>Be Gitler>Be Mussolini>Waste more men in Tunisia than in Stalingrad >Literally no cultural significance Imagine if all those soldiers were utilized in the Eastern front
Agartha was there o qualcosa del genere
Didn't they fight there against the anglos to secure the oil fields?
all of NatSoc and the entire war were an insane hopeless endeavour anywayat least the African theater was kino, and that is what matters
>>18497755originally it was intended to help italy defending libya. but the english were so weak at that time, rommel saw a chance of actually taking egypt, which would have closed the mediterranean for the allies and opened up the way to the middle east oil and so he tried it. after that failed it was mostly about binding allied troops and logistics and keeping the allies away from italy.
>>18497757there was also the bigger strategic picture of turkey, iraq, iran etc. being on the fence and potentially joining the axis if the axis had emerged as the dominant power in the region. turkey wanted parts of the soviet union and the french and english colonies/vassals so they were considering joining the axis early in ww2. there also was a failed landing attempt in iraq. there was a coup in iraq to replace the british vassal governors there and germans were sending planes with troops to assist the rebels, but the coup failed and so no landing was made, or they even shot at the first german plane that tried to land, my memory is a little bit hazy concerning that theatre.
>>18497757>>18497758so basically if germany had commited more troops to north africa they could have won the war. it could have made the uk reconsider its chances and going for a truce and maybe deterred the americans from helping the brits if the british position was that worse.
>>18497759>>18497758>>18497757Interesting info, thanks.
>>18497759>>18497758That's the retarded shit. Goymany didn't do shit when they had a chance and after losing at El-Alamein they doubled down. They should have evacuated after that and focus on TSD.
WW2 was absolutely crazy. Italians and Germans in North African desert fighting Englishmen and New Zealanders. Imagine that happening now
>>18497753I doubt they wasted more than 1.5 million in tunisia
>>18497753>Imagine if all those soldiers were utilized in the Eastern frontAfrika corps was already a subpar fighting force with barely any materiel, so I don't think it would change much
>>18497755There were no oil fields there in the 40s.
>>18497753Hilter should've not invade USSR.Instead he should've concentrate all efforts in Middteranian. That was the pass to victory.Jumping on new countries not finishing those who you are already at war (Britain l) was an obvious strategic mistake.
>>18497762>Imagine that happening nowUkriane? Though recently Ukriane closed foreign volunteers corps.
>>18497753The African theatre doesn't have as much aura as the Eastern Front.
>>18497753Imagine op not being a filthy sodomite and posting a bigger picture.
>>18497772>Ukriane closed foreign volunteers corps.Hahahaha you really believe nafo propaganda like a stupid fucking retard, how gullible are you? american, british, polish mercenaries are dying en masse in Ukraine, actual american orcs with american flags. The news always report of missing american personnel that were just innocently travelling to Ukraine yes sir :)
>>18497759No because they couldn't supply them.
>>18497758Turkey joining Axis is a meme and was never going to happen for as long as Germany were allied to a country that wanted to turn the entire Mediteranian into their sphere of influence.Also Turkey was far too much depending on British trade to survive, hence why they were keen on signing a defence pact in 1939.>>18497759Kek what in the world made you come to this conclusion?First of all Britain doesnt just surrender because they lose Egypt (which wasnt even part of the British empire). Second the British were well aware that Rommels DAK was a logistical nightmare that stood little chance of ever capturing Egypt. The 8th army can simply increase in size but Rommel is stuck with his 4 divisionsEven if we play with the idea that DAK captures Egypt, it's still another +1000 kilometers of desert to the nearest oilfields meaning 1000 km more to advance, 1000 km more of logistical nightmare, and 1000 km more of exposed flanks from Commonwealth frontlines.Thirdly all of this is made redundant by the Anglo-American Torch invasion in 1942.
>>18497753>>18497763Honestly, Hitler should have taken Malta and turned Tunisia into a Korea-tier defensive grinder for the Allies instead of wasting Italians force on the Eastern Front. Deployed tanks division away from Kursk towards Sicily (they can ignored the British "operation mincemeat" bait).
>>18497761It is imperative to safeguard Italy and apprehend Badoglio's treason.
>it's another episode of chuds wondering why hitler didn't send 3 million soldiers to African desert to die from dehydration
>>18497759>>18497769If he didn't invade the USSR Stalin would have invaded the Reich after modernizing the Red Army
pol required viewing
>>18499863But Illya, I did it in Hearts of Iron IV...
>>18499484Turkey was debating joining the Axis wtf are you talking about?>mussolini would have crashed the alliance to rebuild romewell he didnt, because Mussolini acceded to Hitler's wished on everything else.
>>18501851>>18499863Reminder that Hoi4 is more realistic than lefty chuds.>desertDeserts give huge attrition and you basically cant use anything larger than light infantry in North Africa, which was historically untrue.>bababossbarecreating Barbarossa in Hoi4 is really not possible because there are no roads in the game, there is infrastructure and infrastructure in the USSR is level 1 across the board so even with the fastest motorized units, they quickly outrun their supply lines, get themselves surrounded, or they move at a snails pace due to the infrastructure.>sealiobsealion is also not possible in Hoi4 because the Germans require "naval supremacy" to even launch an invasion, a sealion would require the entire British fleet being sank before its possible in Hoi4, something that is not required irl, for instance if the British fleet is in Malaysia, Germany really could just take an army of paddleboats over to England, in Hoi4 the entire British fleet must be sunk, this is simply not possible in the game at the time sealion would actually take place.>but da game mechanicsno one is citing mechanics like insta-capping with paratroopers or abusing the naval system like sending invasion forces before a war begins as evidence for Germany having a clear path to victory.Yeah obviously if Germany sent a bunch of German soldiers disguised as civilians into Britain in 1936 then yes they could capture Britain, but no one is talking about it like this.The "heh chuds play Hoi4 and think theyre experts" crowd doesnt actually play Hoi4 and definitely does not play its multiplayer where the game is much more like a WWI or Ukraine 2026 than it is WWII.
>>18497753Based retard, the North African theatre was crucial to even begin WW2>force Britain to invest a fuckton of troops and resources, America too>factually blockade the Mediterranean aka the quick way to far east, meaning Britain is basically cut off from its colonies, meaning Japan has an easy time steamrolling Britain in the Pacific>if worked it would have resulted in control of Suez and the middle eastern oil fieldsIt was because of NA that Britain didn't steamroll Germany right away and Hitler could even begin to materialize the eastern front.
>>18501928>Turkey was debating joining the Axis wtf are you talking about?Elaborate with a real effort post on this, because it's extremely unconvincing to just take your word for it. Turkey was far closer to the allies than the Axis because 1. treaties. 2. trade 3. Italian autism
>>18502000>treatiessuch as? Turkey wasnt beholden to any Western power and they had legitimate reason to finish off their long time rival Russia.Their trade with Germany was stronger, Turkey had the Turkish Germany treaty of friendship which was far stronger than anything they had with the Western liberals.The Italian angle is nonsense. Italy didnt even ask for all of France, nor did Italy try to invade Spain, Italy's push for Greece was a moment of opportunity, a cheap grab for Mussolini to bring home a victory at a time when he looked ever more like third and fourth string to Hitler, Hungary, and Romania who as a bloc had oil, weapons, men, motivation, and experience, while Italy was the odd one out lacking basically all of those and being left behind during the various planning stages.Italian strategic aims were not actually the Roman Empire, if you unironically believe that then I must kneel for Musso because even 80 years later his ghost rises from the grave to peddle 2500 year old revanchism and it actually has buyers.Going by Italy's reputation, when Germany pulled the leash, Italy didnt resist, so it makes me think if Turkey did declare for the Axis, Hitler would have given them more than enough in terms of assurances and sphere of influence.The biggest factor in Turkey not joining was their oriental sluggishness, deliberating too long and not recognizing how much of a rolling back and forth WWII was until it was too late and the writing was already on the wall in stone in red ochre.unironically HOI4 multiplayer has a better grasp of the political reality of 1930-1950 than this board.
>>18501936>force Britain to invest a fuckton of troopsWhich would have happened anyway because Britain decided on the "Europes soft underbelly" strategy before Rommels DAK arrived.>America tooOnly insofar it provided the US a golden opportunity for their completely green soldiers, officers and command to gain some invaluable combat experience against a handful of isolated poorly supplied German divisions before facing the full force of the Wehrmacht on the continent.>factually blockade the Mediterranean Which was already blocked by Italys entry to the war, which happened a year before Rommels DAK arrived.>meaning Britain is basically cut off from its coloniesExcept it wasnt. Convoys were going regularily from Asia to Europe.>meaning Japan has an easy time steamrolling Britain in the PacificYou give the N.Africa campaign far too much credit to come to this conclusion. Even if Italy never joined the conflict in 1940 it still likely would not have influenced a warring Britains capability to defend itself against Japans sneak attack any more than a non-warring US was able to defend its holding in Asia against the Japanese sneak attack.>if worked it would have resulted in control of Suez and the middle eastern oil fieldsSo because they capture an objective 1000 kilometers away it suddenly gives them control of another objective 2000 km away?That's like saying if the Wehrmahct captures Kiev they automatically gain control of the Caucasus.
>>18502012>such as?Turkish-British defence treaty of 1939 =Britain agrees to come to Turkeys aid if they are attacked.Armaments and credit treaty of 1938 =Britain exports weapons and capital to Turkey to aid Turkey expanding its armed forces.It was also the fact that Turkey was completely dependent on British trade to feed its population, same reason Franco never actually considered joining the war (despite giving the appearence of being 'on the fence' just to appease Hitler).Again, the burden of evidence is on you because you're the one claiming Turkey was considering joining the Axis, something historians have no evidence of but apparently you do.>Their trade with Germany was strongerNo it wasnt, stop making shit up.> Italy didnt even ask for all of FranceThey actually did demand piece of France, most importantly French Tunisia. Germany said no because they did not want to give France a reason to simply continue the war from overseas, and for the fact that the Germans were not too happy that Italy had joined in the last minute and now demanded spoils.Again, you're just making shit up that contradicts facts.
>>18502032>Which would have happened anyway because Britain decided on the "Europes soft underbelly" strategy before Rommels DAK arrivedAnd they needed actual control of NA to do that, which they wasted a fuckton of resources and men on, glad we agree>Only insofar it provided the US a golden opportunity for their completely green soldiers, officers and command to gain some invaluable combat experience against a handful of isolated poorly supplied German divisions before facing the full force of the Wehrmacht on the continent.Ridiculous statement even without considering the sheer amount of materials America invested>Except it wasnt. Convoys were going regularily from Asia to Europe.Britain had to circumnavigate all of Africa to reach the eastern colonies while Italy was blockading the mediterranean. This translated to four times the duration of convoys, oil, and ships expendes; the British empire was factually split in two for the duration of the blockade, and in fact British officers themselves conceded that they could not send and consistent reinforcements over to the far east as long as they did not secure the Med, letting their colonial armies do what little they could on their own, leaving an easy prey for Japan. >So because they capture an objective 1000 kilometers away it suddenly gives them control of another objective 2000 km away? That's like saying if the Wehrmahct captures Kiev they automatically gain control of the Caucasus.You'd be surprised how quick a WW2 motorized army can advance after taking control of a choke point, not to mention Suez would have also also connected Germany and Italy to the Italian colonies in east africa (which were in a similar situation to British colonies in the far east), and huge influence over the pacific
>>18502067>Britain had to circumnavigate all of Africa to reach the eastern colonies while Italy was blockading the mediterranean.Wasn't the entire Italian navy sunk at Taranto by obsolete WW1 biplanes
>>18502036neither of those treaties couldnt be matched by Germany nor do they obligate Turkey to Britain in any way. Turkey is much more concerned strategically with Germany and Russia than with Britain.Turkey would be more concerned with France, whom Germany defeated, than with Britian.>completely dependentTurkey was not completely dependent on Britain for food.France never considered joining the war because they were out, they had no way to actually help Germany as their forces abroad were against Germany and their forces at home were already supporting Germany in a labor capacity.>the evidence is on youI have already stated the evidence, there was never a Turkish British friendship treaty.The Turks have greater gain from a German victory than a British one.>historians have no evidence ofyou are a moron.It absolutely was and you have outed yourself as a pseud because Turkey was an EXPORTER of agricultural goods to Britain, not the other way around.>"Although well disposed toward Great Britain and the United States, Turkey is not apt tomake an early departure from her position of neutrality. Her fear of Soviet domination of theBalkans, however, will probably lead her to active participation in the war, when it can be done atminimum cost, in order to obtain a voice in the peace settlement."11Turkey was asked in 1943 to join the Western liberals and they literally said 'No, if we join at all we are fighting Russia.'Every negotiation Turkey had with the WEST said "we want to fight Russia" over and over, and even when Churchill and FDR promised them guns and planes and ammunition, they kept repeating Russia delenda est.>they actually didactually asked for all of it?because I said all, not Tunisia, all.>making shit upI literally said Italy did not ask for all of France, true, agree?.>https://1997-2001.state.gov/regions/eur/rpt_9806_ng_turkey.pdfTurkey was undeniably closer to the Axis than to the Western liberals.
>>18502290no?not even half the ships at Taranto were sunk.
>>18502310oblige*before you try to weasel out of this with a grammatical attack because I pinned you to the fucking wall.
>>18502067>And they needed actual control of NA to do that,The point is that it wasnt the N.African campaign that decided on the strategy to invest men and resources into the sphere of combat, it was Italy.Britain would have invested in N.Africa even if not a single German division was deployed there. Get the logic?> the British empire was factually split in two for the duration of the blockadeIf the emprie was split it two, then how come the 8th army in Egypt was able to constantly outgrow Rommel?>and in fact British officers themselves conceded that they could not send and consistent reinforcements over to the far eastHow do you think all those British divisions and constant supply of material made it to Egypt? Despite Rommels constant victories the 8th army outgrew DAK. Do you think Britain flew everything to Egypt?So it's on you to explain how, since you're convinced the empire was "split in two".>Ridiculous statementWhy is it ridiculous?US opted to strike N.Africa first specifically because it was the easiest target for them to gain combat experience against the wehrmacht.This isnt some hidden lore. It's literally on the wikipedia page dumbass. Or any other source if you prefer.>Britain had to circumnavigate all of Africa to reach the eastern colonies Which wasnt a problem>while Italy was blockading the mediterranean. Correct, you so now you seem to understand that the Mediteranian route was blocked because of Italys entry to the war, and not because of the N.African campaign>This translated to four times the duration of convoys, oil, and ships expendesWhich again, wasnt a problem for Britain>leaving an easy prey for Japan.You dont seem to understand.Even US holdings in Asia were easy prey for the Japanese sneak attack on December 1941.Why should it have been different for Britain?Why should British holdings have survived the Japanese sneak attack on December 7 1941 but not the US territory can fall just fine according to you
>>18497787Rod Serling was a libtard jew you retard.
>>18502067>You'd be surprised how quick a WW2 motorized army can advanceGermany captured Kiev.They did not automatically capture the Caucasus as a result of capturing Kiev.So it defeats your own logic that an extra 1000 km advance 'isnt a big deal'.Esepecially when that 1000 km is almost nothing but desert. Desert on a different continent.DAK barely had the logistical support to advance outside of Libya. The majority of Rommels consumption was spent on simply reaching the frontline.>not to mention Suez would have also also connected Germany and Italy to the Italian colonies in east africaColonies that Italy immediately lost. Rommel did not muster enough strength to penetrate the Egyptian borders Gazala defensive line until 1942.Italy lost all of East Africa in 1941.>and huge influence over the pacificKek what are you insinuating.That Italy who didnt have enough fuel to power its own Mediteranian navy to leave port (the Italian surface navy was far larger than the Royal navy detachment in the Mediteranian under Cunningham) was suddenly going to start operating in Asia?
>>18502371Imagine if you will... me... giving a single shit.
>>18497753they'd still die and Slavic Bolshevism would win
>>18502290There were no sinkings at taranto
>>18502962bolshevism is jews and so are you>>18497753>Gitlerand so is op
