Fight for Sicily, WW2

[John A]

Good video on some brave Italians
https://youtu.be/k71newAIQkw

[blackcat]

My dad and his four brothers fought in that campaign.

[LowRyter]

Along the same subject, don't know if you watched the first couple of episodes of "Fargo"?    It's about the KC Italian Mafia and one of family members was in Italy before and during WWII.    Seems the fellow killed Commies for Il Duce but keep's his teeth in a tin box after the war turned for the Americans.

Of course Fargo is fiction and the war in Italy was brutal particularly for the Oklahomans in the 45th.  But it is an interesting aside in the story.

[john fish]

My dad and his four brothers fought in that campaign.

That's interesting.  With my extreme kraut last name, my dad was sent to the pacific theater.  Same with my uncle who's last name was Stoecklein.  My uncle McIntyre, however, was sent to Europe.  I wondered if ethnicity played a part in deployment? 

Anyway, I recently finished a book on Patton, Montgomery, and Rommel.  Written by a Limey but it was not particularly complimentary to Monty-- the book maintains that Monty's actions deliberately contributed to American losses in Sicily.

[Guzzistajohn]

My dad (son of German immigrants) fought at Mount La De Fensa and Anzio Italy with the First Special Service Force (AKA Devils Brigade) I had the honor of attending a Congressional Medal Ceremony in Washington for the FSSF.

[john fish]

Well, that kills my theory then.   

[Guzzistajohn]

Well, that kills my theory then.   

Wasn’t trying to “rain on your parade” 😀 he volunteered, he got a bump in pay for jumping out of airplanes 👍 should have been named Schurksteen not Schurke 😀

[Lannis]

That's interesting.  With my extreme kraut last name, my dad was sent to the pacific theater.  Same with my uncle who's last name was Stoecklein.  My uncle McIntyre, however, was sent to Europe.  I wondered if ethnicity played a part in deployment? 

I strongly suspect that no one was paying that much individual attention to people's names versus which theater they were sent to.   Once someone was trained and ready to be deployed, they were deployed in batches of tens of thousands ... no one was looking at individual names and saying "Hmm, I wonder if this Sohn (or Selz or Bockheim) fellow will be willing to fight against Germans?"

Of course, if your name was Isuro Takahashi, you were already cooling your heels at camp and not IN the army ... !

Lannis

[Rough Edge racing]

 I have read a bit about the Allies fighting the Germans in Italy. Arguably the toughest  fighting in Europe . The Germans had excellent leaders, the Allies no so good.

[john fish]

The Germans had excellent leaders, the Allies no so good.

I'm not so sure.  Even Rommel was a bit of a screw up at times.  Of course, the Germans did not have to deal with the politics involved in cooperation between large, very different, countries such as US, UK, USSR.

[LowRyter]

I'm not so sure.  Even Rommel was a bit of a screw up at times.  Of course, the Germans did not have to deal with the politics involved in cooperation between large, very different, countries such as US, UK, USSR.

I totally agree.  Ike, Bradley, Marshall, Nimitz, Halsey.   None better.  Perhaps in all of history.

(I didn't mention the two "movie" guys and won't but they had a purpose too.)

[Rough Edge racing]

 Wasn't  Halsey in the Pacific? The US commander of ground forces was General Clark, read about the Anzio assault and push to the north. Kesselring the German commander said once the Allies were out of range of naval guns and weather prevented air support,  they were not effective as they should have been.This makes the soldiers job much more difficult and it's  a credit to them they fought on .

[LowRyter]

Wasn't  Halsey in the Pacific? The US commander of ground forces was General Clark, read about the Anzio assault and push to the north. Kesselring the German commander said once the Allies were out of range of naval guns and weather prevented air support,  they were not effective as they should have been.This makes the soldiers job much more difficult and it's  a credit to them they fought on .

My point was taking issue with the notion that the Germans had superior leaders vs the allies.  The US had perhaps the greatest military leaders in history during WWII in both theaters of the war.   These guys earned their jobs based on performance in true American fashion rather than being appointed by legacy of birth or reputation.   

And there were some real "tough guys" on the ground like Wainwright and McAuliffe.   Which makes me think that if any of those five guys weren't there, we'd still have other great men to be in their place.

[Rough Edge racing]

My point was taking issue with the notion that the Germans had superior leaders vs the allies.  The US had perhaps the greatest military leaders in history during WWII in both theaters of the war.   These guys earned their jobs based on performance in true American fashion rather than being appointed by legacy of birth or reputation.   

And there were some real "tough guys" on the ground like Wainwright and McAuliffe.   Which makes me think that if any of those five guys weren't there, we'd still have other great men to be in their place.

My point  as mentioned was the fighting in Italy that came after a  invasion of Sicily. Not the rest of WW2..I suggest that all interested read up on the Italian camapaign.

[john fish]

Well, that wasn't exactly my point, LR.  I don't think the Americans had the best leaders.  Or the worst.
But I do think the idea of German superiority in leaders is incorrect.  I'd go as far as to say that the idea of "leadership" in war is a bit overrated anyway.
 
I think the war was won with the Allies' superiority in matériel provided by American resources and manufacturing, and by the USSRs massive sacrifice of people.  I think that is how it usually works.  Leadership can make great short term victories but the war goes generally to the side with greater amounts of people and resources.

Rough:  makes sense to me.  I wouldn't rush forward on a day with heavy overcast and no air support if I could just wait for clear skies and a flight of P-47s (The guzziest of ww2 warbirds) hammering away at the opposition. 

[Groover]

I've seen a few of these still standing around the island. (seen around the 5:00mm mark on the video)

[john fish]

My point  as mentioned was the fighting in Italy that came after a  invasion of Sicily. Not the rest of WW2..I suggest that all interested read up on the Italian camapaign.

I think that may be a result of Montgomery's famous caution.

[Canuck750]

When I moved into my neighborhood over 30 years ago there was an old fellow two doors down, a huge man who walked his dog twice a day no matter the weather. George was gruff, not very friendly or one for conversation. One day we had a block party and he showed up and we began a long conversation. He told me he entered the war in 1941 and did not come home until 1945. He ducked home and brought a box of pictures back to show me some pictures he had of him in Italy, he was an old man in the war, 26 years of age and a Sargent. He told me he was in the Italian campaign from start to finish and how awful it was. He was bitter that D Day gets all the attention while these guys were pounding it out for years.
Last year I visited the commonwealth cemetery in Casino, very humbled by the row upon row of young men’s last resting place.

[LowRyter]

Well, that wasn't exactly my point, LR.  I don't think the Americans had the best leaders.  Or the worst.
But I do think the idea of German superiority in leaders is incorrect.  I'd go as far as to say that the idea of "leadership" in war is a bit overrated anyway.
 
I think the war was won with the Allies' superiority in matériel provided by American resources and manufacturing, and by the USSRs massive sacrifice of people.  I think that is how it usually works.  Leadership can make great short term victories but the war goes generally to the side with greater amounts of people and resources.

Rough:  makes sense to me.  I wouldn't rush forward on a day with heavy overcast and no air support if I could just wait for clear skies and a flight of P-47s (The guzziest of ww2 warbirds) hammering away at the opposition.

No doubt I got off subject here.  But I'll disagree about your assessment of the American leadership in WWII.  I think Marshall, Ike, Bradley, Nimitz and Halsey were the best team in in military history.  I agree that America did have many advantages, particularly with war production.  But America was attacked, got in the war late and was at huge disadvantage coming into the war.   And those five were responsible for marshaling and executing the American war effort. 

Also, the political leadership of FDR, Churchill and de Gaulle was tremendous.   I think this was the highwater mark for Western leadership and American exceptionalism at least on the international stage.

[john fish]

Well said, John L.  But let's not leave out Stalin and the USSR.  Personally, I detest Stalin but the USSR lost a lot more people than all other countries combined and killed more Nazis than all other countries combined.

[PeteS]

Taken near Taormina, Sicily last year. I was surprised it survived the war.




post pictures


Pete

[LowRyter]

Well said, John L.  But let's not leave out Stalin and the USSR.  Personally, I detest Stalin but the USSR lost a lot more people than all other countries combined and killed more Nazis than all other countries combined.

I can acknowledge Stalin's success but can't agree that he was a great leader or that he even defended his populace.  Certainly he defended the USSR aka "Stalin". 

"Scorched Earth", famine, weather, bravery and survival did defend Russia at a terrible price.  I know there were Russian heroes, perhaps Khrushchev and Zhukov were great but I'm not qualified to say they belong with Marshall and Ike.  I'll defer to those smarter than me.

[sign216]

I can acknowledge Stalin's success but can't agree that he was a great leader or that he even defended his populace.  Certainly he defended the USSR aka "Stalin". 

"Scorched Earth", famine, weather, bravery and survival did defend Russia at a terrible price.  I know there were Russian heroes, perhaps Khrushchev and Zhukov were great but I'm not qualified to say they belong with Marshall and Ike.  I'll defer to those smarter than me.

I've got the feeling the Russian "won" by throwing sad numbers of expendable bodies at the Germans.  Often there was only two men for every rifle (when your buddy dies, you pick up his rifle). 

Not so sure of the skill of the Russian leaders, but their comrades did stand up to the fight quite admirably.  But...the Finns did even better against the Russians in the Winter War.

Joe

[Canuck750]

Well said, John L.  But let's not leave out Stalin and the USSR.  Personally, I detest Stalin but the USSR lost a lot more people than all other countries combined and killed more Nazis than all other countries combined.

20 million Russians died in the Second World War, think about that for a moment. Sadly Stalin was responsible for the death of at least 3 million of his own people prior to WWII and probably many more. A good read is “Blood lands” it covers the war on the eastern front as it moved back and forth causing untold death and destruction. The war in the west was terrible but pales in comparison to the  four years of carnage in the east.

[john fish]

The numbers of Russian dead that I've seen range from 15 million to 42 million.  Depends on whether or not you count civilian dead and who you read.  As a comparison, US deaths are thought to be about 450,000.  German losses are thought to be over 4 million with over 3 million lost to the Russians.  UK losses, civilian and military around 500,000.

Many of Russia's losses can be attributed to Stalin's purge of military leadership before the war.  Yes, especially in the early stages of the war, Russia had incompetent military officers led by a sociopath. 

All this is just my opinion.  And, if you want to get lost in an innerweb rat's nest, try finding reliable figures on war losses.  Especially for Russia.

edited for clarity

[Rough Edge racing]

 20 to 40 million dead Russians is often said....Stalin was beyond brutal.
   The Russians did manage to move their immense war production east away from the Germans and then stage a crippling offensive attack with great losses on both sides but it was the beginning of the end for Germany...
    The US lost 70,000 soldiers in Italy...

[ozarquebus]

Huge shame that WWI caused WWII and WWI was unnecessary.

[blackcat]

Taken near Taormina, Sicily last year. I was surprised it survived the war.




post pictures


Pete

My grandparents came from Taormina.

[PeteS]

My grandparents came from Taormina.

Mine came from closer to Palermo. Ever been to Sicily? I wish I spoke the language. Its a beautiful place.

Pete

[Knuckle Dragger]

Not even Italians can speak, & barely even understand, Sicilian.  It's full of Greek, Berber, Norman & even Phonecian/Carthaginian words.