Search results

As History Learner has mentioned the opening post assumed that the Germans do the OTL synthetic production as well as being able to fully ultilise the two oil fields. In that case their deficit in oil is relatively small, presuming they have no larger consumption than OTL. SillyGoose has...

I think we're talking about different time periods. I was referring to the pressure that was put on Spain, primarily by the US, after the latter had entered the war. Yes there were special features affected food production in France in 1940, but some of them, such as widespread looting by...

sillygoose Agreed they can make efforts to cut their reliance on food imports but how much is unclear. Some rationalisation is definitely possibly but there will be limits and unlike Britain, which saw disruption of food imports Spain would be facing a pretty much total cut off. They can...

Except that the article states that Spain was dependent on allied food sources. It mentions that Spain exported foodstuffs to Italy and later Germany but not how large those were or of what types. Assuming that those foodstuffs could fully/largely replace imports from the allies is just an...

Is the 1939 date for synthetic production working on the assumption that Germany continues building very resources extensive capacity until then? As opposed to greatly restricting such once they realise that Matzen provides a much cheaper alternative? Note this would provide Germany with its...

I note that the 2nd paragraph of that report states Similarly on page 4, below the quote about supplying goods to a then still neutral Italy it states. Similarly on page 5 Overall while Spain may have exported some food items to the Axis, in areas they probably had surpluses such...

Point 1: - Germany won't have massive surpluses of oil until it: a) Captures Baku, which as HL suggested in an earlier post with TTL probably wouldn't be until 43 at the earliest, if ever. The other Soviet sources, once repaired can help along the with additional production at Matzen but...

Part 2: - on other issues. They stretched their logistics especially to the limit and got a number of good breaks. They were helped by serious errors by the allied powers who massively underestimated them but a few changes could have thrown off their entire schedule. If the US hadn't...

OK splitting this into two for simplicity and excluded some of the points. The main issue is in this post. Actually if the US hadn't gotten involved with L-L once Britain was drained of funds it would have been forced to make peace shortly before Germany launched Barbarossa. I don't see...

True so will try and keep it shorter. Except that your proposal for a peace which effectively deserts the allies, even if Britain survives as a state with a perpetual war economy to maintain its defences - albeit at a lower level because of economic demands - then Germany is no longer...

Sorry about that. :) Unfortunately as I get older I find I'm less organised and the memory isn't what it is so like to reply ASAP before I forget too many details. Also possibly being very, very old school so to speak I think of it as polite to reply promptly but will try and keep it short...

sillygoose Right can't be sure I have everything as it was a week or so back but try and reply. Then why did Hitler decide on war with the US? That's one point that undermines your argument. Also I disagree about the basic idea of fascist Germany as basically operating on the same...

You said: I have pointed out that: a) Not sending huge numbers of men and air forces to Britain means that large areas of flat lands in the south of the country are not taken up by military camps, training areas, airfields etc. Its not surprising that many of the latter especially were...

Please read what I said. You will find you are at fault on two points. Actually three come to think of it. That assumes that the Soviets keep attacking after a presumed failure of TTL's winter 42 offensive.

Where was US exports going and how much spare capacity was there? Economic exports to countries not involved in the combat could be a saving factor here without introducing significant rations in the US. Or as I've already suggested before if the US doesn't insist on dumping a very large...

Sillygoose Part 4. Why making peace is a bad idea. The basic thing is Nazi Germany will be your enemy. You may think that it won't go to war with you again, despite the historical evidence and there's a small possibility that you would be right. However even if it ends up with a...

Sillygoose Me again ;) In terms of what I was concluding as an alternative strategy to try and clarify its a secure position, hold and where and when possible try and fight the Axis when the conditions are favourable. Working with the basis that the additional oil available in this area...

Sillygoose Had a quick look at those two links: a) The 1st one refers to an organisation that presented a distinctly anti-German viewpoint. It gives no mention of this being sponsored or orgainised by the government. Not saying it wasn't or that FDR didn't welcome its existence and...

I suspect that I was having a senior moment and thinking I was addressing HL rather than you.:oops: Could do that. I'm working on the greater economic and technological potential that the German empire being proposed would have, since both were almost insanely aggressive. From what I...

sillygoose Apologies for the delay but had some access problems and only got back on-line today. Its getting late here and your got a long post while I would need to check back what I was saying so will try and get a reply to you tomorrow. Steve