Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Different PM in Britain?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by grognard View Post
    Not necessarily. Italy considered an invasion of Yugoslavia instead of Greece.
    If italy went into Yugoslavia, Britain would not have intervened. And if Italy tried to take on Britain after France fell, Germany could have left Italy to fail in North Africa while Germany took on Russia. Brits in both N. Africa and Jugoslavia is a real stretch. Greece would not break its neutrality unless invaded.
    The Germans would figure once Russia was taken, the rest would be a mop up.
    Actually, there were three plans drawn by the Italian Supreme Command:

    1) an attack of Yugoslavia with subsequent security measures on border with Greece
    2) an attack on Greece with subsequent security measures on border with Yugoslavia
    3) nothing

    Mussolini felt jealous of Hitler and wanted to tag along. So 3 wasn`t an option. Which leaves 1 and 2.

    Allthough Mussolini considered 1, Hitler didn`t want any trouble in the Balkans due to his preparations for Barbarossa. Not only that, the Italians had a high respect of Yugoslavian armed forces due to the succesfullness of the Serbian Army in WW1. Which left option 2, a option most fitting for the Italians as they didn`t have a good opinion of Greece so they though the conquest of Greece would be easy. Of course, they were proven wrong....dead wrong.

    Also, I would say that had Yugoslavia been attacked, British aid to it would be even more likely as unlike the Greek Prime Minister Metaxas, the Yugoslav goverment had many pro-British elements in it as proven by the March 27 coup. Infact, Regent Paul was himself a pro-Allied person. The only reason why he followed pro-Axis politics is beacuse he had little choice....besides Greece, all countries surrounding Yugoslavia were part of the Axis.
    "Beneath its gilded beauty, though, there lies a poorly designed game which rewards the greedy and violent, and punishes the hardworking and honest; and if you think about it, that's a good representation of capitalism" - Nightfreeze about Eve Online

    Comment


    • #17
      I can speak about ITaly in 1940.

      if in may-June 1940 the british started some negotiations with Germany, Italy would have entered the war - that was the idea of Mussolini... get in the war before it would end... with France down, it was obvious for him that Britain would negotiate and the war end, italy wanted something (probably Nice in south of France.)

      had britain made peace with Germany, Italy would have ratified it as well. and probably stay put for the time beeing. probably still sending some forces to a german clash with the USSR, but no way in more clash with britain and france.

      the world would be a 3-power world. with USA, British empire and a Germany Reich going east. as for Asia, who knows, with the USSR down by mid 1942, Japan might have gone for Siberia instead of the Pacific...
      "Freedom cannot exist without discipline, self-discipline, and rights cannot exist without duties. Those who do not observe their duties do not deserve their rights."--Oriana Fallaci

      Comment


      • #18
        One of Japan's motivations for war was the need for oil, to maintain it's war effort, among other things....They probably would have sought war in the Pacific still, to try and obtain some oil resources

        Comment


        • #19
          If Britain has signed a peace treaty with Germany and Italy in 1940, it would not aid Yugoslavia in 1941 for fear of German repercussions, nor would Britain aid Greece in those circumstances.

          Japan did need oil nad had taken a bloody nose from the Soviets at Nomahan, so Japan would have left Russia to Germany while it sought oil from Indonesia--aka NEI.

          Comment

          Latest Topics

          Collapse

          Working...
          X