Middle East Front 1942

  • Thread starter Deleted member 1487
  • Start date

Deleted member 1487

Handwavery ahead. Say the Axis is able to take Egypt in 1942 and is able to reach the Suez, would they be able to launch a Middle East campaign? Would the Arab population rise up in Palestine and/or Iraq? Would Axis paratroopers already in North Africa be able to use bases in Egypt to drop on the other side of the Suez in Palestine and achieve something or would they get slaughtered? At this point there is no Jewish brigade, that didn't happen until 1944, but the Palmach, the military arm of Haganah was officially raised by the British in mid-1941, roughly 1 year before Egypt was threatened in 1942, so they would be a factor, depending on whether the Arabs rise up against the British, then they might be forced just to defend their communities.

What would the US do? Would they still pull Torch or would they have to reinforce the Middle East directly and preclude landings in North Africa?
 

Deleted member 1487

That all depends on with what they took Egypt and reached the Suez and how.
OTL invasion of Egypt forces, they just win 1st Alamein (say due to weather being better or whatever) and when they enter Alexandria it triggers an Egyptian uprising that rips apart the British forces in the area. So Egypt effectively switches sides when they think they can get out from under the British. So the defensive line, such that it is, is anchored on the Suez from the Sinai, while the remaining naval forces from Alexandria fall back on Cyprus (apparently that was the plan if Egypt fell).
 
Lets say Rommel takes the Delta in an early July 1942 rush.

(A POD could be that the Germans do AGN better in 1941, Leningrad falls and all the Siebel Ferries and Italian torpedo boats used on Lake Ladoga are used to rush supplies to him, right to beach behind the front in early 1942)

It seems the Germans could cross the canal with same MFPs. It seems the British would set up at Aqaba in Jordan using supplies from the Red Sea port. That would be hard to take with British sea power in the Red Sea and blocking any ability to push deeper than that if the German tried to bypass the place.

I suppose the Germans could ship into some place themselves in Palestine since the bulk of British Sea power is in the Red Sea. It would take a big parade of trucks to get to Iraq though where the British can supply right into Basra.

I suspect most of the Arab world is going to be indifferent to these Christian state wars and I can't imagine anybody would want to trade British for Italian masters. So a few leaders will hook themselves to Hitlers rising star in hopes of gaining power themselves but most will continue their ordinary lives. Plus are the Axis going to really bother with seeing people get fed after their occupation messes up existing transportation and trade routes and how soon do people get mad about that.

All in all Egypt and especially beyond doesn't seem worth it for Germany. Probably easier to get Miakop and Grozny oil back to Germany than Iraqi oil (or just get Soviet oil by trading with them instead of attacking and defeat the British with uboats and air laid mining).
 

TFSmith121

Banned
Massive...

Handwavery ahead. 1) Say the Axis is able to take Egypt in 1942 and is able to reach the Suez, would they be able to launch a Middle East campaign? 2) Would the Arab population rise up in Palestine and/or Iraq? 3) Would Axis paratroopers already in North Africa be able to use bases in Egypt to drop on the other side of the Suez in Palestine and achieve something or would they get slaughtered? 4) At this point there is no Jewish brigade, that didn't happen until 1944, but the Palmach, the military arm of Haganah was officially raised by the British in mid-1941, roughly 1 year before Egypt was threatened in 1942, so they would be a factor, depending on whether the Arabs rise up against the British, then they might be forced just to defend their communities.

5) What would the US do? Would they still pull Torch or would they have to reinforce the Middle East directly and preclude landings in North Africa?

Massive...handwavery, that is.

Minor problems:

A) The Quattara position was an excellent defensive position that could not flanked, even if the Axis had unlimited supplies and a troop differential sufficient enough to break up the 8th Army - which they didn't.

B) Then there's the Nile and C) the Delta - both equally excellent defensive positions.

D) Then there's the Canal itself. Yet another.

E) Then there's the Sinai. Yet another.

F) And there are the 9th and 10th armies, aka PAI Force, including what amounts (in 1942) to a half dozen British, Indian, and Polish divisions.

It's the reverse equivalent of the Italian campaign, except the Axis forces, supply lines, and general quality are light years below what the Allies deployed in the MTO in 1942-45.

Other than that, it's a great plan.:rolleyes:

Questions:

1) No. As the Israelis and Egyptians both showed repeatedly, the Suez Canal is an excellent anti-tank obstacle (So is the Nile, but you didn't even mention the river, so there you go);

2) No. In Palestine and Jordan the Arabs actually provided enough volunteers for a substantial enough force the British could raise what amounted to a motorized infantry brigade from them; in Iraq, they'd already tried it and been destroyed by an expeditionary force of what amounted to one infantry division and a partly motorized/partly horsed cavalry division, and the loyal Iraqis (Assyrians and Kurds, largely);

3) No. This is after Crete. Think von der Heydte's "brigade" during the Ardennes - except they are trying a daylight drop.

4) True. Wingate was already in India, but given the need, he could be in the Middle East in a day or two, so there's a British general officer ready to work with the Zionists and who will be accepted by them.

5) TORCH goes forward, if anything with more of a priority, since it is the obvious riposte to any Axis success in eastern Africa; it amounts to a second front, using the Allied superiority at sea and in combined operations to do just that...

Best,
 
Last edited:

Deleted member 1487

1) No. As the Israelis and Egyptians both showed repeatedly, the Suez Canal is an excellent anti-tank obstacle (So is the Nile, but you didn't even mention the river, so there you go);
Two much more modern militaries that were fresh and in their home countries, with pre-war fortifications on the Suez. Not exactly comparable to the situation in 1942. Also the Axis would have Alexandria as a supply source once it was taken on the ground, which means shutting down British naval interdiction of their convoys and putting convoys out of range of Malta, but also netting all the airfields of Egypt, while denying them to the British. AFAIK if Egypt fell there were no forces that were present on the Suez. And removing any from the Middle East would mean letting the Arabs run themselves without British military units to keep them in line.

2) No. In Palestine and Jordan the Arabs actually provided enough volunteers for a substantial enough force the British could raise what amounted to a motorized infantry brigade from them; in Iraq, they'd already tried it and been destroyed by an expeditionary force of what amounted to one infantry division and a partly motorized/partly horsed cavalry division, and the loyal Iraqis (Assyrians and Kurds, largely);
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandatory_Palestine#Allied_and_Axis_activity
As in most of the Arab world, there was no unanimity amongst the Palestinian Arabs as to their position regarding the combatants in World War II. A number of leaders and public figures saw an Axis victory as the likely outcome and a way of securing Palestine back from the Zionists and the British. Even though Arabs were not highly regarded by Nazi racial theory, the Nazis encouraged Arab support as a counter to British hegemony.[39] SS-Reichsfuehrer Heinrich Himmler was keen to exploit this, going so far as to enlist the aid of the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Mohammad Amin al-Husseini, sending him the following telegram on 2 November 1943:
To the Grand Mufti: The National Socialist movement of Greater Germany has, since its inception, inscribed upon its flag the fight against the world Jewry. It has therefore followed with particular sympathy the struggle of freedom-loving Arabs, especially in Palestine, against Jewish interlopers. In the recognition of this enemy and of the common struggle against it lies the firm foundation of the natural alliance that exists between the National Socialist Greater Germany and the freedom-loving Muslims of the whole world. In this spirit I am sending you on the anniversary of the infamous Balfour declaration my hearty greetings and wishes for the successful pursuit of your struggle until the final victory – Reichsfuehrer S.S. Heinrich Himmler
3) No. This is after Crete. Think von der Heydte's "brigade" during the Ardennes - except they are trying a daylight drop.
Ah no, Ramcke's brigade was VASTLY better trained and more experienced than the Ardennes crew, which were the dregs of whatever could be scraped together, many weren't even jump trained, which led to huge losses. Ramcke had some of the toughest men in the German military. In fact they shut down the SAS raids:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramcke_Parachute_Brigade
Plus there was the Italian paratroopers, who were the best men in the Italian military and the Germans rated them as equal to their own paras:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/185th_Airborne_Division_Folgore
During the Second battle of El Alamein the Folgore Division was under attack from three British divisions 44th (Home Counties) Infantry Division, 50th (Northumbrian) Infantry Division, 7th Armoured Division, and the 1st Free French Brigade.[1][2]

Operation Lightfoot launched on 24 October 1942, was designed to break through the supposed "weak" Italian-held southern sector of the Alamein line where the Bologna, Brescia, Pavia and Folgore Divisions anchored the right flank.

The British attack began with an artillery barrage, followed by an all out assault by the 7th Armoured and 44th Infantry divisions. However, all that was achieved at a high cost of life and equipment was a small salient, which was soon recaptured by the Folgore.

In the following days between 25 October and 4 November, the 50th, 7th, 44th divisions, 1st and 2nd Free French and the Royal Hellenic Brigades, supported by artillery and armour, failed to break through in the southern sector.

The Folgore used everything at their disposal including letting the enemy advance into a "cul-de-sac" and then launching a counterattack from all sides.
They also used their 47mm Anti-tank guns from enfilade positions and Molotov cocktails to knock out the advancing tanks.[3]
In the initial British assault alone the Folgore had destroyed over 120 armoured vehicles, and inflicted over 600 casualties.
4) True. Wingate was already in India, but given the need, he could be in the Middle East in a day or two, so there's a British general officer ready to work with the Zionists and who will be accepted by them.
Wingate wasn't exactly successful with the Chindits.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chindits

5) TOCH goes forward, if anything with more of a priority, since it is the obvious riposte to any Axis success in eastern Africa; it amounts to a second front, using the Allied superiority at sea and in combined operations to do just that...
So don't reinforce the Middle East, just go for a flank attack.
 
Two much more modern militaries that were fresh and in their home countries, with pre-war fortifications on the Suez. Not exactly comparable to the situation in 1942. Also the Axis would have Alexandria as a supply source once it was taken on the ground, which means shutting down British naval interdiction of their convoys and putting convoys out of range of Malta, but also netting all the airfields of Egypt, while denying them to the British. AFAIK if Egypt fell there were no forces that were present on the Suez. And removing any from the Middle East would mean letting the Arabs run themselves without British military units to keep them in line.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandatory_Palestine#Allied_and_Axis_activity

Ah no, Ramcke's brigade was VASTLY better trained and more experienced than the Ardennes crew, which were the dregs of whatever could be scraped together, many weren't even jump trained, which led to huge losses. Ramcke had some of the toughest men in the German military. In fact they shut down the SAS raids:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramcke_Parachute_Brigade
Plus there was the Italian paratroopers, who were the best men in the Italian military and the Germans rated them as equal to their own paras:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/185th_Airborne_Division_Folgore

Wingate wasn't exactly successful with the Chindits.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chindits


So don't reinforce the Middle East, just go for a flank attack.

keep in mind that to cross the Suez in 1973 both the Egyptians and Israelis spent years preparing... the Egyptians by getting Ribbon Bridges (a lot better than anything the Germans ever had) and firefighting equipment to knock down the sand berms. The Israelis by acquiring and designing and building their own weird but ultimately useful bridge

While Ramke had really good troops, he still had only a brigade. Even with the Folgore (the elite Italian parachute division), that is still only about 4 brigades. Getting the airlift won't be easy either.

Agreed, the Chindits were not really worth the time, energy and casualties suffered, although to be fair British options were somewhat limited in Burma

Flanking the Depression isn't doable. The Nile would be a difficult position to defend because of its length, which would stretch the British pretty seriously, but I suppose defending from Cairo to the Delta would be enough, as south of Cairo it quickly becomes trackless desert on the western side.

For that matter, Alexandria and Cairo would be a tough fight, being large cities full of narrow city streets and the Axis forces in Africa were never particularly super well endowed with artillery. They had their divisional and some corps guns, but the army level (and usually heavier) guns were in short supply, as of course would be the ammunition for them.

Assuming all that works for the Axis, and they still have a viable force when its over, the Suez is a real obstacle and behind that so is the Sinai. When you get to Palestine and Jordan you have a lot of hills to deal with too.
 

TFSmith121

Banned
Notice how the Axis just leaped over the Alamein-Quattara

keep in mind that to cross the Suez in 1973 both the Egyptians and Israelis spent years preparing... the Egyptians by getting Ribbon Bridges (a lot better than anything the Germans ever had) and firefighting equipment to knock down the sand berms. The Israelis by acquiring and designing and building their own weird but ultimately useful bridge

While Ramke had really good troops, he still had only a brigade. Even with the Folgore (the elite Italian parachute division), that is still only about 4 brigades. Getting the airlift won't be easy either.

Agreed, the Chindits were not really worth the time, energy and casualties suffered, although to be fair British options were somewhat limited in Burma

Flanking the Depression isn't doable. The Nile would be a difficult position to defend because of its length, which would stretch the British pretty seriously, but I suppose defending from Cairo to the Delta would be enough, as south of Cairo it quickly becomes trackless desert on the western side.

For that matter, Alexandria and Cairo would be a tough fight, being large cities full of narrow city streets and the Axis forces in Africa were never particularly super well endowed with artillery. They had their divisional and some corps guns, but the army level (and usually heavier) guns were in short supply, as of course would be the ammunition for them.

Assuming all that works for the Axis, and they still have a viable force when its over, the Suez is a real obstacle and behind that so is the Sinai. When you get to Palestine and Jordan you have a lot of hills to deal with too.

Nicely summed up.

Notice how the Axis just leaped over the Alamein-Quattara position, leaped across the desert between Alamein and the Nile, took Alexandria, found airlift for four parachute RCTs or whatever, found bridging equipment magically for the Nile, fought their way through two of the largest cities in the region, found more bridging equipment for the Suez, etc...

It's interesting; apparently none of these troops need food, water, ammunition, or gasoline.

Best,
 

Deleted member 1487

Nicely summed up.

Notice how the Axis just leaped over the Alamein-Quattara position, leaped across the desert between Alamein and the Nile, took Alexandria, found airlift for four parachute RCTs or whatever, found bridging equipment magically for the Nile, fought their way through two of the largest cities in the region, found more bridging equipment for the Suez, etc...

It's interesting; apparently none of these troops need food, water, ammunition, or gasoline.

Best,
Alexandria is a massive port that could be used once captured.
Alamein to Alexandria is only 111km, about 2-3 hours by road. Really the only issue is taking Alexandria and the port and huge British supply dumps are captured. The British fleet is out of an anchorage and will have a hard time interdicting Axis supply via convoy due to losing their air and naval bases. Then once with that supply source they can spread out with Egyptian help to liberate/conquer the country. Alexandria is the only thing that needs to be taken, then the rest, other than leaping the Suez is possible and easy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexandria_Port


ela1.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:

TFSmith121

Banned
And the Axis get there how, again?

And the Axis get there how, again?

By land, sea, air?

And this is in when, again?

Best,
 

Ian_W

Banned
Nicely summed up.

Notice how the Axis just leaped over the Alamein-Quattara position, leaped across the desert between Alamein and the Nile, took Alexandria, found airlift for four parachute RCTs or whatever, found bridging equipment magically for the Nile, fought their way through two of the largest cities in the region, found more bridging equipment for the Suez, etc...

It's interesting; apparently none of these troops need food, water, ammunition, or gasoline.

Best,

It's wiking.

He points at maps, and then other people need to tell him that Army Group Steiner doesnt exist.
 
Alamein to Alexandria is only 111km, about 2-3 hours by road.

If one ignores such issues as the fact there is a British army in the way, the Germans don't have the logistics to go that additional 111 kilometers, and we're talking large military forces and not a single person in his car. Once those are factored in, it might as well be on the far side of the moon as far as the Germans are concerned.

It's wiking.

He points at maps, and then other people need to tell him that Army Group Steiner doesnt exist.

I have more then once observed that he'd fit in great at OKW or OKH.
 

Deleted member 1487

If one ignores that there is a British army in the way, the Germans own supply problems, and the fact we're talking large military forces and not a single person in his car. Once those are factored in, it might as well be on the far side of the moon as far as the Germans are concerned.
The Germans covered the distance between Mersa Matruh and El Alamein in 2 days, which was almost twice as far as Alamein to Alexandria.

If one ignores such issues as the fact there is a British army in the way, the Germans don't have the logistics to go that additional 111 kilometers, and we're talking large military forces and not a single person in his car. Once those are factored in, it might as well be on the far side of the moon as far as the Germans are concerned.
If the Alamein position is breached, which it nearly was at the 1st Alamein IOTL, then British defenses effectively fall apart. There was nothing left between the Axis forces and Alexandria after Alamein, that was the last prepared position and organized forces. The Germans had the fuel on had to reach Alexandria thanks to what was captured at Mersa Matruh according to the Osprey book on the battles of Alamein, so really they just needed to reach Alexandria and enjoy British stocks until convoys arrive from Italy.
 
The Germans covered the distance between Mersa Matruh and El Alamein in 2 days, which was almost twice as far as Alamein to Alexandria.

And all it achieved was to exhaust their fuel supplies (with zero prospect for getting any more) and seizing several hundred kilometers of nothing. It didn't even destroy the British forces in front of them: the British simply fell back to their fortifications west of El Alamein where they handily stopped the exhausted, overextended Germans.
 

TFSmith121

Banned
Didn't the Axis try that a couple of times, actually?

Once you get through the Alamein position Alexandria is just northwest by highway.

Didn't the Axis try that a couple of times, though?

Didn't exactly work out for them, did it?

So what's changed, in your concept of operations?

Best,
 

Deleted member 1487

And basically ran out of fuel in doing so.
Not according to the info I've read about the battle, they had the fuel to continue on had they breached Alamein and continued on. They had enough to get to Alexandria, but not much further. But in Alexandria was more than enough for the Axis to sustain themselves for months. Getting supplies forward from captured dumps at Mersa Matruh was initially problematic and delayed the IOTL 1st Alamein, but the fuel got there in the end.
 

Deleted member 1487

Didn't the Axis try that a couple of times, though?

Didn't exactly work out for them, did it?

So what's changed, in your concept of operations?

Best,
We can have all sorts of PODs. Perhaps the weather is a bit better, they have slightly more transport working out to get supplies forward so the offensive jumps off on time, which means the defenses wouldn't get reorganized.

The only thing that needs to change is the outcome of 1st Alamein and British positions in Egypt fall apart. My OP handwaved how that happened, as it would likely have to be something earlier so that they can transport supplies a bit better, as they captured fuel and whatnot at Matruh. Get that forward on time and things likely work out.
 
Not according to the info I've read about the battle, they had the fuel to continue on had they breached Alamein and continued on.

The info is simply wrong. WW2 advances supplied by road rather inevitably petered out around 400-500 kilometres from the nearest port or railhead, due to exponential transport requirements.

When you look at the distances between the major ports of Libya and Egypt, they tend to be around that limit, meaning anyone advancing eastward has a hard time as they were very much at the end of their tether, and the defender was sitting on a logistics hub.

The British, having actually paid attention to this issue both prior and during the war, appropriately invested in Egypt's infrastructure and their own forces logistical assets (both material and personnel) so they could better avoid this problem. This is why the Eighth Army was always significantly larger than the Axis forces in North Africa, which was decisive in stopping Rommel at Alamein.

They had enough to get to Alexandria, but not much further. But in Alexandria was more than enough for the Axis to sustain themselves for months.
Which, aside from being predicated on the Germans breaching defenses they physically do not have the forces and supplies to breach, is also predicated on them taking Alexandria and those dumps intact. Both of these essentially require more then the British substituting lead time for tea time: it requires God to descend from the heavens and grant the Germans unlimited tanks, men, and fuel. And we do have a forum for that...
 
Top