What if the US did nothing?

[piscator]

Those confounding American planes were part of the same American Army that won that battle and won that war.

If US troops were shit, what does that say about a generation of Australian women?

I haven't got the slightest idea what you're talking about.

Blame that on your sorry education system, Cousin.

[laklak]

It was supply lines and the Russian winter that did much to defeat Hitler in Eastern Europe.

Stalin took Napoleon's advice and didn't interrupt his enemy while they were busy making a mistake.

Had Hitler not had a resurgent UK to worry about (resurgent because the U.S. arrived) he would have regrouped, moved massive numbers of troops to Russia and finished the job at Stalingrad. What would the UK have done? There was no possibility of mounting a D-Day type invasion, the best they'd have managed was hit-and-run stuff along the coast and the odd bombing raid. Hitler could have held mainland Europe with a relatively small occupying army, there simply was no one left to mount a credible resistance without outside (i.e. U.S.) support. Once Russia was either finished or stalemated he'd have turned his attention back to the UK. A tired, demoralized and hungry UK would have sued for peace.

[pErvinalia]

Australia won the war.



You're welcome.

[laklak]

Australia won the war.

Did not.


Plllllluuuuuuuuuuuuubbbbbbbhhhhhhhhh.

[Blind groper]

The fight against Nazi Germany was mostly on the eastern front. Hitler committed a minority of his forces elsewhere. Nor was Britain powerless. People forget that at that point in history, Britain was a major military power. WWII essentially bankrupted Britain, and it has never risen to the same relative position since, but at the time it was one of the most powerful nations.

The USA helped, but was not critical. Even those who claim that Russia could not have held on without American shipments are talking garbage. Do not forget that the Soviet Union was a massive country, with enormous natural resources, and had an industrial might equal to its military might. The Soviets built, and sent to the front, literally thousands of aircraft and tanks. They had their own steel works, oil wells, and munitions plants. In war time, you accept aid where you can get it, but they were well able to supply most of their needs, and did.

[laklak]

Oh FFS, believe whatever you want, this is like talking to homeopaths or fundys.

You're right, U.S. involvement was insignificant. You'd have done just fine on your own. We were fucking stupid to spend a couple of hundred billion bucks and a half million men when we could have sat back and let you lot get on with it. Once you'd dug out from under the rubble you'd have given old Kaiser a bloody nose in short order, eh wot?

[Seth]

The fight against Nazi Germany was mostly on the eastern front. Hitler committed a minority of his forces elsewhere.

And that was the great error that destroyed him in the end. His transfer of his Panzer forces to the Eastern Front left Normandy inadequately defended, which facilitated the D-day invasion that ultimately brought him down.

Nor was Britain powerless.

Well, yeah, mostly it was.

People forget that at that point in history, Britain was a major military power.

At sea maybe. But then again the Bismark sank what, four or five British ships before she was taken out in the final pursuit.

Land and air forces? Not even close. At best they could fight a holding action but as has been said, if Hitler had concentrated on suppressing and occupying the UK before turning towards the east, history would be markedly different, because without a secure beachhead on the European continent the US would not have been able to deliver, much less support the troops and equipment necessary to make D-day a success, much less the push to Germany.

WWII essentially bankrupted Britain, and it has never risen to the same relative position since, but at the time it was one of the most powerful nations.

Only because of it's imperial holdings, it's sea power, and it's brutal repression of rebellion in it's imperial provinces. As soon as the people of India, for example, got their shit together under Gandhi, the Brits soon packed it in and retreated to their island.

The USA helped, but was not critical.

Revisionist bilge.

Even those who claim that Russia could not have held on without American shipments are talking garbage.

Ignorant revisionist bilge.

Do not forget that the Soviet Union was a massive country, with enormous natural resources, and had an industrial might equal to its military might. The Soviets built, and sent to the front, literally thousands of aircraft and tanks. They had their own steel works, oil wells, and munitions plants. In war time, you accept aid where you can get it, but they were well able to supply most of their needs, and did.

Except for that whole delivery system problem. The Russian lines of supply were enormously long and equally vulnerable to being interrupted by Nazi air power, and were. Without the supply problems of the Russians and the winter, Hitler would have overrun Stalingrad easily.

[Clinton Huxley]

Yawn. Facts are, everyone on the allied side bust a gut to beat the Nazis. Its not a competition.

[pErvinalia]

Merca was the best, though.

[Seabass]

Yawn. Facts are, everyone on the allied side bust a gut to beat the Nazis. Its not a competition.

Yes.

[Seabass]

Merca was the best, though.

No, apparently the Merkin contribution was worthless and inconsequential and insignificant and paltry and they should have just stayed home because no one likes them anyway. Also, there would be no more violence in the world if not for the Americans.

[pErvinalia]

[Ian]

This thread is surreal.

[mistermack]

Germans and British the best in the Ardennes. Official.

[Warren Dew]

...but without U.S. material aid to the USSR the outcome of that conflict would have been a coin toss.

This is something most people don't know about WWII...the amount of critical aid the US shipped to Russia. Perhaps the most important in terms of its success against the Nazis were the locomotives we sent them to replace those destroyed by Nazi air power. Without those locomotives Russia would not have been able to transport its troops and materials to their "western front" and Hitler would have rolled over them like he did Poland.

Indeed. A substantial proportion of the trucks Russia used were also made in the U.S.