Allies of Germany

[Alexandru H.]

Who was the most important ally of WWII Germany? Militarily speaking, of course.

Please explain your answer

[PanzerKing]

I'd say Romania first, then Finalnd and Hungary. Germany couldn't rely on Italy to do accomplish anything. I think Romania and Finland did the most, and Hungary too.

[Führerul]

JAPAN


I think Japan should be number 1, first Japan was a real world power, with an incredibly strong Navy. (That should have kept the Americans bussy in the event of war) 2nd - Japan is a very Militaristic country...perhaps more than Germany is... it is 'expansionist', it likes to conquer...it has little resources..so it must conquer to survive. Romania has plenty of resources, we don't need Oil, and we don't need Lebensraum in the East, so from that perspective we would not have been a usefull ally for Germany except if things had turned out the way they did...with the USSR invading Romania in 1940 and taking what did not belong to them...

Japan would have been usefull if they had made war on Russia, and attacked America later... Also the way they used their navy was not entirely decisive...first at Pearl Harbour they not only missed the Carriers, but failed to launch a 2nd Bombing followed by a ground landing... and later...ohh no.. at Midway...big shit...4 Carriers sunk, not good...and that was the turning point in the pacific war.

Romania could have been more usefull and the Germans would have had a better oppinion of us today had we not betrayed them. :roll:
In Theory Japan would have been a greater asset to Germany then Romania, but the way things turned out...Romania proved more usefull *
* if it was not for that shamefull act on the 23 August, and the events that followed.

[inahurry]

Japan is in another league, another continent, fighting an almost independent war.

From the European allies Romania comes first. The Finns put up a great performance and their efforts compared to the manpower base were more important but the Romanian army impact was more important through the overall course of the war. Well, against the Germans too.

[Victor]

QUOTE

Romania could have been more usefull and the Germans would have had a better oppinion of us today had we not betrayed them.

Here we go again!
1. What betrayal? There is no such thing as loyalty in politics. Only interest. Common interest brought us together, not love of each other.
2. How could Romania had been more useful? Germany was already defeated and could provide the necessary military force to guarantee our status quo. Dying together with Germany and its Fuhrer was not an option. Especially since NW Transylvania belonged to Hungary and to get it back we needed to fight. Nobody would have given it for free.
3. The Germans opinion of us today has nothing to do with WWII, but rather more with the inefficiency of our leaders and the acts of some of our citizens.

Now, back to the main topic. IMO, Germany had no Allies. Only satellites. Japan, the only power that can qualify as an Ally, fought its own war and there was almost no cooperation between the two. Italy tried to act like an Ally, but failed on several occasions.

[Dénes]

QUOTE

1. What betrayal? There is no such thing as loyalty in politics. Only interest. Common interest brought us together, not love of each other.

Besides vested political interests - which may shift during time - there are inter-governmental contracts, or pacts, officially signed by a certain country's representatives and legally binding.
'Führerul' probably refers to the Aug. 23, 1944 breach of the Tripartite Axis Pact Rumania had adhered to in 1940. If the unilateral move was a proper one from the political interests of that period, that's another matter.

QUOTE

3. The Germans opinion of us today has nothing to do with WWII.

I am not so sure about this. Although I do not have any direct proofs in this regards, I can tell you that several German persons (true, of the older generation) told me that they never forgot that Hungary stuck to Germany in hard times (this includes reference to the de facto opening of the Iron Curtain by Hungary for East Germans in early 1989 IIRC, which later on lead to the crumbling of the entire Wall).
However, most young Germans probably don't give a damn about history in general, as a result of the intense unhistorical education they get, including the feeling continuously propagated that they are the ‘guilty nation’ and their fathers/grandfathers were ‘sinners’. One pertinent example is that Germany is probably the only country in the world to have an army, where no decorations exist, as not to promote "militarism". But this is already off topic.

Dénes

[Geto-Dacul]

Führerul wrote :

QUOTE

Romania could have been more usefull and the Germans would have had a better oppinion of us today had we not betrayed them.

"We"??? "We", referring of course to the entire Romanian people... I have to remind you that those who did the act of 23 August were not representents of the Romanians. They were simply a bunch of irresponsible conspirators. So please do not blame an entire people for the crimes of a minority.

And BTW, Romania had to break one day or another with Germany, because Germany was unable to help us defend efficiently our country... And I don't think that the crumbling Reich would have been able to develop and produce the promised secret weapons.

[C-2]

I think it was Italy!
First Mussolini help Hitler in the early days,then they fought together in Spain,North Africa,Russia,and Italy.
Yes Italy had no Oil like Rom.but they had a better industry and colonies.

[Alexandru H.]

Maybe I should have said that Japan has nothing to do with the current poll! Actually, the competition is among Finland, Romania and Italy. I chose Finland, btw.

[Geto-Dacul]

Against USSR, I chose Romania... The Axis war in 1941-1944 was mainly against USSR, and Romania played a major role by sending much troops and delivering precious oil for the common cause... In higher measure than Finland. Finland fought more a war on her own, and did not conquer much foreign territory.

Getu'

[Victor]

QUOTE

Besides vested political interests - which may shift during time - there are inter-governmental contracts, or pacts, officially signed by a certain country's representatives and legally binding.

I was always curious to know what exactly did Antonescu sign. What was written in that treaty? I heard several historians say that Romania did not have a military pact with Germany, which would have prevented some of the German abuses.

[Csaba Becze]

C-2 you are wrong. Spain was a different situation. A real military alliance and cooperation in WW II started just in summer, 1940 between Italians and Germans.

After September, 1943 the Italians fought in both sides (but they had more efforts against the Germans) Hard to estimate their efforts after this date.

Actually, Italy had the longest continually wartime period (between Oct 1935-May 1945).

The Rumanian betrayal, as the Germans says, was not a lonely event - it was in 1916 also(and both were popular actions among the Rumanian people - actulally, in political view, both were good actions for the Rumanians).

BTW, you have spoken just about the 1941-1944 period. In fact, the eastern war lasted till May, 1945. The Rumanians and Finns left Germany in summer, 1944 and later attacked them (especially the Rumanians had important wartime efforts against Germany under heavy Soviet pressure).

Only Hungary fought till May, 1945 with Germany, and a part of Italy (amongt the significant nations). So, IMHO you must choose between this two countries, but this topic was discussed on the thirdreichforum before.

[Dénes]

QUOTE

Only Hungary fought till May, 1945 with Germany, and a part of Italy (amongt the significant nations).

Actually, Croatia also held on until the very end. In fact, remaining Croatian units fough throughout May 1945, well after VE-Day, they being the last organized armed forces to fight the Allies in Europe in W.W. 2.

Dénes

[inahurry]

Romania couldn’t accept indefinitely the situation arisen after the Vienna diktat. Germans were well aware of this fact, Antonescu discussed the issue bluntly with Hitler.

As long as unconditional German surrender was the only way to end the war from an allied viewpoint, Germans and to a certain extent its allies were left with very few choices.

Extreme situations produce radical overthrows. Each nation follows, or should follow if honestly represented by its leaders/politicians, its own interests. Within reason. First and foremost is the survival as a state within a territory. Romanian state, its sovereignty and territorial integrity were threatened in such a way (not to mention potential human losses) other long term strategic goals couldn’t be followed.

The Germans should understand, imo, there was and still is a certain sympathy for them, as a people, in Romania. There is appreciation for their qualities which Romanians view as representative for the whole, generalizing for the better, which is rare. This happening in a country who fought against them in 2 Wwars and was/is usually playing the French card (when Europe is concerned). While Romanians look upon French and Italians with sympathy and identify to a point with them through the closeness of common origins (Geto-Dacul will skin me alive for this, hehe) and cultural affinities, they also notice a lot of their flaws where Germans, as I mentioned, are idealized. Of course, in case we are dealt with like it happened in the summer of 1940 the reaction will be to defend ourselves.

If it is to look beyond WW2, Romania is the first eastern country to establish diplomatic relations with West Germany, for example.

[Csaba Becze]

Dénes, do you know, what does SIGNIFICANT mean? Croatia's role is evidently important for the Croats, but not at all for the other ppl