Message from the Comando Supremo staff
Follow us now on Twitter!
RSI units VS The Allies
Posted 07 August 2010 - 02:50 PM
I thought it would be good with some kind of list for future reference, and this is what I've come up with so far;
Various units of the 4 regular ENR divisions;
1st Alpini Div. "Monterosa"
2nd Inf. Div. "Littorio"
3rd Naval Inf. Div. "San Marco"
4th Bersaglieri Div. "Italia"
Various units of the Xª Flottiglia/Divisione MAS
Various units of the 29th Waffen Grenadier Division of the SS(Italienische nr. 1)
Btg. "IX Settembre"
1st Bersaglieri Btg. "B. Mussolini"
Btg. "B.Mussolini" (commanded by Rino Cozzarini.)
13th Black Brigade "Marchello Turchetti"
"Nembo "Autonomous Para. Btg.
Various small units in Normandy
Paratroopers on the eastern front(In german uniform)
Did the paratroopers who fought around Rome belong to Folgore?
If there's anything that isn't correct with this list or if there's anything you'd like to add, let me know!
Posted 24 August 2010 - 06:08 PM
I don't know and don't think so.
Anyway, if you are able to read Italian language, here you find an old article (april 20th, 1945) on the newspaper "Il Resto del Carlino" dealing with the fight of Pianoro: http://www.fondazionersi.org/mediawiki/ ... Acta16.pdf
Posted 26 August 2010 - 12:28 AM
Yes, I believe so. I'll get back to you later with more info. out of a book I'm borrowing from milice* that has a section on the chemical/smoke units stationed in the Baltic.
«Gruppo Italia»: A Bersaglieri Reenactment Group in the Pacific Northwest
Posted 12 September 2010 - 11:38 AM
Posted 12 September 2010 - 09:12 PM
Not really sure I understand what you are trying to say. AFAIK, no Italian 2GM veterans are posting on this site. Nothing posted here is first hand information.
This is the crux of the matter. Is the statement made by a poster here on Comando Supremo taken from a source or is it merely speculation? As I have stated, no 2GM Italian veterans are members of this forum. So anything posted by a forum member came from somewhere. Many here don’t initially offer the source for their statements and therefore are asked to provide it.
Sometimes the idea/concept is initially speculation. Note the speculation, when driven by verifiable data, can lead to new research and discovery of knowledge. Just saying Italy could have won the 2GM is meaningless; stating Italy could have won the 2GM and offering a logical discussion using verifiable facts provides value to the discussion.
Most here on the forum are not asking for ‘impossible validation’. They are merely asking for something that indicates that the idea/concept being offered is something more that wishful thinking. Too often on websites an individual will offer a thought/position on the matter that counters accepted thinking. Rather than offering anything verifiable as a starting point, they just argue it could be so regardless of the mountain of data offer to refute the thought/position. Some members now ask for some logic showing that the thought/position (or the individual) merits being taken seriously before they ‘jump into the fray’.
Many of the individuals on Comando Supremo are reenactors. Part of the hobby is educating the public. Are there exceptions to everything? Likely yes.
To take your own example of weapons in Iraq. Did soldiers in your unit use captured weapons? It appears the answer is yes. Did you unit/army have a policy to use capture weapons whenever possible? The answer is no. In fact, use of the captured weapons was not condoned and they were confiscated when the leadership/authorities became aware of their existence. As a reenactor, would it be correct to carry a captured weapon as part of a display or tactical event? No, because your army took the time and effort to equip you with the proper weapons. Could you carry a captured weapon if the display was for a specific historical action in which it is well documented that the unit (not an individual) carried and used capture weapons? Yes, but the display should be clear that this was a unique event and not the norm.
This specific thread was identifying historical actions between formed R.S.I. units and Allied forces. Why ask this question? Because it is well documented that most R.S.I. units were used in rear area security or in the Balkans. Is it historically correct to have R.S.I. units as part of a tactical against American, UK/Commonwealth, and other Allied troops? Generally no, it is not historic. But as this thread demonstrates, there are exceptions. Therefore event organizers can offer a tactical event that includes R.S.I. units in such situations.
Again, I am not sure of the point you are attempting to make.
Posted 27 September 2010 - 06:47 PM
If you are able to read italian, this page can be useful:
Even here: http://books.google.it/books?id=hihmEt6 ... ni&f=false
you could find something, although I' m not sure that the preview allows the see the pages dedicated to Mussolini battalion.
Share this topic:
|Topic||Forum||Started By||Stats||Last Post Info|
|The Spanish Civil War Sites?||Related Links||Guest_stefano_*||
|"The Illusion of Victory" Fascist Propaganda and t||Books, Film, Audio & other Media||Guest_RobJac_*||
|Good Photo of the Aquila Aircraft Carrier||Image Sharing||Jim H||
|Info on Italy and its allies||Related Links||Guest_Marcus_*||
|Italian RSI Figurines||Scale Models||Guest_Barbarigo_*||