|
|
Post by Emilio Mola on Jun 16, 2021 13:15:55 GMT
Economy was not state run under Nazis. It was completely state-run, in one sense of the word. The state approved all private companies, took after their affairs, provided subsidies, in the manifesto there is talk of providing everyone with a UBI. How much more could you want? Hence you do not know what is state run economy. You also don't seem to know how the Nazi government worked. |
|
|
|
Post by STILETT0 on Jun 16, 2021 13:43:20 GMT
Luigi Cadorna is a very underrated or imo misunderstood general. He is called an incompetent General for failing to invade Austria Hungary, but he shouldn't be called incompetent because out of all the nations that Austria-Hungary invaded, only Italy was holding out. Serbia, Montenegro and Albania were overrun in 1915, Romania lost its capital and most oil fields by 1916 and surrendered in early 1918. Austria-Hungary's rival Russian army ceased to exist by 1917 and surrendered few days after Romania's surrender. But Italy held out against Austria-Hungary in the freezing alpine terrain for 3 years and also launched repeated assault to help its allies by distracting winning five battle near isonzo. Gerd von Rundstedt John Marston @vonmanstein77 , will this count as a historical post? It was not Cardona's leadership that held out in the alps for three years, it was the resilience and expertise of Alpine Fighting in Italian troops. Hotzendorf and Cardona themselves were both bumbling idiots. Both were launching useless attack after attack when it was much more convenient to defend. Cardona did not need to bend the frontline. The Western Front would take care of that, but instead he tried to take some glory for himself, and he screwed up. |
|
|
|
Post by Emilio Mola on Jun 16, 2021 14:08:51 GMT
Luigi Cadorna is a very underrated or imo misunderstood general. He is called an incompetent General for failing to invade Austria Hungary, but he shouldn't be called incompetent because out of all the nations that Austria-Hungary invaded, only Italy was holding out. Serbia, Montenegro and Albania were overrun in 1915, Romania lost its capital and most oil fields by 1916 and surrendered in early 1918. Austria-Hungary's rival Russian army ceased to exist by 1917 and surrendered few days after Romania's surrender. But Italy held out against Austria-Hungary in the freezing alpine terrain for 3 years and also launched repeated assault to help its allies by distracting winning five battle near isonzo. Gerd von Rundstedt John Marston @vonmanstein77 , will this count as a historical post? It was not Cardona's leadership that held out in the alps for three years, it was the resilience and expertise of Alpine Fighting in Italian troops. Hotzendorf and Cardona themselves were both bumbling idiots. Both were launching useless attack after attack when it was much more convenient to defend. Cardona did not need to bend the frontline. The Western Front would take care of that, but instead he tried to take some glory for himself, and he screwed up. How would generals like Joffre will knock Austria out of war without Italian and Russian help? |
|
|
|
Post by 𝘛𝘳𝘰𝘵𝘴𝘬𝘺 on Jun 16, 2021 20:44:38 GMT
Luigi Cadorna is a very underrated or imo misunderstood general. He is called an incompetent General for failing to invade Austria Hungary, but he shouldn't be called incompetent because out of all the nations that Austria-Hungary invaded, only Italy was holding out. Serbia, Montenegro and Albania were overrun in 1915, Romania lost its capital and most oil fields by 1916 and surrendered in early 1918. Austria-Hungary's rival Russian army ceased to exist by 1917 and surrendered few days after Romania's surrender. But Italy held out against Austria-Hungary in the freezing alpine terrain for 3 years and also launched repeated assault to help its allies by distracting winning five battle near isonzo. Gerd von Rundstedt John Marston @vonmanstein77, will this count as a historical post? Have you any source, that can give an indication, that Cardona was not a brutal, egoistic idiot that is considered as one of the worst human and most unsucessfull generals of the great war? indubbiamente le sue strategie eccessivamente rigide e la spietata disciplina imposta alle sue truppe causarono pesanti perdite e influirono sul drammatico crollo ... |
|
|
|
Post by Emilio Mola on Jun 17, 2021 2:45:30 GMT
Luigi Cadorna is a very underrated or imo misunderstood general. He is called an incompetent General for failing to invade Austria Hungary, but he shouldn't be called incompetent because out of all the nations that Austria-Hungary invaded, only Italy was holding out. Serbia, Montenegro and Albania were overrun in 1915, Romania lost its capital and most oil fields by 1916 and surrendered in early 1918. Austria-Hungary's rival Russian army ceased to exist by 1917 and surrendered few days after Romania's surrender. But Italy held out against Austria-Hungary in the freezing alpine terrain for 3 years and also launched repeated assault to help its allies by distracting winning five battle near isonzo. Gerd von Rundstedt John Marston @vonmanstein77, will this count as a historical post? Have you any source, that can give an indication, that Cardona was not a brutal, egoistic idiot that is considered as one of the worst human and most unsucessfull generals of the great war? indubbiamente le sue strategie eccessivamente rigide e la spietata disciplina imposta alle sue truppe causarono pesanti perdite e influirono sul drammatico crollo ... Cadorna was not a good general |
|
|
|
Post by 𝘛𝘳𝘰𝘵𝘴𝘬𝘺 on Jun 17, 2021 3:19:59 GMT
Have you any source, that can give an indication, that Cardona was not a brutal, egoistic idiot that is considered as one of the worst human and most unsucessfull generals of the great war? Cadorna was not a good general I don't want to offend you, but the only thing I know about him (maybe a movie?) was his dispect against his own men combined with absolute sencless attacks. He decimated morale and quantity of the italian ecertito more than any enemy. I always believe history has to be seen from different points of view. I am curious to get your entry to Cardona. |
|
|
|
Post by Emilio Mola on Jun 17, 2021 3:50:21 GMT
Cadorna was not a good general I don't want to offend you, but the only thing I know about him (maybe a movie?) was his dispect against his own men combined with absolute sencless attacks. He decimated morale and quantity of the italian ecertito more than any enemy. I always believe history has to be seen from different points of view. I am curious to get your entry to Cardona. Cadorna was planning war against France when he was asked the government to prepare the army, he thought the government was going to war against French due to being part of Triple Alliance, he has no idea that the government was actually siding with Entente. All his preparations were wasted when Italy declared war on Austria and he has to completely relocate everything in short time. First attack didn't go well. Cadorna was indeed very strict, more strict than anywhere necessary. He put harsh punishment for desertion and men were machine gunned if they refused to charge on fortified Austrian positions, even when underequipped and underclothed. These attacks were conducted in mountainous terrain which decreased chances of success. Out of 11 attacks on Isonzo, 5 saw atleast some amount success, including 6th or 7th(probably) which was about to create a breakthrough when attack was called off. |
|
|
|
Post by 𝘛𝘳𝘰𝘵𝘴𝘬𝘺 on Jun 17, 2021 4:51:41 GMT
I don't want to offend you, but the only thing I know about him (maybe a movie?) was his dispect against his own men combined with absolute sencless attacks. He decimated morale and quantity of the italian ecertito more than any enemy. I always believe history has to be seen from different points of view. I am curious to get your entry to Cardona. Cadorna was planning war against France when he was asked the government to prepare the army, he thought the government was going to war against French due to being part of Triple Alliance, he has no idea that the government was actually siding with Entente. All his preparations were wasted when Italy declared war on Austria and he has to completely relocate everything in short time. First attack didn't go well. Cadorna was indeed very strict, more strict than anywhere necessary. He put harsh punishment for desertion and men were machine gunned if they refused to charge on fortified Austrian positions, even when underequipped and underclothed. These attacks were conducted in mountainous terrain which decreased chances of success. Out of 11 attacks on Isonzo, 5 saw atleast some amount success, including 6th or 7th(probably) which was about to create a breakthrough when attack was called off. Yes, he got the job without preparation, because his precedor died unexpected. About his unhuman treatments we don't have to talk, if I read your post. I would call it war criminal against own troops.About the useless attacks he commanded: If I am not wrong, most of the attacs were only his personal decission. There were 2 or three attacks where a strategical advance was theoretical possible - with more troops - quite sencless to immagine where this troops can come from. He was just waisting material (life of his soilders) for his statistics (Like:I command more attacs than my grand grandpa  ) even the military result was not this important to him. I play EW4 - with one single light infantry without coverage, there is no chance to crack a large fortess (even on a mountain) - I can try it 12 times without success - but thats a game not human lives, but always stupid. |
|
|
|
Post by Emilio Mola on Jun 17, 2021 8:17:34 GMT
Cadorna was planning war against France when he was asked the government to prepare the army, he thought the government was going to war against French due to being part of Triple Alliance, he has no idea that the government was actually siding with Entente. All his preparations were wasted when Italy declared war on Austria and he has to completely relocate everything in short time. First attack didn't go well. Cadorna was indeed very strict, more strict than anywhere necessary. He put harsh punishment for desertion and men were machine gunned if they refused to charge on fortified Austrian positions, even when underequipped and underclothed. These attacks were conducted in mountainous terrain which decreased chances of success. Out of 11 attacks on Isonzo, 5 saw atleast some amount success, including 6th or 7th(probably) which was about to create a breakthrough when attack was called off. Yes, he got the job without preparation, because his precedor died unexpected. About his unhuman treatments we don't have to talk, if I read your post. I would call it war criminal against own troops.About the useless attacks he commanded: If I am not wrong, most of the attacs were only his personal decission. There were 2 or three attacks where a strategical advance was theoretical possible - with more troops - quite sencless to immagine where this troops can come from. He was just waisting material (life of his soilders) for his statistics (Like:I command more attacs than my grand grandpa ) even the military result was not this important to him. I play EW4 - with one single light infantry without coverage, there is no chance to crack a large fortess (even on a mountain) - I can try it 12 times without success - but thats a game not human lives, but always stupid. Germans and Austrians were banging the Russians, continous attack was needed by Italians to relieve the pressure. One of the reasons for huge Russian success during Brusilov offensive was that Austrians were focused on Italian front. Also, attacks were backed by Artillery, so it was not only Infantry assault. |
|
|
|
Post by John Marston on Jun 17, 2021 9:31:53 GMT
Emilio Mola, how do you think Triple Alliance could win WW1?
|
|
|
|
Post by Emilio Mola on Jun 17, 2021 9:50:39 GMT
Emilio Mola, how do you think Triple Alliance could win WW1? If it includes Italy then why not |
|
|
|
Post by John Marston on Jun 17, 2021 9:56:23 GMT
Emilio Mola , how do you think Triple Alliance could win WW1? If it includes Italy then why not I mean, how could they win? What could they do differently? |
|
|
|
Post by Emilio Mola on Jun 17, 2021 9:57:47 GMT
If it includes Italy then why not I mean, how could they win? What could they do differently? France will have to face another Front and supporting operations in Balkans will be far more difficult for Entente. Austria will face one less front allowing them to help Germany. |
|
|
|
Post by John Marston on Jun 17, 2021 9:59:30 GMT
I mean, how could they win? What could they do differently? France will have to face another Front and supporting operations in Balkans will be far more difficult for Entente. Who would have satisfied as the second front for France? |
|
|
|
Post by Emilio Mola on Jun 17, 2021 10:00:10 GMT
France will have to face another Front and supporting operations in Balkans will be far more difficult for Entente. Who would have satisfied as the second front for France? Italy |
|
) even the military result was not this important to him.
