Biggest contributor view #1: "Losses inflicted to the Axis powers"

Yes, I recall the Germans also having many problems on the Eastern Front as well. Beevor gives an interesting statistic that the German soldiers most susceptible to deaths attributable to a suppressed immune system due to malnutrition were actually the younger ones – usually ages 17 to about 22…

Similar findings by British early in the war on shipwrecked sailors. Alas, I can’t recall a source.

Young blokes in teens to early twenties had worse chance of survival in lifeboats / Carley floats / whatever in Atlantic.

I have a feeling that these findings led to some improvement or change in survival rations to try to increase energy for young blokes.

From memory, a lot of the problem with younger sailors had more to do with them being fussy eaters (!) than the actual calorific content of the food. I think chocolate was added to make up the deficiency in absorbed nutrients.

High energy chocolate was at the back of my mind as one of the solutions when I wrote my last post, but I don’t think it was fussy eating that was the cause of the young blokes dying.

I think it had more to do with them having less resistance to shock and exposure etc, which was a physiological consequence of not having matured fully.

I think the young blokes were dying in the first few hours and days after being sunk where endurance wasn’t the issue but simple resistance which their bodies lacked.

I have a suspicion that blokes around their mid thirties were the median for best survival results.

I think there’s also something about their higher metabolism requiring more calories…

A bit more recognising the problem of young sailors dying, but I still can’t find the source which I think was in some rather more serious study than is referred to in the quote.

Founded in 1941 in the UK, Outward Bound has since spread to 30 schools in 6 continents with nearly 2 million people worldwide having completed an Outward Bound course.

Outward Bound’s outdoor education courses are based on the principles learnt from training young British seamen to survive in the North Atlantic Ocean during the Second World War.
In 1941, the Blue Funnel Line was regularly losing merchant ships to German U-Boat torpedoes. The loss of life among thousands of seamen who went down with their ships was horrific. But there were also hundreds of preventable deaths among survivors in lifeboats.
Surprisingly it was discovered that the survival rate of young sailors in lifeboats was dramatically worse than that
of the older and presumably less fit men. Lawrence Holt, Chairman of the Blue Funnel Line sought help from Kurt Hahn, a noted academic and educationalist and founder of Gordonstoun School. Hahn recognised that the young men had not yet developed an understanding of their own physical, emotional and psychological resources.

The older men were able to draw on their life experiences and inner resources to survive the hardships of the Atlantic in an open lifeboat.

To address this tragic problem Hahn founded the first Outward Bound School to educate the young sailors of the Blue Funnel Line to better handle the hardships they might face.

His program of experiential outdoor education raised the self-confidence of participants who later, when put to the test, were successful in saving their own lives and those of others.

From these unique beginnings, Outward Bound has spread to 30 countries throughout the world. Outward Bound Australia was founded in 1956 and since then over 250,000 Australians aged between 13-75 have completed one of our many courses.

Outward Bound Australia provides the opportunity for all Australians to build self-confidence, self-awareness and resilience, not just physical fitness. It uses the outdoors as the classroom to allow each participant to reach their potential in a safe and managed environment.
http://www.outwardbound.org.au/content/blogcategory/57/95/

Do you mean the Japanese territories that were invaded by the Japanese? The territories where the innocent island inhabitants were butchered and slaughtered by the ruthless Japanese so that Japan could conquer it and call it their territory? Japan was much smaller before the war fyi…

The Italians had the best production of armaments that you could imagine. Italy today is a superb example of the best that there is to offer.The Italian army was much more effective than the Japanese when considering the degree and type of battles the Italians fought in.

Are you trying to be funny?

The Italian campaign against Greece and the Italians’ experience in North Africa demonstrate that, overall, the Italians were very ineffective troops, although they had some effective units.

The Germans had to rescue the Italians in Greece because the Italians were getting beaten by the Greeks in a war the Italians started but couldn’t finish.

As for being effective in North Africa, consider Tobruk where the Italians had excellent defences and plenty of artillery but still failed in quick time.

The Italian troops generally offered little resistance - large numbers surrendered without fighting. The Italian commander, General Petassi Manella surrendered himself after only 12 hours, but he had refused to order the surrender of his forces, which meant that it took a further day to clean up any resistance. Australian casualties were 49 dead and 306 wounded, while capturing 27,000 Italian POWs, 208 guns, 28 tanks, many good quality trucks and a large amount of supplies.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Tobruk

About the only time Italy was effective in a 20th century military campaign was in Abyssinia in 1935-36 when it used modern weapons, mustard gas, and air power against people armed largely with primitive weapons. That was Italy’s only claim to a great military achievement, and it’s not much of an achievement.

As for comparing the Italians to the Japanese, I’d back a brigade, maybe even a battalion, of Japanese troops of the calibre used in the invasion of Malaya against most Italian divisions.

Talked about italy,. is it correct,… one of the reason the Italian not really putting full effort to the war due to ,… so called Freemason things?

Thanks
G

I don’t know anything about this.

Can you give more information?

I read on one forum,… one of the unwritten reason for Italian not to fully committed against Allies due to fact,… that most of high-ranking italian officers are member of a high profile secret society - freemason- whereas,. in the society, the bond and commitment to the member are supposed to be stronger than to the country itself.

Am not familiar indeed with the society, however, according one source, the majority of its member are from US and UK alike, therefor, the italian counterparts are hesitant to commit the full strenght of the Italian force to the war, as they will also has to fight against their fellow society member.

This, one of the least know conspiracy theory on why italian performed, so-called, poorlu during the war.

Cheers
G

I think that’s stretching an idea way too far. You could get the same effect with less effort by pointing out that Italy had only existed as a more or less recognisable state since 1871, and so was less than 70 years old when it joined WW2. How many of the soldiers would truly have felt Italian, and how many of those would be willing to fight to the death in a cause they had little interest in - after all, Mussolini only joined the war to get a “few thousand dead” to enable him to sit at the peace table as a belligerent. He misjudged the situation rather badly, as was usual for him!

My instinct was to doubt it. The Freemasons at that time were rabidly anti-Catholic, and vice versa. I wouldn’t have thought that the Freemasons could get much of a hold in a Catholic country like Italy. But I googled it and it turns out that my instinct was wrong. The Freemasons were well established in Italy before Mussolini and he was violently opposed to them.

Maybe there’s something in what you said.

On February 23, 1923, Mussolini’s Fascist Council decided that Fascists who were Freemasons had to choose between the two. The Grand Orient replied that Fascist Freemasons were at liberty to give up Masonry and that such action would be in accord with the love of country which is taught in the lodge. Many Masons then resigned, and there followed a period of violence against Masons and destruction of their property. Grand Master Torrigiani appealed to Mussolini about this violence, but the response was a declaration in August 1924 that Fascists must disclose the names of Masons who were not in sympathy with the Fascist government. Committees were appointed to collect information about Freemasonry. In 1925 Mussolini gave an interview in which he said that while Masonry in England, America, and Germany was a charitable and philanthropic institution, in Italy Freemasonry was a political organization that was subservient to the Grand Orient of France. Most lodges ceased meeting, but the Italian Grand Orient continued through 1925. Mussolini then charged Italian Freemasons with being agents for France and England and opponents of Italy’s military actions. Persecution increased and prominent Freemasons were assassinated. In January 1926 the government appropriated the Grand Orient building, which had already been looted.
In 1924, General Cappello, one of the most prominent Fascists who had also been Deputy Grand Master of the Grande Orient, Italy’s leading Grand Lodge, gave up membership in Fascism rather than Masonry. Less than a year later, he was charged, in a palpable frame-up, with complicity in an attempt on Mussolini’s life and was sentenced to thirty years in prison. In 1925 Mussolini dissolved all Italian Freemasonry. The Grand Master of the Grande Orient, Comizio Torrigiani, had the courage to stand up for democracy and freedom of thought in an open letter to Mussolini. He was exiled to the Lipari Islands in August 1932 and died soon afterwards. Hundreds of other prominent Italian Masons shared exile there. In 1925-1927 Mussolini’s black-shirts looted the homes of well known Masons in Milan, Florence, and other cities, and murdered at least 100 of them.
Giovanni Preziosi rose to political power with his attacks against Freemasonry, international socialism, and Jews. In 1943 Mussolini was a prisoner of the Allies and the Germans were looking for new leaders to raise support in Italy. Preziosi so impressed Alfred Rosenberg that he was his candidate to head the new government. When Mussolini was freed to continue for a while as head of the government in northern Italy, Preziosi made broadcasts from Germany to Italy blaming the “Judeo-Masonic conspiracy” and demanding a purge of Freemasonry, and sent letters to Mussolini and Hitler warning them of the consequences of failing to cope with this “conspiracy.” In 1944 Mussolini appointed Preziosi Inspector General of Race, with the rank of Ambassador, and he continued to complain that Italy was in the hands of Freemasons acting for the Jews. Preziosi asked Mussolini to appoint him head of what would have been an Italian Gestapo, but the Fascist government of Italy had not acted on this when it was overthrown in 1945. Preziosi committed suicide to avoid being killed by the crowd.
http://www.risingstar.co.za/percecution.html

The Italians were not very effective in North Africa and the Balkans. The soldiers seem to have lacked much enthusiasm for the war.

I dont agree with what you are saying,… if you say the soldiers (the foot soldiers, tank crew or any in field person who sheed their sweat and blood) are to be blame upon their performance,…

On how the foot soldiers perform should be the task of their leaders, if they have leaders that lacked of enthusiasm,… this will be shown by the army they led,…let say Afrika Corp,… Rommel really shows high tenacity on his daily routine and thinking,… this shown on the performance of DAK,… even there were complaints by the soldiers he led.

It is interesting that the USSR’s contribution would be put at only 36.7%, not terribly far above the contibution of the UK and dominions when its military casualties (based on the figures I have seen) are higher than those of the other allies by such an enormous margin.

One thing I’m curious about is why axis powers such as Finland, Romania and Hungary are not counted? I was under the impression that these countries only contributed to the axis cause on the eastern front but they were still allied with Germany.

Perhaps no one has dug out the data? If you have it feel free to adjust the numbers & comment.

Where are you getting this figure from?