In WWI, Russia played a more important role in the defeat of the Central Powers than France.

"Major Russian Battles: *I don't include Tannesberg because we both already know the casualties there."And also because Russia got their a** kicked in that one"During the Gallipoli Campaign there were 500,000 British troops and only 80,000 French troops. Gallipoli was the most important battle of the Middle Eastern Theater"Well sounds like an argument for why the British played the most important role in WWI, nor Russia or France. "this debate is not about who was in the war for the longest period of time. Its about who did the most to defeat the Central Powers"Yeah, and usually the nation that stays in the war longer tends to be the one that does the most to defeat the other side, as was the case in WWII"That's why saying that Russia left early is not an argument for this debate."Except it is, you just claim it isnt because it completely defeats your argument. "In July [1916] there were 112 German divisions on the Western Front and 52 divisions in Russia and in November there were 121 divisions in the west and 76 divisions in the east"There were more troops fighting on the western Front in the battlefields of France then there were fighting in the a** whippings in Russia, got it. "Con talks about the Brusilov Offensive: "And it only took Russia two years to finally win an important battle....." I explained in both in the previous round and in the beginning of this round how that is untrue."Losing badly to the Germans in the outbreak of the war at the Battle of Tannenberg doesnt count as a key victory for Russia though. "While Russia was fighting all alone on a front three times the length of the front France was fighting on, France had help from Britain and the United States"Russia wasnt fighting alone though, France and its allies were on the other side of the theater keeping a majority of Germany's troops at bay which prevented them from going into Russia. This allowed Russia to go toe to toe with just Austria-Hungary, and they still managed to lose a sh**load of territory, have their economy and government implode, and almost caused the Central Powers to win WWI had France and its allies not managed to hold off the millions of reinforcements Germany now had thanks to Russia surrendering. =========================================================================================Numbers only go so far in demonstrating who played a bigger part in a war. There are strategic elements and characteristics of the war that also come into play that are just as important as stats like casualties and wins- France single handedly managed to bring a halt to the German invasion of France at the Battle of Marne in the initial outbreak of WWI- Russia failed spectacularly to prevent the Germans and Austrians from pouring into Russia at the Battle of Tannenberg- France managed to regain all of its territory before Germany signed an armistice- Russia lost territory so quick that it caused their economy and government to fail and caused them to surrender. - France and its allies managed to absorb the attack by Germany launched with the forces from the Eastern Front and then push them backAt the very least, France and Russia played equal roles in the defeat of the Central Powers. It seems that strategically though, France played a much more vital role in causing there to be a two front war compared to Russia, who got beat hard and eventually surrendered to make it a one front war that France and its allies still managed to win in the end.