Any student of history knows that the US did not win the war single-handedly. Anyone who thinks otherwise doesn't know their history.
2006-08-23 13:38:38
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
In my opinion, an honest assessment World War II would show that the Soviet Union did most of the fighting. However, the contribution of ALL the Allies was essential in their collective victory over Axis forces. There really was no one "winner". It was a team effort, and it wouldn't have succeeded without all of the Allies.*
Still, you can make a good case that the Soviet Union would have succumbed to Nazi forces had the U.S. not given assistance through Lend-Lease, D-Day, and the Pacific campaign.
The Soviets were good at making tanks, aircraft, and weapons, but they were struggling in terms of food production and logistical support. The U.S. gave enormous assistance in these areas through Lend-Lease, sending tens of thousands of communication devices, hundreds of thousands of top-of-the-line trucks, and millions of tons of food, oil, and industrial equipment. By the time the bulk of U.S. aid arrived in 1943, the war on the Eastern Front became one of manuever. Without American trucks, locomotives, and field telephones, the Soviets would not have been able to move as quickly or as synchronized. Without American food, gunpowder, and oil, the Soviets would not have been able to supply their numerically superior forces.
Many experts feel that the U.S.S.R. could have still won without Lend-Lease, though it would have been much more difficult. However, it is my belief that without the U.S. opening new fronts in Africa, Italy, and Western Europe, Soviet victory would probably have turned into a settled peace. Without the Japanese being distracted with a war against the U.S., the Germans would have had one front and the SOVIETS would be looking at two. Then, the settled peace would turn in to a Soviet defeat.
Of course, I could just as easily show how the U.K. and U.S. would have been defeated had the U.S.S.R. not been invaded and had chosen to continue collaborating with Hitler. Or how the U.S. and U.S.S.R. would have lost had the U.K. not stood against the Nazis from the beginning. That's why I say all of the Allies were essential.
*Except maybe countries like Tonga, Mexico, or San Marino
2006-08-23 11:39:15
·
answer #2
·
answered by timm1776 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
The Soviet Union joined the battle sooner. That does not mean they won the war. Personally I believe the alliance won the war even if it was dropped like a hot potato immediately afterwards.
Any of the countries fighting would have had a really hard time without the others.
2006-08-23 11:04:22
·
answer #3
·
answered by BettyBoop 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
Uhmm... No. The CCCP did not fight in France, nor in Africa. Most of the Pacific theater was absent of Soviet soldiers, as well... Where is your information coming from? There were five (5) nations involved in winning WWII. They are the current permanent members of the UN Security Council: China, France, Great Britain, The United States of America, the Russian Federation (Then called the USSR or CCCP). No single nation fought and won WWII.
2006-08-24 10:20:32
·
answer #4
·
answered by sjsosullivan 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
The U.S.A. DID win the second world war. Some of you have hit on good points but none have mentioned the MAIN ones.
Prior to entering the hostilities officially, the U.S. entered into the "lend lease" program with Brittain and the Soviet Union. Lend Lease provided war materials which the only the U.S. had the industrial capability to manufacture in the quantities needed.
The "Liberty Ships" were an additional war winning step provided by the U.S. Liberty ships were manufactured en-masse like cookie cutters and were cranked out at an astounding speed. The construction process was maximized for speed (of construction) and simplicity resulting in an amazing number of the ships being built and some truly mind boggling times of construction from keel laying to launch.
After the U.S. entered the war, the sheer numbers of military men and their equipment transported to the war zone would have been impossible for any other nation to have accomplished.
While the men were being shipped overseas to do the fighting, the women stepped into the industrial factories and "Rosie the Riveter" continued to produce massive quantities of aircraft, rolling stock, ships, munitions, clothing, and all the other thousands of things that it takes to support a massive military effort.
The vast resources of the U.S. in food production, ship building, automotive capabilities, tractors (which resulted in better armored vehicles), every sector of manufacturing.....combined with the raw materials of land to grow crops, minerals, oil refineries (remember, the world was not nearly as dependant on oil at the time and the U.S. was THE number one producer of refined petroleum products).
The U.S. intelligence services (Brittish and U.S. intel worked hand in hand but the U.S. had the most stuff and the most men) cracked both the German and Japanese codes allowing them to know what the enemy was going to do as soon as the enemy decided to do it.
Then throw in the financial capability and the educational institutions with their mathematicians and physists. Who worked dilligently and at breakneck pace to develop and field a working nuclear weapon.....
Yes, the U.S.A. DID win the war. Could they have done it without the assistance of the other allied nations? Possibly. Could the other nations have done it without the U.S.? ABSOLUTELY not.
2006-08-23 11:22:05
·
answer #5
·
answered by StaffSergeant C 2
·
2⤊
0⤋
they did win the war and saved the world from Hitler and his fascist friends! so lets not try to change history on .... soviet was fighting the most and were also doing great, but US did not want to enter the war they waited on the sidelines but when Japan attacked Pearl Harbor ( It was hitting it home ) and this is when US jumped into the war full fledged, but if they had not most of Europe would be under the communist regime of Russia and democracy is always the better regime.
2006-08-23 11:16:46
·
answer #6
·
answered by imhm2004 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
The Allies won World War II if that's what you're thinking of.
So allies being- US, Russia, UK, France, etc.
Fought the most? What is that supposed to mean? Lost more people? Gained more ground?
I mean geez-- the US sent an army and supplies across multiple continents from NA to Europe and to Asia. Give me a break.
2006-08-23 11:03:42
·
answer #7
·
answered by dapixelator 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
Just because the soviets were fighting doesnt mean they were winning. 2 things saved the soviets.
1. the harsh russian winter. Germans werent used to the cold,and their advance stalled.
2. We " the Americans"...Invaded France,and caused the germans to fight a war on 2 fronts.Russia was all but defeated and Stalin pressured us to hurry and invade france,because he knew it was russia's only hope.We saved Russia's ***.
2006-08-23 11:08:55
·
answer #8
·
answered by rick 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Do they think that?
Everybody knows it was the Allied Forces
One lasting memory may be Hiroshima which ended that war really once and for ever. And that clearly was the US. They made a statement with that and perhaps folks who don't know history only remember that fraction? Like you remember only a few headlines when consuming news but forget about the background and details....
2006-08-23 11:04:41
·
answer #9
·
answered by spaceskating_girl 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
USA might not have fought the most but they fought the smartest since they did win and liberated millions from the Germans and the Japanese.
2006-08-23 11:01:32
·
answer #10
·
answered by scarlettt_ohara 6
·
0⤊
1⤋