Sea Lion 1941

[RF]

With respect to Italy, I doubt whether they could make an effective response, certainly not in the short term.

That leaves the Germans. As you say Free French co-operation is essential to the Americans. By 1945, which is when I would expect this hypothetical scenario to happen, the US has much bigger forces for land, sea and air operations for ''Torch'' than they would have had in 1943. The US needs to acquire bomber airfielda over Algeria quickly and gain command of the air. US Navy battleships and carriers need to penetrate the Med in substantial numbers to deter Italian Navy interference and tackle German supply routes, backed also by US submarines.

A key factor here is that Hitler has to keep the bulk of his forces, particulary the Waffen SS formations deep inside Russia. If logistical constraints delay the Germans for weeks on end, the Italians are unreliable and on the verge of surrender, if the Free French are on side then the US could establish itself in North Africa and western Med and the Germans won't be able to dislodge them. Particulary if forces have to go to Britain to stop the US there as well.

[alecsandros]

That's why I mentioned Franco. IF Spain decides (or is finally "convinced") to enter the war on the Axis side, especialy after the fall of western Russia, a response in Algeria may be a double one: Italian+Spanish. I wouldn't expect the Spanish to hold the lines for to long - after all they were hopelessly inequipped for a modern war - but maybe they could win some time for Rommel to arive with 4-5 fully operational Pz divisions... With Franco on their side, Hitler and Mussolini could take both sides of Gibraltar, and pretty much close the Mediteranean for Allied intervention (Allied meaning US, free French, free British, Canadians, Australians, etc).

[RF]

It is a double edged scenario that Spain would present. I can't see the Germans getting 4 or 5 panzer divisions to Algeria that quickly. What would be crucial is the initial shock and speed of American landings. The Canaries were very poorly defended, Morocco could only be held by the French, and of course the Spanish coastline around Cadiz and Ageciras can be quickly invested. The problem for the Germans is that panzers would be required not just in North Africa but in southern Iberia as well. I suspect they could get to Spain more quickly than to Algeria (and I'm not sure whether the Pyreenees would hold them up as well). If the Americans had Patton in the lead for Africa with orders to get as far east as he could then the Germans are likely (if the French don't hold up th Americans) to find they are in a race to Tunis. Any panzers sent to Iberia weakens the panzer response in Africa.

The British who held Gibraltar couldn't close the narrow passage to Axis subs: I would expect the US to breach the narrows with substantial naval forces, not least to take Algiers and Mers el Kabir. If the Americans get airfields in Morrocco/Ageria for their B29's and US subs get into the central Med then I would say the advantage lies with the US. The Germans would be likely to gain some success initially against the US ground forces, but I doubt that they could be there quickly enough to force the Americans back through Morroco into the sea.

[alecsandros]

I don't think the US would have the logistics and ground forces to sustain an invasion of North Africa AND Spain. Moreover, the country has a rough terrain, and an attack could easily be contained or delayed.

A successfull attack on Gibraltar with surface ships would be highly unlikely, beacuse of the probable heavy artillery which will be emplaced by the Germans (because I assume the British artillery would be blown up by the retreating troops). Even if some ships would manage to pass through, I don't see how they could transport enough troops to capture a harbor inside the Mediteranean basin.


What would be left would be the main thrust in Algeria... Which may be very dangerous to the nazis, if Patton moves fast enough past Italian/Spanish lines...

[RF]

By 1943 standards you would certainly be right about US logistics being unable to tackle Spain as well as North Africa.

But this scenario is around 1945, with the US fully mobilised as it was then.

The essence of taking in Spain, as with North Africa, is surprise and speed. The Germans would not be in Africa, and Franco, unlike Mussolini, kept the Germans out of his country to prevent it from becoming a German dependent vassel state that Italy was by 1943.
Gibraltar would not be too difficult - you don't assault it direct, instead land at La Linea and drive west to link up with the Cadiz landings. Speed would be of the essence, to build up before the Germans arrive. The Rock can then be gradually cleared of any defenders, who would have no reinforcement or supply.

To some extent the operation sounds like the Gallipoli landings - and most people don't appreciate the real reasons for that operation failing. Bold, fast moves are needed, going around rather than confronting strongpoints direct. It needs a Patton and not a Clark.

[alecsandros]

Another aspect of an attack on Gibraltar in 1945 would be the available equipment of the US Army and USAF. Many, if not all of the cutting-edge tanks and aircraft were developed, or at least production hurried, after confronting the German forces. So it is probable that the land assault(s) would be spearheaded not by Pershings, but by Shermans... While the nazis would field, at the very least, Tigers 1s and Pathers... The P-51 Mustang was also hurried into production because of the need to assure air escort over Berlin. This may not have become apparent without confronting the Luftwaffe in 1942-1943.

My take would be that Gibraltar's rock would be held by German forces with GErman equipment... It was to much of a strategic gateway to leave it to Franco... And it would have been defended as such... In any event, Franco's troops could intervene if the Germans would be at risk of losing the rock... (but that only if Franco's position woudl change in this hypothetical scenario. If not, and the Rock would be a lonely outpost of German forces, I would expect formidable defenses there...)

[RF]

I doubt that the Germans would be in Gibraltar. Franco would insist on it being Spanish, and with no apparent US threat he would want total Spanish control over the Med entrance.

As I say, total surprise and speed would be of the essence. Then it is a matter of how quickly the Germans react. Hitler would already be obsessed with Russia - would he care about Gibraltar, or even realise its significance?

Note that when Mussolini lost Cyrenaica in November/December 1940 it was six weeks before German air support was made available to the Italians, and two months before Rommel was sent in with the bare minimum to shore up the Italian defences. Had O'Connor promptly aimed for Tripoli Rommel would have either been too late, or worse taken POW as he got off the plane on his arrival! And this was without the Russian Front!
If a similar reaction time scale applied to the scenario here the US would gain a winning foothold, even with Shermans and other untried battle equipment.

[alecsandros]

It may be that Franco would demand the entrance to the MEd, but I very much doubt Hitler woudl accept that. And, in all rpobability, it would be nazi Germany that would be imposing conditions over SPain, and not the other way around... The main reason would be that only German attack could capture Gibraltar in the first place, as Franco's army was so badly inequipped for fighting a modern war.

Hitler and Russia. As I said, my opinion is that a peace in the west in 1940-41 would make Russian opposition crumble very fast under the intial German thrusts. The panzer armies could conquer all the way to the Urals. After that (late 1942, or mid-1943 at the worst) it would a matter of controlling what they allready conquered, and possibly holding up the eastern Russian forces in their attempt(s) to recapture their western parts. After all, most of the Russian heavy industry was moved beyond the mountain chain, so a strong production capacity was available for the Red Army to launch counterattacks.
Their problem however would be lack of logistics to ensure a realistic attack on the German forces. (this only became available thanks to the US steel, and US trucks delivered through the Arctic convoys and Persian corridor, alongside caned food, and other must-haves for an attack to succeed... )

However, the mountain range is excellent defensive territory, albeit its length may prove to be a daunting task for a defending army (whcih would be spread thin along it)

Rememebr however, that in mid-1943, the Germans were supplying (or trying to supply :) ) troops in North Africa, Russia, AND mantaining quite a few divisions in France as well. Moreover, some troops were staitioned in occupied territory, to block partisans, and ensure the "peace" in various countries. The Italians were allready badly battered, adn the Spaniards not at all in the conflict. While the Romanians and Hungarians allready lost pretty much of their best troops and equipment at Stalingrad.

In this hypothetical scenario, the Germans and their allies would be in much better shape: protecting the eastern border with the "free Russians"; counter-attacking in North Africa/Gibraltar; mantaining some troops here and there.

[srgt rock]

IMHO, I do not think speculation about the possibility of a US invasion of Europe has taken into account the additional forces that the KM AND the Luftwaffe would have available in 1945. A short list would include:

KM
CV Graf Zepplin and the three converted merchant carriers
Seydlitz
3 M class cruisers
a ton of U boats

Luftwaffe Aircraft types
Me 262
Ar 234
Ju 290
(maybe even the first types of the ME 1110)

I would also add in 2 carriers for the Italian Navy

As I see it, the USN fleets would not even get close to any European nor African coast before being spotted by long range search.

Air units could be quickly moved to the threatened areas and begin air attacks on the approaching fleets. The naval units could disrupt the reinforcement supply lines without direct confrontation of the stronger USN units.

Just my thoughts.

[RF]

It may be that Franco would demand the entrance to the MEd, but I very much doubt Hitler woudl accept that. And, in all rpobability, it would be nazi Germany that would be imposing conditions over SPain, and not the other way around... The main reason would be that only German attack could capture Gibraltar in the first place, as Franco's army was so badly inequipped for fighting a modern war.

Once he is obssessed with Russia I don't think Hitler is going to be that bothered about the Med. With either a successful invasion of Britain or some other form of British capiulation Franco would undoubtedly try to acquire Gibraltar without a fight and as part of the cessation of hostilities the British would have to concede to all its Axis foes...... that I would expect to mean ceding Malta and the Suez Canal to Italy, Singapore, Malaya and Hong Kong to Japan, Gibraltar and perhaps some Caribbean islands such as Trinidad (with its oilfields) to Spain.....
With the war in the West apparently won, Germany would have no need to make demands on Spain, or vice versa. Spain I think would get Gibraltar almost by default.

[RF]

..... my opinion is that a peace in the west in 1940-41 would make Russian opposition crumble very fast under the intial German thrusts. The panzer armies could conquer all the way to the Urals. After that (late 1942, or mid-1943 at the worst)

Even without a war in the West or the Med Germany does not have the manpower, economy or logistics to accomplish such an occupation. Even if Soviet communism is destroyed, I could see the war carrying on over ever larger swathes of territory without Germany ever being able to eliminate the opposition short of developing nuclear weapons and rockets to deliver them.

In such a scenario it would become extremely difficult for Germany to take panzer forces out of Gorky or Astrakhan or further east and redeploy in Algiers or Tunis or Spain. It would take weeks, indeed could take months.

[RF]

IMHO, I do not think speculation about the possibility of a US invasion of Europe has taken into account the additional forces that the KM AND the Luftwaffe would have available in 1945. A short list would include:

An interesting point.

However - where does Germany find the resources for such construction and development, if Hitler becomes so obsessed with occupying Russia that he orders Speer and the KM to turn over all resources to the Heer and Luftwaffe - that means men and materials - which would not be so unreasonable if the KM didn't have the British to fight?

[RF]

I would also add in 2 carriers for the Italian Navy

As I see it, the USN fleets would not even get close to any European nor African coast before being spotted by long range search.

Air units could be quickly moved to the threatened areas and begin air attacks on the approaching fleets. The naval units could disrupt the reinforcement supply lines without direct confrontation of the stronger USN units.

Just my thoughts.

With the war in the West won, what incentive does Italy or Mussolini have to build carriers? They already have Mare Nostrum - with the existing battleships and no carriers.

If there is no perceived serious US threat, why would there be planes watching the eastern Atlantic? They would be deployed, on Hitlers' orders, on the Russian front from all western Axis powers.

[alecsandros]

With the war in the West apparently won, Germany would have no need to make demands on Spain, or vice versa. Spain I think would get Gibraltar almost by default.

I have to disagree on that; the Gibraltar, like the Suez, Panama, were to important strategic passages... Regardless of Franco's demands, Hitler would occupy it; even by a naval landing (if Franco would forbid access of German ground forces just to force the note for getting Gibraltar)

I am not at all that sure the US ARmy would be capable of taking on the Wehrmacht without Commonwealth support. The German forces would NOT suffer the attrition of 1942-1944 eastern conflicts, and by 1945 new and devastating war machines would be available... Even if they would establish bridgehead(s) in North Africa/Europe, they would be pushed into the sea...

The ONLY possibility of a successfull US invasion would be if HItler would be mad enough to pass over the Urals with most of the army. Redeployment in the west would take months...

[RF]

With the war in the West apparently won, Germany would have no need to make demands on Spain, or vice versa. Spain I think would get Gibraltar almost by default.

I have to disagree on that; the Gibraltar, like the Suez, Panama, were to important strategic passages... Regardless of Franco's demands, Hitler would occupy it; even by a naval landing (if Franco would forbid access of German ground forces just to force the note for getting Gibraltar)

Hitler made no attempt to take Gibraltar in 1940 or 1941, or to force Franco to accept German forces. Plans were drawn up for an assault on Gibraltar by the OKW staff, but Franco specifically told the Germans that Spanish forces would take Gibraltar and that German forces were not required. This was on a point of Spanish honour rather than military necessity. Franco was well aware that German forces in Spain would be deeply unpopular and weaken his control over the country.

There was a further meeting between Hitler and Franco in Hendaye where again Franco rebuffed him. Hitler could have forced compliance but made no attempt to do so.

That is why I don't think that post Sea Lion the Germans would be in Gibraltar.