Truly the ‘Father of German Blitzkrieg,’ Guderian was crucial to the Germany’s war plans and instrumental at the tactical level. However, this is where his usefulness ends as the bigger his commands got, the less of an impact he had. Eventually, he lost relevance altogether.
-
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.
There were ways around this problem: Open another front in Syria, strongarm Turkey into joining the axis, invade Spain and secure Gibraltar. These are all Option Germany could have taken to Change the Situation in the Mediteranean Theatre. Neither of them is a guarantueed success but both securing Gibraltar or opening a second front from Syria or through Turkey would have been within the capabilities of Germany as would have been an increased focus on the mediterranean theatre by the Luftwaffe.
What would they gain with that? Apart from the readily available sand there is not much they could do with Northern Africa. Yes sure they could link up with Iran for the oil deliveries (had they build a tanker fleet and the escorts in the meantime which they of course did not do IRL).
Taking control of Gibraltar would immensely complicate the supply Situation for the British Forces in North Africa - not only is the route through Gibraltar blocked but you also have to worry about U-Boats operating from there - and establishing a presence in Syria would open up another avenue of attack against Suez without putting further strain on the Lybian infrastructure. While historically raw material shortages were a concern it is likely that Germany would have had enough time to exploit a victory in North Africa,
Taking Gibraltar really doesn't do anything. The British already sent their convoys around Africa, because they weren't so stupid as to try and fly them between Tunis and Sicily and along several thousand KM of enemy held coastline.
The Turkey route is more viable, but still poses the problem of maintaining large forces across a considerable distance on terrible infrastructure. One could probably manage this, but it would require a massive diversion of resources and the Nazis to not be the Nazis.
What you gain is also dubious. To get to the Iranian oil fields you have to push through Mesopotamia, which is seasonally terrible tank country, completely lacking in infrastructure at this time, and a hell of a long way away.
Yes Gibraltars value was mainly being an untouchable military port in an important location. Also denying passage to the Axis of course.
Which indicates that the Axis could have made Gibraltar useless by not playing the game. Capture Malta, and whatever invading army would have a long threatened supply line.
Germany should just have taken French N.Africa after the fall of France.
Gibraltar closed for the British ---->Submarines operating out of Casabalanca (or somehwere close)----> Huge problem for the Allies.
they did, though they didn't really use it (Spain controlled northern morocco too) as they wanted Vichy to not be part of the war.
How would they get to North Africa after the fall of France? It just wasn't possible, the Med isn't a river you can easily cross.
How would submarines be able to take French North Africa? To base Submarines in North African harbours you actually need to control those bases.
I am talking about the African West coast here. They could certainly move from Germany. By land isnt certainly impossible but that would be a rather big logistical feat.
Certainly. By land. There had to be a reason behind Mers-al-Kebir operation, hadn't it?
Ah yes ground troops. Would they swim or teleport past the Royal navy and French navy?
I assume they would use ships. Are you somehow tring to tell me that Axis forces had no means to get to North Africa in force after the French surrender ?
Last edited: