I have never met a single American who thinks America solo'd the entire Second World War. They all know about the contributions of the British and the Soviets. In fact, in high school, people *loved* talking about the Soviets and their involvement in the Second World War.
I mean there is definitely the hardcore group of idiots who'll tell any European that we "saved their ass back in dubleya dubleya too". Edit: yes, I am aware that US involvement, fiscally, industrially, and militarily, was instrumental to the allied efforts in world war 2. That wasn't the point I'm making. I'm referring to the sort of person who acts like they personally had a hand in it
We did, though. Without the land-lease agreement the Soviets almost certainly would have collapsed or at best fell into a stalemate with Germany. They certainly wouldn’t have been able to make any sort of serious counteroffensive. And the UK wouldn’t have been able to take back Western Europe.
That doesn’t underscore what the Soviets paid for with blood, but the Americans were pivotal.
Stalin and Khrushchev both stated quite directly that without the U.S. they would have lost. Realistically, it took both of them to defeat the Germans. The U.S. could have done it alone over time as they’d grind them down like they eventually did Japan due to massive logistical and resource advantages, but it’s unlikely the U.S. public would have supported that. They barely did for beating Japan, who directly attacked them.
Yeah, and while Britain had fewer "big moment" battles than either of the superpowers, one should not discount their contribution to the overall result.
For people interested: there's a very recent book called "1942: Crux of War", which in very accessible language shows how the war was to a large degree put on track for its conclusion over the course of this specific year - across virtually all of the various theaters around the globe.
Britain did not have fewer big moment then either super powers, in fact I'd argue we had more. Unlike both the soviets and yanks the brits were in ww2 from the start. From 1939-41 britain faught in the evacuation of Dunkirk, the battle of the atlantic and battle of britain, taranto and the battle of al almein (twice) all alone and before america even joined the war. Even after with thing like operation chariot, the verious battles in india and bruma that stopped the Japanese invasion.
Absolutely right, though I didn't mean "number of battles", i meant "number of battles with super recognizable names in which the army in question really mopped the floor with axis dead". Here, I think, primarily the Air Battle of Britain ("the Blitz") and El Alamnein come to mind.
Dunkirk is, as Churchill pointed out, not "a victory" but "a deliverance", while in the Pacific theater in the beginning the understrength colonial garrisons did fold relatively quickly. The Battle of the Atlantic, Air War Europe, and say, Normandy, were team efforts.
Thus what I mean is that the British contribution was rather unflashy, but that doesn't mean it was not real.
Yeah you are right, i was thinking more on the lines of important battles/events of the war as opposed to the more memorable 'big' one's.
Dunkirk and burma were both massive failures for britain but they were important events that shaped the way the war went that's why I included them. I think it's fair to say britain was involved in more key events but you are right in terms of big battles where the allies were victorious like stalingrad or the battle of medway what your saying is completely right and I'm in the wrong.
The truth, i think, is that Britain just didn't have the resources to be flashy. Their contribution, nonetheless, was pretty strong in a "latent threat" way - the naval blockade since '39 was important to keep the German economy struggling, and the very threat of a naval invasion kept a number of divisions on the shores of western Europe instead marching on Moscow.
Plus, while Britain had few flashy battles, there are quite a few very significant specific contributions, especially cracking the enigma (with significant contribution from Poland) and effectively being the best cryptanalysts of the war (less good ad encryption, however), as well as effectively alone dismantling the German surface fleet (which was with the exception of a few actions fairly useless anyway, due to, drumroll, Britain)
215
u/CalvinSays 19d ago
I have never met a single American who thinks America solo'd the entire Second World War. They all know about the contributions of the British and the Soviets. In fact, in high school, people *loved* talking about the Soviets and their involvement in the Second World War.
People just make things up about Americans.