Is this ASB?
- Thread starter Blind
- Start date
Argentina and Uruguay were very much good being neutral and selling supplies to both sides. While it's true Argentina had a large Nazi movement, they were never real close to power.
Many people from other countries in particular, watching everything with WWII lenses, try to see Argentina as an Axis vs. Allies struggle. In truth, Argentina was WAY more busy with internal conflicts and the rise of Peronism, the most important political event of modern Argentina. World War Two was an affair that affected us as it did all the world, but it was far away compared to the political struggles inside our nation.
Tibet, Nepal, Buthan and Sikkim have nothing to gain joining the Nazis and even less to offer. Ditto Afghanistan and Turkey, though if I remember correctly the Germans tried to persuade them. I'm not sure of Iran's history on the peroid, but they might choose them over the Soviets and the British?
Spain and Sweden were very happy to be non-commiting to the Nazi cause. The only one I see sort of plausible is Yugoslavia, and it would mean a messy ethnic conflict.
Many people from other countries in particular, watching everything with WWII lenses, try to see Argentina as an Axis vs. Allies struggle. In truth, Argentina was WAY more busy with internal conflicts and the rise of Peronism, the most important political event of modern Argentina. World War Two was an affair that affected us as it did all the world, but it was far away compared to the political struggles inside our nation.
Tibet, Nepal, Buthan and Sikkim have nothing to gain joining the Nazis and even less to offer. Ditto Afghanistan and Turkey, though if I remember correctly the Germans tried to persuade them. I'm not sure of Iran's history on the peroid, but they might choose them over the Soviets and the British?
Spain and Sweden were very happy to be non-commiting to the Nazi cause. The only one I see sort of plausible is Yugoslavia, and it would mean a messy ethnic conflict.
Would it be possible for Spain to become commiting to Axis if they could guarantee Spanish control of Morocco?
Could Germans convince Reting Rinpoche and Tashi Namgyal to join during the Axis Deutsche Tibet-Expedition? This could created Himalayan Co-Prosperity Sphere, with Nepal and Bhutan joining?
What if the Yugoslavian coup d'état had failed, then Yugoslavia may have remained part of the tripartite pact, thus joining the Axis?
What if the Axis promised Argentina that they could get Falkland Islands and Chile?
No. Spain had nothing to gain by entering WWII and everything to lose. Franco's position was rather precarious (the Civil War is barely over), Spain is devastated by the fighting, and its military is in no position to fight another conflict. Meanwhile entering will cause the UK to sieze what few vestiges of territory Spain still has.
No again. No nation is South America will enter the war on the side of the Axis unless the United States is on that side, which guarantees an Axis win regardless. Why? Because they aren't stupid. They might hate each other, but making an enemy of the United States while allied to Nazi Germany is basically like a team of five year olds going up against *insert whatever team last won the Super Bowl/World Series/World Cup as appropriate* in a game of *insert appropriate sport* on the grounds that they are friends with a team of ten year olds two states away.
As for the others:
Iran: Occupied by the Allies OTL, doesn't matter.
Iraq: Can be occupied with no difficulty by the Allies, and again can expect no help. Doesn't matter.
Turkey: No air force, little military strength. Not much more than a minor ally, and one who is bordered by the Allies, who no longer have any reason to not invade or bomb.
Sweden: No reason to join, and little impact if it did. Ends up making a seperate peace with the Allies ASAP to save themselves from being destroyed.
Nepal-Sikkim: Small nations, cannot impact the war.
Once the Axis has made an enemy of the United States its over. To put this in perspective even if all these nations joined America ALONE would still outweigh the entire Axis.
All of those countries joining the Axis? Yes, that is ASB.
You might be able to engineer a plausible situation where one or two of those countries which were historically neutral might join, but the reality is many of them are better off remaining neutral. In my view your scenario becomes more difficult the further afield the country is from their Axis allies. That is, it is very unlikely any South American nation would formally join the Axis — likewise with Iran, Nepal, Bhutan, Afghanistan etc.
Well that wasn't your question, but:
Sweden and Yugoslavia: Highest probability in the right circumstances. The chance for Sweden is still low IMO.
Spain and Turkey are next. They'd basically have to set aside self-preservation and thinking altogether.
Iran and Iraq: Doubtful, and even if a good POD could be thought up the subsequent Allied occupation will quickly reverse that policy.
The various Central Asian States: Very, very doubtful. What reason would there be to enter the war on the side of Germany?
South America: Virtually impossible. Any attempt to do so would end as the United States president informs their governments that the US would, shall we say, rather put out if such a thing occurred. And then mentions that the US really doesn't need all these weapons, and you know the neighbors of *insert country here* was recently looking to update their equipment. And what do you know, the US forgot to ship the bill.
Even if the Nazis promised the moon and the stars, Argentina (and all South American nations) knew that the British and the US had total strategic superiority on their seas. The Nazis could not ever hope to break it, and the Japanese neither. It would have a similar effect to the Zimmernman Telegram. Perón was very smart playing both sides, and the former governments were happy to be neutral. The main Nazi support was from the huge German community on Argentina, and even that was cracked down on Perón's time.
Argentina would have to abandon all common sense (like the Proceso during the 1982 conflict) to join the Axis. While there is a slight chance than an insane general could take power and go full Axis, it wouldn't end well: he'll either be a mistrusted 'ally' like Franco (with the added disventage that he would have joined openly the Nazis), be deposed (most likely) or be deposed in a South American war, with bad consequences for Argentina and South America overall.
Germans could beat Britain in Suez Canal, creating Mediterranean Sea into Axis Sea. Meaning, French North Africa, Morocco, Algeria, and Tunisia could have been occupied. German forces could have seized Dakar in Senegal on the west coast of Africa, from which submarines and aircraft could have dominated the main South Atlantic sea routes. With no hope of aid, Yugoslavia and Greece would have been forced to come to terms. Once the Suez Canal was taken, the way would have been open to German armored columns to overrun Palestine, Transjordan, the Arabian peninsula, Syria, Iraq, and Iran. This would given Germany unlimited supplies of the single commodity it needed most: oil. A German position in Iran also would pose a huge threat to India, agitating for independence under Mohandas K. Gandhi and other leaders. From Iran Germany could invade India through the Khyber and other passes. The United States would have no hope of launching an invasion against the mainland of Europe and an undefeated and waiting German army until it had spent years building a vast navy, army, and air force, not to speak of the transports, landing craft, vehicles, and weapons necessary for such a giant undertaking. It is possible that the United States would take on this task, but the chances for its success would be extremely small. Far more likely, the American people would turn first to counter the expansion of Japan in the Pacific.
No they couldn't. The German supply lines were stretched very thin even before reaching the Suez, taking out the Middle East would be impossible. Gandhi wouldn't support Hitler, and getting through all of the mountains and passes of Central Asia would be a struggle in and of itself. And that's not even mentioning how long the supply lines would have to be.
Sigh.
Do you know the difference in forces at El Alamein? The British outnumbered the Germans 2-1, they had more tanks and artillery, and they were defending. Rommel had already outstripped his capacity for advance. Germany could send no more supplies, the ports of Libya were simply overstetched. Meanwhile those supplies were being shipped bya ridiculous number of trucks, over 80% of which had been captured and could not be repaired or replaced.
TL;DR no, they can't.
Yes, they are going to march their army across the Sahara Desert, occupy a country, and hold it against the Royal and American Navies. Then they are going to pick up their submarines and carry them across the Sahara Desert and toss them back into the water. I assume they will then use magic carpets to fly the supplies (again, across the Sahara Desert) required to run a military operation here.
TL;DR: No, they can't.
That's funn...oh wait, you are serious.
Look, logistics matter. Germany is overstretched as it is. Pumping more resources into a sideshow does not help them. And the ports these supplies can be shipped to? Again, they are already at capacity. Shipping even more supplies just means ships (which could be doing something useful) sitting in harbor waiting for the congestion to clear out enough for them to go back.
TL;DR: No, they can't.
Doesn't matter. Oil does nothing if they can't ship it anywhere, and they can't. Meanwhile the Allies can put more forces in the Middle East and would throw them out even if the Germans did magically take it, which they can't.
No, they can't. You know what happens when you try to launch an invasion along the only route possible while far outside you're supply lines and facing hundreds of thousands of soldiers you view as subhumans deserving only extermination?
If you guessed you get slaughtered, then congratulations you are tonight's big winner.
India, while not completely happy under British rule, was content enough to have no desire to rebel. With an enemy army quite literally on their doorstep no one with any sense is going to start a civil war.
They don't need to invade. By 1947 the United States has two things Germany cannot match or beat:
around 100 cans of instant sunshine and the B-36 intercontinental bomber. The question is, how much of Germany doesn't glow afterward.
Also, where is the Soviet Union in all of this? Do you think that the Germans would be able to pull off all this wizardry, and still manage to defeat the Soviets?
Here's the problem with these dies: they completely ignore logistics.
World War II wasn't won by tactics, it wasn't won by courage, it wasn't won by skill. World War II was won because one side controlled 85% of the world's wealth, industry, and scientific power in one form or another. That side was called the Allies. The United States was about half of that. The Allies could call upon larger numbers of people, factories, mines, farms, shipyards, ports, etc. than the Axis could. An often quoted (and incorrect) statistic is that it took 4 Shermans to defeat one Tiger. The United States built 50,000 Shermans. Germany built 1,400 Tigers. The United States built more shipping capacity in six months in 1943 than the Axis built in the entire war.
The United States spent more money on the B-29 bomber in 1942 than Japan's entire national budget. In total the United States spent more on the B-29 than Japan's entire national budget for the ENTIRE WAR. The United States alone controlled 60% of the world's oil supply, and nearly the same amount of steel.
The United States waged a two-front war across tens of thousands of miles and it won.
And the United States did all of this while working on the largest military project in history, the atomic bomb.
One country beat the United States in production in one category: the USSR which produced more mortars and artillery.
Meanwhile even during the height of the Blitz even Britain was outproducing Germany in every field except small arms. As for navies? Except for U-boats the Germans were behind in every single ship class. The vaunted Graf Zeppelin? Crap. Their "battleships"? Crap.
The German atomic project? So completely screwed up that if they had gotten so far as to produce a reaction (they didn't) the resulting radiation leak would have killed the entire team, their staff, any observers, and heavily irradiated significant parts of Germany.
And you notice I didn't mention the Soviet Union? Glad you did, because (while I have less to say about them) the Soviets also outproduced Germany in virtually every category. Germany hit the bottom of its replaceable manpower in 1943. The Soviet Union hit it in 1945, as the war was ending.
German victory in World War II is flat-out impossible. Japanese victory even moreso.
thaddeus
Donor
still my favorite (near) ASB scenario, Spain AND Argentina join hands and jump off the cliff together.
Gibraltar and Falklands/Malvinas fall in 1940.
