International Was American involvement in world war 2 key to victory?

[Thrawn33]

I'm as critical of takes on history as any leftist, but damn we won the war.

 

[pinger]

The soviets supplied the majority of the bodies.
Would have been impossible/useless without US supplies.

Without the soviets the loss of life for the western allies would be many times greater.

And look what the Republicans are doing to Ukraine

 

[Blayt7hh]

What the US did in the Pacific is probably a bigger contribution to winning the war.
Especially combat wise

Europeans are racist and think Japan was inconsequential to the war

 

[Squarechoke]

It was.

Some Europeans don't like to admit it (LOL at that - are they embarrassed they got bailed out, or just jealous?).

The US was absolutely key to the Allied victory. The US obviously didn't do it alone though - but saying that the US's involvement didn't make a difference is just being delusional.

I rarely see anyone try to make a different take on why the Allies won with the goal to downplay the US. It just doesn't make much sense for Europeans to do that when it largely means to prop up the Soviet Union/Russia more, which pretty much everyone thinks far lesser of than the US. On the contrary I much more often see Americans be upset that someone says they didn't just win the war because they take pride in it for some reason.

There's just no real reason to take pride, or feel embarrassment, about this for anyone here since none of us were there to fight. One really has to have no personal achievements to speak of if one has to hang one's pride on such things, although I guess that isn't all that uncommon.

 

[MarloStanfield]

Americans surrendered or went awol in numbers that were unheard of, cowards is a term used, the fighting that they confronted when they arrived was overwhelming for them, they were considered liabilities on the battlefield and no one wanted to fight along side them, what they did have was freshness, the war had taken its toll and they came and did fuck all but it was some comfort for the hardened soldiers that they would have support, the fact that America never went into Berlin first is everything you need to know about them, In fact every conflict since has been an embarrassment, they have all the bells and whistles but inferior soldiers

 

[Arashikage4Life]

Americans surrendered or went awol in numbers that were unheard of, cowards is a term used, the fighting that they confronted when they arrived was overwhelming for them, they were considered liabilities on the battlefield and no one wanted to fight along side them, what they did have was freshness, the war had taken its toll and they came and did fuck all but it was some comfort for the hardened soldiers that they would have support, the fact that America never went into Berlin first is everything you need to know about them, In fact every conflict since has been an embarrassment, they have all the bells and whistles but inferior soldiers

Lol, what a shit post. The servicemen in the Pacific did "fuck all?" Fuck off

I'm very much aware of the Russians' achievements and sacrifices in the war but to say American surrender numbers were "unheard of" after Russian surrender numbers totaled roughly 3.5 million in 1941-42 is laughable.

 

[curryjunkie]

Let's start here.

"$11.3 billion, or $180 billion in today's currency, the Lend-Lease Act of the United States supplied needed goods to the Soviet Union from 1941 to 1945"

Yea pretty much this, and supplying Britain, if Americans did not take part in the fighting, Germany would have isolated Britain and concentrated on defeating stalin, fuck knows what would have happened in the Pacific theatre.

 

[MarloStanfield]

Lol, what a shit post. The servicemen in the Pacific did "fuck all?" Fuck off

I'm very much aware of the Russians' achievements and sacrifices in the war but to say American surrender numbers were "unheard of" after Russian surrender numbers totaled roughly 3.5 million in 1941-42 is laughable.

Pacific lol you sat on a boat in the middle of fucking no where bombing the fuck out of an island and then struggled taking it, meanwhile the allies were on the ground in the trenches doing the real shit, go and watch your one sided fantasy war movies, your clueless, lmfao the pacific good one

 

[Andy Capp]

It was.

Some Europeans don't like to admit it (LOL at that - are they embarrassed they got bailed out, or just jealous?).

The US was absolutely key to the Allied victory. The US obviously didn't do it alone though - but saying that the US's involvement didn't make a difference is just being delusional.

But the question in the OP is not did they make a difference; rather it's whether they made the difference. Just sayin'.

 

[Koro_11]

Many uneducated simpletons only imagine WW2 taking place in Europe, but they're clueless about the battle in the Pacific.

Russians made a difference on the Eastern front mostly due to geography, weather, and the fact that they were run by a lunatic who was willing to keep throwing his people into the meatgrinder and didn't give a shit about the casualties.

But when Russia attempted a naval battle with Japan a few decades earlier they got their asses handed to them. If not for the US Navy, and the atomic bombs the Japanese would probably still be fighting.

 

[Koro_11]

Pacific lol you sat on a boat in the middle of fucking no where bombing the fuck out of an island and then struggled taking it, meanwhile the allies were on the ground in the trenches doing the real shit, go and watch your one sided fantasy war movies, your clueless, lmfao the pacific good one

I hope you're just trolling.

 

[Kudo]

It was for a Soviet victory.

Then of course Soviet Union and communism became the biggest threat to USA and basically still is in the form of Russia and China.

 

[Siver!]

Germany literally declared war against the US when it had no obligation to do so.

This is fundamentally inaccurate. There is no scenario where Germany is able to knock Britain out of the war militarily or politically. They failed to even attack most convoys making it to the UK, and they never had close to the capabilities to invade the UK.

Just to make this very clear. 90 percent of convoys to the UK were never attacked, and over all less than 1 percent of merchants to the UK were sunk.

How exactly do you think an invasion of the British isles would have unfolded?

Why would the US have stopped sending shipping to a country? Unrestricted submarine warfare is very illegal.

People really need to understand that no amount of more submarine building was going to win the Battle of the Atlantic. Literally 90 percent of German submariners were killed or captured during the war.

So here's the thing. Britain was about to LOSE the Battle of Britain, this seems to get forgotten. The key to any invasion was to take out the RAF. Before the destruction of the RAF took place, Germany pivoted towards Russia.

Churchill admitted Germant were on course to achieve their aims, and after that, invasion was perfectly possible. Yes Britain is detached, yes it's an island nation, yes it was belligerent and liable to fight back, but all that is misty eyed hyperbole.

We were in the shit in a way people don't seem to be aware. Reading Churchill's World War 2 series is both fascinating and terrifying. We were saved by a lapse in judgement by Hitler, and it wouldn't be his last error.

Churchill also believed Hitler wasn't aware how close Britain was to being defeated.

 

[cincymma79]

What did the leader of the Soviet party say about this issue?

"The United States is a country of machines. Without the machines we received through Lend-Lease, we would have lost the war." -Stalin.


Over 180 billion dollars in today's value. Over ten thousand planes, over six thousands tanks, over 300,000 trucks and other vehicles, plus food and agricultural assistance during some of the harshest winters of fighting.

You're welcome.

 

[Blayt7hh]

I rarely see anyone try to make a different take on why the Allies won with the goal to downplay the US.

I see it all the time on the internet. It’s even in this thread coming from multiple posters. I think it’s because America is just not very popular these days and this is how they cope. It always boils down to the fact that a lot more Soviets died.

 

[Deorum]

I see it all the time on the internet. It’s even in this thread coming from multiple posters. I think it’s because America is just not very popular these days and this is how they cope. It always boils down to the fact that a lot more Soviets died.

A lot of the same resentful little fucks have been cheerleading China's alleged takeover as the world's premier superpower over the last decade. It's gotten really quiet over the last 18 months though, because Chyna about to tailspin and wither the fuck away. The postponement of it even surpassing the US in nominal GDP is indefinite. Not in this lifetime buds, sorry.

 

[Arashikage4Life]

AskHistorians provided a typically great response to this question. It's basically a non-answer, but it's hard to delve into historical hypotheticals without changing other things that happened during the war. Next thing you know, you're going back to pre-WWI and changing things to match the scenario. Anyway...

But this argument always comes back to those two [U.S.A. and Soviet Union] which in turn informs the focus here, and it really is true that the Soviet Union and the USA in turn created a very well matched pair of complementary partners, the former with the manpower, and most importantly the willpower to use it, and the latter with the massive industrial, agricultural, and logistical capacity to keep not only herself, but also her Allies, going. It is hard to imagine an American people with the fortitude to accept the level of losses the USSR suffered, just as it is hard to believe that a Soviet military would achieve anywhere close to the level of operational capabilities it did without American support.

 

[SandisLL]

I rarely see anyone try to make a different take on why the Allies won with the goal to downplay the US. It just doesn't make much sense for Europeans to do that when it largely means to prop up the Soviet Union/Russia more, which pretty much everyone thinks far lesser of than the US. On the contrary I much more often see Americans be upset that someone says they didn't just win the war because they take pride in it for some reason.

There's just no real reason to take pride, or feel embarrassment, about this for anyone here since none of us were there to fight. One really has to have no personal achievements to speak of if one has to hang one's pride on such things, although I guess that isn't all that uncommon.

I think americans are too cocky dreamers. They are thinking that invalide FDL ghost and Churchill were great businessmans.
Stalin, their business partner had treaty about non aggression with Japan and despite this demanded lend lease and get this.
Cocky yanks and anglo saxonians are thinking that they are winners In this world, like russian world dream. It is business and nothing personal.
Supplied Stalin and always will be not better than ....Russians...while more soft Empires ofc.

 

[SandisLL]

In 1939 th Joseph Stalin had promised Japan not to attack them and really had kept this promise between lines for long timeframe. History facts is easy to see.
While european colonisators offsprings imagined that they are ....new nation. Culture ofc but ...not to trade with Georgian gyps* Joseph and imagine that others are idiots....here....
Outcome was Pearl Harbour etc....

 

[SandisLL]

Europeans are racist and think Japan was inconsequential to the war

You are sts because all white " americans " are european colonisators offsprings cos bloodline genetically and there isn't nation genetically called american. Never will be and nothing wrong here....
While ofc mindset and culture ofc is different. A lot of good stuff, a lot of bad stuff. The same for Europeans ( all white Americans does have european bloodline genetically )...It is nature ..