Delta Force
Banned
Found it. It was the Nairn Transport Company, which used American cars to transport people and cargo from Baghdad to Beirut, Damascus, and Hafia between 1923 and 1959.
Bagdadbahn finished in november 1913
- Thread starter Khalkali
- Start date
Found it. It was the Nairn Transport Company, which used American cars to transport people and cargo from Baghdad to Beirut, Damascus, and Hafia between 1923 and 1959.
Hmm seems both Germany and Austria-Hungary sent military forces to Turkey but they were sent two late and were too small. Bagdadbahn fully operational would probably triple materials and personnel...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asia_Korps
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asia_Korps
Fascinating - a little shame hey didn't start decade earlier in 1913 but it was amazing feat nonetheles. And it proves my point!
Except the aircraft and vehicles available in the 20's were vastly improved over those 10 years earlier. The technology really isn't there in 1914. You can escalate things with some changes, but the country with the most developed automotive plant in Europe in 1914 was France. Proto blitzkrieg by France in 1914 would be awesome.
Fascinating - a little shame hey didn't start decade earlier in 1913 but it was amazing feat nonetheles. And it proves my point!
I am afraid that you don't know what you are talking about, and have not even made the effort of looking at a map of Middle East and Iran.
The Trans-Iranian railway (from Bandar Shahpur on the gulf to Bandar Shah on the Caspian via Tehran took 11 years to build, from 1928 to 1939. From Tehran to the Indus is more than 2,500 km on roads that were practically not existing in the 1910s.
To believe that engineering did not make huge progress during the WW1 period or to say that " engineering in Russia (which had one component only, the slave labour)" is just too much.
Read some books, please.
Lod Kalvan you're raising some good points, but please do not mix Persia with Suez (OK I admit I do not know much about railways in Persia, but Stalin's infrastructure was built by gulag prisoners, that's a fact - plus whole intelligentsia was exterminated, so Soviets had to hire american engineers, like at Dnepropietrovsk). US automotive industry was manufacturing trucks sturdy enough to cross Sinai as early as 1912, in fact trucks were crossing desert of Arizona and New Mexico at the time, so it's rather issue of german and otttoman leaders being bright enough to see the obvious thing.
You are mixing up fun facts and historical periods with the greatest nonchalance.
Fun fact: 6 American engineers including Hugh Lincoln Cooper,one of the greatest specialists in the construction of earth dams, were retained by the URSS in 1927 to supervise the construction of the 1st phase of the Dnieper Hydroelectric Station. The power station came on line in 1932 and incidentally the 5 generators were supplied by General Electric. The second phase of the power plant completed in 1938 was done by Russians only and the next 4 generators were manufactured in Russia (not by "gulag labor"). To build up from this isolated episode the theory that Stalin had to hire foreign specialists because "whole intelligentsia was exterminated" is truly a bridge too far. Stalin was a bastard and killed/imprisoned/deported whole populations; he managed also to become the leader of a backward nation who was coming out of 4 years of war and at least as many years of civil war and to turn it in the second most powerful nation of the world by the end of WW2. Not too bad.
One wonders how he managed this feat since he exterminated the whole intelligentsia and relied on "gulag prisoners" to build the infrastructure that the URSS needed.
I am a bit skeptical that by 1912 there were already in production in the USA trucks who could reliably go cross desert (it takes a 4-wheel drive). By 1940 these trucks certainly existed but 30 years earlier? It is however sure that no army had motorized divisions at the break out of the war and it would be at least less that generous to accuse German and Ottoman not to have been " bright enough to see the obvious thing"
. In September 1914 gen. Gallieni had to send 10,000 men from the garrison of Paris to the front on the Marne river to support the VI Army. 6,000 of these reinforcements were transported to the front in 600 Parisien taxis: I'm inclined to believe that if Gallieni had a couple hundred trucks available he might have chosen to use them. This happened in France, not the most backward country in the world.You fantasize having an army of at least 50,000 men plus all the artillery, the pontoons and the supplies being transported across 300+ km of wild desert. It would have been an unbelievable performance in WW2 (and nothing of this order of magnitude was ever tried). In 1914 it would have been impossible and more than that unthinkable. We are in some very deep ASB territory here.
Such lengthy, apologetic tirade in defense of genocidal Soviets is out of place in this thread: we can open separate one if you want, but I'd not go into this here. There are howewer two iron facts regarding early USSR: massive extermination of entire social classes including intelligentsia and officer corps; and wide use of prison labour for various pharaonic projects like Belomorsk canal. This issues are so well documented that ridiculing them is rather risky.
Similar things have been said about crossing the Alps with 50,000 men before Hannibal actually done it.I am a bit skeptical that by 1912 there were already in production in the USA trucks who could reliably go cross desert (it takes a 4-wheel drive). By 1940 these trucks certainly existed but 30 years earlier? It is however sure that no army had motorized divisions at the break out of the war and it would be at least less that generous to accuse German and Ottoman not to have been " bright enough to see the obvious thing"
You fantasize having an army of at least 50,000 men plus all the artillery, the pontoons and the supplies being transported across 300+ km of wild desert. It would have been an unbelievable performance in WW2 (and nothing of this order of magnitude was ever tried). In 1914 it would have been impossible and more than that unthinkable. We are in some very deep ASB territory here
I have not denied that Stalin was a murderous bastard, I said it in so many words if you would take care to read my posts (and btw you are the guy who brought Stalin in the discussion).
The mechanized army which in your wet dreams of Ottoman resurgence would take Suez is plainly ASB.
I have tried to help you to avoid the most obvious pitfalls of ignorance and wanking, but it looks like that educating people who don't want to be educated is a thankless task and almost never works.
I'm out of this discussion. Last advice: read books, not propaganda and research the historical events you want to modify.
Deleted member 9338
Yes American Ford trucks were crossing the American desert, but they were limited in number (less than a dozen) and had issues with the crossing. A raid is possible, but the number of trucks needed for even a battalion attack is outside the realm of posibility.
BlondieBC
Banned
Yes, the UK tended to use troops near the area being attacked for unexpected events, as most armies do. If the Ottomans successfully breach and hold the Suez for any reason, it will become the #1 issue for the UK. The UK without the Suez will lose the war if for no other reason the UK lacks enough ships to make up for the extra time it takes to go around Africa for the slower vessels.
Since many of the Gallipoli troops staged in Egypt, they will be the first to fight such as the ANZAC units. Then if needed, you will see units such as ended up in Salonika. A lot depends upon the exact time of the war the successful attack occurs.
In the long run, the UK will always defend or successfully retake the Suez since ships can deliver supplies faster than RR through a desert (or camels or trucks of 1914). Now IMO, breaking the Suez even for a few weeks to months is a huge Ottoman win, OTL gamble was well worth the cost. And this gets to the problem of attacking the Suez. It was not the Ottomans could not get enough troops to the area to win locally, it was their troops were not good enough. If you simply take OTL attack and replace it with the 10th best German Division (or French for that matter) with the 10th best division commander, the Suez would have been shut down. And we can't improve the Ottomans to French or German level units with massive, massive prewar reforms.