|
Post by raharris1973 on May 27, 2024 17:27:38 GMT
Per wiki: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radomir_Putnik#World_War_IAs followers of WWI in the Balkans know, the Serbs took far longer for the Austro-Hungarian to defeat, with far more help from Central Powers partners than expected. Would Serbian resistance and longevity in the face of Austro-Hungarian attack have been significantly impaired without the Serbs having Marshal Putnik in command to defeat the first two or three Austro-Hungarian invasion attempts?
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,495
Likes: 12,915
|
Post by stevep on May 28, 2024 11:34:02 GMT
Per wiki: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radomir_Putnik#World_War_IAs followers of WWI in the Balkans know, the Serbs took far longer for the Austro-Hungarian to defeat, with far more help from Central Powers partners than expected. Would Serbian resistance and longevity in the face of Austro-Hungarian attack have been significantly impaired without the Serbs having Marshal Putnik in command to defeat the first two or three Austro-Hungarian invasion attempts?
Well it definitely helped Serbia in that they have a recognised and capable military leader. Judging by the comment about Prince Alexander seeking to replace him in early 1915 you could have had the army under royal control and the leadership might have been significantly worse. On the other hand he was already a very sick man and a younger general being prompted to the role could possibly have done better in some ways. However not clear how much Serbian resistance could have been extended or shortened either way once the Gallipoli campaign failed, which pretty much ensured Bulgaria joining the CPs and the fall of Serbia.
Wasn't aware Putnik had suggested a pre-emptive strike against Bulgarian force but given the casualties the Serbian army had already suffered and that German forces were involved in the attack from Bulgaria I can't see that having much hope of success.
|
|