Where the hell is Monte Cassino?

So I'm watching Mike and Mike at 5 AM because my head cold prevents me sleeping, when Ryan texts me about the BATTLEFIELDS series on the Military Channel. No argument from me, it's top of the line production and one of the very best series concerning WWII. Then Ryan goes on and tells me how underrated the Italian campaign was, the overall strategic importance, the third front, the propaganda. None of which, I will add here, this wonderful show says. Know why? Because it isn't true.

The Italian Campaign was one of the biggest overall tragic wastes of WWII. In scope and casualties it far outshines Operation Market Garden, and misses pushing said operation out of number one in the West only because it finally did succeed in capturing Italy.

Once Sicily falls, the entire Med is the Allies to play with. From bases in North Africa and Sicily, a two pronged invasion coinciding with the Normandy invasion of 6 June 1944 on the southern coast of France (which does happen 15 Aug 1944) achieves the same goal of drawing resources from the main thrust of the invasion. All the thousands upon thousands of Allied casualties were for nothing because the Wermacht losses were marginal. Italy is a defensive action commander's wet dream. Add to that the blunders of Clark, commander of 5th Army, and you have a strategic failure. FDR buckles under Stalin's pressure for a third front, refuses to listen to the warnings of Churchill concerning Communist post war policies dictating their offensive movements, and throws men and material away into a needless Italian campaign.

Even General Burnside would have looked at Monte Cassino and said, "Not today, boys." And that's BURNSIDE we're talking about. And Monte Cassino is only ONE of many mistakes made on the campaign. All the Allied successes in the boot were bypass actions. My contention is the ENTIRE BOOT should have been bypassed.

Thoughts?