The Instigator
Con (against)
0 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
7 Points

What was Germany's worst ally Italy(pro) or Japan(con)?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/21/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 751 times Debate No: 65600
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (2)
Votes (1)




round 1:acception and reasoning

round 2:starting argue

round 3,4:main arguement

round 5: closing arguement

Germany chose bad allies in World War 2, and Japan was a worse ally in my opinion.


Ok so I accept this challenge and despite being Italian myself I will argue that Italy was a worse ally than Japan overall.
(All three axis power made tremendous strategic mistakes, though)

Before getting started let me define some of the criteria I will use to determine who has been worse :

- Directly responsible for German losses (both men and material) --> They actually killed Germans.
- Indirectly responsible for German losses --> Their failure to achieve common objectives increased German losses
- Failure to communicate their intentions effectively to their allies.
- Total contribution to war effort
Debate Round No. 1


My first reason is that japan never notified germany they were going to attack Pearl Harbor.


Italy was not prepared at all for major military operations

1) Italians were supposed to secure the Balkans before Operation Barbarossa could be effectively launched.
However after disembarking in Greece Italian troops stalled. Germany had to divert troops in the region.
Also after Yugoslavian coup Germany could not trust Italy to occupy Yugoslavia alone and therefore had to intervene directly.

The Balkan Campaign delayed operation Barbarossa by several weeks. This was crucial in the final outcome. All these delays contributed to the Soviet ability to gather more troops and probably prevented the German from seizing Moscow before winter 1941.

2) Italians had to invade Egypt in order to seize the Suez Canal. Not only they failed to do so they were countered, lost territory and desperately needed the assistance of DAK (Afrika Korps).

3) Mussolini was removed from power in July 1943 by his political opponents. Italian Kingdom negotiated and signed a secret armistice with allied forces. The armistice was made public the 8th of September. Germans felt betrayed and occupied Italy
After operation Achse only 197,000 Italian soldiers of the over 1 million disarmed continued the war alongside the Germans"
My point is that if Italians instead of surrendering had fought with half of Japanese determination, the Italian front could have resisted allied advance. While Germany could focus on the other fronts.

"My first reason is that Japan never notified Germany they were going to attack Pearl Harbor."

I do agree that this caused prejudice to Germany. However it was Hitler who declared war on the US after Pearl Harbor... He didn't have to do it. It was an impulsive move... but no one dared to contradict the Fuhrer !

Debate Round No. 2


Hitler declared in hopes Japan would attack the USSR. Russia moved a large majority their tanks and solders east to deal with Germany because Japan was more concerned with the USA at the start. If Japan surprise invaded the USSR at the same time Germany did it could have a different impact on Russia.


1) Well yes, this is a very good point. However this was in December 1941. By then the war on the Eastern front had already stalled because of the harsh weather conditions.

"The temperature dropped far below freezing. On 30 November, von Bock reported to Berlin that the temperature was –45 °C (–49 °F).General Erhard Raus, commander of the 6th Panzer Division, kept track of the daily mean temperature in his war diary. It shows a suddenly much colder period during 4–7 December: from –36 to –38 °C (–37 to –38 °F).Other temperature reports varied widely. Zhukov said that November's freezing weather stayed around –7 to –10 °C (+19 to +14 °F) Official Soviet Meteorological Service records show the lowest December temperature reached –28.8 °C (–20 °F). The absolute numbers did not matter to the German troops who were freezing with no winter clothing, and whose equipment was not designed for such severe weather. More than 130,000 cases of frostbite were reported among German soldiers. Frozen grease had to be removed from every loaded shell and vehicles had to be heated for hours before use. The same cold weather, typical for the season, hit the Soviet troops, but they were better prepared. The Axis offensive on Moscow stopped."

If the Germans where not delayed by the Balkan campaign, Soviet would probably not had been able to prepare Moscow defense. If Moscow had fallen before weather condition deteriorated, Russian units coming from the East could not have been able to effectively reorganise and fight back.
My point is that the Italian are partly responsible for Operation Barbarossa delays (Arguments in R1)

2) Yes, Germany and Japan lacked coordination and communication. But this is not entirely Japan's fault.
Hitler expected Japan to attack the USSR, however they did not made any previous agreement or common plan.
Japan unlike Italy had no obligation towards Germany to fulfill certain objectives.

Debate Round No. 3


volcan forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4


sorry school stuff happened that prevented me last round

japan failed to keep the usa busy enough in the pacific to help germany


"japan failed to keep the usa busy enough in the pacific to help germany"

This may be true but as I said Germany had not any obligation to declare war to the US in the first place (Japan did not requested it either).

I will also remind my 2 main arguments :

1) Operation Barbarossa delays caused about 3 milions extra german deaths in the Eastern Front between 1942 and 1945. In fact if the USSR had collapsed before december 1941 the final outcome of the war could have changed drastically. Italy was responsible for almost 5 crucial weeks of delay (by failing to secure the Balkans on its own).

2) The Italian signing the armistice in 1943 left the Axis with about 800.000 men less (In fact most Italian units were disarmed and disbanded). Germany had to spread its own troops across the Balkans and Italy to replace these disbanded units.

Finally, I thank my opponent for the debate.

Debate Round No. 5
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Adam2isback 1 year ago
All of them were good, seriously.
Japan, Italy and Germany were friends and the same. No difference.

Now, Denmark, Britain, Sweden -- that's a den of backstabbers
Posted by Elijahhill97 1 year ago
We forced Japan to seem like a bad ally. We did wrong things to them and lied and took back promises that they made them. I do not blame them for attacking us.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by LDPOFODebATeR0328 1 year ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: The win, obviously, goes to Pro. Arguments: Pro actually provided solid evidence. Conduct: Con forfeited. S&G: I found much less spelling errors in Pro's arguments. Sources: Pro provided sources, Con did not.