07-05-2020, 05:03 PM
I think that the reply is quite obvious, and depends on the society that was behind Roman soldiers, and the society that was behind Italy in IIWW. Because I think that all similar dicussions start from the IIWW. The society behind Rome was a really innovative one, that generated a lot of interesting leaders, and a society in which the attention to the public interest was extremely high. This society has been able for a long time to support its army.
Something radically different in the IIWW. Italian society in that period has been able to produce few quality leaders, at all levels. The dictatorship favored unique thinking and punished those who thought differently, with the result of promoting mediocre figures, but good at saying yes. Aside from official proclamations, the real interest in the military was low, and the armies were not in good status.
One of the most interesting point is the discussion in the navy concerning the building of aircraft carriers. Mussolini partecipated in a discussion in which navy staff state rejected the adoption of aircraft carriers, because they were considered useless in the Mediterranean theater. The war proved otherwise, but the damage was now done.
For the army? a similar situation. Germany was investing in war of movement. In Italy? Old guard generals were still thinking to the mule and dolabra (a kind of pickaxe).
So, Italian Army in the second world war... was simply not ready for it. As its society was not ready for it. Apart this, we should add that Italy had not the vast resources of other countries.
Following this situation, the result is obvious. Instead, it is interesting to see the self-sacrifice of many Italian soldiers who were second to none. I could think to Enrico Frattini's Folgore men, or to the men of the Ariete. Or, to the men of the X MAS that alone sank many British ships with extreme courage.
I hope this answer will give you the desire to read more about it.
Something radically different in the IIWW. Italian society in that period has been able to produce few quality leaders, at all levels. The dictatorship favored unique thinking and punished those who thought differently, with the result of promoting mediocre figures, but good at saying yes. Aside from official proclamations, the real interest in the military was low, and the armies were not in good status.
One of the most interesting point is the discussion in the navy concerning the building of aircraft carriers. Mussolini partecipated in a discussion in which navy staff state rejected the adoption of aircraft carriers, because they were considered useless in the Mediterranean theater. The war proved otherwise, but the damage was now done.
For the army? a similar situation. Germany was investing in war of movement. In Italy? Old guard generals were still thinking to the mule and dolabra (a kind of pickaxe).
So, Italian Army in the second world war... was simply not ready for it. As its society was not ready for it. Apart this, we should add that Italy had not the vast resources of other countries.
Following this situation, the result is obvious. Instead, it is interesting to see the self-sacrifice of many Italian soldiers who were second to none. I could think to Enrico Frattini's Folgore men, or to the men of the Ariete. Or, to the men of the X MAS that alone sank many British ships with extreme courage.
I hope this answer will give you the desire to read more about it.
