What would have happened if Franco joined the Axis?
>>422994
Get rekt by 1945. Social Democrats and surviving commies set up a government similar to post war Italy.
>>422996
>Social Democrats and surviving commies set up a government similar to post war Italy.
That's really unlikely given that the Italian government was set up by conservatives and the US.
Capture Gibraltar from the English. Spain and Italy block the Royal Navy from the Med.
British holdings in north africa and middle east are now even more cut off from the UK.
Spain and Italy screw things up. UK and USA invade Spain. Spain surrenders quickly. North Africa and Italy campaigns set back 6-8 months.
>>423062
Yes, but Germany would still give zero fucks about the Mediterranean theatre, so in the end, absolutely nothing would have changed; British victory in Egypt/Lybia, Anglo-American invasion of French North-Africa, Sicily, Stalingrad and an hero in the Berlin bunker.
British forces land on Spain's indefensible coastline as early as 1942. Possibly ends up making the post-war division of Europe between the US and USSR slightly more favorable to the US.
>>423963
They wouldn't be able to do that before winning the battle for Egypt and North Africa.
The landing in Spain would need to be in the South, because landing in the North would prompt inmediate german response from their divisions in France and in 1943 the Anglo-Americans werentyet prepared for this, much less in 1942. Landing in the South would mean the need to attack and occupy all of Spain and traversing Spain's over 1000km to the French border, and that could turn out to be quite plenty of anglo-american coffins if the Spanish population stays behind Franco and reacts patriotically against the invasion
>>423040
Set up by right wingers compared to USSR and the cia made sure of it, but IIRC it was more left than most Europian countries, with the christian democrats being the first elected party.
>>424056
Not the guy you're responding to, but Franco going over to the Axis is likely to put Portugal into the Allied camp, and if they can land in a friendly port in Lisbon, a lot of the problems that needed to be surmounted in a real invasion scenario simply don't exist.
You can certainly do that before you win in North Africa. I mean, if you stop and think about it, the Torch invasions weren't categorically that different than invading somewhere in Spain, or in landing in a not-actively-resisting Portugal.
We'd probably have gotten an Iberian campaign instead of an Italian campaign, which would be difficult, yes, but Spain's easier to push over than Italy would have been, if nothing else, there's more room to maneuver, which will help the side with the far superior logistical ability.
>>424068
Portugal also had a right wing regime, if anything they would ally with the axis but their old alliance with the UK keeps them neutral
>>424056
>and that could turn out to be quite plenty of anglo-american coffins if the Spanish population stays behind Franco and reacts patriotically against the invasion
You seem to be unaware of Spanish history in the 1930s.
>>424082
Salazar knew that Germany couldn't threaten him the way it could threaten Hungary or Romania, didn't have to choose between German or Soviet influence like those countries did, and was highly threatened by the overwhelming naval power of Britain. This all in a situation where the was at most a few months in the summer of 1941 when anyone thought Germany had a prayer of winning the war. There was no way any Portuguese regime would ever aligned with the Axis. Not even if the Germans conquered Spain.
>>424082
Portugal provided limited aid to the Allies historically, and they were piss-scared of Spain. Whatever loyalty right-wingers find to each other, I think that realpolitik trumps it.
>>424124
There wasn't really any sense of ideological unity on the part of fascist regimes. Germany and Italy had a shared enemy in Britain, Germany and Japan had a shared enemy in the United States, Germany and Hungary/Romania/Bulgaria had a shared enemy in the Soviet Union. It wasn't like in the first half of the 19th century when right-wing regimes across Europe had an ideological commitment to monarchy and the suppression of nationalism and liberalism everywhere. Fascists were all about their own country.
>>424068
It's unlikely that Portugal would turn to the Allies, much less openly allow its clay to be used as a staging point for an invasion of Spain. If there was any suspicion about that, Spain and Germany would occupy Portugal right away.
As for the "maneuver advantage", there is none for mechanized units in pretty much mountainous country like Spain except for a few areas. Not to mention the wrecked infracture. Landing is one thing, that's eady, but advancing to the interior is another story. Add the guerrilla war behind the lines (which didn't happen in Italy) and keeping the logistics working and the army advancing would be a lot more complicated in Spain than in Italy for the anglo-americans.
>>424134
>It's unlikely that Portugal would turn to the Allies, much less openly allow its clay to be used as a staging point for an invasion of Spain. If there was any suspicion about that, Spain and Germany would occupy Portugal right away.
Then they invade the old-fashioned way. If they could do it for Torch, they could do it in Iberia.
>As for the "maneuver advantage", there is none for mechanized units in pretty much mountainous country like Spain except for a few areas.
Except your front is way, way wider. You actually have space to maneuver, even if you're not doing it with mechanized forces; you can actually exploit a breakthrough somewhere and use it to roll a whole line back. Italy had 20-25 divisions on each side crammed along a front that was never more than about 200 km wide, and often far less; there just isn't enough space to do anything but WW1 style "hit them from the front" operations.
>Add the guerrilla war behind the lines
Especially if Franco's support is ambivalent (I don't know enough about 1940s Spain to make a judgment there) it might not develop, and even if it does, well, I doubt they'd be as nasty as the Partisans in Yugoslavia, or what you saw in the Baltic states, and that didn't stop the far more strapped for resources Germans from moving as they wished. They might cause some damage, but they're not going to stop something like the U.S.
>keeping the logistics working and the army advancing would be a lot more complicated in Spain than in Italy for the anglo-americans.
I am far from convinced in that: the CEF would often discard their trucks in favor of mules, the only points of advance being incredibly steep mountains, a situation that is unlikely to arise in Iberia.
>>424117
I am, and that's why I said that a lot would depend on how the general population, specially those that sympathized with the Republic, would perceive and react to the invasion.
In any case, Franco could easily mobilize~1M people of not mere conscripts that have never shoot a gun but ideologically motivated guys that had actually fought a war a couple of years before.
>>424151
In Torch the allies were fighting colonial troops of disenchanted French troops that couldn't receive any reinforcement and passed en masse to the Free French army of De Gaulle a couple of days after the first landing.
Im Spain you wouldn't have that scenerio but one of the entire German Army in France (plus the Italian one) that could easily reinforce the Spanish army anytime.
Although most likely the Germans wouldn't enter the peninsula, but rather cause as much damage as possibly to the anglo-americans, slow their advance and sit comfy at strong defensive lines inthe Pyrenees while the anglo-americans get stuck and slowly bleed to death in Spain with their daily rations of guerrilla and skirmish action.
>>424217
Kind of like how they did with Italy and the Alps. Wait...
>>424217
>Im Spain you wouldn't have that scenerio but one of the entire German Army in France (plus the Italian one) that could easily reinforce the Spanish army anytime.
Most of which, (especially if this is around the same time as the historical Torch landings) are static garrison armies, not people who are adept at packing up and moving at a moment's notice. Dragoon showed how badly the German troops in France could handle a mobile war.
>Although most likely the Germans wouldn't enter the peninsula, but rather cause as much damage as possibly to the anglo-americans, slow their advance and sit comfy at strong defensive lines inthe Pyrenees while the anglo-americans get stuck and slowly bleed to death in Spain with their daily rations of guerrilla and skirmish action.
Unlikely from Hitler's personality too, I'd think it's far more likely that they attempt to repulse and fight for every inch, overriding Franco's objections if necessary (It's what happened in Italy after Husky)
And even if that is in fact what happens.....
1) You have to dissolve Vichy, at a stroke giving the Allies most of what they'd have gotten from that fighting in North Africa anyway, one of the big provisions of the armistice was that German troops would stay out of Vichy, stick to the occupational zone. If you want to fortify the Pyrenees, that's out, and that means a lot of the French colonies are going to defect.
2) Without German support, how long do you think Franco can last? 4 months? 6? Especially if his power base isn't that stable, you'll likely see a coup by whatever pro-Republican elements exist once you get Allied advances.
3) Any force that fortifies on the Pyrenees is going to be massively overextended when the main invasion in northern France hits. It's the logical invasion route into Germany. You don't want a bunch of forces stuck in southern France when that hits, and once the railroad bombing campaign starts in earnest, it's going to be tough to move them around.
not much
country just out from civil war
no considerable military
Italy 2.0 basicly
>>424250
>I base my argument on Hearts of Iron
How's being 15 again?
>>424159
>Post 1939 Spain
>Franco
>Mobilize 1 millions conscripts of trained men
More like 1 million famine-struck/tired/scared/ill-motivated people who didn't give too shits anymore about who would win the war.
Plus, the partisan movement being really active until the late 40s, not to say in the early 40s.
source: i'm spanish, and my current job is to study this period in particular.
>>424787
Samefag. When I ment that my current job is to study this period, I ment that I get paid for being part of an investigation group on the archaeological sites of the ebro front.
>mfw the only chance spain has at modernizing itself and fails
>>424068
You keep us out of your stupid war.
t. Portugal
>>424787
In the early 40s, certainly not. The Falangist and Carlist movements were in their best moments.
The partisan activity was basically irrelevant until 1944. In fact many of those suspicious of having been rojos joined the Dividion Azul for a fresh start. And considering the number of volunteers there could have been several Divisiones Azules being sent to Russia. After Normandy happened there was some 'major' internal partisan activity if you can call 'internal partisan activity' to commie guys operating from France and striking a few villages in Urgel and surroundings before being kicked the fuck out by the Guardia Civil.
t. Spaniard too.
>>422994
Gilbratar falls to Spain. D Day doesn't happen because the Americans and British forces instead land on the poorly defended Spanish Coast and quickly capture Madrid. German forces are now spread even thinner in the west, and, once the Allies secure Spain, they land on France on the North, leading to many victories and probably a quicker invasion of Germany. The Wester Allies would have probably reached much more eastward, making the NWO for Germany for democratic than communist. Look, Spain had just gone through a disastrous civil war. Despite what Franco would have thought, it would be like putting Romania next to France, the Allies would have captured it and been given an opening to take down the big guys. Also, Latin America might have been more active (easier for them to send a force to Spain than to France, both for logistical and security reasons (if the occupiers Speak Spanish, the people might have been more at ease)).
>>422994
Spain would have gotten btfo along with the rest of the axis
>>424796
Republican Spain is best Spain, bro.
>>425365
Where are you guys going to behead the king?
>>425368
Hang him off of the Sagrada Familia, so his corpse rests next to the statues of the dead men of the Catholic Church, the one whose corruption long plagued mighty Spain.
>>425372
>Republican Spain best Spain
I see what you did there
t.Alberto Barbossa
>>426073
Are you following some kind of shitty new meme?
>>426092
Its from /int/.
All Moortugese like myself have to use it now
Franco didn't join the war as it's economy and social fabric where smashed after the civil war. He didn't feel they could win, even in the darkest days where Britain was the only country left against the nazi s and stinging from defeats in france and sinapore.
During the civil war both sides where quite amateurish and depended heavily on foreign support. They wouldn't have been able to stand up to the British/ allies long term. It would have meant a longer war though.
Britain came very involved in supporting resistance movements and deep sabotage operations through occupied Europe, so soon after the civil war Spain could be very vulnerable to anti-fascists rising up with more firepower, a supporting airforce and would probably lose control of much of its coastline due to RN support. The Germans would need to spread themselves even thinner to fill the gap.
The need to secure Spain for the western allies may have allowed the soviets to secure more of Europe though.
