Could Germany at the height of its WW2 powers have defeated Sadam’s Iraq when it was at the height of its power? I think there is much here to consider/debate: A giant war machine able to adapt new technology against a country that buys most of its weapons, but has much newer weapons. Just for starters.
You can pick your own scenario–Hitler invading Iraq, Sadam invading Germany, a neutral playing field, whatever.
Heck, branch out if you want. How about WW2 Japan vs Sadam? Vs Hitler? And let’s throw in WW2 Italy for good measure, or WW2 Great Britain or US or whatever. I’ll be interested whichever way you take this.
Let’s keep it clean. There is no need in this thread to make reference to ANYTHING occurring after 2000 or so. We don’t need no stinking politics!
Thanks.
Myself, I don’t have much to contribute, at least to start. I hope some of you are considerably more imaginative than I.
So, what you are really getting at here is Germany vs Iraq, not some Saddam vs Hitler in a cage match.
Well, on the surface of it Iraq could have probably handed Germany its head in a war…mostly because if you’ve looked on a map Germany would have had quite a distance to go to GET to Iraq (I would assume Germany would be the agressor…I don’t think Iraq really had the capabilities for large scale logistics required to attack all the way to Germany).
Not only that, but as crappy as late 70’s era Soviet equipment turned out to be (especially in the hands of Iraq) when going up against US equipment in either GWI or GWIII, it was a hell of a lot better than WWII vintage German equipment. Iraq was also self sufficient in energy requirments (before the first gulf war is when I’m picturing all this btw), while German was not. If Iraq pre-GWI was magically teleported an alternative WWII era alternative universe, then it would dominate at the very least the ME…at least for a while (I have no idea how sustainable Iraqs military was pre-GWI…i.e. how their stocks of munitions and spare parts was, what if any manufacturing capabilities were, etc.). It could easily defeat a German WWII era invasion.
Nice thread you had there SimonX. I didn’t mean to come along and stomp on your lawn. Maybe the slightly different suppositions in this thread plus the influx of new posters will still make this thread worthwhile.
Assuming Germany could actually get to Iraq, I think they might stand a chance…versus 2003’s Iraq, that is. Am I mistaken or was Iraq distinctly light on fighters and anti-aircraft in GW2? If so, Germany could take out iraq’s armor by air, then use numerical and tactical superiority to take out the infantry.
Pre-GW1 Iraq, Germany wouldnt stand a chance. The only ww2-era country, considering the situation on the map, that would stand a chance versus Iraq IMO is the US. Assuming Iraq did not go for a preemptive strike and the US was allowed to build up forces in a neighboring British protectorate, the US could carpet-bomb Iraq with loads of heavy bombers. I don’t remember how many fighters saddam had pre-GW1, but even they might not have been sufficient to stop the bombers (we had tens of thousands of airplanes, i dont know if saddam even had 100 fighters.)
I don’t actually think anyone during the WWII era would stand a chance against pre-GWI Iraq…the technology difference would simply be too great. They had advanced radar (advanced compared to WWII era countries anyway), advanced fighters, tanks, radar ranged artillary…even a small fleet of gunships that would probably be a match for just about anything short of a battleship (stand off missiles and such). The Iraqi doctorine basically sucked (such as it was I think it was a mixed bag of older Soviet combined arms and French WWI era defensive doctorine…all poorly implemented), but tactically their vast superiority in arms would have been decisive.
How would you attack? Bombers? Toast with ‘modern’ radar coordinating jet fighters, ‘modern’ air defenses and ground to air missiles. How sustainable they would all be is another question, but initially at least such attacks would stand no chance. Ground attack? Well, you’d have two big problems. One would be logistics (as with everything else). Where would you stage out of in WWII to attack into Iraq? Wherever you staged the Iraqis could hammer you. Even after you’ve staged up, you’d be massacared going in. The Iraqi’s were decent enough on the defensive against Iran, so they would bleed any nation white trying to attack against a superior Iraqi technology and logistic scenerio.
Even Iraq pre-GWII would have been able to wipe out a foe for much the same reason…it comes down to logistics, and the Iraqi’s are THERE. Look how long a build up took the US (the greatest military in the world today) for both GWI and GWII. Logistics logistics logistics…and the disparity in technology would seal the fate of any country attacking.
It would make an interesting dark novel though…Saddam would be an absolute horror if Iraq had of been transported to a past alternative world. Eventually he would have been able to fulfill his dream of taking over the ME I think.
The only factor in Germany’s favour would be much better levels of training, discipline and personal intiative. In a straight infantry fight, they’d clobber the 54th Iraqi Surrender Division (“The Cowering Weasels”). Once you get into aircraft or tank battles, though, technology wins out.
Well, remember though that the Iraqi ground troops are equiped with AK variants and superior artillary. The ‘surrender troops’ did pretty well against Iran after all…it was only when they were totally outclassed by the US that they surrendered so easily. No chance Germany would get air superiority, and that was a key to the US’s total dominance…in fact, I’m sure Iraq would have total air superiority, so the Germans strung out logistics would be VERY vulnerable. You are right that small unit tactics wise Germany would have an edge…but I don’t see how they could overcome the huge disadvantages to get to a tactical situation where they could actually utilize that.
I suspect the technological advantage wouldn’t be as decisive as many are assuming and other factors would count for more so I’ll go for the minority and buy German war bonds for this one. The German army was orders of magnitude more capable then the Iraqi army in many respects such as leadership, motivation, and unit cohesion. The Germans would also have a massive numerical superiority and very importantly have an overwhelming advantage in sustainability. For the Iraqis it would be pretty much a ‘come as you are’ war, and their ability to support their own foreign-procured equipment is crude in comparison to the Germans with their native gear.
Technologically the Iraqis definitely have a strong edge and would certainly inflict heavy casualties on the Germans but at the end of the day the Iraqi army even at its peak was pretty sluggish and not overly gifted with initiative. German tactical initiative will overcome many of the Iraqi advantages. As early as 1940 for instance the Luftwaffe was used to fighting against a radar-equipped opponent and in the battle of Britain conducted numerous below-radar-level fighter sweeps.
The Germans will lose many aircraft and have essentially no air-to-air ability against Iraqi jets but thats not the war they would fight. The jets cant be everywhere and while they will win where they are, the Iraqis will get pounded where they arent. Given that they are also largely dropping dumb bombs the Iraqis will also lose many jets to German flak, which was both very widespread and very efficient. Coming from a smaller pool each Iraqi loss is more significant then the the rapidly replaced German losses of much cheaper aircraft.
Also worth pointing out that if we are more generous and assume 1944 Germans instead of 1941 ones that there are very few Iraq vehicles that will survive a hit from an 88L71 or a panzerfaust round especially against side or rear armour. The APCR round for the 88L71 penetrated well over 200mm of armour at 1500m and over 300mm at close range.
So while it will be bloody for the Germans I dont see Iraq emerging victorious. I think in the end it would come down to the men more then the machine and fundamentally the Iraqi army just wasnt very good.
As in the other thread, most opinions tilt toward Iraq, which makes sense if Iraq has home field advantage.
But suppose the battle was in North Africa, and both armies had to be supplied?
I don’t know what anti-submarine weapons Iraq had. If they didn’t have much, German U-boats would have shreaded any sea-bound logistics lines Sadam could put in place.
Probably the Germans would make it their primary goal to capture as much materiel as possible, for their own use. They’d be going after any supply convoys they oculd reach, as well as vehicle depots, airports, communications centers, etc. I have no doubt they’d quickly learn how to use the moden gear, and much more effectively than the Iraqis, who’d be forced fairly quickly on the defensive. The more sophisiticated items, like helicopters and jets and whatnot that the Germans couldn’t easily adapt to, they’d destroy. At the very least, they’d be grabbing modern assault rifles left and right (from ill-trained Iraqi conscripts), and discarding their bolt-action Mausers.
The German’s biggest problem is going to be their tube-based radio equipment; bulky, unreliable, and ridiculously easy to detect, monitor and jam. The best strategy for the Iraqis will be to bomb the crap out of any EM sources, hobbling the German’s ability to coordinate attacks. They might even be able to succesfully spoof German transmissions and get units to attack each other. How quickly could the ENIGMA code be broken, using modern computers, anyway?