Italy Stays Neutral or Pulls Out Early During WW2

[mspence]

Based on this and this, let's say that Mussolini has a moment of clarity in either situation and either keeps the country out of the war or quits earlier. Would Hitler care? Would he actually respect their decision and treat them like Spain or Sweden? Also what happens to Italy's colonies in Africa if they stay out of the war (this is assuming Mussolini is still overthrown and disposed of after the war.) Note: If this belongs in the miscellaneous after 1900 thread I guess it should be moved there?

[stevep]

Apr 17, 2023 8:16:04 GMT mspence said:

Based on this and this, let's say that Mussolini has a moment of clarity in either situation and either keeps the country out of the war or quits earlier. Would Hitler care? Would he actually respect their decision and treat them like Spain or Sweden? Also what happens to Italy's colonies in Africa if they stay out of the war (this is assuming Mussolini is still overthrown and disposed of after the war.) Note: If this belongs in the miscellaneous after 1900 thread I guess it should be moved there?

  Well I can't see him easily leaving early once he's in as at least the allies or the Germany would be less than happy.  However if in a moment of sanity he could decide to wait and see.  That makes for a massively different war, especially if Italy stays out permanently.

  Germany gains in the short and medium term in that they aren't diverting resources to mop up Italian failures in Greece and then N Africa - which means marginally more forces for Operation Barbarossa and later not needing to worry about the 2nd front in Italy.  Also given Italian neutrality this also means less threat of bombing attacks from across the Med.

  On the down side for Germany they lack Italian resources in the Balkans and USSR but probably even more the lack of a major theatre in the Med means a huge burden off Britain in the period 1940-42 especially.  Without the continued heavy losses, land, sea and in the air in the Med and the forces that had to be committed to maintain the allied position there then Britain has a lot more for other theatres.  This might not mean a great amount for Germany, other than more resources being available for defeating the U boats but could also be greatly significant in protecting vital territory against the initial Japanese surge when/if they attack in the east.

[lordroel]

Apr 17, 2023 8:16:04 GMT mspence said:

Based on this and this, let's say that Mussolini has a moment of clarity in either situation and either keeps the country out of the war or quits earlier. Would Hitler care? Would he actually respect their decision and treat them like Spain or Sweden? Also what happens to Italy's colonies in Africa if they stay out of the war (this is assuming Mussolini is still overthrown and disposed of after the war.) Note: If this belongs in the miscellaneous after 1900 thread I guess it should be moved there?

Hitler is going to eat him alive.

[stevep]

Apr 17, 2023 15:17:15 GMT lordroel said:

Apr 17, 2023 8:16:04 GMT mspence said:

Based on this and this, let's say that Mussolini has a moment of clarity in either situation and either keeps the country out of the war or quits earlier. Would Hitler care? Would he actually respect their decision and treat them like Spain or Sweden? Also what happens to Italy's colonies in Africa if they stay out of the war (this is assuming Mussolini is still overthrown and disposed of after the war.) Note: If this belongs in the miscellaneous after 1900 thread I guess it should be moved there?

Hitler is going to eat him alive.

  If Mussolini, having joined the war decided to try and quit yes.  If Italy never joins the conflict then Hitler will probably moan and complain a lot but I doubt he would do anything militarily.  After the fall of France and then probably a failed Battle of Britain he will turn toward the invasion of the USSR and once that's started he won't really have the resources to attack Italy, especially given the defences that Italy had established and the fact that such an attack would bring allied support to Italy.

[Max Sinister]

Surviving fascist regime?

The next question would be what Churchill'd do with the troops he doesn't need against Italy. Still try to meddle in the Balcans, via Greece?

Also, with no Tarent, Pearl Harbor might be butterflied away.

[lordroel]

Apr 20, 2023 2:41:47 GMT Max Sinister said:

Surviving fascist regime?

The next question would be what Churchill'd do with the troops he doesn't need against Italy. Still try to meddle in the Balcans, via Greece?

Also, with no Tarent, Pearl Harbor might be butterflied away.

Ore Japan might do a decisive battle in the Pacific aka the Kantai Kessen for Japan and War Plan Orange for the United states.

[Max Sinister]

Apr 20, 2023 2:44:30 GMT lordroel said:

Apr 20, 2023 2:41:47 GMT Max Sinister said:

Surviving fascist regime?

The next question would be what Churchill'd do with the troops he doesn't need against Italy. Still try to meddle in the Balcans, via Greece?

Also, with no Tarent, Pearl Harbor might be butterflied away.

Ore Japan might do a decisive battle in the Pacific aka the Kantai Kessen for Japan and War Plan Orange for the United states.

Defeating the US in a single decisive sea battle? I know it worked at Tsushima, but the US in 1940 weren't much like Tsarist Russia in 1905.

[miletus12]

Apr 20, 2023 3:19:58 GMT Max Sinister said:

Ore Japan might do a decisive battle in the Pacific aka the Kantai Kessen for Japan and War Plan Orange for the United states.

I think that a Kantai Kassen in 1933-1937 to a draw was plausible. After 1938, the chances drop. Read this thread for why I think that fits

[stevep]

Apr 20, 2023 2:41:47 GMT Max Sinister said:

Surviving fascist regime?

The next question would be what Churchill'd do with the troops he doesn't need against Italy. Still try to meddle in the Balcans, via Greece?

Also, with no Tarent, Pearl Harbor might be butterflied away.

   Not meddle in the Balkans unless Italy still attacks Greece - which he might thinking Britain will be too busy with the war against Germany to intervene.  In which case Britain might still seek to oppose them.

  Its very possible that there wouldn't be a Taranto type attack although I have seen arguments that Japan wasn't that inspired by that operation.  However that could well play into Japanese hands as it would avoid probably their worst strategic error in the entire war in the Pacific.  Combined with a probably distinctly more powerful Britain this could change a lot on both when/how a Pacific war starts and then how it develops.

[stevep]

Apr 20, 2023 3:19:58 GMT Max Sinister said:

Apr 20, 2023 2:44:30 GMT lordroel said:

Ore Japan might do a decisive battle in the Pacific aka the Kantai Kessen for Japan and War Plan Orange for the United states.

Defeating the US in a single decisive sea battle? I know it worked at Tsushima, but the US in 1940 weren't much like Tsarist Russia in 1905.

  Well the Japanese won several other battles against the Russians as well.  Its very unlikely that a Japanese victory similar to Tsushima would cause the US to give up although there's a possibility that such a battle could occur if the US, still having a Pacific fleet get too rash in early 42.

[miletus12]

Apr 20, 2023 17:29:45 GMT stevep said:

the US, still having a Pacific fleet get too rash in early 42.

That statemenht is quite infomative in many ways about Euro-views about the Pacific War. RASH is the precisely accurate description of the Pacific Fleet throughout 1942. If they had not been reckless and instead played it conservatively, the Japanese would have consolidated and made a takeback much much harder.

Conservative operations (*Mediterranean) tended to lead to stalemate. An early PEDESTAL might have had the same effect as a CORAL SEA.

[stevep]

Apr 20, 2023 17:56:38 GMT miletus12 said:

Apr 20, 2023 17:29:45 GMT stevep said:

the US, still having a Pacific fleet get too rash in early 42.

That statemenht is quite infomative in many ways about Euro-views about the Pacific War. RASH is the precisely accurate description of the Pacific Fleet throughout 1942. If they had not been reckless and instead played it conservatively, the Japanese would have consolidated and made a takeback much much harder.

Conservative operations (*Mediterranean) tended to lead to stalemate. An early PEDESTAL might have had the same effect as a CORAL SEA.

  We have different definitions of rash.  I was referring to the USN trying to force an early full scale clash with the IJN rather than niggling at the edges of Japanese power as OTL.  Which was pretty much all they could do with the forces available.

  Your suggesting a severe ignorance of events in the war in the Med. both in suggesting that the British approach was conservative - Taranto, Compass, aid to Greece - which was a serious strategic error as it destroyed any chance of clearing out Libya and repeated bids to supply Malta, despite the heavy costs to the RN that resulted.  Also it should be remembered that the main conservative factor on the allied side in the Med was the US - with its opposition to landings in Tunisia which ensured the fighting there lasted 5-6 months [albeit by chance that resulted in a markedly higher Axis casualty total and helped the Soviets] and then being reluctant to take operations in Italy or the Balkans seriously.

  Operation Pedestal was also a basically defensive battle that succeeded but with heavy costs.  It was to maintain a resource.  Doing it earlier would have been impossible with the resources available and furthermore no variant of the battle could have done strategic damage to the Axis cause as the Coral Sea did for Japan.

[raharris1973]

Apr 17, 2023 8:16:04 GMT mspence said:

Based on this and this, let's say that Mussolini has a moment of clarity in either situation and either keeps the country out of the war?

At the time he joined the war, given his overall revisionist and expansionist agenda, it would have taken more than a moment of mere ‘clarity’ or ‘sanity’ to sit out the war, it would have required a moment of ‘clairvoyance’.

It is not like anybody on either side had the path to British victory and German defeat all figured out in June 1940.

[raharris1973]

Apr 20, 2023 6:20:34 GMT miletus12 said:

Apr 20, 2023 3:19:58 GMT Max Sinister said:

Ore Japan might do a decisive battle in the Pacific aka the Kantai Kessen for Japan and War Plan Orange for the United states.

I think that a Kantai Kassen in 1933-1937 to a draw was plausible. After 1938, the chances drop. Read this thread for why I think that fits

You're going having to spell it out and bring out the specific lines from your two posts on that page where you somehow specify that the Japanese can force a decisive battle on their terms up through 1937, but then lose that ability from 1938. I'm not catching it on that page. Plenty of other good information and argumentation though.

[miletus12]

Apr 21, 2023 13:03:16 GMT stevep said:

I was referring to the USN trying to force an early full scale clash with the IJN rather than niggling at the edges of Japanese power as OTL.

That was Coral Sea, which would be roughly equal to Dogger Bank with aircraft carriers. You can cast Takagi in the role of Beatty. 

Midway was the USN's Jutland with the Japanese cast in the role of the Grand Fleet. Once again think of the aircraft carriers as in the role of battle cruisers as they probed and fought the meeting engagement. After the USN pilot cadre was slaughtered on Day 1 and the Midway airgroup was almost annihilated, consider Yamamoto's actions? On Day 2 he ordered a cruiser group to poke at Midway to see what was left. If Spruance had not hammered Kuritia and Kurita had not bungled his probe mission, it was likely Yamamoto would have kept coming. Instead, Kurita fumbled his tasking with march and countermarch, his ships' crews panicked when someone saw a tired US submarine just trying to get home and Mikuma and Mogami collided. He turned tail and ran. He reported that he turned tail and ran. Spruance RDFed that and sent planes to bomb those two Japanese retreating cruisers and put Mikuma under and sent Mogami home with a 2 year repair bill, all of which Kurita reported.

And then Yamamoto RAN.

Now the curious thing is that junior admirals like Kondo wanted to stay and fight it out. They wanted to wait for Hosagaya, who while as big a bungler as Nagumo, still had managed to carry out his independent operation against the Aleutians and not gotten himself shot up or sunk. He still had a couple of light aircraft carriers that could have given TF 16 a really bad time, on 11-13 June 1942 if he had hustled south, but he had a bad case of Halsey and dithered until Yamamoto made his retreat decision.

But Yamamoto, who was not politically handcuffed like Campioni had been at Spartivento, pulled an Iachinio (Battle of Cape Matapan), overestimating American strength, turned tail against best advice and he yellow dogged out.

That is a major reason I consider Yamamoto one of the worst admirals of WWII, ranking right down there with Pound, Phillips, Noyes, Turner, Goto, Raeder, Doenitz, Andrews, Somerville, Mitscher, Turner, Nagumo, Inoue, Takagi, Kondo, Iachino, and Lutjens.

Miletus