Colonel flagg
Banned
Under what conditions would United kingdom and Nazi Germany make peace in 1940/1941?possibly status quo?
Rommel (or Graziani) takes the Suez and/or Franco either joins the Axis and takes Gibraltar or allows German troops through there territory to take it.
Germany would cut off the UK from resources and Germany would have the Middle East oil.
With German subs taking a toll in the North Atlantic and UK supplies having to go around the Cape of good hope, taking months,
So that the British take the Canary Islands and promptly begin to starve Spain. Bad deal - and that's why Franco did not do that.
From Suez to the oilfields there are still a few hundred kilometers of desert with no rail lines.
Huh, that's exactly the OTL situation. If British convoys went through the Med, it was chiefly to resupply Malta. Most stuff did go around the cape.
Franco knew that the UK would take the Canary islands and had factored that it. From what I've read he didn't join because Hitler refused to forgive $200 million in war debt.
The Axis would have built rail lines, moved oil by truck or some way figured out a way to move the oil.
The UK supplied Egypt and Malta through the Med, so both would have been lost.
Sometimes you place demands you know can't or won't be accepted because you don't want the deal, actually.
Sure, over time. Say a year. Naturally, you do remember what happened to the Kuwaiti oil wells when Saddam had to abandon them. Say another 18 months to re-drill the oilfields.
exactly.
Just no. Egypt was supplied from around Africa. After the Tiger convoy, I think no more than a dozen of cargo ships went all the way from Gibraltar to Alexandria while there were Axis troops in North Africa, and that was because the Brits had a convoy stopping in Malta anyway.
1) So maybe that is the POD, Franco wanted to get back at the Allies for the international brigades?
2)Exactly
3) If Graziani had used the mobile warfare doctrine he came up with and taken the Suez, there is no way for the UK to supply Egypt "from around Africa".
1: Well, he'd fail getting revenge for that since he'd be overthrown by a starving populace before the war was over.
2: How are the Axis forces even going to get there with their logistical deficiencies in the region?
3: And how is he going to take and hold it when Axis logistics were already stretched to breaking point by being in Egypt?
1) So maybe that is the POD, Franco wanted to get back at the Allies for the international brigades?
2)Exactly
3) If Graziani had used the mobile warfare doctrine he came up with and taken the Suez, there is no way for the UK to supply Egypt "from around Africa".
1) So Franco would doom his governance in Spain because of the International Brigades? Franco wasn't stupid enough to do that OTL.1) So maybe that is the POD, Franco wanted to get back at the Allies for the international brigades?
2)Exactly
3) If Graziani had used the mobile warfare doctrine he came up with and taken the Suez, there is no way for the UK to supply Egypt "from around Africa".
Maybe not.
Not a great idea considering what's happening in the SU.
First, Graziani totally lacked the wherewithal to apply such a doctrine, even assuming he had the wits.
Second, keep track of what you are claiming. You wrote that "Egypt was supplied through the Med" - it was not. Facts are facts.
Third, yes, if Suez and Alexandria and Cairo fall to the Axis, Egypt cannot be supplied, not even through the Cape route - obviously, because it's no longer in British hands. But in the previous message you claimed that the British supply lines going the Cape route would be a factor against Britain after the entire Middle East has fallen to the Axis, and that's wrong, since supplies to India or Singapore or Australia, and from there, did go around the Cape in OTL and Britain did not seek terms. In this scenario, the British LOCs would still go around the Cape to reach Port Sudan and Basra, and this thing would be not one whit different from OTL.
1) Once the UK sued for peace, the point would be moot.
2) with the Med closed off to the Allies, by sea.
3) If Graziani would have used the mobile warfare doctrine that he came up with and didn't use, the supply problem would have been much less. After he reached the Suez, by sea.
As has already been pointed out British LOC was already via the cape OTL*. It was only a relatively handful of very important convoys that went to Egypt via the Med once Italy had joined the war. The mass majority went around the cape. *A great deal of the supplies the Commonwealth forces needed was sourced relatively locally from the Middle East or elsewhere in the World in order to reduce the logistical burden. Not everything came from the UK/USA.Maybe not...The whole point is...what if.
Not a great idea...I was agreeing with you, now you are saying your point wasn't a great idea?
Graziani came up with the doctrine, so I would think that he had the wit. As for not being able to apply it...what if he could?
Egypt was supplied through the Med ports and the Suez was a vital supply line for the UK. Are port Said and Alexandria in the Med?
Sending All men, resources, food, etc (supplies) around the Cape would be a major obstacle. Considering that most of Europe was under Nazi control, that might...just might have made them consider an agreement. That is what this whole thread was about.
The real world isn’t a game of hearts of iron.
You can’t just pick “mobile warfare” doctrine and suddenly your armies are awesome until about 1943 when the other doctrines catch up...