The War in the Desert 1940-1943 mapped
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 27 июн 2023
- The campaign in the desert of North Africa in World War II was special, because it heavily relied on tank combat. Join us, as we map out the tank movements during the desert campaign.
Footage used:
archive.org/details/Dividean1...
archive.org/details/gov.dod.d...
archive.org/details/ARC-38959
archive.org/details/gov.archi...
archive.org/details/DesertVic...
archive.org/details/gov.archi...
Images used:
commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operati...
commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...
commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...
commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...
commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...
commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...
commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...
commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...
commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...
commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...
commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi... - archive.org/details/DesertVic...
commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...
commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...
commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...
commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...
commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...
commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...
commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...
Thanks to the Patrons for the support: Adam Coni, NvllivsInVerba, B L, ccplz, Christian Richard, Daniel, Daniel Benhardt, Deniz Özger, CatInSpace, Ehood Garmiza, Daniel Li, Håvard Damsberg, KingHarkinian, Idan Vegana, Ivan Trapić, Jeremy Roberson, Juan Escobar, KB, Tylorn, Lucio Franceschini, Marek Novák, Alexander G Morgan, Sam Tyson, Arkonos, William Nettles, Nicholas Cubbon, Woody, William Bowe, Rahs, Travis Fudge, Just A Random Contributor, VonKickass, WillN2Go1 ., Dennis Anthony Zaluski, Work_to_do, Bram Spliet, Adam H, Adam Wallace, Bishops, Rocky Koer, KARRAZ, Bdiah, Bogdan Sacarea, Yuri B, Craig McCall, Derrick Liu, RocketWrench, Daniel J Pierce, D G, Dongbin Zhang, Fabrice Egal, Eli Krumholz, Federico Peyrani, Michael, D C, Frank Scheer, Evosioa, Greengsg9, Amine Hajji, Neil Heriot, Tibor Helienek, Isaiah Snell-Feikema, Talbot-Jaaskelainen, JAY ALAN EDELMAN, _thefishball, aserehuehue, João Vítor Guidi, Kelly-Stephen Soo, Kevin Castillo, Nandor Kocsi, Kristofers Borovskis, Kristaps, Kureivun, omega21, Coast Guard #1, Ivan Avdeev, Louis Burke, STRONTJESBERG, Michael Libin, Michal Weyer, Mirco Künne, Yury Kuchanov, Michał Zdunek, first_last, Ned Weinert, ned hulton, Plok, Ori Taichman, Eiko Streitz, Shmavon Gazanchyan, Pavel Kuriscak, Pavel Kletnoy, rJ, Philip F Myers, PLD, s3xyfish, Christopher Plummer, Harambe, Dmitry Zaitcev, Rob H, Ryan Harbottle, Sam Wolf, Simon Stock, Sitraka Forler, Stefan Moluf, Luke Sypkes, אביתר הכהן, Herr Burns, Marco, Torfinn Tyvold, Robert Vroman, Nicole Winters, Mingjian Wang, Jordan Corkins, Arta Yusa, Marco Agnoletti, Bryan Linsley, Jorge Campos, Naseem Hanna, Piia Orav, Johan West, Kyle Askine, Eric Strachan.
Nerves Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License
creativecommons.org/licenses/b...
BTS Prolog Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License
creativecommons.org/licenses/b...
Music provided by MAGENTAMUSIC, Tinley, JMSOUNDS/ Pond5"
The North African campaign is one of the most chaotic of the entire war. The amount of times that the mobile front swung back-and-fort was just insane. Probably the most mobile of all the fronts in the entire war.
Not insane - but surprising I think you mean, surprising if you fail to take into account the difficulty in fighting at the end of your supply lines using late 1930s designed kit. Kit that is now clapped out due to driving and fighting over the last 500 miles of harsh desert. That is what each side encountered when it pushed to the ends of its limits only to be pushed back in turn.
Very similar to Napoloen's Italian Campaign in the 1790s.
@@yereverluvinuncleber A little passive-aggressive, but thanks for the extra information.
@@hirocheeto7795 No, just trying to understand your use of insane, which typically means mad here. Assuming you mean surprising - If you don't know or don't take the vast distances into account then it may seem surprising.
@@yereverluvinuncleber What's really insane is not noticing that I'm not the guy you first responded to. Also, you *were* passive-aggressive (and still are), and just saying "no" doesn't change that.
North Africa, one of the harshest environments to fight in during The Second World War yet its often overshadowed by the war in Europe. The distances covered were hard to fathom and both sides fought with immense bravery. Great video 👍🏻
I guess the largest battles in north africa pale i ´n comparison to something like Kursk where there around 10 thousand tanks.
I don’t know which would be worse honestly, dying of dehydration through heat exhaustion in North Africa or dying of hypothermia through freezing temperatures in the Soviet Union.
it's overshadowed because there were less forces fighting than got encircled under Stalingrad
Id rather fight in a desert than a dense jungle on a tropical island
@@shruk4To be expected, the infrastructure in North Africa is really minimal and supple can only get in by ships. The fact both side can pack thousand of tanks and hundred of thousand of soldiers are impressive to said the least.
Love it - well done Eastory
the 2 war map goats
Yeah
Love y'all
The advantage the Allies gained in holding the chain from Gibraltar to Malta to Cyprus to Suez cannot be overstated.
Those four colonies holding the line is legit one of the things that won the war for the British Empire and kept them in the fight.
Yes! Weren't they all former or current 'coaling stations' like Aden further out?
Someone described the desert campaign as "chaotic," and I would agree. Thank you for putting the map into motion at a rate allowing us to track the constant back-and-forth of the whole thing. A couple of added points: Controlling the Mediterranean Sea was also crucial to Great Britain as this allowed them to use the Suez Canal to shorten their supply route to their forces in the Far East. And capture of Egypt would have opened up the oil fields of the Middle East to the Axis. So there were very important strategic aspects to this campaign, extending far beyond the size of the involved armies.
Yeah and moreover it would have guaranted Italian full control over the sea (mare nostrum) as the british navy wouldn't be able to enter the Mediterranean and the remaingning british navy already trapped in the Mediterranean would have no choice but to stay at port in Malta/Cyprus (no oil, ammunitions to supply them anymore)... and they would eventually be bombed to death or surrender/sabording themselves
@@nicolasiiiletzar7984
Uhm, no...?
Gibraltar would never have fallen, so the British could still get in and out of the Med if Suez had fallen.
(it would, of course, have been a disaster for them and for holding Malta, like you said)
@@MrNicoJac Yeah you are right, but maybe such victory over the Allies forces could pressure the Spanish fascist regime to join the Axis ? and then it would be over for Gibraltar ?
(Or at least giving Axis military access and/or blockading the strait to allied millitary ships... because if Spain doesn't control Gibraltar, they controle Ceuta, so they can easily contest the British in the strait with Axis support ?)
@@nicolasiiiletzar7984
From what I've heard, even with Spanish support, it would be an absolute bloodbath to get Gibraltar
I think only the Soviets would've been ruthless enough (to their own men) to attempt to take it
As for Spain, I've heard it was dependent on grain imports from the Allies
So it never would've joined, because they'd get a mass starvation, apparently
Like, maybe if the USSR had fallen and Hitler had magically gotten all the wheat from Ukraine, then Franco may have felt secure enough to join - but that never happened, and even if it had, it sorta included killing all the local farmers there :/
Do you know in which app author make his animations( war consequence)
To think that even with all the tactical genius, improvisation, and innovation on the battlefield, there is no way to ignore the most important element in a war: Logistics.
The Campaign in North Africa is clear proof of this.
And the Malaysia campaign is clear proof against that idea.
@@harrybuttery2447 well the cause effect for the British to surrender was the loss of their fresh water supply but I still understand half of what you are saying
@@harrybuttery2447 And the entire pacific campain is proof for that idea. You're wrong and stupid
yup, at 7:10, the reason the german tanks drove to bardia instead of engaging the british was largely because they were running low on fuel
Oh, he "ignored" logistics? Wow amazing knowledge thanks a lot for sharing. I'm sure that's what historians outside of youtube comment sections and reddiy threads say too.
“They sent Erwin Rommel, who turned out to be an aggressive commander.”
Thats a RAF level understatement
I didn’t realize how disastrous Tunisia was for the axis. 250,000 pows is insane. They got out played hard.
Your constant inventory of available tanks for both the allies and the axis powers gives a different perspective to the entire campaign. Effective armor battalions backed up by sufficient logistics proved to be the difference between victory and defeat.
Eastory has returned! All aside, this is very interesting and useful because this part is lesser known to my knowledge, especially compared to the Eastern or Western front, while still being valuable for some events like the landings of Sicily in 1943, which influenced the landings of Normandy in 1944. Good job
I'd love to see your telling of some of the naval conflicts. i think the maps and numbers would help people see how dire some of those situations were. love your work!
There are good battles, the Atlantic submarine war, the war with the Japanese, Pearl Harbor, the British air battle... I hope it comes!
I wanted to see montemayor do a video like this tank one, as he does these for ww2 pacific naval battles. Now I don't need that as this is the exact kind of video he would have made
Naval battles are more tactical and rely more heavily on operational strategy, fog of war, and the exact positioning and deployment of individual vessels. And of course the skill of individual commanders.
Put it simply, Naval battles are more micro than land battles, and require more in depth analysis.
I would suggest Montemayor or Baz battles if you're interested in these kinds of battles.
Awesome as always! I didn't think your visuals could get any better, but you clearly proved me wrong
Shaun
ㅤ
Gazala contains one of the most beautiful pieces of british understatement in history. When the german tanks were attempting to retreat and were effectively running straight through the rear of the commonwealth defensive positions, the man in command sent the sitrep, "Situation not in hand."
With 45 C air temperature, in open sun, next to an engine, drenched in oil... what a life...
It made it easier to cook eggs on the tanks.
@@maxhouse2409the sweat would feel disgusting and unbearable
The situation was even worse, there are a lot of reports of axis soldiers often drinking the black water from their tanks cooling system in order to avoid drinking the (contaminated) water collected from the ground.
@@adrianzanoli at first I was like [citation needed], but then I thought of the smell of the water that leaks from my radiators when I try to deareate them for winter....
I mean, the good thing is it was iron, natural rubber and some tar...
@@klakier19901 there are a TON of italian "crews" that tell similar stories in documentaries, the official italian documents only report 2 (two) logistical trucks for water, for like 250.000 soldiers in 1940, so this makes sense.
According to some italians, a bottle of water (1 Liter) was sold for about 2000 Liras, in comparation, a Fiat 500 Topolino, literally a car, had a retail price of 3800 Liras in 1936.
Italian and germans troops were dependent on oasis, this is why they were defended more than the coastline even if this makes no strategic sense.
Other problems were illness, the lack of proper meals (german MREs were made of meat only, the british ones had a more balanced content) and the lack of portable toilets.
Tripoli being the only usable shipping yard was also a source of huge stress on the axis logistical effort. During the offensive they've also discovered that the italian aircrafts needed so much anti-dust filters that the engines were unable to lift the aircraft even with half cargo.
This was excellent! Well done again 👍
Great video again, Eastory! Tank you so much, your channel is great!
Thanks for making this, these videos are so brilliant
Great video. But i did miss a mention that, despite armoured units being key in battle, since it's difficult to contain the battle to an area or to use geographical features to defend, most tanks were lost fighting against infantry anti-tank units, artillery and aircraft, not against other tanks!
Yeah, tanks were crucial for offense, but infantry were still very useful for defense, especially if they had fortified position. Importantly though on the African front, without any tanks, there was little a force could do to punish their enemy for going around them, through the open desert, flanking them, and cutting off their supply. To defend such an open front, they must always have some tanks and offensive potential or they are screwed.
@@Michaelonyoutub no necessarily tanks but mobile units!
And thank the cooks too, who kept everyone else fed - that's what my grandfather did in the British 6th Army for the whole war in North Africa and Italy.
Informative AND entertaining as always, great work!
The goat returns
Love your channel, I was waiting for this video for quite some time, thanks mate!
Great video!
I also think a video about naval combat in the pacific or the mediterranean would be really interesting!
Like seeing the different fleet movements and battles over ww2
I just searched for this yesterday to see if you ever did a North Africa video and now it’s here. Amazing timing.
I simply love your detailed videos!
Very interesting and well explained!! Always looking forward to an Eastory clip
My most profound compliments on a masterpiece! Not only the beautiful and carefully detailed maps outmatch ALL of even the greatest ...every daymonthyear videos but you have a talent bringing complicated circumstances on the point. You already showed this in your great Eastern Front Videos!!! Many thanks for contributing to a detailed whole and better history understanding!👍👍👍
I love your videos!!! Thanks for the work you do!
Another brilliant masterpiece!
Amazing quality. Thank you.
Excellent video - as always!
I really appreciate this episode. Most of my reading is about aviation and although Christopher Shores excellent books discuss ground campaigns, I have always struggled with understanding the movements of ground forces in Africa.
Eastory uploading is like an early Christmas
Tanks very much for this...
Unbelievable how many tanks get lost in a battle. Equally unbelievable how both sides were able to either repair or replenish them.
The legend is back
I love this type of videos. I'ts great. Keep it up please!
I was just watching your other videos when i got a notification, Nice!
I almost which you would have made a 30min video for each chapter, and I already watched such content on this campaign, there is so much to discuss
Another great video and really shows how vital tanks were in north Africa
People seem to forget just how large Africa is, the distance from Tunisia all the way to El Alamein is more than 2000 km! Which is just a a few kilometers farther from Berlin to Moscow. Though the sheer length and scale of the eastern front completely overshadows the African campaign, the distances these forces covered is still incredible.
Supply situation was even more critical in north Africa compared to eastern front as well, cuz you were literally fighting in a barren wasteland meaning all supplies had to be shipped up to the frontlines and there was no possibility of 'living off the land'...talk about scorched earth tactics North Africa was exactly that.
Brilliant!
Thanks, again.
This is a brilliantly clear description of this camapaign.
This was great. North Africa as sandbox for tanks battle. Was there any plane involve (attacks, not recon)? What happen so many POW during war? Was there any prisoner exchanges as we see now?
Comparing tank numbers in battles between WWII and current conflict is insane. Cost of tank productions & effectiveness is totally other scale
Yes, the planes did play a large role in the latter part of the campaign by defeating the Axis tank offensives and also cutting their supply lines by sinking the Axis ships coming from Europe. As for prisoner exchanges, I did not come onto this information during my research.
Member gang
Wait…. HOW DID YOU COMMENT 3 DAYS AGO!?
@@jettmckay2985 that's what a patreon member is.
@@Eastorythis video was the perfect video for a WoT or WT sponsor :>
You deserve more views :(
These videos are so good
I LOVE YOUR VIDEOS. PLEASE MORE
Very good video! I do not see a lot of channels covering ww2 in the Middle East area, especially around Iraq and Iran
Babe, wake up! Map-man has blessed us with another video!
I can’t thank you enough for creating this video. While I’ve studied the eastern front over these last two decades, I never researched the German order of battle during the Afrika Campaign. Great stuff. It’s surprising to me,
For whatever reason, how many tanks Hitler fed into the Afrika campaign. And Rommel was resupplied several times with new tanks.
Fantastic job as always! It might be nice to see some air battles, the Atlantic submarine war, the war with the Japanese, Pearl Harbor, the British air battle... Hope it comes!
Excellent analysis
Thank you it was a very good video
love your videos keep it up
Could you do one video on east african campaign ww2?
Great video as always.
Outstanding work. Excellent video. Great shout out to the rear service troops too. As a former Grunt, we made fun of the "in the rear with the gear" troops, but without them my rifle would have been so much junk. They had the parts! They called us the "grunt up front", but everytime I had to go get ammo, food or weapons and parts it was in and out shopping. They even had door to door service too if the order was large enough. Sometimes that got hairy and they were outstanding troops. Cheers from a former Tennessee Grunt.
Finally another great eastory video
Great video!
Finally somebody did operation exporter, thank you
Best map guy on yt
Tanks for the video
You have the Pacific campaigns to cover too! Great video l
great video love it
Excellent video
I love watching these videos
awesome episode
Great video :D
Well-played!
In the Medeteranian tanks arent key, ships are key.
This entire video takes effect under the fact that the Axis cant simply naval invade Egypt do to the royal navy. While the US can naval invade North Africa do to the US navy.
*The US and UK could naval invade North Africa due mostly to the Royal Navy. That would be a more accurate summary of Op. Torch
@@silverhost9782 Then why didnt they invade before the USA joined the war? The Royal Navy was streched thin and locally only had parity with the italians so didnt dare naval invasions.
@@baltulielkungsgunarsmiezis9714 Because they didn't need or want too? Torch was an idea designed around the British allowing the Americans to get involved in the fighting. They had already refused the daft American idea to invade France in 1943. They signed off on it to to be nice, essentially. In the east, the British had already won the conflict, it was only a matter of time before the Axis were pushed out by that point. The naval forces in play during Torch were overwhelmingly British, and a large number- including many of the best performers- of the troops were British too. Torch gave green, inexperienced American units the opportunity to actually get involved in the fighting, that was its main reason for existing, NOT because it was an essential operation for actually winning Africa. Regardless, your reply doesn't actually make sense, no one was disputing that the USA didn't increase allied presence in the Med. I was saying that your failure to mention the British (and French) forces which were involved was dumb.
This video begins with historical errors of chronology and dives into operational strategy in place of looking at the grand strategy. It fails within the first minute. I’m giving it a pass and saving 20 minutes.
@@silverhost9782 "Because they didn't need or want too?" Because they couldnt. Britain alone was trying to fight the Axis on the preifery, it took a while of convincing by the americans that now the Allies have the strength to fight them head on.
"In the east, the British had already won the conflict, it was only a matter of time before the Axis were pushed out by that point." Pushed all the way to Casablanka? That would take years.
"The naval forces in play during Torch were overwhelmingly British" Such devides are pointless. Good allies fight with their forces being interchangable. If the US is doing convoy escort than the british can do naval invasion support, and they could just as easily swap roles.
Really good video
A very good overview of the Western Desert Campaign. While both sided tended to wait until they had an advantage to go on the offensive. Both sides were still tied to their supply lines . All too often either side tended to go on the offensive before they had built up sufficient supplies to support it. Offensives were often only limited because of this, they would leap forward only to run out of the chains that tied them in place until more supplies were built up. Montgomery after initial advances of October 1942 ensured he continually built up his supply bases behind his offensive. This lead to short pauses in his advance but did not allow Axis forces to build up enough supplies to go on the offensive. This is one of the reasons for his slow pursuit of the Axis that he is often accused of being to slow with.
Tanks for the memories
superb video
Finally! This is the one part of the war that has always been a blur for me. The battle lines and such.
Another thing i'd love to add is that king farouk of egypt had pro axis goverment in charge which lead general Robert stone to surround abdeen palace on 4 february 1942 to force the king to install a pro allied goverment , which would ultimatly sour the relations between britain and egypt
What I find particularly exciting here is that there was no continuous front line like in the other Videos, but apparently it was more often possible to simply flank the enemy unnoticed through the desert.
(I suppose the yellow parts are dessert?)
I believe non coloured in parts are the areas of which arent governed
I would assume non coloured parts have no permanent populations in the countryside. They can still have towns around oases, but with no people in between, there is no one there to notify either you or the enemy of each other's movements through the region, making it perfect for flanking around and surprising your enemy.
@@Michaelonyoutub I always find it interesting in warfare, some spaces are so vast its just strange that people can effectively still fight in it
Most places didn't have a 'continuous' front line
Even in Normandy, you had strong points/positions that overlooked certain areas
And then a lot of those side by side create a 'front line'
But there were no trenches connecting _everything_ together, and unmanned (but watched) areas in between positions
@@MrNicoJac yeah its pretty interesting, stuff like that often makes me wonder how many soldiers were able to slip by. somewhat unrelated but it also makes me think about how do countries such as russia actually govern many of the areas in the east, on a map showing the area of control in russia surely it would only show along major towns/cities and the trans siberian railways right?
This videos is quite good.
Thanks for Tank video
cool video 🔥
Thank you.
i waited for that the whole time!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Can you do Winter War next
this video is awesome
Thank you
14:48 Ramcke Parachute Brigade. A side branch of the Fallschirmjagers who fought on Crete, they were now sent to support Rommel. During the retreat from El Alamein 16:10, they were separated from the main German column but instead of getting destroyed, they captured a British supply column and drove back across the desert to rejoin Rommel.
General Ramcke was later sent back to Germany to take command of the newly formed 2nd Parachute Division.
18:00 1st Parachute Division. After Crete, the division was sent to France for the planned assault on Malta, which was never carried out. Instead, they were sent to Tunisia. As the North Africa campaign concluded, they retreated to Sicily, where they will fight against the American 82nd and British 1st Airborne.
The 1st Paras will be featured in Eastory's next episode (when he makes one) in a place called Monte Cassino.
love the vid
Well done.
Good video
Eastory, Eid Mubarak
Very good
I was 100% expecting this video to be sponsored by world of tanks :D
I've just finished listening to Hans von Luck's war memoir, and I'm most grateful for you to demonstrate what happened where. However, although it is important to note tank numbers, you may want to include aircraft as well. It made a huge difference to the German effort that they were almost totally without fighter support. Also, it might be interesting to mention what equipment who had. The Italians had "sardine can" tanks (von Luck's words), and initially the Brits were totally overpowered by the Panzer IV's, but when they received Grants they achieved parity and when they started getting Sherman's they were in the pound seats. Furthermore, it might be interesting to indicate who is running the show on either side - the Brits went through a couple of generals until Monty arrived, and he put up such a crybaby show and wouldn't move until he had enough stuff. Which brings us to logistics: The Germans were getting there stuff from miles away, the Brits got theirs from Aden and Alexandria (I think). Makes a huge difference, especially since a lot of German stuff got sunk in the Med. Also, von Luck loved the Italian infantry and tankers (thought they were very courageous), but hated the navy who didn't seem to be too serious about winning the war.
Stuarts probably had a greater effect than Grants. The light stuart was fast, numerous, and importantly, reliable. The British tanks tended to be horribly unreliable. Most of their losses were due to mechanical failure.
@@pax6833 According to Wikipedia, the Stuart had a dinky little fuel tank and under operational conditions it only had a range of 121 km (75 miles). Also, the 37 mm gun wasn't much use except against the Italian "sardine cans", and also had no HE shells. But as you say, reliable and comfortable inside.
Hello eastory, i always wondered how do you make a territory colour shape, in the tutorial video that you made a couple months ago, it only shows how to animate the frontline
(Sorry if my grammar was bad)
I wondered the same thing and I think you can put a green screen that moves at the same time as the frontline and then edit it later to put the other colour, or at least that's how I'll do it. Hope it helps
But for me i'll just duplicate the frontline and also create another points for the new frontline to create a shape,set the fill mode to both so i could fill the shape with colour, and for the opacity, i would change the blend mode from Opaque to alpha blend and as the frontline move, i would copy the shape of the frontline manually
I hope you also do Italian Civil war (1943-1945)
Good Video.
Take a shot every time he says 'tanks'
I would challange a middle aged deppresed Russian in drinking if i did that.
I love the animated tank Davian’s
Amazing
An important point not made in the video is that in late 1940, the British thought Africa was done, so they (Churchill) sent their experienced troops to Greece in an ill-fated attempt to stop the Nazis there. They replaced them with understrength, undertrained, green formations. If Rommel had gone up against the hardened veterans of 1940 in early 1941, the result might have been very, very different.
True, but the battle-hardened forces in Greek didn‘t do to well there either.
@@ColHoganGer90 Yes, but the German forces in Greece were enormous and well-supplied compared to the forces in North Africa. The infantry in North Africa were largely Italian. Italian soldiers fought bravely and well but suffered from poor leadership and terrible vehicles. Italian shipping was sunk by British forces based on Malta. There really is no comparison. The British had no chance in Greece. Churchill's advisers told him this. He ignored them, largely for political reasons.
If the Brits hadn't pulled troops away, Rommel would probably never have had a North Africa campaign to fight. Libya would have been gobbled up and that would be that. Sadly the righteous decision to help Greece ended up being ill-advised, though the campaign going on for 3 years gave the British Army the opportunity to improve and damage Axis forces more than they would have if North Africa had fell in '40, so in some ways it wasn't a bad thing
The point of the Greek campaign was to show the world that Britain was on the side of victims of German aggression. The campaign convinced many in the US that the UK's cause was one worth fighting for. Nobody believed Britain actually stood a chance of winning.
this feels really diffrent from your previos videos
YESSS FINALLY AN EASTORY VIDEO😊