What is Evil and Good?: A Three Way WW2
- Thread starter okmangeez
- Start date
Deleted member 1487
Ploesti always gets trotted out in this discussions, but you're failing to note that it was the best defended oil target of WW2. Baku was not that well defended at the height of German penetration in the Caucasus in 1942, let alone in 1940 when the Soviets lacked even experimental radar, modern fighter aircraft, or gun laying computers, while Ploesti in 1943 was fitted with technologies the Soviets lacked even in 1943-45.
Beyond that the very earth around Baku was soaked with oil due to Soviet mishandling of the exploitation of it:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Pike
Frankly if the Allies dropped heaps of incendiaries haphazardly at night they'd set the area on fire.
Well, your the one resorting to strawmen like this, not me. There are multiple instances in this forum where I have quite thoroughly discussed the problems of the Red Army and dissected how they could lead to failure. It's just I also discuss the potential of the Red Army and how they can achieve it. All you ever do is discuss how the Red Army will fail, that it must fail, because... because... you demand it, I guess?
You are quite obviously pretty blind to what they did have going good at the time and repeatedly assume a inability to reach their potential because that would hurt your mental picture of the Soviets as a pack of incompetents.
Oh, so you understand nothing about how Khalkin Ghol unfolded either. Duly noted.
Nor is it about the image, like you are asserting. Stalin ignored both in making his decision to purge, as they were entirely politically driven.
That was one of the excuses added into the charges, but it was hardly the impetus for it. We have multiple instances of people failing Stalin in much more important matters (such as getting entire armies wiped out) that end with no one being shot.
Something you are doing plenty, it just isn't Soviet propaganda that your image of Stalin is being confused by.
And I have the actual history of strategic bombing to back me up. You have nothing but a blatantly obvious anti-Soviet agenda.
Which would have meant nothing had the invasion been handled as incompetently as it was earlier in the Winter War, when the Red Army also had overwhelming use of material. Massive superiority in quantitative factors means nothing without some underlying quality.
Wishful thinking. The officer in charge has direct bearing on how the invasion will go. Good officers can do wonders with even the worst of soldiers.
The terrain in the west, the Trans-Caucasus regions, are mountains broken up with hills. The Soviets have a large force of mountain forces to use in this area.
Supposition without evidence. Stalin had learned his lesson of half-assing an invasion from the Finland fiasco and it is more likely he will properly prepare. It is what he did when he prepared for the invasion of the Baltics and Romania during the ultimatums he issued to them.
Wishful thinking. The Turkish and Iranian air forces would be promptly overwhelmed as the Finnish air force was and the RAF would mostly be defending the homeland against the Germans.
And you ceaselessly assume that the scapegoat he finds will be something that harms future Soviet efforts. The consistency in your efforts to denigrate Soviet capabilities is telling.
Already factored that in. Even if taken by surprise, a Red Army which has been given the room to continue rebuilding by '42-'43 would still be skilled enough to pull off a fighting retreat back to the D'niepr while suffering much fewer and smaller encirclement then OTL, roughly what happened in certain stages with Operation Blau OTL except much further west.
Well, yes. Because it represents a prime example of an oil facility getting directly struck with the bombers slated to strike it actually getting their bombs on target, which is more then could be said for the likely results of Pike. Reality is that industrial targets are hard to destroy.
Except they wouldn't, because those incendiaries would likely not land anywhere near the oil fields as your own link testifies:
"In any event, Allied bombers would probably have been ineffective in destroying the fields, as in 1940 British night bombing raids against Germany were so inaccurate that few bombs managed to be dropped within miles of their targets, a disadvantage that remained for the whole war. With around 100 bombers each capable of carrying only half a ton of bombs, low payload and poor accuracy made it is extremely unlikely that they would have any great effect on Soviet oil facilities anyway."
The entire assertion of Pike doing massive damage to Soviet oil is based on a over-romantic view of strategic bombing that simply isn't born out by history at all.
Last edited:
Deleted member 1487
This is the source of that comment:
http://nationalinterest.org/blog/th...razy-plan-bomb-russia-almost-lost-world-14402
An online news blog about foreign policy.
Comparing the attacks against German cities inland without night navigation methods versus against Baku, which was on a sea coast and on moonlit nights was highly visible and navigable due to the reflections on the Caspian Sea, is something entirely different. The plan specifically called for navigation by the coast line as Baku is at a very unique land feature on the Caspian, so would be easy to find:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a1/Baku_pipelines.svg
Discussion on this topic:
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=19737
It was a major oil producing area too, so a MUCH larger target than a German city, even one as big as Berlin. The Butt Report said 1/3rd bombers were getting within 5 miles of a German city by dead reckoning, which is plenty good to hit the huge oilfields of Baku and in fact within 10 miles of Baku with coastal navigation will be sufficient with small incendiaries spread out over the oil soaked ground. There was no need to hit the city proper. Hitting the oil refineries wasn't necessary, getting incendiaries on the oil soaked ground around the pumping stations was all that was needed.
And strikes against coastal German cities, which would have everything you posited they would have against Baku. And strikes against border cities. Oh, and you automatically assume that the British will have night navigation against Baku despite totally lacking them in 1940.
"The requested topic does not exist."
Given that the British in 1940 missed entire German cities, that isn't saying much.
If the British can hit the ground around the pumping stations. And if they can hit it enough to start enough fires to overwhelm Soviet fire fighting efforts, which were quite good as the area was already something of a fire hazard. And if the Germans developed the atomic bomb in 1940, they could have knocked Britain out of the war.
There is a lot to be said for doing a thing as opposed to talking about doing a thing and we know what the record of strategic bombing enthusiasts results when talking about doing was as opposed to the results when actually doing.
That would mean the bombs land on nothing. Not refineries, not pumping stations, and certainly not oil soaked ground. Here is an image just a few miles within Baku:
Look at all that invisible oil.
Deleted member 1487
http://www.azer.com/aiweb/categories/magazine/92_folder/92_articles/92_letter_mackay.html
Apparently the last number in the address got clipped:
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=197374
http://www.sjvgeology.org/history/baku.html
Apparently the last number in the address got clipped:
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=197374
http://www.sjvgeology.org/history/baku.html
And would you look at that. A lot of the same points I made are raised in that thread and never adequately addressed. Even quite a number of points made about the Ploesti raids (the inexperience of the crews and planners in the raid as well as the much bigger distances) are quite applicable to a Pike raid. They even raise some points I didn't, like how the Baku oil fields are easier to repair then the Ploesti ones.
You simply have not done anything to show that the British can land enough bombs to overwhelm Soviet firefighting and repair efforts and do much greater damage to a large area. And all in a handful of missions carried out by ill-trained and inexperienced crews flying extraordinary distances with much smaller bomb loads against a much larger target
No, i just say that it will take time as it will not like snapping a finger and results will be obtained, success it's not a given and they can fail and all you discuss is how Red Army will succeed as it must suceed, because...beacuse...you demand it, I guess.
All i ever said it's that the at the time of the winter war and throught the initial phase of Barbarossa, the entire soviet armed forces were a damned mess because the man in charge had decided that political reliability was more important that efficiency and his overall administration of the Red Army, the preparation or better lack of preparation for the war, the morale and his idea that arrest, torture and killing people to motivate the other was genial.
My opinion, is that without the clusterfuck that was initial invasion and the war for survival that become the Eastern Front, we had never seen the Red Army we know it as Stalin had other priority than efficient armed forces that can overthrow him...and while he had basically politically neutered them with the OTL purge, he was a damned paranoid he will be never satisfied as he never stopped purging people even after the war, even if in lesser quantities as after all he had learned his lesson.
No i assume that the ability to reach their potential it's not a god given right and different circumstance can prevent it and in any case it will be not immediate, as in this case just some months has passed from the end of the winter war and if the reform were underway at the time of Barbarossa, excuse me if i think that by the moment of ITTL Soviet Dow things are not changed by much and a lot of problems that were on their way to be resolved in OTL still exist or do you think that the STAVKA using magic will resolve the situation overnight.
Basically i see them as human being not idealizated image.
Image is politically important in any political entity and expecially in a dictatorships with a cult of personality like the URSS, so yes head will roll
Still the Finn caused staggering loss to the VVS and the RAF (plus the French if they still fight) without Italy in the war can move air asset north and have pilot and aircraft of much better qualities than what the Soviet had faced before, so i remain of my opinion that the initial stage of air warfare in the region will not end well for the Soviet.
We are in the middle of 40, between here and 42-43 there is enough time to change a lot of how the red army will develop expecially during wartime, so saying that by that period all will be peachy and even if taken by mild surprise they will be good it's a little overoptimistic; frankly there are not enough information to even theorize this expect great faith in SOviet Army and system
Quantity is a quality on her own, and yes while the Red Army was better lead in the second stage and more focused...remain the fact that in the end the Soviet had 460.000 men (with more coming), 1300 aircraft and 3000 tanks against 150.000 tired finns low on ammunition of any type and general supply and without hope of relieve
, so no were are not talking about a great and difficult strategic victory; as Italy don't get any cookies for beat Abyssinia (except maybe the fact that was at the edge of her logistic line) the URSS don't get any for beat after 3 months Finland suffering in the effort more than 300.000 casualities
That were planned invasion started by soviet political action; this is a reaction to an attack and a pubblic humiliation (regardless of the result, even if you think all will be A-OK) and the boss can quickly unlearn the just learned lesson, plus there is the fact that more time they wait, more time the British (and possible the French) will have for bringing troops in Turkey and Iran.
Because I actually looked at how the Red Army was evolving in 1941 prior to Barbarossa and what Soviet plans for the development of the Red Army and why it was that they were involving (hint: it's in response to combat experience obtained during a war) in that time frame was instead of blithely assuming that Stalin would just do things.
Correct.
And incorrect. Stalin was historically steadily putting more and more competent men and prioritizing efficiency and the overall administration of the Red Army in early-'41. Zhukov was already Stalin's number one military adviser. The Front Commanders like Kuznetsov, Timoshenko, and Shaposhnikov had been selected for their military credentials and not political ones. Guys like Rokossovsky, Vlasov, Vatutin, Vasilevsky, and Konev were army or corps commanders. Others like Rodin, Malinovsky, Rodmistrov, and so-on were divisional commanders. The German invasion accelerated this trend in some ways and set it back in others, but it did not create it. If anything, ITTL this trend will be entirely accelerated as the Soviets are now in a war providing them with useful combat experience yet avoiding all the devastation and destruction of their forces and resources that set it back OTL. And the Soviets, for all their flaws, were quick learners.
And you assume the different circumstances will always prevent it. You never assume that different circumstances can accelerate it. Circumstances like, say, being in a war on the periphery that doesn't do a lot of damage to the heart of Soviet resources yet nonetheless provides them with plentiful combat experience. You know... like ITTL.
I think that by being in a war, STAVKA will be able to identify the problems faster and will have the impetus to correct them. You know, just like what happened OTL. Your right that they won't happen overnight ITTL, that's just a straw man you've dreamed up about my position, but your wrong that they won't happen faster compared to OTL.
No, it's pretty clear that you seem them as an idealized image. It's just that the idealized image in this case is of people who can't do anything.
And you keep asserting that there will be an image problem. The Soviets will just be able to correctly observe that very little damage was done and exaggerate the number of aircraft they shot down (overclaiming is pretty standard, particularly the worse trained your pilots are) and come to the conclusion that they decisively defeated a Anglo-French attempt to destroy their oil production. This is not an image problem by any stretch of the imagination.
North to Britain, you mean.
Most of which for the positive as the Red Army will be benefiting from practical military experience and have the urgent impetus of war to implement those lessons ASAP instead of having to feel it out during peacetime.
Hardly. I even drew a direct comparison with a historical event. And it would hardly be "peachy", as the retreat in the face of Blau was a pretty desperate affair. It just wasn't the utter catastrophe Barbarossa was.
Not if it is completely absent of quality of itself.
Which is what mattered. The Red Army improved in response to it's experience. IT did not get worse. That means that ITTL the Red Army will improve as the war progresses and not get worse.
Which does not at all mean it won't be planned like you are asserting. Stalin was perfectly okay with patiently waiting for his moment (he even has a quote about how one of the best things in life is waiting for the right moment) to strike and the idea that he would rush into it runs in contradiction to his cautious nature.
Only because it's convenient too you. We have actual historical example that he did learn those lessons and no examples that he unlearned them.
Last edited:
Shadow Master
Banned
I have not yet heard back from the OP to my original questions, but by further reading I have new questions:
No one seems to be discussing the PR value of a surprise attack upon the Soviet Union, by the decadent western Imperialists, just as Stalin and co have been saying would happen sooner or later. Now Stalin can truefully point out the the peace loving people of the USSR were treacherously attacked by the decadent British and French empires, and so now they must fight them with a whole heart, and where ever their evil exists.
So far from a bad thing for Stalin, politically, as no one will be speaking out against an all out war with Britan and France in retaliation for their treachery. And of course, no matter what damage is done, Stalin can always make it out to be worse than it really is, in odrer to stir up fervent support for the war, and there really isn't anything the allies can say at this point that will change that.
The other side of this coin is, how does the USA react to the dasterdly doings of the British and French? At the least, I would expect that their will be no LL in this ATL, not to mention no use of US military forces to support them in any way outside of US territorial waters.
No one seems to be discussing the PR value of a surprise attack upon the Soviet Union, by the decadent western Imperialists, just as Stalin and co have been saying would happen sooner or later. Now Stalin can truefully point out the the peace loving people of the USSR were treacherously attacked by the decadent British and French empires, and so now they must fight them with a whole heart, and where ever their evil exists.
So far from a bad thing for Stalin, politically, as no one will be speaking out against an all out war with Britan and France in retaliation for their treachery. And of course, no matter what damage is done, Stalin can always make it out to be worse than it really is, in odrer to stir up fervent support for the war, and there really isn't anything the allies can say at this point that will change that.
The other side of this coin is, how does the USA react to the dasterdly doings of the British and French? At the least, I would expect that their will be no LL in this ATL, not to mention no use of US military forces to support them in any way outside of US territorial waters.
That would be the POD. Stalin, instead of agreeing to a peace, decides to create a puppet government (which was actually the plan in OTL).
Sweden and Norway are definitely nervous. Sweden especially, since it wants to remain neutral. However, with the fall of Norway (it happens per OTL), Sweden is more determined to stay neutral and not be invaded by the Soviets or the Nazis.
Yes. It was a surprise attack, thus the reaction from Stalin being a DoW.
I doubt even if the USSR declared war on France and Britain that the Soviets would magically start cooperating well with the Germans. I would expect it to be like a quasi-alliance, works together sometimes, but mostly still economic partners. Though, I wouldn't be surprised if the Soviets did conduct some air raids in the Battle of Britain.
Norway fell to the Nazis like OTL. The British were still too late to help defend it, as Sweden and Norway didn't want anything to do with the Allies after the fall of Finland.
VVS will definitely strike the French and British homeland with some help from the Nazis, but the fighting will mainly be focused on the British and French possessions in the Middle East.
Or a very limited Land Lease. Remember, it was mainly Roosevelt that had the say in the matter. He will send Land Lease to Britain and France (Especially France), but will most likely keep it a secret or lower the figures of the equipment being sent.
The US is still far away from this story. They're still the isolationist trading partner that we know.
Shadow Master
Banned
Ok, so nothing changes in Scandinavia other than Finland. That being so, I don't see anything possibly changing for the fall of France, except that ITTL, it will be a total fall with no peace possible short of total surrender. This gets you the France fights on part, as their navy has nothing to loose once their entire homeland is occupied by Axis armies. What TTL does not get you, is a somehow stronger France than OTL.
You say that like there would actually be any doubt about it. ITTL you have created some very strange bedfellows, in that, through no super secret, dasterdly and underhanded, Hitler/Stalin intentional pack, you have forced them into a situation where they are both suddenly fighting the exact same enemies who, by their own actions, have managed to provide not only a casus beli (sp) for the USSR to go all in, but where by they make themselves the bad guys in the mind of the other nations of the world, most importantly the USA.
That is ok, and not to important to your story, as that would likely have been the result either way, I just needed to know for sure that that was the case.
I agree that the ground fighting will be taking place mainly in the middle east. Still don't see the case where, forced by allied treachery into an unexpected alliance with Nazi Germany, the Soviets are going to refrain from going all out to help smash the allies homelands.
Actually, I think you are confusing two very different things, namely:
The use of US military forces to escort commerce - something historically within the POTUS's authority (although Roosevelt was really, really pushing this OTL).
And the sending of aid (both in war making material and financial support) to beligerents - something historically within the CONGRESS's authority.
He got away with the use of the USN as he did mainly because the US puplic was kept in the dark about it, and that was in a different world from this one, there the French and British didn't go around making surprise attacks against Neutral nations. He would not be able to get congress to pass aid packages to either the British or French in ITTL after their attack upon the USSR.
So no LL to either, and very likely he will not be able to risk being discovered attempting to use the USN to help protect their commercial shipping outside of american waters.
It's your ATL, of course, but I think that what you have done is create a very interesting POD that deserves to be explored, it just might not be the ATL you seem to want to write, though.
Cheers, and good luck.
I will be following this one, Subscribed!
Last edited:
Chapter 2
There are many speculations on why France did not surrender on that faithful day of June 25th, 1940. After all, most of northern France had fallen and their military was thrown into a disarray, while most of the cabinet desired for peace with the Germans. However, after analyzing several key documents and reports after the war, it became clear that the French was far from being defeated; 500,000 men, 700 air crafts, and over a thousand tanks that were either in southern France or were slowly withdrawing to southern France. Additionally, Prime Minister Paul Reynaud, the staunch anti-peace cabinet member, refused to resign and insisted that France continue the fight. This was mainly because of his fear that the Nazis and the Soviets would occupy France and take revenge for the attack on Baku. Additionally, he was well aware of the vulnerable position of French Syria and believed that the Soviet offer for peace would be giving up French Syria, leaving British possessions in the Middle East as open targets. As a result, Prime Minister Reynaud refused to resign and overturned the French cabinet's objections, claiming that those who wished to surrender French sovereignty over to the Nazis and Communists as "traitors to the Republic." He reminded all of them, especially the pro-peace Marshal Philippe Petain, how Finland ended up after signing a "peace" with the Soviets. Though this did not silence the opposition, it did mute them quite well, as many of them did not want the Soviets to dictate their terms on them. On June 26th, Prime Minister Reynaud made a speech to the French people, declaring that France would never surrender and would fight "from Marseille to Hanoi (Indochina), our country shall never surrender to the Nazis and the Soviets." After the speech, the French capital was moved from occupied Paris to the port city of Marseille in the south. The speech was motivational, and though speculated to have been copied from Churchill's "We Shall Fight On" speech, was a morale boost to the badly defeated French Army and the morale stricken French population.
To Germany, this was no surprise. Hitler and his General Staff had planned for a long war against France and had never really expected them to collapse within a month of fighting. As soon as it became clear that the French would not be asking for peace, Hitler had several options which ranged from continuing the war against the French and fighting a bitter battle to occupy the rest of France or to make a silent cease fire agreement in order to avoid the loss of men and equipment that would be needed for his planned invasion of the Soviet Union. His choice was a middle ground, a cease fire with the French and a request to the Soviets to possibly send troops in aiding the offensive into the French homeland. Despite the deep mistrust of both sides, the Soviet Union agreed to send a small expeditionary force of 100,000 men through Germany and into the front lines of France, mainly to use the event as propaganda to show that the French "imperialists" would be paying the price of attacking Mother Russia. The troops, led by Army General Georgy Zhukov, a popular USSR general that was a hero of Khalkhin Gol, were sent to the border between occupied France and free France. Fighting had died down heavily, mainly due to the secret Cease Fire agreement (mainly signed by the French to allow itself to reorganize and reinforce itself with British reinforcements) and the German forces in the area were either shipped back to the Germany or remained as garrisoning forces. However, the Soviet Union had no idea that such agreement was signed and fighting broke out again on July 8th on the border when Soviet troops broke through the French border defense and began to spill into southern France. The French government demanded explanation, but Germany staunchly denied that their own troops had breached the border, claiming that the Soviets were bent on getting revenge for Baku. This was all a masterful plan by Hitler to not only make the Soviets bleed early on, therefore softening up the defenses of the USSR, but also to continue the hostilities between the Allies and the USSR. Hitler personally ordered for the supply lines to the Soviet forces thin, just enough to make them an additional problem to the Allies, but not enough to completely destroy or occupy much of the free French territory.
Stalin was well aware that he needed troops for the invasion of Iran and Turkey, but the offer to strike back at the French (he also supposed that Germany would be assisting) was too tempting to pass up. In addition to the expeditionary force, the VVS were able to use German bases to strike at Britain and France, striking at the latter a bit more successfully than the former. Both France and Britain still had their air force, so the Soviets were unable to find much success, but did manage to bomb cities in "retaliation of Baku." Nevertheless, Western Europe was considered a "backwater" theater by Stalin, as his main focus was now on the Asian Front against Iran and Turkey. The forces that had been gathered numbered at a strong 700,000 soldiers, 3500 tanks, and nearly 2000 air crafts for the invasion of Turkey and Iran. The forces had originally been planned to be used to take over the Baltic States until the French and British attack on Baku. The Soviet troops were quickly brought down south and within a matter of a month, were ready to invade the Middle East. Learning his lesson from the Winter War that humiliated the Soviet forces against a much weaker and smaller force, Stalin appointed Marshal Boris Shaposhnikov, the marshal that saved the Soviets forces in the Winter War from a complete defeat, to take down the Iranians and the Turks. Fortunately for Stalin, he had chosen the right man for the job as Marshal Shaposhnikov was both competent and tactical, as his moves during the war would later show. Despite the USSR learning lessons from Finland, it still held onto the belief that Turkey and Iran would be relatively easy to beat, mainly because Russia had defeated both Turkey and Persia back in WW1. Though Stalin did approach with caution, he still held firm beliefs that with the reformed officer system and actually experienced leaders, the Soviet Union would be able to avoid the problems from the Winter War and carry out the war with ease. Though the USSR did not make the same blunders from the Winter War, it would face new problems and lessons from the Turkish and Iranian Military.
Britain and France were both well aware that the Soviets would intrude into the Middle East and began to ship supplies and equipment to both Turkey and Iran to the best of their ability. However, due to the invasion of France by Germany, only Britain was able to send substantial equipment to the two nations, though most of the aid was directed towards Turkey. When the invasion began, the Iranians manage to muster up 10 divisions (about 100,000 soldiers), 150 obsolete tanks imported before the Second World War began, 50 Cruiser Tank MK IV given to Iran by the British, and around 400 air crafts, 250 of which were obsolete. However, thanks to British intelligence and support, the Iranian Army was not caught off guard when the invasion began on June 28th and fortifications were set up to defend against the Soviets. Turkey was even better equipped and ready for the Soviet invasion, as they already had a decent military to begin with. Thanks to earlier British support (Britain sent 25 million pounds to support the Turkish military's growth in 1939, along with rifles and other pieces of equipment), Turkey fielded an army of 400,000 men that were moderately equipped. In addition to the large number of soldiers, Turkey had 500 tanks (aided by the British and the French) and 800 air crafts of all types, including trained pilots and personnel (around 200 were actually British and French planes and pilots to aid the Turks). On top of all that, the British and French troops based in the Middle East (the 1st Cavalry Division, 7th Armored Division, 6th Infantry Division, and several other variety of divisions) also assisted in the defense of Turkey, in order to protect British oil in Iraq and the French colony of Syria. Over the course of the war, several more units would be shipped to the Middle East to aid Turkey and Iran, though the latter would still fall in early '42.
The USSR requested Germany to apply pressure upon the French and British by possibly antagonizing them in North Africa, thus forcing the British and French to divert their resources to defend the strategic port city of Alexandria and the Suez Canal in the case of a German breakthrough. However, with Italy maintaining a neutral stance against France and Britain (mainly due to the fact that the Italian Army was still disorganized and critically under equipped, along with the fact that France did not fall), Germany rejected the Soviet proposal and instead proposed that Germany would plan for new offensives into southern France and undergo Operation Sealion, the invasion of Britain (both were false, as Germany did neither). However, to honor its "alliance" with the Soviets, Hitler dutifully declared war on Turkey and Iran, knowing full well that both were now in the Allied camps because of the Soviet invasion and any attempts of diplomacy would now be turned down. Satisfied, the USSR would begin its operations with bombing Iranian and Turkish air bases and overrunning the borders with overwhelming manpower and equipment. Thus beginning what would be known as the Middle Eastern War.
There are many speculations on why France did not surrender on that faithful day of June 25th, 1940. After all, most of northern France had fallen and their military was thrown into a disarray, while most of the cabinet desired for peace with the Germans. However, after analyzing several key documents and reports after the war, it became clear that the French was far from being defeated; 500,000 men, 700 air crafts, and over a thousand tanks that were either in southern France or were slowly withdrawing to southern France. Additionally, Prime Minister Paul Reynaud, the staunch anti-peace cabinet member, refused to resign and insisted that France continue the fight. This was mainly because of his fear that the Nazis and the Soviets would occupy France and take revenge for the attack on Baku. Additionally, he was well aware of the vulnerable position of French Syria and believed that the Soviet offer for peace would be giving up French Syria, leaving British possessions in the Middle East as open targets. As a result, Prime Minister Reynaud refused to resign and overturned the French cabinet's objections, claiming that those who wished to surrender French sovereignty over to the Nazis and Communists as "traitors to the Republic." He reminded all of them, especially the pro-peace Marshal Philippe Petain, how Finland ended up after signing a "peace" with the Soviets. Though this did not silence the opposition, it did mute them quite well, as many of them did not want the Soviets to dictate their terms on them. On June 26th, Prime Minister Reynaud made a speech to the French people, declaring that France would never surrender and would fight "from Marseille to Hanoi (Indochina), our country shall never surrender to the Nazis and the Soviets." After the speech, the French capital was moved from occupied Paris to the port city of Marseille in the south. The speech was motivational, and though speculated to have been copied from Churchill's "We Shall Fight On" speech, was a morale boost to the badly defeated French Army and the morale stricken French population.
To Germany, this was no surprise. Hitler and his General Staff had planned for a long war against France and had never really expected them to collapse within a month of fighting. As soon as it became clear that the French would not be asking for peace, Hitler had several options which ranged from continuing the war against the French and fighting a bitter battle to occupy the rest of France or to make a silent cease fire agreement in order to avoid the loss of men and equipment that would be needed for his planned invasion of the Soviet Union. His choice was a middle ground, a cease fire with the French and a request to the Soviets to possibly send troops in aiding the offensive into the French homeland. Despite the deep mistrust of both sides, the Soviet Union agreed to send a small expeditionary force of 100,000 men through Germany and into the front lines of France, mainly to use the event as propaganda to show that the French "imperialists" would be paying the price of attacking Mother Russia. The troops, led by Army General Georgy Zhukov, a popular USSR general that was a hero of Khalkhin Gol, were sent to the border between occupied France and free France. Fighting had died down heavily, mainly due to the secret Cease Fire agreement (mainly signed by the French to allow itself to reorganize and reinforce itself with British reinforcements) and the German forces in the area were either shipped back to the Germany or remained as garrisoning forces. However, the Soviet Union had no idea that such agreement was signed and fighting broke out again on July 8th on the border when Soviet troops broke through the French border defense and began to spill into southern France. The French government demanded explanation, but Germany staunchly denied that their own troops had breached the border, claiming that the Soviets were bent on getting revenge for Baku. This was all a masterful plan by Hitler to not only make the Soviets bleed early on, therefore softening up the defenses of the USSR, but also to continue the hostilities between the Allies and the USSR. Hitler personally ordered for the supply lines to the Soviet forces thin, just enough to make them an additional problem to the Allies, but not enough to completely destroy or occupy much of the free French territory.
Stalin was well aware that he needed troops for the invasion of Iran and Turkey, but the offer to strike back at the French (he also supposed that Germany would be assisting) was too tempting to pass up. In addition to the expeditionary force, the VVS were able to use German bases to strike at Britain and France, striking at the latter a bit more successfully than the former. Both France and Britain still had their air force, so the Soviets were unable to find much success, but did manage to bomb cities in "retaliation of Baku." Nevertheless, Western Europe was considered a "backwater" theater by Stalin, as his main focus was now on the Asian Front against Iran and Turkey. The forces that had been gathered numbered at a strong 700,000 soldiers, 3500 tanks, and nearly 2000 air crafts for the invasion of Turkey and Iran. The forces had originally been planned to be used to take over the Baltic States until the French and British attack on Baku. The Soviet troops were quickly brought down south and within a matter of a month, were ready to invade the Middle East. Learning his lesson from the Winter War that humiliated the Soviet forces against a much weaker and smaller force, Stalin appointed Marshal Boris Shaposhnikov, the marshal that saved the Soviets forces in the Winter War from a complete defeat, to take down the Iranians and the Turks. Fortunately for Stalin, he had chosen the right man for the job as Marshal Shaposhnikov was both competent and tactical, as his moves during the war would later show. Despite the USSR learning lessons from Finland, it still held onto the belief that Turkey and Iran would be relatively easy to beat, mainly because Russia had defeated both Turkey and Persia back in WW1. Though Stalin did approach with caution, he still held firm beliefs that with the reformed officer system and actually experienced leaders, the Soviet Union would be able to avoid the problems from the Winter War and carry out the war with ease. Though the USSR did not make the same blunders from the Winter War, it would face new problems and lessons from the Turkish and Iranian Military.
Britain and France were both well aware that the Soviets would intrude into the Middle East and began to ship supplies and equipment to both Turkey and Iran to the best of their ability. However, due to the invasion of France by Germany, only Britain was able to send substantial equipment to the two nations, though most of the aid was directed towards Turkey. When the invasion began, the Iranians manage to muster up 10 divisions (about 100,000 soldiers), 150 obsolete tanks imported before the Second World War began, 50 Cruiser Tank MK IV given to Iran by the British, and around 400 air crafts, 250 of which were obsolete. However, thanks to British intelligence and support, the Iranian Army was not caught off guard when the invasion began on June 28th and fortifications were set up to defend against the Soviets. Turkey was even better equipped and ready for the Soviet invasion, as they already had a decent military to begin with. Thanks to earlier British support (Britain sent 25 million pounds to support the Turkish military's growth in 1939, along with rifles and other pieces of equipment), Turkey fielded an army of 400,000 men that were moderately equipped. In addition to the large number of soldiers, Turkey had 500 tanks (aided by the British and the French) and 800 air crafts of all types, including trained pilots and personnel (around 200 were actually British and French planes and pilots to aid the Turks). On top of all that, the British and French troops based in the Middle East (the 1st Cavalry Division, 7th Armored Division, 6th Infantry Division, and several other variety of divisions) also assisted in the defense of Turkey, in order to protect British oil in Iraq and the French colony of Syria. Over the course of the war, several more units would be shipped to the Middle East to aid Turkey and Iran, though the latter would still fall in early '42.
The USSR requested Germany to apply pressure upon the French and British by possibly antagonizing them in North Africa, thus forcing the British and French to divert their resources to defend the strategic port city of Alexandria and the Suez Canal in the case of a German breakthrough. However, with Italy maintaining a neutral stance against France and Britain (mainly due to the fact that the Italian Army was still disorganized and critically under equipped, along with the fact that France did not fall), Germany rejected the Soviet proposal and instead proposed that Germany would plan for new offensives into southern France and undergo Operation Sealion, the invasion of Britain (both were false, as Germany did neither). However, to honor its "alliance" with the Soviets, Hitler dutifully declared war on Turkey and Iran, knowing full well that both were now in the Allied camps because of the Soviet invasion and any attempts of diplomacy would now be turned down. Satisfied, the USSR would begin its operations with bombing Iranian and Turkish air bases and overrunning the borders with overwhelming manpower and equipment. Thus beginning what would be known as the Middle Eastern War.
Last edited:
Well things are certainly getting complicated and bloody. Both in the Mid East and in France, Russia is getting battle trained troops, but also possibly losing out of keeping its resources in one theater. If enough Russian troops are lost in France, maybe along with Zhukov, it may hamper their operations against Iran and Turkey.
I look forward to updates on what is happening in the US and Japan and how they may play their parts in this tangles weave of ideologies.
I look forward to updates on what is happening in the US and Japan and how they may play their parts in this tangles weave of ideologies.
Quite possibly. And the fact remains that if Turkey and Iran doesn't collapse fast and the Germans invade the USSR, the USSR might be looking at a two-front war that Hitler so feared...
The US and Japan will be covered in the update after the next (as the next update will contain info of the Soviet invasion). Italy will also be covered in future updates, along with Spain, China, and the other minor powers that will have very different fates ITTL.
Yep, and with it, the Axis alliance is very different. Italy is opting out (though they will still look to expand). Japan is also a big if. Nobody knows what they will do yet.
Also, just something to note. The Baltic states are still free and independent from the USSR, but their fate is still unknown...
Italy will look to the Soviet troops in France and will not like it very much to put it mildly
The US reaction at the attack on the URSS will not be to immediate cry: OH my good the evil europeans attack a neutral nation. The Soviet Union had occupied half of Poland and all of Finland till that moment (plus his material support to the Germans) so they will hardly can be seen as innocent victim...and them fighting with the Germans and having France on the rope will scare a lot of people as OTL Fall of France, so no, i doubt that LL will be rejected ITTL
Japan, will go probably more or less as OTL but much depend on her move on French Indochina as that started the american embargo...in any case with the situation in China starting to cost a lot more of the expected everyone in Tokyo will want to do something about it.
The US reaction at the attack on the URSS will not be to immediate cry: OH my good the evil europeans attack a neutral nation. The Soviet Union had occupied half of Poland and all of Finland till that moment (plus his material support to the Germans) so they will hardly can be seen as innocent victim...and them fighting with the Germans and having France on the rope will scare a lot of people as OTL Fall of France, so no, i doubt that LL will be rejected ITTL
Japan, will go probably more or less as OTL but much depend on her move on French Indochina as that started the american embargo...in any case with the situation in China starting to cost a lot more of the expected everyone in Tokyo will want to do something about it.