America took all the credit because the Allies weren't in good shape before they joined, and then the Allies won. I'm no history major, so I may be wrong, but I also believe the Americans sold guns to the Allies so that helped
@Captain Magma, I think the Soviet Union would have won the war by themselves eventually if America didn’t join, but America certainly did speed things up a lot in Europe and the Pacific
@theprofprofessor, the US pretty much shifted the war from: Likely allied victory to guaranteed allied victory.
@theprofprofessor, the Soviet Union may have won but it was no garuntee
Don’t forget the us was a major support for them as well.
If the us never supported any of the allies they most likely would have lost.
“War isn’t won by battle, but by whom ever can last the longest.”
@carguy25, I know, but the Soviets were doing most of the fighting after the first months and were getting the upper hand on the Germans, they were definitely lasting longer.
I think Stalin is quoted to say that the war was won as a combination of American, British and Russian efforts but I can’t be bothered looking it up. TL;DR I’m not denying America’s influence and impact
@theprofprofessor, the soviets pretty much won the war on the ground, but they would have lost if the US didnt supply them with basically everything. The Soviets were fierce, but you cant fight a war with no raw materials, food, transportation, etc. So yeah, the US didnt win the war by themselves, but without the US the allies would have lost
@theprofprofessor, yeah they had to do it with US support though. Otherwise they were just going to be throwing bodies at German defenses, and we all know how well that worked for them.
@Oujosh29, I mean if you imagine that the axis had beaten the U.K. Before going after Russia and so brought the full front to the Russian side instead of a 2 sided battle, plus Japan pushing in; think they would have won quite handedly and beaten Russia
@Captain Magma, as a history major, it depends on which world war but pretty much yeah that's about right
@theprofprofessor, the war was won by British brains, American money, and Soviet blood. It was close before the Americans joined although eventually the Russians would've pushed the Germans all the way to France
@LeafOnTheW1nd, nah in both world wars, the axis powers (specifically Germany) were doing really well and probably would have won if not for the US entering the wars
@WickedStyx, The SU was already pushing back with effective counter advances by the time Americans did anything...it was America being pressured to join by British&Allies in fear of a entirely soviet Europe. Then it became a land grab
@Can yew knot, yes but not in the first world war
@WickedStyx, germany had won signficantly in continental europe but it wasnt feesable for them to continue the way they were. They didnt have the resources to continue to fighting over and over. The British Navy made invasion of Britian impossible despite the ambitions plans the nazis considered. Britian was comitted to fight tooth and nail to the bitter end as well. Then with the constant resistance fighters throughout the conquered territory the war would have become a guerilla war with backing of the UK. Then when germany attacked the SU they signed their own death sentance as Russia just had too much manpower for them to overcome.
This however does not take away from the significance of what the americans did. They greatly sped up the european campaign and helped stop the germans getting off with a peace treaty which probably would have gave germany some concessions and left the nazi's in power. Tbh the most important affect the americans had was probably in the pacific campaign.
@Captain Magma, American businesses also laundered Nazi money and funded Hitler's forces. But nevermind. Facts aren't relevant in Murica
@bonja, you’re probably right, I guess I learned it wrong
@WickedStyx, hey man thanks for reacting in a postive way.
Teaching on ww1/ww2 is so poor worldwide. Even countries which were devestated by the wars are losing their history due to poor teaching. I think a lot of the time people are mistaught because it helps people fit their own narrative for political gain or for patroitism. History is History we shouldnt try to change it for our own gain haha.
@bonja, for some reason my teacher was told to only teach us about WWI and the Cold War (something about “we would learn about WWII next year”) and completely skip over WWII. “nah fvck that, imma teach them kids about WWII because they need that knowledge for the Cold War, but I’ll have to condense things because we’re short on time.” So it isn’t my teacher’s fault.
@Captain Magma, the Allies were 50/50 until the soviets joined in and made it about 80/20, but America was helpful when it came to freeing France, so maybe it made it about 85/15
@LeafOnTheW1nd, tired axis vs fresh americans
@Captain Magma, Americans came in the end that's the point. The soldiers were so demoralized and clothes were destroyed and they were just exhausted. Then the Americans came and were fresh and fought and everything ended. And you Americans take the credit. Then you fought a war at the start and couldn't win that one. So don't give me that, we gave guns so that helped. No you sitting at home resting till the end is all you did
@dada1012, you do understand that you would have most likely STARVED to death if it wasn’t for our aid correct?
We did a hell of a lot more than guns. Pretty single handedly won the pacific theatre. Imagine what would have happened if Japan was free and able to do its own bidding.
Not to mention how much supply shipping we did and protected for your asses.
Wars aren’t won by battle. They’re won by endurance. Something the allies would have greatly lacked without our AGRICULTURAL help and protection of shipping.
@carguy25, not saying you did nothing, I'm saying you take credit for way more than you should
History major here, in WWI and WWII Europe was getting defeated by Germany on all fronts until the USA joined. Britain most certainly would have been ran over if we did not join in both times. Also, we were the sole fighters of japan.
@RiffRaff, us and US supplied China. also the Germans wouldn't have conquered the UK. their bombers weren't good enough
@RiffRaff, not to mention the informational, logistical, ***AGRICULTURAL***, and industrial support the US provided. . . Well, basically everyone. If it werent for American food supplies Europe would have starved in both wars and between them, and during the reconstruction efforts.
@RiffRaff, I'm sorry you can argue it for ww2 and even then its most likely britian would have lost but invasion of Britian was increibly unlikely hence why they tried to bomb and starve the UK.
But for ww1. The allies were already winning ww1 when the americans joined. I'm not saying this to diminish what the Americans did because it was vital to the war and an honourable thing that they eventually joined. But ww1 for one certianly was not won by americans sorry.
@RiffRaff, Didn't the Russians and the Chinese fight against the Japanese?
You do realize we were fighting the Japanese at the same time with little help
That last one is the flag of Thailand right? What does that have to do with world war two? Is this some obscure history reference I don't know?
@Bag Man, yup. Interesting stuff. Google it. Pretty much, they were neutral, Japan got right up in their business, they became Axis and started invading their neighbors, and then a bunch of them fought a guerrilla campaign against their own government. So when the war ended, the country was pretty much left alone, with no kind of reparations or anything.
That’s a funny looking Western Australia flag
@theprofprofessor, of course those filthy Westies would act like they’re the whole country, it doesn’t matter that you’re the biggest state if most of it is desert and the rest is occupied by emus. Absolutely disgusting.
If the US hadn’t joined it wouldn’t have been the end of the war
Is that Siam?
This is indeed a joke. Haha