Meanwhile, average Bulgarians with access to maps are probably asking why their “glorious victories” are occurring closer and closer to their country.
A good thing that the average peasant does not own a map. On the other hand the steady flow of killed and wounded...
I'd be curious to hear about an Armenian perspective of this. Like what the Armenians are doing here and any thoughts they're having.
I'd expect it to be very... straightforward. In 1941 their country, was invaded by the country responsible for their genocide a generation before...
Nice to see Bakirtzis have a better fate here. (for now)
i'm sympathetic to Bakitzis. Certainly more than Sarafis. I'm also inclined to believe he was likely more capable that either Sarafis or Psarros.
So basically the Turkish navy has ceased of exist as such...
Cakmak was making the probably valid calculation that losing the fleet was not really affecting the Turkish position. So using what remained of the fleet at best offered tangible gains at worse cost little in the grand scheme of things.
Seem that in case to choose/opt for one war front after other that the decision would be a matter of Stalin political-military priorities rather than purely military/logistical considerations...
Of course it's a political/strategic choice...
Yeah and that's a good thing for the Greeks and Wallies. The beginning of the end for Turkey is near...
Tbf I think Stalin will attempt all three at the expense of getting any breakthroughs. Finland and Germany will fight (especially Germany considering what the soviets would do) and turkey's land is much less developed.
That depends. One notes Stalin did hear out his generals. At least occasionally.
Yes, the destruction of the Turkish navy (though not total), does mean that the Sea of Marmara is less secure than before. That said in 1915, the Ottoman Navy was not that much stronger either.
Breaking through the straits would still require a major effort, with or without the Turkish navy. Half a flotilla of destroyers and a smallish light cruiser, do not really affect this as long as the coastal batteries and the minefields are still in place...
Oh bummer!
The alt-Adrias is sunk. I guess the ship couldn't have been that lucky in both timelines. Was Aigaion captained by Toumpas as in OTL ?
Of course not. Toumbas was Venizelist. TTL he has 6 years seniority on OTL. He won't be commanding a mere destroyer escort. One of the cruisers or higher is more like it.
Averof so far has fought 4 battles against the Ottoman and Turkish Navies and during all of them Lemnos was the main base. I think it would be only fair that when Uncle George is turned into a museum, he should be in Moudros Bay.
Right... not happening.
Old uncle George (for the non-Greek readers, the nickname of Averof by its crew) strikes again! If IOTL it was named "devil ship" by the Turks, I can't imagine how it will be called ITTL !
Averof had pride of place in the battles of Helli, Lemnos, Lesvos, Chios and now Tenedos. I'll admit it wasn't planned this way, it just happened. i wonder what naval historians and enthusiasts TTL will be thinking of the Greek and Turkish naval choices TTL. For example the Greeks built their sole battleships back inn the early 1930s to deal with the Turksh pocket battleships. It never fought them unlike the heavy cruisers and Averof. I could see arguments that large cruisers would had been a good idea. The latter's modernization will likely be considered very value for money.
Does that mean the Germans abandoned the IOTL idea of
Maus ?
German engineers and an overly complicated, huge design? That they can keep tweaking to death?
The Soviets probably don’t have enough resources to fight all three of these successfully, so it’s going to be interesting to see whether they fight all three with bad results or if they decide to let one front sit. My personal bet is the Finnish front goes on the back burner. I could even see the Soviets agreeing to Status Quo Ante Bellum so they could focus on the more important fronts with Germany and Turkey.
Prioritization is the logical thing to do. After all what stops you from say first knocking out Finland for example and then switching the divisions to Turkey? Or the reverse>
This is perhaps a plausible convergence to OTL; Cassino is a natural chokepoint. But see below...
Given the continuing difficulties in Asia Minor and the Balkans, why are Greek troops in Italy and not British or American troops (which are also in the Balkans and Anatolia)? It seems to invite unnecessary logistical complications for the Greek forces and for the Allied command in Italy.
Two reasons. First the political and propaganda ones. Eve in OTL Roosevelt, and Churchill for that matter, wanted to have Greek army units participating in the liberation of Rome. In OTL it did not happen due to the I Greek brigade mutinying (at communist instigation) in Egypt at the worst possible time for everyone... including the communists. No such silliness here, and Greek divisions receive most their material from the US so little logistical issues.
Second... one might note that TTL the Allies were able to land 12,000 more men than OTL, call it two brigades worth of troops. That's coming from the landing ships and transports of the Greek navy, as hinted in part 137. It eases communication for the troops loaded to be speaking Greek as well. As well as using troops that have some experience and training of landings as they had conducted one in Pieria.
This convergence however is way too pat. After 20+ years of butterflies and knock-ons, the same commander in the same position on almost the same date making the same decision?
I won't much apologize for that. After all WW2 is broadly recognizable and there is one. I could argue with a straight face that Hitler was shot in the head in 1923 but then the TL wouldn't be about the outcome of the Greco-Turkish war in 1921.
Doing Anzio to flank the German winter line is a logical move and Lucas is a logical candidate for corps commander at this time, he was Eisenhower's deputy after all. And would someone else in his position actually make a different decision? Yes Lucas has been criticized for not being aggressive enough but then he was being ordered by Clark to be cautious and feared that a rush to Rome might leave the landing force exposed to German counterattack was very much present. Would Dawley for example act much differently?
Timing is a different matter. There is a clear limit after which Anzio cannot happen. Early February since afterwards the landing ships will be gone. Could it be done simultaneously with TTL 1st Cassino in mid-December 1943? I was not certain the landing ships would be around that early, after all OTL Anzio was cancelled in December 18th when 1st Cassino happens TTL and initially only landing ships for a single division were nade available. So I played it safe and had it coinciding with TTL 2nd Cassino. Now inconveniently for me the timing of that happened to be close to OTL 1st battle...