Lets say that in the 1930s a group of Turkish Imperialist who wish to see Turkey restored to its former grandeur overthrow the Ataturk Government and work on building up a strong military along German Lines and fomenting Turkish revolts in the Caucasus and Arab revolts in the Middle East.

After France falls they formally declare war on the British.

Discuss.

okay well i am a new member so dont be too critical
well turkey would invade British middle east from one side while rommel attacks on the other. Britain has no real force in the area to prevent such a large scale attack from the turks.

without large scale U.S aid in suplies and arms British empire in africa, suez, india and middle east crumbles hastening the end of the war and the british empire. further down the line, a cold war between Germany(which controlls virtually all mainland europe and its vast resources) and the U.S

how does that sound??

If the Turks do launch an attack on British positions in the north (Asyria and the Lebanon) then the Italian 8th Army would certainly attack Egypt, with British having to face two fronts they would struggle and if say Italian forces remaining in Ethiopia manage to attack British forces in the Sudan to link up with the Italian 8th Army then i see that the British would certainly be hard pushed to attain victory, but i'll add another aspect, a revolt by Egyptian Army led by General Anwar Sadat against British forces. It could see the entire middle east eventually become Axis dominated.

This could even speed up the defection of Iraq to the Axis. Also this would mean that the Soviets would have to divert far more men into the Caucasus.

I dont think Turkey wanted a war with Russia

__________________
The war against Russia will be such that it cannot be conducted in a knightly fashion. This struggle is one of ideologies and racial differences and will have to be conducted with unprecedented, unmerciful and unrelenting harshness. -Adolf Hitler

No but that opens up another front that the Soviets would have to deal with, also another point is that it could mean that Axis naval units get to operate within the Black Sea or that Turkey blocks supply to the Black Sea.

I believe this topic was discussed here somewhere... Nothing good would have come out of this for Turkey.

__________________
The war against Russia will be such that it cannot be conducted in a knightly fashion. This struggle is one of ideologies and racial differences and will have to be conducted with unprecedented, unmerciful and unrelenting harshness. -Adolf Hitler

I don't know about that. Just say Turkey is allocated vast quantities of military hardware (maybe obsloete but still worth the result), Territorial concessions such as Greece, Cyprus, Southern Caucasus, Northern Iraq access to Middle Eastern oil, becomes a major power in the Eastern Mediterranean. Sounds like something to consider at least.

With Turkey in the Axis camp German troops could gain transit right to launch an attack on the Soviets through the Southern Caucasus.

Turkey was in no shape to go to war. Siding with Germany once, caused the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. Also an eventuall confrontation with Great Britain and the Soviet Union as a result for helping Germany was inevitable. Turkey was well aware.


While this scenerio might be more of use for Germany, Turkey on the other hand would not indulge in the fruits of such an alliance and would find herself facing Russia.

I would imagine that Turkey as an ally might be as usefull as Italy was?

__________________
The war against Russia will be such that it cannot be conducted in a knightly fashion. This struggle is one of ideologies and racial differences and will have to be conducted with unprecedented, unmerciful and unrelenting harshness. -Adolf Hitler

Did you have to bring the Italians into it, they have suffered enough, as allies they were shockers.

__________________
The war against Russia will be such that it cannot be conducted in a knightly fashion. This struggle is one of ideologies and racial differences and will have to be conducted with unprecedented, unmerciful and unrelenting harshness. -Adolf Hitler

No turkey would want to start a fight against a bear.

Lol! Nice pun!

With or without a tutu.

I think this what-if is feasible because the political dimension for going to war on the Axis side has been outlined.
Germany would benefit more from this hypothetical event. On paper, a Turkish entry into the war would've tied up more Soviet troops allowing Germany more leg room to move faster. Ditto for the Allied forces in the Mideast.
The key, I think, would be coordination between the Turkish and German military commanders.

If the Turks agree to fight spoiling or holding actions in Russia's and Great Britain's flanks, Turkish forces could do this mission. If the Turks go for more ambitious goals, they would set themselves up for a disaster.

The question that comes to my mind is the German record for coordinating forces from various nationalities. Given the superiority mindset of the Nazi mind, I doubt the Germans and Turks could work together in a very cooperative manner. This would be the saving grace for the Soviets and Allies.

Another thing that just popped up in my mind just now: I think the Turks would've gained a lot more under this what-if if the Turks settled for allowing the passage of German troops through their territory and hold themselves to very limited defensive action. I think this would be more feasible for them because the Germans would bear more of the fighting. I doubt, though, if the Germans would settle for such an arrangement. Hitler would undoubtedly demand more from Turkey.

But Turkey was in much better shape for military conflict in the Great War and look at what happend. Why would Turkey ever consider fighting again especially when it was at a weaker state?

__________________
The war against Russia will be such that it cannot be conducted in a knightly fashion. This struggle is one of ideologies and racial differences and will have to be conducted with unprecedented, unmerciful and unrelenting harshness. -Adolf Hitler

I don't think much changes. The British troops which conquered the Vichy colonies in Syria and Lebanon would instead face the Turks. Syria and Lebanon would stay neutral as Vichy territory. Turkish troops would then have to advance into Iraq to be of any assistance to Italian troops in Africa. I have been to that part of the world. Not easy country to fight in , or even move through. So, let's say the turks do this anyway, I'm not sure why, Iraq is not a strategic objective in WWII. The British forces which historically conquered Syria and Lebanon can now be added to the forces that historically put down the pro Axis Iraq coup and face the Turks. IF things get dicey for the Brits they have some excellent troops in India who can be rushed to the front in Iraq. (Since this is 1940, the Japanese are not a threat). I think the Turks get routed. Now Hitler has to bail out both the Turks and the Italians. Again, this is 1940/1941. Assuming that Mussolini still starts his stupid Greece campaign, the Germans roll over the Balkans and Turkey just becomes an extended front to that campaign. The Germans then move to take out Iraq and join their allies in Syria and Lebanon for a move on the Suez. The Suez falls, Egypt falls, Iraq falls, and Persia falls. The Germans can now take the caucasian oil fields in reverse from Turkey and Persia. The Persians probably make a deal and become Axis minor powers. Iraq definitely does this.

What does Russia do without the caucasian oil fields?

I think this was the most important mistake that Hitler made in the war, not making sure that the Turks would enter the war, or at least allow German troops passage through their country. With the Wermacht camped on the Turks European border as a result of the Balkan campaign the issue could have been forced.

I agree that Turkey was in a weakend state, but in 1940-42 it looked like Axis victory in Europe. Just like Germany, Turkey was a weakend, humiliated and castrated state by the treaty of Versailles. The empire stripped and lingering wounds of the First world war could easily have lead to the same sort of Nationalism and resentment against Britain and France that would lead them to throw their weight against the (at the time seemingly) crumbling facade of British/Frence power in the region.

I agree that Turkey would not want a war with the Soviets but they had many scores to settle in THEIR region and much to gain by joining the growing Axis power in Europe.

As stated above, the entry of Turkey into the war would have altered the outcome of the battle for Africa, the middle east and would eventualy have reprecusions for the USSR and eventualy India as they became more intangled in the Axis alliance (For better or worse to their initial cause)

I think this is a valid "What If" and deserves a closer look "Bump"

__________________
"If your going to get it, take one with you!"

The battle of Africa was an attempt to save Italy from humiliation and to prevent the allies from attacking via Africa. What is the point of capturing all of North Africa? It would mean even more divisions wasted on minor fronts.

Attacking India from the Middle East? You must be joking. Germany didn't even have the strength to fully conquer the USSR, and trying to occupy the Middle East and India at the same time was out of the question. If you ask me, I think the African front shouldn't have even existed.

So no, the entry of turkey in the war would not have changed the over all situation for the better, but for the worse.

Without some serious military aid, Turkey would be of no use. Germany just did not have the resources to provide such aid. Hitler complained when Franco insisted on Germany providing the weapons for the Blue Division. If Hitler wanted the Spanish manpower, he had to provide everything. Germany was providing the fuel and coal for Italy. It provided some military hardware to Rumania and Hungary. Germany just could not afford any more 'allies'.

Now, had Turkey possess a modern army and air force, it would definitely been a worthy ally that could have relived some strain off of the Germans especially in Russia. But it was not meant to be

__________________

American by birth, TEXAN by the grace of GOD!

"The Turks, although neutral, were courted by both Germany and the Allies. They staunchly maintained their neutrality to the end of the war, giving haven to Germans escaping the Russian Juggernaut in Bulgaria and Romania in 1944, and from the Allies in Greece in 1944-45.
Of course their surrendered Kar. 98K's and other equipment were immediately absorbed by the Turkish Army."


"The Turks had a dilemma as World War II approached. On the one hand, they had made a great deal of progress toward becoming a modern secular nation. Entering the war on either side would put that progress at risk. On the other hand, the Turks had lost a great deal of territory at the end of World War I. In the Middle East, they lost territory which today is Iraq, Syria, Jordan, Israel, and part of Saudi Arabia. In the Mediterranean, the Italians seized islands along the Turkish coast, some as close as 3 miles away from the mainland. A strong current of Turkish political thought said that World War II was an opportunity to take those territories back. The question was: which territories did they go for? The Italian-held islands were an affront to Turkey. On the other hand, England ran (directly or indirectly) former Turkish territory in Iraq, Jordan, and Palestine. France held Syria and Lebanon. Turkey was also interested in regaining influence and/or territory in Turkish-speaking areas of the Soviet Union. Turkey could swing toward the allies and try to recover the Mediterranean islands, or it could swing toward the Axis and try to recover lost areas in the Middle East. After the Germans invaded the Soviet Union, Turkey also had the option of trying to exploit that war to reach its goals in the Soviet Union.

Throughout the war, the Allies and Axis were very aware of Turkey's potential role. At various times both sides offered fairly major incentives to bring the Turks in. A couple of times it looked like they were about to succeed."

http://members.aol.com/dalecoz/ww2_0998.htm

__________________
For the first time I have seen "History" at close quarters,and I know that its actual process is very different from what is presented to Posterity. - WWI General Max Hoffman