PDA

View Full Version : The least acknowledged national contribution in WWII?



Rising Sun*
12-30-2008, 06:37 AM
On the Allied side, the Dutch are strong contenders.

As I was reminded by something else tonight the Netherlands, unlike France, fought Germany and Japan to the limit of its ability in Europe and its colonial possessions.

Unlike France which under its Vichy regime let Japan into French Indo China as the springboard to Malaya and parts south west and held its navy against the Allies, the Netherlands transferred all its military, naval, air and merchant marine resources to the Allies, then continued to fight with the Allies for the rest of the war, and in so doing made a significant contribution to the defeat of Japan.

Are there other contenders on the Allied and Axis sides?

Bomber
01-01-2009, 06:19 AM
Australia? Indian Army under British rule? New zealand?

Schuultz
01-15-2009, 09:28 AM
Definitely Bulgaria on the Axis side. I never even knew they were Axis until recently.

Rising Sun*
01-15-2009, 09:38 AM
Definitely Bulgaria on the Axis side. I never even knew they were Axis until recently.

Neither do they, after decades of glorious Soviet rule since WWII rectified the historical awkwardness of Bulgaria's (alleged :rolleyes: ) support for the Axis.

Major Walter Schmidt
01-15-2009, 09:41 AM
Finland?

Rising Sun*
01-15-2009, 09:47 AM
Brazil.

Schuultz
01-15-2009, 10:15 AM
Neither do they, after decades of glorious Soviet rule since WWII rectified the historical awkwardness of Bulgaria's (alleged :rolleyes: ) support for the Axis.

But did they support Germany? I don't really trust my source for it, so were they Axis?

Major Walter Schmidt
01-15-2009, 10:21 AM
Bulgaria was a major player in the southern part of barabrossa, so were the romanians, they occupied a lot of places like Ukraine, I think.

muscogeemike
01-21-2011, 10:07 PM
I nominate India. Despite popular resentment against British rule over 2 million Indians volunteered for military service in the War. India also provided financial and industrial support for the War effort.

"Anything you do can get you shot-including doing nothing." Murphy’s 26th law of combat.

Deaf Smith
01-21-2011, 10:55 PM
Anglo-Portuguese Alliance.

Portuguese Timor was invaided by the Japanese and Timorese and Portuguese civilians assisted Australian commandos in resisting the Japanese.

And yes, I never heard of this either. Amazing what Google will do.

And ever hear of Tannu Tuva? It was a country before Russia annexed it in 44 (and of course the communist didn't ask the citizens either.)

Deaf

pdf27
01-22-2011, 03:24 AM
If you're judging by what they got in the postwar settlement, then how about Poland? The first to fight the Germans, they suffered the worst from the extermination camps and sent very large numbers overseas to keep fighting - yet all they got postwar was people shifting their borders around and 45 years of Soviet occupation/domination.

Rising Sun*
01-22-2011, 07:07 AM
Anglo-Portuguese Alliance.

Yes, a very old and generally little known alliance.


Portuguese Timor was invaided by the Japanese and Timorese and Portuguese civilians assisted Australian commandos in resisting the Japanese.

Something even less well known is that Australia invaded Portuguese Timor over Portugal's objections, to meet Japan's advance. It amounted to a hostile invasion by Australia, but that got lost in the aftermath.

So it was actually Australia rather than Japan which was the real invader of Portuguese territory.

Iron Yeoman
01-22-2011, 03:25 PM
Spot on RS, the Anglo-Portuguese Treaty of 1373 is the oldest still active alliance still around today. 637 years isn't bad going.

royal744
02-26-2011, 06:03 PM
Definitely Bulgaria on the Axis side. I never even knew they were Axis until recently.

Interesting thing about Bulgaria is that King Boris resisted deportation of Bulgaria's jews until the end, enraging the Germans in the process. Not a single Bulgarian jew was deported from Bulgaria, although they did not stop the Germans from taking the jews in neighboring Macedonian provinces which were sort of annexed by Bulgaria. Little countries didn't stand much of chance but this exploit was successful.

royal744
02-26-2011, 06:16 PM
On the Allied side, the Dutch are strong contenders.

As I was reminded by something else tonight the Netherlands, unlike France, fought Germany and Japan to the limit of its ability in Europe and its colonial possessions.

Unlike France which under its Vichy regime let Japan into French Indo China as the springboard to Malaya and parts south west and held its navy against the Allies, the Netherlands transferred all its military, naval, air and merchant marine resources to the Allies, then continued to fight with the Allies for the rest of the war, and in so doing made a significant contribution to the defeat of Japan.

Are there other contenders on the Allied and Axis sides?

Dutch submarines, provisioned by the Americans and Australians, continued to attack the Japanese until the end of the war and gave an excellent account of themselves.

I think the side-handed swipe against the French is not warranted. If it weren't for the French defending the approaches to Dunquerque in an obviously hopeless but extremely gallant and successful fight, more than 300,000 British and French troops would not have survived to fight another day. The British, Americans, Aussies and Canadians apparently love to hate the French. Tell that to the hundreds, if not thousands of downed pilots and crew who were smuggled out of France along dozens of escape lines in an extremely dangerous business whose principal reward for those who were caught was torture and death

flyerhell
03-07-2011, 08:50 PM
I second Poland - forgetting about the postwar for now, Poland put up a pretty good fight (well, the best that they could against a numerically and technologically superior enemy) until they were invaded by the USSR. Even though the Germans caused horrific destruction to that country (not just to the Jews but to most of the population) they managed to have a very active resistance throughout the war and even succesfully regrouped and fought back in 1944. I believe I read somewhere that the Germans took significantly more damage than they expected to take during the invasion of Poland (possibly the reason for the "Phony War" in 1940?). I also heard somewhere that the Polish were very active in other armies and air forces (fighting in the battle of Britain, etc).


What about Denmark? Didn't they destroy their entire navy so it wouldn't be captured by the Germans? I know the circumstances are different than other countries (greater degree of self rule than other countries and much smaller Jewish population) but they were the only country that looked after the well being of the Jews who were sent to the concentration camps and also had popular support to help the Jews escape to Sweden.


I think the side-handed swipe against the French is not warranted. If it weren't for the French defending the approaches to Dunquerque in an obviously hopeless but extremely gallant and successful fight, more than 300,000 British and French troops would not have survived to fight another day. The British, Americans, Aussies and Canadians apparently love to hate the French. Tell that to the hundreds, if not thousands of downed pilots and crew who were smuggled out of France along dozens of escape lines in an extremely dangerous business whose principal reward for those who were caught was torture and death

True and the French resistance was obviously very strong and an integral part of the Normandy operation. HOWEVER, talking about the French government, I think there was much to be desired - the French advanced a few miles into Germany in 1939 pretty much unopposed before pulling back (granted, the UK didn't do much either). Had they been better prepared, they could have easily inflicted heavy damage on the Germans (I don't know what would have happened once the Germans pulled units from Poland to fight the French but at least it would have taken some pressure off of Poland). The French also completely misplanned the entire German invasion into France and rather than fighting for every inch of land like the Poles and later Soviets did, they surrendered half of the country without even fighting for it.

Ardee
03-08-2011, 12:00 PM
Interesting that no one has mentioned (unless I missed something) the only power that might be considered "least acknowledged" for BOTH the Axis and Allied causes: Romania. As an Axis power, Romania provided the largest contribution of manpower after Germany in the war against the USSR, and I think the third largest (after Germany and Japan) army, period, for the Axis powers. When Romania defected, Hitler is suppose to have for the first time said "We've lost the war." This was probably also due in no small part to the loss of strategic resources as well as the manpower, but in simple truth, the Germans could not have fought as long as they did without the Romanian blood and muscle.

Then, when the Romanians switched sides, they provided the 4th largest national army against the Germans -- following the USSR, USA and British Commonwealth. (In terms of raw numbers, Poland is said to have provided the 4th largest amount of manpower in the war against Axis. But these were dispersed among the armed forces of many countries. Moreover, I suspect there may be some "double-dipping" going on: was a soldier who fought for Poland, escaped to France and joined the Polish exile forces there, then escaped to England and joined the forces there - was such a man counted once, or three times? I don't know.)

Yet the name of Romania tends to draw only blank expressions in you ask the "average Joe" about WWII (outside of Romania and Hungary, of course).

Rising Sun*
03-09-2011, 07:46 AM
Interesting that no one has mentioned (unless I missed something) the only power that might be considered "least acknowledged" for BOTH the Axis and Allied causes: Romania.

Well, apart from France (and maybe Italy on a generous view), there weren't a lot of significant nations which allied themselves with both sides during the war. But of those which did, Romania certainly was the most important.

Romania also has to be acknowledged for its contribution of oil to oil-starved Germany.

Ardee
03-09-2011, 11:38 AM
Well, apart from France (and maybe Italy on a generous view), there weren't a lot of significant nations which allied themselves with both sides during the war.

What I was saying was that Romania could be considered the "least acknowledged" significant nation of Axis, AND the least acknowledged Ally -- not that there should be a special category for "switch hitters." ;)