If Italy was neutral it was far more likely it would attack Yugoslavia before Greece.
A neutral Italy could have beat Yugoslavia in 1940 without German help and without having to join the Axis powers.
Yup, certainly Yugoslavia was partly to appease German allies, but the main reason Germany allowed it to happen was becuse of fear of a Yugoslavia joining the allies. And don't forget Hungary and Bulgaria are both still in the Axis in this TL, and Germany might feel they have to help them regaining their lawful territory, and at the same time squash a potential threat to the Reich.
Italy would probably move to take Fiume during the Axis attack on Yugoslavia, but any further advance would jeopardize their neutrality.
I dont think Britain would declare war on Italy if it invaded Yugoslavia at this time.
German help would not be needed in taking it either.
Yugoslavia was a house of cards.
Maybe, but against Italy alone, it would have done considerable damage to their armed forces. Britain already had its hands full with Germany which is why it overlooked Stalins invasions of Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Eastern Poland, Bessarabia and attempted invasion of Finland (apart from sending volunteers in the last case)
The Hungarians and maybe the Bulgarians would join the attack on Yugoslavia.
The Croat divisions would rebel.
Yugoslavia would be lucky to last a month.
This would leave Germany free to attack the USSR a month earlier with more men and aircraft.
In the invasion of the USSR the Axis would not have the Italian 8th Army or the Italian Air Force (for what it was worth) but they would still have a large number of Italian volunteers who would be better equiped and supplied.
Moscow would be attacked in November but would not fall and the Axis troops would suffer very heavy losses.
This however may well put Hitler off attacking Stalingrad one year later.
Well, the war would have lasted longer. 1939 to about 1946 or 1947.
Not one chance in hell. In 1945, Germany gets treated with instant sunshine in a can. Endgame.
Hungary was still pretty weak at this point. Obviously there will be a few logistical problems with the Yugoslav army, but ultimately if the Italian alliance does defeat them, they will still have to face the mother of all resistance movements.
This would leave Germany free to attack the USSR a month earlier with more men and aircraft.
Why would the Italian army suddenly be better equipped or supplied?In the invasion of the USSR the Axis would not have the Italian 8th Army or the Italian Air Force (for what it was worth) but they would still have a large number of Italian volunteers who would be better equiped and supplied.
Not logical. The fighting in Stalingrad didn't stop the Germans from fighting in other cities later, like Warsaw.Moscow would be attacked in November but would not fall and the Axis troops would suffer very heavy losses.
This however may well put Hitler off attacking Stalingrad one year later.
The British and the Americans started their nuclear program before Japan attacked Pearl Harbor.Just because the US had nukes in 1945 doesn't mean they use them on Germany in 1945. First and foremost, without Italy hindering them, the Germans may have done even better in the USSR. No North Africa, no Yugoslavia, no Greece. Those are quite a few reinforcements. The Communists would have tasted quite a bit more hell from those freed up troops.
No way Speer could have gotten the entire German industry protected against nuclear bombs or spread out without decimating the industrial production.Most importantly, Speer made most factories underground or secured. Nuke the cities. So what? Slave labor and underground factories would continue to churn out jets and tanks and so on. Unlike Japan, you will have to occupy Germany as long as Hitler lives. With only two nukes, Hitler would have seen the US bluff and proven it just to be that.
Prepare for a guerilla mwar.
This is definitely worth considering. As someone else mentioned just because the Germans get to Moscow doesn't mean they take it quickly. It's pretty common to think that an earlier Barbarossa helps Germany a lot but it is interesting to consider this possibility, where a bit of a head start and more men just gets a big German force stuck in Moscow when Zkukov's counteroffensive begins, resulting in a big blow to the Germans.The air war goes as scheduled and little difference is made as regards Barbarossa, although one possible result of an extra week or so would be hideous sub-zero temperatures and many German divisions involved in street fighting in Moscow just as Zhukov's divisions attack. Yikes!
I've read this remark about 5 times in this thread.
As far as I know it's not true.
Barbarossa couldn't start any earlier then it did in real life, thanks chiefly to the weather. By attacking before the rasputiza (or rasputitza or any other spelling) is gone, the German armies, who have much to gain by moving fast, will be moving much slower.
This would mean much more of the Soviet armies get to escape encirclements they didn't get out IRL.
IIRC the only advantage the Germans have in this timeline is some of their equipment could be in a better state, but even that's debatable.
Why would the Italian army suddenly be better equipped or supplied?
If anything, without facing Brits like O'Connor in the Desert War, the Italians (read Mussolini) will overestimate themselves even more then IRL.
Not logical. The fighting in Stalingrad didn't stop the Germans from fighting in other cities later, like Warsaw.
If anything, the Germans will get that much-needed experience sooner.
How the Germans are going to suffer worse casualties then they did when several 100 000 people got encircled isn't logical IMHO.
The British and the Americans started their nuclear program before Japan attacked Pearl Harbor.
If anything the nukes were developed to be thrown at Germany. If necessary, if Britain had fallen launched from CONUS with B-36's.
Besides, in WWII nukes are seen as just a bit more powerfull bomb, not in a seperate category with biological and chemical weapons like today, which most of the belligerants didn't dare to use during WWII.
No way Speer could have gotten the entire German industry protected against nuclear bombs or spread out without decimating the industrial production.
Once the German factories stop churning out weaponry, either by bombing or by some weird plan it's over for the Germans.
For all of Hitler's faults, I don't see him hiding a la Saddam Hussein to keep a war going. I also don't see the German population supporting a guerillawar if that means starvation for them, which it would.
On the offchance Germany withstands both conventional strategic bombing and 2 nuclear bombs, it's just a matter of time before the next nuclear bombs drop.