Wich was the worst nation in the war?

Wich was the worst nation in the war?


  • Total voters
    82

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

Status
Not open for further replies.
syscom3 said
I stand by what I said. The US single handidly won the war in the PTO.


That is pure bull,

the Russians had put the largest contribution into pushing the Japanese out of china, British Military advisors taught Guerilla warfare to the People of Indochina, Im not sure but I think the Brits ended up taking Singapore back, what about the Strafings and Bombings done by the Canadian/U.S. Airforce on Japanese Shipping around the Aloutian Islands Huh?

And The Manhattan Project? the team of Scientists were a Mix of Canadians and Americans who developed the A-Bomb, also the Enriched Uranium ore that were used came from Canada,

So it was a like everyone says it was a team effort, and that arrogance is exactly what I had posted about earlier.
 
Although I admire the abuse of syscom's national arrogance, I would like to point out some flaws.

The Soviet Union didn't have a massive contribution to the combat of Japanese troops in China. The only real contribution was a selling of weapons. However, pre-war the Soviet Union did soundly defeat the IJA at Khalkin-Gol which disallowed the Japanese forces crossing over from Manchuria.

The British taught many groups inside South-East Asia to act as spies and insurgents to the Japanese occupation. These were not isolated to Indochina.

Britain did not actually take back Singapore before the war was over officially. However they were well on their way. By August 15th, 1945, the British and Commonwealth forces had recaptured all of Burma, taken back Rangoon and Moulmein. Another month or so and Singapore, Malaya as well as all other Japanese holdings in the region would have been in Allied hands.

It's spelt Aleutian islands. And there were actual land battles when the U.S forces landed on Attu. There was also some interesting sea battles around the region. And, as you said, the air attacks on Kiska.

The "Manhattan Project" wasn't solely Canadian and American. The first country to begin research into nuclear power being wielded as a weapon was Britain. The research, with scientists, was sent to the U.S in 1939. The Manhattan Project was multi-national. A lot of the enriched uranium did come from Canada.

In fact, hussars, if you would go to the WW2 General section I have, with the help of others, given a significant "nod" towards Canada's contribution in the war.
 
Ok but the russians did in fact play a very significant role, crssing the border into a portion of Japanese controlled Manchuria (where most of the Japs were at the time aside from Kowloon and Hong Kong) forcing their way into the North Of Korea and occupying it with the Americans taking the south.
 
The war had already been won by then. That was the Soviet Union's plunge for more terrority and/or influence. They did not help in expelling the Japanese from China. The Chinese could have, and would have, done that themselves.
 
102first_hussars said:
Pardon my french but i think you meen Le Habitents
I wasn't talking about the Habs specifically, but French-Canadian players in general.

Have a look around the site. The WW2 General section has some interesting stuff, as well as the other military related sections like Post-War and Modern.
 
The Aleutions were another sideshow. Although it looked quite important from a strategic point of view early in the war, the wretched weather conditions made it nearly impossible to conduct meaningfull operations. After the retaking of Attu and Kiska, the whole area became a backwater (just like the CBI).

The Soviet Union contributed nothing to the defeat of Japan. Name me one battle between Dec 7 1941 and July 30 1945 that they fought in.

"British Military advisors taught Guerilla warfare to the People of Indochina"? That didnt stop the Japanese one bit.

Lets face it, the facts are clear. When the Mariana's were seized in the summer of 1944, Japan had lost the war at that point. Anything after that was to "destroy in detail". It didnt matter if the IJA had 1 divison or 100 divisions in CBI/Philipines/Rabaul/New Guinie/Dutch East Indies, because none of the raw materials from SE Asia were going to make it to Japan.

Now not to denigrate our commonwelath allies, but aside from a couple of cruisers used in MacArthurs navy, every single major naval engagement after the battle for Savo Island was an American affair. The USN single handidly defeated the IJN. The submarine war was a total American affair. The 20th AF bombing of Japan was an American affair.

And although the A-bomb ended the war in the Pacific, Japan was already beaten to a shambles by then.

Plus, after the 5th and 13th AF got up to strength in mid 1943, it was they who wiped out the bulk of IJAAF in the SW Pacific. In fact, quite a few Commonwealth air groups used US warplanes.

Like I said before, the US so dominated the war in the PTO, we can safely say we won it single handidly.
 
To plan D

my paste from another site


(From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.)

Operation August Storm


Operation August Storm was the codename for the Soviet invasion of Manchukuo, Mengjiang, Korea, the southern portion of Sakhalin, the Kuril Islands, and Hokkaido. This was the initial action of the Soviet Union against the Empire of Japan. At the Yalta Conference, it had agreed to allied pleas to break the neutrality pact with Japan and enter the Second World War's Pacific theatre, but not until three months of the end of the war in Europe.

The invasion began on August 8, 1945, precisely three months after the German surrender on May 8. It occurred notably between the droppings of the atomic bombs on Hiroshima (August 6) and Nagasaki (August 9).
 
Yeah, but the point was that the Japanese were already beaten by then. The Russians were just looking for more territory. Their role in fighting the Japanese was practically nil. It really was nil actually.
 
Not one historian that supports the scenario of a russian intervention in Japan has ever explained how the red army would cross the sea of Japan, and be able to invade Japan proper..

I would say a plan for a German invasion of England in 1940 has more credibility than a Russian invasion of Japan in 1945.
 
102first_hussars said:
To plan D

my paste from another site


(From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.)

Operation August Storm


Operation August Storm was the codename for the Soviet invasion of Manchukuo, Mengjiang, Korea, the southern portion of Sakhalin, the Kuril Islands, and Hokkaido. This was the initial action of the Soviet Union against the Empire of Japan. At the Yalta Conference, it had agreed to allied pleas to break the neutrality pact with Japan and enter the Second World War's Pacific theatre, but not until three months of the end of the war in Europe.

The invasion began on August 8, 1945, precisely three months after the German surrender on May 8. It occurred notably between the droppings of the atomic bombs on Hiroshima (August 6) and Nagasaki (August 9).

And how was that a significant contribution. Japan was pretty much defeated. The Russians invaded 2 days after Hiroshima was nuked Aug. 6, 1945 when they new that Japan was going to have to surrender. The only reason that Russia invaded was to put there influence more into the region so that the western allies could not do it instead. Nothing less and nothing more. Roosevelt and Churchill had been asking Stalin to open a new front against Japan. Stalin said that he was keeping up his bargin but that was bull, all he wanted was to build the Soviet Unions sphere of influence.

If Russia made a great contribution to the PTO then why did they not declare war on Japan before Aug. 8, 1945? The real contribution was made by the US, England, Australia, Canada, and a slew of other commonwealth countries.
 
syscom3 said:
Not one historian that supports the scenario of a russian intervention in Japan has ever explained how the red army would cross the sea of Japan, and be able to invade Japan proper..

I would say a plan for a German invasion of England in 1940 has more credibility than a Russian invasion of Japan in 1945.

Agreed. They bought surplus river barges from Germany after the war was over. You know, the ones that the Germans prepared, but never used. ;) :lol:
 
so now we know here in the present that it was a waste of russian lives, but if the Japanese hadnt of surrenderd it would have meant that we would have to hit the beaches, the allies would have been better prepared and the Japamese mainland would have been surrounded
 
The only reason the Russians invaded was because of the atomic bombings. So how is it the most significant contribution. Sorry if anyone was going to invade Japan it was going to be the US, England, Australia, and Canada.
 
I dont think the US had any plans to ask the other countries to contribute forces for the invasion.

Although I darn know that if the the fighting got really bloody, the Aussies would have been asked to contribute a division or two. It seems like MacArthur liked the Aussies and had a very high opinion of them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back