Post by Tipsyfish on Nov 17, 2017 17:12:59 GMT
Hello,
I make Youtube videos regarding alternate history scenarios. Currently working on the script for "what if Turkey joined the Axis powers" Yes, I know that it has been talked about to death on the forum already and I've read through some of the threads but figured it would still be beneficial to get some opinions on how horribly worded this thing is. Few things to note:
- This is an un-edited, first draft so spelling mistakes or stuff not making so much sense is due to that.
- I'm trying to keep the length from going to high so would ideally not make this a ten-twenty page things (easily could with all the useful information). The scenario isn't all that realistic nor do I have a proper POD established since that would just take a while to explain and likely lose people.
- Would love to talk about all the details but in reality, few (especially on the internet) care for details. So this is me trying to give useful/needed information for someone that doesn't know a damn thing about the topic. Is what is written out give someone a clue who doesn't know much if anyone before-hand? Visuals would be added to show what is being talked about too. Trying to hit the big points and explain some changes from this.
I make Youtube videos regarding alternate history scenarios. Currently working on the script for "what if Turkey joined the Axis powers" Yes, I know that it has been talked about to death on the forum already and I've read through some of the threads but figured it would still be beneficial to get some opinions on how horribly worded this thing is. Few things to note:
- This is an un-edited, first draft so spelling mistakes or stuff not making so much sense is due to that.
- I'm trying to keep the length from going to high so would ideally not make this a ten-twenty page things (easily could with all the useful information). The scenario isn't all that realistic nor do I have a proper POD established since that would just take a while to explain and likely lose people.
- Would love to talk about all the details but in reality, few (especially on the internet) care for details. So this is me trying to give useful/needed information for someone that doesn't know a damn thing about the topic. Is what is written out give someone a clue who doesn't know much if anyone before-hand? Visuals would be added to show what is being talked about too. Trying to hit the big points and explain some changes from this.
Anatolia has been home to many powerful empires through-out history. Such as the Hittie, Byzantium, and Ottomans. The latter being a major regional and world power for nearly six hundred years. But, with the end of the First World War, all of that changed. The Ottoman Empire was officially abolished, and the rump state of Turkey was all that remained of an empire that had been so prevalent and long-reaching centuries prior. The area was rif with in-stability, economic problems plague the region, and social tensions were high. After the mid 1920's, the new nation of Turkey was largely forgotten by most of the world, merely existing as any other nation would. That is, until World War 2.
World War 2 saw Germany within a year knock out her neighbors in a quick strike, removing the main continental contender France in six weeks what the Germany thirty years ago couldn't manage in four years. This, combined with the Italians entering the war against them caused a panic for the British and the remnants of the French Empire that continued to fight. With most of Europe under Axis control, the middle east seemed like the next main target for attack. However, this attack never occurred. To do this, Germany would have had to either invade or convince Turkey to join to the war on their side. This obviously didn't happen and so the middle east was spared attack. But, for the sake of Alternate history, let's look at what would have happened if Turkey joined the Axis Powers. But first, some history:
After the end of the first World War, the power dynamic in the Middle East changed heavily, for centuries, the main and most dominate power in the region was the Ottoman Empire, this empire at it's height had control of most of the Middle East, North Africa, The Balkans and a large section of South Eastern Europe. But by the start of the first World War, the once mighty empire had been reduced to its middle eastern possessions, being labeled as the “sick man of Europe” for over a hundred years previous. By the end of the Great war, they were heavily partitioned between the victorious powers, Britain and France dividing up the Middle East while Greece and the newly independent Caucasus nations attempted to split Anatolia between them. Dissolution of the Ottomans, birth of the nation of Turkey and a war of independence followed which will be covered in a future episode. After this, the nation had massive reforms to westernize and to rebuild the crumbled economy that nearly two decades of war had caused.
When WW2 started, Turkey seemed to be far away from the main conflict, but, within a year, they were at the border of a very successful Germany. Within a year Germany and her allies had occupied Poland, Norway, Denmark, The Low Countries, France, the Balkans and much of the South Eastern Europe. Now, Turkey was effectively a buffer between the Germans in Europe and the British in the Middle East. Both sides tried to get Turkey to join the war on their side but the nation stayed strictly neutral until the end of the war was nearing. So, Let's look at what would happen if Turkey joined the Axis powers in 1941 Keep in mind, I'm mostly going to focus on what this would do in regards to the invasion of Russia, there would be a huge change in the Middle East, but I don't want to make this video too long.
For this to happen two things would need to happen. First, Turkey would need a different President then they had IOTL. As İsmet İnönü was not only pro-allied, but he and many others, understood that the nation had very little to gain in this war and had much to lose if it joined either side. With Inonu out and some other, would have to be an absolute idiot in, Germany would also need to give enough incentive for Turkey to join there side, IOTL, they offered bits of Greece but that wouldn't be anywhere near enough to off-set the material they gain from being neutral. Likely, demands of military aid, manufactured goods, food, land claimed by the Italians and other material would be demanded, something that Germany likely couldn't supply as when this was demanded from Spain, the negotiations went no-where. But let's say that Turkey joins the war anyway, what does this mean? Well
This would immediately open up a front in the middle east, and, depending on the timing of the entry. Could mean a significant change in how the fighting in the Vichy French possessions of Jordan and Syria, would play out. The British pre-emptivly invaded the region to prevent Germany from being able to use the bases to assist the North Africa campaign. If this invasion still happens IOTL, and Turkey joins the war shortly after the start of the invasion, it could cause significant problems. Turkish troops could march into the Northern part of Syria, where the main invasion was taking place, and either hold off the British, or possibly even damage them so heavily that they would need to pull out.
If they time it right they could also make the Iraq Revolt work. The Germans badly needed Turkey to be able to move supplies into Syria, but didn't have it IOTL, but here they could rail things in and use it as a staging base for expanding Middle East operations. Making the Iraqi revolt stick would be a disaster for the British and might even get Iran to be a lot more strident in their pro-Axis leanings. Getting Iraq as an ally, plus perhaps even Syria/Lebanon as an on going front would be extremely helpful to Rommel, but would require more German divisions through Turkey, which might well be a major problem for Barbarossa. However two German panzer divisions that had operated in the Balkans were not allocated for Barbarossa, and lost their equipment when re-deployed to Italy. If they are instead are used for Middle East operations based out of Turkey, to complement Rommel's Afrika Korps efforts. While the region is largely poor tank country with a small line of supply, The two Panzer divisions in the Middle East would be a major problem for the British, potentially a fatal one if met with an Arab revolt in Palestine and perhaps Iran asserting their pro-axis stance.
Iran is in a large part untouchable to the British if Iraq is in open revolt/free of British troops. If the Germans play their cards right Turkey then could lead to a total unraveling of the Middle East for the British and probably the Fall of Egypt. Later Turkey would be a critical base for operations against the USSR in the Caucasus, but in 1941 if Barbarossa is going to happen it will be a very important transit point for shipping and warships. IOTL Turkey did not allow warships through the Straits, which would have been extremely helpful against the Soviet Black Sea Fleet.
The Turkish navy consisted of the outdated battle cruiser Yavuz, 4 destroyers, 5-6 submarines, 2 light cruisers, 3 mine-sweepers, 2 gunboats, 3 motor torpedo boats, 4 minelayers and a surveying vessel. IOTL, the Soviet Black seas fleet was a major player during early operations/sieges. It could also allow the Black sea to be under "axis control", with Italian and German ships being able to come into the black sea unlike IOTL This, combined with the Romanian (The Romanian navy consisted of four destroyers, twelve torpedo boats, four gunboats, six minelayers, three amphibious landing self-propelled barges, four submarine chasers, three submarines and five midget submarines.) navy could possibly defeat or at the very least, hold up the Soviet fleet under Filipp Oktyabrsky. Preventing the vital aid the fleet gave to important sieges of Odessa in 1941 (evacuating 86,000 soldiers and over 150,000 civilians), and Sevastopol. This would also prevent the counter-attack at Kerch and (possibly) allow the Germans to cross over the straight themselves or be able to have the 11th army properly act as the flanking guard for AGS at the start of 1942 like they were instructed too and allow an additional 600 aircraft (including a heavy mix of Medium bombers, and dive bombers) to be deployed elsewhere.
So what does this mean for the war as a whole? Well, this would almost certainly mean a major fight over the Middle East and likely leave the Axis in control of North Africa. As to whether or not the Middle East would be under complete Axis control is un-certain. Iraq and Iran may very well come under loose Axis control but the British possessions in present day Yemen and Oman would not be open to Axis attack, the logistic line, supplies, and over-all manpower just wasn't there. The Germans big target was the Soviet Union, so the least amount of resources to achieve results would be diverted to this front. Would the British leave the war at this point? Unlikely, The Axis were spread desperately thin and this was in reality, the furthest that they could possibly hold with the infrastructure that was there. So long as an invasion of the Soviet Union occurs, it is near impossible for the British to be knocked out of the war due to territorial conquest. Everything south of Egypt is safe from invasion, India is far too large to conquer and India and the other Commonwealth nations also can supply a massive amount of troops for the British. It would be a dark time, but it wouldn't be a dark age.
In regards to the invasion of the Soviet Union, if the operations in the middle east delay Barbarossa then the likely-hood of success in the invasion only diminishes. Why is this? Because of Stalin. One of the largest factors that made Barbarossa so successful in the first few months was that the defense lines that Soviet troops were put forward to in 1940 were not finished by the time of the invasion, and the previous Stalin line had been demolished to build up these defenses. This, combined with his admitted refusal to believe that the Germans had invaded for days and thus surprise by a large section of the staff, meant that many of the forward units were just pushed further and further back, captured, or killed. If Turkey joins the Axis and fighting takes place in the Middle East, Stalin will notice this and adjust what needs to be adjusted to meet it head on. Also, the more time would allow the Soviet officer class to be fully replenished, and the army to finish its re-organization program. When Barbarossa started, it was only partially completed, so the army was stuck in the middle of the transition with only half of its officers and two partial defense lines. An invasion from the Middle East is possible, but the lack of infrastructure in the region would made such a thing rather difficult, especially if the area had had an increase in defenses due to the fighting going on in the region to the south. The Soviet oil fields in Baku would be open to German bombardment but later analysis would have suggested that the damage to the fields wouldn't be devastating as accurate bombing of the area would be difficult to accomplish. Estimates ranged that the damage done would reduce out-put by around 15 percent. Staging a massive offensive from the Middle East would likely end in failure. The supply situation would be at its tail end, especially since the main bulk of supplies, support, and replacements would be for the invasion from Europe. That, combined with additional soviet defenses, terrain, and the supply line only adds more difficulties to an operation. Would this mean the Germans have less success in Barbarossa? Likely, does it mean that the war ends quicker? Possibly. The only known fact from this is that the opportunity to take-over the USSR was slim to none.
World War 2 saw Germany within a year knock out her neighbors in a quick strike, removing the main continental contender France in six weeks what the Germany thirty years ago couldn't manage in four years. This, combined with the Italians entering the war against them caused a panic for the British and the remnants of the French Empire that continued to fight. With most of Europe under Axis control, the middle east seemed like the next main target for attack. However, this attack never occurred. To do this, Germany would have had to either invade or convince Turkey to join to the war on their side. This obviously didn't happen and so the middle east was spared attack. But, for the sake of Alternate history, let's look at what would have happened if Turkey joined the Axis Powers. But first, some history:
After the end of the first World War, the power dynamic in the Middle East changed heavily, for centuries, the main and most dominate power in the region was the Ottoman Empire, this empire at it's height had control of most of the Middle East, North Africa, The Balkans and a large section of South Eastern Europe. But by the start of the first World War, the once mighty empire had been reduced to its middle eastern possessions, being labeled as the “sick man of Europe” for over a hundred years previous. By the end of the Great war, they were heavily partitioned between the victorious powers, Britain and France dividing up the Middle East while Greece and the newly independent Caucasus nations attempted to split Anatolia between them. Dissolution of the Ottomans, birth of the nation of Turkey and a war of independence followed which will be covered in a future episode. After this, the nation had massive reforms to westernize and to rebuild the crumbled economy that nearly two decades of war had caused.
When WW2 started, Turkey seemed to be far away from the main conflict, but, within a year, they were at the border of a very successful Germany. Within a year Germany and her allies had occupied Poland, Norway, Denmark, The Low Countries, France, the Balkans and much of the South Eastern Europe. Now, Turkey was effectively a buffer between the Germans in Europe and the British in the Middle East. Both sides tried to get Turkey to join the war on their side but the nation stayed strictly neutral until the end of the war was nearing. So, Let's look at what would happen if Turkey joined the Axis powers in 1941 Keep in mind, I'm mostly going to focus on what this would do in regards to the invasion of Russia, there would be a huge change in the Middle East, but I don't want to make this video too long.
For this to happen two things would need to happen. First, Turkey would need a different President then they had IOTL. As İsmet İnönü was not only pro-allied, but he and many others, understood that the nation had very little to gain in this war and had much to lose if it joined either side. With Inonu out and some other, would have to be an absolute idiot in, Germany would also need to give enough incentive for Turkey to join there side, IOTL, they offered bits of Greece but that wouldn't be anywhere near enough to off-set the material they gain from being neutral. Likely, demands of military aid, manufactured goods, food, land claimed by the Italians and other material would be demanded, something that Germany likely couldn't supply as when this was demanded from Spain, the negotiations went no-where. But let's say that Turkey joins the war anyway, what does this mean? Well
This would immediately open up a front in the middle east, and, depending on the timing of the entry. Could mean a significant change in how the fighting in the Vichy French possessions of Jordan and Syria, would play out. The British pre-emptivly invaded the region to prevent Germany from being able to use the bases to assist the North Africa campaign. If this invasion still happens IOTL, and Turkey joins the war shortly after the start of the invasion, it could cause significant problems. Turkish troops could march into the Northern part of Syria, where the main invasion was taking place, and either hold off the British, or possibly even damage them so heavily that they would need to pull out.
If they time it right they could also make the Iraq Revolt work. The Germans badly needed Turkey to be able to move supplies into Syria, but didn't have it IOTL, but here they could rail things in and use it as a staging base for expanding Middle East operations. Making the Iraqi revolt stick would be a disaster for the British and might even get Iran to be a lot more strident in their pro-Axis leanings. Getting Iraq as an ally, plus perhaps even Syria/Lebanon as an on going front would be extremely helpful to Rommel, but would require more German divisions through Turkey, which might well be a major problem for Barbarossa. However two German panzer divisions that had operated in the Balkans were not allocated for Barbarossa, and lost their equipment when re-deployed to Italy. If they are instead are used for Middle East operations based out of Turkey, to complement Rommel's Afrika Korps efforts. While the region is largely poor tank country with a small line of supply, The two Panzer divisions in the Middle East would be a major problem for the British, potentially a fatal one if met with an Arab revolt in Palestine and perhaps Iran asserting their pro-axis stance.
Iran is in a large part untouchable to the British if Iraq is in open revolt/free of British troops. If the Germans play their cards right Turkey then could lead to a total unraveling of the Middle East for the British and probably the Fall of Egypt. Later Turkey would be a critical base for operations against the USSR in the Caucasus, but in 1941 if Barbarossa is going to happen it will be a very important transit point for shipping and warships. IOTL Turkey did not allow warships through the Straits, which would have been extremely helpful against the Soviet Black Sea Fleet.
The Turkish navy consisted of the outdated battle cruiser Yavuz, 4 destroyers, 5-6 submarines, 2 light cruisers, 3 mine-sweepers, 2 gunboats, 3 motor torpedo boats, 4 minelayers and a surveying vessel. IOTL, the Soviet Black seas fleet was a major player during early operations/sieges. It could also allow the Black sea to be under "axis control", with Italian and German ships being able to come into the black sea unlike IOTL This, combined with the Romanian (The Romanian navy consisted of four destroyers, twelve torpedo boats, four gunboats, six minelayers, three amphibious landing self-propelled barges, four submarine chasers, three submarines and five midget submarines.) navy could possibly defeat or at the very least, hold up the Soviet fleet under Filipp Oktyabrsky. Preventing the vital aid the fleet gave to important sieges of Odessa in 1941 (evacuating 86,000 soldiers and over 150,000 civilians), and Sevastopol. This would also prevent the counter-attack at Kerch and (possibly) allow the Germans to cross over the straight themselves or be able to have the 11th army properly act as the flanking guard for AGS at the start of 1942 like they were instructed too and allow an additional 600 aircraft (including a heavy mix of Medium bombers, and dive bombers) to be deployed elsewhere.
So what does this mean for the war as a whole? Well, this would almost certainly mean a major fight over the Middle East and likely leave the Axis in control of North Africa. As to whether or not the Middle East would be under complete Axis control is un-certain. Iraq and Iran may very well come under loose Axis control but the British possessions in present day Yemen and Oman would not be open to Axis attack, the logistic line, supplies, and over-all manpower just wasn't there. The Germans big target was the Soviet Union, so the least amount of resources to achieve results would be diverted to this front. Would the British leave the war at this point? Unlikely, The Axis were spread desperately thin and this was in reality, the furthest that they could possibly hold with the infrastructure that was there. So long as an invasion of the Soviet Union occurs, it is near impossible for the British to be knocked out of the war due to territorial conquest. Everything south of Egypt is safe from invasion, India is far too large to conquer and India and the other Commonwealth nations also can supply a massive amount of troops for the British. It would be a dark time, but it wouldn't be a dark age.
In regards to the invasion of the Soviet Union, if the operations in the middle east delay Barbarossa then the likely-hood of success in the invasion only diminishes. Why is this? Because of Stalin. One of the largest factors that made Barbarossa so successful in the first few months was that the defense lines that Soviet troops were put forward to in 1940 were not finished by the time of the invasion, and the previous Stalin line had been demolished to build up these defenses. This, combined with his admitted refusal to believe that the Germans had invaded for days and thus surprise by a large section of the staff, meant that many of the forward units were just pushed further and further back, captured, or killed. If Turkey joins the Axis and fighting takes place in the Middle East, Stalin will notice this and adjust what needs to be adjusted to meet it head on. Also, the more time would allow the Soviet officer class to be fully replenished, and the army to finish its re-organization program. When Barbarossa started, it was only partially completed, so the army was stuck in the middle of the transition with only half of its officers and two partial defense lines. An invasion from the Middle East is possible, but the lack of infrastructure in the region would made such a thing rather difficult, especially if the area had had an increase in defenses due to the fighting going on in the region to the south. The Soviet oil fields in Baku would be open to German bombardment but later analysis would have suggested that the damage to the fields wouldn't be devastating as accurate bombing of the area would be difficult to accomplish. Estimates ranged that the damage done would reduce out-put by around 15 percent. Staging a massive offensive from the Middle East would likely end in failure. The supply situation would be at its tail end, especially since the main bulk of supplies, support, and replacements would be for the invasion from Europe. That, combined with additional soviet defenses, terrain, and the supply line only adds more difficulties to an operation. Would this mean the Germans have less success in Barbarossa? Likely, does it mean that the war ends quicker? Possibly. The only known fact from this is that the opportunity to take-over the USSR was slim to none.
