Axis

Members: 6,450
Threads: 18,400
Posts: 230,108
Online: 255

Newest Member:
jrhess3

 
 
 
Go Back   World War II Forums > General Discussion > What If?
Register FAQ Gallery Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


What If? Alternate History: Speculate about WWII battles that never were. Could the Axis have won? What if Hitler had the bomb?

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #1 (permalink)  
Old October 5th, 2000, 10:54 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 9
Salute!: 0
Saluted 0 Times in 0 Posts
Henrik Krog is an unknown quantity at this point
Post

Let me propose an alternative here. In the spring of 1942, the Italian high command was at a crossroads: take Malta or go with Rommel and push into Egypt.
Many dont realise, that Rommel in fact was under Italian command, though he normally got his way - if not on his own, then by appealing to his friends in Berlin.
Now, in February-March 1942 he had launched a counter-offensive without informing neither the Italian High Command in Libya nor the German High Command in Italy. Now, what if they had not been impressed by Rommels victory in it, but instead had chosen to be more cautious, cleaning up the logistics and eliminating Malta??
An invasion would have included the San Marco Commandoes and Marines ana a blackshir regiment going in first, 7th German Mountain, 185th Folgore Parachute and 80th La Spezia Airlanding Infantry division going in by air, while the 4th Livorno and 20th Friuli Assault and Landing Divisions went in by sea. And that was first wave.
Now, assuming the invasion goes well, the Allies cannot attack Axis convoys from Malta anymore, but have to go from Gibraltar, Egypt and Cypres. Also, more airpower is freed from attacking Malta all the time, and can be employed in Northern Africa. Thus: more supplies get through, less are lost. At the same time, the supply route for the Allies by Malta is lost, and they have to take the route south around Africa.

So: we have Malta eliminated, better logistics for Rommel, worse for Auchinleck. Rommel can still launch his attack in June, perhaps July, with probably the same results, but vastly better prepared to take losses. Even if everything after that happens as in our timeline, Rommel is vastly better prepared to recover from the losses he took at El Alamein. Also, the Axis have more opportunity to put troops across to Tunisia once the British and Americans land in Algeria and Marocco. Hey, why shouldnt the Axis be able to hold the Western part of Libya as they had done time and again since 1940?? If we give them a victory at Kasserine and let them take the port of Bone in Western Algeria, too, they are pretty good in place logistically. But even if not, they are still stronger and closer to home than ever before.

Even if Northern Africa falls or is evacuated, we still have Malta in place, that needs to be taken by the Allies before they can go on to take Sicily, and all this give the Italians more time to reorganise and reequip. During 1943, moves were underway to reorganise and -equip the Italian divisions so that they actually could survive in a modern war.
At the same time, a number of German divisions dont need to be sent into Italy, Southern France, Yugoslavia and Greece to take over occupation duties, and the partisans in those places dont get the enormous ammounts of weapons that they originally got from surrendering Italian troops. The Yugoslav partisans, for example, doubled their numbers from 160.000 to 320.000 as a consequence. Also, there is possibility to build up the Cetniks there as more of a counterpart to the partisans.
The German divisions not pulled away to Southern Europe can be used in other places, the Eastern Front being the most important. Not that they will turn everything in favour of the Axis, but they surely will matter.

What do you think??

Henrik

Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old October 8th, 2000, 08:58 PM
Peppy's Avatar
Idi Admin
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Out of Nowhere
Posts: 871
Salute!: 3
Saluted 2 Times in 2 Posts
Peppy Is actually quite decentPeppy Is actually quite decent
Post

I think this would have only been a succesful startegy for the Axis had they persued an all out Mediterranean strategy. Capturing Malta would have only made delayed the inevitable defeat of the Axis in this theater. What would have been more prudent, but also possibly risky, was the German conquest of Gibraltar, and than later Malta. The Germans could have sent just a few divisision through Spain, with or without Spains concent to take it from the rear. This would have effectively sealed the med from the UK and made the North Africa campaign MUCH easier.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old October 13th, 2000, 11:41 PM
Otto's Avatar
GröFaZ
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Chicago
Posts: 4,984
Salute!: 38
Saluted 50 Times in 24 Posts
Otto is a glorious beacon of lightOtto is a glorious beacon of lightOtto is a glorious beacon of lightOtto is a glorious beacon of lightOtto is a glorious beacon of lightOtto is a glorious beacon of lightOtto is a glorious beacon of light
Post

Malta was a key point of failure for the Axis in the Med. It was also Rommel's only strategic mistake, (not taking it). I think WW2 could have been won and lost in the Med, but not with the half-assed strategy Hitler thought would do the job.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Google
 

All times are GMT. The time now is 05:05 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.2.0 RC5
Copyright © 2000 - 2007, the World War II Network, all rights reserved.Ad Management by RedTyger

Allies