"Bernardz" wrote in message
news:MPG.1a39bf46de8212ec98977d@news...
In article ,
says...

"Bernardz" wrote in message
news:MPG.1a38909ef387a918989772@news...
In article ,
says...



For the British eighth army that's certainly true but the Torch
convoys
sailed from the US and Britain.
The Sicily invasion force staged out of the North African ports

Torch were dependent on British forces for the majority contribution.
I think you will find that almost all supplies went though the Suez
until very late in the war.


The Torch convoys entered the med via Gibraltar
http://www.combinedops.com/Torch.htm

Yes. The exception that proves the rule. It was too dangerous for a
regular supply convoy. Only very important convoys went though that
route. I repeat almost all supplies went to the British Eight army and
that was around the cape though the Suez. Cost a lot in shipping to go
that long route.

That was only true up until the time of the capture of North Africa

By the time Scicily was invaded the allies had already taken
the Italian Island of Pantalleria and between the airfields
they had there and those on Malta were able to re-open the
Med to traffic.

It indeed cost a lot in shipping to go around the Cape
which is why they didnt do it when it could be avoided.
Troopships and supplies from East Africa and Australia
would come through the Suez Canal but the rest came
via the straits of Gibraltar.

The invasion of Scicily and Italy involved substantial
US and Canadian forces who most certainly did not
travel round the cape and neither did their supplies.



You are incorrect with regard to the routing of supplies for the
Torch landing and suubsequent operations.

I never said anything about subsequent.

Of course you did, you said

Torch were dependent on British forces for the majority contribution.
I think you will find that almost all supplies went though the Suez
until very late in the war.

Its a matter of record that the Torch force and its supplies
came in via Gibraltar

Perhaps a better plan might have been rather then fight a war in North
Africa do a direct invasion of Sicily from Egypt.


snip


What Middle Eastern oil fields in the early 1940s in the Middle East?

The ones in Iraq and Iran that were suppling Britain with
a lot of its oil, the first Iranian reserves came on line
before WW1 and the Iraqi ones during the 20's

Never denied that either.

You asked a question, I answered it.


And a lot of oil

I hope this table comes out they rarely do on the usenet. It comes out
of a discussion I had awhile ago on a similar subject

Here are some crude oil production figures for 1945
Source: American Petroleum Institute, Petroleum Facts & Figures 1959

snip

The significant oil fields in the region is in Iran which is a lot
further still.

No there were large fields in Norther Iraq around Mosul
which were routed via pipeline to Haifa

[Notes Rumania is very low because of the destruction in the war]

If Hitler could not make it to the canal, he ain't going to make it to
Iran. If he did make it to Iran, the British would make sure that there
would be that there would be so much damage to the oil fields and the
pipelines that it will be a long time before the fields would be of any
use.

All of which is only possible if the British defend the Middle East
take a look atv the title of this thread

Hitler took an oil field in Russia too never got a drop out of it. The
Japanese took some in the Pacific and got very little out of it too.

The only fields the German took in Russia were some very
small fields, the whole Satalingrad campaign was part of an
attempt to seize the Caucasian oilfields

snip


After Germany invaded Russia it was just a matter of time before
the red army appeared on the horizon.

I really am unsure about this.

It *might* be possible for Hitler to win the East. Say an early German
assault on Leningrad and then once it falls, a very risky direct assault
on Moscow and pray that the Russian army on his flanks in Kiev don't do
him much damage.


Germany captured Kiev in 1941 BEFORE they attempted the
assault on Moscow. By that time they already had Leningrad
besieged. The only Soviet army in good enough shape in
1941 to launch an offensive was the Siberian force and they
had to be held back until the Soviets were sure which way
the Japanese were going to jump. It was that force which
shocked the Germans in the Soviet winter offensive of 1941/42


In any case whether Britain and Russia together could have defeated
Germany without the US is debatable. But it is hard to see how the US
could have stayed out. In any case with all three Britain, US and
Russia, it was only a matter of time before Hitler was finished.

Once the Germans failed to knock the USSR out of the war in 1941
it was just a matter of time until the vast manpower and industrial
resources of the Russians overwhelmed them.

The Wehrmach was in retreat on the eastern front BEFORE D-Day


Keith