Allies of Germany

Given that 95+ % voted Hitler into power so that he could take their voting rights away, one might conclude there is some uncomfortable level of overlap. It's your right to make a difference between the Germans and the nazis (and I certainly do) but, to the foreign victims of the nazi political regime, or those fighting desperately for their survival, they were less inclined to make such a fine distinction.

Is this valid for the Russians/Soviets, too? Namely, since the Communist Party's approval was close to 100%, all who voted (not only the Russians, but all ethnics from the former USSR) were Communists?

Gen. Dénes

When you have only one party you have no elections you have only a farce.

The NSDAP conquest of power was a regular democratic process as they started almost from scratch and constantly progressed until 1933. The best exemple hisory can give of a democracy torpedoed from inside. The republic of Weimar had insufficient defenses. Tolerance has a limit and a price.

This post has been edited by Chandernagore on January 24, 2005 05:37 pm

Why not blame the democratic process? If democracy allowed a non-democratic party to ask for votes, maybe it's not the problem of the germans but more of a political system...

Oh, yes, Darwin, the mother of all monsters

There are several democratic processes, many variants. The Republic of Weimar certainly had weaknesses.

However you have very peculiar ideas when it come to attributing responsibilties.

A thief break in your house during the night. He shots you dead, rape your children and dog, burn everything and run away with your mothers' jewels.

Your culpability order would perhaps be something like this.

1. The architect for not making a more solid house
2. The police, for failing to catch the thief in time
3. The weather, for 3m snow would have prevented the murderer from
reaching the house.
4. The alignment of Venus with Mars
5. The ether
6. Negative waves
7. ....
....
....
958. The thief, well, but that's far from sure, we need to investigate more. Wait, maybe he's a victim too.

As far as I am concerned I still place the thief as number 1.

This post has been edited by Chandernagore on January 27, 2005 06:52 pm

1. Romania- of course was Germany's greastest ally durring the Second World War. No other nation contributed so either economically or militarially to the Axis cause. Romania Troops fought bravely against the Red Army and the Romanian Air Force out fought the Red Air Force through out the war. If Germany had allowed Romania to be better armed; Romania's armed force's would have had a far greater effect on the course of the war, then they did. The Romanian Air Force also fought well against the US Air Force in 43 & 44. Without Romanian Oil Germany would have lost the much earlier then it did.

2. Japan- the strongest axis ally both economcally and militarially, was far too distant, to be of any direct aid to Germany, during the course of the war in Europe. Japan did not attack the USSR in 1941, which may have caused the fall of the Soviet Union. Instead Japan foolishly attacked the US!!... which brought the US into the war and only hurt Germany greatly.

3. Italy- was on paper, Germany's strongest ally in Europe. They had a hard time conquering lowly Ethiopia, got beat up by the French in1940, then completly humbled by the Greeks. Then the British, (who were badly out-numbered by the Italians) completly humilated them in North Africa. The only Italian arm that fought with any skill was their Air Force. On the Eastern Front Italian troops were barely able to deal with partizan's.

4. Finland- what can I say except that the Finnish Air Force and Army were a model of excellence and skill. Only the small size of the Finnish armed forces and Finlands refusal to invade the USSR prevent Finland from ranking maybe second!!!

5. Hungary- weaker then Romania or Finland, Hungary refused to send its army against the USSR for most the war. Their Air Force fought well against the Soviets.

6. Slovakia- Air Force fought well against the Red AF, claiming more then 250 Red aircraft downed. Sent a fast division to the Eastern Front.

7. Croatia- Air Force fought well against the Red AF, army pre-occupied with Partizens for entire War.

8. Bulgaria- refused to fight the Soviet Union, help invade Yugoslavia and fought the RAF and USAAF in 44.

This post has been edited by Victor on February 12, 2005 10:54 am

Stephen Dabapuscu, I have edited your post. National insults will not be tolerated here.

As for the your analyzis of Italian participation into WW2, I suggest you do more research on the subject and you will see that the oversimplifications you posted aren't exactly correct. Both the Regia Marina and the Regian Aeronautica fought bravely against a numerical and sometimes technically superior foe. In North Africa people forget that the bulk of Rommel's forces was made up of Italians and fought quite well under his leadership. In Russia, the Italian Alpini fared very well during the 1942/43 Soviet offensives.

To Victor's remarks I will also add the Italian artillerymen. That arm was the real Italian backbone in the desert war. At Sidi Barani, and despite the havoc wreaked by the British heavy tanks, the Italian artillery groups distinguished themselves with a show of skill and uncommon courage that can only be admired.

It's not all "run away" stuff

make that 35% and you'll be closer to the truth. Still a big percentage, but a far cry from 95%.

make that 35% and you'll be closer to the truth. Still a big percentage, but a far cry from 95%.

That must be 1932. I stand corrected.

After entering Rhineland it must have been 150 %

Well I know no voting occured by then

This post has been edited by Chandernagore on February 17, 2005 03:23 pm

I tend to think of the Regia Marina's impact as being limited by limited more by poor warship design choices before the war than by lack of skill or bravery in battle. Overestimating the tactical value of speed compared to guns and armour, and the impact of true (carrier-borne) naval aviation come to mind. They were hardly alone in this, but Italy's industrial limitations made the mistakes hard to correct after the war started.

This is hardly my strong subject... I would be interested in what the assembled wisdom of the forum's readers has to say.

This is hardly my strong subject... I would be interested in what the assembled wisdom of the forum's readers has to say.

you may find that the combined wisdom of the members not being so high

also, it is interesting to see the data about hitler's democratic victory, varying from 35 to 95 percent....

the truth may be in the middle...

True! I was trying to be complimentary. But seriously, I am consistently impressed by some member's posts. It's obvious some of the members are very knowledgeable in some areas.

I do not have my best sources on this close at hand, but 35 percent does strike me as correct or close to correct. I think we need to be very careful in judging popular support for the Nazis by looking at one electoral result. The opposing parties had all discredited themselves (to some extent) and were hardly united against the Nazis. While its true that Hitler made his intentions clear in Mein Kampf, the Nazis did not emphasize the nastier parts of their program. If I had been a middle-class German, economically ruined by inflation and resenting the Versailles treaty, some parts of the Nazi message could have been appealing.

Then there is the problem of electing a government that makes no secret of its contempt for democracy. Do you vote for a party, knowing it is likely to be the last vote you will cast?

But this is getting well off topic.

No. The truth is 35%. 95% was a totally subjective assessment made by the poster, referring to a time when no fre elections were held. 35% is, to a +/-2%, the actual result of the last democratic elections held in Germany.

You mean overestimating speed and _under_estimating aircraft carriers.

You mean overestimating speed and _under_estimating aircraft carriers.

True. I stand corrected.