Italy stays with Central Powers 1914

[Abdul Hadi Pasha]

How much of a force would Italy's army have been in this ATL ? On the whole OTL they were very poorly regarded by both the Central Powers and Allies, due to their generally being poorly equipped, undertrained, and ineptly led (esp for the Alpine campaigns against the Austro-Hungarians on the Isonzo Front) resulting in the shattering 1917 defeat at Caporetto, from which Italy was only able to recover with significant British and French (plus to a lesser extent American- including with Ernest Hemingway's experience as an ambulance driver) manpower and materiel. Could this generally-regarded inferior army have made much of a difference on the CPs' side ?

I think that's an overstatement; Italy's commanders just overestimated the capabilities of their army, as did most of the other powers.

For instance, the Ottomans, who had many of the same problems, did not fare well in huge offensives with inadequate planning, as in the Caucasus, but did extremely well in operations where attention was paid to plannig, Ottoman capabilities, and cooperation, as at Gallipoli, Kut, Rumania, and Galicia.

Italy's contribution would have been enormous if only due to the release of Austrian and German troops for other uses, and we can't understimate the impact of adding the Italian fleet to the CP mix. That leaves 6 dreadnoughts and a BC at the beginning of the war plus 3 more on the way, and a large number of pre-Dreadnought battleships and lots and lost of cruisers and other smaller warships. Against that there are 3 French Dreadnoughts. The British would be hard pressed to send any help, as diversion of any dreadnoughts would threaten their contol of the North Sea. This is a very difficult problem.

 

[Grey Wolf]

btw John did you get the message about being in Sargons Stronghold chatroom right now ?

Grey Wolf

I think that's an overstatement; Italy's commanders just overestimated the capabilities of their army, as did most of the other powers.

For instance, the Ottomans, who had many of the same problems, did not fare well in huge offensives with inadequate planning, as in the Caucasus, but did extremely well in operations where attention was paid to plannig, Ottoman capabilities, and cooperation, as at Gallipoli, Kut, Rumania, and Galicia.

Italy's contribution would have been enormous if only due to the release of Austrian and German troops for other uses, and we can't understimate the impact of adding the Italian fleet to the CP mix. That leaves 6 dreadnoughts and a BC at the beginning of the war plus 3 more on the way, and a large number of pre-Dreadnought battleships and lots and lost of cruisers and other smaller warships. Against that there are 3 French Dreadnoughts. The British would be hard pressed to send any help, as diversion of any dreadnoughts would threaten their contol of the North Sea. This is a very difficult problem.

 

[Tom_B]

Sweden

Grey Wolf,

"1. Sweden could declare for Germany. The add-on effect of this could bring Italy onside for the lands which Germany bullied Austria into offering to Italy"


Was ever a possibility, or did you offer this just because it sounds interesting? It was my understanding that the tradition of Swedish aloof "we're better than you" neutrality had already developed by WW1.

Sweden was also unhappy about the Aland Islands. There was a definite proCP tilt to their neutrality in the early part of the war. The head of the Russian Baltic Fleet, Admiral Essen thought they would likely enter the war against Russia and planned a confrontation with the Swedish Navy ordering them to move and stay at a remote base. OR ELSE. Essen was just barely stopped from doing this by the Russian Army commander he reported to.

The latter RN submarine offensive in the Baltic designed to intterupt the flow of iron ore to Germany didn't make them happy either though my impression is that the committed neutralists in Sweden got stronger as the war progressed.
Interestingly the Swedes very quickly went to convoying as a counter to the RN subs.