Why did Italy perform so poorly in ww2? How different would the

>>3264150
Not industrialized enough, both in terms of factories and resources.
Shitty generals.
Shitty ideas when it comes to war (why, why, why invade greece? just why)

>>3264151
>why, why, why invade greece?
I mean why not
If you're gonna be a pastaboo fascist might as well try to go for gold and reclaim ancient glory.

>>3264153
>favagrossa
HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAH

>>3264158
To anyone not understanding this response, "favagrossa" is literally "bigdick".

>>3264151

This, plus mediocre-to-poor equipment, and a general population that didn't really want a war in the first place.

>>3264171
his ancestors were probably pea farmers you bullies

>>3264150
If it did perform well the big contributions it could have made would be taking Egypt and Suez in the North Africa theatre and also invading Gibraltar and could effectively keep the British out of the Med and stop stuff coming through Suez. I don't think them performing better would have changed the outcome of the war but they certainly could have made things very difficult, mostly for Britain, but I still see them getting taken out.

>>3264184
His ancestors were probably Biggus Dickus and Incontinentia Buttocks.

>>3264150

Mussolini thought he could just meme his way into a martial culture by LARPing as a Neo-Roman Empire and got hit hard with the reality that Italy was an impoverished second rate power at best playing with the big boys when he couldnt even finish his kids meal at the kiddie table (ethiopia)

Poorly led, motivated and equipped soldiers, they performed admirably for their quality under Rommel and Kesselring

>>3264150
they only had tankettes, and had to import a lot of shit.

also take in account how clever the allies were in africa with fake blow up tanks n sheeit

>>3264150
wait I know this joke.
Hitler gets told italy has joined the war so he says "send three divisions to their border," to which is responded "mein herr, they joined on our side" to which Hitler says "send ten divisions"

but honestly, Italy sucks fucking dick. its because they were losing to greece and yugoslavia that operation barbarossa was delayed to winter and germany lost the whole war.

>>3264770
>operation barbarossa was delayed to winter and germany lost the whole war.
>June 22nd
>Winter in the northern hemisphere
What a horrendous post

>>3264150
Because Mussolini's government was a colossal clusterfuck. He didn't enjoy the same kind of broad, mass popular support other dictators like Stalin and Hitler did, and consequentially had to play a much more tame role. He was quite literally dismissed from government by the king after the Allies made it onto Italy proper. Because of that, he could never allow any of his ministers or top generals to become too powerful, out of fear of them ousting him, and because of THAT, he had to actively sabotage their efforts.

This is not a good recipe for external effectiveness.

It did not have the resources to wage a modern war on their own. Best they could have hoped for was joining Germany and accepting their officers and equipment and giving them some time to perfect it. Their Great War achievements were really only that they had okay small arms firing and fighting in rough terrain. They did not have a command structure with experience coordinating artillery, mechanized elements, or plane coverage.

>>3264150
>How different would the war have been had they performed better and were a more useful ally to Germany?
If Italy had performed better the war would have been bloodier all around. Without German troops needing to bail Italy out at every turn the Wehrmacht could have launched Operation Barbarossa earlier, which would have given them enough time to fully encircle Moscow and either take it and dig in or lay siege to the city. The Eastern Front becomes even more of a bloody meat grinder and it's very possible that the Allies beat the Soviet Union to Berlin. Should Allied forces take all of Germany there is no partition of the country and the Cold War doesn't escalate as much without the dick-measuring contests between Stalin and the Allies over Germany.

The Italian capture of Suez and Gibraltar means that the Western Front is effectively moot unless the Allies can force a landing in France, similar to D-Day. Massive bombing campaigns devastate the French and German industrial centres in an effort to undermine the Nazi war machine and the costs of reconstruction is immense. All in all, Italy escapes relatively unscathed if they capitulate with the fall of Germany. We might even see the survival of an Italian fascist state similar to Francoist Spain if capitulation occurs before any major Allied occupation.

File: The rock of Gibraltar.jpg (107KB, 980x370px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 980x370px

>>3264808
>Without German troops needing to bail Italy out at every turn the Wehrmacht could have launched Operation Barbarossa earlier,
This is wrong; go look up when Case Blue started, June 24th, 1942. You don't get consistently dry weather in that part of the world until that late in the year, and if Barbarossa starts in may or something, you'll run into the mud.

> which would have given them enough time to fully encircle Moscow and either take it and dig in or lay siege to the city.
Just read this. What you're suggesting isn't feasible in the slightest, even in better weather.
http://www.history.army.mil/html/books/104/104-21/cmhPub_104-21.pdf (Skip to chapter 5)

>The Italian capture of Suez and Gibraltar means that the Western Front is effectively moot unless the Allies can force a landing in France, similar to D-Day.
I suppose very theoretically a better Italy could have taken Egypt in 1940 (although how you're going to get troops and supplies all the way to Suez is a mystery to me, even with very competent people), but you can't invade Gibraltar from the sea. See pic related, and try to figure out how to get on the beach when you can be overlooked by that fuckhuge mountain. Going after Gibraltar requires getting Spain in on things so you can attack from the overland side there, which introduces an entirely new kettle of fish.

>. Massive bombing campaigns devastate the French and German industrial centres in an effort to undermine the Nazi war machine and the costs of reconstruction is immense
You realize this happened already, right?

>>3264808
>Without German troops needing to bail Italy out at every turn the Wehrmacht could have launched Operation Barbarossa earlier
It's fucking amazing how wehraboos lifted what was literally considered a pitiful piece of british propaganda at the time to justify their defeat in Greece and started actually believing it.

At least Italy is fun in hoi4

Italy was incredibly backwards for the time and Mussolini only allied with Hitler after being promised by Ribbentrop and Hitler that the nazis wouldn't start a European war until 1942. So when they started one in 1939, Italy was still 3 years behind they're best estimate of when they could competently wage war

as an Italian, I always just assumed we naturally suck at fighting when it doesn't involve the Romans.

>>3267391
I think Italy done fairly well in ww1 and against the Turks in Libya

this id what happens when you waste your money in 2 useless wars (Ethiopia and Spain CW)

File: kw371102.jpg (74KB, 431x600px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 431x600px

>>3264150

>Why did Italy perform so poorly in ww2?

He might have been dead, but his ghost still haunted the Italian Army.

>>3264150

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=nFJI04ifSoM

When your basic machine gun needs stripper clips to be reloaded, you've got some serious problems.

File: bad-generalship-luigi-cadorna_fb_951013.jpg (12KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 300x300px

>>3267818
>no battles were fought in the isonzo during world war 2
SACRILEGE

>>3264150
They didn't have a good army and they didn't even need to go to war. They should have sat on the sidelines like Spain.

>>3267824
I'm still uncertain how that thing got adopted.
Virtually every other firearm they used was at least competent, and in some cases advanced for its time. So why the fuck did they adopt this overpissed nightmare as their LMG?

File: 1501063018295.jpg (262KB, 1284x980px) Image search: [Google]

262KB, 1284x980px

>>3264158
>didn't notice at first
DIO MIO

>>3264150
They were more opportunistic and always sell out to the highest bidder/obvious winner. They shat on A/H empire during their darkest hour in the first war

>>3267818
That man is probably the most barbaric commander in the first war

Because they spent the middle ages LARPing through wars while everyone else was fighting for real.

>>3267431
And in the north they got their asses kicked at the third front of their enemies. With way superior numbers, horrible losses and loss of territory.