and remarks keep shifting back and forth, contradicting yourself over and over again. So how is it Morocco is "well defended" when the defense collapsed in three days?

Oh fuck me yet again but the stupid is intense with you. "El Alamein II" was resolved 4 November, three days before the troop ships assembled off their targets. First Alamein and Alam Halfa were checks on the German advance...and "E Libya", Montgomery's Pursuit, was simultaneous with the TORCH landings.

Meanwhile, the FUCKING PLANS were made beginning in July and were solidified in early October.

By the way, it pays to check the shit you make up before you post it. The Spanish "Blue" Division (250. Inf.-Div.) was organized 20 July 1941. The "Siege" of Leningrad began on 8 September 1941.

Fuck the rest of your idiotic tangents. I'm tired of your dishonest inability to address direct questions and stay on track with YOUR FUCKING BULLSHIT FANTASY.

No, only a perfect idiot wouldn't do basic research on such a complex subject. Nobody "saved" Spain. Franco's autarky caused economic problems well into the 1950s. In 1951, a British diplomat reported in Andalucia many workers could not perform their jobs due to starvation and in Jaen during even the Falange recognized the fact that around 60,000 families spent most of the year simply aspiring to have enough food to stave off death.

The thing you keep missing is, FRANCO DIDN'T GIVE A SHIT. He ruled by fear. By 1 April 1939 he had solidified his control, exiling, executing, or imprisoning all opposition. Even the Blue Division was used as a convenient means of purging the military of possible dissent.

Finally, you continue to refuse to do a single bit of research in the planning behind TORCH and the political discussions that went on. I DON'T "INSIST a single fucking thing, Roosevelt, Churchill, the CCS, and their staffs did. They looked at the situation and considering the risk they were already taking that only a blithering idiot would chose to deliberately antagonize Spain as well.

Congratulations, or something, for continuing to prove yourself a blithering idiot through 10 pages of posts.

 

Idiot, you just brilliantly defined every single post you make. Filled with sound and fury, but signifying nothing.

 

Now the idiotic tangents have extended to Vietnam. Simply fucking brilliant.

 

???? This statement is rather ambiguous but I'm not aware of any US SP guns in WWII that were 5". Care to clarify?

 

Apparently the Mythtry Channel told him about the 5" T666 GMC, which mated the 5"/31 Mark 1 with a Caterpillar earth mover. It was contracted for by ASB Overlords to provide fire support for the German assault on Petsamo.

Either that or he has no clue what size a 155mm gun is.

Meanwhile, the M7 105mm HMC cost roughly $56,000. About the same cost as an Medium Tank M4. So yet again I have no idea WTF he thinks he's talking about.

 

The 30 t, M12 6" SP gun makes even better the point that 3" guns are ridiculous for an expensive 1,200 t DD.

 

Stop, PLEASE! The STUPID HURTS!

You still haven't bothered to do basic research. Dallas was armed with four 4"/50 Mark 9 and one 3"/50 Mark 5 or 6 on Mount Mark 11 AA gun. The account talks about the 3" engaging because it was the one that fired. Within consulting the deck logs we don't when or if the 4" guns fired.

Dallas wasn't "expensive" - it was mass produced after the end of the Great War in such quantities the USN could not man her and instead, along with her sisters, rotated her commission periodically with others of her class during the interwar period. She was bought and paid for long before World War II. So she was used on her hazardous mission because she was EXPENDABLE!

Meanwhile,

M12 GMC (T6, Standardized October 1943) was a 155mm M1917 GPF (Grand Puissance, Failloux) gun mounted on the M3 Medium Tank chassis. Production began September 1942 and continued through March 1943, for a total of 100. However, at the time there was no requirement for the type and they were placed in storage. Then in preparation for the invasion of Europe, it was decided to equip six Field Artillery battalions (later a provisional six-gun battery was also equipped) then in Europe with the M12. As a result 74 M12 GMC were taken from storage and rebuilt, followed later by an additional 19 (the fate of the remaining seven is unknown).

 

Actually the point that it makes very clearly is that you have no real understanding of the material you are trying to discuss. PLS review the difference between naval armaments and army artillery. Also look at the armament of other destroyers of that period (in the case of Dallas WWI and early 20s). Then look at how and for what they were intended to be used. Or are you suggesting that the Furious, as designed, would have been a good ship?

 

On Nov 8, 1942 the allies get Portugal to join them and grant permission to land a Canadian and an American divs and 150 planes in N Portugal, to further induce Spain to join the allies.

Also on Nov 8, French cargo ships deliver AT, field and AA guns, mortars, MG, etc, and munitions each in Toulon, Nice and Cannes and a message offering air support, armor, troops, etc, from Corsica and Majorca against the imminent German invasion of Vichy. Allied planes also drop small arms and ammo along the French Riviera and the French-Spanish border (on the French side). The allies also threaten to air drop small arms and munitions in areas of Catalonia and the Basque Countries and provide air, naval and army support for an uprising against Franco if Spain does not join the allies and benefit from L-L.

On Nov 9 Franco faces allied planes, ships and troops in Majorca, N Portugal and Gibraltar and is thretened with being blockaded and invaded if Spain does not join the allies and declare war on Germany. Seeing the strong allied forces in his area and the possibility of receiving ample allied supplies, Franco joins the allies on Nov 14 and grants right of way to allied troops and planes. The Canadian, American, Portuguese and 8 Spanish divisions (now equipped with American guns and vehicles) deploy along the French border and invade France on Nov 16. Spanish and Portuguese ports, Toulon, and Nice prove invaluable for the allies to unload large tonnages and hundreds of thousands of men in Europe.

The allied advance from Toulon, Cannes and the Spanish border forces the WM to weaken NW France where the allies land in May 1943.
In July 1943 allied amphibious and airborne troops land in Aalborg, where a strong air force deploys, decimates the KM and LW in the Baltic and S Norway, isolates the WM, LW and KM in Norway (leaving them w/o supplies) and interrupts the flow of iron ore from Norway in the winter. The battered WM and LW also have to reinforce S Denmark, against a possible allied offensive into Germany.

Huge tonnages and hundreds of thousands of men arrive in Spain, Portugal, Toulon and Nice in 1943 from the US and Canada and are quickly put to use, instead of being amassed for years in Britain, without being used. Several Vichy N African divs and 1/2 million Indian troops also arrive in these ports to take part in the Liberation of France.

the WM is even weaker and fares worse in Kursk. The Soviets incur lighter losses in Kursk and lift the siege of Leningrad in the fall of 1943. From France the allies enter Germany in early 1944, while the Soviets liberate Estonia, Latvia , Lithuania and Belorussia and invade E Prussia.

Germany is not receiving iron ore from Alsace-Lorraine or from Norway in early 1944, so steel production drops considerably, weakening German forces enormously.

 

In my infinite ignorance I wonder why, if the European theater had priority, were so many Essex class carriers, new BB, CA, CL, DD, F6F, etc, and all the Marines deployed in the Pacific and so few in the Atlantic and Med in 1943, when the Kidobutai was a joke. Wasting Essex, etc, bombing insignificant Marcus, and Wake and invading useless islands seems a much worse use than invading Aalborg.

Even if they had to attack Japan, Essex, etc, would have been much more useful liberating Rangoon in 1943 (clearing the way to supply the huge Chinese army and bomb Japan and Manchuria from China), than bombing Marcus and Wake and invading useless islands, remote as hell.

 

I agree : infinite ignorence .

 

I think this thread has run its course as we seem to have lost all civility and are wandering all over the map.

This thread is closed, please enjoy other portions of the forum.