stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,843 
Likes: 13,229
|
Post by stevep on Jul 6, 2024 19:27:35 GMT
a) Agreed.
b) This might depend on what happens in China after Japanese domination collapses - as I believe you intend. Does it go KMT or communist? Think more likely to see the former than OTL since there's no belief that Stalin is an ally here so any idea of western support for them or lack of support for the KMT as the USSR will be seen as as much of a threat as the still existing Nazis. Also IIRC you're working on the assumption that Japan stays as a regional power with control over Korea, Manchuria and possibly Taiwan. If so there's going to be no Soviet conquest of Manchuria and handing over much of the area and a lot of weapons to Mao. Although once the US and USSR are open enemies I think Stalin will switch support to Mao earlier.
Basically if you get the KMT winning in China it will be officially pro-west, at least at 1st but could easily seek to play the field and also link up with India and other newly independent states in a Non-Aligned bloc as OTL. [Albeit that's Mao's definition of non-alignment is somewhat dubious OTL].
Also it depends what India emerges. IIRC the Soviets overrun much of the ME region and if as is likely this includes most of Iran then for a good chunk of the war India will be facing Soviet attack through Iran and Afghanistan. This could mean for a much more militarised India needing to look after its own defences. Also does the clear external threat result in the sectarian tension being controlled or do the Muslim areas still break away? Which could be even more violent here with additional players seeking to cause problems. As such you could see a much stronger India but possibly with greater internal tensions that boil over some years down the line or one with a markedly bigger military and even more divided. It could be non-aligned as OTL or looking towards the west for protection against the communist threat. Possibly also expressing some interest in the Third Reich but given that the latter was so racist and is likely to be more so here I doubt Berlin and Delhi are going to be that close.
c) In terms of French Africa I expect that the north will stay under formal Vichy control because their likely to have an even more brutal suppression than OTL and that's likely to be backed by the Nazis. The rest of Africa I'm not sure the Free French will have that much actual power and their likely to get a large measure of independence albeit with a dependence on western support to protect them from the European fascists. I suspect that Washington, despite its own discrimination at home which might last longer here, will find it easier to proclaim itself the home of liberty if its prompting independent African states from the former colonial empire - especially if a relatively powerless Free French state is the alternative, which might need a lot of aid repressing independence movements. [Well unless the Free French are willing to become an overwhelmingly African organisation which is possible but I suspect unlikely].
In terms of what parts of Africa Britain remains under control of when the fighting ends west Africa will quickly move towards independence, possibly earlier than OTL, It will be more difficult in terms of eastern and southern colonies which have small but influential white settlers groups.
|
|
|
|
Post by Max Sinister on Jul 6, 2024 21:33:03 GMT
For the moment, I'll just talk about China: A KMT victory would throw away much of OTL's post-WW2 history. Not impossible, but I'm not sure what to make of it. The Maoists were mass murderers on a huge scale, it'd be good to avoid that, but China'll still be a poor, warlord-torn nation with lots of corruption. I'll have to think about it.
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 68,007
Likes: 49,410
|
Post by lordroel on Jul 12, 2024 20:50:49 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Max Sinister on Jul 13, 2024 21:57:53 GMT
Regarding the German priorities, I decided to keep them as IOTL: 1) Leningrad, 2) Ukraine, 3) Moscow. I'd like to have tried out something different, but as stated in the other thread, since nothing substantial happened to make the "führer" shift his priorities, there's no reason to do so. (Too bad, I'd like to have this path explored.)
Some other thing: Because of butterflies, the incident with the SS Automedon won't happen, as it did IOTL on November 11th in 1940. Either the Germans don't catch her, or sink her so they don't find the documents, or they get destroyed, or (since she left on September 25th!) the documents are on a totally different ship... many possibilities. Too many to expect that things will go as IOTL.
Japan will still change its policy towards war with the Empire, because of the Battle of Dunkirk. So these two changes cancel each out, roughly.
About China: I'd like to explore the question of a three-way Cold War after I'll have finished the WW2 of TTL. If China won't turn Communist, this would restrict Communism to the SU proper and the one or other satellite nearby. Which means that the Soviet block would be in danger of breaking down as the first one. I'd like to give them (in the story only!) fairer starting conditions. (This means ignoring butterflies for once, as AFAIK Mao's troops in Manchuria only weren't crushed because George Marshal insisted on meddling, which gave them time to recover... but I digress.)
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,843
Likes: 13,229
|
Post by stevep on Jul 14, 2024 14:46:46 GMT
Regarding the German priorities, I decided to keep them as IOTL: 1) Leningrad, 2) Ukraine, 3) Moscow. I'd like to have tried out something different, but as stated in the other thread, since nothing substantial happened to make the "führer" shift his priorities, there's no reason to do so. (Too bad, I'd like to have this path explored.) Some other thing: Because of butterflies, the incident with the SS Automedon won't happen, as it did IOTL on November 11th in 1940. Either the Germans don't catch her, or sink her so they don't find the documents, or they get destroyed, or (since she left on September 25th!) the documents are on a totally different ship... many possibilities. Too many to expect that things will go as IOTL. Japan will still change its policy towards war with the Empire, because of the Battle of Dunkirk. So these two changes cancel each out, roughly. About China: I'd like to explore the question of a three-way Cold War after I'll have finished the WW2 of TTL. If China won't turn Communist, this would restrict Communism to the SU proper and the one or other satellite nearby. Which means that the Soviet block would be in danger of breaking down as the first one. I'd like to give them (in the story only!) fairer starting conditions. (This means ignoring butterflies for once, as AFAIK Mao's troops in Manchuria only weren't crushed because George Marshal insisted on meddling, which gave them time to recover... but I digress.)
Unless its made a lost of conquests elsewhere and especially with a fair chunk of its core territory annexed by the Germans the USSR is likely to be the militarily weakest of the three, at least in the sort term. How much of the ME are you thinking of it controlling and anywhere beyond that region. If it got into the Persian Gulf region its going to control a hell of a lot of the world's oil sources but also a hell of a lot of Muslims and if it included Jerusalem, let alone Mecca and Medina that would be a massive issue for them.
On the other hand, if this means it only has a short war with both Germany [albeit very destructive] and a short one with the western powers [far more successfully] its going to be a lot less drained and as an ideological power it could be well placed to compete with the nihilistic Nazi empire and probably also the capitalist west in much of the undeveloped world.
However I can see some arguments that China still goes communist, especially since aid to the KMT will probably be less and the war in the Far East is likely to last longer. As such the KMT is still worn down, probably more than OTL and the western powers concerned as well at the formidable Nazi empire you could see them fail to support the KMT enough as OTL.
After the 1st couple of decades then it could be the fascist states that are the weakest of the three. Depending on how long they keep their ideologically policies but those would cripple much of their economy and educational system as well as cause a hell of a lot of devastation and suffering, along with a lot of slave revolts. Coupled with the endemic corrupt which seemed even worse than in the USSR. Plus a lot would depend on what happens after Adolph passes away. At the least there's going to be a bloodbath inside the party as whoever comes out on top purges potential opponents. At worse - for them - you could see a level of civil war along with possibly assorted nations to break away. Not sure what the status of the other fascists states will be although Italy might still have a level of independence but I suspect just about everywhere else will have only paper independence. Which will rankle with many people.
|
|
|
|
Post by Max Sinister on Jul 17, 2024 21:50:12 GMT
1. Jerusalem is Musso's turf, so that's out. The Arab peninsula will be declared a German sphere of influence, as is black Africa. I've decided to add both conditions to the "Ostfrieden". How (and whether) the Axis will get these areas, is a different question.
2. Yes, the Soviets will be drained much less. Which still means that the Nazis will kill several millions Soviet Jews, and let several million Soviet PoWs die. Also, the SU will have to prop up fewer Soviet states in the Third World. But they also have to deliver resources to Nazi Germany, and are lacking the best part of their country. Partly, these changes may even cancel each other out...
3. Nazis and fascists weakest? Because their economy relies on forced labor? We have to keep in mind that the same Germans who worked hard IOTL to make the "wirtschaftswunder" possible are alive, have learned to work and will be willing to do so for a better future. In fact, even more of them will be alive, and not crippled either.
Later generations who seriously believe that work was something for the Slav(e)s, however...
But before I can write about that, I'll have to finish Barbarossa first. I'm still thinking: Will we see a similar development next, with a big battle as with Vyazma-Bryansk from OTL? Or would the (more optimistic) Germans try out something more daring, with a bigger pincer movement? They will have lost at least as many panzers as IOTL, but have more men available, who'll also have killed more Redarmists. Especially important: Unless the weather is butterflied away, they'll have some more days before Rasputitsa will start. IOTL it struck in the middle of Vyazma-Bryansk... hence, ITTL the fights in the mud might happen right next to the suburbs of Moscow!
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,843
Likes: 13,229
|
Post by stevep on Jul 17, 2024 22:53:01 GMT
1. Jerusalem is Musso's turf, so that's out. The Arab peninsula will be declared a German sphere of influence, as is black Africa. I've decided to add both conditions to the "Ostfrieden". How (and whether) the Axis will get these areas, is a different question. 2. Yes, the Soviets will be drained much less. Which still means that the Nazis will kill several millions Soviet Jews, and let several million Soviet PoWs die. Also, the SU will have to prop up fewer Soviet states in the Third World. But they also have to deliver resources to Nazi Germany, and are lacking the best part of their country. Partly, these changes may even cancel each other out... 3. Nazis and fascists weakest? Because their economy relies on forced labor? We have to keep in mind that the same Germans who worked hard IOTL to make the "wirtschaftswunder" possible are alive, have learned to work and will be willing to do so for a better future. In fact, even more of them will be alive, and not crippled either. Later generations who seriously believe that work was something for the Slav(e)s, however... But before I can write about that, I'll have to finish Barbarossa first. I'm still thinking: Will we see a similar development next, with a big battle as with Vyazma-Bryansk from OTL? Or would the (more optimistic) Germans try out something more daring, with a bigger pincer movement? They will have lost at least as many panzers as IOTL, but have more men available, who'll also have killed more Redarmists. Especially important: Unless the weather is butterflied away, they'll have some more days before Rasputitsa will start. IOTL it struck in the middle of Vyazma-Bryansk... hence, ITTL the fights in the mud might happen right next to the suburbs of Moscow!
1) Ah possibly I'm forgetting details. I thought that after the 2nd Nazi-Soviet pact Stalin basically invaded the ME starting with Iran? Was assuming that he would get most of the region while the Axis got Africa and a much freer hand in the rest of Europe, i.e. being able to concentrate on Britain and possibly forcing Franco into line for the closing of the Med and more advanced subs bases. Possibly Axis get Palestine as well as Egypt to secure control of the Suez canal. What does the USSR get in this scenario then please or are you still deciding? I can't really see it getting India without a hell of a fight. I can't see the Axis getting all of Africa here although possibly you just meant the northern reaches. As long as the allies dominate the oceans once the US enters its much easier for them to get reinforcements and supplies to the southern parts of the continent, where their already in command as the logistics for land transport across the Sahara and then even further south would be abysmal.
2) Soviets will be drained much less than OTL, especially if their able to make a separate peace while the allies are fighting it out to an ultimate stalemate with the European Axis and defeating Japan. I can't see the Axis getting all of Africa here although possibly you just meant the northern reaches. They have still lost a lot of their most valuable lands and also a lot of people but far less than OTL and its possible you could see a fair number fleeing the Nazi zone as the latter might be glad to see 'worthless' Slavs freeing up space for their settlers.
3) I was thinking of the effects of the insanity of nazi ideas, especially if fanatics like Himmler gain prominence. Both in terms of the economic destruction their disorganization looting, racial ideas and incessant infighting would cause, Adam Tooze's The Wages of Destruction gives some ideas of what that would do. - Unfortunately that wiki link is a poor one as it doesn't really mention how grossly inefficient the Nazi system was. Coupled with their 'educational' ideas which would have steadily crippled future generations by denying them a sound scientific education. Plus with their glorification of war and with a resistant Britain backed by the US to their NW and south - in terms of possessions in southern Africa - and the Soviets to their east and SE I would expect a very large military spend. |
|
|
|
Post by Max Sinister on Jul 20, 2024 20:59:15 GMT
1. Jerusalem is Musso's turf, so that's out. The Arab peninsula will be declared a German sphere of influence, as is black Africa. I've decided to add both conditions to the "Ostfrieden". How (and whether) the Axis will get these areas, is a different question. 2. Yes, the Soviets will be drained much less. Which still means that the Nazis will kill several millions Soviet Jews, and let several million Soviet PoWs die. Also, the SU will have to prop up fewer Soviet states in the Third World. But they also have to deliver resources to Nazi Germany, and are lacking the best part of their country. Partly, these changes may even cancel each other out... 3. Nazis and fascists weakest? Because their economy relies on forced labor? We have to keep in mind that the same Germans who worked hard IOTL to make the "wirtschaftswunder" possible are alive, have learned to work and will be willing to do so for a better future. In fact, even more of them will be alive, and not crippled either. Later generations who seriously believe that work was something for the Slav(e)s, however... But before I can write about that, I'll have to finish Barbarossa first. I'm still thinking: Will we see a similar development next, with a big battle as with Vyazma-Bryansk from OTL? Or would the (more optimistic) Germans try out something more daring, with a bigger pincer movement? They will have lost at least as many panzers as IOTL, but have more men available, who'll also have killed more Redarmists. Especially important: Unless the weather is butterflied away, they'll have some more days before Rasputitsa will start. IOTL it struck in the middle of Vyazma-Bryansk... hence, ITTL the fights in the mud might happen right next to the suburbs of Moscow!
1) Ah possibly I'm forgetting details. I thought that after the 2nd Nazi-Soviet pact Stalin basically invaded the ME starting with Iran? Was assuming that he would get most of the region while the Axis got Africa and a much freer hand in the rest of Europe, i.e. being able to concentrate on Britain and possibly forcing Franco into line for the closing of the Med and more advanced subs bases. Possibly Axis get Palestine as well as Egypt to secure control of the Suez canal. What does the USSR get in this scenario then please or are you still deciding? I can't really see it getting India without a hell of a fight. I can't see the Axis getting all of Africa here although possibly you just meant the northern reaches. As long as the allies dominate the oceans once the US enters its much easier for them to get reinforcements and supplies to the southern parts of the continent, where their already in command as the logistics for land transport across the Sahara and then even further south would be abysmal.
2) Soviets will be drained much less than OTL, especially if their able to make a separate peace while the allies are fighting it out to an ultimate stalemate with the European Axis and defeating Japan. I can't see the Axis getting all of Africa here although possibly you just meant the northern reaches. They have still lost a lot of their most valuable lands and also a lot of people but far less than OTL and its possible you could see a fair number fleeing the Nazi zone as the latter might be glad to see 'worthless' Slavs freeing up space for their settlers.
3) I was thinking of the effects of the insanity of nazi ideas, especially if fanatics like Himmler gain prominence. Both in terms of the economic destruction their disorganization looting, racial ideas and incessant infighting would cause, Adam Tooze's The Wages of Destruction gives some ideas of what that would do. - Unfortunately that wiki link is a poor one as it doesn't really mention how grossly inefficient the Nazi system was. Coupled with their 'educational' ideas which would have steadily crippled future generations by denying them a sound scientific education. Plus with their glorification of war and with a resistant Britain backed by the US to their NW and south - in terms of possessions in southern Africa - and the Soviets to their east and SE I would expect a very large military spend. 1. Stalin will get Iran - or most of it at least - but before he can think about India, he'll have to take Afghanistan. And when he'll invade there (I think about 1943), a certain Winston Churchill will (correctly) predict that the "Pathan" snipers there will make the Redarmists suffer. Of course there'll be a lot of arms smuggled over the border there. But let me finish Barbarossa first, if you please.
2. After thinking about it, I think the Axis will need all of North Africa, and not only for the (yet undiscovered) oil. If the WAllies try an invasion (similar to Torch) there, they'll have to duke it out. I wonder how soon such an invasion might happen. The earlier, the better for the Allies.
3. I've read Tooze (after miletus12 recommended it), and it's true what you say. Of course, after the Ostfrieden the nazi machine won't have to run on fumes anymore. You're also correct about Himmler, but still - the more the war went on IOTL, the weaker the whackjob faction of the Nazis seemed to become. Hess ran away, blackletters abolished, so were the old-fashioned month names thought up by Schönerer... post-war nazism will look more technocratic, as I guess, and will have to if they want to survive. And as soon as the "führer" bites it, Hörbiger's Welteislehre will be out, or re-interpreted. (Similar as in Reich-5 from GURPS Alternate Earths.)
For now some diverse thoughts...
- Turkey will be seriously tempted to join the war on the one or other side. As soon as the Wehrmacht will reach Moscow, president Inönü will think that as soon as Moscow and/or Leningrad will fall, he might have to join the war on the "Reich"'s side. IOTL, they didn't really mind if the Caucasus and Inner-Asian Soviet republics had been turned into buffer states.
- Remember what I said about Raeder stepping back because of the loss of Scharnhorst and Gneisenau? Apparently IOTL he stepped back in 1943 because the "führer" had insulted him in his rage, although he tried to make him rethink his decision. I guess this will happen here too.
- During the Augustkrise, the "führer" already expected that he wouldn't be able to finish the East war in 1941 anymore. The victory of Kiev made him change his mind, though. And ITTL things look even better for him, as Budyonny died on September 9th, and Karelia's taken during September. - During Typhoon, OTL Stalin was close to capitulating. Or at least giving up Moscow, although he had stated earlier that in this case, the SU would lose all the lands west of the Volga. Somehow understandable - the Wehrmacht reduced the distance to Moscow from 300 km to less than 30. Of course some people think it was logical that the rest would be a cakewalk. - IOTL, the last targets the "führer" wanted to take in 1941 were Maykop, Stalingrad, Vologda, and Gorky. Something I'll have to keep in mind.
- Moscow's surrounded by three defense rings which the Wehrmacht never broke through IOTL. I expect that the Soviets would fight like hell. However, if you look on the map, you'll see that there's a gap in the north next to the Volga (artificial) lake at the end of the Moscow-Volga canal, and in the South, there's a gap near Kolomna (where the Moskva river mouths into the Oka river) as well. If the Wehrmacht advanced in the one or other place (optimally both!) enough, nightmares related to the failing Maginot line will happen. Unfortunately I can't find a good map on WP... OK, here's one. - IOTL, Rasputitsa started to become really bad in early October. But ITTL, Barbarossa started ten days earlier. Even if the Wehrmacht loses some time because of the long distances re: logistics, they certainly won't arrive there later than IOTL. Which means there'll be what the Soviets, esp. Muscovites, will call the "black October", with the Wehrmacht being close to Moscow, just in front of the three defense rings, even if stuck in the mud.
I even had considered that the Wehrmacht might try a bigger pincer movement - first going some distance east of Kiev, and then moving the panzers north. Just so "my" Barbarossa would look less like a n00b's campaign who simply has all big decisions happen like OTL, for lack of fantasy. But even so, the panzers coming from the South had a damn long way. Wouldn't be smart to make it even longer.
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,843
Likes: 13,229
|
Post by stevep on Jul 20, 2024 23:29:54 GMT
The issue with Moscow, as long as Stalin doesn't lose his nerve is reaching it is one thing, talking it another. As the Germans found at Stalingrad and Moscow is much bigger and an even clear centre of Russia prestige and history. Unless you mean that the situation is that both sides knowing how weak they are and not aware of the other's problems panic and that's how you get a sudden peace agreement in late 1941. Possibly remembering wrongly but think that was discussed. Mind you getting Hitler to recognise that his armies in the outskirts of Moscow face possible destruction would be the big issue here.
In terms of how wacky some of the Nazis are I've seen evidence that a number at least got more extreme as time goes on. Here of course things will go a lot better for them and they won't spend the last couple of years of the war with the echos of approach doom closing in on them. This might ease the drive for insanity in some but with things looking so good it also makes for less incentive to make changes.
True after Hitler goes, which could be not long after 1945 a lot will depend on how the succession goes and who wins.
Steve
|
|
|
|
Post by Max Sinister on Jul 24, 2024 21:19:06 GMT
stevep , Oh, I've never even considered the Wehrmacht actually taking Moscow. You know why they didn't invade Leningrad either? When the AGS took Kiev, they found that the Soviets had booby-trapped the city, which lead to high losses. They wanted to avoid such "surprises" in future, which lead to absurd situations - on the one hand, AGS wasn't allowed to take Kharkov after this, OTOH they needed it as an HQ... Anyway, this is part of the reason the "führer" wanted to besiege Leningrad and Moscow until everyone there was dead, and destroy the cities afterwards. Even surrounding Moscow would be a feat that's barely feasible. Even, as ITTL, with Barbarossa starting ten days earlier and with a dozen divisions more. About the future... authors agree for how long Adolf Nazi would live, if he hadn't lost. Harris had him alive and kicking in 1964, Reich-5 (GURPS AE) had him die in 1951, in an older "Nazis win" TL of mine I had him survive until 1959, when he'd be around 70... but that might be too long to be realistic. His health wasn't the best, he often complained himself how his parents had died early... truth may be somewhere in between. Even if he takes fewer drugs ITTL. And who'd win the power struggle is a very different question. Personally I imagine an "SS block" around Himmler and Heydrich vs. pretty much anyone else. But too much would depend on developments re: who amasses how much power in the time between. In one point I dare to contradict the great Haffner: He stated in "Germany: Jekyll and Hyde" that many nazis, esp. SS men, were essentially nihilists behind their facade. But in practice, most nazis started to get fat and complacent once they had acquired their fiefs. Hell, Göring tried to prevent WW2 via Birger Dahlerus, and Nazi general Reichenau thought the war was unwinnable after he saw his first T-34.
PS: I've decided that Budyonny ITTL dies on September 9th. The question is, who'll replace him? Zhukov is the best man, but for this reason, he may be needed in a different place - Moscow again, I think. Voroshilov covers the north, Timoshenko the center... I guess it's Kirponos. Unless he dies too - or loses his command, because Stalin's angry.
|
|
|
|
Post by Max Sinister on Jul 25, 2024 1:27:34 GMT
OK, here's my take on the "Ostfrieden" aka Second Peace of Brest-Litovsk:
- Stalin's generally more skeptical about the Empire willing to help. After Dunkirk, he asks them only in a sarcastic way whether they can spare 20+ divisions.
- ITTL's 1990s, two Management Gurus named W. Shearing und G. Bay will write something reminding of this: "When Iacocca changed the direction, he did it in the way of a slightly rusty weather vane when it goes loose: abruptly, and 180 degrees. [...] Strong enough not to flip-flop with every light breeze, but weak enough to change the direction before anyone else."
- And here's a quote by Adolf Nazi:
Originally there might just have been the rage speaking, but some nazis secretly wished for peace or even had sympathies for Russia (Goebbels, as crazy as that sounds - there's the old "National Communist" speaking) or hated the Brits even more than the SU (Ribbentrop!). They and all the women in the inner circle tried to convince the "führer" that his idea was truly that of a genius. Since he couldn't take back his words, he started to open the secret channels - initially with the expectation that peace talks wouldn't lead to anything anyway.
Initially, the Soviets thought it was just a ruse either. But times were desperate, and if nothing else, they could use it to stall for time. So Stalin gave his OK for negotiations.
In Germany, everyone tried their best to convince the "führer" that it's time to reap the fruits of Barbarossa. Finally, even the "führer" thought it'd be good if the German people still had to deal with a weakened SU, to keep them on their toes.
He had some conditions though: To make an armistice, the Soviets have to give up the pockets of Oranienbaum (important for the access to Leningrad) and Sevastopol, and retreat behind river Don, giving the Wehrmacht an easy to defend eastern front, plus Voronesh - and threatening Stalingrad and the Caucasus, just in case. Stalin agrees on the condition that the ice road to Leningrad will be opened again. (In the time between, the Germans've reached the Svir river.)
The most tricky bullet point is this one: The "Reich" wants bases in the Middle East, from which they'd be able to bomb Baku as well, as with Operation Pike. Obviously Stalin isn't willing to concede this.
But meanwhile November had arrived, and around Moscow the mud freezes. The Wehrmacht can advance a few kilometers, which matter: North of the capital they cross the frozen Volga reservoir, south of it they reach Kolomna at the Moskva's mouth into Oka river.
The final straw is when the Germans get a few new panzers to the southernmost front and manage to push the Soviets behind Donec river. Rostov and Voroshilovgrad/Lugansk are lost and not taken back. So Stalin finally agrees.
Whew! It hasn't been easy, but Barbarossa is over, and the "eastern peace" is there.
|
|
|
|
Post by Max Sinister on Jul 27, 2024 22:26:29 GMT
A few tidbits...
* I've decided that Orwell will write his most famous work a bit earlier, getting inspiration from the "Ostfrieden". Since he can't name it "1984" (from 1948) anymore, he'll call it "1988" instead, by doubling the "44" from 1944. This time he'll have it easier, publishing it, since Britain and the SU aren't allies anymore. In fact, they'll rather encourage him. (I had had the idea that Orwell'd die some months earlier, in late 1948, so his book would be published postum - but I can't use both of them.)
* I've got to think about Japan. It makes sense that they'll occupy southern Indochina around the same time as IOTL, after Barbarossa starts. Of course FDR will object, Konoe will negotiate, that'll fail, then Tojo'll come to power... but when exactly will they strike? Very probably after the "Ostfrieden". And what'll the "führer" decide then? I want to explore the Anglo-American Nazi War (not that other TL!), but what's his motivation in this very different world?
* Meanwhile I learned that Salazar moved 35,000 men to the Azores in case the Axis invaded his country. Hm. If the WAllies ever decided to take these islands, that'd get nasty.
|
|
|
|
Post by Max Sinister on Aug 1, 2024 0:15:44 GMT
A small retcon: Sudoplatov writes in his memories that thanks to Red Orchestra spy Arvid Harnack (who worked in the ministry of economics), the Soviets knew in October/November 1941 that the Nazis were running out of oil and ammo even. Under these circumstances, an "Ostfrieden" is unlikely. Seems I have to find a way to get rid of this information, and I know one: As said, after "Goldfuchs", the Finns will capture Kuusinen. He was acquainted with Harnack, so he or some underling of him might spill the beans. "Golden Fox" was in September, so they can capture Harnack just in time. That'll mean consequences for the "Red Orchestra" too, but that's not my list currently.
As said elsewhere, I'm thinking about making an unsuccessful invasion of the WAllies. There will have to be good reasons - both for making it, and why it'll fail. My rough sketch: * FDR and Churchill will still prefer a "Germany First" strategy. * Since they look bad after having supported "comrade" Stalin, they need some victory. ** FDR doubly so, because there are midterm elections in 1942. * That's why he urges the generals to make a rushed invasion, hoping it'll work. * But in the first half of 1942, Felix is successful. (See above.) Now the invasion will be restricted to western Morocco. * Eisenhower's wise/careful enough to see that this is too dangerous. Given the size of the US Army, it'd be better to wait and play safe. But FDR doesn't want to compromise, they clash, and Ike is almost tried for subordination. Only because Marshall speaks out for him, he's sent to a different theater instead. * FDR needs a new army commander to lead to invasion and finds someone with good grades and recommendations: Lloyd Fredendall. Yes, the one of the Kasserine pass infamy. * After Felix, the WAllies occupied Kap Verde and Madeira. (I thought about the Azores as well, but seeing as Salazar had sent 35,000 men there...) * Meanwhile the Wehrmacht is winning victories in the Near East, straining the nerves of the WAllies. * Since Enigma isn't broken, the 300 or so ships the Allies need to transport six divisions suffer significant losses. Not most of them, but enough so it hurts. * At first, the invasion looks good - the planes and ships of Vichy are defeated easily, and general Marie Émile Antoine Béthouart changes sides. * However, the soldiers suffer from the summer heat. Hence, many don't wear their helmets. (Patton pushed for it, but ITTL he's not here.) * Since Ike with his talent to smooth out things isn't around, there are clashes between G.I.s and Commonwealthers. (IOTL even the Brits wore US uniforms, because it was assumed that the US Americans were more popular there. Not entirely wrong: Many French officers and civil servants in the colonies were so backwards they still hated the Brits more than the Germans!) * Still, the Allies occupy the important Moroccan cities. Not however the Atlas mountains and their hinterland. Governor Noguès is caught by a British commando (the only one around). * Similar as IOTL, Fredendall wastes time building an elaborate bunker for himself. * After Barbarossa, the "führer" had already sent two infantry divisions to Tunisia, to support Rommel. Useless there because as smart people know, it's the logistics. But now they can march west - or rather, be transported by coast ships, since Gibraltar has fallen and the western Med is free of Allied ships. * Two mountain divisions are sent there as well, plus their commanders Dietl and "bloodhound" Schörner. * Before, there's the "race to Oran" - similar as with Norway IOTL, but in the air. The Germans win by minutes and take the airport. An air battle ensues, but they stay victorious. * Now the experienced Luftwaffe is able to fight the WAllied planes. And thanks to the "Ostfrieden", they get oil from the SU now. * Meanwhile, de Gaulle's Free French will win victories by attacking French West Africa - few people, few important resources, but looks very impressive on a map. (There are still many details to solve, but I think this is a good start. How many troops on each side, and when, and how quick can you get more troops there? This applies to both sides. And what'll Salazar do? Sure, the alliance with Britain is still the oldest in the world, but it might become very strained.)
Very rough sketch: The Germans will defeat one Task Force (army corps) after another - first the one under Swift, then the one under Fredendall and some unlucky Brit commander, finally that of Bradley. Only some French Foreign legionnaires will be able to make it through the desert.
Sounds horrible? But this is what you might get if you take OTL's worst corps commander of the US Army and put him in charge of a whole army when he's never seen the war yet.
That would be the seventh Six, with the invasion failing. Afterwards, the Republicans could gain a majority in the House of Representatives even. And the Allies wouldn't be able to make another invasion of the ENA (European-North African) theater for at least six to twelve months. |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,843
Likes: 13,229
|
Post by stevep on Aug 1, 2024 11:12:48 GMT
A small retcon: Sudoplatov writes in his memories that thanks to Red Orchestra spy Arvid Harnack (who worked in the ministry of economics), the Soviets knew in October/November 1941 that the Nazis were running out of oil and ammo even. Under these circumstances, an "Ostfrieden" is unlikely. Seems I have to find a way to get rid of this information, and I know one: As said, after "Goldfuchs", the Finns will capture Kuusinen. He was acquainted with Harnack, so he or some underling of him might spill the beans. "Golden Fox" was in September, so they can capture Harnack just in time. That'll mean consequences for the "Red Orchestra" too, but that's not my list currently.
As said elsewhere, I'm thinking about making an unsuccessful invasion of the WAllies. There will have to be good reasons - both for making it, and why it'll fail. My rough sketch: * FDR and Churchill will still prefer a "Germany First" strategy. * Since they look bad after having supported "comrade" Stalin, they need some victory. ** FDR doubly so, because there are midterm elections in 1942. * That's why he urges the generals to make a rushed invasion, hoping it'll work. * But in the first half of 1942, Felix is successful. (See above.) Now the invasion will be restricted to western Morocco. * Eisenhower's wise/careful enough to see that this is too dangerous. Given the size of the US Army, it'd be better to wait and play safe. But FDR doesn't want to compromise, they clash, and Ike is almost tried for subordination. Only because Marshall speaks out for him, he's sent to a different theater instead. * FDR needs a new army commander to lead to invasion and finds someone with good grades and recommendations: Lloyd Fredendall. Yes, the one of the Kasserine pass infamy. * After Felix, the WAllies occupied Kap Verde and Madeira. (I thought about the Azores as well, but seeing as Salazar had sent 35,000 men there...) * Meanwhile the Wehrmacht is winning victories in the Near East, straining the nerves of the WAllies. * Since Enigma isn't broken, the 300 or so ships the Allies need to transport six divisions suffer significant losses. Not most of them, but enough so it hurts. * At first, the invasion looks good - the planes and ships of Vichy are defeated easily, and general Marie Émile Antoine Béthouart changes sides. * However, the soldiers suffer from the summer heat. Hence, many don't wear their helmets. (Patton pushed for it, but ITTL he's not here.) * Since Ike with his talent to smooth out things isn't around, there are clashes between G.I.s and Commonwealthers. (IOTL even the Brits wore US uniforms, because it was assumed that the US Americans were more popular there. Not entirely wrong: Many French officers and civil servants in the colonies were so backwards they still hated the Brits more than the Germans!) * Still, the Allies occupy the important Moroccan cities. Not however the Atlas mountains and their hinterland. Governor Noguès is caught by a British commando (the only one around). * Similar as IOTL, Fredendall wastes time building an elaborate bunker for himself. * After Barbarossa, the "führer" had already sent two infantry divisions to Tunisia, to support Rommel. Useless there because as smart people know, it's the logistics. But now they can march west - or rather, be transported by coast ships, since Gibraltar has fallen and the western Med is free of Allied ships. * Two mountain divisions are sent there as well, plus their commanders Dietl and "bloodhound" Schörner. * Before, there's the "race to Oran" - similar as with Norway IOTL, but in the air. The Germans win by minutes and take the airport. An air battle ensues, but they stay victorious. * Now the experienced Luftwaffe is able to fight the WAllied planes. And thanks to the "Ostfrieden", they get oil from the SU now. * Meanwhile, de Gaulle's Free French will win victories by attacking French West Africa - few people, few important resources, but looks very impressive on a map. (There are still many details to solve, but I think this is a good start. How many troops on each side, and when, and how quick can you get more troops there? This applies to both sides. And what'll Salazar do? Sure, the alliance with Britain is still the oldest in the world, but it might become very strained.)
Very rough sketch: The Germans will defeat one Task Force (army corps) after another - first the one under Swift, then the one under Fredendall and some unlucky Brit commander, finally that of Bradley. Only some French Foreign legionnaires will be able to make it through the desert.
Sounds horrible? But this is what you might get if you take OTL's worst corps commander of the US Army and put him in charge of a whole army when he's never seen the war yet.
That would be the seventh Six, with the invasion failing. Afterwards, the Republicans could gain a majority in the House of Representatives even. And the Allies wouldn't be able to make another invasion of the ENA (European-North African) theater for at least six to twelve months.
Given what's gone on so far this could be quite possible, leading to a very grim position for the allies. Also without Ultra the situation in the Atlantic is going to be markedly worse, especially with shipping and escorts transferred to this more threatened invasion bid and attempts to support and supply it.
I'm not sure that the US would be interested in another attempt at FNA, at least in the short term. They were very much dash for the centre of German power by the shortest route but in this world that's going to be hugely more difficult since the Germans have more oil, at least for the moment and most of all don't have the resource black hole of the OTL eastern front. There are still going to be issues garrisoning their new conquests there and the inefficient nature of Nazi rule plus probably some illicit support of resistance movements there by Stalin but the drain, especially on men will be far, far less. Also with German forces in FNA and friendly French forces removed any new invasion would be much harder.
In the short term I suspect the main aims would be: a) Winning - or at least not losing - the Battle of the Atlantic. This will obviously be the primary British aim and also for any intelligent American that wants to see Nazi Germany defeated because without that no victory will be visible at all - other by US versions of wunderwaff advocates talking of trans-continental bombers. b) Their main aim could probably be a stronger strategic bombing campaign, although again that's going to be a strain on British resources. Both in terms of the Bomber Command component going up against a strong Luftwaffe defence and also resources being lost to support a massive USAAF contingent in Britain. c) As well as whatsoever happening in the Pacific and SE Asia there is the issue of the ME and what the Soviets are doing. The loss of Egypt as a base of operation to either Soviets or Germans would make the Med an Axis lake which would free up a lot of their assets, as well as another big prestige loss. Also losing Iraq and western Iran would remove the primary source of allied controlled oil outside the US which would mean forces operating in the Indian Ocean region and at least eastern Africa would need bloody long supply lines from the US. d) There is also the issue of India which would in this scenario potentially be threatened from both the east and the traditional invasion route via the NW frontier. Yes the terrain is bad and the Afghans aren't going to welcome Soviet 'liberation' whether or not the Red Army can force its way through all of Iran. However while he will be keeping a lot of reserves watching the new border with Hitler, especially given how much closer it is to the Russian heartlands Stalin has a hell of a lot of forces.
The US will want political concessions to the Indian nationalists, which would be logical but Churchill is likely to be bitterly contested. Plus how much would the Indian National Congress insist on. Dominion status is likely to be too little for the fanatics, I would include Gandhi here. At the same time trying to force through the establishment of an Indian state in the midst of a world war is a recipe for chaos, even without the problems of how the Muslims react and the princely states. India potentially can do a hell of a lot of heavy lifting to defend itself, even against the Red Army as it raised a large totally voluntary army OTL and could raise more here but it would need a hell of a lot of equipment much of which could only really come from the US and with the current shipping crisis that's going to be a big problem. - Coupled with the issue of getting food to India, especially with the Bengal famine at its height and probably worse here. Which could cause issues with Indian Nationalists claiming that food supplies are more important than weapons with some understandable causes.
I see only really two options for actions to get a landing in Europe and can't really see either going on before 1944. 1) This would be a landing in N France as OTL. Going to have to be a lot more powerful and supported to stand a change against the Germans and even with the US's economy fully militarised its going to be a very bloody grind and probably a long shot. Especially with very few allied forces have any real combat experience let alone of amphibious landings. 2) Just possibly there might be one weak spot with a large scale surprise landing in Portugal with the intent to gain control of much of the country including undamaged ports and some airfields before the Axis can react. However this is going to be very risky as its way beyond any land based air support other than by strategic bombers and would also have the political costs of attacking a neutral. If it works you can possibly push into western Spain and hopefully link up with republican remnants for local knowledge and support then fight a bloody battle of attrition against the bulk of the German army and its allies. Even if you win and overrun most/all of Spain your going to have an impoverished and war torn land as your base with a lot of local opposition and then face the issue of fighting across the Pyrenees into France. Although it might catch the Axis by surprise and could re-open access to the Med. Again however its going to be bloody difficult and costly in this scenario.
Both of those options assume that Japan stays very much on the back burner and that some resolution is obtained with Stalin.
Anyway initial thoughts. My old PC is struggling with the temperature so probably going to be off until hopefully the evening will have cooled off somewhat.
e) That of course excludes issues of what happens with Japan and US interests in defending links to Australia and desire to take the war to Japan.
|
|
|
|
Post by Max Sinister on Aug 6, 2024 14:35:48 GMT
stevep, one small retcon: I had mentioned Jesse Jackson from OTL running in an election, but there is a problem: He was conceived after the PoD, so he should be butterflied away. Maybe I'll replace him by Colin Powell. And I'll make him a former governor. Of a US state which doesn't exist IOTL. Now to your other comments: 1. The submarine warfare will be the next thing I'll have to research. Which'll include Prien's autobiography. Robert Harris was right to include this as a PoD. Even then I can't see the Brits accepting occupation, though. Leaving aside the fact that they won't buy that the "führer" will leave them alone. (Fun fact: Salazar had sent 35,000 men to the Azores because he also feared that the Axis might invade, so he could go there with his government, just in case. Hence, taking them with "War Plan Gray" won't be that easy. Using it as a base neither - IOTL, he waited until 1943 to allow it to them. In fact, he had allowed the KM to use the Azores earlier!) 2. The WAllies certainly will increase bombing the "Reich", but this time, they'll have to face a stronger Luftwaffe. That much is sure. Losses on both sides will be high. 3. Yes, if the Axis/SU will be in Iraq and/or Iran, they'd better send troops to Saudi-Arabia to make sure that they'll keep at least that theater. 4. India is tricky... I don't really want it to go to the SU, or Japan. Of course, it's one thing for the SU to expand into Turkey/Iran/Afghanistan and outright declaring war on the Empire. Stalin will prefer the other two blocks duking it out. Also, ITTL Gandhi was arrested after protests in 1940. 5. 1944 would be a good estimation. Which also means: The Nazis should rather knock out Britain before that, or this will become a long war. Hard to tell whether the population of either country in it could bear that. (Theoretically, the people in the WAllied nations will have the better life - but the long list of defeats will be hard on morale.) 6. If they tried to land in Portugal, there's the danger of the "Reich" immediately sending several divisions to strike back. Against Franco's will, if necessary.
Now about Japan. I've read up a bit from this site. But I haven't decided about details. I wanted them to start the war between December 6th and 16th. But using the exact same day (it was Monday in the US) feels odd. I'm wondering: Would they rather start the war earlier, since the bigger German successes will encourage them to be greedy? The "Ostfrieden" will most probably happen before their strike date, so they'll have to fear the SU now. And even if not, they'll be very puzzled. Also, there are possible butterflies. One of them (no Automedon) might be cancelled by the German success at Dunkirk. Also, ITTL the telegram might reach Hawaii soon enough - after all, the Allies had cracked Purple long before. Hell, in April 1941 Ribbentrop got a message from DC telling him that Purple was cracked, and he passed it on - but the Japanese didn't believe it. Big mistake!
|
|
