Would Italy have been able to beat Poland in a one-on-one conflict in 1939?

Clearly not. Poland fought both Nazi Germany (Slovakia and collaborating Ukrainians) and the Soviet Union for over 1 month and 5 days outflanked from 4 sides with a ratio of 4 against 1, while France fighting only Nazi Germany whilst having the Maginot Line and a ratio of 1 against 1 fought for only 1 month and 10 days... Poland outnumbered did much better than France which had as large of an army as Nazi Germany in terms of manpower and equipment.

this
Poland actually did really well. That horse meme needs to die

Whoever's attacking would lose, since invading a country that's half of Europe away through neutral countries is logistically nonviable. And that's if you actually managed to negotiate free movement for your troops. Italy could negotiate free movement through Germany (though, as I said, that wouldn't have been worth anything), but Poland, as far as I know, couldn't really hope to secure any path to Italy.

As for a comparison of military power and production, I don't immediately see them pop up, which means that I'd have to do some digging, which I don't feel like doing. So I won't comment on that.

>a few months after they got BTFO
>10 months is few

so why france didnt go all out like the USSR?

And here are some videos of the prewar Polish Armed Forces (for those interested ofc):
youtube.com/watch?v=7KrWneSgOhc

Artillery and Air Force
youtube.com/watch?v=8TYFM7Ptph0
More of the same, just extended
youtube.com/watch?v=UwRkHkD1Bw8
Navy, bombing raid and tanks with anti-tank canons training with cavalry closing
youtube.com/watch?v=nRJggLgQlME

...

in 1939, probably. If Italy waited till 1940 or 41, no. They'd get smacked

that last one is really neat

Thanks, have some infantry marches now:
youtube.com/watch?v=YV1TeRVxToM *
youtube.com/watch?v=FMf8ENjjGvo
youtube.com/watch?v=bb_ZQdATeog
youtube.com/watch?v=0nSmxyAKQUI
youtube.com/watch?v=_k24j4F2o9w
youtube.com/watch?v=OgUcbGd7QMs
youtube.com/watch?v=4Y3Oqzz8sx8
youtube.com/watch?v=jkxrMq2jD-0
youtube.com/watch?v=vdNcH-K2vTU
youtube.com/watch?v=Jjpf7PREKZ0
Cavalry marches:
youtube.com/watch?v=sUqA0s57P50
youtube.com/watch?v=UnFM3UiSgQw
youtube.com/watch?v=laPkLMUiGHw
youtube.com/watch?v=NGKk-xurOZ0
youtube.com/watch?v=TNdy0ea6gc4
Military ladies march:
youtube.com/watch?v=3ZrhTjaBFyE
Air Force march:
youtube.com/watch?v=16FW8U_TauY
Navy march:
youtube.com/watch?v=6AxPyiHRf34

gonna make a prewar Polish hell march with this desu

nice cherrypicking

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Poland#cite_note-13

You got YT?

Yes. If they shared a border. It would be embarrassingly bloody though.

Memes aside Italy was a great power. They handily outclassed the Poles in every area of men and materiel several times over. And the Poles don't have mountains to hide behind.

Poland and Italy should have been natural allies against Pr*testant G*rman autism. Shameful that Mussolini sold out in 1938.

Hardly. Greece exhausted itself fighting Italy- they literally ran out of artillery ammunition until the British brought more, and their losses were not sustainable. Sure, 150,000 eyeties became casualties- but so did 90,000 Greeks. If the Italians had x2 Greece's ability to sustain losses, they would win. And the Italians had far, far more than x2 Greece's manpower.

t. Luigi

they did, france had an incredibly huge army relative to their population size in 1940, and both the Soviets and the French suffered similarly catastrophic defeats at the beginning of the war
The difference is once the French lost that army their population was too small and their strategic depth too limited to raise another, while the Soviets repeatedly did, losing them until they finally stopped the Germans.
All of the Allied powers generally had horrifically incompetent opening campaigns (british in battle of france, british against the japanese, americans against the japanese, americans against german u-boats, americans first deploying combat troops in north africa, soviet union getting invaded by the nazis), but the difference is they all had strategic depth or oceans and more manpower and mean to recover with
France didn't

And it's funny because in reality the "horse meme" actually worked.

Can yall stop bullying us :(

OOPS

>Being absolutely pedantic over an off the cuff remark which has no impact on the argument being made
>Thinking this post makes you look clever

Why were the Italians so shitty in general in WWII?

They were living in a semi pre-industrial era nation.
Their Enlightenment and Victorian era success bit them in the ass as they did not need to industrialize like the more rural states of France, England, Russia, Austria and "Germany" and they were content with their idyllic nation as it was.
We should be surprised they didn't fight both world wars with muskets.

>early allied estimates for german losses: 90,000 KIA, 200,000 WIA
holy shit that is some wishful thinking

Propably not. Ofc if we assume they somehow share border and germany/ussr are not involved.

yeah but they won.
>muh k/d ratio
fucking polishits

...