Possibly. I don't think it would hurt their chances.
Yep.
Also, remember, the British aren't attempting an amphibious landing in isolation, they're going to have a lot of support from the RN and RAF, which should help cover for any mistakes.
Sir John Valentine Carden Survives. Part 2.
- Thread starter allanpcameron
- Start date
Also, remember, the British aren't attempting an amphibious landing in isolation, they're going to have a lot of support from the RN and RAF, which should help cover for any mistakes.
There's more to taking Rhodes than the territorial gains described above.
Threatening Rhodes puts Italy in the position of trying to defend it - either risking their last few naval units or tying up all their air transport in expensive and risky reinforcement missions - or effectively ceding Rhodes to the allies along with the other Greek islands.
This further weakens Mussolini, which increases the chances of overthrow.
This matters a lot because even a generous Italian armistice weakens the axis, effectively cedes the Med to the allies (there would be no direct axis outlets at this stage) and sends a powerful political message around the world that the axis is beatable and can be broken up.
Add to this, the experience of amphibious landings even if unopposed or only weakly opposed is useful and makes a statement that every Mediterranean coast is now vulnerable.
Threatening Rhodes puts Italy in the position of trying to defend it - either risking their last few naval units or tying up all their air transport in expensive and risky reinforcement missions - or effectively ceding Rhodes to the allies along with the other Greek islands.
This further weakens Mussolini, which increases the chances of overthrow.
This matters a lot because even a generous Italian armistice weakens the axis, effectively cedes the Med to the allies (there would be no direct axis outlets at this stage) and sends a powerful political message around the world that the axis is beatable and can be broken up.
Add to this, the experience of amphibious landings even if unopposed or only weakly opposed is useful and makes a statement that every Mediterranean coast is now vulnerable.
Would the Italians be willing to risk what's left of their Navy though? The RN may not have taken the horrendous losses that Crete caused in the long and short term which is a major bonus but the Italian Admirals would know they have to run a massive gauntlet to even hope of relieving Rhodes he orders that it's the equivalent of one of the Germans death rides.
Would the Italian officer Corps be willing to even try something so blatantly suicidal.
Would the Italian officer Corps be willing to even try something so blatantly suicidal.
Exactly.
I think it's safe to assume that the allies know this too, and probably a few of the Italian leaders on Rhodes have at least some suspicions.
It's probably fairly optimistic especially at this stage, but if Italy capitulates earlier it probably won't have German forces in its borders this time round, and with what happened in North Africa, the Germans might want to put some forces aside to keep an eye on them even if they aren't actively belligerent.
Mussolini's probably safe for another year, but once the British land in Sicily he's toast.
Ironically, I think he might actually be more vulnerable if he forces the Italian Navy to go out and they gut utterly crushed than if they just cede Rhodes.
Ceding an undefendable Island even if it means abandoning the troops can at least be justified with the idea that there was nothing he could do.
Sending the last remnants of the Italian Navy out to die for his own pride on the other hand?
I don't think it's particularly likely, but if North Africa is finished off and Rhodes falls after a Mussolini forced suicide run in quick succession then that could be enough for morale to drop and people to start plotting.
Ceding an undefendable Island even if it means abandoning the troops can at least be justified with the idea that there was nothing he could do.
Sending the last remnants of the Italian Navy out to die for his own pride on the other hand?
I don't think it's particularly likely, but if North Africa is finished off and Rhodes falls after a Mussolini forced suicide run in quick succession then that could be enough for morale to drop and people to start plotting.
I can't see how he could hold on a year. Within a month or two he will have lost every Italian colony in Africa (a year and a half earlier than OTL) and without any victories to boast of because he made bad choices. He can't or won't defend the Greek islands they took off the Ottomans only 30 years ago (again a year and a half earlier than OTL). He had to call in the Germans because the Italian army failed in Greece and Albania. And, to cap this, their German allies not only got beaten comprehensively by the allies in Africa, but on the way abandoned Italians units in battle and then blamed the Italians for failure. In addition, the Region Marina has effectively been neutered.
So you don't need to invade Sicily to show the fascist council, king and people they have the wrong man in charge.
Now there's no guarantee he will be ousted, but with no navy, a beaten army, no empire, a weaselly useless ally and an ongoing threat of further loss, there's a strong case to come to terms before it gets even worse. If Mussolini tries to block this, who would want to support him?
Well, I had in mind the 1941 campaign season. Naturally there is no reason for the amphibious ship to return to Britain during the winter. The last update took place at September 17th. I don't think that the British can start Crusader before late October or even the first week of November. To me it makes sense to wait a couple weeks more in order to get a heavier opening punch. With the distances involved and the challenges in logistics, I would expect the British not to attempt a battle of attrition and then exploitation but a quick and heavy offensive. The shorter the offensive, the easier the logistics.
Hmm. 'Iran' or 'Persia'? I know Churchill seems to prefer the use of 'Persia' in his memoirs, although he's from an older generation and Wikipedia currently claims that the government of Iran/Persia had expressed a preference for 'Iran' in the 1930's.
Real world contemporary evidence seems to suggest that outside of open official statements, most in the "West" continued to refer to it as Persia for a good few years.
The name change was, after all, only in 35. It takes time for that kind of thing to spread beyond official addresses and into common language and thought.
allanpcameron
Donor
I used Iran for that reason, it was the governments preferred choice of name. I believe Iran is how Iranians would say 'Persia', they mean the same.
<snip>
Diamond and Wryneck were sunk in the evacuation of Greece, which also happened TTL, and Gloucester, Fiji, Juno & Greyhound were sunk while on anti-invasion sweeps north of Crete, before the evacuation had started. Given that the Luftwaffe had air superiority over Crete TTL as well, it's probably optimistic to assume that the Royal Navy got off completely unscathed.
Which points up an issue with a prospective invasion of Rhodes - without air superiority over the Aegean, any campaign there is likely to end as a bloody mess (c.f. the OTL Dodecanese Campaign of 1943). So before Rhodes can be contemplated, the RAF will have to build up enough forces and supplies on Crete to control the skies. I haven't heard anything about Crete Convoys (the ports in Crete are inconveniently on the North side of the island), but doing so may be neither quick nor easy.
Still, I think an Aegean operation is more likely than some sort of amphibious hook into Tripolitania. The Axis still have considerable air and naval strength in the Central Mediterranean and the risks of the invasion force either being attacked at sea or finding itself cut off in the desert, with no supply lines, hundreds of miles from friendly forces are too high for any likely gain. It's not like the British have had much trouble turning Italian defensive lines this far.
The problem, as I've said before, is the Italian occupation zones in Dalmatia and Albania - they can't expect to hold them in a separate peace, which means that any new government would have to start by signing away the only territory Italy has managed to gain in this war - without a foreign boot on Italian soil and with no real prospect of getting East Africa or the Dodecanese back. I suspect the Moose will hold on until Italy's position becomes blatantly hopeless, simply because no-one else wants the responsibility.
Persia/Persis - Fars in Iranian - is one of the provinces of Iran and the homeland of Iran's largest ethnic group, the Persians. Because it's where the ancient Royal dynasties came from and where the Royal capitals were European's picked up the habit of calling the entire region/country Persia.
It's the same as reffering to the United Kingdom as "England" or calling the Netherlands "Holland".
Your point of view seemed to me to be that of 1940's British military members in that update - not of 1940's Iranians - but oh well...
As with Tolkien in The Hobbit, I guess you can omniscient narrator translate for the benefit of modern readers...
It's noted that that the deployment of the 100th Mountain Regiment was called off as the aircraft were over Crete, which would have been seen by the British. It's quite possible Gloucester, Fiji, Juno & Greyhound weren't sent on anti-invasion sweeps here.
Allan has stated repeatedly that this is primarliy a tank -based story, so such developments, as Cretan infrastructure might well get ignored. Also, Britain has carriers to help cover a shortfall in their land-based airpower.
With so much focus on attacks coming from the east, it's quite possible the Axis government in Tripoli might miss the deployment of an amphibious force landing to the west of Tripoli.
It's something I never considered but you know, with the UK putting so much more effort in diesel powerplants compared to OTL* I'm curious about Ricardo's whereabouts since in 1941 he was working on I8 and H16 diesels for the army.
In the end it might also bring the advent of fully dieselised forces a decade or two forward compared to OTL.
*And fun fact, Canada briefly worked on a dieselised version of the Ford GAA V8 and the Commonwealth considered a diesel Meteor OTL.
In the end it might also bring the advent of fully dieselised forces a decade or two forward compared to OTL.
*And fun fact, Canada briefly worked on a dieselised version of the Ford GAA V8 and the Commonwealth considered a diesel Meteor OTL.
Since the allies used Iceland(c) and Ireland(r) to prevent confusion that makes sense.