• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
All this argument over Italy and you haven't even mentioned it :rofl:
What is the date in-game at the moment, has Germany reoccupied the Rhineland sooner or later?
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Nazis are on the move! :eek:
Hitler seemingly predicted that Britain is too busy with Italy to effectively stop Germany from making such a bold move in the continent....Hopefully he´s wrong.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Smashing update concluded by a reminder that we are working at less than RL speed here. Although I have to concede that it is impressive to have crushed 1/3 of the Axis countries before the Rhineland is even re-militarized...

Vann
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Wow, we're finally to Germany playing a role. That was some absolutely engaging reading there, with the rush to get the general back to South Africa; looks like Herzog has finally met his match. If SA had gone into practical rebellion, that might have had a huge effect on the British war effort in Africa.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Looks like South Africa will stay loyal for now...
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Great update. How this will impact the long term, its hard to say...
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Excellent Update!

Most engaging read, now the bally huns are sticking their heads above the parapet, eh? :mad:

...Although I often decry the modern tendency (learnt from our cousins over the Atlantic) to sue or otherwise engage lawyers at the drop of a hat, I can't help wondering if 'Barry' is going to need a spot of legal advice shortly?

...That, or let Winston take a well-deserved break down to the Cape. Of course, Winston would never travel anywhere without his Webley, would he? :rofl:
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
brilliant update pip. unfortunatley one crises solved and another rears its ugly head. uncle adolf feels he can succeed where mussolini failed does he?

he may be right. despite victory over the italians i don't believe Britain can stand up to germany, not with the 'disagreements' with france at the moment.

it's looking ominous.

later, caff
 
  • 1
Reactions:
High drama in SA! Almost a movie-like defusal.

So, Germany flaunts the Versailles treaty...Does Britain have the assets in place to effectively threaten realistically? Without a peace treaty in place with the Italians, how can the Brits convince the Germans that they can and will support the French?

Ah, the complications of interventionism...
Keep up the good work!
TheExecuter
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Could Tortoise Herder or someone else start another debate with El Pip regarding the future course for Britain? This seems to result in more frequent updates.

:rolleyes:

El Pip: It seems like a Christmas present that you are back updating this AAR - keep 'em coming.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Ok than, Wish Granted.

Everybody seems to notice the Reich seizing the Rhineland without a shot fired by the French, and everybody seems to jump to the conclusion that we must sign a peace treaty with the Italians *RIGHT NOW* even at the cost of leaving Il Dunce in place.

However, I would have to disagree.

If anything, this leads me to believe that the necessity of a march from Sicily to the Alps is even more dire than previously.

Many people are correct in seeing that, without a peace with Italy, they cannot concentrate on the Reich, which has now unsheathed its claws and its aggression. However, the fact is that, one must understand, at this point in time, the Reich is FAR from strong. It was obvious that, barring an absolute miracle, the Germans would be tossed out by a minor French intervention against them. This was obvious enough at the time (see some French papers against it to see that), and that shows that, while the Reich is certainly arming on a wide scale, it is also obvious that they are not near finished yet.

The Reich remains a rather minor factor militarily for now, and you can use that time to take advantage of it.

And, even though it happened, the seizure may have had some positive influences. You can use this to sell to the public the dire threat of Fascism, and the needs to not only counter it, but to destroy it utterly. Thus, it could possibly work as a way to get an OK for an invasion of the Boot.

Thirdly, the defeat of the Italians can not only be useful as a way of breaking Fascism, but also due to Italy's position.

To explain, one of the fundamental parts of the National Socialist platform was to unite all Germans into one state (and expand said state and the Germans, but that is irrelevant for now).

One of those is clearly Austria, as Hitler has made blindingly clear from his rhetoric. He has gambled on a Western inaction over the Rhineland, and, however, mad he may be, he is not stupid enough to risk prodding it again (at least realistically). Thus, he is limited to bullying the Central/Eastern European Nations into submission, of those, one of the ones that is under most threat is Austria, for both personal and ideological reasons, coupled with the fact that it has a large portion of the population throughout the entire country and government (rather than say the Sudetens) that are sympathetic to Grossdeuchland.

Austria is HIGHLY unlikely to be able to resist the Germans even assuming that all of Austria got behind a unified defense plan (which, btw, is NOT going to happen unless the world flips upside down, maybe), and factoring in dissidents and Germanophiles, the result is even uglier. Thus, any safeguard to Austria will have to happen outside Austria, and this is where my third point kicks in: a friendly Italy will serve as point from which to intervene against any German threat to Austrian independence, and can also be used to buttress the French (who are slime for selling out, but will likely fall back to your foxhole eventually).

And, lastly, and which many people have touched upon, Italy requires a deployment of forces to the theater. However, while many people seem to tie this into the war (and rightfully so, to a large degree), they do not understand the underlying point: The need to have forces spread out in the Med to counter the Italians is NOT going to vanish when a peace is signed. It is ONLY going to be eliminated when a friendly or at least neutral government is in power in Rome.

If and when Il Dunce and co are eliminated, you can free up large numbers of forces (save for some to guard against Arab Nationalists, the Spanish, the Portuguese, and the Turks) to either counter Japanese, Soviet, German, or anybody else you please.

So, I feel that my case is only strengthened by the seizure of the Rhineland.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
But,
The Italians were friendly to Austria...Hitler's gamble with the Anschluss was that Italy might intervene, not the Allies. I see no reason why Hitler would be disuaded from embarking upon that path in the present circumstances. In RL, the Entente allies had four chances to go to war with Germany (within the confines of 1936-1939):

1. Remilitarization of the Rhineland
2. Munich conference
3. Annexation of Czech (although this is pretty much wrapped up in #2)
4. Poland

The allies didn't think they had the casus belli to go after the remilitarization, they knew they lacked the military strength to be decisive at Munich and thereafter. By 1939, the 'delay' had bought enough military rebuilding to make a 'ultimatum' alliance with Poland look 'doable' to the allied governments.

T-H, I'm curious which British government personalities you think would be most likely to support the kind of interventionism you are proposing.

TheExecuter
 
  • 1
Reactions:
TheExecuter said:
T-H, I'm curious which British government personalities you think would be most likely to support the kind of interventionism you are proposing.
Clearly it would be Field Marshall Perfect Foresight and Minister for Event Files, Herbet Knows-Whats-Going-To-Happen-In-The-Future-Smythes.

As for everyone else;

Jalex - It's April 25th (ish). So Hitler is about 2 months late. Italy will get mentioned when it needs to get mentioned, peace talks do take a while to set up.

Karelian - That is indeed Hitler's plan, particularly after the ANGA talks which forced him to uprate his opinion of British opposition.

Vann the Red - Italy is not yet crushed, as senor T-H will doubtless bang on about, but certainly reduced. Certainly no longer a threat to the Med or British interests in the Middle East, which is the main thing.

Judas Maccabeus - Indeed a outright rebellion in South Africa would have been very messy, a third Boer War perhaps, something no-one who experienced the first two would ever want to seriously contemplate.

Glad I expressed Smut's rush home well, I can imagine that would be a hell of a journey. :)

GeneralHannibal's - Smuts was always very pro-British, pro-global co-operation, as long as he stays in power (tricky as the more pro-Brit you are the more certain Boers will hate you) South Africa will be fine.

Sir Humphrey - Too many ways to say, the future is.... uncertain to say the least.

RAFspeak - I believe Churchill will still be needed in Westminster, while Barry H really should take a pistol and a bottle of whisky and do the honourable thing. Of course he won't because he's a dishonourable self serving git, but that's what he should do.

caffran - France will have to take the lead over the Rhineland, as Lord Lothian said (historically) it's just the "Germans walking into their own backyard". He wasn't alone in thinking that, however wrong you may think he was, and that body of opinion has to be a factor in Austen's thinking.

TheExecuter - Now you mention it, the last update has something of the 'Bond cutting the wire' about it. Only problem is the bomb is in fact somewhere else. :eek:

Dr. Gonzo - I think Smut's goes down as liberalish, so things aren't going to get any worse for the black minority, but I can't see them getting a great deal better. The plain fact is though that universal suffrage means a black government and the end of white rule. That really isn't on the cards in the short term so it's down to who Hertzog's successor is and what line the wounded National Party takes as it rebuilds itself (I can't see Smuts and the SAPP in power for ever, if the Nats get in unreformed they would push for Hertzog's 'legacy' to be fulfilled).

madsb - See what you've done now? Set off his obsession. You know what he's like if he hasn't had his medication.

Glad you like the updates though. :)

Funkatronica - I fear his sleeves are worryingly empty, as opposed to his plate which is overflowing with issues and problems. Britain will have to let other's take the lead over the Rhineland crisis.

TheExecuter - Again - As you say Italy saw herself as the protector of Austria, that only change when Il Duce 'sacrificed' Italy for a German Alliance. I would imagine a humbled Italy to be even more keen on preserving what remains of her sphere of influence, if only through pride.

I remained to be convinced that stopping Hitler at the Rhineland would have been as decisive as it's portrayed. It does, of course, depend how it happens but assuming it's a Entente show of force and a German withdrawal at worst it's a humiliation for Germany who have to be more circumspect in their actions, being less overtly aggressive and a bit more cunning. It also removes a great deal of the case for Anglo-French rearmament, possibly lulling people into even more false senses of security. I suspect all it would of done it delay, not avert, the coming war. But there are so many unknowns frankly anything could of happened.

Tortoise Herder - All your arguments are based on justifying and helping an invasion of Italy. That is still not going to happen as it's still a massive and disproportionate over-reaction, there's still no historic figure in the British government who would even contemplate it, let along suggest it in cabinet and it would still be massively unpopular.

On top of all that it feels too gamey and needs too much perfect foresight from too many people in power, none of whom are to to do anything but the "correct" decisions (again correct in hindsight) or to make any mistakes, or to miss things, or to be politicians and thus concerned about being elected or the will of the people.

In fact they must deliberately over-ride the will of the people, send their sons and husbands to die against their wishes and in general behave as dictators, in order that they can remove a dictatorship from somewhere else, which you have to admit is fairly ironic.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Here, Here!!

T-H - perhaps you could try and restrain your comments so that they are less in volume (though no less in substance)?
Not wanting to be critical :D but, your 'wall of text' postings seem based on an errant and 'gamey' outlook to El Pip's story, (I'm not even sure that EP is even playing this game out to be honest, but getting more enjoyment out of simply story-telling) and although your imperialistic (almost pseudo-dictatorial) sabre rattling and blunt 'pro-american, democracy-pushing' style politics (rather ironic considering how America (and Britain) has over-stretched itself in recent years with exactly that policy - I digress) is entertaining, (installing an army of spies, broadcasting soap opera's featuring Italian prisoners to name but two :rofl: ) it does seem as if you are trying to hi-jack rather than simply debate and comment upon what is (after-all) El Pip's alternative reality.
In all of your recent commentary, your fundamental mis-conception and what you fail to take into account is really the basis behind most British social and political actions, the inbuilt sense of gentlemanly honour, which although may be in less abundance in today's world was still very much 'de-rigeur' in the mid-1930's and why it's always so bloody embarrassing that Chamberlain felt he had Hitler in his pocket with his paper-waving antic's of '39 :rolleyes:

El Pip - Your imagery of Smut 'rattling across the African scrub' is inspired and typifies how the British Empire was being held together at that time with almost nothing more than glue and string and some damned fine machinationing (is that a word?).
Now it really starts to get interesting, although you've got 31 web pages done and it's only April 1936 :eek: This will indeed end up being your 'magnificent octopus' :p
So, finally, Adolf siezes his moment and moves Kings pawn forward 2 spaces. Perhaps your first serious mention of what Stalin's been up to is in the offing as well?
A most excellent update!! Perhaps now the real fun can begin ;)
 
Last edited:
  • 1
Reactions:
T-H,

Il Duce was the reason why Germany did not annex Austria in 1934. Removing him from power via invasion forces the UK to take his place in preventing anschluss. Leaving him in power almost guarantees him joining the Germans in the axis.

The only sensible way to ensure Italy is in a position to help support Austria (again) is for there to be a coup in Italy. This is something that SIS et al understand and is far less unpalatable than mobilising the country to invade Italy because we want to win a future war against Germany over Austria :wacko:

I would expect there to be increased espionage activities against Italy but not full blown intervention. If the French won't stand up to Hitler over the rhineland they are hardly going to give two hoots about Austria
 
  • 1
Reactions:
As Mr. Pullem mentions and as I suggested some ways back, the combination of a humiliating defeat for Italy (and, Pippy, I meant only that the RM had been decisively defeated, not the entirety of the Italian military) and some diplomatic pressure (i.e., a coup) could be more effective at bringing Italy into the proper sphere (and without the necessity to shatter the Italian army) than an invasion.

Vann
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I read this whole thing in 2 sittings just to end up with a semi flame war? :rolleyes:

Anyways this is a very interesting AAR5 you have going here El Pip, keep up the good work. I do wish there would be more ingame screenshots though.

Anyways glad to hear that Hitler is in the story now.

Hopefully Ethiopia gets all of the horn. :D
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
El Pip said:
Judas Maccabeus - Indeed a outright rebellion in South Africa would have been very messy, a third Boer War perhaps, something no-one who experienced the first two would ever want to seriously contemplate.

Ah, but that would mean the right (or wrong?) person in London would shudder when conflict breaks out and would attempt to spare his countrymen the horrors of the jungle. Playing right into the hands of Hertzog. He does seem to have a BW III planned, just a subtle one. He just failed in the execution this time, wanting too much too fast. Whether he will be running or will enter a charismatic protegé into the race, next time he might want to make a secret deal with Hitler to covertly bring South Africa into the Axis. Maybe they can arrange it so that they take their steps simultaneous to coincide with the scandals each creates. Hertzog was lucky to have survived British attention due to the Rhineland occupation but he should not leave that to luck a second time, but plan it.

BTW, just curious. What's the status with the Netherlands so far in this game? Anything more interesting than a modest rearmament going on?
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: