Afrika Korps: 6 Months Early! - Alternate History
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 8 ก.ค. 2019
- In this Alternate History Drachinifel, Military Aviation History and me look at the possibility and chances of an "early Afrika Korps". We look at a lot of data, the different sides and several aspects, like Malta, submarines, oil, different approaches, etc.
Of course, it gets overly complicated, although we simplified quite a lot, e.g., we left out most of the political aspects. Additionally, you gain quite some insights in what was going on historically.
»» SUPPORT MHV ««
» paypal donation - paypal.me/mhvis
» patreon - / mhv
» subscribe star - www.subscribestar.com/mhv
» Book Wishlist www.amazon.de/gp/registry/wis...
»» MERCHANDISE ««
» teespring - teespring.com/stores/military...
» SOURCES «
Fennell, Jonathan: Fighting the People’s War. The British and Commonwealth Armies and the Second World War. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2019
Creveld, Martin van: Supplying War. Logistics from Wallenstein to Patton. Second Edition. Cambridge University Press, 2004
Das Deutsche Reich und der Zweite Weltkrieg, Band 3: Der Mittelmeerraum und Südosteuropa 1940-1941. Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt: Stuttgart, Germany,1984 (English Version below)
Germany and the Second World War, Volume 3, The Mediterranean, South-east Europe, and North Africa, 1939-1941
Lieb, Peter: Krieg in Nordafrika 1940-1943. Reclam: Stuttgart, Germany, 2018.
Wagner, Gerhard (Hrsg.): Lagevorträge des Oberbefehlshabers der Kriegsmarine vor Hitler 1939-1945. J. F. Lehmanns Verlag: München, 1972
Citino, Robert M.: The German Way of War. From the Thirty Years’ War to the Third Reich. University Press of Kansas: USA, 2005.
Frieser, Karl-Heinz: Blitzkriege-Legende. Der Westfeldzug 1940. 4. Auflage. Oldenbourg Verlag: München, 2012.
Cambridge History of the Second World War. Volume I: Fighting the War. Cambridge University Press: UK, 2015.
Cambridge History of the Second World War. Volume II. Politics and Ideology. Cambridge University Press: UK, 2015.
Cambridge History of the Second World War. Volume III. Total War: Economy, Society and Culture. Cambridge University Press: UK, 2015.
#AlternateHistory #MilitaryHistory #AfrikaKorps
You three together ? Now that's proper combined arms.
Noticeably, Drach showed up with the largest hip flask, clearly prepared for shore bombardment at some point
MHV: When doing alternate history, go big or go home.
Also MHV: We go big.
@AltHistoryHub /Cody, you have been issued a challenge.
In a beautiful twist of fate, the room had no airconditioning and it was boiling that day. Made it perfect for any discussion on the MTO!
I hope, no camera was hurt! :-)
Was there any public audience? Presumably not, as there are no crowd noises. Would have been a great public lecture.
It reminds me of the old Battle Group Trainer (BGT) TEWT at Bovington.........ahhh the memories!
Was there an Ice Cold In Alex moment once the panel had concluded? :P
@@glennsimpson7659
Except for the awful echoing in that room, involving every sound.
Marvel: Infinity war is the biggest crossover event in history
These three boys: Hold my Bob Semple tank...
Me seeing Bob semple getting mentioned: hold my Flying T26 prototype!
Pillar Men theme plays.
MHV, Drachinifel and Bismarck doing a collaboration video? Awesome! The three of you should consider doing a lengthy article / paper or even a small book about this scenario.
Cen Blackwell That's Awesome Idea.
Agree - more collaboration between this group can only be a good thing.
Experts in three totally separate military branches. All well versed on WW2 history as well. I couldn't think of a better trifecta of guys.
The prophesied Triumvirate has come
they represent each of the branches of the armed forces, MHV is the Army buff, Drach is the Navy Buff, and Bismarck is the Aircraft buff
A face to the voice of Naval history. Hi Drach.
Hello :)
@@Drachinifel Yes, only seen your hands up until now, Beardo. :)
“You should never meet your heroes”..... well that formula is a lot of nonsense an’t it?
Nice work, as ever.
@@MayaMediated The Royal Navy have always liked their beards.
@@MayaMediated Hes a handsome devil ! ;o)
In a world with infinite distractions (even an Infinity War) I am captivated, indeed captured, by three men sitting at a table and talking.
Bravo gentlemen.
If you wanted to keep this going my suggestion would be:
- take it one step at a time.
- do a series of videos, in whatever format, each concentrating on one aspect; what role would the Soviet Union play? How would this effect the entry of the United States? What forces could each side draw on and how were they matched?
- keep the length of each section under an hour.
- recognise that you make quality content people want to watch and support.
- produce a line of t-shirts
SEAL team 3
SEa Air and Land team of 3 historians (Pardon my apportioning of you strictly to "land".)
Sea, Air and Logistics :^)
SEa Air and Logistics you mean ?
Oberkommando der Heress, Oberkommando der Luftwaffe, Oberkommando der Kriegsmarine
@@MrGreghomeHeeres*
Not in a million years did I think drach looked like that. My absolute favourite TH-cam channel. I watch his videos when away on business to relax and any time I need to unwind haha. Well done all of you.
What did you think he would look like? He looks Greek or something Mediterranean to me.
Not enough tweed obviously and the monocle is absent.
@@ArenBerberian Well he's English.
Steve That was a Model they hired ? He is too important to risk by having us know what he looks like exactly . Such a Wealth of Knowledge sitting at that table
so in the UK you have 3 main European people. The people who are descendants of Anglo-Saxons, Irish/Scottish and finally you have people that look like Drachinfels who are mostly descendant o the original Brittonic people. Kit Harrington who plays Jon Snow in Game of Thrones is also dark eyes and dark sort of curly hair and he and his family have been in the England for hundreds of years. pretty cool stuff
Since Chieftan doesn't have facial hair you left him out??? Tell him to grow a mustache & do this again😄
Now I'm imagining Nick with a full-on 70s stache, and it's hilarious.
It is a pleasure to listen to intelligent people having an intelligent discussion.
Scott Hill indeed
One day all you guys are going to be published authors filling your own shelves and this will be a gem for your readers to find edit- absolutely best wishes to all three of you, you help countless people get through their days
Drach, You, And Bis? What more could one ask for in a video?
The Chieftain?
Fortunately for their foe's; to maintain such a feat of Combined Arms required an amount of logistical support that could not be met by horses.
Lindy ragging on the mg42 could be a good addition ;)
Someguy in the background shooting a panzerschreck
48:30 - Drach brings out the most impractical way to drink water, or is a raging alcoholic
Glad I am not the only one to notice Andre the Giant's Hip Flask
😂😂😂😂
He is a navy dude
What always puzzled me as an American, even from when I was boy in the 1950's, was why Germany did not act to seize Gibraltar and Malta and force the Spanish to cede them a base in Africa opposite Gibraltar. A question I think that was planted by the musings of my uncles and father over their war time experiences.
@ 14:12
*Bismark looks at Camera*
*wink*
Behave yourself
Aww you guys just spoil the hell out of us. What more could anyone interested in military history ask than MHV, Bis & Drach putting their massive brains together to give an immensely thorough Alternate History 😍
An excellent video with tons of actual historical detail that is always lacking in other alternate history scenarios in my experience. I am going to make two points, neither of which is really a critique, since Drach didn't have time to properly develop his point about Middle Eastern oil at the end and none of you dealt with the political issues. Just so, I think these two points should be mentioned:
1. While I think the Germans could have effectively denied Britain the use of Middle Eastern oil by cutting off the Suez Canal, I doubt, without a major infusion of troops (like, Hitler decides to postpone Barbarossa because so many mobile assets are sent south) that doing much beyond Egypt is feasible. I'll assume that the Germans can get past the Nile in a "The Desert Army has completely collapsed" scenario, since German armored units crossed some very difficult rivers in the Soviet Union. However, as several Arab-Israeli Wars showed, the Suez Canal is a formidable barrier. Also, even if you do cross it, what do you do next? The long coastal roads in North Africa may strain your logistics the further you drive along them, but at least your schwerpunkt is obvious - the only place between the sea and the Sahara with roads and people! Once you cross the Suez it is not at all obvious what you should focus on. The oil is mostly on the wrong side of the Middle East, by the Persian Gulf. British garrisons and bases are widely scattered, and I'm not sure any one city or port in the region has the outstanding strategic importance of Cairo or Alexandria. Also, at least in the Great War the area from Palestine to Mesopotamia was a logistical black hole, as the British and Dominion forces found out to their cost at the Siege of Kut and the battles of Gaza. Maybe things were better 25 years later, but I'm skeptical.
2. While I understand not wanting to get into the politics I think there is a real case to be made that in this alternate reality Churchill is replaced by someone who might be willing to negotiate with Hitler. This is not solely speculation. We know that when Tobruk fell in the summer of 1942 there was serious discussion in the House of Commons about replacing Churchill as PM. This would likely have made little difference then with the US and USSR firmly in the war on Britain's side, but what if we suddenly had Lord Halifax as Prime Minister in early 1941 when the UK stood alone? And it might well have happened in a scenario where Malta is lost, the Royal Navy can't stop the DAK being shipped to Libya and the aggressiveness of the RAF can't save Alexandria. I'm going a bit into "intangibles" here, but the British did seem to invest a lot of emotional effort into "impregnable" islands, peninsulas and bases during World War II. The reason the Fall of Tobruk mattered so much to Brits back home is that its heroic stand in 1941 had been widely played up. Think about the effect of the fall of Singapore on morale, or the supposed stories that Churchill ensured certain birds were restocked in the Tower of London and certain monkeys in Gibraltar because of old myths that "this place cannot fall as long as [insert creature here] still lives here!". Then imagine that Malta, the place the Turks could never capture, falls in a matter of days to paratrooper attack. Follow that up with the loss of the best naval base between Gibraltar and Aden (if not India) and the British might well change leadership and be open to some sort of compromise with the Axis.
Once you get the RN out of Alexandria they are out of the Med, the Italians can land supplies along the coast unimpeded until able to capture a port in Palestine. Going inland would still be a pain...
The only option is Turkey, with the RN out and completely isolated form the world they would likely have to reach an agreement with the Axis in order to survive, meaning an Axis attack along the Baghad railway into the Persian Gulf.
That is likely to succeed.
Yes, I think so too, going beyound Alexandria would be real tricky. But Hitler basically wanted to end the war with Great Britain. The Suez canal would be some heavy bargaining chip.
you dont need north african roads when you have the port of alexandria
You made two valid points. Just would like to add to the first one that this scenario has also very strong political implications.
On the one hand, France might have gone over to the Axis powers, or at least under their pressure would have had to provide its mandate areas in Syria and Lebanon as a base of operations. From Syria, the offensive could have been taken against Iraq. In a much worse situation, in the spring of 1941, the Iraqi government tried to shake off British supremacy. One can probably assume that they would have tried this also in the autumn of 1940, with the Germans in Syria, and with their support would have succeeded (in 1941, Germany could only provide two air force squadrons to support them).
You are right to point out that there was a lack of such clear operational objectives as Kairo or Alexandria in this whole area - with one exception: Baghdad. There was a reason why the British tried again and again to conquer Baghdad from their position at the Persian Gulf during World War I. And when they succeeded in 1917, the Turkish position in this whole area collapsed.
Speaking of Turkey, a massive presence of the Axis powers in the Middle East might have made Turkey (Germany's old ally from WW I) inclined to join or at least massively support them.
@@vatanak8146 Maybe but the British may have been able to sabotage port facilities putting it out of actions for months perhaps.
One thing to add, Hitler did meet with Petan, Franko and Mussolini prior to the invasion of Russia, in order to feel out the possibility of an aggressive Mediterranean strategy, including and invasion of Gibraltar. While Hitler was already inclined to invade Russia, the intransigence and conflicting territorial ambitions of Franko and Petan solidified this decision.
The Italians attacked the British in Kenya June 13, 1940 -- so a state of war existed from that date. I think the missing piece here is East Africa, which was also strategically important, and largely ignored in terms of the strategic picture in the Mediterranean. It was the strategic choke point between the Suez Canal and the British Empire in the East.
Even though the British were fighting on a shoestring, the Italians were pretty much thrown out of East Africa by late 1941.
The Italians were thrown out only after the fighting had reached its bitterest climax ... They fought like dogs in East Africa .... When it came to an end ... The last remaining Italian troops were given the highest military honours by the English .... And remember 'thrown out' is so cheap a description of the gallantry of Italy in East Africa ... A defeated army against an army which never had the disadvantage of logistics/supplies etc. I hope you are capable of at least understanding the simple fact that the fighting would have had extremely different outcomes if the Italian supply chain wasn't as problematic as it was .... When the Italian surrender was finally made official ... The military honours they received were given because there was almost never an army that fought so well and so resilient despite the massive disadvantages ... AND the English .... Were never so appreciative of an enemy's efforts in quite possibly their entire military history...
@@dannyv8577 you're really exaggerating here.
By fortune the British had welsley bombers, which destroyed the Italian fuel dumps in the first action
The same Italians who lost to the Greeks, bearing in mind that the Greeks didn't have enough boots for there troops........ I think you give the Italians too much credit.
In the old Avalon Hill game company game Rise and Decline of the Third Reich the Mediterranean Strategy was considered a game winning one.
I had forgotten about that game......
Still have Pazer Blitz and Pazer leader. And little dated now.......
In some ways, a better game then anything else.
@@knutdergroe9757 There is a merged rule set out there called Panzer Warrior that I helped develop. It also has some very good optional rules in it.
I think this would be a excellent board game or video game a team of 3 or 3v3 where each person controls the Air,Navy or Army part of the faction and must agree what they are going to do.
You guys did a great jobs coordinating on this.
It looks like the greatest preamble to the one of the most interesting bar conversations.
Also I think ending on the oil note was really important and really high why this would have changed things.
I haven't watched Drachinifel before, but I gave him a sub.
Conor Hoary
In case of Japan, there the player representing the navy cannot speak to the other two :V
Omar Hanbali
Yeah it would fun scenario.
something like where there incentives to not work together as well.
This is pure gold
The most legendary crossover ever.
This is a really cool talk! I'd be great to see the three of you collaborate again sometime, it's was great hearing the different perspectives!
In terms of the presentation, I'd add two points: I think a setting like an old study room or a room in a library would provide a more suitable ambience and also better acoustics. The other point is I think it'd be a good idea to add a separate person as a moderator for the discussion. I can imagine that juggling between participation and moderation was a real challenge, and it showed, in the paper-searching in the middle. I think if you added a knowledgeable person as a moderator, to ask the guiding questions and keep the discussion together, then each of you three can really focus on land, sea, and air respectively. I think that could make for a _fantastic_ flow of the discussion and really do a really cool in depth analysis of a major battle, or maybe even campaign of the war.
I'd love to see the three of you collaborate on another discussion! Keep up the good work!
Thanks, about your suggestions, simply not possible or better not feasible due to logistics.
Alternate history: what if the UK had AC?
We would be less shiny :)
I could listen to these 3 sit and talk shit all day. Thanks guys!
There was an analysis on a Spanish military magazine of the time that mentioned what Italy and Germany should have listed as objectives: According to the author, the experiences in the SCW showed that military aviation could cause mayor damage to enemy warships and docks, even to the point of being able to act as deterrant, and a closed sea like the Mediterranean is the perfect place for using naval bombers as a tool for effectively atrittioning the enemy fleet. Thus, the country making better use of its planes on the strategical level would be the winner. Spain, according to that article, should establish an air outpost in the Baleares Islands, and Italy in order to survive against the British should not only archieve air and naval superiority but also take the Suez canal to control that entrance to the Mediterranean.
Early in the war, pre Battle of Britain, Germany could afford to take those kind of losses, later on not so much. Germany has to get their armor and supplies to Africa early and be ready to go when the troops land or it never happens. The British and American Air force can easily gain air superority in fairly short order and cut off their supplies.
@@readhistory2023 What does that have to do with what I said. What I mean is that, even according to the wartime theorists, the Germans and Italians should have focus on archieving air superiority over the British on the combat zone.
14:13 That wink made my day😂 @Bismarck
Three of my favorite historians at once: this should be perfect, thanks guys.
I really enjoyed this, it took alot of hard work but I really appreciate it! I'd be happy if you made more of these type of videos. Really well researched
Congratulations gentlemen. A thorough analysis and an interesting discussion.
Fantastic job guys! Love the work all 3 of you do!
It was great to finally see Drach. Thanks to all three for a great discussion.
A year or so ago I made a comment about the lack of a naval historian, since we already got Bismarck for the Air and you for the Land side of things. Now we finally got Drachinifel to fill that void.
The perfect trio. Love all of you guys
At 17:47, the Italian army’s problems were not restricted to poor training. Poor equipment (except in the Artillery), poor supplies and poor Officer/soldier relations were also big factors, which were in large part a reflection of Italian society. Plus Infantry Divisions of 2 rather than 3 (or even 4) Regiments/Brigades as were found in other armies. Add this to a history of defeats in WW1 and lack of popular support for the war means that no amount of even German Army training would change the overall combat performance of the vast bulk of the Italian Army in less than 2-3 years. Or was the comment really meant as ‘get them to a place like Munster Laager where they can’t do too much harm to the Axis cause”?
The other problem they had was not having enough staff officers - and the move to 2 Brigade Divisions from 3 Brigade Divisions increased the number of formations needing staff officers (which was about the same regardless of sub units)! These could only be drawn from the actual regiments themselves which had the effect of reducing the effectiveness of the units while having relatively inexperienced staff officers running divisions. Another issue was after the first Greek campaign Mussolini disbanded many units (to allow men to return to their civilian jobs) only to then decide to have them return to the colors a few months later with the subsequent loss of cohesion and loss of training etc. It's almost like he was expecting to fight a short war and to reap the rewards at the victors table!
There were so many variables to this topic that I had never even considered! Great video.
Bravo, lads. This was fascinating, would love to see more of these.
Great to see the real Drach at last. So young to be so knowledgeable! I must admit I had a mental picture more akin to Robert Hardy or Michael Palin. Wish I had been there!
Basically Italy needed to take over Malta in the first week of them declaring war against the UK and having and NOT hsving an entire army destroyed during operation compass. Italy needed tanks and tons of artillery at the begining stages of the push into egypt
Love this kind of video. Great work and thinking all of you
Just started watching and this is such an amazing idea.
Looking forward to it.
I really enjoyed this video, I hope you do something similar like this in the future. Alternate ww2 history is fascinating.
now all we need is gun Jesus (Ian McCullum) and Tank Jesus (Chieftain) to do a collab
On what? A tank carrying 8 Bren MGs made by the New Zealand people?
@@andrehashimoto8056 on the bob semple fuck yes
@@andrehashimoto8056 The cross over of a life time.
Which finally happened just a few months later :)
This is awesome! I hope you do more alternate history in the future.
Great job!
I know your team made the point of avoiding the political aspect but that showed the crucial aspects of the political impact. Had there been a direct way to attack Gibraltar, the whole strategy changes. If Alexandria did fall as in your model, the reverberation through the whole British Commonwealth would have been massive. Loss of oil fields, loss of support of Indians and other peoples in the Middle East.
The second aspect you hit upon indirectly was infrastructure limits of the Axis. Why couldn't more airfields be built on Sicily? The WW2 Pacific war was centered in many cases around controlling the seas to control certain air fields. This weakness in the ability to build up infrastructure is probably underappreciated.
Again great job!
One political repercussion of the fall of the Middle East would be the loss of the 2 Australian Divisions and other troops there - which would have certainly led to the fall of the Australian UAP Government and strident demands by their Labour Party successors for Churchill’s resignation. Perhaps the admirable New Zealanders would have just taken it on the chin and kept fighting, but we Australians would certainly have looked for someone to blame.
Interesting analysis. Good collaborative work chaps! It's nice to put a face to the voice of Drach!
This is just awesome, pls do more of this teamwork.
The 2 things that got most stuck in my head from this was:
1. germany had good chances to get the fuel in middle east
2. i also want that bottle from drach, made me laugh hard when i saw it xD
Most of fuel in middle east still did not found that time.
@@hansjetschessandanother4515 Kirkuk oil fields in N Irak were fully operational since the late 20' and got the Med in two pipelines through French Siria. And as the Iraq uprising against the "independent" pro-english government was coming soon there was a chance to seize both the pipelines and oil fields almost intact.
@@r.ladaria135 Its gonna hard to send forces there, unless :
1. Navy supremacy in Medi.
2. Turkey allowed germany to pass their forces through anatolia and greece already defeated.
@@hansjetschessandanother4515 As I recall the bad guys managed to send the AK six months later, after the Taranto raid. So NO. Thanks Adolf stupidity they did not. The fact is that timeline is far cheaper than the greek campaing , plus Cret, plus Barbarossa.
Finally! I have a face to go with the voices! Awesome collaboration guys! Thank you so much!
Collaborators will be . . . rewarded with more views! Am already subscribed to all three channels.
Fair challenge. I'll subscribe to all 3. More importantly how was Drachs giant gip flask!
The Holy Trinity of internet military history :-)
Fantastic more of these please so enjoyed this and Drachinifels all videos huge fan thank you
Awesome panel
Many thanks
great content, thanks, keep it up
Best thing Germany could have done was to take Malta, both to secure the supply\transport lines, and, to get the British thorn from the Italian side.
Why not Gibraltar? That is the keystone IMO.
@@fazole Issues with Spain perhaps but I think Malta more key for Libya and tbh given its location a far easier proposition.
@@tcroft2165
Yes, of course. Franco wanted to stay out of the war, but not securing the Med was an unbelievable error IMO. A desert war where enemy supply routes are open on both ends! I know Hitler relied on U-Boats to secure the entrance, but not possible.
@@fazole Too focused on France no doubt until it was too late. And the German forces were never the best in naval combined arms.
Alexandria makes no difference to Gib. Even Malta is supplied almost exclusively from the West.
This is absolutely amazing....like the ultimate crossover in TH-cam history.
I'd love to see more of this.
Haven't watched yet, but this line up has me excited.
Das war wirklich faszinierend! ... Ich war skeptisch, wie interessant eine Diskussion über "alternative Geschichte" sein könnte, aber die zugrunde liegenden Punkte und Argumente waren großartig und machten Spaß
(verzeihen Sie mein Deutsch, wenn ich das geschlachtet habe)
50+ years studying military history and I learn something from your videos.hats off to you bernhard bismarck and drachnifel.outstanding.semper Fi
Drach needs a huge moustache. If Nimoy can do the ears you can certainly do the 'stache. With a Navy cap. Jacket is optional. Maybe the ascot. This is so exciting. This is living history, kids. These guys do their homework.
Excellent work guys, both in the presentation and in the research leading up to your conclusions. Some would say this is a purely academic exercise, but thinking alternative history opens the aperture on significant events of the past. That, in turn, limits the deterministic nature of military history, and reinforces how susceptible military results are to the smallest of changes. This helps put us in the mindset of those actually making the decisions at the time...kind of what Clausewitz intended with his "Critical Analysis" ideas (per Jon Sumida). Since a key vulnerability in peacetime thinking on war is the tendency to assume the past is prologue for the future, opening up the mind through these kind of exercises is very important. Well done!
Interesting when your talking about Brits having to run supplies long way around Africa to get supplies to Egypt. This give you a idea of how desperate the Brits were to send a Convoy through med past Gibraltar under almost constant attack to deliver tanks to Egypt. IIRC there was another run specifically to send Spitfires to Malta
Drach's voice sounds different here. Deeper with less snark. Great video nonetheless!
Drach sounds different in the location videos, eg HMS Victory. He does a quite clever voice in the 'studio' videos, which is very easy to listen to. A great channel, underrated, still.
@@neilwilson5785 I keep forgetting he has such a tiny sub count. He deserves hundreds of thousands.
Most excellent! Thank you all for the excellent debate.
Excellent video. :)
Great job gentlemen.
Excellent video!
Thank you, Bernhard, for bringing together our three great 'go-to' resources. Not that what follows is related to anything, but my lovely wife goes all girly when Bismarck smiles - no, I am not angry or jealous or upset .. I am all too thankful (she is a very hard-working young lady, so any little cheer-up is more than welcome; thank you Bis). ;o)
Fun stuff! Thanks!
Damn all 3 of you in one video that’s awesome
A really enjoyable discussion on a "what if" topic.
I do like the formula that has been created with this video. Drach doing naval, bismark Air and MHV on the land.
This should be a series of videos if possible of these three analysing theatre operations in history each focusing and providing input on their specialisation.
Shallow is not a word I would ever associate with the videos you produce!
This is incredibly interesting stuff
History boner, Uncle Drach is my favriot, long time watcher of MHV. And just started watching the Aviation guy religiously..
Great video, loved to collaboration!
The only qualm I really have is the lack of an Italian participant, or at least someone supplying the Italian perspective. The role of the RM in escorting supply ships or carrying out many of the needed objectives can't really be understated, and I feel that a lot is missing out of what is and isn't feasible, or what changes, without that perspective.
Avengers Assemble! Never have I clicked a video this fast with my three favorite history TH-camrs all sharing one stage, representing the three areas of the battlefield; the skies, the waves and, ummm, the dirt...(sorry) This is quality content
Very interesting. Thank you.
A alternate history in detail and from views from all the three branches of service. If only the Germans could get such inter-service levels of strategic cooperation.
Fascinating and quite informative. Excellent work the three of you, of all the videos that could come up this was a wonderful surprise.
The axis were plagued by lack of cooperation/coordination between the alliance and even between their own branches. North Africa could have been a potential victory with huge long term benefits for the axis but they all had different goals and just did their own thing. Tackle on severe inter-service rivalry, it is going to be a disaster. The Allies on the other hand were a lot more cooperative.
Now the giant hip flask reference makes sense.
I think one of the more interesting discussions in relation to this topic is what the British do with the Capital ships in Alexandria. As discussed the British lose Malta and the Germans would then push onto Alexandria after defeating the British. The Admiralty then gets faced with the problem of whether they keep the ships in the Mediterranean to support the defence of Alexandria with Naval Gunfire support or leave via the Suez canal.
In the former case, the British can try to stop the Germans taking Alexandria, but run the risk of losing the city and access to the canal, essentially trapping them in the Mediterranean. These ships then have to essentially try and get to Gibraltar, lest they be cornered and trapped by the Italian fleet and Luftwaffe, or even simply run out of fuel and forced to Scuttle. However it would be an incredibly difficult trip non the less since the Axis would know where they are going, and could intercept and bomb them the whole journey.
In the latter case, the British lose critical gunfire support for the Defence of Alexandria, but save the majority of their ships (since theoretically the luftwaffe could try bomb them whilst they are making the transit through the canal and try trap them). However these ships are now far away from any sort of theatre at that point and have to make the long journey around Africa, which takes half the British capital ships out of action for a while at least.
Also surprised that no one mentioned that the Balkans campaign would be in significant trouble if this scenario took place. With Alexandria lost the Allied forces in Greece and on Crete would be trapped and wiped out, further reducing the already dwindling strength of the British. However since the discussion was so complicated and time limited i can understand not mentioning it.
An expert on Italian military would have been fantastic.
Sofus which Military
Sadly us Italians history buffs are not very well versed in English, so very few make international videos.
I think also that the second world war is considered too much political to talk about right now in Italy
@@brainyskeletonofdoom7824 It's a shame it's rarely a good sign, when it's considered politically inconvenient to talk about certain footsteps in one's own country history.
Sofus
Given that Mussolini’s descendants are far-right politicians....
Drach you look alot younger then i thought.Like Victor said nice to put the face to the voice.
Fantastic video. One thing I'll note if the Axis take the middle east, turkey will almost certainly join the axis because they are now surrounded, giving an easy supply line to and from the middle east.
This also cuts the primary lend lease route to Russia from Persia and puts the primary Russian oil fields within range of German bombers.
Nice think tank! A part II would be most wilkommen!
TIK has cleared up a number of things. But my strong feeling has always been that a big mistake was not going all out to take the Suez Canal. BEFORE any attack on Russian etc. The Italians would be given one job. To take Malta.
More of these collaborations please
There was one thing that went unmentioned, the British invasion of Italian East Africa. The Italians had huge forces and if the British were preparing for German forces on the Egyptian border they would have been very anxious about drawing away scant forces to conquer Addis Ababa. Italian forces would not have suffered the huge casualties and shock of losing their empire, and they would make great support and police forces for Egypt and other places. This would have been huge for Italian morale.
Three of my favourite channels together for a great collaboration video....just missing 'The Chieftain' !
Great presentation gentlemen. I can only imagine what the three of you plan as a sequel to this. ;-)
This shows why discussing alternative history can be so useful, as you have to research what did happen in detail, and often questions get asked that come up with surprising results, that wouldn't have been asked otherwise. If Italy was planning to enter the war, as seems to be implied by the early movement of German troops there, then Italy would be planning to take Malta, and there was no plan to defend Malta at that time. This is one of the most stupid consequences for Italy of rushing into the war, was that they were not prepared for an instant Malta attack - which could have involved taking advantage of neutrality to get Italian troops inside ships inside the harbour before war started, like the Germans did in Copenhagen. There's also the possibility that the Italian general that got shot down and killed by his own troops doesn't get killed and the Italian invasion is better run. The Italians then might also have used a smaller, more mobile and effective force.
the big thing really would be keeping the aussie's out of it,
as they were shown to be highly effective there, holding places that they had no right too, and it an earlier commitment might will have meant more ANZAC troops sent before the japanese threat pulled them closer to home
What if the Germans had seized the French fleet at Toulon?
I second that question!
Would the French surrender in June 1940 result in the German occupation of the mediterranean coast with a landlocked Vichy?
Simple, the French would have scuttled the ships as planned, which is what they did IRL...
@Finished Finnish No, simply no trained sailors available for them in any case... everyone going into the KM was green as a pea, many lacking even merchant background.
Germany wouldn't have had the fuel to operate the French fleet. They barely had fuel to keep their own fleet going.
I'm only past the introductions and I already pressed like.
Wow. Just wow. Three of the very best.
what a wonderful dreamed of video.
Well done lads.
Nice one.
Why was the camera to the side? Where you guys talking to an audiance?
as long as the live audience was not 67.086 people (adjusted for "present people more important than internet people", maybe: 10.000), I still regard us as more important than them?
They could still put the camera in the center...
(though i do like the angle, makes things less static)
lol just casually refer to Istanbul as Constantinople, I love you guys!
Very common in the west. Especially when discussing history. I'm English and I would always say Constantinople. Just a historical hangover.
@@AdamMGTF not so sure about that. I also live in the west and I've never heard anyone (not even anti-Turkish racists) call the city by it's true, Greek name. In fact most people don't even know what I'm talking about when I call it Constantinople.
Isn't the two names just translation of one another?