Austria's WWI Chances without the Italian Front

[FW]

How does everyone think the war would have gone for Austria without the Italian front to force them to split their army between Russia and Italy (after Serbia was knocked out).

[StG-44]

of course better

i think for the royal army italia were no match to fight alone, but
with russia on the other side... but the austrians were brave and fight the italians well.

Greetings Christian

[White_Trader]

stg u cannot say only austrians couse there were more hungarians and other people in the austrian army than austrians so the glory of the austro-hungarian empire belongs to all the people that lived in it.

[FW]

well of course it would have been better but I meant would they have been a lot more effective in fighting the Russians on the Eastern Front?

[StG-44]

stg u cannot say only austrians couse there were more hungarians and other people in the austrian army than austrians so the glory of the austro-hungarian empire belongs to all the people that lived in it.

yes of course, but it was one country, and with austria i mean also our brave hungarian soldiers. but i want to add that the italians where fight by special trainied austrian mountain troops.. in hungarian aren't many mountains you know

Austria did well against the russian. Well we had high losses, but we drove the russians back and of course with the German help (Tannenberg 1916 i think, Russian debacle).....

Greetings
Christian

[James McBride]

Stretch this a little further; what happens if Italy sticks with the Triple Alliance and a new front is opened up in France? It seems to me that Verdun might have been a decisive victory for the Germans if joined with an Italian attack in the south. Falkenhayn nearly did bleed the French to death, though at great cost, and the Germans could have pushed into the heart of France. Even if the Italians were as ineffective as they were against the Austrians, the drain on troops would still have helped the Germans greatly.
James

[dead-cat]

Austria did well against the russian. Well we had high losses, but we drove the russians back and of course with the German help (Tannenberg 1916 i think, Russian debacle).....

uh well? by what possible criteria??
Austro-Hungary entered the war almost completley unprepared. Huge deficiencies in equipment especially when it comes to artillery (arguably the most important weapon of that time) numberwise. After almost being smashed in August/Sept. 1914, the Austrio-Hungarian army wasn't able to mount any sucessfull large scale operation for the rest of the war.

In Dec. 1914 the Austro-Hungarian army in Galicia was down to about 500 000 men and 1578 artillery pieces (Janusz Piekalkiewicz) after losing 250 000 men in the fall 1914 and was pushed back from the imperial border almost all the way to Hungary (lucky for the Carpathian mountains).

From January 1915 the southern front was reinforced by german troops (7 divisions)

While we are at it, there was no Austro-Hungarian contribution at Tannenberg (1914). What you probably meant was the Brussilov offensive which, again, required considerable german assistance for the notoriusly weak southern wing which was reinforced with german troops from the western front despite the situation at Verdun and the expected Somme offensive.

[Balrog]

the austrian army did enter the war rather under prepared as far as cannons,etc. however, the army was well trained, disciplined, and with an extremely able officer corps. as for effectiveness, the austrian army maintained it's effectiveness trhoughout the war. starting in 1918, or perhaps even late 1917, wounded austrian soldiers were sent home after ecovery in hospitals, and the austrian lines never "collapsed", austria was never over run or anything close to that. and the austrains and germans had effective operations right into 1918. april 1918 25% of the italian army was either killed or captured in 1 day(caporetto). rommel was there, fighting in the german army. i don't agree that the austrian army stopped being effective after 1914. the austrian army held together mostly, right up until the last few weeks of the war(when the german army started to fall apart and the germna navy mutinied) so, i think the austrians did alright in ww1.

[Balrog]

the austrian army did enter the war rather under prepared as far as cannons,etc. however, the army was well trained, disciplined, and with an extremely able officer corps. as for effectiveness, the austrian army maintained it's effectiveness trhoughout the war. starting in 1918, or perhaps even late 1917, wounded austrian soldiers were sent home after ecovery in hospitals, and the austrian lines never "collapsed", austria was never over run or anything close to that. and the austrains and germans had effective operations right into 1918. april 1918 25% of the italian army was either killed or captured in 1 day(caporetto). rommel was there, fighting in the german army. i don't agree that the austrian army stopped being effective after 1914. the austrian army held together mostly, right up until the last few weeks of the war(when the german army started to fall apart and the germna navy mutinied) so, i think the austrians did alright in ww1.

[dead-cat]

there are countless reports of czech regiments deserting, some even through successfull offensives (like spring 1915). hard to call that disciplined. the reliable factions were hungarians and germans in austria, the slavic soldiers were often quick to desert because few felt this was their war, for most the austrians were opressors anyways.

define collapsed. the austrian army was pushed back from the border allthe way back to hungary (the carpathians saved them). during the Brussilov offensive 1916 they were pushed back again to a comparable amount and the front was only stabilized with german reinforcements from the western front. except the russian armies in eastern prussia no army, to my knowledge, was surrounded and taken out of action during the entire war.

during the war the austro-hungarian army had 87% losses (including dead, wounded, missing and prisoners). that with no verdun, ypres or somme. no successful large-scale military operation without german assistance. if you know one, please name it.

[Balrog]

that the austrians suffered reverses, i don't deny. as for a czech regiment deserting, so what. the majority of slavic soldiers remained loyal to the hapsburgs. slavic russia was plagued with more than just desertions, it fell apart in every way possible, including civil war, ethnic fighting(baltics,caucuses,etc.) and murdered the czar and his entire family. austria never came close to that. prague, zagreb, all remained part of the empire until the fall of 1918, when even internal germany was dealing with mutinies, desertions, and revolution. apparently the majority of the russian army no longer felt the war "was theirs" either. austria had successful operations in the weak balkans,against the italians and serbs, as for the western front/russian, the germans were stronger, and joint operations among all the allies was normal. the hapsburg army was not nearly as fragile as some peole in modern times are lead to believe.

[Gwynn Compton]

The confusion of someone else using your avatar

I just deleted two duplicate posts.

Gwynn

[FW]

also the majoirty of the Czech desertions came on the Russian front. The entire Army fought well and relatively cohesively on the Italian front until Autumn 1918. Everyone always makes a huge deal about the Czechs deserting but not one person mentions the mutinies France had within their army.

[James McBride]

The difference between the two is that the Czechs were facing active fighting, while the desertion and refusal to fight in France 1917 was largely unknown to the Germans. The western front didn't see any monumental campaigns during 1917, since the Germans were busy on other fronts.

Czech desertion also took place much earlier in the war, as the Russians were still in range of the Carpathians. Though the Czech desertion didn't cause a whole lot problems, I think it was of greater detriment than French mutiny.

James

[FW]

yes but again I was refering to the Italian Front on which my research has been concentrated and there the Czechs did not desert en masse.