Be a Supporter!

Who won the ww2?

  • 6,467 Views
  • 157 Replies
New Topic Respond to this Topic
Jonowales
Jonowales
  • Member since: May. 27, 2003
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 09
Blank Slate
Response to Who won the ww2? 2007-10-02 06:45:54 Reply

the answer, the allies, no one power should be considered above others in winning it... surely?

Kiril-Tupitsin
Kiril-Tupitsin
  • Member since: Feb. 16, 2006
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 19
Blank Slate
Response to Who won the ww2? 2007-10-02 08:31:35 Reply

You right about the allies witch sent tanks and etc to Russia, but who the one who fought and died during the battle? Who the one who get the shots and the deaths?
AND ONLY SOVIET UNION took over Berlin by themselves!

Who won the ww2?


BBS Signature
bcdemon
bcdemon
  • Member since: Nov. 9, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 02
Blank Slate
Response to Who won the ww2? 2007-10-02 10:09:11 Reply

The USA won ww2. All on their own. They had no help from anyone, and not one single soldier from a country other than the USA died in WW2. We, as a planet owe our freedom and ability to speak our native tongue to the great USA, they saved us all from speaking German and eating sauerkraut.

Right Cellardoor?


Injured Workers rights were taken away in the 1920's by an insurance company (WCB), it's high time we got them back.

Kiril-Tupitsin
Kiril-Tupitsin
  • Member since: Feb. 16, 2006
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 19
Blank Slate
Response to Who won the ww2? 2007-10-02 12:21:06 Reply

At 10/2/07 10:09 AM, bcdemon wrote: The USA won ww2. All on their own. They had no help from anyone, and not one single soldier from a country other than the USA died in WW2. We, as a planet owe our freedom and ability to speak our native tongue to the great USA, they saved us all from speaking German and eating sauerkraut.

Right Cellardoor?

learn some history.


BBS Signature
Ledgey
Ledgey
  • Member since: Feb. 16, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 24
Blank Slate
Response to Who won the ww2? 2007-10-02 12:42:01 Reply

Oh the Battle of Britain was an important battle alright. He never said it was a large scale fight, but it did provide a major propaganda victory for Britain, not to mention setting back Hitler's definatly possible invasion plans for the future. It also lead to the blitz, which involved the bombing of factories (affecting British military production).
The Battle of Britain isn't what caused the ultimate defense of Britain. It was a single successful air campaign, that wouldn't have permanently deterred the Germans had the US not provided aide and eventually entered the war.

Of course not, but it's buying time, and they did not attempt another stragetic attack on Britain. If we had lost the Battle of Britain, it would leave the navy open to air attack and the Blitz could have been much worse.


Although the US did help us alot, you even said before that the war in Europe was a united effort.
Yes, but the war in Europe wasn't the entire war. Those who fought in the European theater were united mostly by the US, who was the logistical foundation of the allies, and at the same time played the most prominent role on the Western Front.

Well the USA were alot more organised and were bigger in numbers and arms than the other allies, so it's understandable that they were the foundation. But then without allies, could America have charged through Europe by themselves? Not that I doubt it, but considering they'd have to strain their troops alot more.


We owe part of our existence to the US because of the supplies.
Also by supplying the Soviets, and intervening with troops which led to the demise of the Germans. Something that wouldn't have happened if the US didn't do those things.

But we also owe part of our existence due to our governments ability to keep moral high and the defense strong. And technically, the Lend-Lease act didn't just benefit the British, it highly benefitted the US too.
Yes, but considering that aide was essential to Britains survival, and the fact that the US forgave the debt from Lend-Lease, and only a tiny fraction of that debt was ever paid back... it was far more beneficial to the British than it was to the US.

If Britain fell then America would never have gotten a foothold in Europe.
That's highly debatable. Considering how much the invasion of Europe by the allies was funded, planned, and executed by the US in comparison to the other allies, it's pretty reasonable to suggest that the US could have done it by itself. It would have been a lot more difficult and complicated, but it still could have happened.

Invading from the Atlantic would be alot more difficult than invading from the English Channel.

FDR also said that the best way for the US to guarantee a safe defence would be to help Britain defend.
Yes, and how does that act as a detriment to the US in the argument? The US both defended Britain, and played the most prominent role in the entire war at the same time, as part of a larger strategy.

If the US never provided aid, it would have left America open to attack and democracy in Europe would have been dead.
Actually, if the US never provided aide, chances are Europe would have been doomed and it wouldn't have effected the US for quite some time. Had the US never supported the British, the axis, especially Japan, wouldn't have had reason at that time to attack the US.

Hell I remember reading that at one point in time, Hitler had a favorable view of the US due to his believe that it was made up mostly of Aryans, and would have eventually become a valuable ally to Germany. Henry Ford and Hitler were peas in a pod, by the way, lol.

Yeah, he actually thought the same about Britain (Mein Kampf), classing them as the 2nd best race until they went to war.

If only America actually fought in every theater of war. They didn't fight any large scale battles on the Eastern front.
The Eastern front wasn't a theatre of war, it was a front in the European theater.

My mistake.

Althought the single largest factor, you did not fight a major battle (apart maybe from few volunteers).
Haha the US didn't fight a major battle? Actually the US fought several, including being almost entirely responsible for Operation Overlord, The battle of Normandy, and the entire Western front. Not to mention the entire operation in the Pacific that was fought almost entirely by the US against the Japanese.

Sorry, let me rephrase that, I meant that to mean they didn't fight a major battle on the Eastern Front. Awful mistake for me to make (2am in UK D:)


And I guess the reason why the US led the operation was because of more expendable troops and their home front wasn't directly affected.
No, the US led the operation because the US was the most competent, and most capable, especially considering the previous attempts by the British to land forces in western Europe that had failed miserably.

The British proved they were basically feckless at that point in the war. That is why the US took control. The reasoning was validated when, after US-led Operation Overlord until the end of the war, the first and last operation the British were allowed command over was Operation Market Garden, a complete and utter disaster due to British incompetence.

Dunkirk was a failure, true, but it was one of the first times the Brits had seen the might of the German army. It also helped Britain to realise that defending is the best option in Europe and to stick to the offensive in other theaters.

Market Garden on the other hand... yeah. That was a bit of a failure.


GT - LedgeyNG, Steam - Ledgey91, PSN - LedgeyNG

BBS Signature
Complete
Complete
  • Member since: Jul. 27, 2006
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 27
Blank Slate
Response to Who won the ww2? 2007-10-02 13:12:38 Reply

At 10/2/07 10:09 AM, bcdemon wrote: The USA won ww2. All on their own. They had no help from anyone, and not one single soldier from a country other than the USA died in WW2. We, as a planet owe our freedom and ability to speak our native tongue to the great USA, they saved us all from speaking German and eating sauerkraut.

Right Cellardoor?

You know, so many UK and CA users want him to stop proving facts. But you guys fuel him to do it more.

He even stated it would be difficult without help but it is possible we could of won:

At 10/1/07 10:55 PM, cellardoor6 wrote: , it's pretty reasonable to suggest that the US could have done it by itself. It would have been a lot more difficult and complicated, but it still could have happened.

If you seriously want him to stop, then stop bringing up arguments and take it to another forum where he doesn't lurk.


LOL

BBS Signature
shab189
shab189
  • Member since: Sep. 9, 2007
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 04
Blank Slate
Response to Who won the ww2? 2007-10-02 13:15:28 Reply

we did


thats me baby

BBS Signature
CaptainChip
CaptainChip
  • Member since: May. 24, 2007
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 11
Blank Slate
Response to Who won the ww2? 2007-10-02 13:50:04 Reply

OK.
Who won the war? Allies. Not one country
Who did the most? Who cares, but it was probably not Russia.
Who was in the war the longest? European allies... or maybe Japan.

Everyone understand?


Who will guard the guards guarding the guards?
World of Words 2
IF YOU NEED FLASH CARTOON IDEAS, COME SEE ME!

BBS Signature
megalolord
megalolord
  • Member since: Aug. 26, 2007
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 10
Blank Slate
Response to Who won the ww2? 2007-10-02 19:25:34 Reply

At 9/25/07 04:51 PM, K-RadPie wrote:
At 9/25/07 02:41 PM, jef01 wrote: who wins?

no one,it's a war,nobody wins a war,there are only small losers and big losers
Oh really now? And why is that? Just because some n00b says so?

You are a total jerk! Are you saying that war is good? I think that Jef01 is right. He's not a n00b, he is human.

Snicp
Snicp
  • Member since: Sep. 16, 2005
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 19
Blank Slate
Response to Who won the ww2? 2007-10-02 22:29:22 Reply

At 10/2/07 01:50 PM, CaptainChip wrote: Who did the most? Who cares, but it was probably not Russia.

it probaly was Russia.

TheMason
TheMason
  • Member since: Dec. 26, 2003
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 08
Blank Slate
Response to Who won the ww2? 2007-10-02 22:35:16 Reply

At 9/24/07 10:28 PM, Snicp wrote:
if they were'nt opening the 2nd front in the end of 1945 no could defiet the nazis
so stupid that the history that teaching in canada is fucking WRONG

Actually, the second front wasn't opened in the end of 1945 (afterall the war ended in early August 1945). It was opened in July 1941. And the Red Army was demoralizied by Stalin's 1939 purges. The Russians were weak.

Furthermore, it was not the Russians who opened the second front but the Nazis who invaded Russia (who was cooperating with Hitler). This did draw troops and resources away from the Western Front which did help the Allies...but that was not enough to tip the balance towards the idea of Russia winning WWII. Afterall it was the Americans and English who put the strangle hold on the Nazi's oil reserves in N. Africa.

The Soviets did renounce its non-aggression pact towards Japan on 8 August 1945...one day before the US dropped the second bomb on Nagasaki effectively ending the war.


Debunking conspiracy theories for the New World Order since 1995...
" I hereby accuse you attempting to silence me..." --PurePress

BBS Signature
Imperator
Imperator
  • Member since: Oct. 10, 2005
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 17
Blank Slate
Response to Who won the ww2? 2007-10-02 22:45:55 Reply

At 9/29/07 11:33 PM, Gwarfan wrote: Its was the GREEKS, man, the fuckin' GREEKS.

Lacedaemonians, PHALANX!

AHOO AHOO AHOO!

I like how the entire thread went on and y'all never answered my question about what your measurements are......

Meaning you're all trying to objectify things that you have no claim for.....

Y'all might as well measure who did the best based on which president was the most handsome.....


Writing Forum Reviewer.
PM me
for preferential Writing Forum review treatment.
See my NG page for a regularly updated list of works I will review.

tony4moroney
tony4moroney
  • Member since: Jun. 22, 2007
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 07
Blank Slate
Response to Who won the ww2? 2007-10-02 23:23:13 Reply

At 10/2/07 10:45 PM, Imperator wrote:
I like how the entire thread went on and y'all never answered my question about what your measurements are......

Meaning you're all trying to objectify things that you have no claim for.....

you cannot observe everything objectively, history doesn't work that way (as you should know). what the debate is about is how significant america's role was in WWII vs. the other allied nations and the soviet union. how can you quantify the significance of killing 100 000 people in comparison to assassinating a general for e.g? what about the dependency on u.s resources versus the soviets causing the nazis to fight on two fronts? there is no scientific measurement but what we can do is observe the outcomes and the role played in these events and what was critical to the successful outcomes of those campaigns, then we can make a determination on how/ if the u.s was the key to the allied success.

and because i like pictures...

Who won the ww2?

Imperator
Imperator
  • Member since: Oct. 10, 2005
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 17
Blank Slate
Response to Who won the ww2? 2007-10-02 23:45:16 Reply

At 10/2/07 11:23 PM, tony4moroney wrote:
you cannot observe everything objectively, history doesn't work that way (as you should know). what the debate is about is how significant america's role was in WWII vs. the other allied nations and the soviet union.

Fine. Then what's your measurement of comparison? If you're debating the significance between the two and comparing, what are you using to measure that significance?

The question still stands, otherwise, you're making cake by just eyeballing how much of an ingredient you need.....worse yet, you're randomly choosing what ingredients you're using.

If you're going to measure significance, put it in a context, bracket your variables. Ie,
Russia's role was more important globally due to X, Y, and Z factors, being the factors that most directly affected world affairs post WWII.

US's role was more important scientifically due to X, Y, and Z factors, being the factors that most directly affected innovation.

Otherwise we're looking at another pointless WWII endless, moronic, NG "debate". You might as well argue who's army looked prettier if you're not going to define any measures or variables.....

(this is how you objectify history, write multiple vantage-points, or write "omniscient God" views of history. Because without some MEASURE of objectivity, History loses significance)

how can you quantify the significance of killing 100 000 people in comparison to assassinating a general for e.g?

By defining what your objective outlook is, defining the variables you use to show that significance, and explaining why the significance is important (to whatever audience you are addressing).

If I wanted to show the significance as it relates to a campaign, I would show how the loss of 100,000 men would affect said campaign, as compared to the loss of a general. I'd use previous examples where campaigns have lost generals but had low casualties to show that the death of a field general in a campaign was less significant than the loss of 100,000 troops.

If I wanted to show the significance between the two as it related to the war at large, their respective societies, morale, war costs, etc, I'd do the same, albeit with different points of argument and comparison.

there is no scientific measurement but what we can do is observe the outcomes and the role played in these events and what was critical to the successful outcomes of those campaigns, then we can make a determination on how/ if the u.s was the key to the allied success.

There's no measurement because you haven't MADE any yet. It's clear what you want to do, but you haven't bothered showing how you're going to get there. Read history or anthropology articles. They're very "scientific" when it comes to defining things.

A lot of them start off with sentences like "My goal is to show the relationship betwen X and Y by using A, B, and C, which relate to X and Y in the following ways, etc etc etc".

If you want to say the US was more important, go right ahead. But explain WHY they were more important, and make sure you explain why the points that make them more important are relevant and accurate.


Writing Forum Reviewer.
PM me
for preferential Writing Forum review treatment.
See my NG page for a regularly updated list of works I will review.

Demosthenez
Demosthenez
  • Member since: Jul. 15, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 13
Blank Slate
Response to Who won the ww2? 2007-10-03 01:17:28 Reply

At 10/2/07 08:31 AM, Kiril-Tupitsin wrote: AND ONLY SOVIET UNION took over Berlin by themselves!

The Battle of Berlin was probably the most worthless battle of the war. So many Germans and Soviets died for nothing, absolutely nothing. The Soviets could have barricaded and sieged the city into starvation and, eventually, capitulation without having to take the million something casualties they all took. And thats just the soldiers, forget the civilians.

They were just peasents though, its not like Stalin cared, they were expendable.

bcdemon
bcdemon
  • Member since: Nov. 9, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 02
Blank Slate
Response to Who won the ww2? 2007-10-03 02:33:38 Reply

At 10/2/07 12:21 PM, Kiril-Tupitsin wrote:
At 10/2/07 10:09 AM, bcdemon wrote: The USA won ww2. All on their own. They had no help from anyone, and not one single soldier from a country other than the USA died in WW2. We, as a planet owe our freedom and ability to speak our native tongue to the great USA, they saved us all from speaking German and eating sauerkraut.

Right Cellardoor?
learn some history.

Learn to read sarcasm...Sheesh.

At 10/2/07 01:12 PM, Complete wrote: You know, so many UK and CA users want him to stop proving facts. But you guys fuel him to do it more.

I watch alot of MMA (Mixed Martial Arts), and the guy I like to see get beat up the most, are the guys like Cellardoor6. The ones who say stuff like "I am going to kick the other guys ass, rip him apart, make him wish he never got into the ring, he has no chance against me". And they are usually shit-kicked by the guy who says "I've been training hard, working on some knew techniques, and I think it will be a good fight". I don't mock cellardweller because he can prove his drivel now and then, I mock him because he is an egotistical fuckwad with no respect for anyone else but himself. What I wrote above, is exactly what Cellar would write if he were entrusted to write a history book on WW2.

He even stated it would be difficult without help but it is possible we could of won:

It's also possible that you could have been blown into oblivion. I don't see much point in speculating on what may have happened half a century ago, although Cellar does.


Injured Workers rights were taken away in the 1920's by an insurance company (WCB), it's high time we got them back.

urbn
urbn
  • Member since: Jun. 10, 2007
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 18
Programmer
Response to Who won the ww2? 2007-10-03 04:28:56 Reply

I like the fact that the Western European Allies had been fighting and dieing for some time before the US even decided it was a legitimate problem.

Yes the US had a significant role in turning the war, as did Russia, but only for the amount of Troops they both had. If it wasn't for The fact that the Western European Allies were not going to roll over and died there wouldn't have even been a War, and we would all be speaking German, as they would have easily created the A-Bomb before the US got their finger out of their arse.

IMO ofc.


BBS Signature
urbn
urbn
  • Member since: Jun. 10, 2007
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 18
Programmer
Response to Who won the ww2? 2007-10-03 04:32:34 Reply

Also, just adding that I agree with TimeTheGreat, the Battle of Britan was a huge victory for the Allies BEFORE America even came in.


BBS Signature
TheMason
TheMason
  • Member since: Dec. 26, 2003
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 08
Blank Slate
Response to Who won the ww2? 2007-10-04 12:25:32 Reply

At 10/2/07 08:31 AM, Kiril-Tupitsin wrote: You right about the allies witch sent tanks and etc to Russia, but who the one who fought and died during the battle? Who the one who get the shots and the deaths?
AND ONLY SOVIET UNION took over Berlin by themselves!

So? Berlin was not the only battle of the War. There was the US and UK that kicked Rommel out of N. Africa. There was the invasion of Sicily and operations in Italy that involved the US & UK. Then there was the invasion of Normandy and the US/UK advance from the West that broke the will of Hitler's Western front. All the while the US/UK were incurring "shots and deaths".

Then there was the war in the Pacific...the Soviet Union incurred very little losses in that (in fact they only fought against Japan for one day) theater...most of that was the US with help from the UK and Australia.


Debunking conspiracy theories for the New World Order since 1995...
" I hereby accuse you attempting to silence me..." --PurePress

BBS Signature
Greggg586
Greggg586
  • Member since: Sep. 27, 2007
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 06
Gamer
Response to Who won the ww2? 2007-10-04 13:34:31 Reply

At 10/2/07 10:09 AM, bcdemon wrote: The USA won ww2. All on their own. They had no help from anyone, and not one single soldier from a country other than the USA died in WW2. We, as a planet owe our freedom and ability to speak our native tongue to the great USA, they saved us all from speaking German and eating sauerkraut.

Right Cellardoor?

Although it's very true that If the U.S. had not innervain the Allies would have lost, but know one thing the fighting was being done way before we came, and much of the allies and axis military power was batterd; allies taking most of the beating. I am not taking credit away from our U.S. WW2 vetrens cause they kicked they're butts, but with out the help of team work with the other ally countries, certain things like the D-day wouldn't be a stright victory. Much of D-day was a combine attack with other countries not only the U.S...So yes The U.S. was a very important part of the victory aginst the Axis, but We didn't win it alone.


KEEPIN It REAL Like HOLIFIELD, RAW like STAR WAR, CLEAN like Mr. CLEAN, MEAN Like Mr. T, SWEET Like SWEET TEA, I BRING THE BOOM shakalaka! Da Kool Kids Go Here

CogSpin
CogSpin
  • Member since: Nov. 5, 2005
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 16
Blank Slate
Response to Who won the ww2? 2007-10-04 14:27:06 Reply

Umm, America, obviously. They gained shit loads of money from the weaponry and vehicular contracts, lifting them out of the depression and into a ridiculously booming economy, which is the reason they are the world's sole superpower today.

Does that answer your stupid fucking question?


cogspin

Tomsan
Tomsan
  • Member since: Nov. 7, 2002
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 21
Movie Buff
Response to Who won the ww2? 2007-10-04 15:05:19 Reply

I for one, simply think the third reich would have crumbled anyway, with or without US involvement.
hitler had no recources.

oh and havent read a +5 cellardoor post; youre still the most narrowminded chauvinistic bigot on the i-net (atleast youre #1 in something)


God invented evolution 'cause he couldn't do it all by himself! Awesome Tees!

BBS Signature
Idiot-Finder
Idiot-Finder
  • Member since: Aug. 29, 2002
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 60
Gamer
Response to Who won the ww2? 2007-10-04 21:26:41 Reply

At 10/4/07 03:05 PM, Tomsan wrote:
oh and havent read a +5 cellardoor post; youre still the most narrowminded chauvinistic bigot on the i-net (atleast youre #1 in something)

Hmmm...


Please subscribe
"As the old saying goes...what was it again?"
.·´¯`·->YFIQ's collections of stories!<-·´¯`·.

BBS Signature
Oblivia
Oblivia
  • Member since: Jul. 1, 2006
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 09
Blank Slate
Response to Who won the ww2? 2007-10-05 03:03:58 Reply

At 9/24/07 10:33 PM, LordJaric wrote: Dude the russians were not the only fucken country fighting in the war. Each country contributed to the war, so with that said it was the Allies that won the war. Besides the war ended with the droping of atomic bombs (from the USA) on Japan (I would of perfered to end it in some other means).

Operation Olympic would have been a total disaster for both sides. Not only that, the USSR would have made Japan another divided Germany (Berlin Wall). There's also the fact that the cities that were bombed had primary military facilities, so the US had no intentions on attacking civilian areas.

TheFryingIrishman
TheFryingIrishman
  • Member since: Sep. 12, 2007
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 08
Blank Slate
Response to Who won the ww2? 2007-10-05 05:40:01 Reply

At 9/24/07 10:33 PM, LordJaric wrote: Dude the russians were not the only fucken country fighting in the war. Each country contributed to the war, so with that said it was the Allies that won the war. Besides the war ended with the droping of atomic bombs (from the USA) on Japan (I would of perfered to end it in some other means).

Wasn't Russia Part of the Allied forces?


This is a bit of text.

JBlauth
JBlauth
  • Member since: Feb. 4, 2007
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 04
Blank Slate
Response to Who won the ww2? 2007-10-05 16:13:55 Reply

From my opinion its for sure 100% russians(its a fucking fact), usa help a little bit
but the stupidest thing is that canadians saying that they did it
without they help the war wasnt over
if they were'nt opening the 2nd front in the end of 1945 no could defiet the nazis
so stupid that the history that teaching in canada is fucking WRONG
and i guess that the same is in usa..
so who realy won the was for you ?
-sorry for my grammer i am using esl-

I have a split opinion on this
The Soviet Union pushed the Nazis back to Berlin. They actually never had any aggresion toward Hitler until he invaded. The Nazis wouldn't have taken Russia anyway. Reason?
Napoleon invaded Russia. He got to Moscow. Had to turn back becuase of the cold and Russia's 'Scorched Earth' policy.
Hitler had the same reasons. Millions died in Stalingrad because of lack of food and the cold.
The Soviet Union did stand alone. They had little to no assistance.

The Canadians did help. They fought D-Day and all the way to Berlin. They didn't have the armies like us and Britain though.

However we provided Britain with aid. If we didn't Britain would have been defeated. We dropped the Atomic Bombs. I agree with that. The pacific was our theater. We got no help from anyone there.

Now the Nazis. I see the Holocaust. That was fucked up and disgusting. On the flipside the Germans had the first major rocket. The V-2. They built the ME- 262. (picture below). The Nazis were scientiffically advanced. If they didn't attack Russia prematurly they would have won WW2.

Who won the ww2?

Buffalow
Buffalow
  • Member since: Jun. 5, 2005
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 08
Blank Slate
Response to Who won the ww2? 2007-10-05 19:52:59 Reply

Canada, Britain nor America went "All the Way to Berlin". It was the Russians.


Well-a Everybody's Heard About the Word, Tha-Tha-Tha Word-Word-Word the Word is the.....

BBS Signature
Musician
Musician
  • Member since: May. 19, 2005
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 04
Blank Slate
Response to Who won the ww2? 2007-10-05 20:36:20 Reply

At 9/24/07 10:54 PM, cellardoor6 wrote: Um actually the Russians only fought to a significant degree on the Eastern Front in Europe. And they couldn't have done this if the US didn't give them so much freaking aide.

We couldn't have won the war without Russia and Russia couldn't have won the war without us. One of the main reasons we were able to overcome the superior german military was because they had to fight a war on two fronts. And also since it's relevant the american casualties in WW2 were NOTHING compared to the
casualties in Russia.

without they help the war wasnt over
if they were'nt opening the 2nd front in the end of 1945 no could defiet the nazis
That's debatable. But you fail to realize that the Nazis weren't the only enemy in WWII. Europe wasn't the only place where decisive battles and operations took place. It was a WORLD WAR, and while the war against Germany was a united effort (with the US providing about 1/3rd of combat forces, but the majority of war material), the war against Japan was almost exclusively done by the US

haha what? the war with japan almost exclusively with the US? maybe we're forgeting about the chinese. an estimated 15 to 22 million chinese died in the war with japan.


so stupid that the history that teaching in canada is fucking WRONG
and i guess that the same is in usa..
so who realy won the was for you ?
The US was the single largest contributor to allied victory in WWII. The Russians did more tactically against the Germans, but couldn't have done this without the aide the US provided. The US did the most on the Western Front in Europe by far, leading the operation and providing material to the allies in the entire European theater. The US also almost single handedly defeated the Japanese and fought in Europe and Asia, two simultaneous large-scale operations that no other country did during the war.

The US didn't win the war, but the US did the most to win the war tactically, strategically, and logistically.

I doubt we ever would have won if Hitler hadn't been in charge. The guy was insane, in a way he was one of our greatest assets. He tried to micromanage his forces and disregarded the advice of his generals multiple times. I don't think anyone should undermine the amount the US contributed to the war, but in no way was the US the largest contributor. Russia held a front on its own, the US held it's front with allies from Canada, Britain, and France. If anyone should be called the "largest contributer" it would be Russia with near 25 million deaths (2/3rds civilians) as opposed to the US who only lost 292 thousand soldiers


I have no country to fight for; my country is the earth; I am a citizen of the world
-- Eugene Debs

D2Kvirus
D2Kvirus
  • Member since: Jan. 31, 2001
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 38
Filmmaker
Response to Who won the ww2? 2007-10-06 13:16:23 Reply

Switzerland, Cuba and Mexico: 0 military deaths, 100 civilian deaths and 0 Holocaust deaths each (with Sweden and Ireland marginally behind with 0, 200, 0) - none of which had any effect on the population of the country (as opposed to the 300 Mongolian deaths, which were 0.04% of their population).


Propaganda is to a Democracy what violence is to a Dictatorship
Never underestimate the significance of "significant."
NG Politics Discussion 101

BBS Signature
Idiot-Finder
Idiot-Finder
  • Member since: Aug. 29, 2002
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 60
Gamer
Response to Who won the ww2? 2007-10-06 13:46:17 Reply

At 10/5/07 08:36 PM, Musician wrote:

haha what? the war with japan almost exclusively with the US? maybe we're forgeting about the chinese. an estimated 15 to 22 million chinese died in the war with japan.

With most of the deaths from civilians massacred by the Japanese.


Please subscribe
"As the old saying goes...what was it again?"
.·´¯`·->YFIQ's collections of stories!<-·´¯`·.

BBS Signature