The most important allies

Actually I do understand what you mean, but I do not really agree with it.

Altough the margin of benefit for having Italy as an ally was not big for Germany, but it wasn't the burden as which it is often described.

Yes, Germany had to send troops to support Italy on various fronts, but much more numerous british + commonwealth troops were figthing in the mediteranean.
Some of the best british troops, a third of their navy and important RAF units were needed in the mediteranean because of Italy's entry in the war. These units could otherwise have been used elsewhere.
If you compare how many units the germans used in the mediteranean war theatre, and compare this to how many allied units were used there, there is absolutely no comparison.
For every german fighing in the mediteranean, there were at least 3-4 allies.(if not more)

Also, Italy's entry in the war gave the germans the chance to considerabely weaken the british empire by seeizing the Suez Channel and the middle east oil fields.
The fact that Hitler didn't take this chance can hardly bee the fault of the italians.

On the other hand consider what had happened, had Romania not supplied Germany with oil, Hitler would just have taken the oilfields by force.

 

However, Germany needed those troops elsewhere. Britain arguably did not (I would guess that, had the troops not been needed in Egypt, they would have been either kept in Britain to guard against the invasion, or (for the Commonwealth troops) kept at their homes to defend (ie: Australia at the time was very fearful that the Japanese would invade).

So no real boon to the war effort...

Plus, we lose all the lessons that we (eventually) learnt out in the desert. And American troops in the ETO have no taste of battle until we invade.

 

That's debatable.
How many german troops were there in North Africa in 1941-1942?
2-3 divisions, a bit more after mid 1942.
Do you really think Germany lacked these troops elsewhere?
Also, had the british had more troops in Britain, Germany would have had to assign more troops in France and Norway to guard the coast.
And I don't think had Britain not been figthing in the mediteranean it would have done nothing from 1940 to 1944.(Considering that it would have had much larger ground, air and naval forces at it's disposal)

It was only in early 1943 that Germany moved large amounts of troops to North Africa but that was because Hitler wanted to all cost maintain a bridgehead in Tunisia, which was a strategical fault for which again one cannot blame the italians.

 

If you consider Britain and the Commonwealth in WW2: large and potentially very powerful, but spread to its utmost in the protection of its own world-spanning lands, then the Axis "strategy" (more of an accidental course of events) of applying light pressure on all sides of these lands is the most advantageous strategy that can be followed. Britain and its allies will be forced to commit troops everywhere and thus have very few available for its own plans.

 

Yes, Italy's entry in the war meant that a key positon of the british empire was threatened:The Suez Channel(as well as Malta).
For three long years Britain fought to keep tis route open, which without Italy would not have been threatened at all.

 

The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics was the greatest ally Germany ever had. Not only did the USSR help dismember Poland and draw some of hostile public opinion by its Winter War and annexions of the Baltic states and Bessarabia.

Thanks to the great Stalin, the German weapons industry and the economy at large did not feel the effects of the British blockade of the Continent. Stalin supplied all necessary raw materials (incl. grain, so that German children could stay healthy and oil, so that Hitler´s toys could work) in such quantities, that German industry could not manage to produce enough to ship East (the trade was on barter basis).
Hr. Schnurre made several trips to Moscow to assure Molotov, that sure, all contracts would be honored, albeit with some delay.

But nothing as good as that can last. Too late did it appear to poor Hitler that while the one hand gave him all he needed, the other held a cocked gun.

 

Well, that and the fact that Hitler had always intended to wipe the 'Bolshevik menace' off the face of the earth. That and 'kill the Jews' featured rather heavily in practically all of his political offerings, including the incredibly dull 'Mein Kampf'. Talk about a man with an agenda. :roll:

But still, ever the opportunist, make alliances with your most hated enemy if it is to your benefit...

 

Yeah, the book was much less attractive than its PR. However, Iosif Vissarionovich cared to translate it to Russian and pay the Author his due. That I know for sure. And has read it himself. No nationwide edition ensued. And he made his mind up: "I like the guy." And he helped him all he could.
The Soviets then kept talking about the few phrases about changing the direction of German interest to the East. But they forgot to add, that Hitler had meant it as a program for the distant future. Not in his lifetime, anyways. The most dangerous enemy of Germany was France, France, France. It must be dealt with before anything else. A large part of the book is about the vicious French. THAT was the part Uncle Joe liked a lot.

Yes, he hated Jews. Somehow they didn´t fit in his picture of Germany. Ugly, asiatic, stinking or stinking rich and plutocratic or bolshevik. You name it, I´ve got it. That I call Hate. Considering the public animosity against (particularly) Ostjuden, the Jews have actually caried him to power, at least partly. Let´s stop this line.

You keep calling him opportunist, I keep - my maniacal/inferiority complexed psychopat. It´s not labels that matter, don´t you think?

 

Fine by me. Everybody knows Hitler's peculiar hatred of Jews, and nobody here agrees with it.

Well, I think that he was an opportunistic maniacal/inferiority complexed psychopath! He certainly was a psychiatrist's dream. Or nightmare, depending on viewpoint.

 

Freud would have definitely been of assistance :lol: . I like our joint diagnosis.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4508901.stm

Go lodge an opinion!

 

I was going to post that link under a new thread but saw your post just in time Makes for interesting reading as do the opinions expressed.


There are some other articles as well. Seems like this page has the links to them http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/war/wwtwo/veday_germany_01.shtml

 

See, Ricky. The decimated army of Stalin (8 mln lost in 1941 only) defeats 93% of all German soldiers. As a 3rd generation Bolshevik I am proud.

 

1. Italy-they were the closest and fought along the Germans the most
2. Finland- they gave Russia a good fight even though they lost
3. Romania- Oil