Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[USEC_OFFICER]

No, you see, the Nazis clearly believed that their horses were the True Aryan Horses® and thus obviously superior to the low-class British breeds.

Obviously.

Alternative, less snarky answer: The Germans needed the horses for transportation^*, and I'm pretty sure the British knew that too. So their chances of capturing enough for their transportation needs were pretty slim. Really, planning to capture equipment from the enemy so that you can continue your advance sounds like a monumentally stupid idea to me. It sounds much better to me to spend the effort to ships the horses over and not need them, as opposed to not spending the effort and suddenly needing to while in the middle of an invasion.


^{* - You know, for how modernized and scary the German army was in WWII, it's odd how much of it was held together with proverbial duct tape and an indifferent shrug. Horses were heavily relied upon for transporting supplies, your average infantryman was using a rifle from 1891~... Heck, a good portion of the tanks that invaded France were training models and only equipped with machine guns. And most of the rest had problems damaging enemy tanks. Yeah, I know that most of these problems were due to lack of factory space, but... That just makes what they accomplished even more impressive.}

[Culise]

Also, UR, France would never give their military fleet, nor their sailors, to the Germany. It was directly mentioned in the peace treaty, and the France has said that if Germans tried to capture the ships by force, they would sink all of them.

For that matter, Germany tried, and France did.  Operation Lila was an utter fiasco - of over 100 surviving French ships, the Germans captured only 39, most of which had been sabotaged and/or already disarmed to serve as training hulks. Giving them even more ships (those that were historically destroyed at Mers-el-Kébir) to attempt to secure at the same time would have only resulted in even more hulls at the bottom of Toulon harbor. 

EDIT: Actually, I just realized that I misparsed the original question.  It isn't asking about if the ships at Mers-el-Kébir survived to reach Vichy at all; it's if Operation Lila itself had somehow, miraculously succeeded.  The answer to that is still that Germany doesn't benefit very much - most of the ships were transferred to Italian control, not German, since it was the Regia Marina that operated in the Mediterranean.  Italian fuel stores were low, there would still have been issues of sabotage, and arresting the entire French crews would have meant that the Italians and Germans would have to scare up enough warm bodies to crew the things themselves.  The fact that many of the ships were positively obsolescent and had no place on the field of battle (hence why they had been disarmed in the first place) would not have assisted matters any, either.

[mainiac]

Maybe if the Germans had asked politely the Japanese would send a fleet to the Atlantic to meet up with Germany and Italy instead of Pearl Harbor.

^{* - You know, for how modernized and scary the German army was in WWII, it's odd how much of it was held together with proverbial duct tape and an indifferent shrug. Horses were heavily relied upon for transporting supplies, your average infantryman was using a rifle from 1891~... Heck, a good portion of the tanks that invaded France were training models and only equipped with machine guns. And most of the rest had problems damaging enemy tanks. Yeah, I know that most of these problems were due to lack of factory space, but... That just makes what they accomplished even more impressive.}

Well it's not like the Germans were alone in that regard.  Every nation but the US was using a comparable bolt action rifle and the M1 wasn't a huge advantage.  The most common tank for the Soviets at the start of the war was the T-26.  Everyone was fighting on foot at the start of the war, it's only as the war progressed and huge numbers of trucks were built that motorized forces cropped up.  Germany had more motorized troops then France in 1940.  Operation Compass was such a huge success because the Italian couldn't even muster a corps worth of motorized troops from an Army's worth of troops.

Where the disparity happens is as the Soviet and western forces modernize and the Germans are slower to adapt.  While everyone was desperate for war supplies, the Germans picked a strategy of pouring resources into every useless project they could find.  As their soldiers slogged through the mud in Russia, 10% of Germany's trucks were shipped to North Africa so they could break down in the desert while Rommel drove towards objectives he still didn't have enough trucks to attack in strength.  While American and Soviet factories churned out tanks nearly without interruption all war long the Germans restarted production about every month as they went through dozens of variants and three different medium tanks.  As the German Army prepared to attack Russia, the campaign that would lose them the war, the air fleet was bled dry bombing England.  As Germany soldiers attacked fortified mountain defenses in pursuit of oil, Italy was hording the stuff and getting new shipments.

[Jopax]

So I've been thinking.

What if the Japs decided to not chicken out at PH and instead went to take the entirety of Hawaii. Sure they'd need some extra ships ferrying troops but it wouldn't be that infeasible to see them doing it, considering how quickly they devastated the fleet and the surrounding base.

[Sheb]

I'm just waiting for Erkki to shoot you down.

[10ebbor10]

Well, the primary benefit of taking Hawaii means you get to destroy Pearl Harbours logistical facilities. Not destroying those was a big mistake, as it meant that Pearl Harbour was back in operation within months and destroying them would have restricted US operations in the Pacific for one or even several years. (Japan's plan was a short descisive war, so therefore they didn't target logistical systems).

On the other hand, Hawaii was on the edge of Japan's logistical support capability. Had they attempted to invade, their carriers would not have been able to stay their for long, lest they risk having to abandon escorts on the way home. This leaves the Japanese invasion force dangerously open to an attack by US carriers and other US forces.

I'm just waiting for Erkki to shoot you down.

Indeed. As am I.

A more interesting question might be, what if Japan never attacked the US in the first place?

[LordSlowpoke]

either japan starves out (thank you oil embargo) or america declares war anyway

[Sheb]

Why would the US declare war? Couldn't Japan makes an agreement with the Dutch for DEI oil?

[10ebbor10]

Or, you know, just invade the Dutch East Indies.

[Sheb]

Wouldn't that have triggered a US attack?

[LordSlowpoke]

Why would the US declare war? Couldn't Japan makes an agreement with the Dutch for DEI oil?

the purpose of the embargo was to provoke japan to attack in order to circumvent isolationist attitudes of the american public and allow america to overtly enter the war against the axis

sounds tinfoil as fuck, i know, but legit

[10ebbor10]

However, the US policy was already very much slanted in favour of attack Germany first, and solving the Pacific later. Not attacking Pearl Harbour might have resulted in further diversion of resources towards the European Front, giving Japan additional room in the Pacific.

And the additional forces wouldn't have helped the US much. Four out of eight battleships, all 3 Cruisers and 1 out of 3 destroyers  and 2 out of 3 auxiliaries were back in service within the year.

The attack on Pearl Harbour wanted to prevent a US counter-attack against Japanese invasion of the Philiphines. However, that was unneeded as the US never intended to charge across the atlantic. Since 1935, the plan had been to evacuate the Philippines and focus on keeping Japan out of the Eastern Pacific while concentrating forces against Nazi Germany.

[Jopax]

I'm just thinking how much time the Japs would've bought themselves if they had taken PH. They would've gotten some loot from it certainly so I don't think supply would be that big of an issue initially, and once they clamped down on the islands they could've provided atleast some form of sustinence to the troops stationed there.

But what would most certainly happen is the US not having any staging ground to launch any kind of offensive in Asia without taking Hawaii first. That would've allowed the Japs pretty much free reign in the Pacific with only the Australians to try and stop them.

[10ebbor10]

I'm just thinking how much time the Japs would've bought themselves if they had taken PH. They would've gotten some loot from it certainly so I don't think supply would be that big of an issue initially, and once they clamped down on the islands they could've provided atleast some form of sustinence to the troops stationed there.

But what would most certainly happen is the US not having any staging ground to launch any kind of offensive in Asia without taking Hawaii first. That would've allowed the Japs pretty much free reign in the Pacific with only the Australians to try and stop them.

You're kind off forgetting the US controlled Philipines.

[Sheb]

Well, the Japs could have used fuel (if the tanks aren't blown in the attack or destroyed by retreating US troops), but I doubt US munitions and spare part would have been useful.