Today in history - Italian front

On the 19th March 1916 the fifth Isonzo battle ended on the Italian front.
<<As the financial terms demonstrate, everyone involved expected the war to end rather soon after Italian intervention. However, the collapse of the Russian war effort in 1915 ensured that Italian intervention, instead, saved the Entente from defeat>> (James Young)

[leo]

Italy's entry into WWI was welcomed by the Allies, but i think you over state the case. The Austrians were pretty well able to fend off Italy's efforts with a small portion of its army. The defensive positions of the Austrians permitted this and frustrated Italian efforts. The front was reasonably static until after the failure of the last Ausrian offensive in 1918. Please remmember that there were also contingents of British, French and american troops on hand.

leo

Thanks for your reply, Leo.
That statement is not mine but by James Young. He is Professor emeritus of history at Edinboro University and chairman of the Division of Administration and Media Studies at Central Pennsylvania Business School. He has contributed to "Doves and Diplomats", to "The Biographical Dictionary of Modern Peace Leaders", and to the forthcoming "Fear Itself: Enemies Real and Imagined in American Culture".
I reported his statement about the results of Italy's intervention simply because those results are usually ignored or, in the best of cases, underestimated.
Apart from that, I seriously doubt that only such a limited portion of the A-H army was employed on the Italian front, especially after the Russian defeat. If this was the case where was the major part ?
It is certainly true that French, British and American forces were emplyed on the Italian front, but they arrived too late to stop the A-H / German offensive of Caporetto, which had already been halted by the Italian army only on the Piave river. Moreover, those allied forces were not as large as someone seems to believe and they did not have a decisive impact on the war's destiny.

[leo]

Until after Brest-Litovsk, the majority of the AH army was on the Eastern Front. Probably two-thirds. Those troops who were moved out of the east in 1915 were German. The offensive at Verdun required the return of these men.
Besides, Russia was down, but not completely out. The Brusilov offensive in 1916 and the Kerensky attempt at one in 1917 demonstrated that.

leo

[AGO]

There was an American pilot of Caproni bombers who was there: Willis.S.Fitch.
<<General Cadorna had pleaded with France and England to reinforce him with guns and troops.They left him to fight alone,even in the autumn of 1917 when the collapse of Russia set Austria free to mass men and artillery against Italy.The calamity of Caporetto followed(....).Yet Italy,still alone but still valiant,rallied her men and held the enemy at the Piave.It was that last-ditch stand ,through the winter of 1917-18 that determined the outcome of the war.>>(from:"Wings In The Night";The Battery Press,Nashville; pgs 33-34 ).

I don't say this is certainly the absolute thruth but it's likely that at least some of these opinions were shared by the other American airmen who fought on the Italian front.
VBR
AGO

Thanks for your message, AGO, I did not know that paragraph and it is most interesting.
Also, we could ask Fritz Weber about this topic.
Are you on line, Fritz ?

[leo]

I might have added that austrian troops were also being used in the invasion of Serbia in 1915 and reserves were being held on the Eastern Front in anticipation of Rumania entering the war.

The Germans pretty much left the Russian Front ro the Austrians. They pulled their troops out for Verdun. If the Austrians so outnumbered the Italians in 1915, why was there no major Austrian offensive at that time? Austria had taken heavy casualties in 1914-1915 on the Russian Front The second half of 1915 was spent trying to replace and retrain those losses. Italy didn't come into the war until the end of May 1915 and there wasn't a great deal of offensive action on the part of the austrians that year. They fought on the defensive from superior defensive positions.

leo

[leo]

I might add that the only reason there were any Austrian troops facing Italy in 1915 is trhat tht Italians declared war on Austria-Hungary. This was a country with which Italy had a formal alliance. Please don't tell me how the Austrian Army was set loose upon poor Italy in 1915.

leo

Thanks for your reply, leo.
Of course, A-H troops did not outnumbered Italian troops. Nobody stated this. What I believe is that if Italy did not enter WW1 on the Entente side, after the Russian defeat A-H would have had the chance to send their troops on the Western front to help the Germans and this could have caused much more difficulties to the allied troops. One more thing to remember is that Italy entered WW1 not so long after the Italo-Turkish war, which was NOT a quick and easy affair by any means.
Prof. James Joung's statements can be discussed, of course, but I believe he is true in thinking that the Italian intervention had a decisive impact on the entire war's destiny, most probably saving the Entente from defeat. The whole war's turning point was the 1917-18 winter, when the Italian army alone stopped the joint A-H and German offensive on the Piave river. Allied troops and materials arrived too late to help stopping that advance.

The formal alliance between Italy and A-H did not state that Italy had to intervene at the A-H side in any case. On the contrary, that treaty stated that if one of the two signing countries WAS ATTACKED by any other, the other one would have been forced to intervene. Of course, that was not the case.......
I may add that Germany tried to bring Italy to their side, without much success.