Previous Next Index Thread

Re: Balkans WW I to WW II (was: 20th-century historical figures in AH(was Thoughts on "Two Score: 100

 >Alexander N. Bossy ( wrote:
 >bs925@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Donald Tucker)' wrote: 
 >><clipped stuff includes my timeline> 
 >Having looked at your time line, I'll amend my statement.  The 
 >Soviet Union's occupation of Bessarabia started a northern Balkan 
 >war, into which Hungary and Bulgaria helped dismember Romania. 
 Agree, I accept that causes *can* have lagged effects, such as the 
 delays shown in our timeline.  Even in the ununited Italy timeline, 
 Hungary and Bulgaria would see Romania's war with the Soviet Union 
 as their best opportunity to settle accounts    I will modify my 
 ununited Italy timeline to include this action begining *some time 
 after* the German's invade the Soviet Union.  You might be interested
 to note that I started a separate thread on the German invasion
 called: "Yet another Russo-German WW II" after David made some
 good comments on my original post on "20th-century historical figures 
 in AH".
 >This continued an earlier action, in which Poland, Hungary and 
 >the Soviet Union helped Germany dismember Czechoslovakia.  
 >The southern Balkan war, which really focused on dismembering 
 >Yugoslavia in our time line, was more or less started by the
 >Italian invasion of Greece.  However, I think that, without 
 >Italy in Albania, Greece and Yugoslavia would be likely to help 
 >Romania defend its territorial integrity vis a vis Bulgaria 
 >(which had territorial claims against each of them) in our time 
 This might happen *after* the German invasion of Russia was underway 
 and Hitler would be unwilling to divert troops for sideshows.
 But its just as likely that they would sit it out until they
 thought the Nazi's were headed for defeat as they would not
 be punished for attacking Germany's ally.
 Or they might wait for Allied support (as speculated below).
 >A seperate question is whether the Little Entente could survive 
 >the dismemberment of Czechoslovakia.  Personally, I doubt it. 
 Good point.  I also think that this would make it kaput.
 >>I guess I'm dense, but if the Germans aren't occupying the 
 >>Balkans in this timeline what would the Western allies gain by 
 >>exploiting those wars.  This sounds almost like Churchill's 
 >>"soft underbelly of Europe" concept.   
 >Partly, it is.  However, I think that the strategic vision goes 
 >a little further than that.  Greece, Yugoslavia, and Romania 
 >(the south east European victors in WWI) have strong strategic 
 >interests in an Allied victory.  
 >Conseqeuntly, allied force can use those (still independent) 
 >countries for a launching pad in their invasion of Europe. 
 Agree, to the extent that we talk about *a* launching pad instead
 of *the* launching pad. 
 >Instead of having to create a beach head in Normandy, they can 
 >land in Greece, move their forces into Yugoslavia (where they have 
 >local support, unlike the Germans who would have to belatedly 
 >invade).  Gaining control over Yugoslavia, the allies then swarm 
 >into the lowland, taking Hungary in short order, marching north 
 >into Slovakia and Poland.  This cuts off the Reich from the bulk 

with word 'help' in message body