Is there exceptional Italian troops who do not run away?
stormy0...@my-dejanews.com
We all know that Italians were not serious in World War 2, so I wonder if
there is there exceptional Italian troops who fought hard in any instances in
World War 2?
Cheers and regards.
"Reality is based on prejudice"
" Get ahead or get out"
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Derek Lang
<7dkmbn$fui$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>Hello,
>
>We all know that Italians were not serious in World War 2, so I wonder if
>there is there exceptional Italian troops who fought hard in any instances
in
>World War 2?
>
I'm not quite sure how you figure that the Italians were "not serious" but I
assume this is a reference to the well-worn MYTH of Italian fighting
ability.
When the generally poor quality of their (often obsolete) equipment is
considered, the performance of many Italian units was actually very good.
For example, the 185th Folgore (Parachute) Division fought as infantry in
North Africa. This division was the Axis rearguard after El Alamein, where
its heroic self-sacrifice allowed thousands of Axis troops to escape the
pursuing British.
In general, the Armoured, Alpine and Cavalry (Celere) divisions were the
pick of the Italian Army. In fact, the Alpine divisions were so highly
regarded that the Germans actually requested them for service in Russia!
Sadly though, the "Alpine Corps" (2nd, 3rd & 4th Alpine divisions) was
decimated in the Soviet winter offensive in January 1943, as it fought
heroically against impossible odds.
Hope this clears up any "misunderstanding" about the courage of Italian
troops.
Derek L.
A. Walkling-Ribeiro
Derek Lang schrieb:
> stormy0...@my-dejanews.com wrote in message
> <7dkmbn$fui$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
> >Hello,
> >
> >We all know that Italians were not serious in World War 2, so I wonder if
> >there is there exceptional Italian troops who fought hard in any instances
> in
> >World War 2?
> >
A lot of the troops in the campaigns in Northern Africa. There Italy
lost its fighting spirit IMHO. The Bersaglieri and Alpini were surely to
be reckoned with, and the Italian tank units suffered mostly from
non-aedequate equipment, not lacking the fighting spirit. That is IMO a
very good example of how logistics affect combat values. Another thing
is the rather lackluster appearance on the russian theater.
Regards, Alex.
--
"Battle doesn't need a purpose; the battle is its own purpose. You don't
ask why a plague spreads or a field burns. Don't ask why I fight."
(MTG, Black Knight)
Louis Capdeboscq
Thanks for not including all of us in your prejudices.
The Italian army was poorly equipped and poorly led, and usually unsupplied
since Mussolini didn't bother about these details. That doesn't make "the
Italians" not serious, or you'll also have to say that the Soviets were not
serious prior to 1944...
>so I wonder if
>there is there exceptional Italian troops who fought hard in any instances
in
>World War 2?
Well, the Italian corps in Russia was made of pretty good troops. The only
problem is that they were alpine troops (lighter armament) and the Germans
put them where they would guard their flanks near Stalingrad instead of
deploying them to the Caucasus which was what they were trained to do. So
regular German troops were deployed in the mountains, and Italian mountain
troops were faced with the Soviet offensives following the Stalingrad
operation..
In North Africa, Rommel kept the Italian Ariete division, with its
underarmored, undergunned, under-everything tanks, right alongside the
moving arm of the Afrika Korps, which says something about its abilities. In
various instances, Italian units gave the British a run for their money and
in Tunisia they were generally ackowledged to have given a good account of
themselves.
Then you have the counterattacks on the American beachhead in Sicily, where
the Italian troops (infantry) made better progress than the German troops
(including Tigers) and were only broken by concentrated naval gunfire.
You should also include the small units of the Italian navy: in encounters
between light forces, the Italians were a match for the British, and Italian
commandos sunk two British battleships in Alexandria. And don't forget the
crews of the torpedo bombers, the British convoys certainly didn't think of
them as "not serious".
John D Salt
<stormy0...@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
[Light snippage around the edges]
>We all know that Italians were not serious in World War 2, so I wonder if
>there is there exceptional Italian troops who fought hard in any instances in
>World War 2?
Hell, yes. Do a search on DejaNews for postings on this group with
the word "Maiale" for a brief account I posted a while ago about
Lt. De la Penne's tremendous attack on Malta Grand Harbour with
10th Light Flotilla (if you search other groups you'll probably get
a lot of interesting pork recipes, too). There's also stuff about
the bravery shown my Italian merchant seamen on the "death route"
to North Africa.
As has also been mentioned in the past, Italian gunners in the
Western Desert often fought their guns to the muzzle in a manner
that would do credit to any army. If you read an account of the
action at "Snipe" by the Rifle Brigade, bear in mind that those
tanks attacking repeatedly were Italian, as well as German.
Italian infantry broke a battalion of the Essex Regt at Keren.
I've just finished re-reading Roy Farran's "Winged Dagger", and
he certainly seems to have been proud enough that he fought
alongside Italian partisans at the head of the "Battaglione McGinty".
Like most national stereotypes, the image of the Italians always
running away at the slightest opportunity is both a shallow and a
distorted view. On the one hand, there are plenty of exceptions
that don't fit the sterotype -- I'm sure Haydn will be able to
provide us with more. On the other, it must be borne in mind
that Italian equipment was often of wretched quality. As an
example, in "Popski's Private Army", Popski mentions that all
the Italian machine-guns he had very often simply refused to fire.
No nation is likely to gain a great reputation for fighting
infantry with non-functional MGs -- you could probably get a
good first-order estimate of the general reputation of different
national infantries just by looking at the quality of their
standard-issue MGs. On the third hand (ain't genetic engineering
wonderful?) one of the factors in the large numbers of Italians
who surrendered, for example, at Beda Fomm, is the question of
water supply in the desert. If your water supplies are cut off,
it doesn't much matter what your weapons, training and morale are
like, they aren't going to rehydrate you.
A fellow I used to know who was an RM Commando told me that he
once took the surrender of a barracks full of Italians who had
their bags packed, ready to go. They told him, he said, that
they didn't want to fight the British, and this wasn't their
war. You might regard this as a lack of fighting spirit; you
might alternatively consider that, as representatives of the home
of the Renaissance, these people were far too civilised to want
to fight for a dangerous buffon like Mussolini.
All the best,
John.
--
John D Salt Dept of IS & Computing,| Barr's Law of Recursive Futility
Brunel U, Uxbridge, Middx UB8 3PH | [BLORF]: If you are smart enough
Disclaimers: I speak only for me. | to use one of these... you can
Launcher may train without warning.| probably manage without one.
pkmb
stormy0...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> We all know that Italians were not serious in World War 2, so I wonder if
> there is there exceptional Italian troops who fought hard in any instances in
> World War 2?
Yes IIRC they were and still are called the Besalgieri. Those soldiers
with bunch of black "feathers' on their helmets. IIRC they fought very
well in North Africa.
Marcin B.
--
Marcin Bugajski citizen of Poland. NATO member since March the 12th
1999.
This message cannot be used for commercial or scientific purposes
without
the author's consent.
Giuseppe Breccia
>there is there exceptional Italian troops who fought hard in any instances in
>World War 2?
I don"t understand what kind of books you have study to say that. .
Otherwise you will understand that an army not well equipped for a war, like
Italian Army, didn" t go very far.
Nevertless several facts showed that Men well equipped, well determined
made the difference.
Only two examples:
the Airborne Division FOLGORE fighting in Africa 1940-1943
The Xa M.A.S.
Who are they?
They were men that created a lot of problem to English Navy
8 men with two task submarine called "maiali" = pork, were able to enter in
the Alexandria Port (Egypt) and sunk two Navy (Queen Elisabeth was seriously
damaged for a very long time).
regards
giuseppe
Haydn
wrote:
>Italian infantry broke a battalion of the Essex Regt at Keren.
Slight mistake... ;-) it was at Gallabat. :-) And the Essex rout was
due to air attacks rather than to infantry action.
>I've just finished re-reading Roy Farran's "Winged Dagger", and
>he certainly seems to have been proud enough that he fought
>alongside Italian partisans at the head of the "Battaglione McGinty".
Also Richard Lamb, the history writer, who served as an 8th Army
officer attached to the pro-Allied Friuli Combat Group, 1943-45, was
proud of that.
Is "Roy Farran" the same officer who fought at Beda Fomm and describes
the sight of the battlefield?
>Like most national stereotypes, the image of the Italians always
>running away at the slightest opportunity is both a shallow and a
>distorted view. On the one hand, there are plenty of exceptions
>that don't fit the sterotype -- I'm sure Haydn will be able to
>provide us with more.
The original poster clearly intended to provoke and, having become a
saint, I don't bother to reply to such statements anymore. :-)
Your (as usual) excellent and unbiased post is another thing.
Yes, there are many more exceptions I could provide you with. Just a
few days ago I was re-reading about the F Squadron of the pro-Allied
Nembo paratroopers, who in April 1945 carried out the last WWII combat
drop and played havoc among German rear troops capturing 1083 Germans
(confirmed number) and destroying 44 vehicles for a confirmed loss of
6 KIAs and 6 MIAs, earning McCreery's recognition. Of course the
German rear area was not in good shape in April 1945, but it was a
remarkable deed anyway.
>A fellow I used to know who was an RM Commando told me that he
>once took the surrender of a barracks full of Italians who had
>their bags packed, ready to go. They told him, he said, that
>they didn't want to fight the British, and this wasn't their
>war.
Interesting. When and where did the episode take place?
>You might regard this as a lack of fighting spirit; you
>might alternatively consider that, as representatives of the home
>of the Renaissance, these people were far too civilised to want
>to fight for a dangerous buffon like Mussolini.
The seemingly odd thing (odd, but not in an Italian's eyes) is that
several soldiers acted likewise indeed, however many others did
exactly the opposite and sided with the "buffon" to the bitter end.
The Republican Army 1943-45 was hundreds of thousands-strong and while
they know the war was lost, most of them did their duty until the very
last days, and not a few of them lost their lives for an
unquestionably lost cause, especially *after* the end of the war.
Every medal has its reverse.
Haydn
pat
soldiers weren't that bad even if to be taken POW by Italians would be a
major dishonor. He fought mainly the Germans who seemed like viscious
fighters from his experience.
It seems that some german generals even appreciated italian troops in that
particular campaign.
Don't have any ref here.
stormy0...@my-dejanews.com wrote in message
<7dkmbn$fui$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>We all know that Italians were not serious in World War 2, so I wonder if
Derek Lang
pat wrote in message <7dsa9b$k...@dgs.dgsys.com>...
>I know a British infantry veteran of North Africa . He told me that Italian
>soldiers weren't that bad even if to be taken POW by Italians would be a
>major dishonor. He fought mainly the Germans who seemed like viscious
>fighters from his experience.
>It seems that some german generals even appreciated italian troops in that
>particular campaign.
>Don't have any ref here.
>
Spent the last couple of days searching for this quote, and I finally found
it. Why is it always in the last place you look? Anyway, here is Rommel's
description of the Ariete Division at El Alamein:
"Enormous dust-clouds could be seen south and south-east of headquarters,
where the desperate struggle of the small and ineffective Italian tanks of
XX Corps was being played out against the hundred or so British heavy tanks
which had come round their open right flank. I was later told by Major von
Luck (whose battalion I had sent to close the gap between the Italians and
the Afrika Korps) that the Italians, who at that time represented our
strongest motorised force, fought with exemplary courage. Von Luck gave what
assistance he could, but was unable to avert the fate of the Italian
armoured corps. Tank after tank was split asunder or burned out, while all
the time a tremendous British barrage lay over the Italian infantry and
artillery positions. The last signal came from the Ariete at about 1530
hours: "Enemy tanks penetrated south of Ariete. Ariete now encircled.
Location 5km north-west of Bir-el-Abd. Ariete's tanks in action". By evening
XX Corps had been completely destroyed after a very gallant action. In the
Ariete we lost our oldest Italian comrades, from whom we had probably always
expected more than they, with their poor equipment, had been capable of
performing."
The Rommel Papers, Collins, 1953.
And now milord, the defence rests.
Derek L.
Stephen David Thomas
>there is there exceptional Italian troops who fought hard in any instances
in
>World War 2?
Many Italian formations fought very well during the war. In general Italian
troops were not as bad as is popularly believed. They were handicapped by
poor officers, lousy generals, third rate equipment (specifically the
tanks), poor support and problems with supplies. The artillery performed
very well. Considering the death traps they used the armoured formations
did quite well and often fought very courageously.
Steve Thomas
ir...@hourigan.com
>I've just finished re-reading Roy Farran's "Winged Dagger", and
>he certainly seems to have been proud enough that he fought
>alongside Italian partisans at the head of the "Battaglione McGinty".
Can you tell me more about "Battaglione McGinty"? The name suggests
the involvemt of an Englishman, Irishman or American. Was this the
result of OSS operations?
Stefano Pasini
Valerio Borghese were amongst the finest soldiers everywhere, the first
single-handledly assaulting the British Fleet in Alessandria with his
torpedo-mounted assaulters, the second keeping in line thousands of soliders
after the Armistice with great honour.
A fine fighter pilot like Visconti never had airplanes at the same level as
his German or American counterparts, and he was an ace all the same, and his
units, excellent and very gallant: MAS, paratroopers (Nembo, Folgore
Divisions), Carabinieri, Bersaglieri were exceptionally courageous parts of
the Italian Armed Forces.
Unfortunately, Italian hardware was old and scarce; and when we had good
weapons, like our formidable Battleships of the 'Vittorio Veneto' class,
they were grounded by lack of fuel, strategical wisdom, and radar.
Italian Admirals wer the worst in WWII, I fear..... But I do think that many
Italian troops were excellent; my father, decorated former 'nostromo' on the
destroyer 'Fuciliere', confirms..
Stefano Pasini, from Italy
pat <p...@santa.net> wrote in message 7dsa9b$k...@dgs.dgsys.com...
> I know a British infantry veteran of North Africa . He told me that
Italian
> soldiers weren't that bad even if to be taken POW by Italians would be a
> major dishonor. He fought mainly the Germans who seemed like viscious
> fighters from his experience.
> It seems that some german generals even appreciated italian troops in that
> particular campaign.
> Don't have any ref here.
>
> stormy0...@my-dejanews.com wrote in message
> <7dkmbn$fui$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>
casita
>his German or American counterparts, and he was an ace all the same, and his
>units, excellent and very gallant:
"The Eyeties were comparatively easy to shoot down. Oh, they're brave
enough, in fact I think the Eyeties have more courage than the Germans,
but their tactics aren't so good. They are very good gliders, but they try
to do clever acrobatics and looping. But they will stick ( with ) even if
things are going against them, whereas the Jerries will run."
George "Buzz" Beurling, RCAF.
COMMANDE
Italy had a less than half casualty rate than Rumania and even Hungary!
Martin Rapier
> IMHO, they were expetional _because_ they ran! Look at the statistics
> Italy had a less than half casualty rate than Rumania and even Hungary!
Another one for Deja News.
Yes, contrary to popular opinion there were numerous Italian units whihc
fought bravely and efectively. Like any combat unit, they fought was well
as their training, leadership, equipment and logistic support allowed.
Having all ones transport appropriated by your 'allies' in the desert, or
being equipped with anti-tank weapons which cannot penetrate your opponents
tanks generally reduce fighting effectiveness.
A couple of events which spring to mind:
Italian gunners fighting their pieces until overrun on numerous occasions,
starting with Operation Compass in 1940.
The defeat of 22nd Armoured Brigade by Ariete at Bir El Gubi in 1941.
Cheers
Martin.
LRic54
exclent divsion..
Derek Lang
COMMANDE wrote in message <7ebvv5$o...@dgs.dgsys.com>...
>IMHO, they were expetional _because_ they ran! Look at the statistics
>Italy had a less than half casualty rate than Rumania and even Hungary!
I don't know where you get the idea that Italy's military casualties were
less than half those of Rumania and Hungary. The actual figures (killed &
missing) are:
Italy: 227,000
Rumania: 380,000
Hungary: 136,000
Source: John Ellis, The WW2 Databook
When one considers that Italy's armed forces were only involved in the war
until September 1943, it is clear that their casualties are comparable to
those of Rumania (which fought for longer) and far outweigh those of
Hungary. Indeed, in relative terms, Italy's casualties were actually more
severe than Britain's - as Britain suffered 305,000 while fighting for twice
as long as Italy.
So please, lets not have any more of the old falsehoods and prejudices about
the Italian armed forces in the war.
Grazie,
Derek L.
Bob Young
>> stormy0...@my-dejanews.com wrote in message
>> <7dkmbn$fui$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>>
>> >We all know that Italians were not serious in World War 2, so I wonder
if
>> >there is there exceptional Italian troops who fought hard in any
>instances
>> >in World War 2?
A thought just struck me. Did the myth of Italian incompetence originate
from the Nazis as an excuse for losing to the Allies in North Africa. The
same as the "It was all Hitler's fault" excuse?
Bob Young
i...@svpal.org
>
> We all know that Italians were not serious in World War 2, so I wonder if
> there is there exceptional Italian troops who fought hard in any instances in
> World War 2?
I think that the Italian Bersaglieri ( Light Infantry ) were
moderately well regarded and of course their Naval special
ops people were ( as in WWI ) first class.
#-#-#-#-#-#-#-#-#-#--#-#-#-#-#-#-#-#-#-#-#-#-#-#-#-#-#-#-#-#-#-#-#-#-#-#
In their wisdom, the Founding Fathers chose to limit the powers
afforded to government. Government now wishes we would forget this.
Fat chance!
Jon Filkin
stormy0...@my-dejanews.com () wrote:
> Hello,
>
> We all know that Italians were not serious in World War 2, so I wonder
> if
> there is there exceptional Italian troops who fought hard in any
> instances in
> World War 2?
>
> Cheers and regards.
>
>
>
> "Reality is based on prejudice"
> " Get ahead or get out"
>
> -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
> http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
>
The main cause of this rumour was Waverly offencive of 40/41. The Italian
army of some 250,000 men advanced into Egypt then stopped, The British
offencive of only 30,000 men worked because the brits were operating in to
them well known teritory as they had trined there for years before. The
Italian army was logisticly hamstrung by the large scale use of pasta!,
needing an alleged 3 pints of water a day just to cook his pasta, that was
before personal water needs. The mobile Brits/commonwealth troops took the
water holes of note and the Italians were left with a simple choice. die
of starvation and thirst, or surrender and they can eat and drink. Now,
what would you be doing in that situation?
Jon-Paul
Haydn
>A thought just struck me. Did the myth of Italian incompetence originate
>from the Nazis as an excuse for losing to the Allies in North Africa. The
>same as the "It was all Hitler's fault" excuse?
This admittedly is an idea quite widely cultivated by not a few
Germans. General Gause, Chief of Staff, Axis Army Group in Tunisia,
hated the Italians, and was not the only one. In the books and
memories of Rommel, von Esebeck and others, misunderstandings,
mistakes, unconfirmed statements and gossip regarding the Italians are
not rare, although Rommel was much more inclined to praise them than
it is usually acknowledged.
Surely the Germans took advantage of the real Italian weaknesses to
prepare a set of excuses for some of their own huge blunders.
However, personally I believe that the bulk of the "incompetence
myth", as you call it, is of British origin. There are several reasons
why, both old/traditional and recent ones.
Haydn
Haydn
John Salt
Haydn <fob...@iperbole.bologna.it> wrote:
[I wrote:]
>>Italian infantry broke a battalion of the Essex Regt at Keren.
>
>Slight mistake... ;-) it was at Gallabat. :-) And the Essex rout was
>due to air attacks rather than to infantry action.
Oops. My mistake. This is what happens when I post from memory. :-(
[snips]
>Is "Roy Farran" the same officer who fought at Beda Fomm and describes
>the sight of the battlefield?
Correct. It was also Roy Farran who was General "Jock" Campbell's
driver when his car crashed, killing the General.
>The original poster clearly intended to provoke and, having become a
>saint, I don't bother to reply to such statements anymore. :-)
>Your (as usual) excellent and unbiased post is another thing.
Cough, *blush*.
[Interesting mention of "Nembo"'s parachute drop in 1945 snipped.]
I'm just wondering -- did any of the "Folgore" ever make a combat
drop? I know they were in action in North Africa, and IIRC carried
on fighting for the Axis side until V-E day, but I cannot recall
any occasion on which they jumped into action. This seems slightly
surprising given the position of Italy as one of the leading powers
(along with the Soviet Union) in the development of parachute troops.
The mention of parachute operations reminds me that the only fatal
casualty of the first British parachute drop, at Tragino Aqueduct,
was an Italian, Fortunato Picchi, killed after capture.
[I wrote]
>>A fellow I used to know who was an RM Commando told me that he
>>once took the surrender of a barracks full of Italians who had
>>their bags packed, ready to go. [snips]
>Interesting. When and where did the episode take place?
Gosh, you've got me there -- the fellow has been dead for many
years, and I was very young when I used to listen to his war
stories. From what I recall of the deployment of RM commandos,
it can hardly have been North Africa, so it's entirely possible
that this episode took place around the time of the Italian
surrender -- always assuming that this wasn't a story that
falls into the "tell it to the Marines" category.
[More snips]
>The Republican Army 1943-45 was hundreds of thousands-strong and while
>they know the war was lost, most of them did their duty until the very
>last days, and not a few of them lost their lives for an
>unquestionably lost cause, especially *after* the end of the war.
>Every medal has its reverse.
No doubt about it -- there were brave men fighting under every flag.
All the best,
John.
A. Walkling-Ribeiro
Bob Young schrieb:
<Snip>
> A thought just struck me. Did the myth of Italian incompetence originate
> from the Nazis as an excuse for losing to the Allies in North Africa. The
> same as the "It was all Hitler's fault" excuse?
It rather went back to WW1 IMHO. The austrians able to fend off the
Italians (Isonzo theater e.g.) rather well, the estimate of the italian
troops efficiency went down on the middle powers side. As in fact in the
fierce "mountain war" they did a good job, it seems that more had been
expected.
Adding to this was perhaps the lackluster performance in the abessinian
wars. There the italian forces didn't earn much respect at first. I mean
look at what enemy forces they were up to! That perhaps carried over. I
don't know if there are official (non-italian) allied accounts on the
warfare in WW1 concerning the Italians, but that could be a valuable
source.
Haydn
<John...@ux-mailhost.brunel.ac.uk> wrote:
>In article <7dtjcg$1a0u$1...@nntp6.u.washington.edu>,
>Haydn <fob...@iperbole.bologna.it> wrote:
>[I wrote:]
>>>Italian infantry broke a battalion of the Essex Regt at Keren.
>>
>>Slight mistake... ;-) it was at Gallabat. :-) And the Essex rout was
>>due to air attacks rather than to infantry action.
>
>Oops. My mistake. This is what happens when I post from memory. :-(
No apologies needed. We are mortals, not computers... :-)
>I'm just wondering -- did any of the "Folgore" ever make a combat
>drop? I know they were in action in North Africa, and IIRC carried
>on fighting for the Axis side until V-E day, but I cannot recall
>any occasion on which they jumped into action. This seems slightly
>surprising given the position of Italy as one of the leading powers
>(along with the Soviet Union) in the development of parachute troops.
The Folgore as such did never make combat drops. Before the Division
was formed, on April 30th, 1941 two companies of the 2nd Paratroops
Battalion made a drop on the Greek island of Kephallenia. The island
was quickly occupied without a fight.
Several combat drops were carried out by paratroops commando units of
the Army and the Air Force in 1943. The Army had the 10th Arditi
(Rangers) Regt., and the Air Force had the ADRA Battalion
(Rangers-Destroyers, Royal Air Force). They attacked railroad bridges
and airfields in Libya, Tunisia and Algeria. Due to organizational
flaws and the tremendously effective Allied intelligence, all but two
of those commando actions failed. In the most successful action, two
ADRA paratroopers, the last surviving team of a commando squad,
destroyed 25 Allied aircraft.
>The mention of parachute operations reminds me that the only fatal
>casualty of the first British parachute drop, at Tragino Aqueduct,
>was an Italian, Fortunato Picchi, killed after capture.
Yes, I know the Tragino Aqueduct drop. As an anti-Fascist wearing a
British uniform and fighting alongside British commandos, Picchi was
shot by a firing squad. The same would have happened, in case of
capture, to the soldiers of the Indian Paratroops Commando company,
Indian ex-POWs who had joined the Axis and were trained as
paratroopers by the Italians... they should have made commando drops
in India, to sabotage railways, bridges, communication lines. However,
in 1943 Italian well-trained manpower shortage was so dramatic that
their planned drop was cancelled and they were ordered to fight on the
front as regular infantry. This meant certain death for them under any
circumstances: they refused to go on fighting and were sent back to
POW camps.
>Gosh, you've got me there -- the fellow has been dead for many
>years, and I was very young when I used to listen to his war
>stories. From what I recall of the deployment of RM commandos,
>it can hardly have been North Africa, so it's entirely possible
>that this episode took place around the time of the Italian
>surrender -- always assuming that this wasn't a story that
>falls into the "tell it to the Marines" category.
Although the specific case may even be a story, not a few similar
cases, no doubt, did historically happen. In Sicily and Calabria,
1943; but also in Libya, 1940. This happens when an Army believes that
militia Divisions made up by husbands in their 40s and/or settlers and
share-croppers will like to fight to the last man for a dictator's
sake better than to think of their families, jobs and fields, and act
accordingly when things go wrong.
Haydn
Alexander Eichener
> When one considers that Italy's armed forces were only involved in the war
> until September 1943,
I would contend this. Both for the Republic and for the Kingdom of the
South. Not to count the Italian troops fighting in the Balcans after
Sep. 1943, e.g. divisione Garibaldi.
Regards,
--
Alexander Eichener, Heidelberg
Main address: c...@ix.urz.uni-heidelberg.de
COMMANDE
>
> The actual figures (killed &
> missing) are:
So what about the wounded
>
> Italy: 227,000
> Rumania: 380,000
> Hungary: 136,000
>
> Source: John Ellis, The WW2 Databook
>
The statistics I remember were something like:
Italy: 75,000
Rumania: 250,000
Hungary: 250,000
Perhaps I was looking at WWI statistics
I have nothing against them personally, an old nieghbor of mine claimed
to have been paratrooper for Italy. In addition Italy was able to
achieve more than Rumania and Hungary, It was able to supply it's
ownequipment. At one point Rumanian troops were using French helmets
from WWI.
Derek Lang
>
>I would contend this. Both for the Republic and for the Kingdom of the
>South. Not to count the Italian troops fighting in the Balcans after
>Sep. 1943, e.g. divisione Garibaldi.
>
You are, of course, correct. However, I only have reliable data for the
period up to September '43. In any case, I think the point of quoting the
figures was just to show that Italy's losses were by no means negligible -
something on which we both agree.
Derek L.
CTomas1941
and it served with the 2nd FJ division in it's recon bn.
Alexander Eichener
> A thought just struck me. Did the myth of Italian incompetence originate
> from the Nazis as an excuse for losing to the Allies in North Africa.
Yes. Period.
German army command (and air force command) also suffered heavy
casualties in Crete for not wanting to accept the offered Italian
support.
Kesselring's rise of anti-Italian resentmentr also dates after Sept. 1943.
Bonvi's famnous presnet "stormtrooper" cartoons reflect the sentiment
ably, with its running-gag "Courageous Ally Schussolini"
Yama
> It rather went back to WW1 IMHO. The austrians able to fend off
> the
> Italians (Isonzo theater e.g.) rather well, the estimate of the
> italian
> troops efficiency went down on the middle powers side. As in fact
> in the
> fierce "mountain war" they did a good job, it seems that more had
> been
> expected.
It is probably that in WWI, Allied were expecting considerable
contribution from Italia, and were rather disappointed when it
turned out that Austrians easily managed to keep Italians at bay.
Italian 'backdoor' was well fortified by nature. After Caporetto,
main objective of the Italian army was to prevent complete collapse
and they required considerable support from Allied which they really
couldn't have afforded at that phase of war.
In fairness, terrain in Italian mountain front was very difficult
and it is not like Britain and France did any better in France
despite more favourable terrain.
> --
> "Battle doesn't need a purpose; the battle is its own purpose. You
> don't
> ask why a plague spreads or a field burns. Don't ask why I fight."
>
> (MTG, Black Knight)
"Heel."(MTG, Ray of Command)
*grin*
Haydn
>The statistics I remember were something like:
>
>Italy: 75,000
>Rumania: 250,000
>Hungary: 250,000
>
>Perhaps I was looking at WWI statistics
Italian Armed Forces had 650,000 dead in WWI and nearly 250,000 KIA
and MIA in WWII until September 1943.
Haydn
Tommi Syrjanen
> The statistics I remember were something like:
>
> Italy: 75,000
> Rumania: 250,000
> Hungary: 250,000
>
> Perhaps I was looking at WWI statistics
I don't know what statistics those are, but they are not WWI
statistics. According to 'Chronicle of the First World War' Italy lost
680000 men in WWI, Rumania 335706. As Hungary was a part of Austria
then Hungarian casualties are not listed.
- Tommi
George Hardy
<c...@ix.urz.uni-heidelberg.de> says:
>On 7 Apr 1999, Bob Young wrote:
>> A thought just struck me. Did the myth of Italian incompetence
>>originate from the Nazis as an excuse for losing to the Allies
>>in North Africa.
>Yes. Period.
No. Period. It was well established as true before Italy entered
the war. WSC even discussed whether it would be better for England
if Italy was on its side or the Axis side. Italy lived up to its
reputation in Greece. Italy bungled both its Greek and North
African adventures.
Kesselring's antipathy towards Italy and its soldiers began with
their performance on Sicily; it was increased with their surrender
at the time of Salerno (not important which came first by a few
hours); it was further increased by the attacks by irregulars and
partisans (mainly communist).
No. Italy's reputation, and the reputation of the Italian military
was well earned. Italian soldiers were good, if properly armed and
lead. Italy did neither.
GFH
***************************************************************
http://www.ankerstein.org/
The Anchor Stone Building Set (Anker-Steinbaukasten) Home Page
See what makes me tick.
***************************************************************
Haydn
wrote:
>In article <7eqsms$r...@dgs.dgsys.com>, Alexander Eichener
><c...@ix.urz.uni-heidelberg.de> says:
>
>>On 7 Apr 1999, Bob Young wrote:
>
>>> A thought just struck me. Did the myth of Italian incompetence
>>>originate from the Nazis as an excuse for losing to the Allies
>>>in North Africa.
>
>>Yes. Period.
>
>No. Period. It was well established as true before Italy entered
>the war. WSC even discussed whether it would be better for England
>if Italy was on its side or the Axis side. Italy lived up to its
>reputation in Greece. Italy bungled both its Greek and North
>African adventures.
Mr Hardy, Germany didn't lose the war because of the alliance with
Italy. Germany has defeated itself.
>Kesselring's antipathy towards Italy and its soldiers began with
>their performance on Sicily;
Kesselring was also aware of the performance of the German 923.
Festungs Battalion - a second or third line unit deployed in Sicily -
which panicked and was quickly disrupted, exactly as many Italian
second or third line units did. Of course, it's easy - in post-war
years - to overlook one's own garden's weed.
Haydn
Alexander Eichener
> Kesselring was also aware of the performance of the German 923.
> Festungs Battalion - a second or third line unit deployed in Sicily -
But what would one expect from a Festungsbataillon ? Priobably the same
kind of reckless valour as found in the Milizia Territoriale ;-)
Haydn
<c...@ix.urz.uni-heidelberg.de> wrote:
>On 19 Apr 1999, Haydn wrote:
>
>> Kesselring was also aware of the performance of the German 923.
>> Festungs Battalion - a second or third line unit deployed in Sicily -
>
>But what would one expect from a Festungsbataillon ? Priobably the same
>kind of reckless valour as found in the Milizia Territoriale ;-)
Of course. :-) My remark was only aimed at those who disparaged, or
disparage, Italian coastal and territorial troops on purpose. No
matter whether Italian or other nationalities, coastal or territorial
troops' life has always been hard when pitted against first-line
assault troops.
Haydn
Haydn
<c...@ix.urz.uni-heidelberg.de> wrote:
>Well, I was actually fishing for comments on the use (or uselessness) of
>Italian reserve units. At least in the 19th century, the milizia
>territorial seems to have been the nightmare of the Italian military
>rather than of the enemy, and the milizia provinziale was even worse.
>
>I would be interested to know how these reserve-units performed in World
>War I and World War II. Did they live up/down to their reputation ? ;-)
As far as I know, territorial units only had security, anti-commando
and anti-paratroops tasks. In WWII they captured`s/me`B2itish
commandos operating on Italian soil, and a number of bailed out
harmless Allied pilots whose aircraft had been shot down in Italian
skies. They substantially were elderly armed peasants wearing a
uniform, and nobody ever thought they could do more than that. Poor
coastal troops in comparison were Panzergrenadiers.
In Sicily (and, I suppose, also in Sardinia and all over Italy)
territorial units formed the so-called NAP (Anti-Paratroops Teams),
deployed in and around airfields. They mopped up some stray Allied
paratroopers before melting away. In Sicily there should have been
also the famous "Centurie dei Vespri", referring to the 1282 AD
Sicilian Vespers revolt. They should have been civilian resistance
units, groups of snipers and town fighters whose task should have been
to organize an anti-Allied resistance movement and keep it alive even
after the total occupation of Sicily. Needless to say, they were a
dismal failure.
>I today bought a Vetterli-Vitali M 1870/87/15 (converted to 6,5 mms) and
>that one shows a stamping "flaming bomb with the letters MP 8 in it" on
>its right buttstock side. I wondered whether that indicated some unit of
>the milizia provinziale (who indeed were issued these old guns).
Unfortunately, I don't know anything about that mark.
Haydn