Picture of the day

purple said:
The Italian campaign ran for less than a year before it was eclipsed by D Day and fighting in NW Europe as the decisive ground campaign by the western allies. Italy was always regarded as a peripheral campaign, and kind of a supporting attack which would draw German forces away from the main efforts in NW Europe and the Eastern Front.

Unfortunately the geography of Italy makes it a defenders paradise where small forces can obstruct and delay much larger forces. At the end of the day it was a question of just who was being diverted in Italy, the Germans or the Allies. The terrain never changes; as Hannibal demonstrated the best way to enter the Italian "boot" is from the top rather than from the toe.

The US also had considerable numbers of forces engaged in Italy, but the military and public focus shifted to NW Europe after D Day. Forces were skimmed away from Italy as the campaign in NW Europe progressed incl 1 Cdn Corps which was relocated in early 1945. There is a lot of reference material on the Italian campaign, but its just not as popular as the main effort in France and Germany. That doesn't diminish the efforts of the troops in Italy one iota, but its tough to find people who have visited the Cdn battlefields in Italy to the same extent as in France, Germany and Holland.
Click to expand...

The Germans knew all along they'd be retreating, battle plan was to make it as difficult and expensive as possible.

Grizz
 
I can clearly see the logic in that. Thanks, Tony.

CV32 said:
The problem with sonar generally in shallow water, whether active or passive, is that there are many variables that interfere with the efficient propagation of sound. Rocky, uneven bottoms that you tend to see in shallow water leads to scattering and reverberation effects. There also tends to be a lot of ambient noise, such as wave action, in shallow water. If it is shallow water along a coast, for example, with a lot of freshwater entering the ocean, you can get wide variations in temperature and salinity. Which also affects the propagation of sound.
Click to expand...
 
Purple, I heard a wild theory where it was claimed one of the lesser German goals of the campaign was to keep a corridor open for German servicemen fleeing through Slovenia. I have not looked into it further. There might be something to it as the expulsions had started by 1944. In addition, we can read up on the Blieburg repatriations, so maybe not so wild afterall.
 
Last edited:
Russian advances on the Eastern Front threatened German lines of communications to their forces in Greece and caused the Germans to withdraw from Greece. This led to unrest and communist uprisings in Greece which caused the transfer of significant British forces to Greece from the Italian front. It was ironic that the Brits withdrew forces from fighting the Germans in Greece in order to block a takeover by communist elements in Greece.

One of the primary avenues through the Alps to Italy is the Brenner Pass, a much contested invasion route and a strategic defile. In spring of 2017 I travelled by train from Munich to Bologna and Florence via the Brenner Pass and got a good idea of its strategic importance. There are still comprehensive fortifications along the route. In WW2 the Brenner was heavily bombed by US air forces to cut German movements through it.
 
diopter said:
Reminds me of the Pictures on the wall at the old DCRA clubhouse in Connaught.
P1010091.jpg
Click to expand...

These are the rifles and kit that taught me how to shoot, building on the base from my highschool rifle team where we shot Win M52 target rifles. These skills are no longer being taught. I raise eye brows at the range as I shoot from the prone and sitting positions, stunning the bench rest/lead sled crowd.

Recently a comment was made that our 200m and 300m gongs (18" and 20" respectively) were too large. I suggested that if they shot from a position other than from the bench and with a rifle not equipped with a 50mm objective lens scope, their opinions would change radically. I assure you that even with the NM sights on my MI, the 20" gong is a challenge.
 
I think the reasons the Germans defended the Italian peninsula so actively and the ‘United Nations’ attacked so aggresively were not entirely the same. Some mention of Hannibals decision to invade from the north is interesting. Its believed that Hannibals ‘37’ war elephants were ‘drop shipped’ as it were along the army’s route.... it is now believed that Hannibals route into Italy was along a pass between Grenoble and Turin.... Turin of course is on the Po river and in one of the most fertile valleys in Europe. As every 5th grader knows - ancient armies were required to ‘live off the land’ and Hannibal needed access to ready provisions in thatregion to support his army as he developed the allied relationships he needed to march on Rome.

In much the same way the productive northern plain of Italy (for food and manufactured goods) was important to Germany in 1943.

But to the allies - control of the mediteranean (and Adriatic) was probably a higher priority in 1943 than an invasion of France. The capture of Italy (and Sicily) offered the potential for allied air bases ...unchallenged access to the Med also meant access to the Suez and therefore the Persian Gulf ... where critical oil resources (particularly since the British navy had converted from coal to oil) were already being eyed by Stalin (there were soviet troops in northern Iran at wars end) as well the Med permitted some containment of the Soviets if it that might be required... and the convenient thing is this could all be done with Uncle ‘Joe’s’ approval as he demanded a ‘second’ front.

Why would you not priorize Italy first? By late 1942 there were enough US troops in England that a German invasion was impossible and there was still the issue of ‘Vichy’ France and where their loyalties would lie as discovered by the US in North Africa. So all to say - invading Sicily/Italy first before the Allied invasion of Normandy —- probably seemed like a very, very good idea at the time
 
1piat.jpg


"How do you like me now Heinrich?"


The Soviet carrier has a PTRD, the German carrier has an sPzB 41. Both superior to a Boys. Ll the other one had a 'door knocker' - or a two pounder?. Do I see a german helmet on the soldier in the back of the ambulance carrier?

I thought it was an m1919 mg in one of the pics but it was probably an M-2 with a short barrel. Defo not the typical modern era M-2.
 
Last edited:
Wonderful Pics Diopter!! Oddly enough the first time I was ever at Bisley was 1962 with my father -- we were living in UK at the time and we went to visit ####!
 
A big driver for the invasion of Italy in 1943 was the fact that allied armies had rolled up the Germans in N. Africa earlier that year and there was a lot of momentum and resources that weren't going to be otherwise employed until the second front opened with the Normandy invasion a year later. Again, the imperative was to keep the pressure on the Germans and show the Russians that they weren't going to have to do most of the fighting and the dying for another year.

The defeat of the Germans in N. Africa did re-open the Mediterranean route to the Suez Canal. For some time before that allied shipping had to take the long route to the Middle East and Persian Gulf around South Africa. Getting air bases in S. Italy to bomb Germany and the Romanian oil fields was another reason for going into Italy.

There was a lot of debate about the invasion of Italy vs Western Europe. Churchill preferred the indirect approach, calling Italy " the soft underbelly of Europe", but the terrain and lack of operational maneuver room for large scale military operations in Italy argued against that. The Americans were never big on Italy, which they saw as a diversion from the main effort, and wanted to go directly into France, as early as 1943.
 
purple said:
A big driver for the invasion of Italy in 1943 was the fact that allied armies had rolled up the Germans in N. Africa earlier that year and there was a lot of momentum and resources that weren't going to be otherwise employed until the second front opened with the Normandy invasion a year later. Again, the imperative was to keep the pressure on the Germans and show the Russians that they weren't going to have to do most of the fighting and the dying for another year.

The defeat of the Germans in N. Africa did re-open the Mediterranean route to the Suez Canal. For some time before that allied shipping had to take the long route to the Middle East and Persian Gulf around South Africa. Getting air bases in S. Italy to bomb Germany and the Romanian oil fields was another reason for going into Italy.

There was a lot of debate about the invasion of Italy vs Western Europe. Churchill preferred the indirect approach, calling Italy " the soft underbelly of Europe", but the terrain and lack of operational maneuver room for large scale military operations in Italy argued against that. The Americans were never big on Italy, which they saw as a diversion from the main effort, and wanted to go directly into France, as early as 1943.
Click to expand...

I recall driving up the Autostrada in Italy and looking at all the hills, valleys and ridges and think of what a tough time the Allies must have had.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom