Was the Med a sideshow?

One of the major historigraphical debates that has existed since the end of the World War II is, was the med theatre subsidary to the general war effort?

Personnally i would argue that it was in many ways very important to the allies conduct of world war II. For example, i am currently writing a paper of tactical air operations in north africa and the pattern that is emerging from it is that much of what was learnt was used in NW Europe. Also north africa allowed a command relationship to emerge that would be succesfully used in the final campaings of WWII in europe.

Opinions?

 

Certainly not, a great deal was learned in terms of armour, amphibious landings and combat experience...

 

I've always rather had the impression that it was a sideshow as far as Hitler was concerned ( more interested in Russia ), but certainly not for Mussolini.

Vitally important to the British ( Suez, India, the Middle East ) and the Americans ( more interested in the Pacific ) were persuaded by Churchill.

Or is this a bit over-simplistic ?

 

I'm interpreting this as to: "what effect did the Mediterranean campaign had on the war effort?"

In this context I'd say it had a big effect, certainly not decisive but still big.

It was important for the fact that it kicked Italy out of the war, because all threats against the British communication lines with the Far East were supressed, because British morale —at Tunisia and El Alamein— raised after these victories.

But most important of all, the fighting here was the perfect training ground for all Allied Forces which went into Western Europe in 1944. Amphibious landings, mechanised, deffensive and offensive warfare, close air support, better communications, chains of commands, airborne and amphibious operations.

I think that without all these lessons, the Allies wouldn't have been able to successfully make a n across-Channel invasion, which would have allowed the Red Army to finish mopping up Germany…

 

Being a Mediterranean thread I couldn't forget about bashing certain American general…

If the Allies would have managed to encircle and destroy the German X and XIV Armies after the Anzio/Cassino breakthrough, then the Italian campaign would have been decisive to the war effort and the biggest victory achieved by the Western Allies during the war —it would have meant the annihilation of 20 complete German divisions and clearing all the way between Rome and Vienna.

 

Concerning Gottfried's post on Cassino jst not too long ago at least we can say truely that things were learned for the future with the disastrous frontal assault on dug in Fallshirm and Mtn. truppen. And how to deal with camo and defences though primitive and in small numerations could be so upsetting and slow a powerful attacking army.

 

If Hitler had not bothered with Northa Africa, do you think he would have been better off? I mean he didn't really care about anything else besides Russia (which was one of the reasons for his downfall), and he could have used those troops, and especially Rommel for other things that he considered more important. The way I see it, all North Africa did was initially boost morale, create too many fronts for the Germans to worry about, and cause them a stinging defeat.

 

Shame the Allies didnt learn from Cassino to NOT bomb a place into ruins and give the Germans nice defences...

The Med... A sideshow to Germany, A proving ground for the Allies.

 

I suppose the Allies (minus the Americans) would have pushed the Italians out of Africa sooner. No idea about French Tunisia! In any case Hitler would have to come to Italy's rescue, because after Sicily Italy would be one of the obvious next steps.

Or Sardinia. Or Corsica. Or Yugoslavia (!), or Greece, who knows...

The Turkish reaction would be interesting too.

 

10 German divisions fought in North Africa… they wouldn't have made the slightiest difference in the eastern front.

And I'd love to see how Rommel would have got a bloody nose when trying his tactics against the Red Army!

But certainly the Mediterranean Luftflötte could have helped a bit.

 

Well all those JU52s that got shot down in the Med would have been of use...

 

Indeed, Mike. More JU-52s to act as air ambulances, staff transport, back up to the German supply lines and more transports for numerous air-bridges…

Hey! Maybe an airdrop behind the Soviet rear in the Volga at the Battle of Stalingrad to take out the guns and the railroads that the 'mighty' Luftwaffe was unable to neutralise… But these Paras would have had a nice time, I'm sure of it, when some Siberian armoured divisions and a couple hundred T-34s would have been thrown at them…

 

So 500+ Ju52s are not going to be of any use Freddy?

ok...

 

Of course they are, even with my rolleyes smilie, what I put there is true. But 500 transports don't win a war.

They most surely would have been used on more airlifts once the mighty Wehrmacht started being surrounded over and over again, then the transports and their pilots would have been lost little by little…

You know planty more about airborne troops and tactics than me. But I don't think these operations suited the war in the east.

 

I was not suggesting their use for airborne troops, they would have lost them all like in Holland and Crete!

Just think they may have helped the supply situation for a while.

I dont think anything would help the Germans beat the USSR!!!

 

I read somewhere that for every 9 German casualties 8 were caused on the Eastern front. If this is the case nothing would have won the war in the east.

I have a game on my PC at home 'Strategic command' its a turned based strategy game. Playing the Germans after invading Poland I hold off on attacking the USSR, anyway within 18 months the Ivan invades me!

So if this is the case Germany was in trouble from the first kick of the ball so to speak!

 

Even worse, I think…

Yes, they could have helped bringing up some couple thousand gallons of petrol to forward Panzer units and these wouldn't have lost the momentum. But their load weight was still too little.

However, JU-52s when used as ambulances saved many lives of wounded soldiers.

 

Sure there was, all Adolf had to do was hire this pretty bunch of backseatdrivers we all are

 

A new book on exactly this subject has just been published ; 'Hitler's Mediterranean Gamble' by Douglas Porch ( Weidenfeld & Nicholson, London, 688 pages ).

A very detailed and complimentary review appeared in 'The Sunday Telegraph' today written by historian Max Hastings.

Porch is an American academic and, judging from the review, agrees with most of the points raised in our earlier posts ( or should that be, we agree with his points ? Anyhow, not bad for a load of armchair generals ! ). The conclusions are very balanced ; German and Allied commanders come in for criticism, Erich's point about mountain troops is covered, and so on.

This is such a positive review that I shall certainly be looking to buy a copy of the book.

 

How do you know he isn't a lurker on this forum?