How would, in place of WWI, a war between Austria-Hungary versus a coalition of Italy, Serbia, Montenegro, and Romania in the 1910s have turned out?

stevev

Ad Honorem
Apr 2017
3,454
Las Vegas, NV USA
#11
That's why I said "largely". The German offensive (1915?) overran a good part of northern Italy but before that I think AH and Italy were deadlocked in grim mountain fighting during the winter. At the same time AH was holding the the southern Eastern front against Russia. That's also another reason in the 1910 "what if" for AH to only contain Serbia. Your scenario could have touched off WWI in 1910.
The German offensive in Italy actually took place in 1917. Italy and AH were stalemated but the mountain fighting was brutal; especially in the winter 1916-17. The Battle of Caporetto lead to a deep penetration into northwest Italy with German help, but Italy held on. In 1918 the Germans pulled out for the western offensive of 1918.
 
Likes: Futurist

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
21,197
SoCal
#12
The German offensive in Italy actually took place in 1917. Italy and AH were stalemated but the mountain fighting was brutal; especially in the winter 1916-17. The Battle of Caporetto lead to a deep penetration into northwest Italy with German help, but Italy held on. In 1918 the Germans pulled out for the western offensive of 1918.
I wonder if Italy would have been more willing to make peace in 1917-1918 had the US not entered the war.
 

stevev

Ad Honorem
Apr 2017
3,454
Las Vegas, NV USA
#13
I wonder if Italy would have been more willing to make peace in 1917-1918 had the US not entered the war.
I'm of the opinion that US participation was critical defeating Germany in 1918. The allies might have won in a longer war because of the British blockade. Nevertheless, I agree that US participation was a likely factor in Italy remaining in the war to the end.
 
Apr 2017
1,555
U.S.A.
#14
That's why I said "largely". The German offensive (1915?) overran a good part of northern Italy but before that I think AH and Italy were deadlocked in grim mountain fighting during the winter. At the same time AH was holding the the southern Eastern front against Russia. That's also another reason in the 1910 "what if" for AH to only contain Serbia. Your scenario could have touched off WWI in 1910.
Austria-Hungary was not holding the front against Russia. In 1915 Russia annihilated the Austro-Hungarian army in Galicia, they never recovered from it. The Austro-Hungarian army had no reserves, they had a standing military and the equivalent of a national guard. When their army was crushed in Galicia they had to replace the troops with poorly trained, mostly slavs with little loyalty to the army they fought for. The officer corps was also severely reduced and they couldn't replace that. After 1915 Germany had to do almost all the heavy lifting on the eastern front, meanwhile Austria again failed to crush Serbia, requiring Bulgaria's intervention to breach their defenses. As for Italy they only held the line with German assistance and the victory at caporeto in 1917 was mostly because of massive Italian incompetence.
As for the OP, assuming this is after the Balkan wars; Austria would probably hold the line against Italy, eventually crush Serbia with Bulgaria and eventually crush Romania. The Balkan states were poorly equipped and had poor leadership in comparison to the Austrians. Although I doubt all the neighboring states would stand by and watch this.
 
Likes: Futurist

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
21,197
SoCal
#15
Austria-Hungary was not holding the front against Russia. In 1915 Russia annihilated the Austro-Hungarian army in Galicia, they never recovered from it. The Austro-Hungarian army had no reserves, they had a standing military and the equivalent of a national guard. When their army was crushed in Galicia they had to replace the troops with poorly trained, mostly slavs with little loyalty to the army they fought for. The officer corps was also severely reduced and they couldn't replace that. After 1915 Germany had to do almost all the heavy lifting on the eastern front, meanwhile Austria again failed to crush Serbia, requiring Bulgaria's intervention to breach their defenses. As for Italy they only held the line with German assistance and the victory at caporeto in 1917 was mostly because of massive Italian incompetence.
As for the OP, assuming this is after the Balkan wars; Austria would probably hold the line against Italy, eventually crush Serbia with Bulgaria and eventually crush Romania. The Balkan states were poorly equipped and had poor leadership in comparison to the Austrians. Although I doubt all the neighboring states would stand by and watch this.
The Balkan states were able to successfully take on the Ottomans in 1911-1912, though.
 
Sep 2012
3,887
Bulgaria
#18
I said in the 1910s--not specifically in 1910.
Understood. So you are talking about an alternative of the great war ergo after the balkan wars, because in your speculative scenario A-H and Bulgaria are allies. Ottomans and Bulgaria signed a defensive alliance in 1914, when these countries were still neutral (talking about the great war of coarse) so thus southern border is secured & Greece is kept in check. I have to disagree with what Visigoth posted, aside from Austrian Aryan Ubermensch vs Balkanic Untermenschen nonsense, why on the first place A-H and Bulgaria are in war? A-H army has to pass through all of Romania or Serbia in order to fight the Bulgarians, never mind the 'Balkanic' Ottomans.
 
Likes: Futurist

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
21,197
SoCal
#19
Understood. So you are talking about an alternative of the great war ergo after the balkan wars, because in your speculative scenario A-H and Bulgaria are allies. Ottomans and Bulgaria signed a defensive alliance in 1914, when these countries were still neutral (talking about the great war of coarse) so thus southern border is secured & Greece is kept in check. I have to disagree with what Visigoth posted, aside from Austrian Aryan Ubermensch vs Balkanic Untermenschen nonsense, why on the first place A-H and Bulgaria are in war? A-H army has to pass through all of Romania or Serbia in order to fight the Bulgarians, never mind the 'Balkanic' Ottomans.
A-H and Bulgaria are allies in this war.
 
Apr 2017
1,555
U.S.A.
#20
They performed better in WWI than the Austrians did, no?
That's debatable, the Austrians failed to crush Serbia twice, were nearly annihilated by Russia and required massive german aid to stay in the war. The ottomans required German direction to stay in the war, they did fight off the Gallipoli landings (although it was a sideshow in comparison to other fronts) and crush an indian army in Mesopotamia. But ultimately the ottomans faced weaker and fewer troops than the Austrians, and the ottomans were a much poorer force. The ottoman empire collapsed before the Austrians and they mattered less anyway.
 
Likes: Futurist