Best Non-Major Army in World War Two?

This is just a poll for peoples opinions about which army is the finest trained/best equipped/most effective in combat army that is not among the major ones. Than means no America, Germany, Britan, Russia, Japan etc.

In my opinion it would be either the Canadians (though i'm somewhat biased) or the Finnish. The Canucks were an underdog going up against a much better armed and trained foe but they pulled their entire economy to the war effort. Before the first Canadian division shipped out to England they didn't even have enough uniforms and equipment to outfit them, but they pooled their rescources and filled the order a week or so before they left canada. Its a shame how they were sacrificed at dieppe, bloody awful. They proved later in Italy though that dieppe was only a command foul up and not because of poor troops. Also, in normandy they were the only country to achieve their objectives (thanks to the Queens Own Rifles).
The Fins sure gave the Russians hell during the winter war, their hit and run guerilla tactics had a devistating effect on Russian supplies and moral. And if I'm not mistaken they have the highest rated sniper of the war, Simo something.

well thats my $.02 What do you guys think?

 

I have always admired the Swiss armed forces. They keep their defences strong and their country free, plus they mind their own business and don't start fights with their neighbors.

 

Well, personally I DO consider Canada a major player. Their effort with both their army and air force is nothing but remarkable and they have been involved all the way. Just look at the number of Canadian wargraves in Holland alone.

I feel the Dutch did their best under the circumstances. True: training and equipment were certainly not the best. Very much outdated and useless (for example, an Dutch artillery soldier told me that they had a battery of 6 WW1 guns in may 1940. When the Germans invaded the were ordered to lay a barrage at a certain coordinate. 3 of the 6 guns malfunctioned or even exploded firing the first round! They packed up and retreated.)

Nonetheless, what the Dutch lacked in equipment and training, they often made up by persistence and dedictation. Although the war lasted for only 5 days in Holland, the German casualties were considerable: The German paratroopers and Air Transported divisions were pretty much shot up and at several places the German advance was held up till the Dutch surrender (Afsluitdijk is one example that comes to mind). Many German soldiers hailed the persistance of the Dutch soldiers...even Friedrich's granddad told me so!

 

The Greeks, Firstly the Italians, defence then attack, then slowing Germans down, fighting gallant rearward actions with the British.

Punched above their weight.

 

THE MALTESE-I know people will be saying 'But they are civilians' but to hold out against frenzied bombing attacks to live and fight another day, and through it all to be awarded a GC.

 

To have such determination and resistance-that is qualities of an Army I believe-that is my 2c...

 

Stevin,


I read in a memoir dealing with the pre-war area in the Netherlands that the Dutch didn't held their own Army in high regard.

The author describes a "typical" incident when dutch children were throwing stones on Dutch soldiers marching through their village. In general, the author said, being a soldier in the Netherlands wasn't too much honorable, as the Dutch people are pretty much individuals and have a kind of dislike for any kind of "uniformation".

Cheers,

 

Andy,

It is sad, but you're right. Being in the army has never been a popular choice in the Netherlands. Not then and not now. I think the reason you describe is one of the most important ones. When I was in the army, my Sgt-instructor also explained how the Dutch Army worked compared to the US. US training practices would cause a lot of problems with the Dutch. 'We' like to talk things through...have the idea we contributed to a solution or something. I also read an article about what the Dutch and Germans thought of eachother when they met eachother in the Dutch/German Army Corps.

But in May 1940 the army was also considered a waste of time/effort, as most people assumed we could maintain our neutrality. Nonetheless, once in the army, the Dutch can bitch all the want, when the s*#@ hits the fan, they do stand their ground...

 

Stevin, the Dutch and the Germans??? Times of peace...HQ Northag in Rheindhalen Germany, on occasional Fridays I sometimes if I was lucky enough to get to the Friday evening end of week booze up..

Surrounding the British parade square were a few living blocks, one contained RAF cpls club if I remember, I was not allowed in that one...The Belgian offices and bar, German Offices and bar and Dutch Offices and bar...Every one in the Belgian bar for 4 oclock, cheep beer flowing, that shuts hour or two later, every one to Dutch bar, didnt let every one of us in, Dutch were sensible and vey choosy on their drunken allies...Lots of calling Dutch names, all friendly of course but many a hairnet produced to playfully put on their long hair.....Then off to German bar, very quiet by then, but hospitable and still cheep beer...By end of night, the Brits RAF,and Army would be singing and collapsing on floors everywhere...The Belgians had gone home...the Dutch and Germans were at one anothers throats in recreation of battles gone by...AND they say the Brits are violent...

 

I enjoyed reading that, Urgh....All playfull banter I am sure....right!?

We could fill a whole thread about the Dutch/German relationship, how it is and how it is percieved.

I believe I read somewhere that the Dutch/German Corps is being nominated for disbandment. Don't know why.

The Dutch marines have a very close partnership, if you can call it that, with the British Marines. In fact, during war they would be incorporated within the British Royal Marines, under British command. They train together all the time. I think we did learn some lessons from WW2, when the Dutch wanted to field their own independant Brigade, under Dutch command. Problems was that the brigade was never up to strength and was never able to put into action as an independant unit. So, bits and pieces were attached to different bigger units during the campaign. They were attached to the British 6th Airborne in Normandy (after the landings, mind you. The Dutch Brigade came in land in august '44.)

 

Yep all playful banter. The Dutch marines used to be part of the early version Nato rapid reaction force together with Britains Royal Marines, acting under the same command structure for exercises and operations on the Nato Flanks, Norway in the main but Turkey too. Did same training same living conditions etc and where in fact considered to be a major unit with the set up of the Royal Marines in this area.

One tale I remember hearing from Exercise Lionheart, a mojor Brit logistics and action exercise a while ago, was in Denmark when the Brit Paras and Marines were put in with the ACE mobile force containing the Dutch marines was that the Ememy forces, the orange forces were in that case some US formations, Part of the mobile blue forces...the goodies were the germans and an armoured brigade group, During one part of the exercise the Germans complained of blue on blue friendly fire when their armour came under attack from Brit and Dutch marines..The commander complained they were being targeted deliberately and how could this be as we were on same side...The Brits and Dutch were reported as apologising but they had seen the black iron crosses and they then did what they thought was the natural thing..Sorry this not really for this thread, but hey its the new year and thought Id start it off with a laugh..

 

I vote for New Zealand. We started the war with a very small army but in Africa and Italy Kiwi troops proved themselfs as some of the finest in the world.

 

Your right, New Zealands forces were exemplary in all theatres they served in..

This is quite difficult to answer as there were so many none major forces that produced the goods when asked.

Australia is one we have not mentioned yet also.

Depending on what you include as British forces I suppose Ghurkas and mainstream Indian troops can be considered too.

Maybe we should start a thread on the ones that under performed that were not part of the Major well known combatant nations.

But back to the original thread, Ive been persuaded, my vote moves from the Greeks to the Canadians the more and more I think about it.

Then theres the Poles, army navy and air force..

Got to choose one so Im sicking with Canada.

 

And don't forget the native morrocans and Algerians....I read an book by an US vet, who recalled seeing these guys fighting the Germans (in Italy!) in their own native clothing and preffering the knife as their weapon and close combat at night....

 

You mean the Zouaves Stevin-yes they gave no quarter to the Germans, and asked for none in return. Their uniforms weren't exactly the best camouflage though!!!

 

I would have to go with a 3 way tie.

The Dutch--as they did their best with next to nothing to fight with--they were brave and resourceful--but mainly--they were some tough B******S.

The Finns--the Winter War says it all. They kicked the heck out of the Russians for 15 weeks--having little to kick the Russians with. These were also some tough B******S who kicked some serious a$$.

The Swiss--even though they as a country did not really participate in the war but--I wouldnt want to fight them either.

 

i forgot about the greeks. fine soldiers they had, utterly destroying the Italian attempt at conquering greece. The greek defeat of Italy also pushed back Barbarossa since Hitler had to commit his troops there instead of russia.

I havn't heard of the dutch army very much. I dont know enough about them to make any kind of decision on their part. But i do know that the dutch resistance was excellent, almost as good as the Gaullish or Maquis resistance in France.

 

This is a hard one. Look at the choices.

The Australian troops always seemed to be outnumbered by the Japs, but usually managed to not only stand their ground but push them back as well. In North Africa, despite being relatively green and undertrained they still managed to push the Italians out of Tobruk and hold the place against heavy odds.

The Greeks because they not only stood up to the Italians but pushed them right out of Greece, and then had to face the Germans straight after that, fighting strong rear guard actions, despite being out gunned.

The Kiwis, because wherever they were, no matter what the odds, they still fought hard and long to achieve their objectives.

The Finns, because of what they did to the Russians in the early stages of the Winter War. You have to give them credit for what they managed with so little.

Yes, and the Dutch, despite being outnumbered, out-gunned, out-trained, they still managed to hold up the German advance. Not an easy thing when you're equipped with obsolete weapons.

And the Poles, despite being overwhelmed by the German Blitzkreig, they still fought hard and strong to the end, and even when the Russians ripped their country in two, those that were free never gave up the fight.

My heart says the Australians, but then I'm a bit predjudiced, with the Kiwi's a close second but my head says the Finns, because of what they did and who they did it too, and all by themselves.

So my vote goes to Finland.
_____________

"Chamberlain seemed such a nice old gentleman that I thought I would give him my autograph."
Adolf Hitler.

 

Yep! I'm a bit biased since my Grandparents are Poles, but I agree. Yes, Poland lost, but they FOUGHT! Even once the country was taken almost completely, and they knew they'd lose, they still holed up in Warsaw and fought. They tried a hell of alot harder then most of Western Europe did (not counting Britain). Not to mention the fact that Germany invaded from one side and the Soviets invaded from the other. For loosers, they sure were brave. Plus the Polish RAF squadron had a pretty good record, if I remember correctly, and the Polish soldiers in the British army fought their rears off at Monte Cassino.

I swear, the Swiss Army has the coolest equipment ever! I have a ton of it. They may not have fought, but their gear is great! It is all just as functional as the famed Swiss army knife.

I'd also agree with both the Aussies and Kiwis being the best, but would kind of consider them major players. Very tough soldiers that are usually lumped under "Commonwealth". If we are to consider them, we should also consider the GHURKAS (sp?). Passionate and heroic fighters in the Pacific, and part of the Commonwealth.

 

I agree with the original post, although I do consider Canada's contribution major. Considering every Canadian soldier overseas at the time of Normandy was a volunteer and the ability to form an Army for the invasion, assigned there own beach from such a small population says volumes. Of course my favorite quote of Rommel's is:

"Give me Canadian soldiers with American equipment and I will end the war for you"

Gotta admire those finns, Australians and New Zealanders though...