Allied Spain

SO, lets say the POD, is that in 41, HItler tries browbeating Franco into joining the Axis.

Franco not only refuses, but becomes concerned that if the Axis wins, that Hitler will be looking for payback.

So he opens covert negotiations with the UK and US.

Churchill and FDR, despite being warned by the military of the issues raised in this thread, agree as a way of meeting Stalin's increasing demands for a second front.

The allies start building up forces with the supposed intent of invading Southern France but due to logistics are unable to do so in a timely fashion and the Germans learn of the situation and redirect u-boats to target shipping to Spanish ports, and start planning for an invasion.


This occurs INSTEAD of Operation TOrch, so the Axis forces in Africa are in danger of being cut off.
 
I agree, but this is what Franco would get for free from the allies, a massive effort to rapidly improve Spanish transportation networks, port capacity and effeciency,
so that they could sustain and build up their own logistical capabilities. Spain has a broken economy and lots of infrastructure that needs modernization/repair? Get the allies to pay for it all, in addition for whatever else you care to ask for, for letting them in.

The allies could sit in Spain, and threaten a second front, without having to attack the Vichy, but giving the Germans no choice but to do so themselves. And when they do invade Vichy, they will be giving themselves a front at the Spanish boarder, and 1,000's more partisans behind them.

Spain doesnt offer anything Italy doesnt also offer accept more headaches.

In terms of usefulness, a Spanish front is a distant 5th behind France, Italy, Greece, and Norway for possible fronts (note: Greece and Norway are pretty brutal spots to fight but still have more useful potential than Spain). It's a distraction for both sides, which is why Franco was able to stay neutral to begin with.
 
Spain could be interesting if it joined in 1940 right after France falls. Germany can take Gibralter and close of the Med, which puts much more pressure on North African logistics. It would also give the Germans time to build up defenses that would require limited manpower in the event of a allied invasion with a firm defense line at the Pyrenees. And if they get Portugal too and reinforce the Azores, it would help with operations in the North Atlantic and further impair shipping to the UK. That said, I cant see it holding out too long as the Allies would have to take it back quickly.
 
Spain doesnt offer anything Italy doesnt also offer accept more headaches.
I have to disagree here. Spain offers open ports, not bombed out, defended and subject to air attack ports that would be the case in Italy. Invading Italy means that most allied aircraft are going to be flying a good distance to get to the fighting, and won't be able to stay long, and then suffer some attritional losses on the long flight back home.

Allied Spain, OTOH, offers the ability to base aircraft immediately in country, so it would be the Italians and Germans that would be having to come to the Spanish ports, from a good distance away, and then suffer the afore mentioned attrition on the long flight home. The allies cannot invade Italy in late 1942, but they can land in an allied Spain, and begin stockpiling massive amounts of supplies for an eventual invasion of France. Remember, the difficulties work both ways here, if the Pyrenees offer a difficult route of invasion for the allies from Spain into occupied (most likely) or Vichy France, then they also offer the same problems for the Germans, and this while heavily engaged on the eastern front. If Germany is in a bad spot logistically in the USSR, how then can they mount a major land campaign to their SW in this time frame? Where do the troops to do this come from? How are they supplied? If Germany does NOT pre-emptively attack the allied armies while in the initial phases of Spanish entry into WWII, they will only end up facing more, and better supplied and equipped allied armies later on.

What this means is, Germany is faced with a game changing set of choices:
Having secured their western boarder with the occupation of non-Vichy France (which still needs to be occupied and defended against a cross channel invasion, mind you), and thus being able to throw her best efforts into the war in the east, now they suddenly have to choose between invading Vichy, and massing another army of first line troops to fight Spain, over the winter of 1942-1943, in the mountains, and adding in whatever troops Spain can put into the field (supplied by the US and UK) to defend their homeland against the German invaders; or, alternatively, they have to choose to bide their time, build up their own SW army group, which drains men, supplies, logistical assets away from not just the eastern front, but from northern France as well, and these southern forces, in the event of a cross channel invasion in the north of France, which would be made easier by causing the diversion of so much effort to the south, will find themselves in danger of being cut off.

Thus, Germnay has to reopen the war with France, and (sooner or later) fight the Spainsh, British, and Americans, on the ground, in late 1942 or early 1943, while still having to defend northern France, and while fighting as historically in the east.

Spain offers a whole lot that Italy does not.


In terms of usefulness, a Spanish front is a distant 5th behind France, Italy, Greece, and Norway for possible fronts (note: Greece and Norway are pretty brutal spots to fight but still have more useful potential than Spain). It's a distraction for both sides, which is why Franco was able to stay neutral to begin with.
This depends on the nature of the fighting, which side is defending, the season and terrain the fighting is taking place in. As far as the air war, Spanish based aircraft will not pose a greater danger to Germany's heartland than those based in the UK, but they will pose a greater threat than the same aircraft, should they be based in africa, instead. That and the fact that they likely would be a bit easier to supply in Spain than in northern africa.

As an aside, which had the worse infrastructure, Spain, or NW Africa?
 
Don't nessecarily agree. He definitely wouldn't want to. But if Franco can pressure FDR and get on his good side, FDR then pressure Churchill. Or Franco could be an ass and threaten to join the Axis (he's bluffing of course but they don't know that).

Not only that, but in 1942, the allies weren't garuanteed to win yet at this point. They would be more likely to make a deal with the devil now than later.

FDR could never get Churchill to give up Gibraltar short of threatening to drop an A-bomb on London.

And I'm not sure why he would want to risk alienating his major ally just so that an Axis inclined (at least in 1942) dictator of a weak country and strategic burden that would offer no benefits to the Allies could enter the war?
 
It doesn't even affect future diplomacy between the United States and Spain, any more than Turkey joining the Allies affected diplomacy between the US and Turkey, because Cold War considerations affected both cases.
Well it would likely see Spain joining the UN roughly a decade earlier than our timeline as a founding member since IIRC it was initially only open to members of the Allies. It could potentially also see them gaining access to Marshall Plan aid like Turkey.
 
I have to disagree here. Spain offers open ports, not bombed out, defended and subject to air attack ports that would be the case in Italy. Invading Italy means that most allied aircraft are going to be flying a good distance to get to the fighting, and won't be able to stay long, and then suffer some attritional losses on the long flight back home.

Allied Spain, OTOH, offers the ability to base aircraft immediately in country, so it would be the Italians and Germans that would be having to come to the Spanish ports, from a good distance away, and then suffer the afore mentioned attrition on the long flight home. The allies cannot invade Italy in late 1942, but they can land in an allied Spain, and begin stockpiling massive amounts of supplies for an eventual invasion of France. Remember, the difficulties work both ways here, if the Pyrenees offer a difficult route of invasion for the allies from Spain into occupied (most likely) or Vichy France, then they also offer the same problems for the Germans, and this while heavily engaged on the eastern front. If Germany is in a bad spot logistically in the USSR, how then can they mount a major land campaign to their SW in this time frame? Where do the troops to do this come from? How are they supplied? If Germany does NOT pre-emptively attack the allied armies while in the initial phases of Spanish entry into WWII, they will only end up facing more, and better supplied and equipped allied armies later on.

What this means is, Germany is faced with a game changing set of choices:
Having secured their western boarder with the occupation of non-Vichy France (which still needs to be occupied and defended against a cross channel invasion, mind you), and thus being able to throw her best efforts into the war in the east, now they suddenly have to choose between invading Vichy, and massing another army of first line troops to fight Spain, over the winter of 1942-1943, in the mountains, and adding in whatever troops Spain can put into the field (supplied by the US and UK) to defend their homeland against the German invaders; or, alternatively, they have to choose to bide their time, build up their own SW army group, which drains men, supplies, logistical assets away from not just the eastern front, but from northern France as well, and these southern forces, in the event of a cross channel invasion in the north of France, which would be made easier by causing the diversion of so much effort to the south, will find themselves in danger of being cut off.

Thus, Germnay has to reopen the war with France, and (sooner or later) fight the Spainsh, British, and Americans, on the ground, in late 1942 or early 1943, while still having to defend northern France, and while fighting as historically in the east.

Spain offers a whole lot that Italy does not.


This depends on the nature of the fighting, which side is defending, the season and terrain the fighting is taking place in. As far as the air war, Spanish based aircraft will not pose a greater danger to Germany's heartland than those based in the UK, but they will pose a greater threat than the same aircraft, should they be based in africa, instead. That and the fact that they likely would be a bit easier to supply in Spain than in northern africa.

As an aside, which had the worse infrastructure, Spain, or NW Africa?

We went to North Africa first so we could clear the Med lines of communication and destroy the German forces there. In late 1942, we arguably didnt have enough trained men or materials to do both and fight in the South Pacific.

Germany doesnt need to invade/defend Spain. Just reroute some forces to the Pyrenees to prevent their passing. Given there are only a handful of usable passes, it is quite defensible. In terms of the Germans rerouting forces, it is no different than what they did in Italy in 43/44 only now they have an opportunity to withdraw from North Africa should they choose. Practically speaking the Allies would still need to mount an amphibious landing to get to France from Spain anyway, not unlike Dragoon from Italy. In the meantime, you pose little additional threat unlike North Africa and Italy where we destroyed German forces and were able to bomb the Ploesti oil fields, etc.
 
With Spain, covert aid and treachery to the Axis seems like a better way. For example double-agenting more German spies and providing means of supply for the French resistance could help.
 
We went to North Africa first so we could clear the Med lines of communication and destroy the German forces there. In late 1942, we arguably didnt have enough trained men or materials to do both and fight in the South Pacific.
That isn't what I meant at all, but I do agree that we didn't have the strength to invade Vichy held N Africa AND start a buildup in Spain. Besides, an allied Spain, would do wonders for securing the western Med, without the need to violate the Vichy French positions.


Germany doesnt need to invade/defend Spain. Just reroute some forces to the Pyrenees to prevent their passing. Given there are only a handful of usable passes, it is quite defensible.
Ok, but how are the Germans going to defend these passes? All but one of them are in Vichy territory (Or two if you count the one in Andorra). Admittedly, all the passes east of the one going through Andorra seem to converge on just one town, so blocking forces SW of the town of Perpignan would seem to be the proper strategy, but again, that is inside Vichy France. The passes to the west of Andorra are well seperated, and at least three run into Vichy France (Both the west coast and first inland pass lead to the same place), so give the Germans that they could mount a defense within their occupation zone, of only these two westernmost passes, without having to invade Vichy.

Mounting a defense, however, is not the same as being able to hold such a line in the advent of a strong advance. Now for the good part, If the forces that OTL were used in Operation Torch, were instead landed in Spain, we have a large base from which to launch airstrikes against the Italian industrial heartland, probably with fighter escorts (not yet sure about this, have to check the ranges for late 1942 US and UK fighters), and we are now in a great position to take Sardina/Corsica, which would be great for establishing forward fighter bases to wipeout Axis airpower in the region, thus paving the way to do to Italy what was historically done to Germany.

In terms of the Germans rerouting forces, it is no different than what they did in Italy in 43/44 only now they have an opportunity to withdraw from North Africa should they choose. Practically speaking the Allies would still need to mount an amphibious landing to get to France from Spain anyway, not unlike Dragoon from Italy. In the meantime, you pose little additional threat unlike North Africa and Italy where we destroyed German forces and were able to bomb the Ploesti oil fields, etc.
Although Ploesti was hit, by bombers operating out of Italian and extreme NE Libya, once, the losses were far and away to great (88 of 178 assigned aircraft made in back to their bases, and the raid had no lasting effect on overall production). Later in the air war, targets in Germany yielded a far greater return.

The main thing for me is, IF the US/UK go into Spain instead of NW Africa, then we have not violated Vichy neutrality, and so unless Hitler orders an Invasion of Vichy, he cannot mount a 'blocking force' defense of the passes. Makes for a pretty problem, doesn't it?

Let me see if I can up load a picture here...
I guess a link works.
 
Ok, so being able to look at the picture in the link help a great deal (I have one browser window open on the left of the screen, looking at the picture, and a second browser window open on the right, where I am typing this), as now I can SEE the terrain while typing my post.

Ok, looks like an allied Spain, with fighters operating from forward airbases in NE most Spain can possibly reach Corscia without drop tanks, just barely, but with drop tanks, or P-38's, an invasion of Corsica rather than Sicily seems to offer the prize of forward fighter bases within range of all of northern Italy, thus allowing for unhampered bombing raids to carryout strikes all over the place.

Any thoughts?
 
Taking such a circuitous route to fighting the Axis seems politically counterproductive. Remember, Stalin really, really wanted that second front to open up, and Italy wasn't really enough to satisfy him in that regard. This would do even less in terms of keeping him happy.
 

Deleted member 1487

Potentially great for Spain. The Germans have nothing to really throw a them and the Allies have to spend heaps of resources on making them a viable supply source, but they are useful and will negate the need for Operation Dragoon, which means those forces can be routed through Spain ASAP instead of having to seize land from the Germans. As Carl says they are a resource sinkhole for the Allies, but are too useful to pass up, so they get huge aid money regardless, which Franco badly needs. His only concern is having a bunch of Allied troops in his country that might make contacts with resistance movements against him, which I'm sure he'd rightly fear as a way for them to topple him for a less onerous and Hitler linked regime.
 
Tungsten was exported by both Portugal and Spain, without that Tungsten and other materials sold by the two countries as well a smuggling in resources from Latin America. Lose those supplies and Nazi Germany is in serious trouble. Also consider that the Germans smuggled in supplies from Japanese to Bayonne. This would give the Allies bases much closer to the Bayonne and make it harder for those supplies to be smuggled in. Spain would in some ways be problematic but much more useful than not.
 

Deleted member 1487

Tungsten was exported by both Portugal and Spain, without that Tungsten and other materials sold by the two countries as well a smuggling in resources from Latin America. Lose those supplies and Nazi Germany is in serious trouble. Also consider that the Germans smuggled in supplies from Japanese to Bayonne. This would give the Allies bases much closer to the Bayonne and make it harder for those supplies to be smuggled in. Spain would in some ways be problematic but much more useful than not.
By the time of Normandy the Germans were already doomed, so if that makes it happen slightly faster its not going to change much.
 
Its interesting listing all the items Germany could lose if imports from Spain were stopped. My search so far is not ready to reproduce here, except for a 100% loss of the Wolfram or Tungsten ore from Iberia. Not clear yet if any Wolfram ore of significance was coming via Turkey. So far no evidence. Leather, cork, & fruit were three major agricultural products. Those may seem unimportant on the surface, but in food short Europe reducing the vitamin C source by 10% is actually important when you are already 20% short of minimum requirement. Need more info on fish imports from Iberia. Germany was very dependant of the Dutch/Scandinavia fishing fleet to keep the protien supply at or near 60% of peacetime supply. Was Spain/Portugal a major source for that? Lots of items to investigate. Will cutting hem off in November 1942, 20 months earlier than OTL affect Germany?

Really regreting losing my copy of Brute Force here. There were a couple of tables relevant to this in it.
 
That isn't what I meant at all, but I do agree that we didn't have the strength to invade Vichy held N Africa AND start a buildup in Spain. Besides, an allied Spain, would do wonders for securing the western Med, without the need to violate the Vichy French positions.


Ok, but how are the Germans going to defend these passes? All but one of them are in Vichy territory (Or two if you count the one in Andorra). Admittedly, all the passes east of the one going through Andorra seem to converge on just one town, so blocking forces SW of the town of Perpignan would seem to be the proper strategy, but again, that is inside Vichy France. The passes to the west of Andorra are well seperated, and at least three run into Vichy France (Both the west coast and first inland pass lead to the same place), so give the Germans that they could mount a defense within their occupation zone, of only these two westernmost passes, without having to invade Vichy.

Mounting a defense, however, is not the same as being able to hold such a line in the advent of a strong advance. Now for the good part, If the forces that OTL were used in Operation Torch, were instead landed in Spain, we have a large base from which to launch airstrikes against the Italian industrial heartland, probably with fighter escorts (not yet sure about this, have to check the ranges for late 1942 US and UK fighters), and we are now in a great position to take Sardina/Corsica, which would be great for establishing forward fighter bases to wipeout Axis airpower in the region, thus paving the way to do to Italy what was historically done to Germany.

Although Ploesti was hit, by bombers operating out of Italian and extreme NE Libya, once, the losses were far and away to great (88 of 178 assigned aircraft made in back to their bases, and the raid had no lasting effect on overall production). Later in the air war, targets in Germany yielded a far greater return.

The main thing for me is, IF the US/UK go into Spain instead of NW Africa, then we have not violated Vichy neutrality, and so unless Hitler orders an Invasion of Vichy, he cannot mount a 'blocking force' defense of the passes. Makes for a pretty problem, doesn't it?

Let me see if I can up load a picture here...
I guess a link works.

What is your obsession with Vichy France? Why is Germany going to be more reluctant to move through Vichy France than invade Italy? There's no problem here, just a minor inconvenience.

The Pyrenees, outside of the Alps, is probably one of the most defensible lines in Europe. The allies would have no advantage of moment and even the roads leading up to the range are so few that it would provide the defender maximum opportunity to position its defenses.

By landing in Spain rather than North Africa you just gave the Germans an opportunity to salvage its forces in North Africa.

If you are not going into North Africa, you are better off using the forces to invade Normandy in 1943 than going into Spain.
 

ben0628

Banned
What if allies get to the Pyrenees before the Germans? Have Spanish forces hold the line until Allies March in (idk how many Germans were in Southern France, I'd assume not a lot or enough to destroy the entire Spanish army, even if it wasn't that Great) or Have the allies land in Northern Spain (any major ports there). Also what about paratroopers? Find away for the allies to reach the Pyrenees before the Germans and a Allied Spain makes sense.

Also, I think occupation of Spain is meant to replace Italian invasion so Torch would still happen or Spain would be apart of torch.
 
Thought I'd try to game this out in a sort of lite Map Ex

Premise is Spanis government has been friendlier to the Allies after the US entry & Salazar has been 'persuaded'. So Operation Olive is executed with landing day set for 6th November.

Germans had two half trained Pz Corps in France. One was the new SS, the other of units recovering from the Eastern Front. 10-15% of the equipment was German for technical training of drivers and mechanics, the rest was French for field training. Those are shown near Paris. There were the equivalent of three more corps of 'mobile' infantry. The rest were static divisions that garrisoned the ports.

The Eastern TF sets off first. It is comprised similar to the ETF of torch & is the core of Andersons Br 1st Army. Its primary target is Barcelona with secondary targets of the Baleric Islands & a site closer to the Pyrenees mountain passes. When the ETF depart the UK the same deception op is pulled as OTL, first the word to the German spiy handlers is the target is Brittany, second it it is a renforcement for Egypt, third when it passes Gibralter is the target is Sardinia. these are the same deceptions as OTL & Hitler fell for all of them. When the ETF turns north the deception target is France.

Western TF is the same as the Central TF of Op Torch, the US II Corps. It departs the UK about the same time as the ETF reaches the Med. It is the basis for the same initial deception stories: France - Egypt

The Reserve TF is the same as the WTF of Op Torch. That is Pattons I Armored Corps. It is the floating reserve & I parked it off Cadiz.

The Lisboa TF is mostly service units, Azores TF is mostly ASW & service units

Spainish Army mobilizes enough to to defend the mountain passes & cover the coast against italian Navy raids.

Now, I am sure everyone wants to start drawing big arrows all over the map. However, one step at a time. There is only one question at this point. Put on your French Kepi & think like Petain. What action do you take with the French military in the first 48 hours??

Thats the only question I want a concensus on for today.

Op Olive.jpg
 
What is your obsession with Vichy France? Why is Germany going to be more reluctant to move through Vichy France than invade Italy? There's no problem here, just a minor inconvenience.
Yes, just a minor inconvenience. One that ties down more troops than in OTL, with a more active resistance, augmented by allied agents and arms. You seem obsessed with the idea that 'only a ground offensive' matters, but an allied Spain means more manpower, more bomber bases, within easy striking distance of northern Italy. You might be able to reach northern Italy from english bases, and bomb her ndustrial heartland, but your going to have to fight your way through masses of defending fighters to and from the targets, without fighter escorts. Now base airforces in Spain, and your ready to hit Corsica. Take Corsica, instead of Sicily, and now you have forward fighter bases, so all your Italian bomber raids can be escorted, and Italy looses her industrial base and transportation network.

Basically, the moment Germany invades Vichy, the plug is out, and the allies can now go into africa as allies, and all the french forces in the west can be brought up to the front line, and the naval units historically destroyed, are instead availible to support the allied med offensive. So yea, just a minor inconvenience, where the allies were historically slow to reach and meet the axis armies in africa, now they meerly have to land reinforcments to help out the french, and with the add bonus of supply ports and airbases within Spanish territory. Hitler buys himself two new fronts instead of none, by violating Vichy neutrality, and the air front in France is going to eat up lots of extra forces that historically never had to be sent there, to say nothing of the losses, and the replacements that will need to be sent, for the rest of the war.

The Pyrenees, outside of the Alps, is probably one of the most defensible lines in Europe. The allies would have no advantage of moment and even the roads leading up to the range are so few that it would provide the defender maximum opportunity to position its defenses.
And these defenses, suck up troops that OTL never had to be there. These defenders are going to need supplies, which are vulernable to air and partisan attacks. The Germans can "Try" to commit small forces to the defense, and hope that the allies cannot plaster the defenders with bombers and fighter sweeps prepratory to attacking, but as you yourself pointed out, the allies can always move troops to France by sea. Both in the med or atlantic, in addition to the historical northern choices. If the allies do decide to launch one or more seaborn incursions, will your blocking forces be able to hold out if attacked from behind and totally cut off from supplies? I have to put this here, to interject a bit of humor. THIS!

By landing in Spain rather than North Africa you just gave the Germans an opportunity to salvage its forces in North Africa.
Really? Tell me how and, more importantly, why, would the Germans just abandon africa the moment the allies gain Spanish allies and bases? Olny in the case of Germany respecting the neutrality of Vichy do the allies NOT go into N africa, once the Germans occupy, or start to occupy Vichy, the allies are free to reinforce the French forces in africa. So no, once Hitler goes into Vichy, he doesn't suddenly get a 'get out of africa free pass', rather, as historically, Hitler will attact west into Vichy africa, not withdraw. The allies then have the benifit of all Spanish bases from which to support their operations, rather than having to work their war accross africa.

If you are not going into North Africa, you are better off using the forces to invade Normandy in 1943 than going into Spain.
My posts are not getting that far ahead here, where is it said that, once we commit troops to Spain, we are forever barred from using a friendly nation as a staging area to advance further? Spain might not have a world class navy, but they do have merchant shipping, do they not? And this additional shipping, and the ports within the med (as well as all the Vichy ones, after Germany invades), are going to be opened up to allied forces and operations, are they not?

You seem to be arguing that the allies would be WORSE off with Spain in the allies, is that if fact what you think and are saying? That we would gain nothing from bases, ports, and airfields in Spain, and that historically was the best POSSIBLE way to go? The only reason that we needed to go into Vichy territory was to be able to get a front going there against Italy and the axis forces in africa, and given the choice of attacking the Vichy or Spain, Vichy was the neutral that we could most easily defeat, without the German army being able to intervene other than at the end of a long, and poor, supply chain.

In this case though, the Allies do not have to invade any one. In this case, the Spanish will be welcoming allied forces, and defending against any incursion from the Germans. In this case, the ports and infrastructure of Spain is at the disposal of the allies, all at once.
 
Top