Did the US save Europe in WW2?

What language would Europe be speaking if the US stayed out in WW2?

  • Total voters
    77

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

Status
Not open for further replies.
[/I]

I think that you syscom3 are so wrong in this quote. England were actuallay pushing the italians out pf egypt like that person PLAN D siad and i agreee with him england had its empire on Germany wwere in no postion to attack england and it already had failed like the battle oof brtian were the english kicked ass. Also the poor conditions and the brave rusians kept the germans to a halt and the germans had bad morale and were losing in the east and briatin had aid form its empire and many supplies and men from places like india and south africa.

The geramns also were finding it hard to control the conquered contries like france and demark and norway. So no the americians did not save europe at all but we are greatful fot the aid recive dand the americas input in the war.
but i fell englan would have prevailed with the largest empire ever seen were the sun never sets over the english empire. :
 

So the bottom line is still this:

England is too strong to be invaded by Germany
The UK is strong enough to win in Africa, maybe even Sicily.
The UK is not strong enough to invade Europe.
The War ends in 1945 with the Russians on the Rhine or in 1944 with the Germans at the Urals.

End result is the same. Without the US material and manpower, Germany or Russia dominates Europe.
 
With response to the Germans win Europes speaks German, and Russia wins Europe Speaks Russian comment, actually, England wins outright as it is the English Language which is most widespread globally. You all seem to forget is was called "World War 2".

England Wins. Thank you very much.
 

I agree. Thanks to the US helping out, we still speak English. But, I think the US needs to seriously remind itself it was a World War. And it wasnt just the US who saved Europe, what about Australia? Canada? New Zealand? All free countries, and they also sent alot of their boys over to help.

So i finalise my statement by saying, Thanks USA for coming along when the war was almost over, you cant rewite history. But I guess you can make good "fictional" movies over in Hollywood.

Seriously though, I am a serving Royal Marine, and I have served in Iraq with fellow US Marines, and I have to be honest, the United States is the only country I would happilly go to battle alongside its boys!

US UK keeping the world free! Support our troops.
 

The bottom line is still this:

The US entered the war in 1942, with still three years left.

The US provided the decisive edge in material and manpower to win.
 
marinefjk said:
So i finalise my statement by saying, Thanks USA for coming along when the war was almost over, you cant rewite history. But I guess you can make good "fictional" movies over in Hollywood.
Click to expand...

Huh? How was the war almost over? I think you need to learn your history a bit more...


Where in Iraq did you serve? I was a Blackhawk Crewchief in the US Army based out of Tikrit in 2004.
 
Hitler was doomed the minute he decided to invade Poland (although he was justified to some degree). What it did was two fold. It dragged France (useless) and Britain into war against Germany (although interestingly, those two countries did not declare war agaist the Soviet Union when she took the other 2/3 of Poland, which makes me suspect what kind of deals they had with Stalin at the time) and it removed a buffer country between Germany and the Soviet Union.

The Soviet Union was going to invade and Hitler knew that, so it was in his best interest to go on the offensive. However, he had no chance as the Soviets just had to many resources at their disposal. He was doomed no matter what he did.

The US involvement in the war did not change the inevitable outcome (the defeat of Germany by the Soviets). What is did do was keep the Soviets from rolling over the rest of Europe at the end of the war. I believe the dropping of two atomic bombs on Japan days apart was more to give Stalin pause by showing exactly how brutal the US could be than to defeat an already smashed Japan which was looking for a way to surrender.
 
kjcarey2003 said:
I believe the dropping of two atomic bombs on Japan days apart was more to give Stalin pause by showing exactly how brutal the US could be than to defeat an already smashed Japan which was looking for a way to surrender.
Click to expand...
8000 aircraft and a 1.5 million man army with a military leadership that wanted at least one last great battle to save face - Japan was far from looking for a way to surrender.
 
FLYBOYJ said:
8000 aircraft and a 1.5 million man army with a military leadership that wanted at least one last great battle to save face - Japan was far from looking for a way to surrender.
Click to expand...

8000 Aircraft? How many with fuel, maintenance, airfields and pilots? Sure, they could have lashed out with a few waves of violence but it could have not been sustained. A death gasp.

I wouldn't say they were looking for a way to surrender.. I'd say they were looking for unified leadership. Something to believe in. The populace would have followed a divine, honorable, righteous cause.

At the end, Japan's leadership was in doubt. Loyalists, Hardliners, Army and Navy all vied for power. We are fortunate that it ended up the way it did. A-Bombs or not... the carnage may have continued. If the hard liners instilled power, our M-1's would be shattering bamboo spears till 1947.

.
 
A point. Hitler invaded Poland because he wanted to. No justification or need...just because he took the fancy.

America was vital to the free world by saving the free world. I have no doubts on that score. It was American production and technology which was far better than The British Empire that was a deciding factor.

The English Empire never existed.
 
The English Empire did exist; learn the history of the British Isles. Before the 'British Empire' there were three English Empires on the British Isles. And the 'British Empire' was created by English force; Wales and Scotland didn't join without persuasion.
 
I'm an American so I'm gonig to stay clear of this one..But..

The UK did still have a Empire at that time ...But the only thing "I" see that would of made a mess of it all is getting the raw materials to the right place to be turned into the tools of war...The US had all the raw materials in one place ..And one of the big thing the US brought to the table was transportation..Like Japan and the UK the island thing is a set back at times like this..Man the USA was transportation for the Allies ..Just think of no C-47s or Liberty Ships...

And Hitler felt that Poland was part of Germany..And at one time taken..??.As in alot of Mexicans think of the south west of the USA should be taken back by Mexico... ..Turkey and Iraq ..And so on and so on...
 
Even if our Empire had the materials and workforce to reach American levels of production, a major difference was that American factories could work with impunity with no threats from bombing or invasion. Without American help I doubt we'd have had the manpower to launch the Normandy campaign. Perhaps Italy and then Southern France before a peace deal. On a similar vein, I'm not sure if the Russians could have turned it around without lend lease equipment.
 
The soviets Union would not have had the ability to concentrate on military production as they did without the support of the US and Britain. The US supplied millions of pairs of boots. This was vital in Russian conditions and allowed them to use their production capability on planes and armaments. Add to this the huge number of transport vehicles and other equipment supplied and it means a lot of T34's.

Without this massive support in the non armament area the Soviet war machine would have been missing a lot of vital cogs.

Even in my country we are grateful for the help we received from the US in the war. The Battle of the Coral Sea was supposedly a joint effort but most of the work done was by the US navy.

Although Australian ground troops had the first real success against the Japanese army in New Guinea, it was still a combined effort thanks to the US Air force and Navy for cover and supplies.
 
Sys while I disagree with you that the Commonwealth could not have prevailed I have to commend you on your defence of your position. You have been unflappable under continual bombardment. Save a few comments that were nothing less than a blatent attempt to P.O. those who disagree, you have defended your position as well as Rommel in the later part of the African Campaign. Unfortunately for you the result is the same. The Commonwealth would have never stopped untill Hitlers Evil was wiped from the face of the earth no matter how long it took. As always Mr. Churchill said it best.

"We have before us an ordeal of the most grievous kind. We have before us many, many long months of struggle and of suffering. You ask, what is our policy? I can say: It is to wage war, by sea, land and air, with all our might and with all the strength that God can give us; to wage war against a monstrous tyranny, never surpassed in the dark, lamentable catalogue of human crime. That is our policy. You ask, what is our aim? I can answer in one word: It is victory, victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory, however long and hard the road may be; for without victory, there is no survival. Let that be realised; no survival for the British Empire, no survival for all that the British Empire has stood for, no survival for the urge and impulse of the ages, that mankind will move forward towards its goal. But I take up my task with buoyancy and hope. I feel sure that our cause will not be suffered to fail among men. At this time I feel entitled to claim the aid of all, and I say, "come then, let us go forward together with our united strength."

All the bantering back and forth about numbers and quantities are meaningless. It is a peoples resolve that determines the outcome of war. The contributions of the U.S. during WW2 are enormous and greatly appreciated by all. However the U.S. did not save Europe. It saved itself by being involved (albeit a bit late in my opinion) in a war that had to be fought. Any country living in a world that included Hitler would suffer in ways that are unthinkable.
 
It still stands.

Without the US, the Commonwealth and USSR could only hope for an armistice at worst, or a Russian victory at best.

With the US, victory was assured.
 
I agree with syscom on this. Even a Russian victory was unlikely without the massive supply support the US gave. As I posted earlier, the Russian military output would not have been anything like it was without the non armament supplies from the US.

In this respect, the war in the East could definitely have gone Germanys' way, thus giving them control in the West as well.

Japans' entry into the war was very timely for the commonwealth and the Soviet Union.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

Ukraine International Airlines PS752
2 3 4
Replies
60
Views
5K
DerAdlerIstGelandet
F
  • Locked
were the tuskegee airmen the most skilled pilots in the war?
2 3 4
Replies
62
Views
19K
FLYBOYJ
J
Romanian Aeronautics in the Second World War 1941-1945
Replies
0
Views
4K
Jjr
J
  • Locked
SPITS BURIED SINCE 1945 LOCATED IN MYANMAR
Replies
3
Views
6K
evangilder
WW2 career, plausible postings/dates.
Replies
0
Views
3K
Tony Hill
Menu
Log in
Register