Only blue sky - a no BoB PoD

Redbeard

Banned
Less than amazing, it did not exist in France. The Armistice terms prevented the French from maintaining a air force in metropolitan France. Like the tanks and medium/heavy artillery, the aircraft were turned over to the Axis & many soon destroyed. The Armistice did require France to defend its colonies & allowed the maintenance of a air force overseas.
If Germany in 1940 realise the magnitude of the Red Army a sensible PoD ought to have been a serious approachment towards Vichy France, certainly if it is also decided to ignore the British Empire.

Offer Vichy to have all of France back again now and 5 British colonies after the war in return for 30 Divisions for Barbarossa!? I'm not sure at all Petain would turn that down, after all he wasn't exactly a "commie-lover".

That would probably require giving up any serious Uboat campaign in the Atlantic - but if ignoring the British - do it properly!

The problem is "sensible" - that rarely fitted well into German strategic decisions in first half 20th century.
 

Ian_W

Banned
If there is no Battle of Britain, no Blitz, no Afrika Korps and the Germans put their economy on a total war footing the Soviets should be very suspicious about what the Germans are up to.

Shhh. This is Axis-wank thread. Your common-sense observations are not wanted here.
 
Re:. France. Petains policy was to restore French power. He executed that poorly, but he was probably French, not pro German. In this he looked for actions that benefitted France in the long run. The statement to the US ambassador in the summer of 1942 sums this up well. "If you come with three divisions we will fight you, if you come with twenty we will join you."

The French could have supported Germany far more, some French leaders were very supportive. But, the overall activity was one of obstruction. Stalling on shipment of Axis supplies via Tunisia is one example. Stonewalling inquiries about air bases in Morroco for Maritime reconissance is another.

The idea Petain would be eager to make German favorable deal deserves some critical examination.
 
For Barbarossa you have to look at some other factors. Unless the weather is better it goes off at the same time regardless of the Balkans/Africa. In terms of another Army , well logistics is the killer, might help very early on but that's when the Russians crumbled so fast anyway. Once the distance to the rail heads grows, they are just more bodies to overstretch logistics that were on the point of breaking anyway.
If they do not prepare for General Winter better than they historically did, again it just ups the body count. You could use the extra troops instead of the poorer quality allies but you don't get much deeper into Russia unless you change tactics/methodology ie get the natives on your side rather than massacre them, prepare for winter etc. More troops are only an advantage if you can move and supply them.
 
Even without BoB, the English in the summer of 1940 still would prepare for a defense against sea-landings. We now know these landings were impossible, but that is hindsight. The British public expected it and so did many politicians. As mentioned before a cease-fire at this point is impossible.
 

Redbeard

Banned
Re:. France. Petains policy was to restore French power. He executed that poorly, but he was probably French, not pro German. In this he looked for actions that benefitted France in the long run. The statement to the US ambassador in the summer of 1942 sums this up well. "If you come with three divisions we will fight you, if you come with twenty we will join you."

The French could have supported Germany far more, some French leaders were very supportive. But, the overall activity was one of obstruction. Stalling on shipment of Axis supplies via Tunisia is one example. Stonewalling inquiries about air bases in Morroco for Maritime reconissance is another.

The idea Petain would be eager to make German favorable deal deserves some critical examination.
How do we do that now he's dead?

But sure Petain wasn't German or even fond of Germany, but anti-bolschevism had a strong appeal in conservative circles all over Europe. In this context I think regaining control over all French territory would be very tempting if it could be paid by having a number of French Divisions gaining combat experience and glory in Russia.
 

Redbeard

Banned
For Barbarossa you have to look at some other factors. Unless the weather is better it goes off at the same time regardless of the Balkans/Africa. In terms of another Army , well logistics is the killer, might help very early on but that's when the Russians crumbled so fast anyway. Once the distance to the rail heads grows, they are just more bodies to overstretch logistics that were on the point of breaking anyway.
If they do not prepare for General Winter better than they historically did, again it just ups the body count. You could use the extra troops instead of the poorer quality allies but you don't get much deeper into Russia unless you change tactics/methodology ie get the natives on your side rather than massacre them, prepare for winter etc. More troops are only an advantage if you can move and supply them.

I actually think the "logistics" issue is overrated concerning Barbarossa. Sure the Wehrmacht rarely got the supplies out to the frontline that was needed to be 100 % effective, but their Supply Distribution Efficiency (SDE) was much more efficient than that of the Red Army during Barbarossa. In this context I think having extra materiel and a larger strategic reserve would be much more important than improving the SDE and certainly if the general plan still is to conclude the campaign before winter.
 
...

But sure Petain wasn't German or even fond of Germany, but anti-bolschevism had a strong appeal in conservative circles all over Europe. ....

True, but as of 22 June every communist & socialist in Europe (and the US) became anti German. In some respect this was a civil war between the right & left in Europe.
 
Hmm... If the UK doesn't get bombed and is less bogged down in North Africa, could an earlier invasion of Italy or Normandy be possible? Late '42 or early '43?
 

Redbeard

Banned
True, but as of 22 June every communist & socialist in Europe (and the US) became anti German. In some respect this was a civil war between the right & left in Europe.
Exactly, and wouldn't this just push Petain and other conservatives into the German lead anti-bolshevism camp?

From my home country there were many conservative and very nationalistic officers who volunteered for the SS - but only for service on the East Front against the Soviet Union. It was with official Danish Government support and most peculiar some of the officers said they felt like joining the SS because they had not been allowed to live out their martial honour when the Germans invaded in April 1940!

I mean, with that kind of arguments it would appear easy for Petain to find some kind of excuse for supporting Barbarossa - if he had been given a chance. But the problem probably lies here. Seen from 1940-41 Germany France still was the "arch-enemy" and her humiliation had to be enjoyed for some more years - and they had no idea about how much they would need any potential support.
 

Redbeard

Banned
Hmm... If the UK doesn't get bombed and is less bogged down in North Africa, could an earlier invasion of Italy or Normandy be possible? Late '42 or early '43?

I could easily imagine the British planning "to do something", and if Japan stays put or is defeated in the Far East, it certainly will be a much stronger British Empire compared to OTL. My basic claim is however, that the British will not be able to seriously threaten German interests in the time when Barbarossa is planned for (1941).

But of course, if Barbarossa bogs down again, an intact British Empire probably would become a serious threat to Germany, more likely 1944 than 43 or 42 though, but even without active US participation (as long as the Empire is intact).

If Germany follows an "ignore the British" strategy I take that a US active participation in the European war is unlikely or at least postponed, especially if there is no Uboat campaign in the Atlantic. But again, if the USA only weigh in after the SU is defeated, it will be to no avail - we still depend on the Russians holding out.
 
Exactly, and wouldn't this just push Petain and other conservatives into the German lead anti-bolshevism camp?

....

Thats more or less what happened with many right wing French. There were the volunteers for the Charlemagne Division, the Milice, the other Collaborators. Not all pf course Allied offensives in 1942-43 caused many on the right in French politics to dismiss German racism and collaboration, the Resistance was not a Communist movement despite the propaganda of the left. Politics in the French Dark Years were edging into the sort of civil war that Europe was sinking into.

Maybe its expecting too much of Petains group in 1941 but there is a strong disincentive to avoid that. As pointed out before Petains goal from the moment of the Armistice was to restore French power. That can't be accomplished where support of Germany and collaboration splits the internal politics as much as in 1942-44. Turning France into a police state to suppress Communist revolt or leftist resistance interferes in a major way with restoration of Frances economy and its military. If Petain can somehow see the Germans withdraw from their occupation he has a incentive to renege on any agreements as swiftly as practical. Its not like they were dealing with gentlemen who kept their own promises, or who had Europes general interests at heart.
 
...
But of course, if Barbarossa bogs down again, an intact British Empire probably would become a serious threat to Germany, more likely 1944 than 43 or 42 though, but even without active US participation (as long as the Empire is intact).

If Germany follows an "ignore the British" strategy I take that a US active participation in the European war is unlikely or at least postponed, especially if there is no Uboat campaign in the Atlantic. But again, if the USA only weigh in after the SU is defeated, it will be to no avail - we still depend on the Russians holding out.

If Germany is stalemated in the east as OTL the its likely Hitler get frustrated and tries to bomb Britain and interdict imports with submarines and surface raiders. Maybe even threaten a ground invasion.* I don't see the Brits reducing aid to the USSR in this case, it may be increased. While folks will debate the actual help Brit aid was in 1941-42 it was visible, as was the material the US sold to the USSR in 1941.

(*See what I did there? Now we can debate the unmentionable sea mammal from the perspective of 1942 with little of the OTL backstory.)
 
Top