Talk:Foreign relations of the Axis powers

HUH?

OK than, I can understand the need to have a section on controversial relations to the Axis powers. Really I do. But there is a point where one must draw the line. It looks like those included were included for reasons that range from logical to (extremely) trivial. It appears that Having any one of the following: 1. A fascist movement of any size (including two guys sitting on a dock in the bay doing the Roman salute to one another, and this is not as much of an exaggeration as I wish it was) 2. Having at any point whatsoever done any business of any kind with an individual who happened to be a national of one of the Axis countries. 3. Having in the interbellum cut a deal with a future Axis member (which would include France, England, Poland, Belgium, Denmark, Luxembourg, and Holland, to whom I would wonder WHY one could possibly connect with a desire to aid the Axis) 4. Having a few civilians go off on their own accord, often in violation of neutrality laws, and join the Axis. will apparently land you a spot on here.

Some of the cases I can understand or at least think an argument could be cobbled together for. But seriously, some of this stuff is just plain outlandish to be mentioned here. ELV

Originally all that stuff was in Axis powers of World War II. As simple deletion was objected by other user I moved it here. There isn't any criteria here, I threw here everything what I considered unfit to Axis powers of World War II.--Staberinde 10:36, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

I've tried cleaning up this article a bit, and removed some stuff that I couldn't comprehend due to poor grammar and/or the fact that it doesn't belong here. The Singapore section, for instance, was only about atrocities committed by the Japanese and wasn't about relations that the Singapore authorities struck with the Axis. I feel some information is a bit to trivia-esque to be notable (like the bit about a handful of Americans serving in the German military) and other parts merely deals with opposition to the Axis. Also, most of the flags on this page will be going as they mess up the layout and don't serve much of a function in my view.--Sus scrofa 00:50, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

San Marino

San Marino was not officially neutral. They did not deploy any soldiers (they did not have any type of expeditionary armed forces) but their foreign policy was aligned to Italy. --NEMT 04:30, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

United States

The section for the United States notes that "the 1939 Commerce Agreement permitted Elbert Gary (President of United States Steel), Thomas Lamont (from J.P.Morgan and Warranty Trust Company) and Frank A. Vanderlip (Director of National City Bank of New York) to visit Japan ...." The problem here is that by 1939, both Elbert Gary and Frank Vanderlip were dead. Someone who knows more facts about this case should clean this up. Thanks. For now, I've cut both Gary and Vanderlip out of the text. --RedJ 17 01:52, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm curious why it isn't pointed out that the US recognized and dealt with pro-Nazi Vichy France instead of DeGaulle's Free French? The American Communist Party was made illegal but not the American Nazi Party. People like Lindberg and car-industrial magnate Henry Ford as well as Mrs Simpson who the British King abdicated over were pro-Nazi and the 1st two even received medals from Hitler himself. The Vichy not only had more inclusive definitions of 'Jews' they gladly offered to the Nazi Concentration Camps but supplied the German war machine with not only supplies and munitions but actual weapon construction. Funny how the originator of this article didn't mention those teeny things.

In reading the naval history, I was surprised to read how frustrated the Royal Navy was at American shipping trading with the German Reich and Italy. When the British and French placed trade embargoes on Italy for her actions in Ethiopia, the US refused to go along and kept trading the most important war materials like coal and fuel.

I know US trade with Japan was one-sided in Japan being reliant on American fuel(sadly like we are with Iraq and middle-east today) and metal, but given Europes far greater economy back then I wonder if America did more business with German-occupied Europe before Pearl Harbor than they did with Japan?

That's just off the top of my head, so I'm sure someone who's done more research could come up with a fair bit more. I'm just surprised none of this was mentioned. Then again, maybe I'm not.AthabascaCree (talk) 06:02, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

I think these are good points and should be added to the US section by someone with access to relevant sources. --Sus scrofa (talk) 12:44, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Canada -- P. M. Campbell in Alberta

P. M. Campbell, an Alberta politician, did not "take over Alberta" as this article states. However, he was elected to the Alberta legislature. See Parti national social chrétien. Also note that he is not listed in List of premiers of Alberta. Canadian2006 (talk) 03:47, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Move/Rename of Cases of controversial relations with the Axis of World War II

To follow up on the Huh section above, this list seems to have become a somewhat comprehensive list showing how each major non-colonial (and a few colonial) countries interacted with the Axis powers in WWII. As such, it seems to be neither a list of random cases nor necesarilly controversial ones depending on your politics.

How about?:

• National relations with the Axis of World War II or
• Axis of World War II foreign relations

RevelationDirect (talk) 02:35, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

• Like #2, let's see what Wikipedia naming conventions are.--Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 06:41, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Foreign relations of the Axis powers. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.um.dk/Publikationer/UM/English/Denmark/kap6/6-15.asp
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070816205702/http://navalhistory.dk:80/Danish/Historien/1939_1945/dk_efter29august.htm to http://www.navalhistory.dk/danish/Historien/1939_1945/dk_efter29august.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051026222219/http://www.marinehistorie.dk/Danish/Historien/1939_1945/DenDanskeFlotille.htm to http://www.marinehistorie.dk/Danish/Historien/1939_1945/DenDanskeFlotille.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:15, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Foreign relations of the Axis powers. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071110034554/http://www.marinehistorie.dk/Danish/Tidslinie/Maanedsvis/08_Aug.htm to http://www.marinehistorie.dk/Danish/Tidslinie/Maanedsvis/08_Aug.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130114130824/http://www.just.ee/orb.aw/class%3Dfile/action%3Dpreview/id%3D12709/TheWhiteBook.pdf to http://www.just.ee/orb.aw/class%3Dfile/action%3Dpreview/id%3D12709/TheWhiteBook.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:44, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Iceland on the map

Not sure if this is the right place to make this comment, but Iceland should be Neutral, not allied. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.90.253.29 (talk) 19:04, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Iceland was under British then US protection through war… was invaded by British eventually, idk if this is enough to call it “Allied” however CanO27sprite (talk) 00:32, 8 November 2022 (UTC)