Todayinah Ed. says, in this scenario, the combatants take an earlier, strategic decision to fight for the control of global energy resources. If you're interested in viewing samples of my other work why not visit Todayinah site.
| March 2 |  |
Editor says, what if the proposed Anglo-French military intervention in the Winter War had actually gone ahead? (this more belligerent response is re-queled by an earlier action in which Allied Air Forces bomb Stalin's supply of Baku's oil in October 1939). Please note that the opinions expressed in this post do not necessarily reflect the views of the author(s). This story was published in the December 2011 edition of Changing the Times Magazine.
| Share this Article on: |  Facebook |  Twitter |
In 1940, on this day the sovereign governments of Norway and Sweden granted transit rights which authorized a British-French Corps to disembark at the Norwegian port of Narvik and support Finland via Sweden while securing supply routes along the way.
Allied Military Intervention in the Winter WarIn reality the actual prospect of Allied forces fighting the Red Army in the snow was quite ephemeral. Because the diplomatic exchange of these official requests masked a covert feint devised by the First Lord of the Admiralty, Winston Churchill. His secret plan was for the vast majority of the 135,000 men sent to aid the Finns to occupy the Swedish iron ore fields that were supplying Nazi Germany. Nevertheless, upon hearing of the plan Adolf Hitler stated that should Allied troops enter Sweden, Germany would invade.
Of course the allied strategy of neutralising enemy resources had been fixed right at the beginning of the war with the fateful decision to bomb Azerbaijan's oil fields. And that military reaction to the signing of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact led inevitably to the Russians joining the Axis.
Doubtless the Swedish Cabinet's approval of the transit rights request was relucantly given upon the threat of a similiar strike. Yet for all its obvious geographical disadvantages, a Scandinavian theatre clash would enable the Allies to strike a blow of military authority with their considerable air and sea power. And perhaps a military stalemate that starved the Axis of strategic resources might lead to a peace settlement on more favourable terms. But as things turned out, the Winter War was merely an interlude between the Phony War and the Phony Peace. This was the infinitely more complex situation inherited by the incoming British Prime Minister when Neville Chamberlain died on 9th November 1940.
This article is part of our Resource War thread..
Entry posted by Todayinah Editor
© Alternate Historian, 2004-.Story Tags
Permalinks: Post, Day. Browse Thread: Resource War Source: Wikipedia Labels: Finland, Winter War, Britain, France, World War 2. Editor says, in this article we explore an idea on the Military History Forum web site and repurpose content from Wikipedia which concludes ~ On 18 June 1941, the Swedish government quickly agreed to Nazi Germany's demand to transit rights across Sweden for German troops on their way from the then occupied Norway to Finland, in order to join the German attack on Soviet union. A total of 2.14 million German soldiers, and more than 100,000 German military railway carriages, would cross neutral Swedish territory in a thunderous display of "might over right" for the next three years.
~ Would Hitler stay allies with Stalin in this TL? This is my big question, how does England respond to barbarossa when at peace with Germany?
~ March 2, 1940, and Anglo-French Corps is in Narvik with the stated purpose of supporting the Finns and the real purpose of seizing the Swedish iron fields that the Swedes had been using to supply Germany with iron. First, effect - Germany will be reluctant to invade Norway. German rhetoric might encourage the Norwegians to call up their armed forces this making Hitler even more reluctant. The Anglo-French forces occupy the Swedish iron fields. Germany invades Sweden and is caught up in a war with a country that can raise 300,000 men to fight in the forests and hills of central Sweden..
Germany may invade Denmark (easy pickings), but leave Norway alone since they are caught up fighting Sweden. Germany may even delay invading France, Belgium and The Netherlands. If the Sitzkrieg in the west goes on until the spring of 1941, Stalin may attack Poland, Hungary, Germany, Czechoslovakia, etc. and we could be looking at Russian troops in central Germany by mid 1942.
~ I've always wondered why France and the UK declared war only on Germany after the 1939 invasion of Poland. There was a show on PBS awhile ago about the joint German-Soviet invasion of Poland and how chummy the Nazis were with in Soviets, according to Germans and Russians who were there at the time. The only thing that screwed up a potential alliance between Nazi Germany and the USSR was Hitler's invasion in 1941.
~ Norway would get caught in the middle, neutrality impossible as either Germany would take it as they did or the Anglo-French would, as they did to secure Iceland before it could possibly fall.
Please click hyperlink for Yahoo! Groups Discussion comments.
October 31
Editor says, what if the Soviet Union was still in the Axis camp when the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbour? Please note that the opinions expressed in this post do not necessarily reflect the views of the author(s).
| Share this Article on: | Facebook | Twitter |
In 1939, approval for the fateful decision to bomb Azerbaijan's oil fields was granted by the Prime Minister and his Minister of Naval Forces on this day at British General Headquarters.
Crazy HeadsIntelligence reports unambiguously confirmed that Stalin's supply of Baku's oil had been transferred to the Nazis in a secret protocol of the Soviet German Pact (pictured). Twenty-five million barrels of oil per year would be sufficient for Hitler's Panzers Division to conquer Europe, and therefore the strike order was transmitted to French Air Forces in Syria without delay. Trouble was, the operation was bungled, and the oil wells and refineries in Baku and the northern Caucasus escaped with minimal damage. Allied military leaders were forced to revert to the inferior Plan B, in which British submarines would seek to prevent the transportation of oil in the Black Sea.
The "the possibilities of bombing and demolition of Baku" were first raised in Paris by the US Ambassador to France, W. Bullitt. The French Government ordered General Gamelen and Admiral Darlan to work out a "plan of possible intervention with the view of destroying Russian oil exploitation". Ambassador Bullit informed US President Franklin D. Roosevelt that Daladye considered that aircraft attacks against Baku would be "the most efficient way to weaken the Soviet Union".
It would prove a costly mistake. In postwar statements, Charles De Gaulle would later claim that "crazy heads that were thinking more of how to destroy Baku than of resisting Berlin". He was right. Forced into the conflict after Pearl Harbour, the US would find itself at war with the combined might of the German-Soviet-Japanese Axis powers.
Entry posted by Todayinah Editor
© Alfred Montestruc, Yahoo! Discussion Groups Story Tags
Permalinks: Post, Day. Browse Thread: Resource War Source: Azerbijan International Labels: Soviet Union, Germany, Britain, France, 1939. Editor says, based on an original idea by Alfred Montestruc
~ No comment
~ One womders whether, if the Soviets were still allied with the Nazis at the time of Pearl Harbor, the Soviets might have tried a "Pearl Harbor" of their own against Alaska.
~ And in addition, this scenario invites the question of what happens later. If the Soviets remain allied with the Axis, are there "de-Communization" trials after the war (assuming an Allied victory? And does the swith in Soviet allegiance delay the end of the war in Europe long enough so that the first cities to be A-bombed are, perhaps, Berlin and Dersden--perhaps even Moscow?
~ Good question...
~ I'd think that blowing up the Baku refineries would be fairly easy---I've heard lots of comments that a refinery is a fire waiting to happen. Also, if the Communists stayed in the Axis camp longer, the resistance movements in occupied Europe would be a lot weaker---little though I love them, the Commies did bring a lot of underground skills to the resistance. And, after the war, assuming an Allied victory (A-bombs on Berlin and Moscow and Tokyo?) the Communist movement would be much less popular.
Comment from Mia Amani on Facebook: We might have lost the war. It seems improbable that we could have defeated Germany without the Soviets. In fact, ultimately they did most of the German-ass kicking and also bore the brunt of the casualties.
Would Japan have bothered to bomb the US if the Soviets were allies?
And would we really have gone to war against such a formidable axis?
~
~ America losing Alaska and a good deal of Pacific holdings in an embarrassing surrender... maybe, but it'd only be a matter of time before Hitler and Stalin turned on each other.
January 18
Editor says, what if the whole of Finland had been overrun by the Red Army within two weeks as expected by the original Soviet plans? This post proposes a variant different outcome to the article on Rookmoor's Tablets of Lead. Please note that the opinions expressed in this post do not necessarily reflect the views of the author(s). This story was published in the February 2012 edition of Changing the Times Magazine.
| Share this Article on: | Facebook | Twitter |
In 1940, on this day the second phase of the Winter War commenced with the Soviet invasion of Norway, a move which had been predicted by the Danish ambassador to London, Count Eduard Reventlow.
Pact of SteelWith German intentions as yet undeclared the Western Allies gained no benefit whatsover from this prescient warning. Unable to strategically anticipate the next moves in the theatre, they were forced into committing significant military resources to the defence of Scandinavia before the mission could be fully scoped.
What was clear however was that the German point of strategic interest was Narvik, the railway head from which Swedish iron ore mined at Kiruna and Malmberget was brought to the sea. And therefore the decision was taken to concentrate combined services forces on a strike at Narvik. Whether this bold initiative would create conflict in the Nazi-Soviet Pact, or force the two great powers into an integrated alliance, only time would tell. But in any case the allied strategy of neutralising enemy resources had been fixed right at the beginning of the war with the fateful decision to bomb Azerbaijan's oil fields.
This article is part of our Resource War thread.
Entry posted by Todayinah Editor
© Alternate Historian, 2004-.Story Tags
Permalinks: Post, Day. Browse Thread: Resource War Source: Wikipedia Labels: Norway, Winter War, Nazi, Germany, World War 2. Editor says, in we have explorered an idea on the Rookmoor's Tablets of Lead.
~ With the Nazis and the Soviets working together, a lot more of the world would be trounced as the war went on. Soviet invasion of Iran and Middle East, threatening India?
~ It would be interesting to see how the Usual Suspects---the ones who wailed "The Fatherland has been invaded!" in the West would deal with the destruction of Finland and the invasion of Norway. How many of them would still be True Believers in the Future-that-Works?"
~ OMG!
They couldn't make up their minds whether to oppose Hitler or do a deal with him to oppose the Soviet Union.
It's all true and would have had very serious consequences.
Had Baku been bombed it is almost certain northern Norway would have been invaded by the Soviets.
Britain was also involved in the Baku episode, sending a halifaxfrom Persia to aerial photograp it and being fired at by the anti-aircraft guns.
Ambassador Bullitt, a member of the Riga Group, believed opposition and war with Hitler was wrong and there should be war with the Soviet Union instead.
However, in these events it is likely, as was intended Britain and France would invade Sweden as planned to bring aid to Finland. In which case the Soviets can "help" them and we are now opposed by Sweden, the Soviet Union and Germany.
Himmler really would be stiking up on his fiddle in Berlin for the SS stormtroopers to do German folk dances.
Worse follows, with heavier commitment in Scandinavia by Britaian and not having to worry about the Soviet Union for the moment, will Hitler take the decision to invade Britain?
It was Goebbels who said it had to look enuine, but they had no real intention of invading Britain.
Now Hitler is free to go for it.
So what happens if this takes place?
~ I think it's possible that a) a Soviet invasion of Norway would have worked to strengthen the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact and b) that Great Britain would have done nothing to oppose the invasion. Anyone who had read Mein Kempf by 1940 knew that a German-Soviet war was inevitable. I believe it would have been tempting to sit on the sidelines (so to speak) and wait until Hitler decided he could no longer partner with Stalin.
~ Other than in the FAR north [see 1945] how does the SU get to Norway? How does it supply forces there?
Older Posts
© Today in Alternate History, 2013-. All characters appearing in this work are fictitious. Any resemblance to real persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental.
