----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@MSGID: 1@dont-email.me> 0e290055
@REPLY:
<70539341-9666-418f-bf57-8a5fafc5da04n@googlegroups.com> 4a3b9baf
@REPLYADDR Rich Rostrom <rrostrom@comcast.net>
@REPLYTO 2:5075/128 Rich Rostrom
@CHRS: CP866 2
@RFC: 1 0
@RFC-Message-ID: 1@dont-email.me>
@RFC-References: 1@dont-email.me>
<62694a6b-e1b5-4919-af2f-65a38d69b98en@googlegroups.com> 1@dont-email.me>
<70539341-9666-418f-bf57-8a5fafc5da04n@googlegroups.com>
@TZUTC: -0500
@PID: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X
10.15; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.10.1
@TID: FIDOGATE-5.12-ge4e8b94
On 5/3/23 6:50 AM,
lesliem...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Thursday, 27 April 2023 at 10:44:53 UTC-3, Rich Rostrom wrote:
>
> (stuff deleted)
>
>>> - Germany is dependent on the USSR for oil and other raw
materials. His generals offer the prospect of a 3, maybe 5 month victory, but
this may change depending on how extensively Stalin arms.
>
>> Some of them. Others are much less sanguine. Starting a second front
>> while Britain is undefeated doesn`t seem like good idea, except to
>> someone with a severe case of victory disease. OTL, Goering was strongly
>> opposed to BARBAROSSA, but never dared say so to Hitler.
>
> (rest of post deleted)
>
> OTL, Goering didn`t have the information Hitler had.
> Hitler deliberately kept information compartmentalized
> within competing ministries so that he alone had the big
> picture, not to mention he could lie to his subordinates
> in order to further his own preferred course of action. I
> agree Goering was not as reckless as Hitler, but he may
> change his tune once he sees how Stalin is exploiting the
> war against the UK.
I don`t see what additional information would make invading
the USSR more desirable.
> That`s the problem with the UK at the moment. Goering may
> be convinced he can win, but sooner or later he is going
> to realize he is fighting a war of attrition...
The BoB was a battle of attrition, but by November 1940 it
was over and the Blitz was on. Bomber Command was attacking
Germany, but at this time it was relatively ineffective.
> ...where broadcasts of lopsided victories...
The British government issued wildly exaggerated claims
of bombers shot down.
> ...will be overshadowed by
> knowledge of missing sons, boyfriends, and husbands...
In Britain, knowledge of cities going up in flames or
bombed into ruins.
> not to mention the continued rationing.
Much tighter in Britain (Germany has most of Europe to
loot), and getting worse as the U-boats run wild in early
1941. (In late 1941, the British cracked naval Enigma and
were able to evade the U-boats for six months. But that
was in part due to some lucky captures...)
> Also, the people Goering chooses to staff his government
> are going to matter. IIRC, Goering`s staffing of the
> Luftwaffe was poor enough for at least one historian to
> list it as a factor for Germany losing the BoB. Granted,
> Goering should be able to replace Ribbentrop with someone
> more trustworthy, if not more competent. How is Goering
> going to get rid of Himmler without bloodshed?
Easy. in November 1940, Himmler is far less powerful than
in 1943-45.
> Does Goering trust Bormann?
Bormann is nothing without Hitler.
> Goebbels should be easy enough to trust, or at least monitor.
No problem there.
> Does Goering keep Hitler`s "Divide and Rule" approach as a
> guarantee of personal safety, or does he risk allowing
> freer information among his own inner circle so people
> could better offer informed courses of action? What about
> the Holocaust?
--
Nous sommes dans une pot de chambre, et nous y serons emmerd?s.
-+- General Auguste-Alexandre Ducrot at Sedan, 1870.
--- Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:102.0)
Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.10.1
* Origin: A noiseless patient Spider (2:5075/128)
SEEN-BY: 50/109 301/1 463/68 467/888 4500/1
5001/100 5005/49 5020/715 830 848
SEEN-BY: 5020/1042 4441 12000 5030/49 1081 5054/8
5064/56 5075/35 128 5083/1
SEEN-BY: 5083/444
@PATH: 5075/128 5020/1042 4441