Italian Infantry Weapons

World War II Italian Military
#41

Well seeing as my Great-Uncle made the comment after having rounded up a fair few Italians in the Western Desert, I’d say it was a fair comment for him to make.

Just for your information, I do happen to know what went on in the war… Thirty years reading and listening to veterans helps, though I will never know it all. My family is Italian by origin. As was my Great-Uncle who served in the British Army in the Western Desert, and as was his father who served in the British Army in Mespotamia.

Its called tongue in cheek humour, and if you cant take it, then you really need to take a rest.

As Churchill commented…

We have never been your foes till now. In the last war against the barbarous Huns we were your comrades. For fifteen years after that war, we were your friends. Although the institutions which you adopted after that war were not akin to ours and diverged, as we think, from the sovereign impulses which had commanded the unity of Italy, we could still walk together in peace and good-will. Many thousands of your people dwelt with ours in England; many of our people dwelt with you in Italy.

Or his other comment on Italy siding with Germany in WW2…

“It’s only fair. We had to have them in the last war.”

As for the comments about the Irish, I wouldnt comment on their martial ability unless you know of it.

Im not Irish by the way, but English of Italian descent.

#42

shake hands lads?

#43

Yes, of course, Iron Yeoman, my wise friend,
nothing of personal and nothing offensive… (i hope so…). The problem with the Italian, is that probably we don’t understand that “tongue in cheek humour”… But i fell myself in good company if someone says

As a mode, I wish people would refrain from making such cliche, boring comment.
But we don’t have to worry about it… Like i told yesterday, we can discuss about the Duce and his party, the Government or about that chicken-s**t of the King, but, please honour to the poor soldiers…
And like our good friend Iron Yeoman suggests, lets shake our hands! Thank for your time, Nickdfresh. Best regards to all of you.

#44

You didn’t attribute your comment to anyone. What you posted was all your own work. So defend your own comment, not something your great uncle allegedly said seventy or so years ago as the originator of the well worn comment about Italian rifles for sale.

Or, preferably, don’t dig your hole deeper but just acknowledge, publicly or privately, that you made an unwise comment to an unsympathetic audience.

It wasn’t apparent from your comment “Italian Rifles for sale… Only dropped once!” that you have any understanding of the reasons for the unwillingness of many Italian soldiers in North Africa to fight to the death.

Not from my reading of your clear and concise comment.

It was just a smartarse and, as Nick said, cliched comment which unfairly stereotyped and disparaged Italian soldiers. (Refer my next post for further info.)

Nick doesn’t need to take a rest, although he’s long overdue for one as a mod who keeps this board going for no pay and no thanks from members like you who get unduly upset about well-deserved rebukes from mods.

You would be better advised to step back from your comment and from trying to defend it to no purpose, and just accept that you made a mistake and apologise for it. Or, if you can’t bring yourself to apologise, just let it go without further comment.

#45

Like all armies, the fighting qualities of Italian soldiers in WWII depended upon the unit.

Many Italians had the wisdom to see that it was pointless fighting in North Africa for a cause they didn’t believe in and wisely surrendered in droves. This was a gift to the Allied propaganda machine, and to English-speaking peoples with contemptuous attitudes towards Southern Europeans in general and Italians in particular. The impression created by those long columns of generally relieved Italian prisoners gave rise to comments about Italian rifles for sale, never used, dropped only once; Italian tanks having three forward gears and twelve reverse gears; and Italian officers with silver cutlery and lace table cloths and collections of fine wine but disinclined to fight, etc.

On the other side of the ledger, I’ve read memoirs by Australian troops who fought Italian units which fought hard. Their view was that the Italian units which fought hard were bloody hard fighters and at least as good as the Germans or anyone else.

What is usually ignored in flippant comments about Italian soldiers’ courage, or alleged lack of it, is that Italian partisans fought a more dangerous and more courageous war against the Germans which put not only the fighters but their wider families and villagers at risk, with vastly less training, support and resources in every respect than Italian military units had in North Africa. The British, Americans, Canadians, and Australians were never tested in that regard and, while one hopes they would have done as well, the absence of that experience does not qualify them to comment adversely upon the courage of Italian fighting men and, in the partisan context, women and children who all bore the brutal risks of fighting the Germans.

I’ve said some of the above elsewhere in other forgotten threads, as I’ve also said that no nation or people has a monopoly on cowardice or courage.

I’ve also remarked in other threads upon the Italian POWs captured in North Africa who were sent to Australia and rented out as upmarket slave labour to farmers and others, and how they made such a good impression as workers and persons that many of their bosses sponsored them as migrants after the war ended. It also said something about the way they were treated as POWs that those Italians wanted to come back as migrants.

Many of those Italian post-war migrants to Australia probably dropped their rifles only once. They, many now dead and most of the survivors probably not too far away from death, went on to make a major contribution to Australia since WWII. If dropping their rifles only once was what allowed that to happen, I’m glad it did.

#46

Rising Sun*,
you express in the best possible way, something that i haven’t been able to write, 'cause english isn’t my mother language and sometimes doesn’t allow me to express myself in the way i would do…

I’ve said some of the above elsewhere in other forgotten threads, as i’ve also said that no nation or people has a monopoly of cowardice or courage.

If i’m allowed to do it, i would like to close this debate, remainding the last fallen soldier of the Italian Army. Last thursday, January 18th, 2011, the Corporal Luca Sanna, of the 8° Alpini Regiment, were killed in Afghanistan. Yesterday, in Rome, has taken place his Funeral Rites. A kind thought to his family and honour and respect at his memento.

Thank to all of you that express their opinion about this topic: Iron Yeoman, fredl109, The Fiendish Red Baron and, of course, Nickdfresh and Rising Sun*.

Best regards to all of you.

#47

Of course you’re allowed to do it.

I am sure that all members acknowledge Corporal Sanna’s service and sacrifice, and share your kind thoughts to his family and respect at his memento.

Debate closed.

And that’s a mod ruling.

#48

Requaescat In Pace, Caporale Luca Sanna.
In Memoriam Honore.

“They shall not grow old as we who are left grow old,
Age shall not weary them, nor the years contemn,
At the going down of the sun, we will remember them,
We WILL Remember Them.”

– Laurance Binyan.–

(The above “Binyan’s Lines” are said aloud every April 25th, ANZAC Day, the day upon which New Zealanders and Australians Remember the dead Armed Forces personel who have fought in various wars.)

With Respect, Uyraell.

#49

I look at it this way.

The Italians in WW1 were NOT known as poor fighters, right? So why in WW2 did they perform so poorly? Many Italians did not believe in “El Duce’s” and did not want the war (and I mean many, not just a few on college campuses!) The will to fight for what you think is a good cause can make you strong, and if it is not there it can make you weak.

Look at it this way, American has been known to have hard fighters but after Vietnam the world kind of wondered if we were just a bunch of pot heads (if you knew of the demoralization in ’73 the soldiers had in Vietnam you would think the whole American military was pathetic.) But that view has changed cause we have been in wars after that and shown we still had what it takes.

Italy has not been in another war since WW2, which considering the destruction they received I don’t blame them, and thus have not had a way to prove themselves. France, unfortunately, did have one in Indochina but again they have not had chances to redeem themselves since.

Deaf

#50

Sorry but how can you said that they perform so poorly? We didn’t have modern equipment in the numbers needed, logistic lines or great generals. We fight at best as we can, both German and British officiers agree with this and several of them said that we fight well, but we cannot do miracles.
Many Italians believe in “Il Duce” (El Duce is in Spanish language), after all he keeps the power for several years before WWII. You can said that Italian population make this mistake, but you cannot said that we don’t fight well.

No european country want to enter at war because after destruction of WWI and WWII we learn what modern war can do on civil population. Italy cannot legally declare aggressive war and also Germany, these States can declare only defensive war against aggresion of their national soil. I bet that also France, UK, Netherland have the same law.

#51

Deaf Smith forgiveness, but you’re wrong about the Italians, and especially on the relationship they had with the Duce, he was considered the "little father"and the Italian people followed him in all his decisions, although there were opponents, those remains marginal. The takeover of Mussolini had done legally and without undue overflow and that his troops remained in the memory of the people, the more he had begun a major program to modernize his country, both in terms construction (roads, highways, cities) that on an intellectual level, with easier access to school for all levels of society (remember that the Italian company at this time is heavily agricultural), only a few manufacturers and general attempt to dissuade Mussolini to engage in war because they knew the weaknesses of the armaments industry.
Regards Fred

#52

As I think I’ve mentioned elsewhere - perhaps earlier in this same thread, I’m too lazy to go looking – the Italian soldier was poorly paid (IIRC, the equivalent of $0.17 a day, versus what is perhaps the other extreme, the US wage of almost $2.00 a day). The rank and file were what was left over after the Navy and air force got to pick what they viewed as the best and the brightest (they also paid more, giving men more motivation to join those arms). They were, with the exception of some choice infantry units, viewed as the dregs of society, and respected by their command structure accordingly. While I don’t recall any specific discussion of it, I suspect the same general rule applied to the officer corps as well: the “best and brightest” were drawn into the prestigious naval/air arms, with the remainder being left for the army. Must have been fun, huh, being asked to fight and die for a country that held you and your comrades in such high regard?

#53

Fred,

He did it legally? But what about the squadristi violence? And what about the MVSN detachments beat up the opposition and prevented opposition newspapers from publishing news of such? Basically Mussolini did to Italy with the MVSN what Hitler did with his brownshirts.

Yes Le Duce did get the trains to run on time, as Hitler got the Autobahn to work. But neither was universally loved and after the Italo-Ethiopian War, the invasion of Albania followed by the Italian invasion of Greece and the Italian invasion of British Somaliland (which was one of the only successful Italian campaigns of World War II accomplished without German support) gave a lot of Italians doubts.

Enough doubts to start the Italian resistance movement and in ’43 over 50,000 Italians fought on the allies side in the Italian Co-Belligerent Army. Hitler never had to worry about a German armed resistance movement like Mussolini did (yes there was a White Rose movement but not armed resistance fighters in the hills.) And yes there were assassination attempts on Mussolini just as there were on Hitler (and with the same results.)

Does that mean he was hated by a majority of his people? No. But he sure was not liked by a lot of ‘em.

Deaf

#54

Yes he did. When Fascisti march on Roma (Rome), the Italian King instead to order to Army or Carabinieri to arrest them gives to Mussolini the official role of Prime Minister. This is a legal act.

Opposition is still capable to publish his newspapers, even with some problems. The violence of Camicie Nere is an historical fact, but it’s only a minor reason for Mussolini success. Mussolini knows exactly how to use propaganda to control people. While Camicie Nere fought against comunist and labour union, this type of action is capable to get consent from a small fraction of Italians, the middle class that fears wage from low social classes. The majority of population, workers or farmers, don’t like Mussolini because he uses violence against them but for his charisma, charisma artificially constructed by propaganda. Mussolini doesn’t need something like KristallNacth.
Ah, another thing: a big difference of Camicie Nere from SA with SS is the racist violence. In Camicie Nere you can find Hebrews and even some high exponent of Fascist Party is Hebrew.
There is one reason because Hitler considers at the start Mussolini as his teacher and Allies want Mussolini alive: he demonstrates that in modern era you can construct consent with artificial methods using new technologies like radio. Think about Hitler and Mussolini: Mussolini in five years is capable to become Prime Minister of Italy with his March on Roma; Hitler in six years fails with Munchen Putch to overthrow the govern of one of the Lander that form Germany. Hitler imitates a lot of ideas from Mussolini but Hitler surpasses his teacher: he is able to create a huge wave of fanatism. Even when Germany is in ruins, there is clear evidences that war will end with total defeat Germans still want to die for their Fuhrer.

Sorry if I correct you again, but Le Duce is in French. In Italian you said Il Duce.
What are the sources of this claims? Becuase Italians sources said a thing totally different and even my grandparents that live these events said the same. Remember that Mussolini keeps the power for 21 years.

Sorry for my words, but I think that you don’t know too much about us.
Until 1943, Mussolini is still the trustful leader. But in 1943 what happens:

  • Italians open their eyes, Mussolini promises that nobody can enter on Itay soil while Allies are able to land in Sicily easily, it’s a fact that breaks the suspension of credibility that Mussolini created in order to deny any fails of government;
  • Italians know in their souls that Mussolini is not a good person and did orrible things, “Legge Fascistissime” Italian racial laws for example, but at the same time they know that they are accomplices of things that Mussolini did, so it easier for Italians to simply say “we are forced to do this things, we always hate/don’t love Mussolini and his violent Party, then we fight him now!” than admit that they support him;
  • Nazi soldiers in Italy acts from the first day after 1943 Italian armistice as invasors, not like ally (they steal important artworks, they force Italian workers to work for Germany, etc.), they enter in Italy without permission, they are foe and Fascista Party is seen by majority of Italians like traitors that permit that Nazi soldiers enter in Italy;
#55

Burp thank you for this beautiful presentation is exactly what I meant in my post above, but my English is limited and I translated with google is necessarily more limited. It is interesting that many people make the comparison between Hitler and Mussolini and I thank you for your contribution to make to correct this error.
Regards Fred.

#56

It’s not so. Nobody thought that an army would be able of winning a war so far from mothercountry e in so vaste and difficoult spaces in only 7 months. Ethiopians had too some modern weapons, sold by British, with British instructors and sold… by Germans too and other countries. Ethiopians had no heavy anti-aircraft artillery and no air force. But they were not so bad in individual armament. British were defeated in Afghanistan… in similar conditions…

#57

I totally agree. Simply, in WWII Italy was absolutely not fit for such a conflict. Old weapons and in small numbers. The declaration of war was a just a cinic political bet: Germany looks like to be the winner, and the war very brief. Till to june 1940 Mussolini hoped in a French “new Marna” to avoid the conflict. For 20 years Germany, Britain and France have prepared the conflict. The fascist Italy instead built schools, motorways, popular houses, hospitals, new lands for agricolture, new towns in Italy and Colonies, new social laws. Italy just modernized herself, and spent all her little military balance in two expensive wars like Ethiopia and Spain. In 1940, simply, everything, in economics and resources had already be given. Fascism talked about war and made peace. Only Italy tryed to stop Germany in 1934, nor British, nor France.
Last but not least… what Churchill promised to Mussolini in the famous secret letters? We’ll never know. Vae victis.

Just a thing: the Carcano model 91, ordinance italian infantry rifle, killed Kennedy by Lee Oswalds.

#58

You’re wrong. In Italy there was a “not declared” civil war amongst 3 factions: social-communists, monarchy-reactionary-liberists and fascists. Surely only communists or fascists would win.
The monarchy preferred to make an arrangement with Mussolini, rather than to be swept away by the communists. Mussolini preferred an arrangement to avoid the risk of a total war and so he shared the power with the king. Reactionary forces tried to pull him down some years later in 1924, just when Mussolini wanted to open to CGIL sindicate and to the moderate socialist party, and just when the Fascism had reestablished the order. The result was, instead, the dictatorship.
The fascists had over 3000 deads in 1919-24!!! And the episodes of violence against the fascist were countless. It’s absolutely false that the fascists were the “bad guys” and the other poor victims like dumbs. But after 1945, at least in Italy but not only, history books are written by communists… What you wrote is the result of an ideological historiography written by the winners of the second civil war (this time declared) in 1943-45.
Please, have a look to my site, we talk about history and politics of fascism:

http://ilcovo.mastertopforum.net/index.php

#59

Hello to all, to answer you, I would say this, of course there were abuses committed by supporters of Mussolini, but compare to that of Hitler’s brownshirts is to compare day and night. I would say without wanting to offend anyone it is rather “soft” view of Mussolini was to take power in the strictest legality, political end he knew that if it was tainted many lives, it would be very hard to make the national unity, did not hurt my words because I am not a fascist and I do not the apology any death is one death too, but we must recognize Mussolini it was on this side the very successful, and compare it to Hitler does not make sense. I agree with what I said DVX and I know his site is very well, you know our cons, go take a look, he is French, but it should interest you.
There’s just one thing or I do not agree with DVX is that this is not Lee Harvey Oswald killed Kennedy, he was part of the group but it is not he who killed, too bad shot for that.
Regards Fred

http://italie1935-45.forumactif.net/

#60

Really interesting your site fredl109! Why an interest in Italian things? Various international websites study italian military history, and that makes me very corious of why and very happy, too. Of course, mod. 91 and Lee Oswald “officially” killed Kennedy, I meant ;-D