What purpose did the MTO serve?

[Tupac]

I got into an argument with some guy on another forum about what purpose it served. He says that the russians would have won WW2 without any help from the US. I told him he was full of horse dung. I told him that Russia didnt participate in the PTO until the very end and didnt participate in the MTO at all. He remains staunch that the MTO didnt accomplish anything. So what did the MTO do?

[guncrasher]

russia would have won against the germans in ww2 based on one fact:  they could afford to send more soldiers to get slaughter than germans could kill while the german's soldiers couldnt get replenish as fast.  look at the movie "enemy at the gates", that's how it was for the russians, attack until everybody was dead or retreat and get killed by your own army.  eventually the germans would have lost as they would have all been killed while the russians still could muster more soldiers.

in every single war against the "commies" one thing was certain.  they were more willing to send more people to get slaughter than the other side. and russia had more than plenty than germany had.

semp

[Tyrannis]

russia would have won against the germans in ww2 based on one fact:  they could afford to send more soldiers to get slaughter than germans could kill while the german's soldiers couldnt get replenish as fast.  look at the movie "enemy at the gates", that's how it was for the russians, attack until everybody was dead or retreat and get killed by your own army.  eventually the germans would have lost as they would have all been killed while the russians still could muster more soldiers.

in every single war against the "commies" one thing was certain.  they were more willing to send more people to get slaughter than the other side. and russia had more than plenty than germany had.

semp

Basically a case of Quantity outweighing Quality.

[ozrocker]

I would say Strategic blunder played a key, too. If Hitler would not have split his forces to take the Black Sea
oil region, and bypassed Stalingrad, Paulus and company might very well have had a different outcome.
He was so bent on taking "Stalins" City, he failed to listen to his Commanders on the ground.
Not to mention he overran his supply abilities.
Russia was on the brink, thousands surrendering daily (some even welcoming the Nazis).

                                                                                                                                      Oz

[Shane]

The M in MTO is for Mediterranean, as in Mediterranean Sea, as in Straits of Gibraltar and the "soft underbelly of Europe."  It had more strategic value to the UK/US than Russia. It also diverted German (and Italian of course) resources that could have been put to better use if they had a secure southern front.

This four-volume subseries begins with American troops, part of the Allied Expeditionary Force, wading through the surf on the beaches of Northwest Africa on 8 November 1942 and ends in the Italian Alps some 31 months later with the German surrender in May 1945. With supply lines always stretched to the breaking point, American and Allied soldiers faced a determined and resourceful enemy, harsh weather, inhospitable terrain, and indefinite goals in what many would later consider as little more than a sideshow to the "real" war in northern Europe.


http://www.history.army.mil/books/wwii/11-9/mto.htm
 
"Nevertheless, as these volumes trace the slow but steady advance of the Allies from North Africa, through Sicily, and up the Italian boot, the role that these campaigns played in wearing down the Axis powers and contributing to the final victory becomes evident. The authors also devote considerable attention to the politico-military negotiations leading to the surrender of the Italian Army, where military men were required to double as diplomats."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_history_of_Gibraltar_during_World_War_II  - see where this leads you.


Bottom line is it was deemed a necessary area of operations on many levels by military (and political) minds much more attuned to the situation of the day. They *had* reasons. Do your homework and see if you agree.  

[ozrocker]

Note on that. MTO (US OPS) was mainly undertaken to appease Churchill.
And attack "The soft underbelly"
                                                                                                                         Oz

[AHTbolt]

Ask the guy why Stalin was demanding a second front to tie up german forces in 1943.

[bozon]

The MTO placed allied soldiers in Europe before any other front. Was Normandy required is an even more valid question. Were the Russians able to beat Germany on their own? Possibly. I mean they only lost 20 million and Stalin could afford at least 40 million more before asking about casualties among his forces.

The US and Britain has to take western Europe from the Russians otherwise all mainland Europe would end in the Soviet union. The end of WWII was a race against the Russians, just as much as a fight against the practically beaten Germany.

[Shuffler]

Who knows. Russia originally stayed neutral and signed a pact with germany. Who says they would not have come to some agreement later giving up some territory.

Think of all the aircraft and technology russia would have missed out on if the Allies did not send those over there. It was not just numbers that helped them win.

[RTHolmes]

the gibraltar straits and the suez canal were (and are still) some of the busiest shipping routes in the world, so it was vital to prevent germany using them for supply, as well as preventing the kriegsmarine from patrolling at will into the atlantic and indian oceans. then theres also the vast oil fields of n africa and the middle east, and routes supplying minerals from africa.

overall it was strategically vital to kick the axis out of n africa and deny their use of the med as much as possible. MTO did tie up assets that the axis could have used elsewhere but that wasnt the primary goal.

[Elfie]

Who knows. Russia originally stayed neutral and signed a pact with germany. Who says they would not have come to some agreement later giving up some territory.

Think of all the aircraft and technology russia would have missed out on if the Allies did not send those over there. It was not just numbers that helped them win.

Not only aircraft were shipped to the Soviet Union, they also received thousands of tanks, tens of thousands of trucks, ammunition and hundreds of tons of other supplies. Without all of that materiel, the USSR very well might have folded.

[fudgums]

Stalingrad, nuff said on that.

MTO was very vital to the success. IIRC patton couldve made it to Berlin if he was in charge(I think I'm wrong here).

[Soulyss]

The MTO was sort of Churchill's baby, he was also had a hand the WW1 invasion of Gallipoli (Turkey) if memory serves.  The US general staff favored an immediate cross channel invasion of France, ie the most direct route to Berlin.  The British argued for a larger presence in the MTO, they had imperial interests at stake in Africa and the middle east.  Ultimately if memory serves it was a political move on the part of Roosevelt to agree to opening a front in Africa, it would give the western powers boots on the ground, create the 2nd front that Stalin was clamoring for,  and did siphon of Axis resources that were being used on the eastern front.

I think more importantly it gave the allies, and the U.S. forces in particular combat experience that could be put to use when the Normandy front was opened.

[Guppy35]

MTO did exactly what it needed to.  Tied up the Axis and got a second front going to take pressure off the Soviets.  Got US combat forces some seriously needed combat experience, and provided some successes that could be 'seen' earlier then if they'd waited for the invasion in France.

[gyrene81]

MTO did exactly what it needed to.  Tied up the Axis and got a second front going to take pressure off the Soviets.  Got US combat forces some seriously needed combat experience, and provided some successes that could be 'seen' earlier then if they'd waited for the invasion in France.

ahem...doesn't the coast of southern france face the mediterranean sea? german defenses were lighter there than in normandy until the allied offenses in north africa and italy started.