All,
When we try lift the discussion a bit, it does become faily difficult to reach concensus.
Here is one for all:
What should and could Germany do after 1940? The sea mammal excluded, thanks.
1) Make peace at all cost? Not really possible, as Britain seemed not interested
2) Pursue a Middle East strategy, knocking Britain out of the war. That would mean
Malta to be occupied
Crete to be occupied
Full steam ahead for the Suez Canal and the Middle East oil. Maybe not
threatening Soviet.
HOWEVER, that would mean Barbarossa in 1942
3) Invade Soviet in 1941: That, as OTL, leaves Britain in the Middle East, and despite the absolute best outcome of Barbarossa, not really "good enough".
4) Again, full steam for the Middle East, but the objective to link up with Japan in India. Not totally un-realistic (Brooke feared this one).
5) Keep USA out of it, no matter what: But that would mean the submarine warfare becomes impossible
It sort of boils down to:
Knock Britain out of the war: Middle East
Attack Soviet before Stalin attacks
Even with a successful Sea Lion (Not possible, OK, so leave it), Britain could still be holding on to the Middle East. So we can discard any outcome of Sea Lion.
If the Med becomes an Axis lake, Britain is isolated. Incursions from Kenya, etc: not feasible. That solves that.
HOWEVER: If YOU were Hitler, would you dare to focus on the Med? leaving yourselves totally open through 1941 and 1942? I wouldn't.
The hint here is of course: Was a Soviet-German conflict un-avoidable after 1940? If it were, then Barbarossa in 1941 might have been the only option?
Comments?
Ivan