Cook
Banned
Just a reminder that it’s often worth attacking a place simply because the opposition has failed to defend it.
Just a reminder that it’s often worth attacking a place simply because the opposition has failed to defend it.
Deleted member 1487
If they deploy centrally near likely landing zones, they won't need much in the way of troops. The terrain in Italy is prime defensive ground as evidenced by WW2. It would be brutal for any Entente advance and unlikely to get far, turning into a manpower sink, while also providing a vulnerable logistic tail for German, Austro-Hungarian, and Italian torpedo boats and subs, not to mention fleets.
let's list potential landing sites
Crimea war suggests that landings are not so diffucult.
or even Garibaldi's landing in Sicily, if you want a nearer comparison.
However, let's list potential landing sites:
such sites should be
1) favourable to a landing operation (beach)
2) reasonably easy to supply: Thyrrenic/ Ionian sea, maybe south Adriatic but certainly not northern adriatic
3) near some target of some value (useless to land in sardinia for example, I'm sorry if I'm hurting sardinian pride)
If I were in Churchill's shoes instead of gallipoli in turkey I would think to
1) Sicily: easy to cut off and to defend, could become an advanced jump base
2) north of naples: in order to menace at once both Naples and rome and force Italy to relocate troops to protect both cities at one
3) south of rome: enormous propaganda value
4) gallipoli
D) : not the gallipoli in Turkey, but the one in Puglia (the heel of the boot): puglia is a peninsula (easy to cut off and defend) weakly garrisoned, and Taranto base could be menaced from there.
any other ideas?
Crimea war suggests that landings are not so diffucult.
or even Garibaldi's landing in Sicily, if you want a nearer comparison.
However, let's list potential landing sites:
such sites should be
1) favourable to a landing operation (beach)
2) reasonably easy to supply: Thyrrenic/ Ionian sea, maybe south Adriatic but certainly not northern adriatic
3) near some target of some value (useless to land in sardinia for example, I'm sorry if I'm hurting sardinian pride)
If I were in Churchill's shoes instead of gallipoli in turkey I would think to
1) Sicily: easy to cut off and to defend, could become an advanced jump base
2) north of naples: in order to menace at once both Naples and rome and force Italy to relocate troops to protect both cities at one
3) south of rome: enormous propaganda value
4) gallipoli
D) : not the gallipoli in Turkey, but the one in Puglia (the heel of the boot): puglia is a peninsula (easy to cut off and defend) weakly garrisoned, and Taranto base could be menaced from there.any other ideas?
butterflies
well italy honnoring entering for the CP in 1914 does create many possible butterfly's.
if i maybe so bold as to trow in some of my favorites.
because the french and british have some fewer troops available initialy and are more thinly stretched than OTL, the germans win the race to the sea.
afer all it was pretty close OTL.
and my most favorite bar none just because its so cool
because the russian admiral gets his orders to late or ignores them.
his forces either attack the swedish fleet or force them out of there harbor.
as an result sweden enters the CP,or at the least declares war on russia.
well italy honnoring entering for the CP in 1914 does create many possible butterfly's.
if i maybe so bold as to trow in some of my favorites.
because the french and british have some fewer troops available initialy and are more thinly stretched than OTL, the germans win the race to the sea.
afer all it was pretty close OTL.
and my most favorite bar none just because its so cool
because the russian admiral gets his orders to late or ignores them.
his forces either attack the swedish fleet or force them out of there harbor.
as an result sweden enters the CP,or at the least declares war on russia.
All this "Napoleon did it" bull is annoying. Napoleon was obviousely a millitary genious, but he waged war in a time when large concentrations of soldiers wearing bright uniforms lined up on an open field and shot at other large concentrations of lined up soldiers wearing bright uniforms. Not to mention they could only fire about 3 shots per minute.
This also brings the case of amphibious landings. If the Entante is going to gamble with a operation as large as Gallipoli, then why dont they land in Mecklenburg or Pommerania? Its just a quick march away from Berlin.
This also brings the case of amphibious landings. If the Entante is going to gamble with a operation as large as Gallipoli, then why dont they land in Mecklenburg or Pommerania? Its just a quick march away from Berlin.
From a military point of view you're right.
but if you were a french general in the early 1900, the fact of taking N steps again would have a HUGE appeal
also how well where those military reality's created by the new technology's realy understood at the time,by the french high command?
It might not be so far fetched to have atleast some of the frech generals believe they could do what nappy did only to find out the hardway that they can't do that anymore.
after all it only takes but one fool to create a dissaster
shillinger, coastal defenses, reserve divisions...Moltke and other senior officers were actually upset during the lead up to the Marne because a corps assigned to guard the North Sea coast had been redeployed, this at a time when the BEF had barely 100,000 men, all committed in France.
mailinutile2, the key question is what would the Italian navy have no choice but to come out and fight for, even if defeat was likely and the consequences of defeat catastrophic.
mailinutile2, the key question is what would the Italian navy have no choice but to come out and fight for, even if defeat was likely and the consequences of defeat catastrophic.
Eurofed
Banned
Crimea war suggests that landings are not so diffucult.
or even Garibaldi's landing in Sicily, if you want a nearer comparison.
However, let's list potential landing sites:
such sites should be
1) favourable to a landing operation (beach)
2) reasonably easy to supply: Thyrrenic/ Ionian sea, maybe south Adriatic but certainly not northern adriatic
3) near some target of some value (useless to land in sardinia for example, I'm sorry if I'm hurting sardinian pride)
If I were in Churchill's shoes instead of gallipoli in turkey I would think to
1) Sicily: easy to cut off and to defend, could become an advanced jump base
2) north of naples: in order to menace at once both Naples and rome and force Italy to relocate troops to protect both cities at one
3) south of rome: enormous propaganda value
4) gallipoli
Very true. Of course, it also pays to remember that Garibaldi's landing in Sicily, and WWII Allied landings at Salerno, Anzio, and Taranto, all occurred under cricumstances rather more favorable than the WWI Entente got, yet came very near to be bloody failures.
Eurofed
Banned
also how well where those military reality's created by the new technology's realy understood at the time,by the french high command?
It might not be so far fetched to have atleast some of the frech generals believe they could do what nappy did only to find out the hardway that they can't do that anymore.
after all it only takes but one fool to create a dissaster
Oh, this is quite true. IOTL, the French already reaped a disaster by trying to follow Nappy's footsteps with their Plan XVII offensive in Alsace-Lorraine. If Italy declares war in August, the French could decide to follow Napoleonic strategies again and ago for a second elan offensive in the Alps. It's going to be another unmitigated disaster.
I agree that's the key question.
so let' put us in the shoes of Thaon de Ravel
The fleet is divided in 3 squadons, based at Taranto, Venice and Genoa-Livorno-Spezia. The main bulk is in Taranto, maybe 1/3 in Genoa-Livorno-Spezia and only scraps in Venice.
If good organization follows the confict declaration (and I doubt very much it would be possible, since I myself did my military period in the Italian navy), maybe the fraction in Genoa-Livorno-Spezia could be pumped up to 1/2 fleet.
Aid from the Austrian fleet based in Trieste is out of the question both for logistical and internal pride reasons.
If the french try an action with the bulk of their med fleet we need to join the Taranto and genoa fleets to have some possibilities somewhere in the south Tyrrenic sea, but once we've done that, our capability of shore defence of, let's say, Sicily and Puglia is gone.
and our main fleet is near french corsica
and Malta is so close to sicily
and whatever the german high sea fleet could scare, UK will always mantain a Med squad.
I'd say that just for those reasons, such a concentration would not be attempted
Even if gods smile on Italy, the outcome of the naval battle is at most a draw.
this would be a tactical victory (we prevented the invasion!) but a strategic defeat (our fleet is weakened and so the french one, but there is also a UK squadron in the med and now we are incapable of defending the whole coastline )
mailinutile2, exactly.
A modest British effort and it's all over for the Italian fleet, even if the Italians can link up the forces based in Venice with the ships around Taranto and around Genoa. If the British(or French) manage to engage the Italians in bite sized portions...
After that the need to defend Italian soil, forget the colonies, will consume much of the Italian Army, not to mention becoming a drain on Germany as Rome realizes the need for more artillery and other weapons. Until the government in Rome falls and Italy leaves the war...
A modest British effort and it's all over for the Italian fleet, even if the Italians can link up the forces based in Venice with the ships around Taranto and around Genoa. If the British(or French) manage to engage the Italians in bite sized portions...
After that the need to defend Italian soil, forget the colonies, will consume much of the Italian Army, not to mention becoming a drain on Germany as Rome realizes the need for more artillery and other weapons. Until the government in Rome falls and Italy leaves the war...
Eurofed
Banned
All of this talk about Entente amphibious operations in Italy merrily ignores the fact that it is still quite likely that the Ottomans (and hence Bulgaria) join the CPs after all, since this is the side where they can reap the greater perspective gains, hurt their hereditary enemy and greatest threat more, and have the greater links with. The recent scuffle about a far-off, low-value, semi-independent possession utterly pales in comparison.
Hence, why are we ignoring the very real possibility that the Entente may well decide to go with the OTL Gallipoli plan, and try to open up a warm sea connection to Russia, in order to supply it, rather than try to knock out Italy ? Entente leaders may easily decide that in early 1915, relieving Russia is more important than relieving France.
The Rogue Russian Admiral PoD is another of my preferred WWI ones, too, but it would be an independent butterfly. Difficult to see how Italy's belligerance could directly cause it. However, if a more threatening CPs due to Italian belligerancy throw the Russian High Command into greater temporary disarray, or make it a bit more gung-ho, so that the Admiral is not called back in time, yes, we may have a TL where both Sweden and Italy join the CPs in 1914. Well, this magnifies Entente problems even more, and makes all the more probable that Turkey and Romania are going to seize the opportunity and gangpile Russia. There is an old thread where we discussed CP Sweden & Italy, although we then assumed that Italy would join in Spring 1915.
Hence, why are we ignoring the very real possibility that the Entente may well decide to go with the OTL Gallipoli plan, and try to open up a warm sea connection to Russia, in order to supply it, rather than try to knock out Italy ? Entente leaders may easily decide that in early 1915, relieving Russia is more important than relieving France.
and my most favorite bar none just because its so cool
because the russian admiral gets his orders to late or ignores them.
his forces either attack the swedish fleet or force them out of there harbor.
as an result sweden enters the CP,or at the least declares war on russia.
The Rogue Russian Admiral PoD is another of my preferred WWI ones, too, but it would be an independent butterfly. Difficult to see how Italy's belligerance could directly cause it. However, if a more threatening CPs due to Italian belligerancy throw the Russian High Command into greater temporary disarray, or make it a bit more gung-ho, so that the Admiral is not called back in time, yes, we may have a TL where both Sweden and Italy join the CPs in 1914. Well, this magnifies Entente problems even more, and makes all the more probable that Turkey and Romania are going to seize the opportunity and gangpile Russia. There is an old thread where we discussed CP Sweden & Italy, although we then assumed that Italy would join in Spring 1915.
I think that with austrian forces not already engaged, Russian would have to mount a stronger south-west army => try to reach some sort of agreement with turkey (benevolent neutrality/open straits in exchange for a piece of caucasus?)
And there is a GERMAN king in greece, after all
Last edited:
well italy in the CP from the get go will give AH more troops te deploy elsewhere, IF they do deploy them against russia, germany might not have to help AH out and could in theory use those troops to cause the russians even more problems,witch in turn could have them be to busy else where to recall the russian admiral in time.
grant you these are alote of what if's.....i just like the PoD so much that i tought i throw it in there
Eurofed
Banned
Hardly. The Russians made no move to win over their hereditary enemies IOTL 1914, when the Ottomans and the Italians were still neutral, the Austrians were not already engaged, and for all St. Petersburg knew, Italy could join the CPs at any moment (the diplomatic switch towards the Entente only happened well into 1915, Italy tried bargaining its entry with the CPs first).
That hardly stopped Turkey from joining the CPs IOTL.
First of all Constantine I king of the Hellenes was from the House of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg, his father king George I of the Hellenes was a Danish prince. However the Danish Royal house was related to some German noble houses.
Secondly OTL the land of origin of a monarch did not matter, nor did family ties (German Emperor Wilhlem II, Russian Emperor Nicholas II and king George V of the United Kingdom were cousins!). This wouldn't change ITTL.
what I meant is that ottoman empire has basically 3 grudges:
against Russia
against Austria
against Greece
if Austria and Greece seems to be pending onthe same front, it is probable that the ottomans would make things simpler for the other (not necessarily joining the war: a benevolent neutrality -open straits- would suffice).