The Rise Of Australasia

Of course, when facing an island nation famous for its iron-clad tanks, there might be different outcomes.

But Australasia is not short of iron mines, and even light tanks have armor that is completely capable of withstanding cavalry troops.

Not to mention medium and heavy main battle tanks, with their powerful firepower and excellent armor protection, even if they stood still and let the cavalry troops shoot, the cavalry would be helpless.

Apart from the decline of the cavalry and the rise of the tank, the combined infantry and tank warfare approach widely adopted by Germany in blitzkrieg also drew significant attention from Australasia.

In World War I, there was no such method as combined infantry and tank warfare. Because the breakdown rate of tanks was too high, if a tank lay immobile on the battlefield, the infantry behind it would become sitting ducks.

But more than twenty years later, tank technology around the world has significantly improved. One notable point is that the breakdown rate of tanks has been greatly reduced, and they have become one of the main forces of various countries.

The reason why Germany tore across Europe was not only that the German troop could launch fearless offensives but also because the impact of the German armored forces on other countries was quite important.

One of the reasons why France was at a disadvantage in the conflict with Germany was not only the French pre-war fear and reliance on the Maginot Line but also France's lack of emphasis on armored forces. The number of armored forces was nowhere near as exaggerated as Germany's.

Actually, it's not surprising when you think about it. Compared to Britain, France was the country that suffered more damage during World War I.

The pain brought to the French by World War I was already great, and the influenza pandemic at the end of the war added insult to injury for the French people.

After struggling for about ten years to recover from the shadows of World War I and the American pandemic, the economic crisis erupted right afterward.

The French economy and industry, which had just started to recover, were once again severely hit, and the French people were knocked down completely, losing all hope of becoming a world superpower again.

Even the European supremacy that the French boasted about was vastly overstated.

If the French genuinely deserved the title of European superpower, why would France need to actively build the Maginot Line instead of reducing Germany, its former subordinate, to submission again?

France allocated a large budget to build the Maginot Line, which naturally brought down the investments in both the Army and the Navy.

Since the outbreak of the war, France has not been able to have a large scale of armored forces, which is another reason why the French military has been retreating step by step against the German military.

If it were not for the timely support of the Royal Air Force to France, France's number of airplanes was clearly no match for Germany and Italy.

And the impact of losing air superiority in World War II need not be uttered.

On July 17, 1936, the first batch of supplies from Australasia to Britain and France successfully arrived at the southern French harbor of Marseille.

Britain and France regarded these supplies with considerable importance because they not only included 400,000 rifles, 2,225 firearms, and 120 tanks but also 220 airplanes, 550 trucks, and 1200 motorcycles.

Of course, Britain and France did not receive this batch of weapons and equipment support for free.

According to the agreement between Arthur and the British and French ambassadors, Britain and France would freely allocate these weapons and equipment. They would also pay for the weapons, at a price 20% below the current market rate to Australasia, in proportion to the respective amounts of weapons and equipment they received.

Although it was an 80% discount for Britain and France, Australasia would certainly not be at a loss, and might even make a considerable profit.

After all, the price of weapons, compared with the time of peace when Australasia produced these batches of arms, has already risen by at least 30%.

This is due to the fact that the war has not lasted long, and the consumption of weapons and equipment by the countries has not been significant.

As the war continues, the gap and demand for weapons and equipment of various countries will grow, and by then, their value will increase even more.

Of course, no matter the circumstances, Australasia will not be at a loss.

Aside from the rifles, machine guns, and firearms, which are all newly produced equipment supplied to Britain and France, all the tanks and airplanes are outdated stock from Australasia.

Of course, when compared with the most advanced tanks and airplanes of Britain and France, they are actually considered Europe's top technologies at the moment and are completely sufficient for this war.

For Britain and France, these tanks and airplanes are solutions to urgent needs.

To retreat those more than 300,000 troops, Britain and France had already lost over 500 airplanes on the line from Dunkirk to Lille.

Although both countries were continuously producing weapons and equipment domestically, a powerful country transitioning from a state of peace to a state of war obviously requires a lot of time.

At least the transition of economic state for Britain and France, compared to Australasia, is obviously much slower.

Australasia had already been prepared for war, and one might say it was in a semi-war state.

After Arthur declared war, all the industries in Australasia mobilized and quickly shifted to a war footing.

Some parts of the clothing factories in Sydney and Melbourne were temporarily requisitioned and swiftly converted into workshops for military uniforms.

Through the government's call to action, some boot production factories modified their production lines and transformed into manufacturers of military boots.

Arthur's influence within the country enabled the smooth and rapid transition of Australasia to a war state.