|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Forum Home > Ideas Page > What about Greece and Indochina? | ||
|---|---|---|
|
Member Posts: 325 |
The French are obviously having their hands full with the war in Europe, so wouldn't Ho Chi Minh and his Viet Minh take advantage of the situation? Also, what's the situation in Greece? Are the DSE Communist insurgents still causing trouble like in real life? | |
| ||
|
Site Owner Posts: 916 |
Basically, Im ignoring these areas at the moment, but have kept the Allied troops that were dedicated ot them out of the orbats. I will mention them in due course, but neither will become a big thing. | |
|
--
| ||
|
Member Posts: 4 |
I'd imagine the Vietnamese would continue resistance against the Japanese. Maybe not overt resistance, but they were pragmatic. They stopped attacking the Japanese when they knew they'd be leaving, knowing that they had to bide their time for the next fight. If that wasn't the case, I don't think that they would have stopped resistance. I cttually think Scandinavia would be more valuable than Greece. Stalin wouldn't have wanted any potential marshalling areas or even belligerents that close to Leningrad. | |
| ||
|
Site Owner Posts: 916 |
i agree on both counts. Scandanavia is very important, but neither side has the resources to utilise it fully at the moment. Iran would be nice, but one reason the USSR likes the Japanese scenario is that it keeps the Allies pinned in Burma and China and not free to have a crack at the caucausus from the south. | |
|
--
| ||