If U.S. never entered World War 2, how would the war have played out?

[tomjones]

The problem is that Americans have an incorrect view on history and WW2 is a good example.

_______________________

I am the one.

 

[WrestlinganJudo]

The problem is that Americans have an incorrect view on history and WW2 is a good example.

_______________________

I am the one.

In what way? I think most people all over the world have an incorrect view.

Most people from the Netherlands don't seem to know about how bravely their people fought in the Pacific as part of the ABDA.

 

[Aegon Spengler]

If they had never entered in any way, providing no material assistance whatsoever so the Soviets or the British, and Japan had entered the war against the British but not the Americans...it's tough to say how that would have gone down. The soviets were moving hard against the Germans but they had a lot of American supplies, american supplies also helped the UK survive the blitz.

 

[tomjones]

In what way?

Check my previous post in the thread.


__________________________

I am the one.

 

[WrestlinganJudo]

Check my previous post in the thread.


__________________________

I am the one.

You can make a broad assumption of Americans with just that? Isn't that a global problem?

 

[Kanster]

Who knows.

What I find funny is that when I attended school in Uzbekistan the teachers their teach you that Russia won the war, when I said that to my teacher over here in the US, bish almost fell into a coma.

 

[RoryFan]

Band of Brothers would be a vastly different show. Just a bunch of guys going about their daily lives.

 

[tomjones]

You can make a broad assumption of Americans with just that? Isn't that a global problem?

I agree its also a global problem.

________________________________

I am the one.

 

[BB in Crazy!!!!]

Germany would be known as Prussiastan. France would be known as Germany.

 

[Aegon Spengler]

TS you really have to be a little more clear on the term "entered".

Also, people remember who won the battles because that's where the glory is, but they forget where the war material to win those battles was built.

Do you mean if the USA had stayed strictly neutral without supplying either side?
Or would they have continued to supply and support the allies without using actual troops?
Or would they have sent weapons and fuel to both sides?
Would they have only continued to supply Japan with oil to avoid war, while not supplying the rest of the axis or allies...or how does this work?

Those are some of the key questions here.

In a situation where the USA is removed entirely from the equation the allies/soviets could actually have lost the war. Supplies from the United States kept Britain going, without them the UK would have been forced to capitulate to Germany via mass starvation. This quote from wikipedia sums it up

At the start of the Second World War in 1939 the United Kingdom imported 20 million long tons (20 Mt) of food per year (70%), including more than 50% of its meat, 70% of its cheese and sugar, nearly 80% of fruits and about 70% of cereals and fats. The civilian population was about 50 million.[3] It was one of the principal strategies of the Germans to attack shipping bound for Britain, restricting British industry and potentially starving the nation into submission.

(wikipedia claims the source of their info is the UK's national statistics website)

Without the Americans you have to think that the Kriegsmarine and the Luftwaffe would have been able to starve the UK into submission. Churchill says they would have:

The Battle of the Atlantic was the dominating factor all through the war. Never for one moment could we forget that everything happening elsewhere, on land, at sea or in the air depended ultimately on its outcome.

Now even if that quote by Churchill sounds a little dramatic, it's basically true. Consider this:

Roughly 17.5 million tons of military equipment, vehicles, industrial supplies, and food were shipped from the Western Hemisphere to the USSR, 94% coming from the US. For comparison, a total of 22 million tons landed in Europe to supply American forces from January 1942 to May 1945. It has been estimated that American deliveries to the USSR through the Persian Corridor alone were sufficient, by US Army standards, to maintain sixty combat divisions in the line.[29][30]

The United States gave to the Soviet Union from October 1, 1941 to May 31, 1945 the following: 427,284 trucks, 13,303 combat vehicles, 35,170 motorcycles, 2,328 ordnance service vehicles, 2,670,371 tons of petroleum products (gasoline and oil), 4,478,116 tons of foodstuffs (canned meats, sugar, flour, salt, etc.), 1,900 steam locomotives, 66 Diesel locomotives, 9,920 flat cars, 1,000 dump cars, 120 tank cars, and 35 heavy machinery cars

In total, the US deliveries to the USSR through Lend-Lease amounted to $11 billion (not adjusted for inflation) in materials: over 400,000 jeeps and trucks; 12,000 armored vehicles (including 7,000 tanks, about 1,386[25] of which were M3 Lees and 4,102 M4 Shermans);[26] 11,400 aircraft (4,719 of which were Bell P-39 Airacobras)[27] and 1.75 million tons of food.

Let's also look at how America contributed to China's war effort against Japan (China had entered into total war with Japan by 1937).

Through Lend Lease, a total of $50.1 billion (equivalent to $656 billion today) worth of supplies were shipped to the allies, or 17% of the total war expenditures of the U.S. $1.6 billion went to China

.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lend-Lease

Responding to continuing Japanese aggression in China, the U.S. froze Japanese assets in the U.S. on 26 July 1941 and on 1 August established an embargo on oil and gasoline exports to Japan.[11] The oil embargo was an especially strong response because oil was Japan's most crucial import, and more than 80 percent of Japan's oil at the time came from the United States.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Events_leading_to_the_attack_on_Pearl_Harbor#Background_to_conflict

US aid to China wasn't all that heavy, but the fact that the USA stopped supplying Japan made a tremendous difference in the course of the Sino-Japanese war.

If Japan had been able to conquer China, and the United Kingdom had been starved into submission...how do you really think the USSR would have fared without American supplies?

American supplies and trade embargos were a crucial component of the Allied war effort. Without American support, the Allies would not have been able to win the war.
On the flip side, if America had supported the Axis with supplies, the Allies almost definitely would have lost.

 

[BBT13]

Europe Would be Russian and Japan also. Russia would take out Germany and take over Europe and after would help China take out Japan and take it over.

 

[Rawex]

American supplies and trade embargos were a crucial component of the Allied of the war effort. Without American support, the Allies would not have been able to win the war.
On the flip side, if America had supported the Axis with supplies, the Allies almost definitely would have lost.

This just shows how good the German army was at the time. Nation size of Texas taking on England, France and Russia almost alone + supplies from USA (best ally germans had was Italy and they could not even take out Greece on their own. Okay Germany was allied with Japan but they could not really help each other out). But as good as the army was eventually they lost the war of nutrition and could not keep up.

 

[tomjones]

The fact is that Germany was going to lose WW2 even without an allied invasion of western Europe. It would of obviously dragged out the war for a longer period though.


_________________________

I am the one

 

[MadSquabbles500]

Germany would have lost the war still, it would have taken much longer, and civilian and military casualties would be higher.

After Germany fell Stalin would have attempted march to the Atlantic and bring the rest of Europe under his control.

He would have continued to support Mao Zedong against Chiang Kai-shek and helped push the Japanese off of the Asian continent. Control of Korea would transfer from Japan to China as well as all the other territories. With France falling under Soviet control chunks of South East Asia will be Stalins.

It is hard to say if Mao will think Stalin is over reaching and how much friction will form. After that it is very hard to tell how it will play out.

England and Spain, and France would have joined Germany to stop Stalin then.

 

[WrestlinganJudo]

TS you really have to be a little more clear on the term "entered".

Also, people remember who won the battles because that's where the glory is, but they forget where the war material to win those battles was built.

Do you mean if the USA had stayed strictly neutral without supplying either side?
Or would they have continued to supply and support the allies without using actual troops?
Or would they have sent weapons and fuel to both sides?
Would they have only continued to supply Japan with oil to avoid war, while not supplying the rest of the axis or allies...or how does this work?

Those are some of the key questions here.

In a situation where the USA is removed entirely from the equation the allies/soviets could actually have lost the war. Supplies from the United States kept Britain going, without them the UK would have been forced to capitulate to Germany via mass starvation. This quote from wikipedia sums it up


(wikipedia claims the source of their info is the UK's national statistics website)

Without the Americans you have to think that the Kriegsmarine and the Luftwaffe would have been able to starve the UK into submission. Churchill says they would have:



Now even if that quote by Churchill sounds a little dramatic, it's basically true. Consider this:



Let's also look at how America contributed to China's war effort against Japan (China had entered into total war with Japan by 1937).

.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lend-Lease


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Events_leading_to_the_attack_on_Pearl_Harbor#Background_to_conflict

If the USA hadn't supplied China with aid it might not have made much of a difference to the Chinese, but the fact that the USA stopped supplying Japan made a tremendous difference.

If Japan had been able to conquer China, and the United Kingdom had been starved into submission...how do you really think the USSR would have fared without American supplies?

American supplies and trade embargo's were a crucial piece of the war effort. Without American support, the Allies would probably not have been able to win the war.
On the flip side, if America had supported the Axis with supplies, the Allies almost definitely would have lost.

I will say I am positive the USA made a huge difference in how things turned out. Too many people military historians doubt the Axis can still win.

Soviet oil production was greater than all of the Axis combined without the help of the USA. The only nation that produced more oil in WW2 was the USA.

The Soviet Union produced more motorized transport vehicles than Germany but we did give them quite a few as well but much of our gift was after Germany was starting to crack.

The Soviet Union produced more aircraft during the war than Germany.

The Soviet Union produced more tank than the USA and much more than Germany.

Artillery was the #1 killer. The Soviet produced twice as much of it as the USA and 8-9 times as much of it as Germany.

All of the Axis powers combined produced a little over 9K transport aircraft. The Soviets produced over 17k.

The USA absolutely made a huge difference on the duration of the war but the Soviet Union had already started turning back the Germans.

 

[Rusk]

There was a tiny risk but once Japan turned South there was not much they could do.

If you look at Russia via Google Map you will find there is not much in the East.

They have to cross 3/4's of the way across the widest nation on Earth before they could get to where they can get to the critical part.

Japan does not have to logistic capability to punch deed and keep their men supplied. Germany couldn't get winter clothing to Stalingrad, Japan can't take care of their troops with horses either.

Those mountain ranges are going to be a problem.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Sorge#Wartime_intelligence_supplied_by_the_Sorge_Ring
Now lets look at the Soviet troops against Japan if they ever fought.
Taken from some ww2 forum so no idea how accurate these numbers are but should give a rough idea.

So while Soviets sent new troops to Moscow region they still had quite good number of men and machines to face any invasion from Japan. However as said Japan had troops in China, other countries in Asia and Pasific. They also attacked Pearl Harbor couple months after Germany invaded Soviet Union. Since Germany didnt manage to take Moscow and Stalingrad, Japan had no intention of attacking Soviets directly.

Hmm, ok i am now convinced, good points.

 

[MadSquabbles500]

Japan beat the hell out of China on land as well as Sea. Nanking was hundreds of miles inland and was ravaged by the Japanese.

I can see them making huge gains against sparsely defended, sparsely manned Russian Siberia, and causing a huge problem for any retreating Soviet union. The Soviet Union depended on potentially infinite area to retreat to, and once that was lost to them, the USSR could not hope to prevail.

The USSR might not have been extinguished, but it becomes a political and military backwater. I could see Nazi Germany waiting a generation and then taking them on militarily again, provided the Soviets never get the bomb.

Nanking was not that far from the coast. Despite Japan tech superiority, that war lasted for like seven years and they still could not finish the job. They should have been able to finish the job before they ever bombed Pearl harbor, but could not.

they actually did fight the soviets in Siberia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battles_of_Khalkhin_Gol

The got scared off.

 

[WrestlinganJudo]

England and Spain, and France would have joined Germany to stop Stalin then.

Germany was in ruins, 70% of Europe was destroyed. Uncle Joe talked nice then threw up the Berlin Wall, brought Eastern Europe under it's control and the cold war started.

What was France and Spain going to do? France had been occupied for quite some time when liberated. Spain didn't have much power.

 

[dabausplaya]

Would the soviets have survived if not for US lend lease?

I am real interested in hearing what people think would have happened in the Pacific theatre. At one point, Hitler was an ally of Chiang Kai Shek. He ended that when I felt Japan could fight communism better. This happened before US entered the war.

If Chiang could fold the communists into his own, or the communist just give up on their own, Germany may start to help out again or broker a truce. Or the Germans drive the Soviets further east into China, and closer to the Maoists. Being as they are the only allies they have, they may help the Chinese modernize their war machine. If Chiang capitulates to Mao, they may form a united front with Soviet assistance to drive out the Japanese.

Basically this world may be like Wolfenstein the New Order video game. If there is a sequel to that video game, Blascowicz will be assisting the Empire of the Sun launch a final assault on the Nazi Regime.

Japan will be the overlords, and everyone adopts their culture.

I, for one, welcome our sex pillow bearing overlords

 

[MadSquabbles500]

I think Russia and Germany would've fought to a stalemate, and Britain probably could hold them off, but all of mainland Europe, except for Italy and maybe Spain would be under German control.

As far as the eastern front goes, Japan would've taken China, and then probably set their sights further west

Japan already had Manchuria since 1931, and they still could not take all of China before they attacked Pearl Harbor.

I am not sure if Japan's goal was to capture all of China or just get China to sign a treaty turning over Manchuria and some more land.