If italy Joined the allies World War 2

Would the allies have been succesful if italy had joined them

  • Total voters
    8

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

rochie said:
I didnt know that, i worked around the corner in Gisborough hall for a few years too !
Click to expand...
I know, that why I posted it. The de Bruce's were Lords of Annandale, slowly by marriage they became influential in Scotland. Robert THE Bruce was the sixth Lord of Annandale and first one to be king of Scotland. He still owned most of what is present day Teesside which is why they were always invading to try to link up their lands. My uncle was custodian of Pickering Castle, only about 10% of the people in the town had been inside it, some didnt (still dont) know where it is despite a sign saying "castle" in the middle of the high street. Many dont know what is on their door step.
 
I have mentioned this in another thread somewhere here, but a friends' father told some of his wartime experience. Since he seemed too young, as well as very tall and very thin I assumed he had not been in the Army. His mention of Scotland may be of interest. The build up for D day meant lots of US troops and where to put them. His unit was sent to Scotland and they were in the hands of Scottish sergeants for exercise and keeping fit for the invasion. He talked about how tough the Scottish sergeants were and they threw huge rocks back and forth for exercise. When I said that it wasn't punishment but to get you ready to face the Germans, he said, "Oh yeah, after those Scottish sergeants, we went right through those Germans."
 

In order for that to work, this what if begins in 1919. As it historically stands, Italy was no threat to Germany in 1939. Germany would not even need a massive Army in Austria to counter them. Mountainous terrain favors the defender, and Italy's air force, armor and mobility are not going to pose a threat beyond Austria's historical borders.

We have to go back and what if a whole lot of things just to get Italy into a position where it can be a viable threat.
 
Which by the way, I have no problem doing. We can definitely come up with a viable way to make this work, but simply saying Italy had a lot of men, was a world power, and would stop WW2 before it started is not going to work. The Italian Stallion needs to use his critical thinking skills and defend his position.
 
I wasnt proposing Italy do very much, just that all the effort the British and Americans put into N Africa would go into Italy. American build up of forces would have been in Italy, not N Africa.
 

For instance the Italian artillery park was pretty dismal. They had some good designs but nowhere enough of them forcing them to rely on WW I left overs.
A bit less money spent on the Navy and Air Force might have meant a better equipped army. As noted buy others this requires changes in priorities for a number of years before 1939.
 
The only way Italy is an ally is if Mussolini never comes to power. He and Hitler were just too enamored with each other. In fact, I'd say that without the Hitler - Mussolini co-dependency, there is no war. Adolf and Benito were deep down just a couple of bullies that needed each other to feel secure enough to push there plans for world domination. Take one or both out and there is no need to impress the other with your aggression. So, in this hypothetical scenario, if there is no Mussolini, there is no Hitler. If there is no Hitler, there is no Axis Pact, nor any compulsion to prove yourself by invading your neighbors. Poland is at peace. Until Stalin decides to reclaim the territories lost after the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk.
 
Greg Boeser said:
if there is no Mussolini, there is no Hitler.
Click to expand...

I understand your point, but I don't believe this. Hitler would have done what he did without Italy's support. The rise of the Nazis came about through internal turmoil in Germany, it's goals were not unlike the Fascists, but had the capacity and skillset to undertake its external objectives. What might have been different is that if Italy had been an ally of Britain and France, the Med situation would have been very different; the Germans couldn't have gotten so far in North Africa and arguably anywhere in the Med without Italian support.

On the subject of this thread, it's likely that had the Fascists not gotten a handle on the country, Italy would have been on the Allied side at any rate, but how useful that would have been remained to be seen. Italian battleships joining Force H in hunting the Bismarck? Italian warships patrolling the North Atlantic and escorting convoys across, as well as into the Arctic? Italian aircraft guarding the Med's upper flanks, with Allied supported defence of Balkan and Aegean states against the Germans? It's an interesting scenario.

Problem with Italy is that other than what's been mentioned here already, poor leadership, inadequate understanding of modern tactics etc, Italy was a poor country before the fascists came to power and with their entry into government its economy spiked before the war but there was no momentum in that. It simply wasn't capable of sustaining a long-term war footing. It did not have access to raw materials to the same degree as the other combatants and without their help was a bit lost across the board. It could only ever play a supporting role with lofty, but unachievable aspirations. Italy is an example of a country that never came to terms with the loss of its greatness, a bit like Britain after the end of WW1.

This is when Italy peaked...

Europe 480

Its empire was never greater.
 
Last edited:
pops-paolo said:
They still need troops down there to defend like u don't just use a couple of germans soldiers
Click to expand...

Given Alpine terrain, you don't really need a lot of troops to defend the passes. What you need is a good logistics chain to make sure they have food, clothing, and ammo.

If you've actually read up on the Italian campaign, you'll see how the Germans made masterful use of Italian terrain to bog down a lot of Allied divisions. The Alpine passes would be easier to defend, especially against early-war Allied armies.

You may as well throw your troops into a meat-grinder.
 
DerAdlerIstGelandet said:
But they don't need much, because there is no way the Italians are coming up. Germany's military leadership was not stupid. Why would they mass a huge Army at a border that is not a huge threat?
Click to expand...

And on a border so easily defensible? Talk about economizing forces!

Hell, six French divisions held 32 Italian divisions off on the border with Piedmont, another mountainous region, giving up about 20 miles of France.

This ain't rocket surgery. Mountains make good defensive positions. Just ask the Afghanis.
 
not only troops but the Italian air force so Germany would have to divert fighters
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

85 years ago today, Sept 1 1939, the second world war began.
Replies
1
Views
433
MIflyer
M
Favorite "obscure" theater or World War II to research?
Replies
9
Views
1K
EwenS
E
Season’s Greetings from Air War Publications.
Replies
0
Views
53
Snautzer01
From WW2 Bachem's Ba 349 Natter (Viper), to the cold war
Replies
1
Views
504
Gnomey
The Rise and Fall of the Nazi War Machine
Replies
5
Views
1K
pbehn
P
Menu
Log in
Register