Third HoneyMoon, in Europe!

Huda - I think that you are going to spend to much time travelling and not really enjoying the beautiful cities.
I disagree with the others, we spent 3 nights in Venice - and would have love at least another 3. Dont' try to see to much this trip - save something for your next trip. Enjoy!

You are spending a great deal of time on a train - travel time. That said, personally I would skip Milan as it does not have much to offer unless your purpose in this destination is high end shopping. I would add a day to Rome and a day to Interlaken. There is so much to do in the Lauterbrunnen valley area of Switzerland.

For starters, I would cut one of your nights in Venice and add it to your time in Rome. There is far too much to see and do in Rome in just two nights. I haven't been to Milan but it will be interesting to see if the RS readers believe that is time well spent.

It's not that your trip is too long... it's that your changing locations far too frequently. I'll let others comment more on that point. Skip Interlaken at that time of year. The mountains are hidden by thick cloud cover more often than not and most of the businesses in the Alpine towns go on temporary hiatus.

IMHO Roy is right. I'd take a day from Venice and give it to Rome. Enjoy your trip.

With all the wonderful things to see and do whilst abroad why would you go to Disney? It will be little different from any other theme park. You'll be in Paris, romantic capital of the world, and you have time together without the baby. I'd rather spend the day in bed.

I agree that you are going to spend a lot of time on trains and not see much of each place you want to go to. I have spent a week in Rome, a week in Florence and a week in Paris and still did not see everything I wanted to see! Skip Milan and spend more time in Rome, don't cut out Venice but do cut out Brussels. Paris, Rome, Florence and Venice are big cafe cities and you want to enjoy sitting down and eating and relaxing. Paris, Florence have the best museums. Just walking around Rome and seeing the city is a feast for the eyes. Rome has many churches where the best art work can be found. The places you picked should not be rushed but enjoyed. You have the time so enjoy them and see less places but spend more time in the places you are in. You will enjoy your time better.
Amsterdam has some great musuems and the Anne Frank's house which is a must. And walk by all the canals. What I am trying to say is it takes time to see the sights and travel around each city either by walking or by taking the metro. So you don't want to get frustrated by only seeing one or two things in a city and then have to leave. I have not been to Interlaken or Annecy so I do not have an opinion on these places. Have a wonderful time.

How about this plan: Rome: 3 nights Florence: 3 nights Venice: 3 nights Milan: 1 night (to relax before going to Interlaken) Interlaken: 3 nights Zurich: 1 night (to relax before going to Paris) Paris: 3 nights
Brussels: 3 nights

I still say skip Interlaken at that time of year. It isn't worth the considerable cost and effort to get there in March and April. It's the season that historically has the worst cloud cover and most of the mountain businesses are shut down. If you want to see the Alps, I would suggest trying the Mount Blanc massif area on the Italian-French border. Interlaken would be worthwhile by late May, but not in March or April.

How wonderful for the two of you to get some free time together. I'm assuming you're flying into Rome and out of Brussels. I like your new itinerary in that you are spending more time in each city. For me, it would be a bit too much city siteseeing. I like to mix the larger cities with smaller towns. Orvieto is a quaint, small hill town that is a 1 hr. train ride from Rome. This would give you a day to relax between Rome & Florence. I would keep Milan. We just returned from Italy and I really enjoyed this city. We spent one night there. I like that you're going to the Swiss Alps, however, don't stay in Interlaken. Rick Steves' tours stay in Lauterbrunnen and then if the weather is good, they take the lifts up into the mountains. Zurich is nice, but another option would be Lucerne or a town in France (I think that was your original plan). Munich is also a lot of fun and has a lot to see and do. I, personally, would not spend time in Brussels. I'd rather stay in Brugge. Again, it depends on what your interests are. Either way, I know you'll have fun making memories with your husband.

Three nights in Paris is not enough, that only gives you two full days there. I would cut out the one night in Milan and Zurich, you don't need to "relax" before going to Interlaken and Paris. The more time you have for Paris the better!

I agree that you should reduce the number of cities. and if this is a honeymoon, I strongly suggest spending more time in Venice and Paris, 2 of the most romantic cities in the world. Rome is third.
I too think EuroDisney can be passed up -- save this trip for later, when your daughter can go also!

I agree with skipping Milan and Zurich entirely. It's more exhausting to stop for 1 night in a city (trains, getting to hotel, unpacking, packing, getting to train station, more trains) than to have a long travel day. After the long travel day, you can really relax for 4 nights in 1 city.

I love Switzerland with the best of them but I wouldn't try to go to the Berner Oberland in March, for the reasons others have given. Also, if you do decide to go there, there is no reason to go to Zurich "to relax" after Interlaken, BO, Lauterbrunnen Valley. They are very close, and I never felt the slightest "relaxed" there. I take you will be flying in from Dubai so there won't be much jet lag. Good you're flying east to west. I wouldn't have 3 nights is Brussels. Bruges is the place, but in March? Amsterdam is also wonderful, but in March you're a month early for Koekenhof. Stick to Italy and Paris might be the way I'd go, FWIW.

I absolutely agree with Nigel (and Sarah)... I would only do Italy and Paris.

I strongly suggest cutting back on the number of stops. You can get an overnight train direct from Venice to Paris and might want to consider that. We have done overnight trains multiple times and find that to be a good way to cover long distances (get a sleeper cabin). Milan is not a tourist destination by most accounts, more of a business center and good for shopping and fashion, but you can get that in Paris and Rome. Train passes are not always (or, even often) a good deal, so do the math before you purchase.

Can I put Lake Como and Interlaken in the same trip? or are they almost the same? Trip is postponed to end pf March.

Lake Como would be a better choice in March, because there tends to be less cloud cover than Interlaken.

Guys, I want to clarify that my husband and I are not very big fans of historic places and such, so I am concerned about my long stay in italy. what do you guys think?