The Facist Social Republic of Italy...

[DrG]

90000 in other units of Navy, air force and Flak (including personnel serving in luftwaffe)

This data about Italian soldiers in the Luftwaffe is only for those serving in Italy or everywhere?
Nino Arena gives a total of 169,790 Italians in the Luftwaffe .

PS This is a good article (in Italian) about the anti-aircraft defence of the RSI: http://www.arsmilitaris.org/pubblicazioni/Antiaerea/antiaereaRSI.htm.

[rh_LiteVixeN]

Fascinating

[Lupo Solitario]

90000 in other units of Navy, air force and Flak (including personnel serving in luftwaffe)

This data about Italian soldiers in the Luftwaffe is only for those serving in Italy or everywhere?
Nino Arena gives a total of 169,790 Italians in the Luftwaffe .

PS This is a good article (in Italian) about the anti-aircraft defence of the RSI: http://www.arsmilitaris.org/pubblicazioni/Antiaerea/antiaereaRSI.htm.

well, in itself this data was about Italy only but also including entire ANR and units abroad, the Arena data seems me always overstated (I tend to not take Arena as a good source)

[Luca]

I have absolutly no knowledge of Italy's Army after the armistace. I'm aware that Mussolini still had Italians willing to fight the Allies, but I can't find any information about the "new" Italian Army. I would like to know the basics, you know, how large it was, effectiveness, combat experience, and bascially anything!

I would appreciate any info you could offer, thanks!

In my organizate home i have the graphics of the total amount of fighters of the RSI but in this moment i cant find it.
First of all i want say that depend a lot of the month in subject, the numers goes up and down.
In any case the max amount arrive around 600.000 fighters, if i remeber well.
I want also say that this number that seem at my eyes very not important, is very debate in my land.
A lot of historians try to make this number the more possible low, and arrive to really incredible numbers.
The cause of this funny "historical correct" action is for try to appear the Italians as a unlucky people where a little amount of bad fascists have the power with the support of some little numbers of criminal fighters against some "millions" of heroics partisans fighting for the freedoom.
The facts, as the numbers, was very different.
So was a really civil war cause in some families was possible found 1 brother in partisan band and 1 brother in black shirt but the really amount of the two parts was yes, a lot not proportionate, but not in the sense that somone try to say.

Luca

[Acolyte]

About his movie "Salò" it must not be forgotten the most imortant thing about the work: it's the transposition in modern times of the very famous book "The 120 days of Sodoma and Gomorra" written by Marquis D.A.F. De Sade, that's why you see in it such disgusting scenes.

Best regards

It should be clarified that the novel is entitled 120 Days of Sodom or the School of Libertinism and was written by de Sade while imprisoned in the Bastille in 1785. Sade was an avid supporter of the French Revolution mainly because he absolutely detested all organised dictatorial authority, especially that of the state and the church. This appealed to many leftist intellectuals, Pasolini included. The 120 Days... is not only the completest catalouge of sexual deviations but is an apparent criticism of the corrupt French ancien régime. Notice that the four villains in the book are a prince, a judge, a bishop and a banker - representatives of judicial, fiscal, religious and aristocratic authority, all of which Sade thoroughly rejected. All of them are very corrupt, manipulative and despotic. Sade thought the same of the whole ancien régime; he asserted that an individual's inherent evilness will promptly out in the moment he/she is given authority over other individuals, and that organised authority always seeks to manipulate and exploit people through the imposition of despotic rules. Pasolini held roughly the same beliefs, which was probably the main reason he directed the movie Salo (although it was specifically intended to portray the manipulative nature of fascist totalitarianism).

(please excuse my off-topic post)

[Vikki]

I'm reviving this old thread because, like the original poster, I know next to nothing about the Italian military or civilian organizations. But I found the photo below in a German women's publication, and thought this would be an excellent place to get some information on it, since there was an earlier discussion of women in the military:

By the way, for the first time in Italian history, also women were allowed to become members of the Armed Forces. The SAF (Servizio Ausiliario Femminile), commanded by Brigadier General countess Piera Gatteschi Fondelli had a total of 4,500 women (300 KIA and 330 WIA and MIA).

The caption of the photo reads "Führerinnen des Fascio Femminile in einem Mütter-schulungskursus" (Leaders of the Fascio Femminile in a Mothers Training Course). The various brief references I've found to this organization define it as an Italian fascist girls' organization, or as the Italian fascist women's organization--the equivalent of the German NS-Frauenschaft?--so I'm fairly sure the women are in a civilian organization rather than a military one. Does anyone have any further information on the organization?

Thanks,
~Vikki

[Cartaphilus]

I have a question that propose: could we consider the Italian Social Republic an occupied nation, like Norway or Belgium? There was a german military commander (¿Kesselring?), a german civil plenipotentiary (Rudolf Rahn), a german police leader (Karl Wolff). There was also a local government with limited power and no real armed forces, supported by the German occupiers.

From this point of view, do you think that the Italian Social Republic was closer than Petain's Vichy France, or Quisling's Norway, or Nedic's Serbia?

[michael mills]

More like Petain's France.

Petain was the French Head of State before the surrender. The German occupiers permitted him to stay on in that role.

Mussolini had been Italian Head of Government until he was deposed in July 1943. The Germans simply restored him to his former post, over those parts of Italy that had not been occupied by the Allies.

Once back in power, Mussolini carried out a political revolution, abolishing the monarchy and establishing a republic. Petain also carried out a political revolution in France, abolishing the Third Republic and establishing the French State (Etat Français).

Thus, Mussolini's position was most similar to that of Petain. Both took advantage of German intervention to carry out political revolutions that they had previosuly been unable to do.

By contrast, Quisling and Nedic were outsiders who were put into power by the German occupiers.

[Cartaphilus]

It's true, but I see some differences between Saló and Vichy:

- Petain was the legal heir of the III Republic. Mussolini's heir legally was Badoglio.
- Vichy was a full sovereign state, but Salo's existence depended of german protection.
- In Petain's France were not german military, political and policial presence. In RSI stayed Kesselring, Wolff and Rahn.
- Vichy had its own armed forces. Italian armed forces joined the King and Badoglio, and rejectes Mussolini (except Grazziani and few more).
- Vichy controlled the french colonial empire, Italian Republic no. Even, the germans decided to retain Albania and Dodecanese for themselves, and not gave these lands to Mussolini.
- Vichy was internationally recogniced as the legal French state, included the United States. RSI was only recogniced by Germany's allies.
- Petain was "elected" by the french state. Mussolini was putted by the german military intervention.


From these points of view, I consider the Social Republic of Italy was not an Axis Nation in the same level that Romania or Hungary, but a german occupied contry with a puppet colaborationist government like Norway, Greece or Serbia.

[michael mills]

From these points of view, I consider the Social Republic of Italy was not an Axis Nation in the same level that Romania or Hungary, but a german occupied contry with a puppet colaborationist government like Norway, Greece or Serbia.

Feel free to do so.

But many of Mussolini's former followers, ie those who had been his followers before his deposition in July 1943, rejoined him after he was freed by German forces.

Also parts of the Italian armed forces rallied to Mussolini as head of the Italian Social Republic, eg the units under Prince Valerio Borghese. In addition, large numbers were recruited into the new armed forces of the Italian Social Republic, particularly among elements of the population opposed to the Communist partisans.

I am not sure of the exact numbers, but I think the number of Italians fighting for Mussolini was at least as great as the number in the Royal Italian armed forces fighting on the side of the Allies. The armed forces of the Italian Social Republic were deployed against the Communist partisans in the north, rather than against the Allies in the centre.

The operations of the armed forces of the Italian Social Republic against the Communist partisans had very much the nature of a civil war, quite similar to the operations of Vichy police and militia forces against the Communist resistance in France.

[Merobaudes]

Hi.
I'm not an exepert on the story of Italian Social Republic.
Anyway, AFAIK, a few hundred thousand men, voluntarily or under thread, were enrolled by various military formations of RSI.
Here they speak of five hundred thousands: http://books.google.it/books?id=Luv7bqM ... nd&f=false

Best

[madmike61]

yes, this number is almost correct. You can count 250.000 of RSI army, about 140.000 for the GNR, a few thousand of Brigate Nere, and also the Air and Navy forces.

[Loïc]

Vichy was a full sovereign state, but Salo's existence depended of german protection

Your post about Vichy (army, fleet, international recognition etc...) seems only for the period before november 1942
a full sovereign state ? :
France was divided in various zones, even the southern "free" zone (french terminology) was named "indirectly controlled zone" by the germans, how could it be a "full sovereign" state when Germany occupied France and controlled Vichy France since june 1940, or when a state, Germany, interfere even in french diplomatic relations with others states (forbidden with Belgium Netherlands Luxembourg Norway Poland...) and Laval he wasn't put into power by the Germans ?

on the other hand seeing the datas about RSI Army the French Armistice Army wasn't used against the French Resistance or fought with the Germans, there was a even a major Resistance network raised from this army, Vichy armed forces were anti-collaborationnist anti-germans, RSI was a true facist force allied to the Nazis and Axis and never lost their armed forces (having even some units in France until 8th may 1945), Vichy France was more a neutral state from this point of view when it had a free zone, army, fleet, air forces and empire, losing all that in november 1942



The RSI and Croatia are the two only collaborationnist states in Europe, the others are Axis allies (Romania Hungary) or occupied countries with a collaboration policy or collaborators govts (Vichy, Serbia, Greece..), not the same thing that collaborationnist policy or government, many members usually write both terms often indistinctly but I am not sure that they really understand the exact meaning of the words they are writing

[Cartaphilus]

If Social Republic of Italy was a sovereign state, recogniced by Germany as an ally, why rge germans didn't returned to Mussolini the control over Albania, Montenero, the Dalmatic Coast and Dodecanese? And why Germany annexed "de facto" italian lands (Adriatic Litoral and Prealpine Zone)? Are not these facts the signal of a puppet state under german control and occupation?

[madmike61]

come on guys, it was 1944, Vichy was just nominally a 'free state', France was divided in two: who could says that Germany leave 'free states' in their occupied zones?

Vichy have a slightly different status just because it starting in 1941, when Hitler still believe to conquer the entire Europe, and could leave a puppet state that non absorb any occupation troops.

But RSI and Vichy were exactly the same. More: RSI was a true allied of Germany, Vichy, as the facts post-42 have established, was not.