They were also fighting several opponents and soon you will find 80 millions a quite small amount...
By powerful artillery fire, air strikes and a wave of attacking tanks we're supposed to swiftly crush the enemy. -G.K. Zhukov
Quote: What several opponents? After the fall of France Germany didn't have a front with anyone. If Italy wouldn't have been Germany's ally this situation would have continued until Operation Barbarosa. Last edited by Carius on 05 Nov 2005, 16:47, edited 2 times in total.
Yes but His Imperial Majesty Haile Selassie I was able to crush the fascist invaders of the Babylon system.
![]() Quote: Is that so? .... Last edited by Carius on 23 Sep 2005, 17:57, edited 1 time in total.
Carius several opponents - The allied consisted of not only the U.K but many other countries to. USA would probably join the war without Japans help in time and USA had a population of about what was it? 150-200 millions? I can't really remember.
And Soviet Union also had alot of population, do you understand me now and realise that 80 million isn't so much in the long run? By powerful artillery fire, air strikes and a wave of attacking tanks we're supposed to swiftly crush the enemy. -G.K. Zhukov
Do you realise the period of time and scenario we are talking about?
Germany didn't have a front with anyone after the fall of France. If Italy wouldn't have been Germany's ally this situation would have continued until Operation Barbarosa. Last edited by Carius on 05 Nov 2005, 16:48, edited 1 time in total.
What about the invasions of Balkan? I believe that even without Italy those would have occured.
What I am meaning is: Ok, Germany invades Poland and France and so on. There goes some men. Then they invade Soviet Union - there goes ALOT of men. Then all the allied countries (incl. USA) decide to use all their powers to invade France (if Japan would have stayed neutral the USMC also would have been in the invasion) and that's alot of forces... By this time Germany are tired of several years of fighting. Don't you think that in the long run the German Wehrmacht will be in lack of personnel? I'm not only talking about the time 1940-41 when Italy was active in the war. I'm talking about the whole war.. My idea is that if Germany would have been standing alone in the war and had the same enemies as they had in the real war, they would eventually lose due to lack of personnel. I am going on a vacation today so I can't discuss this anymore for a while but please fellow Comrade, PM me your answer and I will read it when I get home again. By powerful artillery fire, air strikes and a wave of attacking tanks we're supposed to swiftly crush the enemy. -G.K. Zhukov
First of all, this is going badly off-topic.
...... Quote: No. Hitler wanted to dominate the Balkans by peaceful means, by getting Yugoslavia to join the Axis and Greece to remain neutral. He never wanted to attack Yugoslavia or Greece. Italy's ill-fated offensive against Greece wrecked Hitler's diplomatic plans. Quote: German military casualtiess cannot be compared with Soviet casualties. During the first weeks of Operation Barbarosa Germans captured over three million Soviets soldiers and captured or destroyed thousands of AFVs, planes, artillery pieces and other equipment. Quote: Without Japanese attack at Pearl Harbour there is a chance that USA would not join the war at all. If USA would not join war, Allies couldn't launch a succesfull invasion. And as I said, this is going badly off-topic. Last edited by Carius on 05 Nov 2005, 16:49, edited 1 time in total.
The U.S would of joined later on to help allies and gain buisness oppurtunities in all the once occupied countries.
The Nazi's couldn't hold off all the underground forces in the occupied countries,it would be just a matter of time before they fell even if they never attacked the soviets. LETS GO BACK TO TOPIC HERE ![]() "None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe Quote: No one can prove this, not even you. Quote: Yes.
Back to topic then, I was having a thought about the Italian armoured forces. People always say have worthless the Italian tanks were and so on, but am I alone to think that all the Italian armour wasn't that bad?
I mean look at all of the Semoventes those were according to me good tanks comparing to what they faced in the Italian sector of warfare.. It was a tank destroyer and most of the models could take out a M3, Crusader and Sherman without much trouble. The only tank which could resist in armour way was a Churchills front... What do you people think? By powerful artillery fire, air strikes and a wave of attacking tanks we're supposed to swiftly crush the enemy. -G.K. Zhukov
Quote: I wouldn't say so, though Italian M11/39 tank was not that effective. It was armed with 37mm fixed gun and machine gun turret. Frontal armor was 30mm, rear and side armor 14mm. Fortunately, only 100 were produced. M13/40, M14/41 and M15/42 tanks were different thing. They had 47mm gun, 42mm frontal armor and 25mm side and rear armor. They were effective against British Crusader and Cruiser tanks and American Stuart tanks. Semovente's were without doubt the best AFVs Italians had. Last edited by Carius on 16 Apr 2006, 19:05, edited 3 times in total.
Good to hear that I'm not alone having those opinions. I really hate it when American/British historicans talk about the M4 on Discovery. I heard one of them say that there was no counterpart in the Italian armor for the M4 and that it's armor was to be invincible against the Italian AT guns. Isn't that so full of bullshit that even politicans election promises are to be more correct?
I would really love to see a surviving crew member of an old M4s reaction to what he said.. By powerful artillery fire, air strikes and a wave of attacking tanks we're supposed to swiftly crush the enemy. -G.K. Zhukov
Piaggio P.108
![]() A strategic bomber, "Italian B-17. engines: 4 x 1,700 hp max speed: 490 km/h authonomy: 5,100 km bombload: 4,800 kg armament: 4 x 12,7 and 6 x 20 mm Last edited by Carius on 26 Mar 2006, 19:54, edited 1 time in total.
During the British counterattack in 1940 in Egypt, Italian units showed a good account of themselves, in battles such as Nibeiwa..
About italian ARMIR, when operation little saturn begun the italian army was the only one, among the rumanian and hungarian, to hold his ground until ordered to retreat. We should also remember, without going into detail, that "The Italian Alpine Corps is the only invading army that can consider itself unbeaten in the soviet soil", Moscow Radio ufficial bulletin of Dicember 1942. If you want to talk about North Africa i am here, we want to talk about the defeat of the 2nd NZ division, about the defeat of the 22nd and 23rn armoured brigate, of the 4th CLY... or maybe we want to talk about tunisian battles such as the Mereth Line, or about the italian forces that fought in the battle for Kasserine Pass ? Maybe we want to talk about the counter attack of Livorno division during the invasion of Sicily, or about the SS Italian division an Nettuno parachute brigade at Anzio, or about X Mas... Maybe about Folgore in NA ? As is written 60 miles from Alexandria in Egypt on a memorial tablet posed by italian bersaglieri, wich where the axis units wich came closer to the african goal, "Luck lacked, not valour".
Italian Macchi MC.202 Folgore fighter.
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Soviet cogitations: 2775
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 27 Sep 2004, 23:23 Party Bureaucrat
Wow...That italian stuff doesnt look half bad.....
Whoppee for Comrade Sergei.
Quote: You are correct about that.
A few pictures
![]() ![]() ![]() P-40 tank ![]() ![]() "None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
Soviet cogitations: 2775
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 27 Sep 2004, 23:23 Party Bureaucrat Quote: A mini-howitzer. I love it. Whoppee for Comrade Sergei.
|
Alternative Display:
Mobile view
|
||||||