time for another what if question. okay, what if Rommel got all his supplies (all the fuel he requested, the ammo and even the Tiger tanks Hitler had promised him). would he have won at El Alamein or did the allies win again with their higer numbers of materials?
He would have won, but it wouldn't have happened as he wouldn't have stopped the first time Even at the second battle where the brits had massive superioty of tanks and guns the brits still struggled to break out. It was lack of fuel, tanks and air power which made all the difference FNG
The big problem with the western desert was which ever side had managed to advance found themselves at the end of a long and slender supply line. Thus a huge amount of fuel was basically used up moving fuel forward.
Im suprised that Rommel didnt rebuild the pier at Tobruk, Bardia or Sollum. Givin that would have taken a few months, but then the supply line would be right there at the front. Plus Bardia and Sollum where both out of the reach of the RAF bombers on Malta, and the bombers that did come from the east of El Alamein could have been downed by the 88s. Although even if he did do that i quess a supply needs supplies and Rommel Would Have needed alot more of them.
Any thoughts about the effects in North Africa if the Axis forces had successfully invaded and seized Malta as they did Crete? I would think that Luftwaffe forces on Malta would have made the Med transit by the supply convoys even hairier.
Most of the supplies sent to Rommel across the Mediterranen didn't arrive at all, which means that opening more ports probably wouldn't have helped. By the way, ground AA fire alone was never enough to repel air attacks.
But if we take Phip's scenario, the bulk of the British ability to sink Axis supply shipping is removed (aircraft are out - subs will be able to spend less time on station, etc) btw - Phip, the only British supplies going through the Med were for Malta - stuff for Africa simple went the long way round and arrived in Egypt via Suez. Many aircraft were flown across from the Gold Coast.
tobruk was no good. Most shipping to tobruk came under air attack from Malta, naval threat from alexandria and the Desert Air Force from Egypt. FNG
What if the ltalians had of held Ethiopia and taken over British Somaliland, how would have the British Supplied their men.
thats a big what if, the italians were never able to carry out 40's mechanised warfare and most of their divisions in africa were 2nd rate. The axis only ever considered africa a distraction to the main war in russia. Churchill knew what it meant to get something under the belt and would have done all in his power to win there. It shows in the ammounts of tanks that were sent to africa including those in the 1940 and early 41 when britian still had to few tanks to resist invasion. FNG
The Italians in Ehtiopia vastly outnumbered their enemies, and yet they suffered a crushing defeat at the hands of the British. I don't think they could ever have managed to keep their colonies.
butt kicked the italians were getting their butts kicked by tribesmen wiith bows and spears in ethiopia, not the best chapter in italian military history
Ya ur right the ltalians did lose to tribes men, but u still didnt answer my: question what if they did??? i know its a big what if... lol.
the brits would make more troops available (possibly from india) and kick the italian but. the suez canal is holy for the brits so they don't want to give it up or have it blocked. the italians really s**ked (forgive my language but i find no other worths). the Carro P.40 tank and Veltro plane were good but they came too late and in too few numbers.
The word you may be looking for is "incompetent". Also "badly led, poorly equipped and unmotivated" come to mind. In any case the British did indeed send them packing with relative ease.
that was also the reason why rommel was defeated. he once wrote to his wife: "The British are using their numeric superiorty to destroy the Italian divisions one by one and the german africa corps is to weak to do it on its own."
don't recall that quote. Rommel was beaten by logistics and lack of interest. Also by 1942 the italians were fielding much better divisions including some armoured ones. Their parachute division also performed far above expectation and duty and was duely destroyed at El Alamein whilst holding the line The main problems with the Italian units were their lack of transport. This left them vulnrable and open to being flanked which is what the brits did in 40. As a matter of interest the book I am reading at the moment suggests that Rommel was not as good as the brits made out. All the good generals were sent east and as such never appeared in the british press or got any publicity. FNG
and what about the conquering of western europe? rommels division was by far the best division there was. it was even called the ghostdivsion because of its speed
The 11th Panzer Division was called the Ghost Division in the East because it always managed to show up right where the line was about to crumble, just in time to save the day. But I'm not hearing you describing the heroic deeds of General der Panzertruppen Ludwig Crüwell, Generalleutnant Günther Angern, General der Panzertruppen Hans-Karl Freiherr von Esebeck, Generalleutnant Walter Scheller, General der Panzertruppen Hermann Balck, General der Infanterie Dietrich von Choltitz, Generalleutnant Johann Mickl, Generalleutnant Wend von Wietersheim or Generalmajor Horst Freiherr Treusch und Buttlar-Brandenfels. (List of commanders of 11th Panzer Division copied from http://www.lexikon-der-wehrmacht.de/Gli ... n/11PD.htm ). Rommel was a good commander at the tactical level, but that doesn't mean he had what it takes to be an Army commander or even an Army Corps commander, and definitely he lacked what it took to be a Field Marshal. In France, Rommel's armoured division was one out of seven in a large-scale campaign which steamrolled over the Allied troops; no single commander but Von Manstein deserves full credit for it.
aaaaahhhh too many names that i don't know :lol: roel, i'm more a naval person, i don't know that much about the war on land. i only know that rommels 7th panzer was called the ghost division in the attack against france. my knowledge about the russian front is only limited to the big battles (main events of barbarossa, Stalingrad, leningrad and Kursk, and some little things) anyway, i'll be taking a quick peak in that lexicon when i've some time
