Have Army Group Africa reach Iran, Iraq or both by Christmas 1943 at the latest. What are the consequences?
AHC: Rommel reaches Iran/Iraq
- Thread starter idontlikesand
- Start date
Rommel was really stretching his supply lines by El Alamein. Marching into Iraq would be a disaster in waiting even if he managed to beat the British (not likely).
Anaxagoras
Banned
It's really not possible. Even if the British 8th Army had simply ceased to exist by order of the ASBs, how is Army Group Africa going to get the fuel, food, and water it needs to get to Iran/Iraq?
Saphroneth
Banned
Afrika Korps: "Balls. Did anyone bring any landing craft?"
British forces on the other side of (and sailing in) the Suez Canal: "You didn't have enough last year, and you don't have enough this year!"
https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=306868
It's in a rather round-about way, but no one has yet to disprove it.
It's in a rather round-about way, but no one has yet to disprove it.
piece of cake..........they can travel with the same cruise line as the Italian army did.......thru the suez canal down the red sea and around the horn on their way to pow camps in Canada. 
Saphroneth
Banned
Contrary to popular belief, what became known as "the Halt Order" did not originate with Adolf Hitler. Gerd von Rundstedt and Günther von Kluge suggested that the German forces around the Dunkirk pocket should cease their advance on the port and consolidate, to avoid an Allied breakthrough.
If the Halt Order was not issued, then the Panzers (by now seriously depleted by their charge across Flanders) can't reconsolidate to press the advance south. Yes, south - the forces trapped in Dunkirk were believed to be small.
This timeline you've presented is formed of a number of individually plausible steps, but when taken together it all results in piling a lot of good luck on the frankly excellent luck the Germans already had OTL.
TFSmith121
Banned
Only way to do it is:
Cancel Operation BARBAROSSA, maintain a pro-Axis alligment by a neutral Soviet Union, AND have the Axis go all in on a Mediterranean strategy; this would have to include Spain AND Turkey joining the Axis, and what amounts to the main route of the invasion force coming through Anatolia, not Africa.
That at least gives the Axis:
1) a counter to sustained naval operations by the RN in the Western Mediterranean;
2) a chance at taking Malta (realizing the Axis are still relying on the Italian navy and merchant marine);
3) An overland supply line, including railway lines through Anatolia to northern Iraq (all one of them) and sort of toward northwestern Iran (see map), although there are plenty of choke points, and the line to Iran actually runs into Soviet territory:
Even then, it is not a given, by a long shot; odds are still against the Axis, even with 1-3, above, I'd say.
If you're talking about an invasion of the Levant/Near East (i.e. what we call Southwest Asia today) sustained across the Mediterranean and overland from Cyrenaica, it is impossible in terms of logistics and extraordinarily unlikely in terms of the British options regarding a Fabian strategy while on the defensive.
Best,
Cancel Operation BARBAROSSA, maintain a pro-Axis alligment by a neutral Soviet Union, AND have the Axis go all in on a Mediterranean strategy; this would have to include Spain AND Turkey joining the Axis, and what amounts to the main route of the invasion force coming through Anatolia, not Africa.
That at least gives the Axis:
1) a counter to sustained naval operations by the RN in the Western Mediterranean;
2) a chance at taking Malta (realizing the Axis are still relying on the Italian navy and merchant marine);
3) An overland supply line, including railway lines through Anatolia to northern Iraq (all one of them) and sort of toward northwestern Iran (see map), although there are plenty of choke points, and the line to Iran actually runs into Soviet territory:
Even then, it is not a given, by a long shot; odds are still against the Axis, even with 1-3, above, I'd say.
If you're talking about an invasion of the Levant/Near East (i.e. what we call Southwest Asia today) sustained across the Mediterranean and overland from Cyrenaica, it is impossible in terms of logistics and extraordinarily unlikely in terms of the British options regarding a Fabian strategy while on the defensive.
Best,
The Germans would have to jump into North Africa right after the fall of France. No battle of Britain, even then then there is going to be two divisions in Egypt to deal with and another in Iraq or some place else in that area. Maybe the Germans could smash units faster than the British could reinforce them and perhaps the British collapse BUT as pointed out up thread the logistics are against the Germans.
Michael
Michael
At first glance, I thought this was an ASB scenario where Rommel is ISOTed to the Iran/Iraq War.
Saphroneth
Banned
It seems churlish to point out that the Indian Army could have been about six million strong just taking OTL volunteers. And Persia is next to India...
TFSmith121
Banned
The British could dig in above the Qattara Depression
The British could dig in above the Qattara Depression at any point from 1940 onwards and any forces the Axis could sustain south across the Mediterranean and then east from Cyrenaica are going to stall there (as they did historically); the British can always reinforce and sustain more quickly and substantially by sea - even around the Cape - than the Germans and Italians can across the Med and then east from Benghazi.
One of the advantages of control of the sea, and the world's largest merchant marine. Control of the AIOC and IPC doesn't hurt, either.
The Axis can threaten Egypt from the west, but with British control of Malta, even that threat is limited.
The only way the Axis could threaten British control of the Levant was through Anatolia, and even then, it would be an extremely difficult campaign, with high odds against success.
Best,
The British could dig in above the Qattara Depression at any point from 1940 onwards and any forces the Axis could sustain south across the Mediterranean and then east from Cyrenaica are going to stall there (as they did historically); the British can always reinforce and sustain more quickly and substantially by sea - even around the Cape - than the Germans and Italians can across the Med and then east from Benghazi.
One of the advantages of control of the sea, and the world's largest merchant marine. Control of the AIOC and IPC doesn't hurt, either.
The Axis can threaten Egypt from the west, but with British control of Malta, even that threat is limited.
The only way the Axis could threaten British control of the Levant was through Anatolia, and even then, it would be an extremely difficult campaign, with high odds against success.
Best,
TFSmith121
Banned
Which Rommel?
This one?
or this one?
If it was the second General Rommel, if he had ended up with Anders' forces, and if the Allies decided to set up a deception force headquarters, it is just possible...
Best,
This one?
or this one?
If it was the second General Rommel, if he had ended up with Anders' forces, and if the Allies decided to set up a deception force headquarters, it is just possible...
Best,
Maybe a Pre war POD where Italy modernizes it's ports and builds more Rail lines in Libya? Combined with Germany using more Luftwaffe transport aircraft to bring over more supplies? Of course more Aircraft in NA means fewer of the Eastern front, which could led to a lot of butterflies.