Cynovolans
Not in my dimension.
Under Ottoman rule, why did so many of the Greeks in Crete convert to Islam(the most is at 45%) while the rest of Greece remained prevailingly Christian?
History questions not worth their own thread
- Thread starter philippe
- Start date
- Status
This is simply a guess, but many may have converted because the island was in a state of war between the Ottomans and Venetians for nearly 30 years. Possibly Turkish rule was preferable to Venetian rule for various reasons or some of the citizens, seeing that the Ottomans were going to win out eventually decided to side with them by converting to Islam. Though parts of Greece were foreign dominated when the Turks took over, other parts like the Peloponnese, were Greek ruled at the time and maybe that made them more patriotic in a sense and less likely to convert.
Mad Man
Your lord and master
What are some of the key battles that South Africa fought in during WWII?
South African troops were heavily involved in the defense of Egypt and the liberation of Ethiopia. South African units continued to serve with Eighth Army during the Italian campaign IIRC. They might've been sent to India as well to fight at Imphal and in Burma but I'm not 100% sure about that.
JoonaspEST
Chieftain
I've wondered did the Italians during WW2 had any good qualities in their armed forces?
Definitely.
Their elite troops and commandos were pretty good.
An example is the raid on Alexandria.
In general though their forces were poorly trained and horribly equipped. For example the Regia Aeronautica had some excellent pilots, but they almost exclusively trained for high altitude level bombing with light or medium bombers (supposedly Mussolini was a fan of the air force).
And their Model 1938 submachine gun was a great weapon, but never made it to the troops in numbers until after the Armistice.
They also had a severe lack of good leadership.
Their elite troops and commandos were pretty good.
An example is the raid on Alexandria.
In general though their forces were poorly trained and horribly equipped. For example the Regia Aeronautica had some excellent pilots, but they almost exclusively trained for high altitude level bombing with light or medium bombers (supposedly Mussolini was a fan of the air force).
And their Model 1938 submachine gun was a great weapon, but never made it to the troops in numbers until after the Armistice.
They also had a severe lack of good leadership.
ParkCungHee
Deity
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2006
- Messages
- 12,921
The above poster has highlighted the salient points.
Also, while not up the scratch against the Royal Navy, the Regia Marina was one of the best fleets in the world at the time. While it was not in the ranks of the Great Naval Powers, it was a significant 'also ran'. They certainly would have given a good showing against the fleet they expected to fight, the French, and were leagues ahead of the Germans in that field.
Also, while they were unable to implement it, due to largely material reasons, the army had a fairly good grip on military theory. Which meant that they could say, in theory, what their forces should do, and what, in practice, the opposing side was going to do to them.
Also, while not up the scratch against the Royal Navy, the Regia Marina was one of the best fleets in the world at the time. While it was not in the ranks of the Great Naval Powers, it was a significant 'also ran'. They certainly would have given a good showing against the fleet they expected to fight, the French, and were leagues ahead of the Germans in that field.
Also, while they were unable to implement it, due to largely material reasons, the army had a fairly good grip on military theory. Which meant that they could say, in theory, what their forces should do, and what, in practice, the opposing side was going to do to them.
The Regia Marina I am really unsure about. They should themselves qutie well on occasion, but failed other times. I have read, in different sources (mostly about the Battle of Malta) that the problem was i) quality of the ships, ii) quality of the crews, iii) quality of officers, iv) failure of high command. The first three of which I also read were strengths.
The other problem, was as the war dragged on they didn't have much fuel for extended operations and as Hitler always considered the Med a side-show, he wasn't giving them anything.
The other problem, was as the war dragged on they didn't have much fuel for extended operations and as Hitler always considered the Med a side-show, he wasn't giving them anything.
ParkCungHee
Deity
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2006
- Messages
- 12,921
It was also that the Navy knew they were completely out matched. The RM threw in the towel without even trying because they knew if they attempted to do battle with the British, it'd be the end of their fleet. So they stuck to a fleet in being doctrine and hoped nobody would bother them.
That said, it was decent fleet. When I said "one of the best in the world" I meant it was in the top ten probably the top 5 in the world, and probably the third best in Europe, which in the end isn't that bad.
That said, it was decent fleet. When I said "one of the best in the world" I meant it was in the top ten probably the top 5 in the world, and probably the third best in Europe, which in the end isn't that bad.
Off the top of my head, Brazil sent some significant forces to Italian campaign. If I recall correctly the Brazillian military suffered approximately 1000 dead, though this may include naval forces in the Atlantic.
I don't believe there was any fighting in South America as all countries were either neutral or joined the Allies. I believe French Guiana joined the Free French forces peacefully.
Although there were a number of engagements off the South American coast, from the famous Battle of the River Platte (and the accompanying campaign) to u-boat attacks.
It is quite likely that some people from French Guiana joined the Free French Forces, though. I also believe it is pretty safe to believe that some people from various South American countries joined one Allied military or another.
But beyond that their primary assistance was economic, supplying the US and other Allied countries with resources (food, oil, etc...).
I don't believe there was any fighting in South America as all countries were either neutral or joined the Allies. I believe French Guiana joined the Free French forces peacefully.
Although there were a number of engagements off the South American coast, from the famous Battle of the River Platte (and the accompanying campaign) to u-boat attacks.
It is quite likely that some people from French Guiana joined the Free French Forces, though. I also believe it is pretty safe to believe that some people from various South American countries joined one Allied military or another.
But beyond that their primary assistance was economic, supplying the US and other Allied countries with resources (food, oil, etc...).
Cheezy the Wiz
Socialist In A Hurry
Another big reason the Italians performed rather poorly in World War II was that they simply didn't care about the war. Mussolini was so popular in his day because he promoted Italian greatness and talked about a new Roman Empire and such, and most of the Italian fighting in World War II was at the behest of some German up north, and many Italians simply didn't see why they should be fighting and dying for German benefit, since the Italian benefit was minimal. Rommel wrote, for example, that the Italians were generally not motivated the way his German troops were, but when they were motivated, such as when pressed in the defense, they were voracious fighters. He said that if they could find a way to harness that tenacity for the offensive, then the war in North Africa would be won.
LightSpectra
me autem minui
Their primary problem was utter incompetence in the high commands. They essentially threw away a full army to Operation Compass because whoever was in charge of constructing fortresses hadn't a clue what he was doing.
I think Brazil also managed to capture a U-boat on their own.
While it's not South America, a little known fact is that the Mexican Airforce actually took part in combat during WWII during the liberation of the Philippines. The squadron flew P-57s and had the nickname "The Aztec Eagles".
Mad Man
Your lord and master
While not actually during WWII, there was the Chaco War 1932-35 and the Colombia-Peru War 1932-33, also I think there was a civil war in Brazil around this time but I'm not 100% on that.
The Italians seem to have been seen as a much bigger threat pre-war and in the early years of the war. The Italian Navy was a major concern to the British as was their contingent in East Africa. The Italians actually had significant amounts of combat aircraft and tanks stationed there (at least compared to the British) and there was worry of them being able capture the Suez Canal and pave the way for a German invasion of the Middle East and even India. British worries only increased when the Italians managed to pull off a bombing run on Palestine as well as either Bahrain or Kuwait (can't remember which off the top of my head). In the end, the Italians' major problem in these campaigns was that they ended up lacking fuel, ammunition and the technical expertise for when their equipment inevitably malfunctioned.
Edit: I feel I should add, a guerrilla war by remaining Italians in East Africa continued for the duration of the war and some lingering Axis submarines continued to cause trouble for a bit. If the Axis North African Campaign had gone considerably better it would be interesting to see how this turned out.I must admit though that the terrible logistics of trying to get troops through the Sudan and the hostile populations there and in Ethiopia likely wouldn't have changed the situation for them much.
Edit: I feel I should add, a guerrilla war by remaining Italians in East Africa continued for the duration of the war and some lingering Axis submarines continued to cause trouble for a bit. If the Axis North African Campaign had gone considerably better it would be interesting to see how this turned out.I must admit though that the terrible logistics of trying to get troops through the Sudan and the hostile populations there and in Ethiopia likely wouldn't have changed the situation for them much.
LightSpectra
me autem minui
Why on earth would Germany invade India? Just blockading the Suez would probably be enough damage in itself.
What would blocking the Suez do? The Mediterranean was virtually impassable to Allied shipping from pretty early in the war until near Torch. Note the Malta convoys (that were only trying to go half way).
While I doubt Hitler would seriously consider advancing on India (getting his armies through the Middle East wouldn't be that easy), taking it out of the war could be quite useful, if Japan reciprocated somehow.
The biggest value would be the ability to threaten or even occupy Iraq (even just some support could foster significant civil unrest).
While I doubt Hitler would seriously consider advancing on India (getting his armies through the Middle East wouldn't be that easy), taking it out of the war could be quite useful, if Japan reciprocated somehow.
The biggest value would be the ability to threaten or even occupy Iraq (even just some support could foster significant civil unrest).
As far as I know, Germany had very minimal if any plans to invade India. That doesn't mean that Britain wasn't worried about it though. It likely wouldn't be a full fledged invasion but just sending enough there in conjunction with the Japanese to rouse up the Indians into rebellion.
The whole thing was rather stupid, just as any Italian attempt to take and hold the Sudan and Egypt from East Africa would have been, but hindsight is 20-20 and these were legitimate fears back then. The British fear of an invasion of India through Egypt dates back to Napoleon, possibly even farther back.
Iraq also did have significant unrest, and Italian and German planes aided the Iraqis in the brief Anglo-Iraqi War. I believe they attacked from the Dedacanese Islands and possibly Vichy French Syria.
The whole thing was rather stupid, just as any Italian attempt to take and hold the Sudan and Egypt from East Africa would have been, but hindsight is 20-20 and these were legitimate fears back then. The British fear of an invasion of India through Egypt dates back to Napoleon, possibly even farther back.
Iraq also did have significant unrest, and Italian and German planes aided the Iraqis in the brief Anglo-Iraqi War. I believe they attacked from the Dedacanese Islands and possibly Vichy French Syria.
- Status
Similar threads
