Proposed peace conditions in 1940?

About Libya : Italian army ration strength was in october 1940 188000 men + 27000 Libyans .Only a part of those were stationned at the border with Egypt. These were piecemeally destroyed, so that there was no Italian numerical superiority . Here also it is wrong to oppose the men of the Western Desert Force to the whole Italian army in libya : if one is counting the whole Italian army in Libya, one must oppose to them not the Western Desert Force, but all British forces in Egypt and even in Palestine,as the Italian units in Tripoli were farther away from the forces on the border with Egypt than the WDF to the forces on the Canal and Palestine .

 

As usual...Not correct.
The Italians were also ill-trained and ill-equipped, which was just as debilitating as the terrain.

The Western Allies could have invaded Italy through the Alps - it could have been done. However, casualties would have been great, and such a campaign would have consumed too much time. The negatives of such a campaign far outweighed any positives, as such, the Allies never made any great effort in that sector, having concluded that the costs far outweighed any benefits.

The list, of what the Allies could have done but didn't, is a very long one.

 

As usual not correct.

The German forces going to Greece by boat came from the Greek port of Piraeus, although the Italians did provide the escorts, or should I say "rescue craft."

The Italians did not provide that many ground troops.
http://www.dodecaneso.org/creta41.htm

 

Ahh more of your patented "1 ship = 40 ships" math?

Or is this your patented "10 ships form one task force + the task force is renumbered = the enemy facing 20 ships" math?

Helpful hint...Lay of the LSD LJAd.

 

Reading problems ?
Without the Italian escorts,no invasion by sea and without invasion by sea, the the invasion by air was doomed to fail .

 

The Italians possessed numerical superiority in more than a few battles during Operation Compass...The Italian still lost those battles.

 

Reading problems? Yes, I recommend you take remedial reading courses. It would help you greatly in these discussions.

The Italian escorts..weren't.

The seaborne German seaborne troops never made it to Crete, their boats were all sunk, because of the failure of the Italian escorts.

The Operation succeeded despite the non-arrival of the German seaborne troops.

 

On 28 may 1941 2582 Italian soldiers landed at Sitia (source : Commando Supremo ) .Thus the Italian escorts did not fail .

 

Thank you for proving that your posting

is a lie.


The Italian escorts failed...

http://www.history.army.mil/books/wwii/balkan/20_260_4.htm

one convoy wiped out and the other recalled because of the first disaster.


2,582 troops landed...Some 7,000 did not. Yet, you consider it a "success?" Why could you have not been one of my school teachers? I like the way you grade! 36% is an "A".

 

So then, a rational analysis of the probabilities on the part of the allies is a "failure"? Also, by your logic anything the allies "knew" they could do that they didn't attempt was a "failure". Interesting concept of failure, but it explains more about you than about anything the allies did.

 

Nonsense. Final MERKUR planning called for 750 glider, 10,000 para, and 5,000 airlifted troops for a total of 15,750 versus roughly 7,000 seaborne troops.

 

That's nice. The British decided to evacuate on 27 May.

 

Utter poppycock.

 

Nonsense again. The figures I gave for Italian strength are for the parts of 10th Army in the border camps. As given in Italian documents captured during the battle by the British, which may be found at TNA. The total strength I gave was what crossed the wire, again according to the Italian sources. You figure includes all elements of 10th Army from Tripolitania east covering a swath some 1500 miles long. The strength of the WDF is as given by British sources for the strength of the formation committed to the attack.

 

This Churchill quote from his series "the Second World War" from 1960 could sum up why he refused the peace proposals. "Germany's unforgivable crime before World War II was its attempt to loosen its economy out of the world trade system and to build up its own exchange system from which world finance couldn't profit from anymore... We butchered the wrong pig." That's from his book, his words.

 

What page is it on?

For that matter...What Volume? There were 6.

Or...is this just another bunch of bull for the CT'ers & neo-nazis.

 

I'll try to get more on that exact source. It said Bern, 1960 as info.

 

What really sums it up is "World War II- The Guilty Parties" by Peter Cohen. Its cited correctly and thoroughly all the way through, with diplomats and leaders of nations as the sources. Appeasement was an anti-communist stance.

 

The West offered more support to Finland than to Poland for God sakes.

 

Poland was doomed after 17th September (16 days), and ceased to exist by 6th October. That's 36 days in total. How much support do you think anyone could've gotten there in less than 30 days?

Finland was still fighting after 3 months.

The Logistics of getting support to Finland was tough, but to Poland was hell. You can't ship to either place through the Baltic. At least in Finland's case, there was time to discuss and negotiate with the Nordics, but that didn't work out either. Delivering aid through Romania was made irrelevant. Forcing through the Nordics was an option, it wasn't in Romania.