Alternate WW2

Italy, Hungary, Bulgaria, and Romania are German leaning but neutral in ww2. They only provide Germany with indirect help through trade and voluntaries. Much of the early war goes as otl. How does the rest of the war go in this pod? Furthermore, can the other fascist nations above work together in taking over Yugoslavia and Greece while still officially neutral and while the other powers are distracted with Germany and Japan?
 
Besides Italy the fascist Eastern European nations only gave Germany military support fighting the USSR, without that the Wehrmacht is more strained and weaker when fighting the USSR, probably making it a shorter war. This is despite the fact the border with the USSR is shorter and the Wehrmacht didn't have to invade Yugoslavia(posibly making barbarossa possible earlier) but the spreadout of the German army to the south will put on a lot more strain, even in the first months.

No those fascist nations can not attack Greece and Yugoslavia without going to war with the Allies, they'd be joining Germany in the war if they did that.

Italy not joining will help the allies(and the USSR) greatly, avoiding a long war in North Africa and in the Meds. This will allow them to focus more directly on Germany and later Japan. Of course the danger still exists so the British will not move the Mediteranean fleet away to the Pacifc or anything, but pressure is a lot less, trade routes more secure, industry capacity and naval activity a lot higher. This will help the USSR with lend-lease and put less luftwaffe planes above their lands.
 
Last edited:

Medved

Banned
With Italy neutral there is no German involvement in North Africa - thats a few additional thousand AFV´s,guns, aircraft, motor vehicles and 200 000+ men the Germans can throw against the USSR in the 1941-1943 period. Then there are no German weapon deliveries to the other Axis powers, Romania and Hungary alone received several hundred tanks and spg´s from the Germans. Then there are no weak Axis sattelite armies on the flank of the German armies - making a Soviet breakthrough far more difficult. This might give the Germans the edge to defeat the USSR in the 41-43 period; at the very least it slows down the Soviet advance and makes it far more costly.

For the British/Americans Italy neutral is a nightmare. They have to attack the Germans in 1942 either in France or in Greece/the Balkans. Meaning the Germans can easily repel them - or turn these into campaigns that would make the OTL progress in Italy look like light speed.
 
For the British/Americans Italy neutral is a nightmare. They have to attack the Germans in 1942 either in France or in Greece/the Balkans. Meaning the Germans can easily repel them - or turn these into campaigns that would make the OTL progress in Italy look like light speed.

Not a nightmare. No war with Italy means that Med is very much open for Anglo-American shipping. They still can invade French North Africa, including Tunis, both to improve strategic position and to improve their skills on landing operations. Less of a commitment in the Med improves British & CW situation in Asia. They don't have to invade France or Balkans in 1942.
Neutral Romania means that staging areas against the Soviet Union are much more clogged, there is no Army Group South as it was historically. German aircraft will have problems reaching southern sectors on day 1. Pz-Is and IIs that didn't went to N.A. will not make wonders in the Soviet Union.
 

Medved

Banned
No war with Italy means that Med is very much open for Anglo-American shipping. They still can invade French North Africa,

Dear god - why would the WAllies be this stupid? Invading North Africa does nothing to defeat Germany and may bring the Italians into an actual alliance with Germany.

They don't have to invade France or Balkans in 1942
Yes - doing nothing is a great way to keep the USSR from negotiating. Assuming Stalingrad happens more or less as OTL - why shouldnt Stalin go for a compromise with his only Allies scratching their backs?

Neutral Romania means that staging areas against the Soviet Union are much more clogged, there is no Army Group South as it was historically. German aircraft will have problems reaching southern sectors on day 1. Pz-Is and IIs that didn't went to N.A. will not make wonders in the Soviet Union.
There is no AGS, so the Germans take Leningrad in August and Moscow in September - war ends in 1941.
 
For the British/Americans Italy neutral is a nightmare. They have to attack the Germans in 1942 either in France or in Greece/the Balkans. Meaning the Germans can easily repel them - or turn these into campaigns that would make the OTL progress in Italy look like light speed.
No GB gets to rest easy with far more shipping available (open Med is worth huge amount 10%-20% of total GB merchant marine not going round Africa) having the Med fleet reduces RN losses massively so KM in Atlantic and IJN are in trouble.

The British can liberate/attack gain France territory, North Africa and even Corsica.....

They can also support the Soviets as they will be able to send far more to far north with more CVs/fleets/fast merchants available to force the passage to and far lower loses, maybe even send a army to fight Finland?
 
No GB gets to rest easy with far more shipping available (open Med is worth huge amount 10%-20% of total GB merchant marine not going round Africa) having the Med fleet reduces RN losses massively so KM in Atlantic and IJN are in trouble.

The British can liberate/attack gain France territory, North Africa and even Corsica.....

They can also support the Soviets as they will be able to send far more to far north with more CVs/fleets/fast merchants available to force the passage to and far lower loses, maybe even send a army to fight Finland?
The allies did the best job at working in coalitions and organizing their forces together when compared to the axis but joint military corroboration isn’t going to happen. Stalin will not accept any direct military aid from the allies. The allies are probably not sure on having their troops fight with Soviets either. They could get more navy support and materials from the allies but that is it. Norway becomes a much bigger battle ground. That would be a good base for cutting off support between the Soviets and Britain.
 

Medved

Banned
The British can liberate/attack gain France territory, North Africa and even Corsica.....

If the British attack France in 1942 - it will end like Dieppe times 100. And they will not start a war in the Med because it might bring the Italians into the war. No war in the Med leaves only an attack against Greece/Balkans and France. Since the first is suicidal, the second will be attampted - which will end badly as well. And yes the WAllies will have to attack somewhere during 1942, otherwise Stalin might just say fuck it and negotiate with the Germans.
 
otherwise Stalin might just say fuck it and negotiate with the Germans.
Errrr just what term is he going to get offered that are acceptable since AH thinks he is winning?
If the British attack France in 1942 - it will end like Dieppe times 100.
I did not say France but French territory very different.......and I do agree Dieppe in 42 isn't a good idea.
No war in the Med leaves only an attack against Greece/Balkans and France. Since the first is suicidal, the second will be attampted
Or just attack nobody (important FF actions in NA/colonies) don't count and ship stuff to Soviets to keep them in war along with RAF wasting spare capacity over occupied Europe/Germany.... also don't Greece will happen as Italy isn't in war.....and anyway it wouldn't be suicidal the forces are small and GB can afford to lose them and might even keep Crete without Italy taking part.
And they will not start a war in the Med because it might bring the Italians into the war.
Might but FF taking France territory isn't really a Italian issue...if they have decided to stay out they will need to be provided and Greece is actually more of an interest to them due to Albania...
 
Stalin will not accept any direct military aid from the allies. The allies are probably not sure on having their troops fight with Soviets either.
Not sure that he can say no without risking GB using it as an excuses to fight the Germans to the last Russian..... if he is doing worse and GB is doing better?

They could get more navy support and materials from the allies but that is it. Norway becomes a much bigger battle ground. That would be a good base for cutting off support between the Soviets and Britain.
Agreed but having the Med fleet including CVs spare will make it far easier as well as the BoA.
 
Dear god - why would the WAllies be this stupid? Invading North Africa does nothing to defeat Germany and may bring the Italians into an actual alliance with Germany.

Who determined that only stupid WAllies would've invade N.A. in this case? Who determined that this will bring Italy on German side? Are you a noted authority on the subject?

Yes - doing nothing is a great way to keep the USSR from negotiating. Assuming Stalingrad happens more or less as OTL - why shouldnt Stalin go for a compromise with his only Allies scratching their backs?

Because he still gets food, clothes, fuel, steel, explosives, tanks, aircraft and trucks for free. Stalin tried to compromise with Germans in summer of 1941, Germans said no.

There is no AGS, so the Germans take Leningrad in August and Moscow in September - war ends in 1941.

Have the German logistical capabilities doubled when nobody was looking?
 
Not sure that he can say no without risking GB using it as an excuses to fight the Germans to the last Russian..... if he is doing worse and GB is doing better?

Agreed but having the Med fleet including CVs spare will make it far easier as well as the BoA.
But wouldn’t Germany also be able to focus more on the northern seas and coast? Isn’t it easier for Germany to use their planes and bombers against the more tightly packed British navy? Also couldn’t Germany utilize its own coastal defenses more against the British navy? Germany only have to cut off the isles not the rest of the empire. U-boats can still encircle Britain and sink it’s ships.

Lastly, why would Stalin and Hitler negotiate. The war between the Soviets and Nazis seem like a all or nothing war from the start. The Nazis plans for what they would do with the conquered Soviet lands were insane. I doubt Slavs would do a large exodus across the Urals mountains willing or let Nazis genocide 90 percent of its people and enslave the rest. The Nazis and Soviets will being arming women and children before surrendering to each other. Nazis only wanted to surrender to the allies never the Soviets. I am guessing the Nazis do their otl war crimes in Eastern Europe which hardened the resistance there?
 
But wouldn’t Germany also be able to focus more on the northern seas and coast? Isn’t it easier for Germany to use their planes and bombers against the more tightly packed British navy? Also couldn’t Germany utilize its own coastal defenses more against the British navy? Germany only have to cut off the isles not the rest of the empire. U-boats can still encircle Britain and sink it’s ships.
They can but without Italian help they have far less than they had in Med facing GB OTL (especially in surface ships).

North Sea is hot no man's land what ever happens like OTL no benefit to ether side.

Coastal defences are irrelevant once you are more than a few 10s of KM offshore and RN will only come in to fight them if it really wants/needs to ie D day (and at that point they will eb overwhelmed by RN/RAF).

Tightly paked ships are worse to attak outside ports (well actually even in port?)

Err cut off UK like they didn't do in OTL? what do they get from Med that will actually help for this? Surface ships = 0, U boats = a few (but not significant % wise), aircraft = most to short range to help west of UK......?
 
If the British attack France in 1942 - it will end like Dieppe times 100. And they will not start a war in the Med because it might bring the Italians into the war. No war in the Med leaves only an attack against Greece/Balkans and France. Since the first is suicidal, the second will be attampted - which will end badly as well. And yes the WAllies will have to attack somewhere during 1942, otherwise Stalin might just say fuck it and negotiate with the Germans.

The balkans are neutral, as is Greece. So no going there.

If they really are pressured into attacking in 1942 Norway will probably be the stage and there will be heavy pressure put on Finland.

Realistically the Soviet are going to have to hold out untill the U-boats are cleared up and the buildup is done to choose a landing. Meanwhle leand-lease will keep the Soviets in the war whilst the German army spreads out over Russia. It all depdns on how well they are able to stp the nazi offense. With Romania neutral the Germans got a much more steady oil supply, although slightly less. They might not go for Blue.
 
it is easy to imagine a neutral Italy, it seems a coin flip historically? but for the rest it seems very difficult?

Hungary, Bulgaria, and USSR all want parts of Romania, and Germany wants to safeguard the oil (in the remaining part of the country)
 
Top