Sardinia and Corsica?

What if the allies had invaded Sardinia and Corsica instead of Sicily after their victory Tunisia?
They could have done it. The Germans believed the next step for the allies was probably going to be the Pelopenesse and Greece. This was due to the planting of 'major martin' on the Spanish coast. Therfore, the oppurtunity existed to invade Sardinia or Corisica. If they had where would the allies land next? most certainly north of Rome. possible even the south of France. The alternative were endless.

 

I think that was not a very suitable option because those two isles were far from any Allied naval base. Sicily was near. But Sardinia and Corsica were within the range of Italian and German air bases in Italy and Vichy France's as well. Besides, that wouldn't have knocked Italy out of the war.

 

true. but there would have been parity in the air and the allies would have had complete superiority on the sea, which would have hindered german reinforcement. they would have run the gauntlet of allied naval patrols, whereas in sicily they could use the straits of messina to transfer men and material to the allied.

 

In fact it was Churchill who wanted an invasion in Sicily. Because he said that is was the soft belly to attack towards Germany.

The main reason - in my opinion - was that the Allies already saw that the Italians didn't want to fight anymore.

Why not Sardinia or Corsica?

I don't know. Maybe - like general said - the airfields were just too close near the landing beaches.

 

Sardinia and Corsica simply weren't priority targets. And hitting the South of France before Italy would just be a bad idea. And hitting north of Rome would not have been a good idea either. Invading Italy from them might have been very complicated, as German forces could have reacted much faster then they did to the historical invasion, which could possibly mean Germany would be able to fortify the peninsula and force the Allies out of Italy and into a tough decision about where to go next. I think Sicily was the best option considering the circumstances.

 

Ah but there were some forces available in southern France that could have been pounded into submission before the battles up the boot. My Fallshirm friend was stationed there for a short time before being sent northward up the crappy French roads to the Normandy front. He told me the Fallshirm units were such a mess after Sicily that they were rushed so fast into southern France or into Italy they didn't know which end was up.....no heavy weapons, very little motor transport, no supplies and little food and water, plenty of wine of course and hot looking babes, but no replacements for over-exhausted troops. His thoughts ran through the gammut of when will I be killed or when will I be captured, of which he was later in the Normandy battles.

E

 

I rememeber having read that the US side wanted to invade Corsica and Sardinia next, The British side wanted to go for the Balkans ( Churchill ).

They made some sorta agreement on this and went for Italy...

 

I think that because the Brittish still had the most troops in the region at that time, they had the right to choose the area where they should attack.

 

If the Allies had attacked Sardinia and Corsica, they could have quite easily taken them. By taking them they would have several options open to them. Firstly they could have invaded Italy north of Rome and finished the war off in that country much more quickly, the Germans would never of had the time to set up there defensive lines that held the allies up. By doing this they could have been on the border of the Reich much more quickly. Secondly, they could have invaded the south of France much earlier, and possibly even before overlord. What if this had happened and the Allies had decided to through there lot into a campaign coming up from the south of France or from Austria?

 

Remember the logistiques. It is very hard to bring your supplies to one of those isles and then to somewhere in the north of Rome.

Remember that the Luftwaffe was still present in Italy at that time.

 

True but the allies had near supremacy of the sea so transporting supplies from these islands to rome would not be that hard as long as a port was captured.

 

But there were a lot of good Wehrmacht divisions in the neighbourhood of Rome and in Rome itself.

They tried an invasion in Anzio and it almost failed!

 

Yeah but that was about 6 months after the invasion of italy. I am talking about earlier before the italians fully collapsed and the germans sent divisions south. It was the capitulation of italy that forced germany to send divisions to the region.

 

But then agains than it is still possible that the Italians would fight the Allies. Besides there would have been a gigantic logistique problem.

Transporting all the tired troops to Corsica or Sardinia. After that again attacking the Italy.
Also food and munition supplies would be needed.

I don't know if there were enough in North-Africa to hold a line in Italy. Because if you would have to bring them to North-Africa it will take a while.

 

Erwin, you have miss understood the premise here. the allies have already taken the islands it is a question of where would the go next.
The allies could have taken the islands. the units were not tired the units earmaked for sicily were fairly fresh.

 

Then again we have the problem of the Luftwaffe.

 

A qoute by the military historian Carlo d'este: "What made sardinia attractive was the fact that in 1942 and subsequently in 1943 the island was lightly defended compared to sicily...Had the allies chosen the more daring sardinian and corsican option, there is no doubt that the way the italian campaign was fought would have been fundamentaly different."
So sardinia was a viable target that could have reshapen the entire course of the campaign in the med.

 

Well, but invading Sardinia and Corsica would have only provoked the reinforcement of Southern France and Northwestern Italy, making a landing very difficult and operations in land, impossible.