Why do some Americans believe they single handedly won WW2?

[Meathead]

The Germans cursed their bloodlines for 4 generations when they did what they did to The Jews.
IYKYK

Nothing compared to what Merkel did to their bloodline.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Why do people make claims about other people that are baseless?
I know no one who thinks WW II was won only because of America.
But it is entirely accurate to say without America - you would be living in a VERY different UK. You would have been taken over just like France was, only no one would have liberated you. Russia sure as shit wouldn't have liberated anyone, all they wanted to do was stop Germany from taking their lands.
And it is arguable to say that Russia may not have been able to defend their lands without supplies from America that totaled, in today's money a quarter of a $Trillion in weaponry and support equipment.

 

[The Duke]

Nothing compared to what Merkel did to their bloodline.

That was part of the curse.
Oh, and then all her green energy garbage. They better get it together before next winter.

 

[ShahdagMountains]

They are definitely doing it wrong. Dumbasses live on an island and are importing their conquerors.

I’m a dumbass? So that’s what you think of me.

 

[meaner gene]

Well, to be fair, America pretty much did with some help from the USSR but absolutely in the Pacific.

With "some help" from the USSR?

Instead of arguing the meaning of some, the statistics speak for themselves.
The USSR was responsible for destroying around 2/3rds of the German army and airforce.

But, we had to do the whole job in the Pacific. Which is also why the Pacific war took much longer without ever invading their home island.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Well, without Lend Lease, the Russians would have eventually lost, but the victory in Russia by Germany would not have lasted, and they would have been bled white. So many little things, from weapons, ammo, field telphones, mines, artillery, Jeeps, food, oil, and too many others to list kept the Russians alive for around the first 18 months. They probably did not have the means to hold off the Germans at the beginning.

Didn't the Russians begin or make their advance during the winter or was that WWI? And they lost of lot of the men to the elements?'

 

[BackAgain]

It seems to crop up quite a few times where posters claim everyone would be speaking German if the US hadn't won WW2.

Time for America to get over its WWII nostalgia

It was the nadir of human history, not a Saturday morning cartoon

theweek.com

There's nothing wrong with an interest in history. But the distorted and chauvinist way the war's history has been presented in the popular imagination is a major problem. It's long since time Americans adopted a more realistic and sensible attitude towards World War II.

The greatest error of historical fact in America's popular interpretation of the war is the idea that the United States won it pretty much single-handedly.

So despite actual history, do you still believe America single-handedly won WW2? Why? Is it something school taught you or your parents? Genuinely would like to know.

Who cares what some folks mistakenly believe?

 

[meaner gene]

Well, without Lend Lease, the Russians would have eventually lost, but the victory in Russia by Germany would not have lasted, and they would have been bled white. So many little things, from weapons, ammo, field telphones, mines, artillery, Jeeps, food, oil, and too many others to list kept the Russians alive for around the first 18 months. They probably did not have the means to hold off the Germans at the beginning.

Lend lease supported all our alies, but the USSR played the biggest role in taking out the Russian army. They defeated the Germany in the biggest tank battle ever in Kursk, where America played no part.

 

[The Duke]

I’m a dumbass? So that’s what you think of me.

You don't even live on the island.

 

[TroglocratsRdumb]

When the allies combined their industrial power against Germany it was just a matter of time.
By the time of D-Day the allies had established air superiority.
After D-Day the allies just chased the Germans back to Berlin.
The Germans did have some excellent guns, planes and tanks.

 

[Meathead]

With "some help" from the USSR?

Instead of arguing the meaning of some, the statistics speak for themselves.
The USSR was responsible for destroying around 2/3rds of the German army and airforce.

But, we had to do the whole job in the Pacific. Which is also why the Pacific war took much longer without ever invading their home island.

In my opinion we shouldn't have interceded so quickly and let a war of attrition go on between the worst leaders in the 20th century,

 

[EvilEyeFleegle]

While it is likely that without US assistance WWII would have been lost by the allies, it is not true that the US did it alone. It was definitely a joint effort.

Without Lend-Lease..The allies were toast...unless--they committed the Indian army in Europe.
Churchill was totally against that..as he was in WWI, because of the recognized fact that Indian independence would follow..which it did anyway.
Even then, assuming that the British industrial base would support a decade of war is a bit risky.

A fairly large number of Brits had no issues with Hitler....after France was lost--a lot would/could have supported a negotiated peace.
Hitler and Goering fucked up with the Battle of Britain..after Germany bombed the civilian cities in response to the British raids into Germany..that targeted residential areas...peace was off the table.
This was fine with Churchill..whose Govt. initiated the unlimited air war to get just that reaction from the British and American people.

 

[Stryder50]

It seems to crop up quite a few times where posters claim everyone would be speaking German if the US hadn't won WW2.

Time for America to get over its WWII nostalgia

It was the nadir of human history, not a Saturday morning cartoon

theweek.com

There's nothing wrong with an interest in history. But the distorted and chauvinist way the war's history has been presented in the popular imagination is a major problem. It's long since time Americans adopted a more realistic and sensible attitude towards World War II.

The greatest error of historical fact in America's popular interpretation of the war is the idea that the United States won it pretty much single-handedly.

So despite actual history, do you still believe America single-handedly won WW2? Why? Is it something school taught you or your parents? Genuinely would like to know.

Without the USA involved, than the Allies would have LOST the War.
The USA didn't win it "single-handed", but we did make the difference, and likely helped shorten it as well.

Arsenal of Democracy is an apt label as the USA in production of material and especially food, and the transport system of ships and planes to get such distributed around the world made a major impact/difference.

The USA also provided most of the resources for rebuilding after the war.

 

[EvilEyeFleegle]

With "some help" from the USSR?

Instead of arguing the meaning of some, the statistics speak for themselves.
The USSR was responsible for destroying around 2/3rds of the German army and airforce.

But, we had to do the whole job in the Pacific. Which is also why the Pacific war took much longer without ever invading their home island.

True enough..along with the official US policy of 'Germany First'.
The USSR was our tool, in fact--and a good one it was.
FDR honestly liked Stalin....more fool him~

 

[meaner gene]

Probably for the same reason Brits (and/or others) downplay the U.S. contribution to the war as essential to winning the war. Ignorance.

This is where it's best analyzed as looking at what would have happened had each of the allies not contributed.
Yes, the Germans would have won if not for the Americans. But the same could be said of the English, and the Russians.
America would not have invaded "fortress Europe" without the English providing a base of attack.

 

[Dante]

Why do some Americans believe they single handedly won WW2?

It seems to crop up quite a few times where posters claim everyone would be speaking German if the US hadn't won WW2.

You seem to jump to conclusions based on what? You obviously have chosen the most perfect scream name -- fits you to a tee -- CaveMan mind and all

People speak informally in generalities. Then there are cavemen who hear things that aren't there. evolution missed you

 

[Meathead]

This is where it's best analyzed as looking at what would have happened had each of the allies not contributed.
Yes, the Germans would have won if not for the Americans. But the same could be said of the English, and the Russians.
America would not have invaded "fortress Europe" without the English providing a base of attack.

How the fuck would Germans have invaded the US from Britain? Seriously, I'm interested.

 

[The Irish Ram]

Churchill begged us. Without the Americans, this is what all of your country would have looked like:

And you would be speaking German. You were not winning the war. You needed us to defeat Hitler. And when we died on the beach at Normandy, was there even 1 French asshole there on the beaches?
You didn't stop Hitler. France didn't stop Hitler. Poland didn't stop Hitler. We did. And we would have done it without the little support from your country if we had to. The world was in awe of our courage.
We had the mightiest military. We had the biggest factories. We could spit out a Mustang in 100 days.
The only thing England could do was ask for help. It was not our war, but yours. And yet, almost half a million Americans died saving Europe.
You are welcome, you little ingrate...

The Immortals: The World War II Story of Five Fearless Heroes, the Sinking of the Dorchester, and an Awe-inspiring Rescue​

 

[Stryder50]

With "some help" from the USSR?

Instead of arguing the meaning of some, the statistics speak for themselves.
The USSR was responsible for destroying around 2/3rds of the German army and airforce.

But, we had to do the whole job in the Pacific. Which is also why the Pacific war took much longer without ever invading their home island.

The Russians were fighting on the terrain that grows their food. Rather difficult to plant and harvest at the time. USA food shipments were crucial to USSR being able to stay in the fight. The weapons and equipment we shipped were also significant, especially the trucks, half-tracks, and railroad rolling stock.

US Army Air Force bombing campaign also played a key role. On top of constant need to rebuild and move their industrial capacity, our daylight bombing campaign caused the major reduction in Germany's air force and defenses. Aircraft and pilots were constantly bled off the Russian front to defend the homeland. Also the growing need for large caliber anti-aircraft artillery diverted guns that would have helped on the Russian front as tank-killers.

FWIW, the USAAF had more casualties than any other land or naval force in the USA military.

 

[Leo123]

America provided arms, cars, ships, etc and really ramped up manufacturing so was a key player in WWII. That being said, it was cooperation of all the allied forces in sharing the development of weaponry tech that really made a difference. Hitler did not have that advantage.