Did the Italians lose it for the axis powers in world war 2?

Question

They made the German army fight on 3 fronts ( east, west, and south with Africa ) and they basically did nothing during the whole war except surrender to the Allied powers( I never heard they won any significant battles at least on their own unlike their counterparts Japan and Germany )

Bonus Question: What if it was Russia on Germany's side instead of Italy, would the axis powers have won the war?

Answer 1

The Italians made it more dificult for the other Axis Powers but were not a major factor in the defeat of Germany; the main reason the Germans lost was because they went to war with Russia at the wrong time and lac of raw materials. Do not speak too badly of the Italian Army in WW2, the main "problem" they had was the officers were to a very large degree political appointments or bought commands through bribery and had little of no experience or concern with much of anything except how things would effect the life style they deserved or the impact of things on their career. Several Italian units operated until the end of the war as part of the German Army operating in Italy and had a very good record of fighting. Also, the majority of Rommel's Afrika Corps was actually Italian troops under German officers; one of the things that caused friction between him and the Italian government is when he got overall control he replaced many Italian officers as incompentent and replaced them with either junior Italian officers he had confidence in or German officers. With good leadership the Italian troops fought very well; without it they suffered many losses and retreated because the officers did not want to endanger themselves which destroyed their morale. If the Russians had bee allied with the Germans the war would have been next to impossible to win for the Allies because invasion of mainland Europe would have been against the full power of the German military (even if the Russians didn't help) instead of he approxiamately 15% they faced, access to raw materials from Russia, manufacturing could have been moved to Russia out of bomber range or Germans allowed Russian plants to build for them but it still would have been difficult for the Germans to win based on the lack of seapower. Probabaly would have evolved into a stalemate.
Do not minimize the Russian effort in WW2, yes they had supply issues early on and had to depend on American equipment but as the Russian factories were moved and set up further inside Russia, out of the German occupied areas, they produced huge numbers of very good equipment-the T-34 tank and T-34/85 tank were either the best or second best tank behind the Panther and the Russian heavy tanks KV-1 and Stalin were again either 2 and 3 or 1 and 3 with the King Tiger filling the gap and Tiger 1 being 4th; the Stormivich close air support aircraft was the best tank buster in the war and Russian fighters after 1943 held their own against the Germans. After early 1944 the main aid given to the Russians was trucks to haul supplies; they did not want or use Amercian/Allied armor because it was inferior. Throughout the war including after D-Day the great majority, it ranged from 80% to 90%, of first rate German troops and equipment were on the Eastern front; these troops were given a "break" and rest time by going to fight the British and U.S.

Answer 2

No, Italy's surrender made little difference to Germany's defeat, as Russia never engaged Italy. Italy was a small barrier stopping the western allies pushing east into germany, but since the war was basically won on the western front, it mattered little if Italy surrendered or not. Also, if Russia was with Germany, the axis certainly would've won, easily destroying the land tropps of the UK and USA, and the luftwaffe would have enough time and resources to get over to mainland UK and from there launch men at the USA, easily crushing them, leading to WW2 being won by the axis.

Answer 3

how did the Italians make the Germans fight on three fronts? the eastern front was a German adventure that they invited several nation to join in on. of which Italy eventually contributed a army to before withdrawing it. the west again a German thing that in the original 1040 invasion Italy was brave enough to get involved in at the end in order to grab some spoils of war, after Germany did all the work. after the allied invasion of southern France in 1944 they were involved in the west because the allied armies attacked them there.
as for the southern front. Italy didn't make Germany fight there. Italy asked Germany for assistance which Hitler gave. Germany lost it for the axis in WWII, Italy contributed to the loss however simply because they were a part of the axis and helped in the cause.

germany and russia could not have stayed together as allies the leader of both countries were paronoid,egomoniacs. the political beliefs of both men were imcompatible.

Answer 4

From a German point of view, Italy was basically there to do several things.

1.) Protect the southern border of Germany.
2.) Control the Mediterranean Sea and the Suez canal.
3.) Get control of part of the oil reserves in North Africa.

They were able to do this until the US entered the war AND they open the Eastern front against Russia.

The Russia question is another thing altogether. Russia would have never sided with the Germans during the war but they were willing to be a nonparticipant. This would have allowed Germany to finish some of the other things it was trying to accomplish first.

Answer 5

Italy was never a big supporter of Mussolini. Their Army was poorly trained, had lousy leaders, and their equipment was next to worthless. The old joke "Want to buy an Italian rifle? Never fired and only dropped once".
Had Russia been allied with the Germans, there is a possibility that the Axis could have won the war but that would have been a slim possibility. The Russians weren't as industrialized as America or Germany. They had to rely on the United States for aircraft. I am not sure if they got any other weapons or equipment from us or the allies.
If you saw the movie "Enemy at the Gates" (true story) about the Russian sniper, towards the beginning of the movie before the battle, they were handing out a rifle to every other soldier, and so many rounds of ammo to each so soldier, telling them If the guy with the rifle gets killed or wounded, pick up his rifle and continue to fight. That just tells me that their supply system sucked, not enough war fighting equipment available to keep every soldier armed and ready to fight.

Answer 6

The Italian contribution to the Germans in WW2 was very ineffectual, truth be known, in fact the Germans were carrying the Italians on all fronts, they never were renowned for their fighting skills apart from attacking lightly armed tribesmen in the Italian African Colonies.

How you come to the conclusion Italy made the Germans fight on any front is beyond me and shows you do not even have a basic grasp of the history of WW2.

With regards Stalingrad, the Italian Army never wanted to be involved in the East, as stated in the Original Book "ENEMY AT THE GATES" The Battle For Stalingrad" by: William Craig.

In the same book it also states how the poorly equipped Romanians and Hungarians had to have the Bulgarians placed between them to stop the traditional historic hatred of the Romanians and Hungarians breaking out into open war.

Answer 7

I do think its irrelevant whether the Italian lose the axis power or not in world war II, but they help the German's in occupying the entire Europe with their belligerent regime. If not with the assistant of the Italian in terms of occupation, the German's couldn't reach Africa by then because some parts of Africa is occupied by the Italian by the early 1920's, so there is no problem with the German's swinging to the African front in order to encircle the globe for their ultimate domination. So in my own opinion they are indispensable allied of the German's as far as I am concern.

What if it isn't the Italian but instead it was the Russian? The more the axis power would have been rid off earlier compared to the Italian, because as I see it plainly, Russia is only big in topography but not militarily as the saying goes. They hardly any outstanding army to begin with, and besides those times, Russia is having their own version of depression, they could hardly eat or find food or job in Russia and now you are telling me what if they side with the Germans? It wouldn't be possible either. There is an animosity between Hitler and Stalin during those time. Hitler wants to occupy Russia obviously for its gas and oil reserves, while Stalin on the other hand wants to quell the rising fanatism of Nazi among his peers. I donot think you will join the dog and a cat in one box.

Answer 8

Italy contributed to the loss of Germany in World War 2. If could have been different if Russia was on the side of Germany.

Answer 9

Look at it from the perspective of the Italian soldier. You are captured by the Americans in North Africa and then sent to a Prisoner of War camp, either in Seattle or Honolulu. So, you write home to La Bella Italia (as is required by the Geneva Conventions) and tell your family where you are. With enough of those letters arriving in the Italian Boot showing what happens to you if you surrender, one wonders why Italy didn't surrender sooner. LOL!

Answer 10

I heard the Italians were on Hitler's side in world war 2.