Did the U.S. save the British during WWII, or the Russians?

Question

Just recently, I heard that it was the Russians that played a larger part in saving our backs in WWII. Is this true?

Answer 1

Thats a very very good Question..
I wonder why is that not asked that often,how many of you dispute had hitler attacked England before attacking Russia,England would be easily captured,when hitler attacked russia,sixth army is to date in written history,the largest army to attack a country,2000 KM non stop,by the time they finished,they had killed around 23 million Russians,had It not snowed early that year,history might have been different...
Why is role of Jewish bankers in motivating america to war not discussed that much?
In the last days of war,there are unconfirmed reports Nazis tried some kind of ceasefire or pact in the west to defend against the east..Unconformed as in the last days of war much of written history is as hitler once described history"Propoganda of the Winning Side"

Answer 2

If you look at how the German army was divided to fight on two fronts you can appreciate the immense task facing the Soviets.
The Germans had 200 divisions in the east fighting the Russians and 80 in the West.
Had there been no eastern front it is unlikely that the allies could have got any invasion under way against 280 divisions.
Unfortunately history is not always remembered as well as a good Hollywood movie and some facts are conveniently overlooked. The Battle of Britain was fought before the USA entered the war and this was for air superiority. The Allies owed much to the 'Few' for winning this battle including the 7 American pilots who took part.

Answer 3

Just exactly what is "saving"? Nobody actually ran to help Britain in 1939. The US did not enter the war against Germany untill Germany declared war on the US. Russia did not fight untill it was invaded. These countries fought the Nazi's to save themselves, not Britain. The lend/lease agreement with the US was probably the greatest help to the UK in the early war, but it did not come cheap. The UK only finished paying it's war loans off at the end of 2006. The second front was in place long before the Normandy invasion. If the Battle of Britain had been lost then Germany would have been free to turn it's might against Russia. An overhelming onslaught might have defeated the Russians andthat would have meant that Germany and Japan could have turned their attentions to an ill prepared US. Britains refusel to give in during the Battle of Britain and its fight with the Germans in North Africa might have saved the US and Russia from German world domination. There are no easy answers when we look back at war. The war created the US and Soviet superpowers and Britain was overtaken and bankrupted as a world power. Before the war the British where a world power and this must not be forgotten today.

Answer 4

Ultimately the Russians defeated Germany; it was the Soviet threat that Hitler really feared. However, aid from both the US, and before them, the British, helped support the devestated Russia industry, thus allowing them to rearm. The US also made possible the Normandy landings.
My view is that no one saved us (the British) , we did that ourselves, with some financial support form America. However, it was through our efforts that the Nazi war machine was halted at the Channel, that the French Resistance even existed and de Gaulle could continue to lead them, and that Russian industry survived. Had Britain not stood, Russia would have struggled far more than it did, and the US would have no base from which to help us strike occupied Europe. If there's one thing that really pisses me off, its the Americans claiming victory. They only really fought for 3 years, the Russians for 5, yet we fought the whole 6. Perhaps if the Americans had got off their fat arses earlier, then millions of lives could have been saved, and the holocaust stopped long before it reached the horrifc heigths its did. And Russia's pact with Germany, and later occuaption of Eastern Europe, tarnishes their role in the war as well. I think that Britain's role in the war is vastly under-rated.

Answer 5

This question keeps cropping up on here, and the only definative answer is that each country played its own part.
Britain and its empire troops stood alone against the Nazi's for nearly 2 1/2 years and was never defeated. Yes lend lease was a big help but it was not given for free, as somone explained earlier we paid the last payment to the U.S. only last month.
Whether Britain, without America's help, would have been able to invade Europe before the Nazi's were defeated by Russia is debatable, but as Germany was overun I would guess that invasion would have become an easier proposition when German troops would be recalled to defend the fatherland. Its anyones guess where the British and Red army's would have met, but it would have been significantly further west than actually happened. Russia with an empire streching to the Atlantic? I dont think that would have been in the U.S. Intrests.
The U.S., with its massive economic and industrial power was a major factor in defeating the Nazi's. They not only supplied Men, but ships, planes, and tanks in enourmous amounts to all the allies (including Russia) without this vicory would have been much more difficult.
The Russians effectivly broke the Nazi army, not only at Stalingrad but also at Lenningrad and the great tank battle at Kursk. Whilst the Germans kept 30 divisions in the west, they had 300 in the east and the vast majority of German manpower and armements where destroyed on the russian front, whilst allied bombing on German factories and supplies also had a significant contribution.
No one saved anyone during the 2nd world war, each country had its own contribution, and was also looking towards the realities of the post war world.

If Britain had been defeated in the early years then the U.S. would have had to contend with a Nazi dominated Europe or more Likley a Communist Russian dominated Europe. This was somthing the U.S. would never want, so they came to our aid as much for their own reasons as for Britains.

Answer 6

The Germans were not defeated by the weather in Russia - the country is simply so vast and their logistics so stretched that they were unable to supply their frontline with enought equipment and man power.

The analogy often used about the Eastern Front is that the German scalpel was blunted by the Russian Hammer. They had the human resources to simply keep feeding the front line whereas the Germans didn't.

With or without the Americans, the Germans would have been defeated. Though the Americans were invaluable, (as were the colonial nations and ex-pats from conquered countries in human terms) in opening a 2nd front and making sure that the Russians didn't make it to the Atlantic.

The German's had abandoned their plans to invade Britain after the aerial battle that they lost and, shortly after, the German's began their invasion of Russia.

Answer 7

From the war diary of Field Marshal Montgomery.............""At the end of Montgomery's war diary, a special note, written by the famous general, stated "And so the campaign in Northwest Europe is finished. I am glad; it has been a tough business ... the Supreme Commander had no firm ideas as to how to conduct the war and was 'blown about by the wind' all over the place ... the staff at SHAEF were completely out of their depth all the time. The point to understand is if we had run the show properly the war could have been finished by Christmas, 1944. The blame for this must rest with the Americans. To balance this it is merely necessary to say one thing, i.e. if the Americans had not come along and lent a hand , we would never have won the war at all." ................

Answer 8

Not realy we the British did pretty good on our own , but without the Americans and the Russians it would have been a long protracted war, We had badly damaged Hitlers air force at the battle of Britain , and being he could not invade this island without air superiority he turned to Russia , we the Brits then started to supply the Russians with weapons and food from then on The Germans were losing , The intervention of the Americans hurried the whole process with vast supplies of food and weapons

Answer 9

The Russians certainly bore the brunt of the fighting against Germany, the Normandy landings would never have taken place if the full might of the German army had been deployable in Northern France.

BTW did you know we only last year finished paying for the American help during WW2 - Lend Lease payments finished in 2006 - 61 years after the war ended.

Answer 10

Just look at the number of german divisions fighting on the eastern front compared with the number engaged in the west the ask yourself what would have happened on D day and in Italy if those extra troops had been available for the Western fronts. Without russia we were stuffed, the germans had better weapons, were better organised, and given anything like parity of resource would have wiped the floor with the yanks as they had already done with both the french and British.

Answer 11

Well we were in a bit of a pickle back in 1940. Churchill was probably overjoyed on the news of pearl harbour. D-Day probably would of been of massive failure without the us power as well. But as for Hitler, he obviously never played risk when he was younger. Why did he try to fight Russia as well. Once the Russians fought them off at stalingrad they were so p***ed off they tore into germany and went a bit mental.