- 01 Jan 2014 00:03
#14347154
Terror and Reprisals. The Nazi WERE fairly willing to maintain a fair amount of terror and acts of reprisals. It didnt work. It did niot eliminate the resistance and over time it polarizes more and more of the population against you.
North Africa , there were quite a few Italian division in North Africa, it's more than just 3 divisions. The British also suffered logistically the further they operated from Suez. While having a massive support base there almost everything had be trucked forward just like the Germans from Tripoli (the British had a small railway, better Naval transport but the vast majority still had be truck). Both sides had very large advantage when much closer to their logisctical base and the other side much further.
Invading the Near East via Turkey. The Railways of the Region are really really really really bad. Supporting half the forces involved in Barbarossa through Turkey is not possible. The Railways through the Balkans are pretty bad. So only a much smaller force could be supported and at a much greater cost. Coming through Turkey the forces at the sharp end in Iraq are still going to quite small due to the bad logistical support.
Even if successful there is no way to get the oil back. The railways are really really really bad. It would take massive upgrading of the railway lines to make it work. unfortunately every thing required has to come over the same really really bad rail lines and roads. The Germans simply didnt have the engines or rolling stock, it would have been a massive investment of resources. 3700 km over some really bad railways.
Why weren't the Nazi's more socialist? Because they were not socialists, and social policies were not priority. It was preparing ot making war, looting stuff, maintaining control, and killing people the didnt like. These were Nazi high priority activities. Social programs were always window dressing and just not that important.
North Africa , there were quite a few Italian division in North Africa, it's more than just 3 divisions. The British also suffered logistically the further they operated from Suez. While having a massive support base there almost everything had be trucked forward just like the Germans from Tripoli (the British had a small railway, better Naval transport but the vast majority still had be truck). Both sides had very large advantage when much closer to their logisctical base and the other side much further.
Invading the Near East via Turkey. The Railways of the Region are really really really really bad. Supporting half the forces involved in Barbarossa through Turkey is not possible. The Railways through the Balkans are pretty bad. So only a much smaller force could be supported and at a much greater cost. Coming through Turkey the forces at the sharp end in Iraq are still going to quite small due to the bad logistical support.
Even if successful there is no way to get the oil back. The railways are really really really bad. It would take massive upgrading of the railway lines to make it work. unfortunately every thing required has to come over the same really really bad rail lines and roads. The Germans simply didnt have the engines or rolling stock, it would have been a massive investment of resources. 3700 km over some really bad railways.
Why weren't the Nazi's more socialist? Because they were not socialists, and social policies were not priority. It was preparing ot making war, looting stuff, maintaining control, and killing people the didnt like. These were Nazi high priority activities. Social programs were always window dressing and just not that important.