Talk:Italian second spring offensive (1941)
 | This page was proposed for deletion by Cplakidas (talk · contribs) on 9 August 2024. |
Italian second offensive
[edit]Hi. This page I created lacked some sources or references. But fell free to add more related to this page. Regards from Jheeeeeeteegh (talk) 02:48, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
Why delete the page if there are sources that attest the existence of the battles?
[edit]The Greek forces, were not forced to retreat only because of the German intervention, but also because of the failure of the last offensive of 3-8 April 1941 against the sectors of the Italian divisions "Taro" and "Venezia", an aspect that is clearly ignored. That the Greek forces were retreating does not matter, it is still a military offensive. The Italians lost more than 5000 men between dead, wounded and missing due to the strong resistance of the enemy rearguards. The Italians, after the reconquest of Klisura, caused the enemy rearguards to collapse from Mount Tomori to the sea. You cannot eliminate a battle if there are dead and wounded reported by official bulletins and historical sources. Here are some notable battles that took place from 13 to 23 April 1941:
•Battle of Valle Dhrinos (Drino Valley) 13-17 April 1941;
•Battle of Lake Maliq and Mali e Thatë 15 April 1941;
•Battle of Hill Qarrit 16 April 1941;
•Battle of Ersekë 17 April 1941;
•Second Battle of Klisura and Battle of Groppa Mountain 16-17 April 1941;
•Battle of Barmash 20-21 April 1941;
•Second Battle of Perati bridge 19-22 April 1941.
Recommended basic sources:
•Mario Montanari: “L’Esercito Italiano nella Campagna di Grecia” (Stato Maggiore dell’Esercito, 1999)
•Luigi Emilio Longo: “Immagini della Seconda Guerra Mondiale. La campagna italo-greca” (Stato Maggiore dell’Esercito, 2001)
•Rodolfo Puletti e Franco dell’Uomo: “L’Esercito e i suoi corpi” (Stato Maggiore dell’Esercito, 1979)
95.248.99.205 (talk) 10:54, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Wikipedia's purpose is to report the existence of armed clashes. From 13 to 23 April 1941, numerous armed clashes occurred between Italian and Greek forces. Just think of the assaults and counterattacks that took place for the reconquest of Klisura by the 3rd Regiment “Granatieri di Sardegna” and the Greek rearguards. 95.248.99.205 (talk) 11:03, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
- Nobody disputes there were clashes during this phase of the war, and yes, these should absolutely be covered in an article like this. The problem is the spin being put by the title and phrasing of this article, which incidentally, is something you yourself acknowledge. The Greek rearguards are exactly why there is a POV and neutrality problem here: if an army advances only because its enemy is retreating, and that slowly and with difficulty, it is not really an offensive. It is, at best, a pursuit, but given that the Italians were not able to pin down, encircle, or otherwise hinder the movement of any substantial bodies of Greek troops, and were held back by rearguard actions, even that is probably too much. It is not just Greek sources, but all histories of the war, whether written in English, German, French, etc. that treat the Epirus front at this time as a sideshow, and if they mention it, it is only under the impact the German offensive had on it, namely that the Greek army began to retreat. Carrier, who is referenced here as source (all citations from Italian sources, not Greek ones, are lifted from there): "On 12 April, left with no other options since the collapse of Yugoslavia and threatened by the German advance, Papagos ordered to his two commanders in Albania to initiate a general retreat... the four Greek divisions of the Western Macedonian sector began their withdrawal, shelling portions of the Italian line to cover the move. Cavallero ordered Pirzio Biroli, the commander of 9th Army, to launch the pursuit and drive back the enemy. In the morning of 13 April, all units left their defensive positions and started the pursuit. The Greek manoeuvre was done orderly and rear-guards efficiently delayed the movement of Italian troops...The Italian progression, supervised by Cavallero, was slow and uneasy...Right after General Pitsikas, Papagos’ subordinate for the Epirus sector, initiated the withdrawal of his line, the Italian units moved forward...Despite signs of unit disintegration, and poor morale, the Greek resistance was not over, and numerous delaying actions and destructions severely hampered the Italian pursuit". This is not the description of an offensive: the initiative was not in the Italians' hands, period. Hence a different title is necessary, along with careful wording in the article itself. Constantine ✍ 12:25, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- the wrong point is that even in a Greek retreat one wants to even say that it was a Greek victory and that it is also underestimated by the first reports of the second post-war period when the majority of the Greek army was against the Italians. The retreat was determined not only by the German intervention, which sped up the end of the conflict, but also by the failure of the Greek offensive of 3-8 April together with Yugoslavia to invade Albania. Furthermore, it is a contradiction to say that the Greeks retreated (and stop) and at the same time however to talk about the rearguards. The task of the rearguards is to resist but their deployment fell from Mount Tomori to the sea due to the loss of Klisura which caused a morale breakdown for the Greeks by the Italian forces. Furthermore in every clash with the Greek rearguards, who bravely attacked, they were won by the Italians. Furthermore the difficulties of the Italian pursuit were also and above all due mainly to the terrain itself which imposed insurmountable obstacles (as the entire campaign demonstrated). Then the very term “offensive” from the dictionary means: "Military operation that tends to ensure the material and moral advantages of the initiative, forcing the enemy to a defensive or passive attitude." In this case the offensive led to the fall of the enemy rearguards and, as said by Mario Montanari and Luigi Longo, it also represented a moral compensation for the Italian troops after months of uninterrupted fighting. So it was an offensive, certainly disordered due to the numerous obstacles encountered, which led to the fall of the enemy rearguards from Tomori to the sea and to the neutralization of the courageous Greek pockets of resistance. Richard Carrier, for example, says in an extract of his book: "contemporaneously, elements of the “Lupi di Toscana” and of the “Julia” also crossed the border and neutralised the final enemy resistance". So we can certainly say that it was a disorganized offensive for numerous reasons but that it was still an offensive and also won by the Italians. Furthermore, in the discussion above I reported the main clashes that took place between the Italian and Greek troops from 13 to 23 April during the second spring offensive. 95.248.99.205 (talk) 14:21, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Don't try to put words in my mouth, I never claimed this was a victory for Greece. "the failure of the Greek offensive of 3-8 April together with Yugoslavia to invade Albania" which neither the sources nor I dispute, however this is about what happened between 12-23 April, and how to label that. On the rest of your bolded quotations, what shall I say? Bring sources that the Greeks intended to hold on to Klisura, and that the Italians took it regardless, and you have a case. As long as Klisura was held in a deliberate rear-guard, delaying action, your point remains unproven, and you even support the case I am making: "Military operation that tends to ensure the material and moral advantages of the initiative". Where is the Italian initiative? The Greeks began retreating, and continued retreating, not as a result of any Italian attacks, but of their outflanking by the Germans, period. "crossed the border and neutralised the final enemy resistance" on 21 April, when the Greek Epirus army was in negotiations to capitulate to the Germans. I do not dispute there were battles, bloody ones, during this period, or that the Italians ended the war on the Greek border. These are facts. But a 'second Italian spring offensive', this was not, for aside from the fact that this term is a Wikipedia neologism, the whole series of events was not the result of an Italian initiative; the Italians were taking advantage of events that they had little control over. Constantine ✍ 14:42, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- you missed the point where the Italians caused the Greek rearguard to collapse from Mount Tomori to the Adriatic Sea. If the Italians had not had a minimal offensive push they certainly would not have caused such a collapse. So arguing about whether it was an offensive or not I don't think makes sense. It simply is, even if it happened in a disorderly manner. Period. I think more can be added to the page (which I would like to do in the future) but not that the title be changed. “The Greeks began retreating, and continued retreating, not as a result of any Italian attacks, but of their outflanking by the Germans, period.” Sure, but along with it there is also the reason why the Italians defended themselves from the Greek attacks of 3-8 April and which pushed the Greek general staff to retreat in view of the German offensive. “on 21 April, when the Greek Epirus army was in negotiations to capitulate to the Germans.” So we have to delegitimize the clashes that took place in those days? The Greeks could also push back the Italians while there were negotiations with the Germans but they did not succeed. We are dealing with the confrontation between Italy and Greece militarily in those last phases, when we then know that the Germans had an easy life against the Greeks because the bulk of the divisions were against the Italians and also logistically exasperated after months of blody war. 95.248.99.205 (talk) 15:25, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Thus the Greek army in the spring of 1941 was pressed to the east by the Germans who disrupted the defenses of both the Greeks and the W force, and to the north by the Italians who caused the collapse of the Greek rearguards. In addition, the Bulgarians from Thrace must also be added. 95.248.99.205 (talk) 15:48, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Don't try to put words in my mouth, I never claimed this was a victory for Greece. "the failure of the Greek offensive of 3-8 April together with Yugoslavia to invade Albania" which neither the sources nor I dispute, however this is about what happened between 12-23 April, and how to label that. On the rest of your bolded quotations, what shall I say? Bring sources that the Greeks intended to hold on to Klisura, and that the Italians took it regardless, and you have a case. As long as Klisura was held in a deliberate rear-guard, delaying action, your point remains unproven, and you even support the case I am making: "Military operation that tends to ensure the material and moral advantages of the initiative". Where is the Italian initiative? The Greeks began retreating, and continued retreating, not as a result of any Italian attacks, but of their outflanking by the Germans, period. "crossed the border and neutralised the final enemy resistance" on 21 April, when the Greek Epirus army was in negotiations to capitulate to the Germans. I do not dispute there were battles, bloody ones, during this period, or that the Italians ended the war on the Greek border. These are facts. But a 'second Italian spring offensive', this was not, for aside from the fact that this term is a Wikipedia neologism, the whole series of events was not the result of an Italian initiative; the Italians were taking advantage of events that they had little control over. Constantine ✍ 14:42, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- the wrong point is that even in a Greek retreat one wants to even say that it was a Greek victory and that it is also underestimated by the first reports of the second post-war period when the majority of the Greek army was against the Italians. The retreat was determined not only by the German intervention, which sped up the end of the conflict, but also by the failure of the Greek offensive of 3-8 April together with Yugoslavia to invade Albania. Furthermore, it is a contradiction to say that the Greeks retreated (and stop) and at the same time however to talk about the rearguards. The task of the rearguards is to resist but their deployment fell from Mount Tomori to the sea due to the loss of Klisura which caused a morale breakdown for the Greeks by the Italian forces. Furthermore in every clash with the Greek rearguards, who bravely attacked, they were won by the Italians. Furthermore the difficulties of the Italian pursuit were also and above all due mainly to the terrain itself which imposed insurmountable obstacles (as the entire campaign demonstrated). Then the very term “offensive” from the dictionary means: "Military operation that tends to ensure the material and moral advantages of the initiative, forcing the enemy to a defensive or passive attitude." In this case the offensive led to the fall of the enemy rearguards and, as said by Mario Montanari and Luigi Longo, it also represented a moral compensation for the Italian troops after months of uninterrupted fighting. So it was an offensive, certainly disordered due to the numerous obstacles encountered, which led to the fall of the enemy rearguards from Tomori to the sea and to the neutralization of the courageous Greek pockets of resistance. Richard Carrier, for example, says in an extract of his book: "contemporaneously, elements of the “Lupi di Toscana” and of the “Julia” also crossed the border and neutralised the final enemy resistance". So we can certainly say that it was a disorganized offensive for numerous reasons but that it was still an offensive and also won by the Italians. Furthermore, in the discussion above I reported the main clashes that took place between the Italian and Greek troops from 13 to 23 April during the second spring offensive. 95.248.99.205 (talk) 14:21, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Nobody disputes there were clashes during this phase of the war, and yes, these should absolutely be covered in an article like this. The problem is the spin being put by the title and phrasing of this article, which incidentally, is something you yourself acknowledge. The Greek rearguards are exactly why there is a POV and neutrality problem here: if an army advances only because its enemy is retreating, and that slowly and with difficulty, it is not really an offensive. It is, at best, a pursuit, but given that the Italians were not able to pin down, encircle, or otherwise hinder the movement of any substantial bodies of Greek troops, and were held back by rearguard actions, even that is probably too much. It is not just Greek sources, but all histories of the war, whether written in English, German, French, etc. that treat the Epirus front at this time as a sideshow, and if they mention it, it is only under the impact the German offensive had on it, namely that the Greek army began to retreat. Carrier, who is referenced here as source (all citations from Italian sources, not Greek ones, are lifted from there): "On 12 April, left with no other options since the collapse of Yugoslavia and threatened by the German advance, Papagos ordered to his two commanders in Albania to initiate a general retreat... the four Greek divisions of the Western Macedonian sector began their withdrawal, shelling portions of the Italian line to cover the move. Cavallero ordered Pirzio Biroli, the commander of 9th Army, to launch the pursuit and drive back the enemy. In the morning of 13 April, all units left their defensive positions and started the pursuit. The Greek manoeuvre was done orderly and rear-guards efficiently delayed the movement of Italian troops...The Italian progression, supervised by Cavallero, was slow and uneasy...Right after General Pitsikas, Papagos’ subordinate for the Epirus sector, initiated the withdrawal of his line, the Italian units moved forward...Despite signs of unit disintegration, and poor morale, the Greek resistance was not over, and numerous delaying actions and destructions severely hampered the Italian pursuit". This is not the description of an offensive: the initiative was not in the Italians' hands, period. Hence a different title is necessary, along with careful wording in the article itself. Constantine ✍ 12:25, 30 November 2024 (UTC)