Search this Topic:
Feb 24 17 1:27 AM
Dave AAA wrote:stevep59 wrote: Far more damage to Britain's resources than Germany's until the final stages. If that's the case, then a reduced bomber offensive won't harm the British war effort or disproportionately help the German one. The RAF then has resources to divert to the Far East and Germany would gain little or nothing. Holding Cyrenia and denying it to the Axis meant a big difference on air support for convoys from Egypt. What convoys? Except for one or two large convoys carrying kit for large offensives, offensives that could be likely be cancelled in this scenario, the Middle East was supplied through the Red Sea.f) Unfortunately Britain had put a lot of propaganda into making the Soviets looking like respectable allies. Don't forget there were idiots calling for a 2nd front in France in 1942! It would need a total reversal of this position, which I think would be a good thing but it would need quite a change in direction by the British government,What position? That the Second Front Soviet fellow travellers and useful idiots wanted in 1942 was impossible? The British government and military knew that. The best they could do was a division sized raid on Dieppe, which was enough of a disaster that it helped delay the real life invasoin until 1944initially they will lack the forces and facilities to do much offensively.In fact, the facilities were there. They and the USN used them in 1942 in real life. Forces not much smaller than real life could be found initially at the expense of operations in the Med, but would increase quicker than the Japanese could do the same.
stevep59 wrote: Far more damage to Britain's resources than Germany's until the final stages.
Holding Cyrenia and denying it to the Axis meant a big difference on air support for convoys from Egypt.
f) Unfortunately Britain had put a lot of propaganda into making the Soviets looking like respectable allies. Don't forget there were idiots calling for a 2nd front in France in 1942! It would need a total reversal of this position, which I think would be a good thing but it would need quite a change in direction by the British government,
initially they will lack the forces and facilities to do much offensively.
Feb 24 17 1:40 AM
Feb 24 17 2:03 AM
Feb 24 17 2:08 AM
Feb 24 17 2:10 AM
Feb 24 17 2:12 AM
Condottiere wrote:If the British knew the entire Japanese armada was heading for Singapore, they'd probably abandon it and withdraw to Burma and India, without trying to engage the Japanese amphibious forces, concentrating their naval assets.
That means destroying the Singapore port facilities, to ensure it couldm't be used as a forward base to project into the Indian Ocean.
The Dutch would be urged to completely blow up their oil industries, removing the actual prize the Japanese had hoped to gain.
Feb 24 17 2:23 AM
Feb 24 17 5:05 AM
Feb 24 17 5:19 AM
Feb 24 17 7:17 AM
Feb 24 17 9:55 AM
Feb 24 17 12:09 PM
Feb 24 17 1:40 PM
Feb 24 17 2:17 PM
dorknought wrote:This assumes no attack on the US but Japan would undoubtedly declare war on the US just as she did on the Netherlands. The PH attack was supposed to be preceeded by the niceties of diplomatic exchange but timing was stuffed up but the US always expected an attack on its forces specifically in China. Pretending US neutrality is naive given how hard the US has shoved Japan to this point. They KNEW the oil embargo would trigger war. The policy for Japan was always one enemy at a time, China, Russia, then Germany... By Dec41 it was all non asian powers, what was just one more?
Feb 24 17 2:30 PM
Feb 24 17 3:23 PM
Feb 24 17 3:49 PM
Feb 24 17 5:29 PM
Bledlow wrote:Germany devoted more of its industrial output to fighting the UK & USA than the USSR. The Eastern Front got the majority of Axis manpower, AFVs & artillery - but apart from the second half of 1941 & maybe early 1942, the majority of the Luftwaffe was in the west & defending the Reich, & in the last 3 years of the war 75% of its aircraft & aircrew losses were against the RAF & USAAF. For the navy, it was even worse. The Type VII u-boats alone took more industrial effort than the entire fleets of Pz IV & Panther tanks, i.e. the two most important German types.
Including all its AA artillery, the Luftwaffe consumed more of Germany's industrial production than the army.
So, let us consider what happens if the USA doesn't join in. I think it's safe to assume the USN will fight U-boats in the Atlantic (it had already started), but at a lower level than IRL. Either Germany has more to fight the USSR with (possibly enough to win) or it puts the same resources into the Atlantic & the UK has less to send east, because there's less US effort. The Battle of the Atlantic was where the UK could lose the war. Even India wasn't worth that.
We have to think about whether, & if so how much, the USA helps the UK, USSR & China while nominally remaining neutral. A 'neutral' USA could ship as much as the Transsib could carry to Vladivostok, on top of the traffic going via Soviet ships. It could 'sell' & ship whatever Roosevelt could get past the US congress to Australia, New Zealand, the UK & India, with the implicit threat of fighting the IJN if it interferes. But would it do that?
Feb 24 17 5:34 PM
Feb 24 17 6:20 PM
Cody2 wrote: Treating POWs poorly would also likely be out. The Japanese and Germans would likely have to submit to regular US sponcered Red Cross visits to any POW camps.
At the same time the UK may well be forced to sell additional territory
to the US in return for cash to buy if "lend-lease" doesn't result in sufficient weapons.
© 2017 Yuku. All rights reserved.