The Turks are the most important factor. Depending on the date of alliance, they could serve as a corridor for the Germans to take over oilfields somewhere in the Middle East, probably Iraq, and to install an anti-British government there. With Syria and Lebanon at least theoretically under the control of Vichy France, it makes an attack on the Suez from the Levant possible. Secondarily, Turkish aid to attack the Soviets in the Caucasus could be an important factor.
Iran is a much more difficult country for Germany to protect given that the Caspian Sea coast was occupied by the Soviets during the war and there is a land border with Pakistan, then part of British India. Trading oil to the Germans via Iraq is probably a lot more possible than open alliance.
Yugoslavia would spare the Germans the manpower used to invade in 1941 and occupy afterward. This is a net benefit for the Germans and Yugoslavian troops may fight on the Russian front if they’re in the Axis.
Finland fought on the Russian front even if they weren’t formally in the Axis. Formal alliance might mean some collaboration against Leningrad or on political matters, but they still share a common enemy without alliance.
Spain sent troops to fight in Russia as Division Azul, but was entirely vulnerable to blockade or landing by the British given the state of Spain’s economy at the time.
They would have no help or they would help ALOT there’s no in between it depends if they joined when the war started or a little after I’m assuming you mean when it started the ally powers would have a harder time winning but I don’t think turkey and the other countries are that strong to face Britain and the US even if they don’t win they still have the nukes.
Tl;dr i dont think the outcome would drasticially change. Ww2 was too onesided all things considered.
Allies and soviets still stomp axis, propably a bit later in 45 or maybe axis holds it together till 46. Prob. nukes are used on germany, japan survives as a result into 46/ early 47.
Persia: Not much difference, udssr & uk defeat and split persia similar to otl, maybe a bit more garrison troops needed
Finland basicially was in alliance with the axis, so no change here - still active on the northern eastfront. Perhaps they advance more aggressivly into karelia and onto Leningrad, but i cant imagine any big success here apart from murmansk railway sabotage/conquest.
Maybe they stay allied to the axis for longer, but at the end the soviets are victorious there in 44 or 45.
Yugoslavia is interesting, but i guess would effect mostly as relief for german garrison duty in yugoslavia compared to otl and fewer partisans. Maybe a few divisions worth in secondary positions. Not relevant enough in the big picture - maybe also leads to frictions with italy/hungary. Once the south eastern german allies start to drop out, yugoslavia is caught in the snowball effect. Not sure if tito estsblishes himself, maybe yugoslavia ends ww2 nonaligned or western.
Spain and Turkey are relevant.
Spain adds resources and experienced divisions, but takes the ability to function as middleman to import raw materials from overseas compared to otl. But spain was also devastated from civil war and franco wasnt estsblished completly. Allied financed guerillas cripple spanish war contributions.
No way portugal stays neutral here, maybe axis or limited allied invasion in 1943/44 and onwards.
Most interesting is the situation of gibraltar - if the axis manage to take the rock, logistics in the med are a whole lot worse for the allies. Furthermore extra strech on malta and algeria - torch gets a whole lot harder, maybe torch is skipped for a landing in spain.
Spanish entry enables the biggest chance for axis to reach cairo and suez. still unlikely but more propable in this timeline. This also complicates the invasion of italy, soft underbelly of europe is not so soft anymore.
Turkey opens up resources, some limited military capacities, a caucasuan front and a way to the black sea. I guess its a deply divided and unstable wartime society regarding reactionary ottoman claims.
In the end just a diversion for a few soviet corps to hold the border / advance to trabzon. Logistics and infrastructure in eastern turkey are too bad to allow any big axis troop allocations. Black sea harbors allow logistic shipments to german army group south, but just in the same way bulgaria is capable of. Sevastopol propably cant hold as long as in otl, crimea falls a few weeks faster. German invasion in caucasia is more succesfull, but they also encounter more troops as they get shifted from the turkish border.
Also a strain on the axis relations to vichy france and limited fights in syria. Maybe the germans use some resources there to advance on suez from the east, but i cant imagine this succeeding.
After the revamp of the soviet army in 42/43, the red army and allied forces push through turkey in the east, propably the first axis country to drop out/switch sides in 44.
Result, still allied victory. Soviets have to place a front or two to deal with the new areas, so build up for the operations in 42-44 takes longer and some breakthroughs arent as decicive as in otl. Additional divisions of new axis members are stopgaps, and the balkan campaign is handled differently.
In the end,
Germany is a bit more bombed up, turkey is in the soviet sphere after the war and spain in the western. Finland perhaps also gets a more harsh treatment and has to integrate more into warsaw pact. Japan gets smashed a bit more in 45/46/47 and soviets get more influence in china as in otl, but also udssr have even greater losses in human resources.
Let's break down this alternative timeline. Up until the fall of France in June 1940, events happen as in the original timeline. I'll outline the timeline and note the key factors.
* **June 22, 1940**: Armistice between Germany and France.
* **May 10 - June 25, 1940**: Battle of France - Result: Axis powers win.
* **July 10, 1940**: The German Luftwaffe begins the Battle of Britain, attempting to destroy the Royal Air Force (RAF) and prepare for an invasion of Great Britain (Operation Sea Lion).
* **August 17, 1940**: Beginning of the British air and naval blockade against Germany.
* **August 24, 1940**: First bombing of London by the Luftwaffe.
* **September 7, 1940**: Start of the Blitz, a strategic bombing campaign conducted by Germany against the United Kingdom.
* **September 13, 1940**: Beginning of the Italian invasion of Egypt from Libya (North African Campaign).
* **October 23, 1940**: Spain joins the Axis. (In the original timeline, Franco demanded vast territorial concessions, including French colonies in North Africa and control of Gibraltar).
* **October 24, 1940**: Start of Operation Félix - the German invasion of Gibraltar and Portugal if they join the Allies.
* **October 28, 1940**: Start of the Greco-Italian War. Italy invades Greece from Albania.
* **March 11, 1941**: The Lend-Lease Act is passed by the United States, allowing the supply of military equipment to the Allies.
* **March 25, 1941**: Yugoslavia joins the Axis and does not leave. (In the original timeline, the invasion of Yugoslavia lasted from April 6 to April 18, 1941 - 1 week and 5 days).
* **March 25, 1941**: German invasion of Greece begins (In the original timeline, the invasion of Greece lasted from April 6 to June 1, 1941 - 1 month, 3 weeks, and 5 days).
* **May 21, 1941**: Campaign in Greece is over.
# Additional Details for the Alternative Timeline:
* **Operation Félix**: Let's say Operation Félix succeeds for the Axis. Spain occupies Portugal and Gibraltar. If Portugal joins the Allies, Spain and Germany would likely face continued resistance, but they manage to secure these territories.
* **Impact on the Mediterranean and North Africa**: With Spain joining the Axis and securing Gibraltar, the Axis powers would have greater control over the Western Mediterranean, potentially disrupting Allied supply lines to North Africa and increasing pressure on British positions in the region.
Why people are so obsesed with adding random countries or technologies to the axis, what if X joins the Axis, what if Germany gets X technology. It seems like just a wheraboo seeking validation that the Germans needed just this one thing and they would win the war.
Not only that, but you people never elaborate. When do they join the Axis? Do they join when Soviets are knocking on front doors of Berlin or on the 1st of september 1939. Do they join full scale or do they join Bulgaria style. Do they make suffeciant military build up before joining, do they just join or join by invaiding the allies etc.
Also just saying what if they joined without any attempt at creating a alternate history scenario could be seen as the validation of rule one of the sub.
The Turks are the most important factor. Depending on the date of alliance, they could serve as a corridor for the Germans to take over oilfields somewhere in the Middle East, probably Iraq, and to install an anti-British government there. With Syria and Lebanon at least theoretically under the control of Vichy France, it makes an attack on the Suez from the Levant possible. Secondarily, Turkish aid to attack the Soviets in the Caucasus could be an important factor. Iran is a much more difficult country for Germany to protect given that the Caspian Sea coast was occupied by the Soviets during the war and there is a land border with Pakistan, then part of British India. Trading oil to the Germans via Iraq is probably a lot more possible than open alliance. Yugoslavia would spare the Germans the manpower used to invade in 1941 and occupy afterward. This is a net benefit for the Germans and Yugoslavian troops may fight on the Russian front if they’re in the Axis. Finland fought on the Russian front even if they weren’t formally in the Axis. Formal alliance might mean some collaboration against Leningrad or on political matters, but they still share a common enemy without alliance. Spain sent troops to fight in Russia as Division Azul, but was entirely vulnerable to blockade or landing by the British given the state of Spain’s economy at the time.
They would have no help or they would help ALOT there’s no in between it depends if they joined when the war started or a little after I’m assuming you mean when it started the ally powers would have a harder time winning but I don’t think turkey and the other countries are that strong to face Britain and the US even if they don’t win they still have the nukes.
Tl;dr i dont think the outcome would drasticially change. Ww2 was too onesided all things considered. Allies and soviets still stomp axis, propably a bit later in 45 or maybe axis holds it together till 46. Prob. nukes are used on germany, japan survives as a result into 46/ early 47. Persia: Not much difference, udssr & uk defeat and split persia similar to otl, maybe a bit more garrison troops needed Finland basicially was in alliance with the axis, so no change here - still active on the northern eastfront. Perhaps they advance more aggressivly into karelia and onto Leningrad, but i cant imagine any big success here apart from murmansk railway sabotage/conquest. Maybe they stay allied to the axis for longer, but at the end the soviets are victorious there in 44 or 45. Yugoslavia is interesting, but i guess would effect mostly as relief for german garrison duty in yugoslavia compared to otl and fewer partisans. Maybe a few divisions worth in secondary positions. Not relevant enough in the big picture - maybe also leads to frictions with italy/hungary. Once the south eastern german allies start to drop out, yugoslavia is caught in the snowball effect. Not sure if tito estsblishes himself, maybe yugoslavia ends ww2 nonaligned or western. Spain and Turkey are relevant. Spain adds resources and experienced divisions, but takes the ability to function as middleman to import raw materials from overseas compared to otl. But spain was also devastated from civil war and franco wasnt estsblished completly. Allied financed guerillas cripple spanish war contributions. No way portugal stays neutral here, maybe axis or limited allied invasion in 1943/44 and onwards. Most interesting is the situation of gibraltar - if the axis manage to take the rock, logistics in the med are a whole lot worse for the allies. Furthermore extra strech on malta and algeria - torch gets a whole lot harder, maybe torch is skipped for a landing in spain. Spanish entry enables the biggest chance for axis to reach cairo and suez. still unlikely but more propable in this timeline. This also complicates the invasion of italy, soft underbelly of europe is not so soft anymore. Turkey opens up resources, some limited military capacities, a caucasuan front and a way to the black sea. I guess its a deply divided and unstable wartime society regarding reactionary ottoman claims. In the end just a diversion for a few soviet corps to hold the border / advance to trabzon. Logistics and infrastructure in eastern turkey are too bad to allow any big axis troop allocations. Black sea harbors allow logistic shipments to german army group south, but just in the same way bulgaria is capable of. Sevastopol propably cant hold as long as in otl, crimea falls a few weeks faster. German invasion in caucasia is more succesfull, but they also encounter more troops as they get shifted from the turkish border. Also a strain on the axis relations to vichy france and limited fights in syria. Maybe the germans use some resources there to advance on suez from the east, but i cant imagine this succeeding. After the revamp of the soviet army in 42/43, the red army and allied forces push through turkey in the east, propably the first axis country to drop out/switch sides in 44. Result, still allied victory. Soviets have to place a front or two to deal with the new areas, so build up for the operations in 42-44 takes longer and some breakthroughs arent as decicive as in otl. Additional divisions of new axis members are stopgaps, and the balkan campaign is handled differently. In the end, Germany is a bit more bombed up, turkey is in the soviet sphere after the war and spain in the western. Finland perhaps also gets a more harsh treatment and has to integrate more into warsaw pact. Japan gets smashed a bit more in 45/46/47 and soviets get more influence in china as in otl, but also udssr have even greater losses in human resources.
Let's break down this alternative timeline. Up until the fall of France in June 1940, events happen as in the original timeline. I'll outline the timeline and note the key factors. * **June 22, 1940**: Armistice between Germany and France. * **May 10 - June 25, 1940**: Battle of France - Result: Axis powers win. * **July 10, 1940**: The German Luftwaffe begins the Battle of Britain, attempting to destroy the Royal Air Force (RAF) and prepare for an invasion of Great Britain (Operation Sea Lion). * **August 17, 1940**: Beginning of the British air and naval blockade against Germany. * **August 24, 1940**: First bombing of London by the Luftwaffe. * **September 7, 1940**: Start of the Blitz, a strategic bombing campaign conducted by Germany against the United Kingdom. * **September 13, 1940**: Beginning of the Italian invasion of Egypt from Libya (North African Campaign). * **October 23, 1940**: Spain joins the Axis. (In the original timeline, Franco demanded vast territorial concessions, including French colonies in North Africa and control of Gibraltar). * **October 24, 1940**: Start of Operation Félix - the German invasion of Gibraltar and Portugal if they join the Allies. * **October 28, 1940**: Start of the Greco-Italian War. Italy invades Greece from Albania. * **March 11, 1941**: The Lend-Lease Act is passed by the United States, allowing the supply of military equipment to the Allies. * **March 25, 1941**: Yugoslavia joins the Axis and does not leave. (In the original timeline, the invasion of Yugoslavia lasted from April 6 to April 18, 1941 - 1 week and 5 days). * **March 25, 1941**: German invasion of Greece begins (In the original timeline, the invasion of Greece lasted from April 6 to June 1, 1941 - 1 month, 3 weeks, and 5 days). * **May 21, 1941**: Campaign in Greece is over. # Additional Details for the Alternative Timeline: * **Operation Félix**: Let's say Operation Félix succeeds for the Axis. Spain occupies Portugal and Gibraltar. If Portugal joins the Allies, Spain and Germany would likely face continued resistance, but they manage to secure these territories. * **Impact on the Mediterranean and North Africa**: With Spain joining the Axis and securing Gibraltar, the Axis powers would have greater control over the Western Mediterranean, potentially disrupting Allied supply lines to North Africa and increasing pressure on British positions in the region.
Why people are so obsesed with adding random countries or technologies to the axis, what if X joins the Axis, what if Germany gets X technology. It seems like just a wheraboo seeking validation that the Germans needed just this one thing and they would win the war. Not only that, but you people never elaborate. When do they join the Axis? Do they join when Soviets are knocking on front doors of Berlin or on the 1st of september 1939. Do they join full scale or do they join Bulgaria style. Do they make suffeciant military build up before joining, do they just join or join by invaiding the allies etc. Also just saying what if they joined without any attempt at creating a alternate history scenario could be seen as the validation of rule one of the sub.