After the 1940 Fall of France, Benito Mussolini goes to war with Switzerland over the Italian-majority Ticino Canton

[ahmed ali]

It was not Trianon.Italian generals fucked up and almost lost their country,so french and brits must saved them.That is why they do not get their part of loot.But still get enough to not complain.

Arabs mostly do not cared about Kurds,unless they lived in Syria.And turks would be beaten,so soviets would not care about their opinion.

In this scenario,Kurds would be treated as poles - formally they were no enemies,so would get their own state.
Althought...soviets killed only about 200.000 poles from 1945 till 1956,so,maybe Kurds would be treated well,too.
Well compared to normal soviets,Sralin killed at least million of them per year.

Yes,Poland is wonderfull - for now.Germans want destroy us,Moscov want the same,we have entire hordes of traitors and USA could sell us to Moscov any given moment.

If we survive,it would be only thanks to Jesus and Holy Mary.

I agree, but it left a bitter taste in the mouths of the Italians towards the agreement

This is if you are not also Iraqi, because Iraq is stubborn in suppressing the Kurds, just like Turkey, because there are also many Kurds in Iraq.

(Iraq and Syria, as Arab countries, have a large communist party, and this is something the Soviets will invest in because they will want to attract Iraq and Syria and support the Kurds. These plans will simply fail.)

So no, the Kurds will not get their own state

I wish prosperity for Poland

 

[ATP]

I agree, but it left a bitter taste in the mouths of the Italians towards the agreement

This is if you are not also Iraqi, because Iraq is stubborn in suppressing the Kurds, just like Turkey, because there are also many Kurds in Iraq.

(Iraq and Syria, as Arab countries, have a large communist party, and this is something the Soviets will invest in because they will want to attract Iraq and Syria and support the Kurds. These plans will simply fail.)

So no, the Kurds will not get their own state

I wish prosperity for Poland

Italians did it to themselves,so they have no reasons to complain.
Iraq and Syria could have large communist parties,but i think that after WW2.But you have right,kurds state would be probably made only from part of Turkey and maybe Iran.
And people there would wish for return of turks after soviet gave them their version of freedom.

I wish prosperity for Poland,too - but we are in Europe,which is falling.We need miracle to survive..
And ,at least i do not deserved such miracle.
Well,maybe God would save us anyway.

 

[ahmed ali]

Italians did it to themselves,so they have no reasons to complain.
Iraq and Syria could have large communist parties,but i think that after WW2.But you have right,kurds state would be probably made only from part of Turkey and maybe Iran.
And people there would wish for return of turks after soviet gave them their version of freedom.

I wish prosperity for Poland,too - but we are in Europe,which is falling.We need miracle to survive..
And ,at least i do not deserved such miracle.
Well,maybe God would save us anyway.

Yes, but the Turks took an important lesson, which is not to anger the British, so they will not fight against them

Iraq and Syria already have large communist parties so supporting the Kurds angers them

Or come back and become a friend of Russia

 

[ATP]

Yes, but the Turks took an important lesson, which is not to anger the British, so they will not fight against them

Iraq and Syria already have large communist parties so supporting the Kurds angers them

Or come back and become a friend of Russia

Brits in 1940 was falling empire.Nobody should care about them,only about germans and soviets.
That is why turks not joined germans in OTL - they considered them as weaker.
But,after taking Baku and maybe Stalingrad,that would change - and turks would probably joined germans.

2.If soviets made kurdistan from turkish and iranian territories,arabs would not care.
Besides....soviets planned to enslave and partially genocide everybody there,including arabs and kurds.
Both would be to occupied working 12h/day and shouting "Long live sralin" to care about new state.

3.Russia do not have friends,becouse it was killed by soviets 100 years ago.
And current kgbstan want all poles dead or enslaved,so we could not befriend them.

But,we could ask China for help,and become their vassals,like Belarus.It would help.

 

[ahmed ali]

Brits in 1940 was falling empire.Nobody should care about them,only about germans and soviets.
That is why turks not joined germans in OTL - they considered them as weaker.
But,after taking Baku and maybe Stalingrad,that would change - and turks would probably joined germans.

2.If soviets made kurdistan from turkish and iranian territories,arabs would not care.
Besides....soviets planned to enslave and partially genocide everybody there,including arabs and kurds.
Both would be to occupied working 12h/day and shouting "Long live sralin" to care about new state.

3.Russia do not have friends,becouse it was killed by soviets 100 years ago.
And current kgbstan want all poles dead or enslaved,so we could not befriend them.

But,we could ask China for help,and become their vassals,like Belarus.It would help.

They are still a superpower

Collapsed or not, they are still a great power and Turkey will not risk provoking them again

The Soviets are friendly with Turkey, they helped them against Greece, so you won't invade

Not real, you're wrong. Arabs care about that

I myself am an Arab, and most of the Arab countries have taken a very hostile stance against the Kurds for the sake of Iraq and Syria. Even the Persians are hostile against the Kurds, and the Soviets want to attract them to their domain, and supporting the Kurds spoils this.

The Afghans were killed by the Soviets and reconciled with the Russians

 

[ATP]

They are still a superpower

Collapsed or not, they are still a great power and Turkey will not risk provoking them again

The Soviets are friendly with Turkey, they helped them against Greece, so you won't invade

Not real, you're wrong. Arabs care about that

I myself am an Arab, and most of the Arab countries have taken a very hostile stance against the Kurds for the sake of Iraq and Syria. Even the Persians are hostile against the Kurds, and the Soviets want to attract them to their domain, and supporting the Kurds spoils this.

The Afghans were killed by the Soviets and reconciled with the Russians

Not after fall of France.Turkey would care only about soviet and german opinions.In OTL remained neutral,becouse germans do not take Baku.
Change that,especially if they take more,and they would join.

And,as a result,end as soviet puppet state - without Kurdistan.
Arabs could do not like kurds - but they do not like turks more.As long as soviets made their "free" kursish state from Turkey and maybe Iran,they would not care.

P.S as a arab,ask yourself - if arabs must choose who would be elimenated,kurds or turks,what would they choose ?
i bet on eliminating turks.

 

[ahmed ali]

Not after fall of France.Turkey would care only about soviet and german opinions.In OTL remained neutral,becouse germans do not take Baku.
Change that,especially if they take more,and they would join.

And,as a result,end as soviet puppet state - without Kurdistan.
Arabs could do not like kurds - but they do not like turks more.As long as soviets made their "free" kursish state from Turkey and maybe Iran,they would not care.

P.S as a arab,ask yourself - if arabs must choose who would be elimenated,kurds or turks,what would they choose ?
i bet on eliminating turks.

It is not true that gaining Baku and losing Constantinople is a deal that Türkiye will not want

A mistake that will concern them and will push the Arabs more towards the West and kill any future Soviet influence

Of course, it is wrong, and the answer is to eliminate the Kurds. The Arabs tolerated Turkey and Iran, allies of the West, since the Arabs were allies of the Soviets, but they preferred them a thousand times over the Kurds.

And the fact that the Arabs hate Turkey is a British lie to justify the revolution of the Sheriff of Mecca. In fact, most of the Arabs fought with the Turks.

The current hatred of Türkiye is because of Erdogan

Hatred of Iran occurred only because of the rise of Khomeini, before that Saudi Arabia and Iran during the reign of the Shah were the closest allies

Arabs, whether Shiite or Sunni, are very hostile towards the Kurds (Anfal, Halabja, and the 1921 rebellion against Iraq are two prominent examples)

 

[ATP]

It is not true that gaining Baku and losing Constantinople is a deal that Türkiye will not want

A mistake that will concern them and will push the Arabs more towards the West and kill any future Soviet influence

Of course, it is wrong, and the answer is to eliminate the Kurds. The Arabs tolerated Turkey and Iran, allies of the West, since the Arabs were allies of the Soviets, but they preferred them a thousand times over the Kurds.

And the fact that the Arabs hate Turkey is a British lie to justify the revolution of the Sheriff of Mecca. In fact, most of the Arabs fought with the Turks.

The current hatred of Türkiye is because of Erdogan

Hatred of Iran occurred only because of the rise of Khomeini, before that Saudi Arabia and Iran during the reign of the Shah were the closest allies

Arabs, whether Shiite or Sunni, are very hostile towards the Kurds (Anfal, Halabja, and the 1921 rebellion against Iraq are two prominent examples)

You claim,that Turkey would never ever help germans,no matter what they would take.
I claim,that after taking Baku they probably join.
And lost with Germany,as a result soviets would create kurdish state from part of their territory.

AAnd arabs hated turks since theeir sultans becomed Caliphs - becouse for arabs only arabs could be Caliphs.

 

[ahmed ali]

You claim,that Turkey would never ever help germans,no matter what they would take.
I claim,that after taking Baku they probably join.
And lost with Germany,as a result soviets would create kurdish state from part of their territory.

AAnd arabs hated turks since theeir sultans becomed Caliphs - becouse for arabs only arabs could be Caliphs.

Anatolia is more important than Baku, and they have barely preserved Anatolia with the skin of their teeth, and the last thing Turkey wants is to re-impose Sever

That is, if they join, this is very out of the question with Autel Facts

This is nonsense. They accepted them for six centuries, and the Arabs did not revolt during this period, until 1916. Even the revolution was not helped except by a minority. Most of the Arabs fought with the Turks, because the Turks are Muslims.

(The religious bond is stronger than nationalism, and this is something that the Arabs deeply respect, and that is why they helped Afghanistan against the Russians, Chechens, and Bosnians)

Do not compare the Middle East with Eastern Europe, they are completely different

 

[ATP]

Anatolia is more important than Baku, and they have barely preserved Anatolia with the skin of their teeth, and the last thing Turkey wants is to re-impose Sever

That is, if they join, this is very out of the question with Autel Facts

This is nonsense. They accepted them for six centuries, and the Arabs did not revolt during this period, until 1916. Even the revolution was not helped except by a minority. Most of the Arabs fought with the Turks, because the Turks are Muslims.

(The religious bond is stronger than nationalism, and this is something that the Arabs deeply respect, and that is why they helped Afghanistan against the Russians, Chechens, and Bosnians)

Do not compare the Middle East with Eastern Europe, they are completely different

You still belive,that turks would never join.When i knew,that they would join IF THEY THOUGHT,THAT GERMANS WOULD WIN.
Which could happen after taking Baku by germans.
And becouse germans were lead by idiots,they would lost anyway,and turks with them.

Yes,muslims are not Europe - but,they are not unity,too.Arabs consider turks as barbarians,and for good reasons.
Iranians consider both of them as barbarians,and against for good reasons.

If muslims were really united,they would take entire Earth by now.
But they did not,just like Christians do not conqered entire Earth.

 

[Airedale260]

What if, after the 1940 Fall of France, Benito Mussolini goes to war with Switzerland over the Italian-majority Ticino Canton? Based on a population density map of Switzerland, Mussolini can argue that this canton doesn't really belong in Switzerland:

What would Adolf Hitler, the British, the US, and Vichy France do in response to such a war and how would this war itself have went?

Hitler probably facepalms in frustration, because the Italians actually tried joining in on the invasion and despite massively outnumbering the French forces got absolutely nowhere. So either he does nothing and Mussolini gets nowhere fast (on the plus side, it helps the Allies in that there will be a LOT fewer Italians to fight down tbe road), or Hitler screams at him privately but tries to execute Operation Tannenbaum, which is highly problematic because he’s facing about 2,000,000 armed and extremely pissed off Swedes in terrain that not only heavily favors the defenders to begin with, but is the WORST possible terrain in which to deploy mechanized forces.

It should also be noted that this would upset his plans regarding Barbarossa, so either he has to postpone it until 1942 or else he still tries going all in in 1941 but things go even worse in the end.

Switzerland may or may not end up falling, and if anything it might actually provoke the U.S. into war earlier given that the Swiss were also neutrals and it might be better to strike first since Hitler clearly doesn’t give a shit about neutrality.

Regarding the British and the Americans, as stated above, it probably drags the U.S. in sooner, but British strategy is already “ally with any anti-Hitler forces” and it’s likely Hitler and Co probably goes ahead with the Blitz at the same time anyway.

Postwar? The Allies have an additional avenue of advance into Germany and Austria so it may mean they beat the Soviets to certain positions. Whether it brings those two into NATO or not, I don’t know.

 

[ATP]

Hitler probably facepalms in frustration, because the Italians actually tried joining in on the invasion and despite massively outnumbering the French forces got absolutely nowhere. So either he does nothing and Mussolini gets nowhere fast (on the plus side, it helps the Allies in that there will be a LOT fewer Italians to fight down tbe road), or Hitler screams at him privately but tries to execute Operation Tannenbaum, which is highly problematic because he’s facing about 2,000,000 armed and extremely pissed off Swedes in terrain that not only heavily favors the defenders to begin with, but is the WORST possible terrain in which to deploy mechanized forces.

It should also be noted that this would upset his plans regarding Barbarossa, so either he has to postpone it until 1942 or else he still tries going all in in 1941 but things go even worse in the end.

Switzerland may or may not end up falling, and if anything it might actually provoke the U.S. into war earlier given that the Swiss were also neutrals and it might be better to strike first since Hitler clearly doesn’t give a shit about neutrality.

Regarding the British and the Americans, as stated above, it probably drags the U.S. in sooner, but British strategy is already “ally with any anti-Hitler forces” and it’s likely Hitler and Co probably goes ahead with the Blitz at the same time anyway.

Postwar? The Allies have an additional avenue of advance into Germany and Austria so it may mean they beat the Soviets to certain positions. Whether it brings those two into NATO or not, I don’t know.

Mostly agree,but i do not think that Swiss would hold long enough to create additional avenue for attack.
But,it would should stall soviet progress,so we would see free Hungary and Czech.

If turks join germans,they would become another soviet state.And Kurds,too.

 

[ahmed ali]

You still belive,that turks would never join.When i knew,that they would join IF THEY THOUGHT,THAT GERMANS WOULD WIN.
Which could happen after taking Baku by germans.
And becouse germans were lead by idiots,they would lost anyway,and turks with them.

Yes,muslims are not Europe - but,they are not unity,too.Arabs consider turks as barbarians,and for good reasons.
Iranians consider both of them as barbarians,and against for good reasons.

If muslims were really united,they would take entire Earth by now.
But they did not,just like Christians do not conqered entire Earth.

Because it is simply more reasons against than reasons for

(Even if they do not see the future, the events of 1918-1923 will make them more reluctant to join)

The Arabs did not consider the Turks as barbarians

Iranians for religious reasons, often if we talk about civilization and history, the Arabs are years older than the Persians

(The newest Arab civilization is older than the entire Persian civilization, and the first civilization in history is Arab)

But the Arabs are very humble and proud of their religion

I will agree with you here

 

[ATP]

Because it is simply more reasons against than reasons for

(Even if they do not see the future, the events of 1918-1923 will make them more reluctant to join)

The Arabs did not consider the Turks as barbarians

Iranians for religious reasons, often if we talk about civilization and history, the Arabs are years older than the Persians

(The newest Arab civilization is older than the entire Persian civilization, and the first civilization in history is Arab)

But the Arabs are very humble and proud of their religion

I will agree with you here

More reasons now,when we knew that thanks to Hitler stupidity germans MUST fail.
But in 1942? Almost everybody though,that they would win.
After taking Baku Turks would amonst certainly join - to get spoils of war and genocide more armenians.If you forget,it was their favourite behaviour.

According to what i read,arabs consider turks as barbarians,and iranians have older cyvilization then they.Remember,that arabs come from Arabia,where first cities could be built maybe 2000 years ago.

Much better then turks or poles,but not iranians.

 

[ahmed ali]

More reasons now,when we knew that thanks to Hitler stupidity germans MUST fail.
But in 1942? Almost everybody though,that they would win.
After taking Baku Turks would amonst certainly join - to get spoils of war and genocide more armenians.If you forget,it was their favourite behaviour.

According to what i read,arabs consider turks as barbarians,and iranians have older cyvilization then they.Remember,that arabs come from Arabia,where first cities could be built maybe 2000 years ago.

Much better then turks or poles,but not iranians.

The events of 1918-1923 will make them more reluctant to join, especially since the people who lived through them are still alive.

(The Germans took Baku in 1918 and lost the war, so this will not convince the Turks)

(Most of the first presidents of Turkey, especially Inonu and Atatürk, are former Ottoman generals, and these are less likely to help the Germans, especially since they witnessed the First World War and the Turkish National War, which are decisive in the establishment of present-day Turkey)

See, for example, the Mosul conflict between Iraq and Turkey in 1926. Turkey gave up its claims easily for fear of the British, who are allies of Iraq.

Türkiye won Hatay not by war but by peace

You need to read about Turkey in the interwar period to understand why the Turks were unlikely to join

Wrong is the oldest Arab civilization, which is Babylon in Iraq, thousands of years older than Iran, and the pharaohs in Egypt are older than Iran, and the Sabaeans in Yemen are older than Iran

So the Arabs are much older than Iran, but the Arabs are simply very humble and do not care about national intolerance, but are proud of their religion

That is why the Arabs did not consider anyone to be barbarians, especially if they were Muslims (we are proud of non-Arab Muslim personalities, as we do with Arab Muslims).

 

[ATP]

The events of 1918-1923 will make them more reluctant to join, especially since the people who lived through them are still alive.

(The Germans took Baku in 1918 and lost the war, so this will not convince the Turks)

(Most of the first presidents of Turkey, especially Inonu and Atatürk, are former Ottoman generals, and these are less likely to help the Germans, especially since they witnessed the First World War and the Turkish National War, which are decisive in the establishment of present-day Turkey)

See, for example, the Mosul conflict between Iraq and Turkey in 1926. Turkey gave up its claims easily for fear of the British, who are allies of Iraq.

Türkiye won Hatay not by war but by peace

You need to read about Turkey in the interwar period to understand why the Turks were unlikely to join

Wrong is the oldest Arab civilization, which is Babylon in Iraq, thousands of years older than Iran, and the pharaohs in Egypt are older than Iran, and the Sabaeans in Yemen are older than Iran

So the Arabs are much older than Iran, but the Arabs are simply very humble and do not care about national intolerance, but are proud of their religion

That is why the Arabs did not consider anyone to be barbarians, especially if they were Muslims (we are proud of non-Arab Muslim personalities, as we do with Arab Muslims).

Turks would be wary - but it is not reason for not joining with germans.
You belive that turks would not join no matter what - but it is Faith,not facts.
I think,that they would probably join if germans take more.But,since it is not my Faith,i am not 100% sure about it.

Babylon,my friend,was Akkad cyvilization built on Sumer past glories.Yes,those were old cyvilizations - but they have notching to do with arabs who come there after 630 AD and conqered people there.

Just like arabs in Egypts have notching to do with pharaohs - it is local christian heritage.


Arabs have some old cities in Arab penisula - but not older then 200-100 BC.

Which made Iran older.And,since iranian keep their ancient cyvilization ,they could be considered as its owners.When arabs have some pre-Machomet cyvilization,but lost it.

 

[ahmed ali]

Turks would be wary - but it is not reason for not joining with germans.
You belive that turks would not join no matter what - but it is Faith,not facts.
I think,that they would probably join if germans take more.But,since it is not my Faith,i am not 100% sure about it.

Babylon,my friend,was Akkad cyvilization built on Sumer past glories.Yes,those were old cyvilizations - but they have notching to do with arabs who come there after 630 AD and conqered people there.

Just like arabs in Egypts have notching to do with pharaohs - it is local christian heritage.


Arabs have some old cities in Arab penisula - but not older then 200-100 BC.

Which made Iran older.And,since iranian keep their ancient cyvilization ,they could be considered as its owners.When arabs have some pre-Machomet cyvilization,but lost it.

The civilization of Yemen, which preceded most civilizations, arose immediately after Noah's flood, and this place is the origin of the Arab peoples

This makes it much older than Iran, and they kept the ancient sequence, which is much older than Iran, and most civilizations arose after the collapse of the Marib Dam in Yemen.

(I myself am Yemeni and my country is very, very old)

(Christian or not, he is still an Arab. The Arabs precede Islam by many centuries)

They would probably join if the Germans marched through the streets of London and Moscow, otherwise no

 

[ATP]

The civilization of Yemen, which preceded most civilizations, arose immediately after Noah's flood, and this place is the origin of the Arab peoples

This makes it much older than Iran, and they kept the ancient sequence, which is much older than Iran, and most civilizations arose after the collapse of the Marib Dam in Yemen.

(I myself am Yemeni and my country is very, very old)

(Christian or not, he is still an Arab. The Arabs precede Islam by many centuries)

They would probably join if the Germans marched through the streets of London and Moscow, otherwise no

Yes,Yemen has very old cyvilization.Other Arab countries - not so.
And Christian Egyptians are descendents of ancient Egyptians,not arabs.But,since they abadonned their cyvilization,they are only biologically descendents.

Turks would join for sure after fall of Moscov.Ofter fall of Baku - maybe,maybe not.If germans take more,it is almost sure,but still not 100%.

 

[raharris1973]

I cannot believe that a thread topic on Ticino, Switzerland by a banned poster has gone on for four pages!

 

[ahmed ali]

Yes,Yemen has very old cyvilization.Other Arab countries - not so.
And Christian Egyptians are descendents of ancient Egyptians,not arabs.But,since they abadonned their cyvilization,they are only biologically descendents.

Turks would join for sure after fall of Moscov.Ofter fall of Baku - maybe,maybe not.If germans take more,it is almost sure,but still not 100%.

Not only Moscow but also London, otherwise they will not join

Yes, they have infiltration much older than Iran

There are Coptic Muslims, and they are most of the population of Egypt. An Arab, according to the definition of an Arab, is a person who speaks Arabic, and this includes even Egyptian Christians.