Michael Emrys Posted January 22, 2004 Share Posted January 22, 2004 Originally posted by japinard: Dorosh - why would the Chinese have PAK 40's? Captured guns - or was part of the Chinese country Axis affiliated? Seems strange since their arch-nemesis was Japan... As Dorosh says, during the early part of the Sino-Japanese war the Germans provided advisors and sold arms to the Nationalist Chinese. The Japanese didn't much like this and protested against it, but there wasn't much they could do about it and Germany needed the foreign currency. After the signing of the Tripartite Pact that made Japan an ally of Germany, the latter began to withdraw support from China. By the time the Pacific War broke out, I think the Germans were pretty much gone from the scene, though I can't rattle off exact dates. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
japinard Posted January 22, 2004 Author Share Posted January 22, 2004 AEB - wasn't Norway the victim of a quick German invasion/takeover? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted January 22, 2004 Share Posted January 22, 2004 It's worth noting that Finland never declared itself an ally of Germany. They were very careful to insist they were "co-belligerents". Once they had reoccupied the territories taken from them by the USSR in 1940, they ceased major operations even though the Germans tried to get them to participate in the attack on Leningrad. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Firefly Posted January 22, 2004 Share Posted January 22, 2004 Originally posted by A.E.B: Iraq - Axis Nope. Iraq was a British puppet in 1939, when a pro-Axis faction siezed power in 1941, the British invaded and overthrew them in a matter of weeks. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted January 22, 2004 Share Posted January 22, 2004 Originally posted by Firefly: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by A.E.B: Iraq - Axis Nope. Iraq was a British puppet in 1939, when a pro-Axis faction siezed power in 1941, the British invaded and overthrew them in a matter of weeks. </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted January 22, 2004 Share Posted January 22, 2004 Portugal was a funny case: A long-time ally of the British, it was ruled by an authoritarian regime with sympathies for Hitler and Nazism. They refused to throw in their lot until it pretty clearly looked like the Allies were going to win and then finally yielded to British and American pressure to allow bases on the Azores. These were useful in fighting the U-boat menace, although by the time basing rights were granted the period of greatest danger had long since passed. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tero Posted January 22, 2004 Share Posted January 22, 2004 Originally posted by japinard: I've already determined the following (non-superpowers): Finland - Axis In 1939, BS In 1939 Finland was leaning towards the neutral Nordic countries (Sweden, Norway and Denmark) and Western Allies because the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact made both Germany and USSR act hostile towards Finland. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
japinard Posted January 22, 2004 Author Share Posted January 22, 2004 Emrys - you recall how long that Authoritarian rule lasted in Portugal? Seems like they were like that for several decades thereafter. So if the Axis had been clearly winning in 1944 - think they would have thrown their hat in with the Axis? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
japinard Posted January 22, 2004 Author Share Posted January 22, 2004 But Tero... the Act made Finland "absorbable" by both the USSR AND Germany. In early 1940 though the USSR was technically a neutral/Axis power. The only known treaties were with Germany with their non-aggression pact. Britian and the US certinaly did not have a non-aggression pact with the USSR. SO wouldn't this make the USSR... Hmm I think I just proved your point 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tero Posted January 22, 2004 Share Posted January 22, 2004 Originally posted by Michael Emrys: It's worth noting that Finland never declared itself an ally of Germany. It is also worth noting that the Germany did deglare unilaterally Finland as her ally only in 1941. They were very careful to insist they were "co-belligerents". Once they had reoccupied the territories taken from them by the USSR in 1940, they ceased major operations even though the Germans tried to get them to participate in the attack on Leningrad. Very true. Since the starting point of this scenario was 1939 none of that had ever taken place. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted January 22, 2004 Share Posted January 22, 2004 Turkey hasn't been mentioned yet. It was another funny case, but indicative all the same for the problems faced by neutrals and caused by them. Turkey stayed neutral until almost the very end of the European war, when it finally declared war on Germany and joined the United Nations. It never engaged in any significant fighting that I am aware of. It continued to ship chromium (an important commodity in the alloying of steel) as long as an open rail lined existed to Germany. It was courted by both sides all through the war and the center of much intrigue. Both Britain and Germany provided weapons either as a gift or at cut-rate prices. The USSR was very concerned about Turkey because it controlled the USSR's access to the Mediterranean, and thus one of the world's chief shipping lanes. The USSR would probably have gone to war with anybody who looked like they were gaining dominant influence in Turkey. For somewhat similar reasons, Britain and the other major Western powers would have taken a dim view of the USSR getting the upper hand there. It was a very delicate and complex situation. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
japinard Posted January 22, 2004 Author Share Posted January 22, 2004 Well, now I have to do 2 versions Version 1 will be 1939 tendancies based on a German-Russian alliance. (SCARY) And Version 2 will be more historical based on overall war effort 1939-1944. So tehnically if we looked at a Russo-German allaince (I kionw that's far-fetched cause Nazi's abhored Stalin and communism) - but this would have put the remaing Slavic, Baltic, Eatern European, Scandinavian, and Low Countries at odds with this type of "Axis of Evil". hehe. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SgtMuhammed Posted January 22, 2004 Share Posted January 22, 2004 Originally posted by japinard: So if the Axis had been clearly winning in 1944 - think they would have thrown their hat in with the Axis? Definitly. They continued their authoritarian ways well into the 60's IIRC. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
japinard Posted January 22, 2004 Author Share Posted January 22, 2004 Emrys - Turkey did end up kind of siding with with NATO though didn't they? After all we had Nuclear Missles there until the 1960's. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted January 22, 2004 Share Posted January 22, 2004 Originally posted by japinard: Emrys - you recall how long that Authoritarian rule lasted in Portugal? Seems like they were like that for several decades thereafter.Absolutely right. It wasn't until a military coup in the late '70s that the old regime was tossed out and a kind of democracy began to take hold. So if the Axis had been clearly winning in 1944 - think they would have thrown their hat in with the Axis? Yes. Even those states that had no great love for Germans, Nazis, or Hitler were pissing in their boots in the face of what appeared to be unstoppable German might. There were very few willing to cross Adolf, and most of them weren't leading governments. After the fall of France, it looked like Germany was going to come out the BIG winner, and nobody wants to be on the losing side, especially in this kind of game. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted January 22, 2004 Share Posted January 22, 2004 Originally posted by japinard: But Tero... the Act made Finland "absorbable" by both the USSR AND Germany.Hmm, I don't think so. I would have to look it up to be sure, but I think Finland was defined as within the Soviet "sphere of interest". Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted January 22, 2004 Share Posted January 22, 2004 Originally posted by Michael Emrys: It's worth noting that Finland never declared itself an ally of Germany. They were very careful to insist they were "co-belligerents". Once they had reoccupied the territories taken from them by the USSR in 1940, they ceased major operations even though the Germans tried to get them to participate in the attack on Leningrad. Michael Very good, Michael, except that you're forgetting that Finns did go a "bit" further than the old borders before they stopped. Map of furthest advance Germans then hoped to be able to link up with Finnish troops at River Svir (Syväri on the map), but were unable to do so, and thus Leningrad could be supplied across Ladoga. As to German ties, it has to be understood that Social Democrats and moderate agrarians had a strong influence in the Parliament (which functioned throughout the war), and during Winter War it was Germans who, loyal to their Soviet ally, didn't allow arms shipments for Finland through its territory. Finland got weapons from Britain, France and Italy. The change took place only when Finnish leaders learned that Germany would be willing to protect it from Soviet interests, and more... (Very nifty, considering that Stalin attacked Finland with the blessings of Hitler!) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted January 22, 2004 Share Posted January 22, 2004 Originally posted by japinard: Emrys - Turkey did end up kind of siding with with NATO though didn't they? After all we had Nuclear Missles there until the 1960's. Turkey has been a member of NATO more or less since its inception. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
japinard Posted January 22, 2004 Author Share Posted January 22, 2004 Sergei -that map is kind of difficult to read. Does that show the Finnish army on the steps of Leningrad? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
japinard Posted January 22, 2004 Author Share Posted January 22, 2004 OK here's my new alignment. Pre-1940 Canada - Allies Finland - Allies Hungary - Axis Ireland - Allies Belgium - Allies Netherlands - Allies Poland - Allies Romania - Axis Baltic States - Allied Bulgaria - Axis Denmark - Allied Greece - Allied Hungary - Axis Norway - Allied Iraq - Allied Portugal - Axis Romania - Axis Sweden - Axis Yugoslavia - Allied Spain - Axis Switzerland - Axis Turkey - Axis USSR - Axis (gulp) [ January 22, 2004, 03:16 AM: Message edited by: japinard ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
japinard Posted January 22, 2004 Author Share Posted January 22, 2004 Overall Average alignment (Primarily post-1940): Canada - Allies Finland - Axis Hungary - Axis Ireland - Allies Belgium - Allies Netherlands - Allies Poland - Allies Romania - Axis Baltic States - Allied Bulgaria - Axis Denmark - Allied Greece - Allied Hungary - Axis Norway - Allied Iraq - Allied Portugal - Axis Romania - Axis Sweden - Axis Yugoslavia - Allied Spain - Axis Switzerland - Axis Turkey - Axis USSR - Allied 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jarmo Posted January 22, 2004 Share Posted January 22, 2004 Originally posted by Michael Emrys: Hmm, I don't think so. I would have to look it up to be sure, but I think Finland was defined as within the Soviet "sphere of interest". Michael It was indeed. The facts of alliance are wery hard to draw. When soviets first ivaded (winter war) and annexed Estonia, the plans for Finnish-Swedish-Estonian defence union fell apart. During the war Britain (and US to some extent) supported finland with weapon and money shipments. It was actually the threat of war with Britain that caused Stalin to agree to a ceasefire. Meanwhile, Germany blocked weapons shipments from Italy to Finland. No particular warmth between finland and germany at that point! It was only after winter war ended, soviets and westerns started getting warm feelings, that finns turned to germany. There was nowhere else to turn to and a follow up war seemed inevitable. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alfatwosix Posted January 22, 2004 Share Posted January 22, 2004 To return to the original topic, most of the overrun countries in Europe had a government in exile (mostly London) whilst the Germans placed a puppet regime to lead the occupied country. This was certainly the case for Poland, Belgium, The Netherlands, Norway, France (with General De Gaule)..... We did not speak a lot about Yugoslavia, but that country was actually non existent, as such during the occupation. It was divided between Croatia-Slovenia-Bosnia on one side and Serbia and the other republics on the other. The Croatian side had a puppet regime under Ante Pavelic (Ustasa movement), had a semi-autonomous status and followed an axis course, whilst the Serbian part was more direcly governed by Germany. Now to say that all Serbs were Allies and Croats were Axis is wrong. Tito, (born in Croatia) made his army of partisans with members from all republics. This just to illustrate that it is difficult to just arbitrarily determine for some countries, which side they were on. Definitely, you can consider Rumania, Bulgaria and Hungary as Axis as they joined the axis side without having been occupied by them. The reason why so many young men from the occupied countries went to fight in SS units on the east front is not to be seen as purely Nazism. Many of these men were Christians and truly believed that communism was the work of the devil. Many of them went to fight, not with the Germans, but against communism. I just love these threads 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
japinard Posted January 22, 2004 Author Share Posted January 22, 2004 So was Sweden in the USSR's "sights" thus the initial reason for the Estonian/Swedish/Finnish alliance? If not, was Sweden more like Swizerland in profiting somewhat from German wartime needs? Alfatwosix - I'm enjoying this thread too So fun to learn new things from old history. [ January 22, 2004, 03:32 AM: Message edited by: japinard ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
japinard Posted January 22, 2004 Author Share Posted January 22, 2004 Did Italy own any parts of North Africa before 1939? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.