Comments by "doveton sturdee" (@dovetonsturdee7033) on "Military History not Visualized"
channel.
-
So, the Italian submarine fleet', 'the world's greatest in terms of tonnage' sank almost 750,000 tons of Allied shipping in three years? Would it be churlish to point out that between April & June, 1941, the German U-boat fleet, with less than 40 operational front line boats, sank 927804 tons?
As to surface ships sunk by the Italian air force, you claim 72 Allied warships. As the allies lost 76 warships in the whole of the campaign, totalling 315,500 tons, are you claiming that, between them, mines, the Italian surface fleet, the Luftwaffe, and the German U-boat arm, sank just 4? I fear you will struggle to justify this claim, especially since, in terms of tonnage, 145800 is recorded as sunk by Italian means, and 169,700 to German forces. Moreover, would you care to comment on axis shipping losses to RN submarines in the Mediterranean over the period June, 1940 to September, 1943? 328 vessels of 815,800 tons. All except 14 of the vessels were Italian, by the way.
The attack on Valiant & Queen Elizabeth, which disabled both of them, was an outstanding feat of arms. Less outstanding, however, was the fact that absolutely no advantage was taken of it. Valiant, by the way, was back in service by June 1942, although her repairs were completed by March, after which she was sent to Durban for a major refit before joining the Eastern Fleet. Queen Elizabeth took longer to repair, 18 months in fact, although much of this time was spent in the US undergoing a thorough refit.
Would you care to provide evidence for your remarkable assertion that 'By mid-1942, Mussolini's navy had fought its way back from crushing defeats to become the dominant power in the Mediterranean Sea' by describing the occasions upon which this dominance was demonstrated? The triumphant annihilation of the RN surface forces protecting 'Pedestal' by the battlefleet would perhaps be a good starting point?
I won't bother with most of the rest, except to say that I cannot find any references to any Italian nuclear weapons programme earlier that the 1960s, and the flight of the P.108 would have been remarkable, given that New York is almost 7000 kms from Rome, and the operational range of the P108 was less than 3300 kms.
You are a total fantasist, albeit a remarkably amusing one.
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Benito-Musolesi A small correction. The Italian government ALLEGED that the British, either directly or indirectly, supplied such bullets. The British government at the time submitted their response, and left the League of Nations to decide the merits or otherwise of the claim. The International Committee of the Red Cross also attempted to investigate claims of breaches of the Geneva Convention, but were not permitted access by either side. Perhaps you would care to read Mr. Eden's statement to the House on 18 May, 1936, as published in Hansard, on the allegations?
So, you consider mass extermination of thousands by means of Mustard Gas to be a 'fair & adequate' response? Thank Heavens Italy didn't have nuclear weapons in 1936!!!!
The rest of your post is simply a rant, on a par with your reference to 'That war criminal of Admiral Cunningham, a coward like all the British.' Presumably, reasoned argument and measured exposition of a case isn't' your forte?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
So, the Italian submarine fleet', 'the world's greatest in terms of tonnage' sank almost 750,000 tons of Allied shipping in three years? Would it be churlish to point out that between April & June, 1941, the German U-boat fleet, with less than 40 operational front line boats, sank 927804 tons?
As to surface ships sunk by the Italian air force, you claim 72 Allied warships. As the allies lost 76 warships in the whole of the campaign, totalling 315,500 tons, are you claiming that, between them, mines, the Italian surface fleet, the Luftwaffe, and the German U-boat arm, sank just 4? I fear you will struggle to justify this claim, especially since, in terms of tonnage, 145800 is recorded as sunk by Italian means, and 169,700 to German forces. Moreover, would you care to comment on axis shipping losses to RN submarines in the Mediterranean over the period June, 1940 to September, 1943? 328 vessels of 815,800 tons. All except 14 of the vessels were Italian, by the way.
The attack on Valiant & Queen Elizabeth, which disabled both of them, was an outstanding feat of arms. Less outstanding, however, was the fact that absolutely no advantage was taken of it. Valiant, by the way, was back in service by June 1942, although her repairs were completed by March, after which she was sent to Durban for a major refit before joining the Eastern Fleet. Queen Elizabeth took longer to repair, 18 months in fact, although much of this time was spent in the US undergoing a thorough refit.
Would you care to provide evidence for your remarkable assertion that 'By mid-1942, Mussolini's navy had fought its way back from crushing defeats to become the dominant power in the Mediterranean Sea' by describing the occasions upon which this dominance was demonstrated? The triumphant annihilation of the RN surface forces protecting 'Pedestal' by the battlefleet would perhaps be a good starting point?
I won't bother with most of the rest, except to say that I cannot find any references to any Italian nuclear weapons programme earlier that the 1960s, and the flight of the P.108 would have been remarkable, given that New York is almost 7000 kms from Rome, and the operational range of the P108 was less than 3300 kms.
You are a total fantasist, albeit a remarkably amusing one. Still, I am sure you remain proud of that wonderful day in September 1943 when the triumphant Italian battlefleet steamed into Valetta harbour to accept the surrender of the fortress of Malta.
1
-
1
-
So, the Italian submarine flee', 'the world's greatest in terms of tonnage' sank almost 750,000 tons of Allied shipping in three years? Would it be churlish to point out that between April & June, 1941, the German U-boat fleet, with less than 40 operational front line boats, sank 927804 tons?
As to surface ships sunk by the Italian air force, you claim 72 Allied warships. As the allies lost 76 warships in the whole of the campaign, totalling 315,500 tons, are you claiming that, between them, mines, the Italian surface fleet, the Luftwaffe, and the German U-boat arm, sank just 4? I fear you will struggle to justify this claim, especially since, in terms of tonnage, 145800 is recorded as sunk by Italian means, and 169,700 to German forces. Moreover, would you care to comment on axis shipping losses to RN submarines in the Mediterranean over the period June, 1940 to September, 1943? 328 vessels of 815,800 tons. All except 14 of the vessels were Italian, by the way.
The attack on Valiant & Queen Elizabeth, which disabled both of them, was an outstanding feat of arms. Less outstanding, however, was the fact that absolutely no advantage was taken of it. Valiant, by the way, was back in service by June 1942, although her repairs were completed by March, after which she was sent to Durban for a major refit before joining the Eastern Fleet. Queen Elizabeth took longer to repair, 18 months in fact, although much of this time was spent in the US undergoing a thorough refit.
Would you care to provide evidence for your remarkable assertion that 'By mid-1942, Mussolini's navy had fought its way back from crushing defeats to become the dominant power in the Mediterranean Sea' by describing the occasions upon which this dominance was demonstrated? The triumphant annihilation of the RN surface forces protecting 'Pedestal' by the battlefleet would perhaps be a good starting point?
I won't bother with most of the rest, except to say that I cannot find any references to any Italian nuclear weapons programme earlier that the 1960s, and the flight of the P.108 would have been remarkable, given that New York is almost 7000 kms from Rome, and the operational range of the P108 was less than 3300 kms.
You are a total fantasist, albeit a remarkably amusing one.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1