Worst ally in World War II.

[TheStorm]

  Worst ally in WWII. In my opinion it is Great Britain and now i will describe why.

  I will start from German militarization, when GB, USA and others didn't say a word while Germany was growing it's power, ignoring Paris Peace Conference of 1919. Also Hitler's party was financed by English bankers (so called Cliveden set) through Swiss banks.

  Then GB assured Poland, that they will immediately help them if Hitler starts a full scale war against Poland. September 3, 1939 - GB declares war, but do nothing to help polish (Phoney/Strange War). Who cares about a given word, when you need this war!

  May 26  — June 4, 1940 - Operation Dynamo. They left their French allies die under Dunkirk.

  July 3, 1940 - Operation Catapult. GB destroys French battleships in Mers-el-Kebir, Dakar and other colonies, cause they considered it as a threat. But Hitler didn't even think about it!

  During the German-Soviet conflict Stalin several times asked Allies to open Western front, but Churchill always refused. "Western front can be opened no earlier than 1947" (c) W. Churchill. Even Americans wanted to do it earlier. It happened only in 1944, when the USSR didn't really need that. They have done it not to help Russians, but to stop us from taking the whole Europe. By the way, the Soviet Union destroyed 80-85% of all Axis troops (not including Japan) in Europe.

  Bombing of Dresden. Strategic military attack on the city of Dresden to show Soviets how mighty their aviation is! Also because it was Soviet zone of influence after the war.

  Operation Unthinkable. It's really unthinkable!!! This plan wasn't realized due to some reasons: 1) Stalin knew about it, that's why Soviets rushed and taken Berlin (Berlin was considered as "impregnable" by the Allies) in short period of time to show that we are strong enough to resist one more aggression; 2) Regrouping of Soviet armies in Europe initiated by Georgy Zhukov; 3) Japanese-Allies unfinished conflict. Some American politics, right after the war, said that without the USSR intervention the war could last for some more years.

Spoiler

  Conclusion: I can't say GB planned this war, but they did nothing to avert it and even helped to initiate in some cases. Even Treaty of Versailles, concluded by the Allies, supposed war in the near future. Ferdinand Foch after the Treaty said: "This is not a Peace Treaty this is a 20 year Armistice."

What do you think about it?

 

[Captain Pyjama Shark]

dot dot dot...

 

[wrc]

@OP I don't think GB was prepared for large scale conflict as WWII as you think they were. They tried to secure their own backyard before any invasion against Germans. Bear in mind that they asked for some aircrafts from the US at the time so if answer was negative they would be ****ed up. Not to mention agreement between Stalin and Hitler so British ( and the rest of the Europe )  didn't actually know what will happen with that agreement which was broken at some point by Hitler's side. It seems that expectations were too high by Polish as well as from Russians.
On the other side, if agreement was lasted long enough and if western front was opened earlier so Hitler could concentrate his forces against British only, they would probably have Bundesliga instead of Premiership today.

 

[Archonsod]

  I will start from German militarization, when GB, USA and others didn't say a word while Germany was growing it's power, ignoring Paris Peace Conference of 1919. Also Hitler's party was financed by English bankers (so called Cliveden set) through Swiss banks.

First moment of ****wittery. Britain constantly demanded Hitler cease re-arming. He ignored them. Amazingly enough they didn't rush to war. Something to do with having seen several millions slaughtered in the trenches of the first world war and not wanting to repeat the experience.

  Then GB assured Poland, that they will immediately help them if Hitler starts a full scale war against Poland. September 3, 1939 - GB declares war, but do nothing to help polish (Phoney/Strange War). Who cares about a given word, when you need this war!

Right. That would be why several thousand Polish airman fought in the Battle of Britain. How the **** do you think they got there, Star Trek teleporters? /facepalm.

  May 26  — June 4, 1940 - Operation Dynamo. They left their French allies die under Dunkirk.

They evacuated 100, 000 French troops (all of those willing to evacuate in fact; around 30 000 French troops chose to surrender). And it was a British regiment which held the rearguard. Still, lets not let facts get in the way of a good rant.

  July 3, 1940 - Operation Catapult. GB destroys French battleships in Mers-el-Kebir, Dakar and other colonies, cause they considered it as a threat. But Hitler didn't even think about it!

They destroyed them to prevent the French navy falling into the German's hands. Which is usual practice in warfare

  During the German-Soviet conflict Stalin several times asked Allies to open Western front, but Churchill always refused.

Yes, he was rather busy with the African front at the time.

if western front was opened earlier so Hitler could concentrate his forces against British only, they would probably have Bundesliga instead of Premiership today.

Wouldn't have happened. Neither Churchill or Roosevelt trusted that Stalin would withdraw troops from Europe after the war, so they deliberately delayed opening another front in the hope the Soviet military would exhaust itself against the Germans. Both fully expected a war with Russia immediately after Germany was defeated.

 

[xenoargh]

I'm tempted to say something rather nasty; this is an incredible mis-interpretation of history. 

But let's deal with the facts instead:

1.  Great Britain was not at all prepared for a major war in Europe in 1939.  The very idea that you're pushing here, that the "Cliveden set" was holding the British back from helping out, is nonsense.  They simply did not have an army worth speaking about and their air force was already weaker than Germany's at that point in time.

Years of military cutbacks initiated largely because of the Great Depression and the British people's strong aversion to another big war led to the British government attempting to avoid conflict by disarming and appeasing the dictators, starting with Mussolini's invasion of North Africa, the German actions in Ruhr, Czechoslovakia, Austria and so forth.

By the time Poland was invaded, Britain had had time to prepare for war, but had largely failed to do so.

2.  When Poland was invaded, Great Britain did indeed declare war, as promised.  Declaring war didn't mean that they could do very much; they had neither the land army nor the support of the French government for an attack on the German frontier, which was the only serious option available, so their declaration of war, while certainly meaningful, could not be turned into a useful strategic action at that time.

Meanwhile, the Russians carved up Poland with the Germans, and concluded a neutrality agreement whereby the Russians would provided substantial raw resources to Germany.

3.  During the Dunkirk operations, all Allied personnel that could be saved were saved.  Given the scope and the tactical situation, it wasn't possible to rescue everybody, and various British and French units in the area were ordered to either retreat southwards or to fight rear-guard actions in defense of the key points preventing the German army from getting into the embarkation area.

The very idea that the British "betrayed" their French allies is pretty disgusting and completely false; every effort was made, and tens of thousands of French soldiers were saved and in many cases returned to France to fight during the tail end of that part of the war.  In retrospect, it would have been smarter for the French troops to remain in Great Britain at that time, as it was already clear that the French were going to lose.  But the political needs of the moment were clear, and Churchill willingly sacrificed many ships, aircraft and men maintaining the corridor and sending whatever he could into the fray, up to the very limit, which was the bare minimum of aircraft his military advisers said would be necessary for protecting Britain from German attacks.  The idea that "just a little more help" might have saved France is ludicrous, given the facts that were available and the logistical situation, which you obviously do not know anything about.

4.  Operations like Catapult were taken only after long discussion in the British War Cabinet and with a lot of misgivings and regrets.  Churchill's own communications during this period make it very clear that this was one of the harder decisions made during the war.

The problem there was very simple; so long as Germany did not possess a navy capable of serious disruption to sea traffic, the threat from submarine warfare and mines, although very dire, was thought to be (and ultimately, was) survivable, albeit with a great deal of help from America and Canada. 

More to the point, the French had broken their repeated assurances and promises that if they lost the war that they would transfer their Navy to points safely out of German influence.  Britain, the United States and other powers had all repeatedly asked the French to merely sail their fleet to a port somewhere safe, where their fleets could be kept intact, and the Americans even offered to buy their ships outright.  All of these pleas and offers were ignored, because the French saw their fleet both as a national symbol and as a possible bargaining-chip with the Germans, who were demanding that no French fleet assets be allowed to go to a port not under Vichy control.

However, given the position of Vichy France and the known behavior of Laval, it was very doubtful whether the French would be inclined to seriously resist German demands for their naval assets to be transferred to their control.  So Churchill and War Cabinet issued what Churchill referred to as a, "hateful decision" and ordered his Navy to cripple the French fleet.

5.  Churchill's record in regards to the Western Front is extremely well-documented and what you've said here is a complete misrepresentation of the factual record.

Churchill agreed to open a Western Front as soon as possible; the problem here was quite simple, that invading a hostile coast is incredibly complicated and dangerous, especially considering the new problem of aircraft being able to sink even well-armored vessels.

Invading across even a short body of water is a much different proposition than invading across land.  All troops, material and supplies must be moved in ships from point to point; all communications are strictly subject to the number of transport vessels available and the large protective elements required to keep them from being destroyed by enemy action.  During the early years of the war, this was simply impossible; Britain was by itself, other than some aid from neutral powers, and simply did not have either the land armies necessary to meet the Germans and have a hope of winning nor the air forces or maritime forces to land, protect and supply an invasion force. 

The very idea that you're pushing here, that it was possible but Great Britain just didn't bother, is entirely contrary to the factual record.  Churchill talked about this with Stalin at length at every one of their meetings and made it as clear as he could, to the point of bluntness.

That the Soviet propaganda machine continued to call for a "Second Front Now", etc., even though the high leadership of the Soviet Union could not possibly have been ill-informed about the true situation, is a marvel of totalitarian politics; Stalin wanted British help, but he also needed a scapegoat to blame for his own regime's complete lack of preparedness and serious intelligence failures.  Even when Churchill explicitly warned Stalin that a German invasion was imminent, in a famous diplomatic telegram that is part of the historical record, this was ignored by the Soviets.

These are the facts.  What you are (badly, and without supporting evidence) trying to imply is entirely not factual.

It's not Great Britain's fault that Stalin made a Devil's deal with Hitler that was not honored by the Germans.  It's not Great Britain's fault that Stalin purged his officers and disrupted his army's morale rather seriously during this period, instead of preparing for the war that Hitler had explicitly called for in Mein Kampf.  Stalin, like Chamberlain, thought that Hitler might be amenable to a long truce while he destroyed his other enemies or could be bought off; this naive view of Hitler's intentions almost destroyed the Soviet Union.



In conclusion, I hope that there aren't a lot of people who believe this rubbish; what happened during the war is quite well-documented and does not support your conclusions at all.

 

[Baguette Eater]

I smell Russian bias with a hefty dose of butthurtness.

 

[RalliX]

Damn straight.

I would say the worst ally was probably France, considering that at the beginning of the war, and quite shockingly with what was to come, they had the most powerful army in the world, in terms of numbers of infantry and tanks.
They used their troops so poorly. There was over 100 French divisions, yet the Germans took only 42 days to settle France and the low-lands, even with the help of the ten BEF divisions.
It was for shame. Hell, with the positioning of their army's mass at the beginning of the invasion, it almost looked like they expected the Germans to throw most of their man-power on the Maginot line.

 

[FrisianDude]

About the ships; didn't the Vichy government secretly scuttle quite a large part of their own fleet to prevent them crazy nazis from (ab)using it?

 

[Leifr Eiríksson]

Hey Mr Russian!

**** off!

 

[Captured Joe]

I say Italy.

They did even worse than Romania.

 

[RalliX]

We're talking allies, not axis, Joe.

Edit: inb4 ally of Germany.

 

[Lord Burgess1]

Italy were still pretty **** when they switched sides.

 

[havoc]

Surely it was Russia.

 

[Baguette Eater]

Surely it was Russia.

Yes I mean, they lost so many troops, you gotta be real bad to achieve such losses.

 

[An4Sh]

All discussion is irrelevant; Italy is the worst ally in World War 2. World War 1 as well.

Italy is a ****ty ally.

 

[RalliX]

All discussion is irrelevant; Italy is the worst ally in World War 2. World War 1 as well.

Italy is a ****ty ally.

True dat.

 

[wrc]

Surely it was Russia.

Yes I mean, they lost so many troops, you gotta be real bad to achieve such losses.

That doesn't make them the worst ally. The largest offensive by Germans was against Russia and Russian army at the beginning of the war wasn't so organized as Wehrmacht, not to mention Panzer divisions which gave Germans huge advance in early days of conflict.

 

[Haresus]

When I read the topic title, I immediately thought "Italy". But hey, who is stupid enough to actually fight in wars anyway? Not the Italians, they ship over a lot of troops, who do not fight, and lose as quickly as possible so they can get back to their peace, quiet and mafia.

 

[havoc]

Surely it was Russia.

Yes I mean, they lost so many troops, you gotta be real bad to achieve such losses.

That doesn't make them the worst ally. The largest offensive by Germans was against Russia and Russian army at the beginning of the war wasn't so organized as Wehrmacht, not to mention Panzer divisions which gave Germans huge advance in early days of conflict.

When I said Russia, I was making my argument based on stupid false facts (so stupid in fact that I didn't state them)

 

[Baguette Eater]

Same, but I stated one of e'm