In hindsight, it would probably be better for Italy to be neutral. But considering the public sentiment and imperial ambitions, if they must have entered the conflict, Italy would have done better entering the war later. Maybe alongside the US of a bit earlier. It is difficult to pinpoint a better time, since the war could have changed a lot without italian participation for a few years.
That would mean that the entente would be in a more unfavorable position, therefore making it easier to get what they wanted in the peace deals, for rescuing them.
Italy could have used those years to study the war and make an actual plan to attack, not to mention better equipping and training their military in the meanwhile and gearing their industry to war (think like Roosevelt did in WW2, where he spend his time between the start of the war and the US entry actually preparing the country and military to enter the conflict, which made the US a formidable force from the get go, especially when you compare to their entry in WW1). That would allow them to actually have sucess in occupying the areas they wanted to own. The Entente would not be easily able to deny territories occupied by the italians, especially if they fought on their own there.
The third point is that they would have faced a weaker Austria-Hungary, more affected by war exaustion. Which makes it all the easier to defeat them. The only disavantage is that the Central powers would have more experience, but preparing adequatelly for the conflict could compensate for that.
manebushin t1_j28sxxz wrote
Reply to Did Italy made a mistake by joining the Entente in 1915 during World War One? by Top_Moment4144
In hindsight, it would probably be better for Italy to be neutral. But considering the public sentiment and imperial ambitions, if they must have entered the conflict, Italy would have done better entering the war later. Maybe alongside the US of a bit earlier. It is difficult to pinpoint a better time, since the war could have changed a lot without italian participation for a few years.
That would mean that the entente would be in a more unfavorable position, therefore making it easier to get what they wanted in the peace deals, for rescuing them.
Italy could have used those years to study the war and make an actual plan to attack, not to mention better equipping and training their military in the meanwhile and gearing their industry to war (think like Roosevelt did in WW2, where he spend his time between the start of the war and the US entry actually preparing the country and military to enter the conflict, which made the US a formidable force from the get go, especially when you compare to their entry in WW1). That would allow them to actually have sucess in occupying the areas they wanted to own. The Entente would not be easily able to deny territories occupied by the italians, especially if they fought on their own there.
The third point is that they would have faced a weaker Austria-Hungary, more affected by war exaustion. Which makes it all the easier to defeat them. The only disavantage is that the Central powers would have more experience, but preparing adequatelly for the conflict could compensate for that.