View Full Version : Hitler invades Switzerland
Melvin Loh
January 27th, 2004, 05:52 AM
Just saw a documentary on HIST CHANNEL last night in the Secret Passages series, which was all about secret tunnels of WWII, including with the very elaborate underground passages set up by the Swiss to resist a possible Nazi invasion. Now, what would've been the outcome of Hitler deciding to invade Switzerland at some point after July-Sept 1940 ? Given the immense strengths of the Swiss fixed defences in the Alps, the large nos. of Swiss soldiers and reservists who would've waged a partisan war against the invaders for every inch of Swiss territory, the respectable Swiss arms industry and the very rugged terrain of the country itself which would've seriously hindered the execution of blitzkrieg tactics, would the Germans have been given a very bloody nose if Hitler had decided to invade Switzerland ?
Mr.Bluenote
January 27th, 2004, 06:06 AM
Uh, that would have been a nasty and costly little war for the Wehrmacht! I don't doubt for a second that the Germans would have conquered Switzerland. But they would have had to pay a steep price in blood! As you yourself said, the Swiss were ready to resist, armed and dug-in!
I however find it highly unlikely that the Germans ever seriously contemplated invading Switzerland. Where else would they store their ill-begotten loot? :)
Best of regards!
- Bluenote.
panzerjay
January 27th, 2004, 06:27 AM
An nazi invasion wold resemble the tiresome anti partisan campaign in Yugoslavia. So much so, the allies wouldn’t even have to liberate it.
One thing about operation Christmas is why….
Were the Nazis that paranoid about the Swiss turning on them?
Or did the Nazis wanted to get to those bank accounts?
Brilliantlight
January 27th, 2004, 07:24 AM
Eventually the Swiss would lose but Germany would be in no shape at all for Barbarosa. I think it would be even worse for them if it happened before the invasion of France. After the fight against the Swiss the Germans not only would have a hard time conquering France but may have a hard time stopping an invasion by France.
MerryPrankster
January 27th, 2004, 12:29 PM
According to "Target Switzerland," Hitler contemplated dividing Switzerland along linguistic lines between Vichy France, Italy, and Greater Germany. Therefore, an anti-Swiss campaign would probably come before Barbarossa and after the conquest of continental Western Europe.
Max Sinister
January 27th, 2004, 02:15 PM
I think that Hitler simply didn't anyone independent next to him. He wanted to reign all over Europe. No exception. And he needed "Aryans" to settle the Lebensraum. Switzerland conquered -> three million more Aryans...
Norman
January 27th, 2004, 04:34 PM
One thing to consider is that if he had invaded and the invasion had ground down the German Army, Switzerland might have gotten a piece of Germany, Austria or Italy (maybe the Tyrolean areas).
How would a bigger Switzerland fit into post war Europe??
Valamyr
January 27th, 2004, 05:24 PM
Uhm, more seriously, though the valor of the swiss army is not put in doubt, what makes it so certain that a tiny country of valorous conscripts would stand any chance not to be overrun in a matter of days?
What I read on the swiss defenses was that it was axed on a dissuasion system. They wanted the germans to believe the conquest would be costly... but there is little fact to back up the claim that it could be the case.
I think if Germany had seen through the scheme, had any reason to invade, and did so, Switzerland would pose little threat. Its westernized population would probably resist after the fact in an orderly french fashion, easy to keep in check, rather than in a bloody eastern way.
The ordeal might not be worth it for Germany, but I highly doubt it would change anything.
basileus
January 27th, 2004, 05:51 PM
Anyway, it would be another tough nut to crack. Better a staging the political disgregation of the country through sympathizing Nazi and Fascist movements (Czech model).
Grimm Reaper
January 28th, 2004, 04:16 PM
The idea of Fortress Switzerland also involved pulling most of the army into an inner core and abandoning most of the civilian population. Alas, it failed to include food supplies in adequate quantities. In all likelihood it means little to the war effort, except that the lack of certain goods from Switzerland may impair German jets, atomic progam, etc. as the allies now bomb the facilities there. And if the allies then menace Sweden, the last source for ball bearings and such...
Brilliantlight
January 28th, 2004, 09:28 PM
Uhm, more seriously, though the valor of the swiss army is not put in doubt, what makes it so certain that a tiny country of valorous conscripts would stand any chance not to be overrun in a matter of days?
What I read on the swiss defenses was that it was axed on a dissuasion system. They wanted the germans to believe the conquest would be costly... but there is little fact to back up the claim that it could be the case.
I think if Germany had seen through the scheme, had any reason to invade, and did so, Switzerland would pose little threat. Its westernized population would probably resist after the fact in an orderly french fashion, easy to keep in check, rather than in a bloody eastern way.
The ordeal might not be worth it for Germany, but I highly doubt it would change anything.
Switzerland has two big advantges, one almost all men are part of the Swiss militia and have guns and military training and two the country is as moutainous as Afghanistan.
gianluca790
March 4th, 2007, 07:13 PM
The Swiss = Afghans:rolleyes:
Germans = Soviets:D
Rememeber what happened to the Soviets in 1989? The same would happen to the Nazis.
Max Sinister
March 4th, 2007, 07:19 PM
The Afghans had one advantage: The US could smuggle weapons via Pakistan, and they could flee there, or into Iran too. Switzerland was surrounded by Germany, Italy and occupied France.
MerryPrankster
March 4th, 2007, 07:23 PM
The Afghans had one advantage: The US could smuggle weapons via Pakistan, and they could flee there, or into Iran too. Switzerland was surrounded by Germany, Italy and occupied France.
But the Soviets had the advantage of a puppet government capable of exercising authority (to varying degrees) throughout the country. Not to mention they had troops and advisors in-country to facilitate their takeover.
The Germans would be facing a government that is not only hostile, but made extensive preparations to fight them. And no forces already inside the country to make things easier.
Steffen
March 4th, 2007, 07:28 PM
Apart from the fact an invasion of Switzerland is a stupid thing in itself, as violation of Swiss independence reduces the strategic importantance of Switzerland basically to nothing.
As usual, it´s a question of the framework: If Hitler invades in, say, 43 or 44 I see the Swiss fighting as vigoriously as it´s always promoted.
If Hitler invades after the Fall of France, I doubt there will be a fight after all, because as the Reich is seen on the victorious side of history with absolutely no-one coming to the rescue- there IS no-one, many -if not most-people would think there´s much more to gain by a face-saving capitulation.
Max Sinister
March 4th, 2007, 07:36 PM
The Swiss liked their freedom and democracy. When did the Swiss government start to prepare for a possible German invasion again?
maverick
March 4th, 2007, 07:40 PM
I don't see why would Hitler invade his personal bank, which also provided weapons to Germany.
Anaxagoras
March 4th, 2007, 08:01 PM
The Swiss population was told that, in the event of a German invasion, any announcement of a Swiss surrender was to be considered enemy propaganda and ignored. That gives you an idea of how determined they were to resist to the end.
ninebucks
March 4th, 2007, 08:16 PM
The Swiss liked their freedom and democracy. When did the Swiss government start to prepare for a possible German invasion again?
Erm, 1291 :D
Prinz Richard Eugen
March 4th, 2007, 08:44 PM
I see the Germans defeating the Swiss in 1940 after France is defeated. The cost would be moderate - less than France and more than Poland. Italy could have added a number of Alpini divisions to make up for the poor showing in France. The manufacturing trade with Germany should not be badly affected as trade was limited between the 2 countries during the war. Running the factories should provide at least as much as trade did. I think an advantage to the Germans would be all the tunnels they would capture. With the bombing raids beginning in 1942-1943, underground factories became important and the Swiss had quite a number that could be converted to manufacturing and the additional armaments would aid the German war effort.
Anaxagoras
March 4th, 2007, 09:16 PM
Running the factories should provide at least as much as trade did.
I doubt the Swiss would have left any factories intact for the Germans.
Nick Sumner
March 5th, 2007, 12:41 AM
http://www.schweiz1940.ch/tannen40-en/
Wendell
March 5th, 2007, 12:48 AM
I don't see why would Hitler invade his personal bank, which also provided weapons to Germany.
While true, I could see a war between the Axis and the Swiss if all other enemies in Europe have been vanquished.
That said, an appeasing Switzerland would be in the interest of Germany even more.
ranoncles
March 5th, 2007, 09:57 AM
The Germans and Italians actually had made up plans in early 1940 for a combined invasion of Switzerland. Luftwaffe planes flew reconnaissance missions over Switzerland and about a dozen of them were shot down by the Swiss Air Force.
What gave the Axis dictators pause was the very poor showing of Italian troops against the French Alpine fortresses after Mussolini declared war on France and attacked in the south. At that point (early-mid 1940), Italian troops hadn’t yet acquired their reputation as complete and utter rubbish (barring individual divisions), so this came as a shock. Eventually, the plan was dropped.
Had the actual invasion commenced, my money would have been on the Germans. The Swiss had a large and decently trained mountain army but lacked modern weapons, tactics and sufficient supplies for a prolonged struggle. The Germans showed in the Balkans and especially against Greece what they could do against mountain troops in mountainous terrain. Nothing suggests that the Swiss would have done better than the Greeks against a rampaging Wehrmacht.
As to suggestions that a mass guerrilla war would have ensued, I consider that unlikely.
A modern, westernized population does not easily switch to guerrilla war, especially if treated reasonably well. Once the Swiss army had been defeated (and presumably a legitimate government of sorts had surrendered), the population would have no incentive or motivation to risk their lives. And in 1940, there would have been no allies, no genuine reason to believe resistance would bring anything more than increased and prolonged suffering.
Max Sinister
March 5th, 2007, 10:04 AM
Does anyone know how many tanks, artillery and so on the Swiss had in 1940?
I think it would go like that:
The Germans would invade and bring the cities, plains and streets under their control, but the Swiss in the mountains would start a guerilla war that'd take a heavy toll on the Germans. Tito did the same in Yugoslavia, and Switzerland is even more mountainous.
MerryPrankster
March 5th, 2007, 12:55 PM
There's one small problem--the legit government said in advance that any surrender message was false.
That would mean that the central government, even if it decided to surrender, would not be able to do so effectively, if you get my drift.
Max Sinister
March 5th, 2007, 01:16 PM
I know, I know (didn't I mention this bit of information in some earlier Operation Tannenbaum thread first?). But still - the rebels need to eat something, and although high mountains make good defences, you can't grow food there. That's a problem. The civilians in the occupied parts would support them, but the nazis would keep an eye on them.
MerryPrankster
March 5th, 2007, 01:22 PM
Does anyone know how many tanks, artillery and so on the Swiss had in 1940?
I think it would go like that:
The Germans would invade and bring the cities, plains and streets under their control, but the Swiss in the mountains would start a guerilla war that'd take a heavy toll on the Germans. Tito did the same in Yugoslavia, and Switzerland is even more mountainous.
I know they had the same aircraft the Germans did--I think they bought them from them.
Of course, if it comes to a war of attrition, the Germans will win.
I believe the Swiss had a plan to dynamite mountain passes in the event of wartime. Unless the Germans can paratroop in and prevent this (which is possible, although the Swiss would have seen it done in France and would know what to expect), the Germans' mobility might suffer severely.
MerryPrankster
March 5th, 2007, 01:23 PM
I know, I know (didn't I mention this bit of information in some earlier Operation Tannenbaum thread first?). But still - the rebels need to eat something, and although high mountains make good defences, you can't grow food there. That's a problem. The civilians in the occupied parts would support them, but the nazis would keep an eye on them.
Oops. Sorry.
Did the Swiss have food and ammo stashes in the mountains? It would be a very bad idea to build these elaborate mountain redoubts and then not stock them properly.
Steffen
March 5th, 2007, 01:40 PM
That´s a bit of a problem with the "unaccessible mountain redoubts". It´s also hard to get out of them, lowering their military worth as bases for guerilla.
Come to think of it, a fortress which can be defended by 2 people can also be laid siege to by 3.
The swiss resistance would soon start to lack significant supplies, and the isolated nature makes it hard to exchange information, personal or supplies.
Homer
March 5th, 2007, 02:43 PM
You forget that most Swiss are German, thus the Nazis wouldn't behave like in the Eastern, Slavic parts.
Pretty soon most cities and plains would be in German hands, and the mountain fortresses are besieged. Then the Germans have the choice: attacking until the end, or just let them sit up there in inaccessible, uninteresting areas while using the industries of the lowlands. I doubt that there would be a much larger resistance than in other Western European countries, I'd rather say it would be smaller with most resistance fighters retreated to the mountains.
Thus with time passing by, what's the point of sitting up there in small, dark bunkers and waiting for the Germans to retreat voluntarily while the families of the fighters up there might be in the hands of SS?
Don_Giorgio
March 5th, 2007, 03:00 PM
Well no bank safet for the Nazis...
After all Hitler wouldnt risk a war with a well trained army... he would beat them of course but it would be a waist of time... he had more important things to do...
nunya
March 8th, 2007, 02:18 AM
Just saw a documentary on HIST CHANNEL last night in the Secret Passages series, which was all about secret tunnels of WWII, including with the very elaborate underground passages set up by the Swiss to resist a possible Nazi invasion. Now, what would've been the outcome of Hitler deciding to invade Switzerland at some point after July-Sept 1940 ? Given the immense strengths of the Swiss fixed defences in the Alps, the large nos. of Swiss soldiers and reservists who would've waged a partisan war against the invaders for every inch of Swiss territory, the respectable Swiss arms industry and the very rugged terrain of the country itself which would've seriously hindered the execution of blitzkrieg tactics, would the Germans have been given a very bloody nose if Hitler had decided to invade Switzerland ?
Hmm.I envision this being a mistake for Hitler,it is technically a strategic victory for Germany over Switzerland,in the larger scheme of things this hurts Hitler a lot.I think what will happen is kind of an parellel to the Russian-Finland war,while Russia officially won,with a small amount of territory going to Russia,it was a Finn victory in the larger strategy,as it did a lot of damage to the Soviet forces and brought to light just how weak the Soviet military had become post-purge,giving Germany the confidence to go on the attack against them.Switzerland will hold in the face of a tough guerilla war,with perhaps just a slight concession.Germany will have taken unneccesarily large casualties and would have had to pull a number of troops off somewhere else in order to do this,so they hurt themselves in the long run.
Bavarian Raven
April 28th, 2007, 03:28 AM
this is an old posting but u guys are missing something...nearly forty-forty five percent of the population were in favor of the Nazis and probably would have supported them...giving Hitler an advantage,,,:eek: ,,,
MerryPrankster
April 28th, 2007, 04:09 AM
this is an old posting but u guys are missing something...nearly forty-forty five percent of the population were in favor of the Nazis and probably would have supported them...giving Hitler an advantage,,,:eek: ,,,
Never heard of that figure--I recall in "Target Switzerland" that there was only a small Nazi presence in Switzerland and they all got jailed.
Of course, I read it some years ago, so my memory might be a little fuzzy.
Shimbo
April 28th, 2007, 08:40 AM
Rather than an invasion and occupation, wouldn't it be more effective to seal Switzerland's borders and then bomb the cities untill their government capitulates?
Alcuin
April 28th, 2007, 09:09 AM
Okay, Tyrolia's over the border in Austria but the events of 1809 might prove instructive. Napoleon Bonaparte decided to give Tyrolia to his ally, Bavaria. A Tyrolian Innkeeper named Andreas Hofer decided this was not to be, and for months, the Tyrolians, armed only with a few obsolete hunting rifles and pitchforks, drove off the Bavarian forces.
The Swiss, especially the German speaking ones, would remember how Hofer turned Tyrolia into a land in which every hut and every tree was a fortress, and how, after Hofer's martyrdom, more rose to take his place.
The Swiss would fight as fiercely as the workers and students who took guns from dead members of the Red Army to defend the tractor factories at Stalingrad.
Added to this, the terrain in Switzerland would have made an invasion using tanks very difficult if not impossible. This would have to be an invasion using unprotected infantry into an area where every tree might have held a sniper.
Grey Wolf
April 28th, 2007, 09:28 AM
Funny, I was thinking about this this morning after reading in Schellenberg's Memoirs the somewhat self-aggrandizing claim that he alone dissuaded Hitler from a preventive occupation of Switzerland. Since it was covered in only a paragraph or so, it seemed to me as if Hitler probably mentioned it in a throw-away comment or in the middle of a rant, and Schellenberg pointed out the potential difficulties and the losses (in benefits from Switzerland remaining neutral) that would accrue
Best Regards
Grey Wolf
Bavarian Raven
April 28th, 2007, 02:12 PM
...it was on a history channel program a while ago about the prewar germany...in 1939-before the war started, the nazis held a vote in switzerland to see if the country would like to join the greater german empire...:( ...and they almost had a majority....of course that might have changed once the actual war began...but nevertheless...if switzerland hadjoined with nazi germany...they would have had hundreds of thousands of more men they could have used as soldiers on the eastern and later on, the western front, and that could have changed the outcome of the war...:eek:
Max Sinister
April 30th, 2007, 09:08 AM
Never heard of that.
Dutchie
April 30th, 2007, 03:34 PM
But the Soviets had the advantage of a puppet government capable of exercising authority (to varying degrees) throughout the country. Not to mention they had troops and advisors in-country to facilitate their takeover.
The Germans would be facing a government that is not only hostile, but made extensive preparations to fight them. And no forces already inside the country to make things easier.
The Soviets were facing a religious-based resistance movement, with a parallel authority structure -the local Imams - directing the populace to die in glory against the infidel invaders. I don't see the Swiss reacting all that different from the French in Vichy France, once the Swiss Forces are neutralized (unintentional pun). There may be some low-level guerrilla campaigning, but the order-loving Swiss populace would probably stump for peace ratehr than whole-scale resistance.
Hapsburg
April 30th, 2007, 10:10 PM
Now, what would've been the outcome of Hitler deciding to invade Switzerland at some point after July-Sept 1940 ?
That would be one war he would never be able to win. All the swiss would have to do is blow a few bridges, collapse a few tunnels, and destroy roadways on the borders, and the German armor will have nowhere to go but back the way they came. The Swiss partisans could then wage a guerrilla war from mountain caves and fortresses, and they could easily raise hell for the Germans.
Economically, the Swiss could freeze the German accounts, and totally stop the money-laundering and gold-smuggling operations they were engaging in, which would really fuck up the entire economy of the Third Reich.
Fenwick
April 30th, 2007, 10:13 PM
Hmmm after the war would be interesting. For now where is all of that Nazi gold? As a matter of fact where woudl all of that swiss bank account gold, money, jewels, and deeds go?
Alcuin
April 30th, 2007, 10:39 PM
...it was on a history channel program a while ago about the prewar germany...in 1939-before the war started, the nazis held a vote in switzerland to see if the country would like to join the greater german empire...:( ...and they almost had a majority....of course that might have changed once the actual war began...but nevertheless...if switzerland hadjoined with nazi germany...they would have had hundreds of thousands of more men they could have used as soldiers on the eastern and later on, the western front, and that could have changed the outcome of the war...:eek:
It doesn't matter. If the Swiss have a referendum, they accept the result. In this case, if Hitler invaded to try to impose what the Swiss had voted against, even the Swiss who had voted in favour would lay down their lives to prevent it. It's part of what makes them Swiss, and not German, French or Italian.
DaleCoz
May 1st, 2007, 12:22 AM
Actually, the most likely German invasion of Switzerland would have probably been as a means of attacking France--an alternative to going through Belgium. The French studied that possibility, and decided that cutting across a less mountainous portion of Switzerland might be feasible for the Germans.
As I recall it, the Germans ran a disinformation campaign to tie up French troops in guarding against such an attack, but apparently didn't seriously consider it as an option in May 1940.
The Germans and Swiss did engage in a fairly substantial air war in the run up to the invasion of France. The Germans routinely violated Swiss air space and the Swiss routinely shot down German planes. At one point Goring challenged the Swiss with a rather large air incursion, but the Swiss put up a pretty good fight against it. After the fall of France, that little mini-war wound down.
From old and possibly faulty memory, the Swiss had a mix of German and French fighter planes. The German planes were ME109s, and I think the French ones were a Moraine Saulner MS406 variant. I believe that the Swiss license-built a French aircraft engine for that fighter.
One interesting little tidbit about a possible German invasion of Switzerland: If they had done it after the fall of France they would have probably had to fight a considerable number of Poles. A considerable part of a Polish exile division crossed the border into Switzerland after the fall of France. The Swiss interned them, but in such a way that they could have assisted in the defense if the Germans had invaded.
-----
Check out Dale Cozort's Alternate History Newsletters (http://members.aol.com/althist1/index.htm) - nine years worth of Alternate History ideas, scenarios, and fiction.
Agrippa
May 1st, 2007, 01:07 AM
As I recall it, the Germans ran a disinformation campaign to tie up French troops in guarding against such an attack, but apparently didn't seriously consider it as an option in May 1940.
Yes - the French intelligence actually received more hints of a German invasion of France through Switzerland than an attack through the Ardennes.
The Germans and Swiss did engage in a fairly substantial air war in the run up to the invasion of France. The Germans routinely violated Swiss air space and the Swiss routinely shot down German planes. At one point Goring challenged the Swiss with a rather large air incursion, but the Swiss put up a pretty good fight against it. After the fall of France, that little mini-war wound down.
The USAAF (and I would imagine the RAF) tangled with the Swiss a few times as well; not hard to understand since the Swiss were flying 109s. A few Swiss cities were also bombed during the Combined Bomber Offensive. A damaged B-17 once crossed the border and crash landed, destroying the house of the head of the Red Cross (who fortunately was not there at the time).
CCA
May 1st, 2007, 03:50 AM
Can the Swiss grow their own food?
Otherwise they're dead
Alcuin
May 1st, 2007, 04:56 PM
Can the Swiss grow their own food?
Otherwise they're dead
Not unless man can live on fondue alone... they do store it though.
Grimm Reaper
May 1st, 2007, 05:03 PM
A quick and easy victory of Hitler.
Swiss military retreats to the mountains. All cities, industry, gold bullion and the families of the military do not retreat to the mountains, fall into German hands in the first days. Wehrmacht established perimeter whenever resistance becomes...well, noticeable, maintains seige.
Invasion plus 6 months, no possibility of successful Swiss counter-offensive, much loss of equipment/heavy weapons/air power/troops on the Swiss side, food and other supplies exhausted.
Switzerland surrenders, German losses possibly comparable to that in the invasion of Poland.
stevep
May 1st, 2007, 07:01 PM
Guys
The big deterrent, other than that the Swiss would have fought and international opinion would have been seriously impacted, may have been economic. Italy depended heavily on imports from Germany, large quantities of coal for instance, without which its economic and military capacity would be seriously affected. Those imports passed through Switzerland, generally through the various tunnels under the Alps. The Swiss government is supposed to have made clear that if the Axis attacked, even after the country was conquered, this would have been impossible as those tunnels wouldn't be there any more.
Steve
CalBear
May 1st, 2007, 08:05 PM
Two very different things argue against this kind of attack.
One is the AID that a country like Switzerland is to a warring Power. The Swiss could, and did, maintain economic ties with ALL the engaged states during WW II. This was a place that Germany could get hard currency from throughout the war. The Swiss maintained trade with the Reich, including these little things called ball bearing, throughout the war. This provided Germany with a source for ball bearings, as well as many other products while internal German sources were getting the pougies bombed out of them. At the same time, the Swiss were actively trading with the Western allies, including the licensing of newly developed andvanced manufacturing techniques for... (wait for it)... ball bearings. Neutrality can be a very good (and profitable) thing for both the neutral AND the combatant.
The second reason that invading Switzerland was very unlikely is the Return on Investment. The Swiss have, over the course of centuries, created a hedgehog of a country. The terrain is wonderfully suited for defense, the people are fiercely independent, the national militia is what the U.S. Founding Fathers had in mind when they crafted the 2nd Amendment, and it is possible for a small number of defenders to hold the primary access points into the country against a much larger force. The invader would have to largely destroy the country to counquer it, eliminating the reasons for invading in the first place.
German troops would, in all likelyhood, have won out (although the Wermacht's Yugoslavian experience makes this far from a sure best), but at what cost? Is Switzerland worth four or five shattered divisions, especially when you are planning (or at least resigned) to fight a two front war? I would point out that the Germans had more troops tied down in the Balkans fighting insurgents in the mountains than they, at one point, had facing the Western allies in France post D-Day.
In all Switzerland simply wasn't worth the trouble. That was, and still is, the Swiss international strategy. Trade with anyone, treat everyone the same, and be ready to imitate a blowfish if the need arises.
Its a plan that's worked for the better part of the last THOUSAND YEARS; it must has SOME validity.:)
Alcuin
May 1st, 2007, 08:33 PM
Its a plan that's worked for the better part of the last THOUSAND YEARS; it must has SOME validity.:)
Well 350 years to be precise. It's 160 years since Switzerland had any kind of war so you're right. It's a worthwhile strategy... be worth less than the cost of acquisition.
whatisinaname
May 3rd, 2007, 02:31 PM
For info. Switzerland order of battle, this dates from 1938 but should be close see link - http://www.orbat.com/site/ww2/drleo/083_switzerland/__army.html
Thanks
vBulletin® v3.8.4, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.