He wouldn't have won WW2, but he would still extend it for 5 more years

citation needed

the real prblem is that Barbarossa fucked the Nazis, could they win if they wait till the 45 to go to the Russians, could they invade UK winning the operation Torch, would that possible victory in North Africa change all the strategy to secure the west front ...

>wait till 45 to fight the Russians

>forgetting Japan.

What are the Japanese supposed to change in this scenario?

Germany gets bomed instead of Japan

And so what? Japan has to wait a few months longer for the nukes?

...

why? If Germany don't try to launch Amerika Bomber, wich is something that couldn't happen if they didn't control all the West and Japan attack first

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europe_first

>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europe_first
that considering that UK would be still a thing and the Nazis couldn't get Dover after that instead of go to Russia

>Again *ASSUMING* the Axis win in the Mediterranean much more ressources would be available for the Eastern Front
No, not really.

>, also they'd have Egyptian and possibly Iraqi+Iranian oil supplies
Egypt's oil production was pretty small, less than a million barrels a year. And even if they somehow close the MEd, that doesn't mean they can get to Iran or Iraq (how? Sail around the Gulf of Aden? Attack across MORE trackless desert?), especially since the British and Soviets overran both countries in 1941. And even if they do take over both countries, shipping the oil out is going to be colossally difficult.

>With hundreds of thousands of Spanish and Italian troops that could now be deployed to France, many more Italian and German airplanes and said fuel ressources Allied air superiority would likely be much harder to achieve
Look up the Transport plan. The Germans already had well over 1.5 million of their own+vassal troops in June of 1944; most of them never saw combat because of the Allied interdiction bombing. There would not be "many more airplanes", and Allied air superiority was overwhelming, far more so than the few hundred planes used in the Med would compensate for.

don-caldwell.we.bs/jg26/thtrlosses.htm

>Again, all this is only possible assuming the Axis win the Mediterranean, which I know was highly unlikely.
Even assuming the Axis win in the Mediterranean, the conclusions you're drawing from it are non-feasible.

No, Spain invades the carribean

>No, not really.
Well, the Afrikakorps and much of the Italian Army could be deployed to Russia, also there wouldn't be a need for so many troops to defend against Allied attacks from North Africa or Malta
>Egypt's oil production was pretty small
Every bit mattered for the Axis
>far more so than the few hundred planes used in the Med would compensate for.
It would make achieving Allied air superiority much harder, also Italy would stay fully under Axis control without the Allied ability to bomb them, so they could probably produce more war material (Spain too)

And finally retakes Cuba from Uncle Sam!

but not without Puerto Rico's help

You mean he would've gotten bootyblasted by the Anglos who would promptly seal the Gibraltar strait.

>Well, the Afrikakorps and much of the Italian Army could be deployed to Russia,
All 7 divisions of them? Because that's what Rommel had at his height on the offensive, 7 divisions. And that of course is ignoring the need to garrison the newly won areas, or the difficulties moving forces through theaters.

>Allied attacks from North Africa or Malta

axishistory.com/axis-nations/134-campaigns-a-operations/campaigns-a-operations/2085-number-of-german-divisions-by-front-in-world-war-ii
You didn't see a significant amount until the invasion of Italy. North Africa was always a sideshow. In this case, with an invasion of Italy non-viable, you'd still need them to fend off a ROundup, or to fend off the threat of one, and with nowhere else for the Allies to mass an invasion, you'd have that threat.

>Every bit mattered for the Axis
digital.library.northwestern.edu/league/le0280ah.pdf
It is literally about 30% more than what was being drilled in Germany itself. It's a smidgen next to what Romania was producing.

>It would make achieving Allied air superiority much harder,
No, it wouldn't. The operations around Malta were the biggest commitment of air assets, and even that was sporadic; at most, you'd have about 2,500 axis planes in the entire theater at one time. That's peanuts next to the air assets that were being spent on the strategic bombing campaign, which by the way, got the Luftwaffe shattered in fairly short order. Diverting a bunch of biplanes, naval bombers, and me-110s north is not going to make a difference when you're losing almost a thousand planes a month in 1944, especially since the Allies can ALSO concentrate their air assets in Northern Europe.

1/2

>also Italy would stay fully under Axis control without the Allied ability to bomb them, so they could probably produce more war material (Spain too)
Italy's biggest year of aircraft production was 1941, where they produced 3,500 planes of all types. In that same year, Germany produced about 12,000, the British about 20,000, and the Americans about 18,500. I don't know Spain's figures, but somehow I doubt they're that impressive. Also, the Allies were bombing Italy from England; it was considered a softer target than bombing Germany.

Quite simply, the Mediterranean was a tiny, tiny theater, and only achieved real mass when you had the invasion of Italy proper. You are colossally overestimating how much impact it had on the war.

>seal
After the African Campain Spain keep all the Riff, don't know if the UK could keep Gibraltar and secure the Channel

Spain already owned Moraco

desu I only answered to post some nice pictures, seems you're right.

>Spain attacks Britain
>Portugal drop their neutrality and push Spain's shit in
>Britain now has easier access to the continent

Portugal was fascist, why would they side with Britain?

Also they wouldn't stand a chance against Spain supported by Germany.

>spain gets gibraltar
>Uk cant easily get into the mediterranean
>french fleet doesnt get destroyed by them and joins vichy.
>spain+italy are able to get egyp and suez >whole axis can get to that sweet iraqi oil
>UK asks persia for permission to send troops from india to iraq
>permission denied
>UK then invades persia so that they can defend iraq
>persia asks for axis help

are you saying they wouldn't?

>persia becomes a mess for all, but axis can secure iraqi oil for some time
>iraqi oil goes to eastern front
>stalingrad goes to the axis favor
>spain invades french and english west africa
>vichy fleet keeps a tighter britain embargo than otherwise posible

>Taking Gibraltar locks the British out of Suez because MAGIC
>Vichy Fleet was not willing to sial under German command and the scuttling at Toulon proves it.
>Spain+Italy+Germany's alliance doesn't alter the fact that they're trying to campaign across a colossal desert with practically no infrastructure, and no ability to actually project meaningful amounts of force away from their ports.
>UK somehow needs Persian permission to land troops in Basra, which they controlled at the time
>UK and Soviets won't simply faceroll Persia the way they did historically.

Don't wank and post alt-his at the same time, the results are always ugly.

Oh god, there's more (why wasn't it all in one post?)

>Persia fell over in less than a month, why would it be a "mess".
>Iraqi oil, even if the Germans could get to Iraq (across the Syrian desert? Teleporting around the gulf of Aden?) has no easy access of getting to the Eastern Front.
>None of this changes the colossal losses the Germans took during Blau, nor the fact that they don't have enough manpower to simultaneously dive into the Caucasus and protect a front along the Volga.
>Oooh, the vital resources in Morocco and Algeria. Still, it's an improvement over the others, as it's merely irrelevant, not impossible.
>Vichy's 4 obsolescent battleships that they historically scuttled rather than let the Germans use doing jack shit.
Seriously, where are you getting these ideas? How are you linking cause and effect?

Yes.

>they wouldn't stand a chance
I really doubt they enter the war, was a fascist state, when Hitler died Salazar send condolences to the Nazi Germany, just figure, they maybe keep the neutrality till the end or join the axis

WW2 wasn Hearts of Iron campaign

Suez would be useless if British ships were unable to pass through the strait of Gibraltar. British ships would have to sail all the way around Africa to get supplies from India, and to get oil from Iran+Iraq.

>Suez would be useless if British ships were unable to pass through the strait of Gibraltar.
No it wouldn't. If you say, want to reinforce or supply Egypt, you don't need to go through Gibraltar at all.

>British ships would have to sail all the way around Africa to get supplies from India, and to get oil from Iran+Iraq.
And going through Gibraltar helps this how? Show me some supply runs that went through the western Med to go to Egypt. Hell, they shipped most of the stuff their troops were getting from England the long way around Africa.

How?

...

what the fuck is your point?

What the hell is this even supposed to demonstrate? Yes, it's shorter to go through Gibraltar than it is to go around Africa and up through Suez. But when you factor in that you have to dodge Italian and German planes/subs/warships, most of the supply of the MTO, to say nothing of the imperial commerce, went the long way around. If you lose GIbraltar, you open up the possibility of Italian raids into the Atlantic, but you don't choke off supplies to Egypt, because the overwhelming majority of supplies to Egypt never went through Gibraltar anyway.

there will be no mo boms 4 Japan!

>The majority of supplies to Egypt never went through Gibraltar

Hell, they only need 10 good puerto ricans a clear mission and pack your bags ladies and gentlemen the war is over

dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a220715.pdf
Skip to page 21 and start reading.

>The main British communications with Alexandria and Suez had to go by the way of the Cape of Good Hope, a voyage of 12,000-13,000 miles. Thus the Eight Army had the longest lines of supply that history has ever known. There were actually two main routes to the Middle East from Britain and America: by sea as mentioned earlier around the Cape of Good Hope, and by air across the middle of Africa over the Niger, and then north along the Nile Valley.

didn't PR support Franco?

Puerto Rico was already a US territory but speaking from what my family has told me there were many franco supporters because of religion. My grandmother that was born in Spain was almost killed by republicans because her father was from the army even though he died in 1922.

Oh lawd

but Franco was an atheist

Why do people assume Spain could take Gibraltar? The UK had naval dominance in the Mediterranean and the Spanish were a paltry force. Even if Spain did a Pearl Harbor the UK could have retaken it quite competently, especially after defeating Rommel.

Because if Spain joins the Axis, suddenly you have a hundred thousand German troops, backed up with things like that penis compensating railroad gun, attacking overland. The Rock is tough, but it wouldn't stand up to that.

> Even if Spain did a Pearl Harbor the UK could have retaken it quite competently, especially after defeating Rommel.
How? First off, Rommel was "defeated" in 1943; years after Franco was interested in joining up with Germany. Secondly, it's enormously difficult to invade and attack a fortified position like that from the water, much easier to invade at a soft point and fight your way overland. That's easy for the Spanish/Germans to do, not so much for the CW's position.

And I have no idea what comparison you're even trying to make with Pearl Harbor.

why didnt germany just build a big wall against russia?

Trumps meems aside
Walls and static lines were obsolete by that time,the maginot line was actually successful,the french acually wanted them to attack through the low countries but was much too costly and in the end became a white elephant
By then it became apparent the best way to have a defensive line is through defense in depth and a large reserve behind for a massive counter attack

What people dont realise is that Spain depends massively on overseas trade
Thats why they try to stay relatively neutral
Mussolini was booed by the people when he announced going to war with Br*tain,imagine Franco doing that especially after a civil war just happened years ago

I am by no means an authority on the subject but I believe that Franco and the falangists championed religion.

>respect the fuking non-aggression pact with russia
>ask franco to join the axis
>axis won
is not that hard really

No.
The winners of the Spanish civil war was hell-bent against communism. It would have made sense to help Germany and Italy. Ideologically and strategically. Specially when these countries are the reason Franco won the war.
But Franco was a fucking traitor and resolved to keep the chair in exchange for betraying his axis allies. He sold himself to the british-american jewry.

>m-muh only concern in geopolitical is because of ideological sentiments rather than realistic policy
>also put on some unrelated shit about anglo-american (((kikery)))

jesus you are such a brainlet

Who exactly?

"Trench warfare" between Japan and USA while the latter assembles some more bombs. Operation Downfall is still unnecessary.

Who in the world saays Spain couldn't have won the war because their military was weak!?

Italy's military was weak too, and yet they successfully invaded all of northern Africa.

Who's to say Franco couldn't do the same in the carribean?