I'm sorry but there are some people on here that haven't got a scooby about history beyond what some conspiracy sites and some politically motivated books have told them!
Apart from STG. You have covered most of the points correctly.
Bren you are miles off the mark, mate. There is absolutely no proof that Russians killed 80% of Nazis. Most Germans that died on the Eastern Front died of cold, starvation and disease, not gunfire.
The following quote smacks wildly of the "
Britain saved the world and no one helped us" brigade that also seem to include so many of your secondary school teachers unfortunately!
LyusN1 wrote: Actually, you were good for surprisingly little. By the time the US decided to enter the war and actually help us, Hitler had already turned his attention to the Eastern front and Russia. We had already weathered the Blitz and the best that the German war machine could throw at us and really only had Doodlebugs left to look forward to - if we are being overly simplistic.
Indeed some Americans DID help us when we actually needed it, i.e. the Battle of Britain, but they did so regardless of the fact that the US Government threatened to revoke their citizenship. Decent people they were to fly in the face of their government and nation and help us. Even then there were probably only about 20 or so.
The US only entered the war when it suited them, when we had stood alone when the rest of Europe had fallen, and still contributed very little man power - a fair amount of whom were actually were trained over here by the British Army and not in the camps like Band of Brothers.
Where to start with this one! Yes, Britain did stand almost alone - but let's not forget the French/Chzeck/Polish/Dutch/GERMAN etc Resistance, huh? Or the fact that much of the food/ammo/materiel etc that kept Britain going was shipped to Britain by the USA.
It is true the USA delayed entering the war but that was as much to do with raising their industrial production and war fighting capability to a workable level of effectiveness as it was to do with political pressure from the quite powerful German-American lobby. To say they then contributed little man power is incorrect. Their army, navy and airforce contributed far more personnel to the fight in Europe after 1942 than Britain did. Britain simply was not in a position post-1941 to defeat the Axis powers in Europe singlehandedly. She didn't have the manpower or the materiel. But Britain played a vital roll in delaying the German Army (and the ensuing indecision of her Generals) and in defeating the Luftwaffe. That role cannot be underestimated. Of course she also contributed soldiers to the fight in Europe post-D Day.
As far as you training "a fair ammount" of Americans, that cuts both ways. They also trained thousands of British & Commonwealth soldiers in the use of new American weapons and technology etc.
LyusN1 wrote:Japan was kinda your war, not ours.
...and let's not forget the Russians reached Berlin first. Hitler had already got bored with attacking us and given up.
The Russians would have probably won it anyway if you hadn't turned up at all in all honesty so yeah we may well have done it sans US involvement.
Also, I tried not to be sarcastic in my reply so I would have hoped that you weren't either. I wasn't trying to turn it into an argument - just stating facts I have learnt.
The Pacific was very much Britain's war until they were so heavily defeated by the Japanese in Singapore and Burma! Again without American manpower and materiel Japan would have occupied the entire Pacific region with relative ease and impunity.
The Russians reaching Berlin first is a silly point. There are several theories about this. Most historians agree that the American Army paused outside Berlin as a gesture to the Russians, firstly to apease them somewhat, and secondly to acknowledge that they were the country that had suffered the most grevious losses at the hands of the Germans. Also there is a school of thought that points towards the American military anticipating that the most bitter fighting would probably be on the streets of the German capital and thus decided to let the Russians take the brunt of it.
The Russians would not have won the war without American help. Firstly the Americans also supplied the Russians with superior intelligence, weapons, ammo and fuel as they got closer to Berlin and their supply lines became stretched. Secondly, one of the main reasons that Russia was so successful in the East was because Hitler had to fight on two fronts, thus the American-led invasion in the West and South (Italy) split the German forces.
Also someone pointed out that America didn't take note of Chinese and British intel regarding Japan. This is also a myth. The American intel services themselves had intel regarding Japan's short term and long term intentions. Thus they moved the carriers out of Pearl Harbour before Japan's "surprise" attack.
To sum up; No, the British and/or the Russians would not have defeated Germany, and certainly not Japan, without America. Whether you like that or not, it is fact. And no, America didn't win the war singlehandedly. Every nation that fought against the Axis powers contributed much and lost millions of young men in the process. To denigrate any one nation's contribution is wrong.
I'm not having a pop at you LyusN1 and I note you somewhat qualified your remarks later in the thread but as a lifelong student of history (particularly WWI and WWII) I couldn't let it go!!
