Can Strict Neutrals be blitzed?

[knp7765]

I want to know if you can “blitz” a strict neutral or unfriendly neutral if it has no standing army.

I just played a game in which the US had forces, including a tank and mech unit, in Brazil.  Italy came along and took Central America with a small force (tank + inf).  Neither side had bothered the strict neutrals yet so they were still unalligned.  The territory of Columbia, a strict neutral, stands between Brazil and Central America but Columbia has no standing army.  So, can the US tank and mech “blitz” Columbia to attack the Italians on Central America?
We could not find an answer in the rule book either under neutrals or blitzing so we went ahead and allowed it.  It turned out to be a big mistake.  First of all, since it was an Ally making a combat move through a strict neutral, all the rest became Pro-Axis which gave the Axis a lot more infantry plus extra income for Germany and Italy.  Secondly, US had bad dice and lost the battle anyway so Italy kept the Panama Canal.  Although, to be honest, by that point in this game it was pretty much in the bag for the Axis anyway.  They already had 12 victory cities and were working on the 13th.  France and China were totally eliminated, UK Europe and ANZAC were out of it, Calcutta was getting squeeze by Italy and Japan and Germany was knocking at Moscow’s door.

Anyway, were we right to allow the strict neutral “blitz”?

[Krieghund]

Yes.

[knp7765]

Thank you.

[BigBadBruce]

If I may… I’m really surprised by this answer. Please forgive my english as I don’t practice it enough… but I want to make sure I understand right.

In Europe 1940’s rule book, p.10, under Friendly Neutrals :

Friendly neutrals may not be attacked, and air units may not fly over them. They can be moved into (but not through) as a noncombat move by land units of a power that is at war

Say, a friendly neutral to me… I can’t move during combat move, I can’t move throught it (blitz) during non combat. But, from your answer, the ennemy can. So, actually, “sided” neutrals without troops is more open to his ennemy’s than his friends.

From that rule, I thought all neutrals were stopping movement, regardless of sides. But seems I was wrong.

In clear, for instance :
There’s no way Russia can rush through untouched Northwest Persia, but Axis could attack Caucasus from Iraq with armors through the same untouched Persia. Correct?
(By untouched, I mean no nation ever walked in, therefore no nation markers over it).

Thank you :)

[Ruanek]

That’s a friendly neutral.  A Blitz is basically an attack, so you can do it to strict neutrals (making them all pro-the other side) but you can’t attack friendly neutrals (since they’re already pro-your side).

Edit: I see your point, though.  It does seem a bit weird.

[Krieghund]

You understand correctly.  Violence against defenseless enemies often yields quicker results than diplomacy with reticent friends.

[BigBadBruce]

:lol: :lol: So funny (but sadly true) answer.

Thanks for you time, I’ll share the information with my group.

[rocknroll]

is it possible to move units into a strict neutral in ncm-phase?,
may i i.e. move german troops in ncm-phase into spain to attack from there gibraltar the next turn?

[Krieghund]

No.

[Daedelus]

If you are Japan and have made an amphibious landing into Persia (with a couple of Tanks) can you then, on your follwoing turn, blitz through Northen Persia (non-activated) to attack the Caucasus?

[Krieghund]

Yes.