Italy Fights With The Central Powers In World War 1

Sure, but everything has a price...even because remaining neutral was not that easy and cushing position during the conflict (even if due to being a great power, Italy has more leeway than Norway or Netherlands) and unfortunely for everyone involved Wien don't want to pay it...or at least pay up front, that for the italian goverment is the same thing due to the trust between the two side being basically zero.
Germany did try to twist Austria's arm and get them to give Italy Trent and Trieste (but not Südtirol nor Istria), but it didn't work out. The fact that Austria had been planning to backstab Italy as late as 1908 doesn't help.
 
Germany did try to twist Austria's arm and get them to give Italy Trent and Trieste (but not Südtirol nor Istria), but it didn't work out. The fact that Austria had been planning to backstab Italy as late as 1908 doesn't help.

As said the general situation between Wien and Rome was bad and Conrad and Franz Ferdinand were notorious anti-italian and the series of clash of interest in the last 10 years really made the alliance a dead letter; basically it lasted while Crispi and the rabid anti-French group remained in power.
 
As said the general situation between Wien and Rome was bad and Conrad and Franz Ferdinand were notorious anti-italian and the series of clash of interest in the last 10 years really made the alliance a dead letter; basically it lasted while Crispi and the rabid anti-French group remained in power.

I think that Austria-Hungary could not give away Triest - it has been Austrian core territory since the 14th century and was the most important civilian harbour of the Monarchy (Fiume a second). While the core city had 75% Italians the suburbs were 52% Slovenes and 43 Italians - Germans around 4-5% . The countryside was almost 93% Slovene. Diego de Castro assumed that around 2,5% of Triests inhabitants were supporters of Irredentism during the war.

Actually that is not surprising because in the Monarchy Triest was one of thze most important and thriving cities - while if Triest was Italian it would lose this important place (The tip of the Adria is probably the point in Italy most far away from the "center of light").

AND

Please refrain form Italian bashing - this is undeserved
 
I think that Austria-Hungary could not give away Triest - it has been Austrian core territory since the 14th century and was the most important civilian harbour of the Monarchy (Fiume a second). While the core city had 75% Italians the suburbs were 52% Slovenes and 43 Italians - Germans around 4-5% . The countryside was almost 93% Slovene. Diego de Castro assumed that around 2,5% of Triests inhabitants were supporters of Irredentism during the war.

Actually that is not surprising because in the Monarchy Triest was one of thze most important and thriving cities - while if Triest was Italian it would lose this important place (The tip of the Adria is probably the point in Italy most far away from the "center of light").

AND

Please refrain form Italian bashing - this is undeserved

Rich i think you quoted the wrong message and by the way i agree with you that Triest is out of the question due to his economic importance for A-H (even if some concession like an italian university and the protection of the italian minority will not cripple the empire and cause the it's dissolution...sorry but my biggest problem with the Hapsburg diplomacy is that they had the most sincerly pro-cp goverment in Italy during Crispi career but wasted it due to their unability to throw a bone to their allies once in a while).
Trentino (with an agreement pretty much similar to what proposed during the 1914/15 negotiation) is another matter, it's neither a core territory and don't have much strategic or economic importance (except in a symbolic way) and the border proposed was military favorable to A-H
 
OOPS yes I did ;)

I should have quoted both messages the one after yours and the one after ;)

The Austro Hungarian army - as maybe the Italian and the French in the second war usually get a harsh treatment. I for my person believe you could only blame the upper tier Officers (and the politicans) for the shortcomings of the army.

IMHO the Austro Hungarian staff made the mistake of "trusting" the other nationalities too much, so they put slav units against other slavs - sometimes that led to whole units deserting. OTOH I have read that czech units did fight as brave as any Austrian or Hungarian unit against the Italians. A bit more planning would have made some bitter defeats less crippling ;)
 
OOPS yes I did ;)

I should have quoted both messages the one after yours and the one after ;)

The Austro Hungarian army - as maybe the Italian and the French in the second war usually get a harsh treatment. I for my person believe you could only blame the upper tier Officers (and the politicans) for the shortcomings of the army.

IMHO the Austro Hungarian staff made the mistake of "trusting" the other nationalities too much, so they put slav units against other slavs - sometimes that led to whole units deserting. OTOH I have read that czech units did fight as brave as any Austrian or Hungarian unit against the Italians. A bit more planning would have made some bitter defeats less crippling ;)
Czech or Slovak units fought well on Eastern front as well. Most famous 28th infantry regiment KuK was after previouse heavy fights heavily weakened and it was recommended it need to be pull back for rest. It disn't happened and it was virtually destroyed. Austrian generality then blamed Czech soldiers for its own mistakes. Interestingly after investigetion Regiment was reestablished.

Most famoust fight of Czechoslovak legionaries at Russia - battle of Zborov 1917 was fought against 35th and 75th regiment which had huge numbers if Czechs and they fought well.

But you are rught. Placing Slavic regiments to Italy would make more sense.
 
Top