- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Just got done reading Rick Atkinson's book about WWII in both Sicily and Italy...
Posted on 11/8/25 at 6:33 am
Posted on 11/8/25 at 6:33 am
Finished reading it a few days ago and have come to the conclusion that the war in Italy was a complete and total waste of time, a vanity product of the British - particularly Winston Churchill - that was run by politicians and not by the military. I think Mark Clark gets an undeserved bad reputation though I can understand why he is criticized for his anti-British paranoia and his blatant refusal to follow orders during the battle that led to the capture of Rome.
While some historians have gone on to justify our campaign in Italy, saying that it diverted resources away from western Europe and the Eastern Front, I feel like they were ultimately negligible. Germany had but 22 divisions facing off against us in Italy, compared to the 60+ that remained in France and the low countries and the 130+ that remained on the Eastern Front. The fighting in Italy became a slog that was very similar to the fighting on the Western Front in World War I. The Fifth and Eighth armies could have been utilized elsewhere.
While some historians have gone on to justify our campaign in Italy, saying that it diverted resources away from western Europe and the Eastern Front, I feel like they were ultimately negligible. Germany had but 22 divisions facing off against us in Italy, compared to the 60+ that remained in France and the low countries and the 130+ that remained on the Eastern Front. The fighting in Italy became a slog that was very similar to the fighting on the Western Front in World War I. The Fifth and Eighth armies could have been utilized elsewhere.
Posted on 11/8/25 at 6:38 am to RollTide1987
What was the name of the book?
Posted on 11/8/25 at 6:39 am to choppadocta
quote:
What was the name of the book?
The Day of Battle: The War in Sicily and Italy, 1943-1944.
Posted on 11/8/25 at 6:43 am to RollTide1987
Okay that's part of his trilogy. I read that a while back it was okay. I think he overused the term "coalc scuttle helmet" while describing the German headwear a few too many times. I thought maybe this was a new book.
Posted on 11/8/25 at 6:48 am to RollTide1987
quote:
Finished reading it a few days ago and have come to the conclusion that the war in Italy was a complete and total waste of time, a vanity product of the British
Easy thing to say in 2025. Not so much so when your making the decision in 1944 and you are planning D-Day.
Since we are doing that, why did we even invade Europe? The Soviets were going to win it.
This post was edited on 11/8/25 at 6:51 am
Posted on 11/8/25 at 6:53 am to Boss13
quote:
why did we even invade Europe? The Soviets were going to win it.
You wanted to let the Soviets control all of Europe?
Posted on 11/8/25 at 6:53 am to Boss13
quote:
Easy thing to say in 2025.
It was also what the U.S. high command was saying in 1943 when the British began pushing for an invasion of mainland Italy. Guys like Marshall and King always were of the mind that Sicily and Italy were sideshows and that the main effort should have been focused on France. However, the British were much too timid and it took us compromising with them on Italy for them to agree to a cross channel invasion of France in 1944.
Posted on 11/8/25 at 7:27 am to RollTide1987
Read Allies at War. You may change your mind.
Posted on 11/8/25 at 7:38 am to RollTide1987
Uh, you do realize after the invasion of Sicily. The Italian king ousted Mussolini and Italy switched sides? Then the Germans had to invade and occupy Italy to set up their own puppet government, tying up manpower and resources, that could’ve been used in France or the eastern front.
Posted on 11/8/25 at 7:44 am to Boss13
quote:
Easy thing to say in 2025. Not so much so when your making the decision in 1944 and you are planning D-Day.
George Marshall thought it was a waste of time in '43. Churchill had one aim, and one aim only: the preservation of the British Empire. He was willing to sacrifice every American life if that's what it took. All of the British possessions in the Med and Middle East were why he kept pushing the "soft underbelly" strategy. He opposed the Normandy invasion. It basically took George C. Marshall threatening to break the alliance to get him to acquiesce.
Basically, Churchill was a strategic and operational buffoon.
Posted on 11/8/25 at 7:50 am to jbgleason
quote:
You wanted to let the Soviets control all of Europe?
That’s not what he’s saying.
He’s attempting to tell you that the outcome of the war would be much different without Germany divided on fronts
Posted on 11/8/25 at 8:10 am to RollTide1987
quote:
Mark Clark
Former president of the Citadel. The student union is named after him.
Posted on 11/8/25 at 8:37 am to willymeaux
quote:
Then the Germans had to invade and occupy Italy to set up their own puppet government, tying up manpower and resources, that could’ve been used in France or the eastern front.
It tied up 22 divisions. Not many in the grand scheme of things.
Posted on 11/8/25 at 9:02 am to RollTide1987
Netflix has a decent miniseries called The Liberator that follows an American unit through Italy, it’s animated, but it’s not bad.
Posted on 11/8/25 at 9:14 am to RollTide1987
A common theme in his trilogy that I wasn’t fully aware of was just the insane amount of infighting and politicking among the Allied high command. Seems like a lot of lives could’ve been saved and the war in Europe won more efficiently if American and British generals could’ve gotten on the same page, which perhaps in hindsight was never going to happen.
Posted on 11/8/25 at 9:54 am to RollTide1987
Another thing to consider is, by taking Italy the 15th AF was able to establish a series of bases around Foggia in SE Italy and bring the oil refineries at Ploesti into bomber range as well as all of eastern Europe plus, Austria and Southern Germany. The Luftwaffe had to devote significant air assets to defend these targets giving the 8th AF some much needed relief.
Then, when the invasion of southern France kicked off the Germans were unable to reinforce troops in France.
All in all, i think it was worth it.
Then, when the invasion of southern France kicked off the Germans were unable to reinforce troops in France.
All in all, i think it was worth it.
Posted on 11/8/25 at 10:09 am to RollTide1987
It's the middle book in a trilogy he has written. The first is about North Africa, and the third is the war in western Europe.
Knox Co TN library has all three.
Knox Co TN library has all three.
Posted on 11/8/25 at 10:15 am to RollTide1987
I'm not sure that it was a "waste" as you say, but, it is clear to me that the Med Front was the only European Front that the Axis "Won" in that they did induce a bit of a Stalemate.
The Eastern and Western Fronts were clear Allied "Wins".
The Eastern and Western Fronts were clear Allied "Wins".
Posted on 11/8/25 at 11:13 am to bigpapamac
quote:
A common theme in his trilogy that I wasn’t fully aware of was just the insane amount of infighting and politicking among the Allied high command. Seems like a lot of lives could’ve been saved and the war in Europe won more efficiently if American and British generals could’ve gotten on the same page, which perhaps in hindsight was never going to happen.
I am currently reading Stephen Ambrose's "D-Day", which details much of the conflict among the British and American commanders and political leaders and the amount of arm-twisting that Eisenhower had to engage in to achieve a substantial agreement on plans and who would be in command of what.
Popular
Back to top

16





