In terms of World War One was there ever a set of miserable fucking failures more wretched than the Italians?

In terms of World War One was there ever a set of miserable fucking failures more wretched than the Italians?

> Betray the Triple Alliance basically for shits and giggles at the start of WW1
>Finally come in on the side of the Allies after being promised Trieste
>Despite the fact that World War 1 has been going on for entire year, army is still in no condition to mobilize, shortage of uniforms and material
>eleven. fucking. battles. of the Isonzo.
>proceed to lose all of them despite extensive Allied support and the fact that Austrians are fighting on two fronts, and are a barely functional state
>Despite this, still refuse to relieve Cadorna of command
>twelfth attempt, get their shit pushed in at Caporetto (again, for the most part by the fucking Austrians), entire front collapses and proceed to get routed out of much of Veneto
>Only the contribution of twelve British/French divisions stop a total collapse
>post-war settlement at Versailles, make wholly unreasonable territorial demands
>don't get them and proceed to go into a collective autistic rage, leading to the election of Mussolini

Seriously, even the Turks had a better overall performance.

Yes, Austrians.

desu famu that was kind of my point

like, how fucked do you have to be to not be able to deal with the fucking Austrians

they pioneered the trench shield

t. butthurt Asstrian

>tfw you got wrecked so hard your country collapses mid battle

The fuckers still got to much land.

t. angry Slovene

Hvala za generala Hrvati

They inflicted two and a half million casualties on the Austro-Hungarians, more than they took. They basically destroyed the Austria-Hungary empire after the Russians weakened it. They did this all on a front full of fucking mountains where nearly 5 million casualties were crammed in an smaller than the area of Scotland. And by the end of the war there was literally no noticeable army between them and Berlin, Austria having collapsed and allowed them passage and Germany having literally all of its forces on the Western Front except for some sparse garrisons.

Italy in WW1 is underrated desu.

>Seriously, even the Turks had a better overall performance

>Allied casualties fighting Turks: ~1.21 million
>Turkish casualties total: ~1.68 million

>Italian casualties fighting Austria: ~2.15 million
>Austrian casualties fighting Italy: ~2.38 million

Their casualty ratio seems better. Also they accomplished their objectives and won the war instead of getting cucked out of existence. How did the Turks do better?

Not to say the Turks didn't do well considering their situation. They totally did.

knocking over a rotting structure in the form of the austrian empire is no big accomplishment, especially THAT late in the war. and there was literally zero chance of them being able to exploit the vacuum between them and berlin, it is a stones throw away from total fantasy.

Why do slavs always try to steal land populated by other people? Fuck off white nigger.

get out dago

You're not getting Südtirol back, Austria

Italy as a nation and a peoples are a miserable fucking failure. They have never been able to bury hatchets between cities, between provinces, between north and south, and it was a fucking miracle in general that they ever formed into a cohesive nation with a single government. Italian patriots have been lamenting Italy and Italians for over six hundred years and the 20th century's media machine allowed us to capture truly for the first time how much of a fuck up Italy is as a whole.

That's because of the South
South Italy is what really ruined Italy

> Betray the Triple Alliance basically for shits and giggles at the start of WW1

It was a defensive agreement and Italy had no obligation to honour it as Germany and Austria were the aggressors.

South Italy has never been able to properly modernise due to the fact that they've never been able to govern themselves (due to being conquered constantly) and the fact that these conquerers abused their powers and gained more from keeping the South in such a terrible position.

This doesn't help when the Piedmontese completely gave up on the South after five years.

Italy's performance in WWI overall was surprisingly solid, between the Arditi special units, the Bersaglieri mobile infantry, and the Mountain Warfare Alpini units. Italy had soldiers that the Austrians rightly feared, with stories of the Arditi firing until they were out of ammo, only to charge Austrian positions with trench knives and hand grenades and win.

Aside from the Cadorna meme, which everyone will admit was a failure of a commander, the Italians at the Dolomites mountain, Monte Grappa, the Piave River, and Vittorio Veneto were the ones that forced the total collapse of the Austro-Hungarians.

Hey cool. How good were they?

>This doesn't help when the Piedmontese completely gave up on the South after five years.
You don't have any idea of how much the south has been helped economically since Italy's birth.
Especially after the Mafia turned into a criminal organisation, the south has been nothing but a money sinkhole for the whole country .
Plus they gave Italians every bad stereotype they are known for today.

This. Italy wasn't great and probably would have gotten butchered against a real power,but it definitely held its ground and it definitely destroyed Austria. Cadorna was a very big factor in how badly everything went at the beginning,it's really surprising how much changed as soon as he was fired and Diaz got his place. The real joke of WW1 was Austria, which managed to lose against Italy with all its problems. It was just an outdated state which the WW1 put out of its misery.

>>Turkish casualties total: ~1.68 million
where do you even get this number from? according to US numbers total number of ottoman casualties were around 1 million out of a total 2.8

>knocking over a rotting structure in the form of the austrian empire is no big accomplishment

Ottoman Empire was much more rotting than even the Austro-Hungarians while having about 1/4 their resources, and it still took four years and 1.2 million casualties for the Allies to topple it. The Austro-Hungarians were so "rotting" that they managed to be the main force on the Eastern Front and inflict millions of casualties on the Russians (often under German leadership though).

This wasn't WW2 where entire army groups could be rapidly outmaneuvered and rolled over, even a rotting power with poor leadership and training was still a threat if they had millions of soldiers with rifles and artillery.

>and there was literally zero chance of them being able to exploit the vacuum between them and berlin

The armistice with Austria let Italian troops pass through their territory and there was literally no army to stop them.

The book "Ordered to Die: A History of the Ottoman Army in the First World War", by Huseyin Kivrikoglu and Edward J. Erickson, contains a very detailed list of sources in Appendix F to total the casualties listed in the chart on page 211. The numbers come out to:

>Killed in action: 243,598
>Missing in action: 61,487
>Died from disease or accidents: 466,759
>Total dead: 771,844
>Seriously wounded (permanent loss): 303,150
>Total wounded in action: 763,753
>Prisoners of War: 145,104

Total casualties: 1,680,701.

Cause fuck you and you mom/sis was cute when i was drunk.

>betray

where I stopped reading
there is no such thing when it comes to geopolitics
especially ww1

>Only the contribution of twelve British/French divisions stop a total collapse
that's a wild speculation.
Care to bring some sauce to back it up?